DS9 Season 4

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-09-23 11:50pm

I bought the set today and am currently watching Way of the Warrior. I forgot just how good this show was, it was second favorite after TOS and I can see why. Great charcters (quick compare Sisko to Archer or Janeway) great storylines, political intrigue, war, romance. Damn this series was good.

Anyone else a fan of DS9 or simply hate the latest batch of trash that is spewing from Paramount?

Laird · Post by **Laird** » 2003-09-23 11:52pm

I concur,TOS>>>Ds9>>>>>>>>>>Tng>>>>>>>>>The rest of trek.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-24 12:03am

You liked "Way of the Warrior"? I thought it embodied everything wrong with DS9: the exaggerated Klingon machismo bullshit, the ridiculous "let's invent a technobabble solution to a tactical problem in the midst of a heated firefight" technique, Gowron (need I say more), the idiotic notion that the Klingon invasion fleet would choose DS9 as its pre-invasion staging ground (thus necessitating that they rendezvous while cloaked somehow) for the obvious purpose of contriving a dramatic "reveal" scene, etc.

And let's not even get into the horribly scripted climactic battle scene ...

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-09-24 12:03am

I hated Sisko.

In fact, the only character I didn't hate was Garak.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-09-24 12:15am

Darth Wong wrote:You liked "Way of the Warrior"? I thought it embodied everything wrong with DS9: the exaggerated Klingon machismo bullshit, the ridiculous "let's invent a technobabble solution to a tactical problem in the midst of a heated firefight" technique, Gowron (need I say more), the idiotic notion that the Klingon invasion fleet would choose DS9 as its pre-invasion staging ground (thus necessitating that they rendezvous while cloaked somehow) for the obvious purpose of contriving a dramatic "reveal" scene, etc.

And let's not even get into the horribly scripted climactic battle scene ...

The Klingon machismo was fine by me, its not like it was out of character for what TNG introduced. Brought Worf into the fold (don't care what some people feel about worf I always liked him). Whether you like the Klingons or not they were Klingons. They were worked into the political tapestry of the series. People bitch about continuity in Trek and reset buttons but things had weight in DS9. If someone did something it carried over. Gowron was the Chancellor, we didn't have a Chncellor of the week or some faceless character. The Federation Klingon war didn't just last for the episode, it went on throughout the season.

No one 'forgot' things or events. There was continuity, even continuity from TNG which was just as guilty of the reset button as Voy was.

"Technobabble solutions to a tactical problem" whether you like it or not that is modern Trek. And it certainly wasn't ridiculous technobabble like we got in Voy. These solutions made sense. Why WOULDN'T a tractor beam disrupt a beam weapon like a dsiruptor? It seemed creative and not ridiculously contrived like let's say "A modified polaron beam that would fry every system on the Klingon ship."

I never said that DS9 was high drama but it is a helluva lot better than the crap we've been force fed from paramount since.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-24 12:25am

Stravo wrote:The Klingon machismo was fine by me, its not like it was out of character for what TNG introduced.

It was out of character for the Klingons as introduced in TNG and as left by TOS. But by the end of TNG, they had already reduced the Klingons to a one-note caricature of Space Vikings, so I guess you could say that DS9 was faithfully carrying that particular torch, as foul-smelling as it may be.

Brought Worf into the fold (don't care what some people feel about worf I always liked him). Whether you like the Klingons or not they were Klingons.

No, they were Space Vikings. The TOS Klingons were Klingons.

They were worked into the political tapestry of the series. People bitch about continuity in Trek and reset buttons but things had weight in DS9. If someone did something it carried over. Gowron was the Chancellor, we didn't have a Chncellor of the week or some faceless character. The Federation Klingon war didn't just last for the episode, it went on throughout the season.

No one 'forgot' things or events. There was continuity, even continuity from TNG which was just as guilty of the reset button as Voy was.

You could say the same thing about "Days of Our Lives". Not for nothing has DS9 been nicknamed "As the Station Turns".

"Technobabble solutions to a tactical problem" whether you like it or not that is modern Trek. And it certainly wasn't ridiculous technobabble like we got in Voy. These solutions made sense. Why WOULDN'T a tractor beam disrupt a beam weapon like a dsiruptor? It seemed creative and not ridiculously contrived like let's say "A modified polaron beam that would fry every system on the Klingon ship."

No, it is stupid. A tractor beam would pull the disruptor beams toward their ship, rather than dispersing them harmlessly.

I never said that DS9 was high drama but it is a helluva lot better than the crap we've been force fed from paramount since.

Why? Because it has really cool-looking battles in it? That's pretty much the only positive thing I can say about DS9.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-09-24 12:32am

I didn't even think the battles were that great. They could have been done much better.

Doesn't anyone in Hollywood television know the meaning of suspense and tension? Anticipation and release? It seemed sometimes like all they knew how to do on DS9 was to shake the camera, shoot off a ton of fireworks, and flash some CGI on the screen.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2003-09-24 12:37am

While DS9 had a couple episodes I liked (And had virtually no battles in them; just character driven story) Ds9 bored the hell out of me. The expositional dialogue over the most mundane crap. The "weighty feel" was actually "ponderous bullshit" most of the time. It took itself WAY too seriously. So did Avery Brooks.

CorSec · Post by **CorSec** » 2003-09-24 12:39am

Well, I'm going to toss out my very subjective opinion here. Having recently finished watching season 4 of DS9, I came away with a favorable opinion. That's not to say that there were perfect, because that's simply not true. DS9 may have been a Trekked version of Babylon 5, but I'm not going to hold that against anyone.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-24 12:40am

Lord Poe wrote:While DS9 had a couple episodes I liked (And had virtually no battles in them; just character driven story) Ds9 bored the hell out of me. The expositional dialogue over the most mundane crap. The "weighty feel" was actually "ponderous bullshit" most of the time. It took itself WAY too seriously. So did Avery Brooks.

Amen, brother! I can't believe people rip on Shatner for overacting when Avery Brooks turned every goddamned line into a pompous Shakespearean soliloquy.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-09-24 12:51am

Darth Wong wrote:
Lord Poe wrote:While DS9 had a couple episodes I liked (And had virtually no battles in them; just character driven story) Ds9 bored the hell out of me. The expositional dialogue over the most mundane crap. The "weighty feel" was actually "ponderous bullshit" most of the time. It took itself WAY too seriously. So did Avery Brooks.
Amen, brother! I can't believe people rip on Shatner for overacting when Avery Brooks turned every goddamned line into a pompous Shakespearean soliloquy.

As opposed to Janeway's whiney evil witch of the west impression or Archer's empty shirt command style? Picard could be just as pompous and just as Shakesperean. Sisko was cut from the same mold as Kirk, he may not have been as daring or dashing, but he was certainly a commander more in line as a militray governor and semi-religious figure than say Janeway.

If DS9 was slow to you, it may not have been your cup of tea, but there wer eplenty B-5 episodes that were loaded down with a bunch of self righteous bull as well (Season 5 in general comes to mind)

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-24 12:59am

Stravo wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Amen, brother! I can't believe people rip on Shatner for overacting when Avery Brooks turned every goddamned line into a pompous Shakespearean soliloquy.
As opposed to Janeway's whiney evil witch of the west impression or Archer's empty shirt command style?

You won't find me defending those two. Doesn't change the fact that Sisko was a pompous ass.

Picard could be just as pompous and just as Shakesperean.

Yes indeed, it was his single greatest character flaw. However, Patrick Stewart had the ability to get away with that much more than Avery Brooks, who tried to substitute intensity for stage presence.

Sisko was cut from the same mold as Kirk, he may not have been as daring or dashing, but he was certainly a commander more in line as a militray governor and semi-religious figure than say Janeway.

And he knew it. Oh boy, did he ever know it. He knew it so much that he had to remind you of that fact at every turn.

If DS9 was slow to you, it may not have been your cup of tea, but there wer eplenty B-5 episodes that were loaded down with a bunch of self righteous bull as well (Season 5 in general comes to mind)

Absolutely. Season 5 was a waste of electrons. In fact, Sheridan's pompous soliloquys piss me off too; he delivers them with the same intensity regardless of whether he just witnessed the destruction of a planet or the end of an annoying diplomatic impasse.

Personally, I feel that too many sci-fi fans have some kind of inferiority complex about sci-fi vs "real drama", and they like their shows to be overly pompous and sombre in order to close that gap. That's one of the reasons some people go absolutely apeshit over Star Wars not taking itself too seriously (or as they put it, "not growing up with the rest of us"); they don't like being reminded that sci-fi is basically uncool. They're so obsessed with coolness that it becomes their only deciding factor.

Burak Gazan · Post by **Burak Gazan** » 2003-09-24 12:59am

Darth Wong wrote:
Lord Poe wrote:While DS9 had a couple episodes I liked (And had virtually no battles in them; just character driven story) Ds9 bored the hell out of me. The expositional dialogue over the most mundane crap. The "weighty feel" was actually "ponderous bullshit" most of the time. It took itself WAY too seriously. So did Avery Brooks.
Amen, brother! I can't believe people rip on Shatner for overacting when Avery Brooks turned every goddamned line into a pompous Shakespearean soliloquy.

Indeed !

I would have paid real money for Q to pop in just one more time, deliver a right cross that put Sisko through the bulkhead, and smile " NOW we're even Benny boy...."

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-09-24 01:08am

Darth Wong wrote:
Personally, I feel that too many sci-fi fans have some kind of inferiority complex about sci-fi vs "real drama", and they like their shows to be overly pompous and sombre in order to close that gap. That's one of the reasons some people go absolutely apeshit over Star Wars not taking itself too seriously (or as they put it, "not growing up with the rest of us"); they don't like being reminded that sci-fi is basically uncool. They're so obsessed with coolness that it becomes their only deciding factor.

Maybe its because I was raised watching TOS and Shatner but I like Shakesperean style, I like my heroes bombastic and pompous sometimes. It doesn't offend me. When Avery Brooks started a monologue and got his voice shaking and trembling - WATCH OUT!! But thats just me. (I don't know if you ever saw Spencer for Hire but Avery Brookes is not naturally that way, see him play Hawk)

Star Wars may not have the over bearing and pompous, but some of that dialogue was written by someone with a tin ear for how normal people speak.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-24 01:13am

Stravo wrote:Maybe its because I was raised watching TOS and Shatner but I like Shakesperean style, I like my heroes bombastic and pompous sometimes. It doesn't offend me.

It's a matter of degrees. Brooks went way over the top with Sisko. Much more than Shatner ever did. Frankly, I think that Shatner has been very unfairly maligned for a long time for his acting, which I thought was pretty damned good most of the time. He had some shitty episodes, but if you actually sit down and watch some of those TOS episodes, he's not overacting anywhere near as much as you'd think from the caricatures of him floating around every uncreative comedian's routine.

When Avery Brooks started a monologue and got his voice shaking and trembling - WATCH OUT!! But thats just me. (I don't know if you ever saw Spencer for Hire but Avery Brookes is not naturally that way, see him play Hawk)

That's the worst thing; it means he was DIRECTED to act like that.

Star Wars may not have the over bearing and pompous, but some of that dialogue was written by someone with a tin ear for how normal people speak.

The same is true for B5, The Matrix, and DS9. The difference is that the grossly unrealistic dialogue doesn't bother people when it's self-consciously "cool" and pompous, as opposed to being "dorky"; it's still about male self-consciousness (that's one of the reasons for the outright hatred of Jar-Jar Binks, who's somewhat annoying but hardly worthy of the hatred he's received; his tragic uncoolness offends alpha-male wannabes). But by all means, if you ever find someone who actually talks like Morpheus or Sisko, let me know. I'd like to know how often he got beat up in school.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-09-24 01:21am

Darth Wong wrote: The same is true for B5, The Matrix, and DS9. The difference is that the grossly unrealistic dialogue doesn't bother people when it's self-consciously "cool" and pompous, as opposed to being "dorky"; it's still about male self-consciousness (that's one of the reasons for the outright hatred of Jar-Jar Binks, who's somewhat annoying but hardly worthy of the hatred he's received; his tragic uncoolness offends alpha-male wannabes). But by all means, if you ever find someone who actually talks like Morpheus or Sisko, let me know. I'd like to know how often he got beat up in school.

I'll see your Matrix reference and raise you Anakin Amidala love dialogue.

There is definately something to be said for Sci-Fi fans and desperately not wanting to be seen as freaks or geeks. Jar Jar was annoying on other levels too. I wonder if adults in the 70's reacted to Threepio in the same way we reacted to Jar Jar? It was fairly obvious Jar Jar was fulfilling the Threepio role in the TPM. I don't recall the same level of hatred there so there had t be more, perhaps the naked attempt at reaching out to kids and marketing potential? WHo knows.

But my original point stands. IMHO DS9 is simply head and shoulders above Enterprise and Voyager. Its not a classic or high drama but its entertaining and thats what I look for after a long day at work. (Besides I paid 90 bucks for this it BETTER be as good as I remember.)

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-24 01:31am

Stravo wrote:I'll see your Matrix reference and raise you Anakin Amidala love dialogue.

Sure, I'd say that's about the same level of woodenness. The only difference is the reactions of self-conscious sci-fi fans and their longing to be cool.

There is definately something to be said for Sci-Fi fans and desperately not wanting to be seen as freaks or geeks. Jar Jar was annoying on other levels too. I wonder if adults in the 70's reacted to Threepio in the same way we reacted to Jar Jar? It was fairly obvious Jar Jar was fulfilling the Threepio role in the TPM. I don't recall the same level of hatred there so there had t be more, perhaps the naked attempt at reaching out to kids and marketing potential? WHo knows.

Let's put it this way: kids liked Jar-Jar, and parents generally found him annoying but tolerable. The people who ABSOLUTELY DESPISE Jar-Jar tend to be self-conscious teenagers and single men. What does that tell you?

But my original point stands. IMHO DS9 is simply head and shoulders above Enterprise and Voyager. Its not a classic or high drama but its entertaining and thats what I look for after a long day at work. (Besides I paid 90 bucks for this it BETTER be as good as I remember.)

Of course DS9 is better than Enterprise and Voyager. But that's a bit like saying that death by firing squad is much better than death by torture or being forced to watch Celine Dion's Vegas show.

CorSec · Post by **CorSec** » 2003-09-24 01:35am

Stravo wrote: (Besides I paid 90 bucks for this it BETTER be as good as I remember.)

Crap! I go hosed! ($110)

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-24 01:37am

And that's the other thing: why are Trek season sets so goddamned expensive? People ask why I haven't bought them, as if it isn't obvious. Look at the price of a B5 boxset compared to a Trek boxset.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-09-24 01:38am

CorSec wrote:
Stravo wrote: (Besides I paid 90 bucks for this it BETTER be as good as I remember.)
Crap! I go hosed! ($110)

90 bucks with my Barnes and Noble club card discount.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-09-24 01:42am

Darth Wong wrote:And that's the other thing: why are Trek season sets so goddamned expensive? People ask why I haven't bought them, as if it isn't obvious. Look at the price of a B5 boxset compared to a Trek boxset.

You'll get no argument from me on that point. Why is B-5 Season 3 $79 and DS9 Season 4 about $100?! That makes no sense unless you're paramount counting on Trektard sales. I am only buying Season 4-7 because those wer worth owning. I did not buy a single season of TNG nor will I of Voyager and Eneterprise.

Although I have to admit I'm debating getting B-5 Season 5. (The Completist in me is going to win out I think)

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-09-24 01:55am

Lord Poe wrote:While DS9 had a couple episodes I liked (And had virtually no battles in them; just character driven story) Ds9 bored the hell out of me. The expositional dialogue over the most mundane crap. The "weighty feel" was actually "ponderous bullshit" most of the time. It took itself WAY too seriously. So did Avery Brooks.

What the hell? I thought I was the only one who ever felt this way, and now you and Mike and your dog are coming out of the woodwork about this!

Post by **Gandalf** » 2003-09-24 02:11am

SWEET MERCIFUL CRAP!!!

I've seen the Trek seasons (TNG at least) for about $80 Australian, which I think is about 40-50 us dollars.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2003-09-24 03:19am

You'll get no argument from me on that point. Why is B-5 Season 3 $79 and DS9 Season 4 about $100?! That makes no sense unless you're paramount counting on Trektard sales. I am only buying Season 4-7 because those wer worth owning. I did not buy a single season of TNG nor will I of Voyager and Eneterprise.

I am too very much interested in buying DS9 DVDs. But the high price is a big problem for a student like me who has to convince his parents to spend 100 bucks for an old TV show.

BTW I came upon a copy of Babylon 5 season 1 at a low price yesterday. Is it worth buying ?

And that's the other thing: why are Trek season sets so goddamned expensive? People ask why I haven't bought them, as if it isn't obvious. Look at the price of a B5 boxset compared to a Trek boxset.

You have not bought them ? Should not DVDs be your first choice since you do a lot of technical analysis ?

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-09-24 06:04am

Darth Wong wrote:And that's the other thing: why are Trek season sets so goddamned expensive? People ask why I haven't bought them, as if it isn't obvious. Look at the price of a B5 boxset compared to a Trek boxset.

Don't they have loads of special features?

My question is, how many discs are there in the two boxes you're comparing?

I kinda want the Season 3 box set, but I have a hard time justifying it to myself when there's so much else I could get...