• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why is DS9 so much more exciting than TNG?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tim
  • Start date Start date
darkxshade said:
when does we get a new star trek tv series dangnabbit?
Click to expand...

I don't know, but I want something new and fresh. Something that is even more into the future than the TNG/DS9/Voyager series. Newer more exciting sci-fi technological innovation the likes of which we've never imagined.

That is what Star Trek is about, isn't it? Anything less would be just a crappy reboot (Enterprise series/The latest ST Movie)
 
I said war.

Huuuh.

Good god y'all.

What is it good for?

RATINGS AND ADDING A SENSE OF URGENCY TO PLOT DEVELOPMENT DURING MULTI-EPISODE AND EVEN MULTI-SEASON STORY ARCS

Say it again.
 
darkxshade said:
when does we get a new star trek tv series dangnabbit?
Click to expand...

It will be a while I think, Enterprise never really took off like previous series. At least the new movies don't suck, though I don't really enjoy the whole reboot they're doing with the alternate timeline.
 
Bignate603 said:
It will be a while I think, Enterprise never really took off like previous series. At least the new movies don't suck, though I don't really enjoy the whole reboot they're doing with the alternate timeline.
Click to expand...

It's hard to go "back" in Star Trek. The Universe is still vastly unexplored in current day Trek, going backwards makes no sense. There is nothing really "new" to it. You know how it ends.
 
Sisco is bat-shit crazy. Watch William Shatner interview him on the Captains.

I'm talking "Needs Gary Buesy to talk him down" crazy.
 
Bignate603 said:
It will be a while I think, Enterprise never really took off like previous series. At least the new movies don't suck, though I don't really enjoy the whole reboot they're doing with the alternate timeline.
Click to expand...

Yeah...that last movie could have had any characters in it. It was an action movie, not a Star Trek movie.

As for Enterprise, that never took off because it made humans look like whiney crybabies that leeched all of their tech and smarts off of other races. They fixed that in the last season, but it got the axe by then.
 
The stories are connected / lots of fighting with a long war / people hoping to see just how far the spots went down. 😛
 
theplaidfad said:
It is to me for some reason.

Well?
Click to expand...

Because you have terrible taste in television shows?

I suppose you also think Voyager was a great show too...

I presume you were a child when you were watching DS9...an adult would have recognized the crap that it was.

()🙂
 
IndyColtsFan said:
There were 3 new concepts vying to be the next Star Trek series, but only one looks to have a shot: http://www.slashfilm.com/david-foster-preparing-pitch-star-trek-series/

Oh, and TNG >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DS9.
Click to expand...

At least its set in the normal 'Trek' canon, not the JJ Abrams crap. Oh, and post-Voyager not a prequel.

Fritzo said:
As for Enterprise, that never took off because it made humans look like whiney crybabies that leeched all of their tech and smarts off of other races. They fixed that in the last season, but it got the axe by then.
Click to expand...

The idiotic temporal civil war story arc didn't have anything to do with it? 😛 Humans did start behind the other 'common' alpha quadrant races.

Edit -
The Bryan Singer pitch actually looked interesting.
http://www.slashfilm.com/bryan-singers-star-trek-tv-pitch-details-revealed/

- The series would have been titled Star Trek: Federation.

- Singer and his team had already commissioned a new logo, designed by Mike Okuda, which you can see above.

- Federation would have consisted of “more complex serialized stories” focusing on “compelling stories about our world today,” as opposed to standalone episodes dealing mainly with the Trek universe.

- It would have taken place in the year 3000 — several centuries after the existing Star Trek series, but within the same continuity.

- The Federation would be in a period of complacency and stagnancy, in a purposeful parallel to both the decline of the Roman Empire and the current state of the “American Empire.”

- The action would’ve kicked off when a new threat called “The Scourge” entered the picture, compelling the Federation to build a new USS Enterprise — the first in over 300 years.

- One of the central characters would’ve been Commander Alexander Kirk, an aggressive officer with a “checkered past” who was the sole survivor of a run-in with The Scourge.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Because of the longer story arcs. They were both philosophically complelling, and TNG was much more interesting on an intellectual level, however, it would have been nice to see more multi-episode story arcs.
 
BoomerD said:
Because you have terrible taste in television shows?

I suppose you also think Voyager was a great show too...

I presume you were a child when you were watching DS9...an adult would have recognized the crap that it was.

()🙂
Click to expand...

You're just jealous that I have the ability to grasp multi-episode plot lines. 🙂
 
data.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top