ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Can't believe how bad DS9 was...

Del_Duio

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 28

Report this May. 09 2013, 5:43 am

Respectfully disagree with the OP, I think as a whole DS9 was the best series.


The best characters overall have to be Picard, Garak, Data, & Bones.


DXF Games: Hasslevania, Equin: The Lantern, ODW, Neil Peart Mission The Camera Eye! http://dxfgames.com

JoPierce

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3

Report this May. 12 2013, 11:03 pm

The thing about DS9 that I found most interesting was that it WASN'T an episode-by-episode story line. You had to really follow along, or you'd miss too much. For some people, this was infuriating. For others, it was compared to a soap opera because of this. But I think it made it the most complex series.


I am surprised that anyone would say DS9's acting was bad. I am not in "the business" but there were only a few episodes that made me cringe. And they were in the first 2 seasons. And, ironically, they seemed to be the kinds of episodes that in my opinion were more characteristic of TNG and TOS, where the goal was simply to introduce a new race, play around with them for 40 minutes, show how exotic they were, and then watch them disappear.  Meh. 


But then you have episodes like "In the Pale Moonlight" and "Duet"...  I mean, honestly, you can't see great acting in episodes like those? 


 Like other posters, I am a bit surprised by this thread... not that others don't care for the show (to each his own, right?) but that it is missing so much.

starfan97

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 235

Report this May. 19 2013, 12:53 pm

I have not seen a whole lot of DS9, but the pilot was not captivating. I really didnt feel a compelling reason to watch more of the series, even though I did. Part of having a good show is having a really captivating pilot. DS9 lacked that. 

Pooneil

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1023

Report this May. 19 2013, 8:41 pm


[quote]


The thing about DS9 that I found most interesting was that it WASN'T an episode-by-episode story line. You had to really follow along, or you'd miss too much. For some people, this was infuriating. For others, it was compared to a soap opera because of this. But I think it made it the most complex series.


[/quote]



 


What I found "infuriating" about DS9 was actually how much of it WAS episodic. I remember watching "The Jem'hadar" for the first time back in 1994 and eagerly anticipating the conclusion. But "The Search" was followed up by a string of episodes that didn't go anywhere or do anything. The same thing happened a season later: "The Way of the Warrior" seemed to begin and end a war with the Klingons in 90 minutes. The episode immediately after they retake the station from the Dominion was about Worf's and Jadzia's wedding. Meanwhile, a lot of action took place in the holosuite, or in Quark's bar, and our heroes spent a lot of time meeting for lunch and talking about their relationships.


The plotting was so subtle and sporadic that I would hardly credit DS9 with a main story. It was just a bunch of stuff that happened to some people on a space station. The scene where Kasidy accidentally burns Sisko's homegrown bell peppers gets about as much dramatic weight as the Jemhadar attack on Earth, and there are half a dozen other potential subplots that were discarded before they could be developed -- the Maquis, the Cardassian dissidents, the Orion Syndicate, the Bajoran terrorists, etc. By the seventh season I had stopped caring.

Pooneil

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1023

Report this May. 19 2013, 8:53 pm

[quote]


I still don't get that DS9 was like a soap opera... Why? As far as the actual similarities go, there seems to be little more than that it goes into more detail about the characters and the community in which they interact, and that there is a strong link between "past" and "present" events of any given episode. Soap opera is a very specific genre and I just don't see DS9 fitting into that category.


[/quote]


I don't think it's soapy either, since soap operas depend on open-ended storytelling to create suspense from episode to episode. DS9 got deeper into its characters (but see my comment on burnt peppers above), but any conflict between two regulars was usually resolved by the end of the hour.


Instead I'd label it what the Turkey City Lexicon calls "False Humanity". (http://www.sfwa.org/2009/06/turkey-city-lexicon-a-primer-for-sf-workshops/) "An ailment endemic to genre writing, in which soap-opera elements of purported human interest are stuffed into the story willy-nilly, whether or not they advance the plot or contribute to the point of the story. The actions of such characters convey an itchy sense of irrelevance, for the author has invented their problems out of whole cloth, so as to have something to emote about."


For example, the hundreds (possibly thousands) of scenes of Bashir and O'brien playing darts served no purpose except to tell you that these characters have personal lives. That's trivia, not compelling human drama. TOS and TNG, in their own different ways, were about the adventure of traveling through space, not the tedium of lunch at the Replimat.

Utopia Planetia

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 88

Report this May. 20 2013, 6:18 am

Quote: Pooneil @ May. 19 2013, 8:53 pm

>

>For example, the hundreds (possibly thousands) of scenes of Bashir and O'brien playing darts served no purpose except to tell you that these characters have personal lives. That's trivia, not compelling human drama. TOS and TNG, in their own different ways, were about the adventure of traveling through space, not the tedium of lunch at the Replimat.

>


Those scenes were rarely used in the idle way you suggest, but instead were almost always used to further the plotline by filling in story details.


That's the real weakness of deep space nine, if you're looking for something to pick at: there's far too much tell and not enough show. Click over to the video page of this site and have a look at that episode where Captain Sisko is using the defiant to take some ambassador somewhere, only the ambassador turns out to be a changling who sabotaged the ship, leading them inexorably on a collision course with some planet. Not once in that episode were there any exterior shots of the defiant rushing headlong towards the planet's surface. The only reason we know it's urgent to find the changeling and reverse his damage is that the characters keep telling us so. If you happened to turn away and miss that bit of dialogue, you might think the whole urgency of the episode was that they had to catch the changeling cause changelings are bad.


That sort of show-don't-tell problem happened over and over again in deep space nine. The biggest and most galling example is the end of the dominion war -- all it took was Odo linking with the head changeling and telling her to stop the war. Well, what do you know! If that's all it took, why the hell didn't they think of that four seasons earlier?


I don't know if this problem was due to budget or time constraints, or if it was simply poor filmmaking. And don't get me wrong -- I love deep space nine. It's my favorite star trek series by far, and I watch the others rarely by comparison. But I find it very odd when some folks talk in such sturm und drang terms about elements that are minor, even plusses, yet completely gloss over its far bigger flaws. It makes me wonder if they're being genuine and sufficiently reflective about what really bothers them with the show.

Pooneil

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1023

Report this May. 20 2013, 7:55 am


"Those scenes were rarely used in the idle way you suggest, but instead were almost always used to further the plotline by filling in story details."



I don't mind a few games of darts now and then, but I felt like the writers spent so much time showing their characters not doing their jobs that it started to feel irrelevant. The cast's private lives and the show's story arc were occurring on totally discrete plains, sometimes as if they'd been written by different people. 


 



"I don't know if this problem was due to budget or time constraints, or if it was simply poor filmmaking. And don't get me wrong -- I love deep space nine. It's my favorite star trek series by far, and I watch the others rarely by comparison. But I find it very odd when some folks talk in such sturm und drang terms about elements that are minor, even plusses, yet completely gloss over its far bigger flaws. It makes me wonder if they're being genuine and sufficiently reflective about what really bothers them with the show."



It was budget combined with overreaching writers. They wanted to tell a huge, epic story, but they only had the money to shoot a small, domestic drama.


Off topic: I'm trying to figure out how to cut up quotes without ruining the formatting, but I'm not having any luck so far.

Utopia Planetia

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 88

Report this May. 20 2013, 8:30 am

Quote: Pooneil @ May. 20 2013, 7:55 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

> >"Those scenes were rarely used in the idle way you suggest, but instead were almost always used to further the plotline by filling in story details."

I don't mind a few games of darts now and then, but I felt like the writers spent so much time showing their characters not doing their jobs that it started to feel irrelevant. The cast's private lives and the show's story arc were occurring on totally discrete plains, sometimes as if they'd been written by different people.

Yea, you're right about that come to think of it. It does seem to be a bit more than with next generation, voyager, or the original series. Though enterprise, from the bit I've watched, seems to have alot of this sitting around thing too.

 

>

"I don't know if this problem was due to budget or time constraints, or if it was simply poor filmmaking. And don't get me wrong -- I love deep space nine. It's my favorite star trek series by far, and I watch the others rarely by comparison. But I find it very odd when some folks talk in such sturm und drang terms about elements that are minor, even plusses, yet completely gloss over its far bigger flaws. It makes me wonder if they're being genuine and sufficiently reflective about what really bothers them with the show."

It was budget combined with overreaching writers. They wanted to tell a huge, epic story, but they only had the money to shoot a small, domestic drama.

Off topic: I'm trying to figure out how to cut up quotes without ruining the formatting, but I'm not having any luck so far.


You just have to reiterate the open and close quotes for the snippets you want to reply to. Here's how I did these replies, minus the parentheses:


 


(quote)



(quote)"Those scenes were rarely used in the idle way you suggest, but instead were almost always used to further the plotline by filling in story details."(/quote)



I don't mind a few games of darts now and then, but I felt like the writers spent so much time showing their characters not doing their jobs that it started to feel irrelevant. The cast's private lives and the show's story arc were occurring on totally discrete plains, sometimes as if they'd been written by different people. (/quote)


Yea, you're right about that come to think of it. It does seem to be a bit more than with next generation, voyager, or the original series. Though enterprise, from the bit I've watched, seems to have alot of this sitting around thing too.


 



(quote)(quote)"I don't know if this problem was due to budget or time constraints, or if it was simply poor filmmaking. And don't get me wrong -- I love deep space nine. It's my favorite star trek series by far, and I watch the others rarely by comparison. But I find it very odd when some folks talk in such sturm und drang terms about elements that are minor, even plusses, yet completely gloss over its far bigger flaws. It makes me wonder if they're being genuine and sufficiently reflective about what really bothers them with the show."(/quote)



It was budget combined with overreaching writers. They wanted to tell a huge, epic story, but they only had the money to shoot a small, domestic drama.


Off topic: I'm trying to figure out how to cut up quotes without ruining the formatting, but I'm not having any luck so far.


(/quote)

Utopia Planetia

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 88

Report this May. 20 2013, 8:40 am

Yea, I guess I'm having the same problem. These boards are very poorly designed.

Del_Duio

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 28

Report this May. 20 2013, 9:25 am

Quote:

The scene where Kasidy accidentally burns Sisko's homegrown bell peppers gets about as much dramatic weight as the Jemhadar attack on Earth


I don't agree with your views on DS9 but this line was funny lol.


DXF Games: Hasslevania, Equin: The Lantern, ODW, Neil Peart Mission The Camera Eye! http://dxfgames.com

fireproof78

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 342

Report this May. 21 2013, 10:01 pm

Quote: JoPierce @ May. 12 2013, 11:03 pm

>

>The thing about DS9 that I found most interesting was that it WASN'T an episode-by-episode story line. You had to really follow along, or you'd miss too much. For some people, this was infuriating. For others, it was compared to a soap opera because of this. But I think it made it the most complex series.

>I am surprised that anyone would say DS9's acting was bad. I am not in "the business" but there were only a few episodes that made me cringe. And they were in the first 2 seasons. And, ironically, they seemed to be the kinds of episodes that in my opinion were more characteristic of TNG and TOS, where the goal was simply to introduce a new race, play around with them for 40 minutes, show how exotic they were, and then watch them disappear.  Meh. 

>But then you have episodes like "In the Pale Moonlight" and "Duet"...  I mean, honestly, you can't see great acting in episodes like those? 

> Like other posters, I am a bit surprised by this thread... not that others don't care for the show (to each his own, right?) but that it is missing so much.

>


I think that one of the things that surprised me when i went and revisited DS9 was how many times plot arcs would almost disappear and then reappear. There are many episodes where the arcs are interrupted for seemingly episodic vignettes, like they didn't always want to be mired down in the Dominion War plot, or the Klingon plot or something along those line.


I'm the type of person who finds little human touches, such as Sisko's cooking or love of baseball, or O'Brien's and Bashier's silly hobbies, because I know people like that, so its relate-able to me. Might be poor television, but its still nice to see.


I get the soap-opery bits due to the often convoluted romantic relationships. That sometimes dragged on too much.

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this May. 22 2013, 1:25 am

For me the "ordinary touches" are what gives depth to the universe, every bit as much as the grand-scale politics going on in the background. A good story really benefits from both (Breen attacking Earth and Kassidy burning Sisko's peppers were both essential contributions to the overall fabric of the world being presented.) The transition from story arcs to one-off episodes was a good reflection of how things happen in real life -- issues arise, come to the foreground, and do sometimes go away for a long time afterwards until, although not forgotten, they are once again brought to the surface. That's what happens with a lot of long-time issues.


Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?

Pooneil

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1023

Report this May. 22 2013, 7:40 am

Quote: OtakuJo @ May. 22 2013, 1:25 am

>

>For me the "ordinary touches" are what gives depth to the universe, every bit as much as the grand-scale politics going on in the background. A good story really benefits from both (Breen attacking Earth and Kassidy burning Sisko's peppers were both essential contributions to the overall fabric of the world being presented.) The transition from story arcs to one-off episodes was a good reflection of how things happen in real life -- issues arise, come to the foreground, and do sometimes go away for a long time afterwards until, although not forgotten, they are once again brought to the surface. That's what happens with a lot of long-time issues.

>


But DS9 was supposed to be a science fiction show. Was there anything remotely science fictiony about the Rom/Leeta or Dax/Worf relationships? Even though they were all different species, they were written just like characters on any other show.


I understand what the writers were trying to do, but I feel like they overcompensated: they included so much detail about the characters' personal lives that the futuristic scenery got turned into a distraction. There were times I found myself scratching my head and wondering why they were on a space station in the first place, since it didn't seem to matter.


Even the Dominion War ended up feeling the same way. It was a fairly generic sort of war, with two-dimensional front lines as if the opposing fleets were sailing on an ocean. I kept waiting for a development that would lend the war a deeper significance, but it never came. It was just an ordinary war between rival superpowers, fought by ordinary humans, and it was just a coincidence that it happened to take place in the 24th century.


Sorry if that got a little off-topic, OtakuJo. My point (if I had one) was that the kitchen-sink plainness of the main characters too often outweighed the drama of galactic events, to the point that anything that happened felt arbitrary to me. I should probably drink some coffee and come back to this later.

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this May. 22 2013, 1:16 pm

Quote: Pooneil @ May. 22 2013, 7:40 am

>

>But DS9 was supposed to be a science fiction show. Was there anything remotely science fictiony about the Rom/Leeta or Dax/Worf relationships? Even though they were all different species, they were written just like characters on any other show.

>


Aside from both of those being alien-alien?


But in all seriousness, possibly not. But by no stretch of the imagination does a science fiction story have to be science fictioney all the time. Kirk, Spock & Bones' relationship on TOS had little to do with science fiction either.


Ultimately if you look at any good S.F. show, and it is the characters that matter. More than the setting. More than the tech. More, if you like, than the science fiction of it. If you don't get the point of it then sure, DS9 may not be the series for you. Future or past, people have done, do, will do ordinary things. You can have the most amazing fricking space ship in the world, and if you populate it with characters who spend all of their time angsting about the ship, then who cares?


I'm a history buff, so I appreciated the level of attention to detail attributed to the Dominion War. You could track battles and strategies, and imagine that it might be something that future history buffs would get into. And war... it's all the same ultimately, whether fought with horses and swords or planes or on a galactic scale. So what's a science fictioney war if human nature doesn't ultimately change?


Me personally I thought they had achieved a sound balance between the ordinary and the grandiose, and if they hadn't gone into people's personal lives (and eccentricities), then it wouldn't have been half as interesting. But hey, if it's not for you, then it's not for you.


Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?

Pooneil

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1023

Report this May. 23 2013, 10:11 am

I guess I just think there's something slightly wrong with the world when a science fiction show about a frontier space station in the 24th century has to rely on the sort of standard-issue melodrama I'd expect from a sitcom.

Post Reply

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum