This. And DS9 explored a lot of very interesting ideas.
It was midly antithetical to ‘the point of Star Trek’ as expressed by Roddenberry (especially circa his time on TNG), in that it was less optimistic about humanity, but…well the Roddenberry-involved seasons of TNG are terrible.
At that, regardless of premise, the earlier shows did plenty of stuff other than exploring new worlds. Think of Kirk and Spock and McCoy: are they playing host to diplomats in general, and Spock’s dad in particular, for a peace conference? Why not? They did much the same in IS THERE IN TRUTH NO BEAUTY and in ELAAN OF TROYIUS. Or are they delivering supplies to a Federation outpost? They did that one repeatedly, too: DAGGER OF THE MIND and WHOM GODS DESTROY and THE DEADLY YEARS.
And in one episode, they’re negotiating with folks who don’t want the Federation to begin mining; in another episode, they’re negotiating with folks who’ll maybe let the Klingons mine there instead; and in another, they’re – assisting Federation miners who’ve requested help with their operations.
And in another, they’re helping Doctor Daystrom test his M-5 Unit. And in another, Kirk is getting court-martialed. And in another, THE TROUBLE WITH TRIBBLES, our heroes spend the episode standing guard duty on a Deep Space Station!
They weren’t looking to do any exploring in either of the Scotty-gets-a-love-interest episodes: not WOLF IN THE FOLD, and not THE LIGHTS OF ZETAR. They weren’t looking to do any exploring in AMOK TIME, either, or in A PRIVATE LITTLE WAR, or in BALANCE OF TERROR or DAY OF THE DOVE. And not in – look, the point is, no matter what the premise of that show was, they did a ton of other things too.
DS9 was the best Star Trek series overall in terms of the consistency of its quality. It’s the only one I still watch sometimes (although I like TOS and TNG also). Great character development throughout the series – not only in the main cast, but so many secondary characters as well. I always thought it was kind of a rip-off that they never got a movie like some of the other casts did – but on the other hand, the finale was pretty perfect and you’d hate to damage that.
One thing is how they treated Worf. In TNG Worf became a joke, the guy who the villain of the week threw aside in order to prove how badass it was. There is even a tv trope named for it I believe. DS9 actually built him up and made him a force to be reckoned with especially in the episode where he kills gem hadar after gem hadar in a grueling prison tournament.
Hell, they killed off Sisko and Dukat, moved other characters to jobs hell and gone; there was no way to make a movie after that.
:dubious:
Sisko’s not dead
The movie will show what happens after he’s done hanging out with the wormhole aliens
The Worf Effect, yeah. Which is rather closely related to being a Redshirt*, or the Imperial Storm Trooper Marksman Academy** to pop universes for a second - a reasonable thing to happen, given narrative need (we need to show the bad guy’s a badass, we need to take Worf off the table), but eventually going to that well too often, especially without giving Worf or the Troopers a chance to rebuild their reputation, it starts to lose its effect.
And you’re right - DS9 did a hell of a lot better at showing us why taking out Worf was both impressive and necessary for the bad guys, as well as not pulling that trigger unnecessarily.
** We know they’re not going to get Luke, Leia, or Han (TFA notwithstanding), but without a lot more Owens and Berus - preferably actual soldiers, not random moisture farmers, but even more civilians would help - it’s going to look less like ‘our heroes are badasses’ and more ‘our villains are crap’. The massacre at the beginning of TFA is…well, it’s weird to call it an improvement, but you know.
His Spouse, son and first officer sure as hell think he is. :dubious:
Can a man be dead if he lives Non-corporeally outside of liner time?
He tells Cassidy that he’s not dead and will return someday.
I’m pretty much on the side of the OP, but in a…let’s say less provocative way.
It’s all subjective of course but for me DS9 is either bottom or second to bottom after Enterprise (I’ve only watched a few episodes of Enterprise, which I hated, but I can’t say I’ve given it a fair chance).
The lack of exploration is too big a constraint for me too. Any time they’re discussing some interesting event in the gamma quadrant I want to see that.
Staying in one place allowed us to explore one or two alien species in more depth, which in itself is a good thing I guess, but the cardassians and bjorans were just standard archetypes for me and not very interesting. Their relationship played out like an TOS episode, but strung out over several years.
Some of the GQ aliens were pretty good though.
And I do feel it lost a lot of the optimism that TNG had, which is one of the significant things about trek…there isn’t much sci fi that tries to imagine a better future while still serving up compelling stories.
Does he say that he is not dead?
As you said, personal taste is subjective, but I strongly disagree with the notion that DS9 abandoned the optimism of Star Trek. Quite the contrary, in fact - to me, DS9 exemplified that optimism better than any other series, because it acknowledged that the universe is a flawed place, but also showed that good people can struggle through those flaws and still Do the Right Thing, as best they can. Yes, DS9 established a troubled setting in which Our Heroes are forced into difficult decisions that will have negative consequences no matter what they choose (y’know, just like in real life). But it also shows those heroes weighing those choices and doing the best with what they are given. That, to me, is far more optimistic than any number of TNG kumbayas.
To quote Sisko, “It’s easy to be a saint in paradise.” The Enterprise (and, inexplicably, Voyager) too often felt like paradise, in which there is a clear right and wrong answer to every question, and in which disagreements arise from heroism versus villainy, and not from individual people having honest disagreements about complex issues. Is it truly difficult for a protagonist to choose the correct course of action under such circumstances? Isn’t it far more challenging when a protagonist has to identify exactly what is “right” out of an array of murky options, each with its own set of pros and cons?
Also, DS9 is, to date, the only Trek series that spent significant time and effort showing that the “bad guys” are as multifaceted and morally complex as the “good guys.” That is a fundamentally optimistic perspective as well - the idea the “other” may be doing things that we disagree with for what they consider a good reason. For all the war and bloodshed that DS9 depicted, it always showed that the Cardassians, Klingons, and even the Dominion were full of people doing their understanding of the right thing. Almost none of the major antagonists of DS9 were moustache-twirling villains (and quite a few of the ostensible “villains” had humanizing arcs, including full-blown redemption stories), and the series is far, far the better for it.
DS9 is the best Star Trek series because its characters are the most human of all.
Very often in TOS, TNG, and Voy, the character act more like archetypes than real individuals. They’re two-dimensional, character sheets in space.
In DS9 the characters live and breathe and feel and grow.
Since there are many DS9 fans here, you might not be aware there are a series of novels set after the finale that continue the story (along with adding new characters). They are generally pretty good.
In some ways the Ferengi in DS9 are the most interesting. They were supposed to be the chief bad guys the TNG because the Klingons were friendly and the Romulans were in isolation. But that quickly fizzled. In DS9 there was more opportunity to develop Quark as mostly greedy but occasionally beneficial with his (briefly) Klingon wife. Rom started off as a mostly clumsy but talented mechanic with low ambitions. He learned to grow a pair (of lobes?), work for O’Brien and marry a Baoran. Nog was a teenage delinquent but by begging Sisko to recommend him for the Academy so he wouldn’t be trapped in the profit-only world of Ferengi as his father was. Grand Nagus provided comedy relief. Jazdia Dax defends them to Worf by saying Ferengi have a great love of life. Quark accuses the Federation of not liking them because they remind hu-mans of what they used to be.
Louise Fletcher as Kai Winn really nails the "smile-at-someone-while-stabbing-them-in-the-gut" of power hungry types.Sell a man a fish, and you feed him for a day.
Teach a man to fish, and you lose a steady customer.
This.
I disagree about Voyager. There were questions about Janeway destroying the what-cha-ma-callit, stranding Voyager so far from home. 
Speaking from my own experience…every person who spoke to me when there was some doubt as to their being alive…was in fact…alive.