Big mistake, season 7 still had some great episodes.
The first half was good, the second half descended really quickly into trash.
I'll watch them at your behest. Thanks for the pointer :)
I'll come back to ask when I finish Sexually Transmitted Disease what to watch next.
>>14158>Roast me for it, I kind of liked Lower Decks
No roasting here, LD is the patrician's nu-trek. STD and Picard are awful.
>>14161>I stopped watching season 7 of TNG because the writing got so bad
season 7 took a nose dive in writing quality. I'd have to see it again to cite specific examples. characters were way out of character and shit like that.
What does this have to do with Star Trek?
Oh right, Andromeda, I completely forgot about that show and that Kevin Sorbo was in it.
When I saw the post I was thinking, "Why is someone posting a tweet from that guy who played Hercules in a Star Trek Thread"?
Honestly been watching it concurrently with Farscape, and man the difference in quality is astounding.
Sorbos acting is mediocre and the plot is poorly written, its like the low rent version of farscape
Characters on Farscape actually have depth, whereas Dylan is good idealistic captain Hayward is cocky wrench monkey Trance is the cooky one Tyr is the gruff warrior man (also mane the Nietzscheans are such a cool concept for a sci fi species and they just waste them). >>14231
Yeah fair, it has some interesting
concepts but god its so dull.
Is it worth watching? They added it to Amazon prime in the UK too. w
STD spoilers ahead:
Oh what is this person with the technology to make large EMPs and fly? There is literally only one explanation, it's from the future.
Seriously the worst fucking writing I've seen in a while, and I like to watch shit anime and shit Sci-fi from time to time. This takes the cake.
God, the Nietzscheans are such a good concept and they are just wasted in Andromeda. AN entire sub-species of human built on geenmodding, but they don't just gene mod for the sake of it, they are a society based on the philosophical teachings of Nietzsche and believe themselves, through gene modding, to be the Ubermensch he taught of. There is such a great basis there, and they are just wasted as "backstabbing barbarian types".
>>14245>Is it worth watching?
yes for season 1, 2 and 3.
Outside of Roddenberry's socialistic/left-liberal leanings (there is no way he didn't knew of Posada considering the story of the first contact), the writers on Trek were never socialist. During the TNG/DS9 era the showrunners were even conservatives. It's really a surprise that it turned out the way it did, largely I think because the fan community pressuring them. ST was the first show that actually a dedicated nerdy fanbase that would get really angry if they deviated from specific formulas.
While there is something endearing about late 80s need culture, the current generation in my view rather acts as a fetter for the creative renewal of Star Trek. There are no "trekkies" anymore than stand out from the cool kids, today everybody goes to fucking comic con, LARPs and soyfaces over franchises. Even chads and stacys now go to comic cons. So they don't have this unique relationship anymore between fanbase and writers that works reciprocally, but instead ST became another "franchise" where shows are produced inside the machine that is modern television mostly directed at consoomers.
Just look how many trekkies eat up all this STD shit. They don't care. The Kurtzman detractors are a small disgruntled minority. >but the first seasons of the old shows sucked too!
Yes, but even in those bad season you could see a kernel of potential, and the characters clicked. They also didn't write themselves into a corner like STD (31st century? Wtf) or Picard (Picard is a robot now????), they weaved some threads here and there but they remained flexible until they knew what worked. For example, TNG originally was supposed to have the Ferengi as the main villains but they looked too ridiculous to be taken seriously so they decided for a more menacing, mysterious enemy, which is where the Borg come from.ddrDDR
I watched TNG, I watched STD. I started watching the original series, it's a bit slow right now. Is there anything that gets to the level of TNG? Unironically one of the best sci-fi series I've seen.
>>14724>Is there anything that gets to the level of TNG?
NTA. DS9 is on par with TNG.
It's why BSG was great.
But that was shit.
It is if you exclude the canon-breaking garbage in DS9.
DS9 & Voy had to introduce some capitalism stuff to counteract all that gommie sharing crap in TNG
Clearly the Federation was in sharp contrast to the AnCap Ferengis, and this contrast was played out in DS9 rather endearing, but you never got the feel that in terms of the "big issues" the Ferengi ideology was ever a challenge to the Federation.
In DS9 it is implied that the Federation uses labor credits, that allows you to use the transporter and replicator on Earth.ddrDDR
God I hope lyrans are real
How exactly is the Borg episode canon-breaking? It ties in well. VOY is far more canon-breaking when it comes to the Borg. It's a good stand-alone episode, it did not feel like fan service. >I guarantee you nobody who disliked Enterprise followed the Shran arc all the way through or watched season 4, particularly the Kir'Shara arc and the Babel arc. They really tie the show together and put it on par with DS9 as one of my favorite series.
I watched the entire series and while Shran is a good character, it's not enough. I'm not a big fan of Vulcan episodes, and ENT was filled to the brim with them, but that may have just been my personal taste (and I guess it makes sense for the 22nd century where the relationship between Vulcans and humans is still evolving). The Xindi arc was a fucking joke, it did absolutely nothing for me. At no point did I feel any emotional investment to care aboutit what's happening to them, it honestly felt more like the first two seasons of VOY where we basically follow a ship behind enemy lines exploring an unknown area of space by itself.
I guess season four works as a season except the finale, but the problem remains that it was still a setup season. DS9 did set up the Dominion War for a long time, but then it erupted in season 6, whereas ENT gets awkwardly wrapped up before the war with the Romulans starts. There is also no main villian like Dukat in DS9 except that one Romulan general nobody cared for. I know that ENT allegedly found their pace and style with the fourth season, but sorry, this was made in the modern era of television, you can not allow yourself to fail around for three fucking seasons like Star Trek tradition and then expect not to be dropped. This isn't the 80s anymore.
Clearly you just need to read the Chakat universe books. Granted those are catgirl-centaurs, but still hot.
what do you guys think about this guys thread saying that DS9 was right wing
Unsurprisingly, a tweet shaves off all nuance.
DS9 is critical of imperialism in the Dominion, Klingon, and Cardassian plot lines. The expansionist xenophobes ultimately get saved by their enemies.
It always bothered me how In The Pale Moonlight
was resolved. I know it's considered one of the best DS9 episodes, but it's literally Sisko doing an American-style false flag and justifying it to himself in the end. This is especially concerning because this in the context of it being revealed that the first Iraq War was based on a staged false-flag.
Based as fuck. I love that Trek had so many numerous acknowledgements of the USSR
>>17466>Chakat universe books
The main site is mostly dead though
I guess, but good luck pulling that off.
>>2207>DS9>Peak Star Trek. Has plenty of high-concept sci-fi, but handled by actual characters, against a backdrop of regional galactic politics that can develop instead of previous shows being almost completely isolated episodes.
I will maintain to my dying day that "Duet" is *the* finest episode of television ever filmed.
Plus, DS9 has an episode where a Ferengi earnestly and sincerely quotes Marx. That was a fun scene.
>I second this >>1870 for the order but note that you definitely can skip around TNG, which has some fucking cringeworthy early episodes before they figured out what they were doing with the series.
I'd argue it was less "figuring out" and more "waiting for Roddenberry to stop vetoing good ideas". It's no coincidence that the end of his micromanaging due to poor health, and the dramatic increase in script quality, both happened at the same time between seasons 2 and 3. I've often felt like seasons 3 and 4 were of such quality because they were made up of 4 whole seasons worth of good ideas, compressed down into 2.
DS9 purposefully changed things because they didn't want it to be a utopian society anymore.
Why didn't they just replicate a baseball card ?
>>19577>Why didn't they just replicate a baseball card ?
You see, Data, humans appreciate things that are genuine, for sentimental reasons.
what's the difference ?
don't replicators make atomic scale accurate replicas ?
People in the star trek future will still care about rarity, when they haven't used markets and money for centuries ? Capitalists say that their value system is transcendental, on an ideological level however we know that value perception is related to economic structure. If you lived in a society based on a economy that functionally has no scarcity because you can make perfect replicas of everything you could ever need there is no point in perceiving the original of something as different than a perfect copy.
The concept of the original is only valid in our world because we can't make perfect copies, and if we loose an original we lose information, so it's not a sentimentality for us to care about preserving artifacts, but it will be in a future with replicators.
>>19626>don't replicators make atomic scale accurate replicas ?
Are you actually autistic? It's possible to recreate any Van Goch painting if you are a crafty artist in the detail, still not gonna be the same.>People in the star trek future will still care about rarity, when they haven't used markets and money for centuries ? Capitalists say that their value system is transcendental, on an ideological level however we know that value perception is related to economic structure. If you lived in a society based on a economy that functionally has no scarcity because you can make perfect replicas of everything you could ever need there is no point in perceiving the original of something as different than a perfect copy.
Fucking lol. Artworks even in capitalism can easily be reproduced, but the art commodity is fundamentally different because it requires the creation by an artist which makes it an absolute monopoly.>The concept of the original is only valid in our world because we can't make perfect copies, and if we loose an original we lose information, so it's not a sentimentality for us to care about preserving artifacts, but it will be in a future with replicators.
We pretty much fucking can make perfect copies (just not with replicators) yet people still appreciate the original. Any smith today can produce you a sword far better in every aspect than an actual sword from the middle ages but the latter is still what's appreciated in collections and museums.
Unique IPs: 9