Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I recently started binging this wonderful series again and felt so unbelievably old when I realized the final episode aired some twenty years ago. So, to that end, I thought it might be fun to start a thread to talk about favorite episodes, legacy of the show, how well it's aged, and whatever else comes to mind.

Favorite episodes for me include The Visitor (I can't help but shed tears every time I watch this episode), In the Pale Moonlight, and of course Trials and Tribble-ations. Watching the show now, I think one of the biggest strengths of this show were the supporting characters. Garak, General Martok, and Weyoun, to name but a few, were outstanding additions to the series. Garak in particular has to be one of my favorite characters in any sci fi universe, he's just great fun to watch.

On the special effects side, I think the show has actually aged pretty well. I'm not sure how much of that is down to the fact that they used models instead of animation, though I'd reckon that's a big part of it. That said, I certainly wouldn't say no to an HD remaster. I would snatch up that Blu Ray boxset in a heartbeat. I've been waiting for an announcement since they gave TNG that facelift, but it seems like I'll be holding my breath forever.

Best. Trek. Ever.

The fact they couldn't simply Warp away from problems. That actions had consequences that'd sometimes come back to bite them.

It's also the last series (before Disco) that I actually enjoyed. Voyager was lacklustre, Enterprise awful.

Fave episodes tend to be the Ferengi ones. Dunno why, but they really do appeal to me.

I wish they'd taken up the Arc format with Voyager. They really hit on some amazing storytelling with DS9. I can't disagree more about the Ferengi episodes, moments of good storytelling lost in really, really, really bad writing, but overall I think it's become my favourite trek.

In the Pale Moonlight, the Dice is Cast, What we Leave Behind,Trials and Tribulations, all solid, solid episodes.

Oh, and I forget the name, but the stunning episode with Sisko as a storywriter back on earth exploring racism. I'll never forget that one. [Aside from the title, apparently.]

DS9 really was a big step for the ST writers as they had to step away from "Monster of the Week" formats. Whilst that was still there (esp in the first season) they quickly had to diversify into other things and no other series fleshed things out better than DS9.

We saw huge things within Starfleet itself from the Dr's Genetic alterations; to the Secret Order within Starfleet. We saw a lot more politics and character development of regular characters and the like.

It also really played with long storylines far more so than many others (Voyager let itself go because most of its long story arc was "going home" then again it was trying to return to its roots)

I didn't like it when I was a young'un as much as Voyager or TNG, but as the years have gone on I've come to appreciate it greatly. DS9 was ahead of its time in a lot of ways, and more than a few episodes seem almost prophetic 20 years later (Home Front and Paradise Lost in particular). In the Pale Moonlight is probably my favorite Star Trek episode period full stop, and one of my favorite 45 minutes of syndicated television. Easily one of the greatest lines of television ever devised and delivered.

Quark I feel is almost a landmark character in ways, a greedy conniving businessman humanized through humor and more than a few really biting lines cutting right to the heart of the optimistic utopia of the Federation. Garak as well. Few television shows can boast a cast of characters as well acted and written as the DS9 cast, and the series managed to tackle broad themes deeply without going into JLP style speeches.

Oh, and I forget the name, but the stunning episode with Sisko as a storywriter back on earth exploring racism

Far Beyond the Stars.

This was also a really good episode, though it feels out of place in the Star Trek canon in a lot of ways. It doesn't really fit, and I suppose in ways it was never really meant to. Kind of a "seize the moment" episode thrown together by a unique combination of circumstances and no other scifi series was really in a position to make that kind of television.

 LordofHats wrote:
I didn't like it when I was a young'un as much as Voyager or TNG, but as the years have gone on I've come to appreciate it greatly. DS9 was ahead of its time in a lot of ways, and more than a few episodes seem almost prophetic 20 years later (Home Front and Paradise Lost in particular). In the Pale Moonlight is probably my favorite Star Trek episode period full stop, and one of my favorite 45 minutes of syndicated television.

Quark I feel is almost a landmark character in ways, a greedy conniving businessman humanized through humor and more than a few really biting lines cutting right to the heart of the optimistic utopia of the Federation. Garak as well. Few television shows can boast a cast of characters as well acted and written as the DS9 cast, and the series managed to tackle broad themes deeply without going into JLP style speeches.

Oh, and I forget the name, but the stunning episode with Sisko as a storywriter back on earth exploring racism

Far Beyond the Stars.

This was also a really good episode, though it feels out of place in the Star Trek canon in a lot of ways. It doesn't really fit, and I suppose in ways it was never really meant to. Kind of a "seize the moment" episode thrown together by a unique combination of circumstances and no other scifi series was really in a position to make that kind of television.

That's the one.
And yes, it was utterly out of place and made no sense. But it was a powerful example of the TV show feeling something needed to be said, and saying it, with beautifully done acting and it was so nice to see the rest of the cast in "other" roles.

I forgot to say how amazing Garak was. Particularly in the James Bond Parody, when he's used to highlight what real spywork is like and just how far away we are from a real conception of it.
So. Many. Good. Episodes.

I believe I'm going to have to re-watch DS9 now, damn you all.

One thing I think that also comes to the fore is that for DS9 every alien they met or introduced mostly had to stick around long term. With Original Series, TNG and Voyager they could do whatever they wanted and that race might never appear again. With DS9 its static state meant that they had to work with what they'd got.

You see the same thing with things like Babalon 5 and I think the whole approach of a static station really lends itself well to the deeper story telling where there are fewer "throw away" episodes overall.



You notice this between a lot of "so so" series and those that last in that those which are "so so"tend to have a lot of throwaway characters and events. Episodes where basically whatever happens happens, but it could have happened at almost any point. The Merlin TV series that was on a while back had some episodes in its last series that felt like they could have been filler from the first.

It's actually something I've noticed recently as I've been rewatching a lot of Buffy and Angel and started to realise how many episodes which should be "throw away" are not. In fact the more "throw away" it feels the more key events are tied into them and a lot of characters don't just die or vanish but come around again and again.

I also liked that, for the most part, the Starfleet Crew were piggy in the middle. There at the behest of the Bajorans, only to help. Not to rule or dictate. It was out first chance to see Utopian Morals challenged by the sheer weight of reality.

The Maquis were pretty damned interesting, and again served as a good counter to 'but we're the good guys' that Trek so usually goes for. I think it's even Sisko that mentions about how they built paradise on Earth, and it skews one's perception of life elsewhere in the Federation.

If TOS worked because of the Triumvate (Kirk, Spock and McCoy representing different facets of the one mind), DS9 managed that with species and cultures.

Just a truly wonderful show. And I'm really hope we see Disco follow in it's footsteps somewhat. We saw the arcs in the first season (and I loved the extended trip to the Mirror Universe) and actions having repercussions beyond the next five minutes of run time.

DS9 is my favorite Star Trek. I loved the complexity of the show. It also allowed the exploration of the alien cultures, which was huge. We learned so much about Bajorian, Cardassian, Ferengi, and other species. They became fleshed out and made sense beyond just stereotypes.

The cast was wonderful and nuanced. Everyone had distinct personalities and brought something to the table. It was also cool to see everyone grow during the course of the series. Someone said that the crew of DS9 were a bunch of Outcasts, and I loved the dynamic between everyone. And the fact that the second in command was a religious terrorist is something that would not fly today.

Oh, and the "O'Brien must suffer episodes" were awesome. I loved how he was the everyday family man who had to deal with the crazy. Power to the engineer!

 AdeptSister wrote:
And the fact that the second in command was a religious terrorist is something that would not fly today.

Another aspect of the show being near prophetic I think. In the 90s you could roll the "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" ball without the moral guardians slamming you for it. You'd never be able to use an unapologetic terrorist as a main character in TV today, nor have a serious conversation about the morality and ethics of such tactics. It's great that DS9 was made before 9/11. In the early and mid 90s Jack Bauer could have been a Cardassian villain of the week and no one would bat an eye.

I will say I think DS9 dropped the ball on this topic at times. The ending of The Darkness and the Light has always rubbed me the wrong way. For most of the series Kira seemed to take a "I did what I had to do and what I had to do was awful and tears me up inside" approach to her time in the resistance. In that episode though she seemed to forget it entirely, and I think the series just glossed over dealing with the reality that terrorism by it's nature hold's a disregard for target legitimacy. Kira ranting about how a laundry man was as guilty as a Gul makes her come off as callus and cruel, and maybe that could have been a heat of the moment thing but the episode just leaves it like that and never bothers to have Kira go back and reflect that maybe that poor laudry man didn't deserve to have his face melted off, and maybe the young children of your oppressor isn't something you should just chalk up to "legitimate targets" and wash your hands of the ordeal.

See, I kinda liked that she was outwardly unrepentant about her killing of civilians. And it feels like the writers knew that as well. She gets out the situation in the episode by exploiting the Cardassian's "humanity" that he doesn't want to kill an innocent. She comes off clearly as not a "good guy" in the episode and I liked that. I thought Nana Visitor did a good job, to me, showing her internal conflict. It felt to me that she dove deeper into religion to deal with her guilt. And the fact that she started to like some Cardassians by the end was huge.


EDIT: Oh, Kai Winn was awesome. And I loved Gul Dukat's arc throughout the series.

I didn't necessarily expect repentance, but I think there was a chance for the show to go "beyond good and evil" as it were, and they passed that up. I think it's possible to say "I blew up children and laundry men, and it's awful, and I'd do it again."

It's a big contrast to Sisko's bit at the end of In the Pale Moonlight, which I liked a lot more. He lied, he cheated, bribed men to cover the crimes of other men, he murdered, and he'd do it again, because one man's morality weighs less than the lives of billions.

 LordofHats wrote:
I didn't like it when I was a young'un as much as Voyager or TNG, but as the years have gone on I've come to appreciate it greatly. DS9 was ahead of its time in a lot of ways, and more than a few episodes seem almost prophetic 20 years later (Home Front and Paradise Lost in particular). In the Pale Moonlight is probably my favorite Star Trek episode period full stop, and one of my favorite 45 minutes of syndicated television. Easily one of the greatest lines of television ever devised and delivered.

Quark I feel is almost a landmark character in ways, a greedy conniving businessman humanized through humor and more than a few really biting lines cutting right to the heart of the optimistic utopia of the Federation. Garak as well. Few television shows can boast a cast of characters as well acted and written as the DS9 cast, and the series managed to tackle broad themes deeply without going into JLP style speeches.

Oh, and I forget the name, but the stunning episode with Sisko as a storywriter back on earth exploring racism

Far Beyond the Stars.

This was also a really good episode, though it feels out of place in the Star Trek canon in a lot of ways. It doesn't really fit, and I suppose in ways it was never really meant to. Kind of a "seize the moment" episode thrown together by a unique combination of circumstances and no other scifi series was really in a position to make that kind of television.

Eh. Its actually something of a cliche, the character is another character writing or believing he or she is another character. (Though one of the later season prophet episodes took it to it's absurd extreme). Buffy did it around the same time, for example.

But several of the racism episodes happened because Sisko's actor (I'm thinking the name Avery for some reason?) insisted they happen, and the show was established enough at they just couldn't ignore him. The 'circumstances' were simply that no other scifi show had a black lead.


I did really dislike the Maquis as an idea. These are federation people with no real needs, playing terrorist apparently for the giggles, after refusing to give up land claims on newly settled worlds as if it were 19th century America. I found no particular reason to find them sympathetic and a lot of reason just to despise them as murderers.

The 'circumstances' were simply that no other scifi show had a black lead.

I think it's two different ways of saying the same thing.

Ira Behr btw, was the one who pushed the episode, after rejecting an earlier idea focused on Jake. It wasn't something Avery Brooks pushed for, though he was picked as director because he loved the idea and wanted to direct the episode.

I think it's also worth pointing out that Far Beyond the Stars, while awkward in Star Trek canon imo, is to good to simply call a cliche. Behr based a lot of the story on experiences of Octavia Butler and Sam Delany. Delany notably had a book rejected in 1967 for the very reason that the publisher didn't want to publish a novel with a black protagonist. They even said "readers aren't ready for it," the same excuse given to Benny Russel in episode. He eventually did get it published and it won the Hugo Award for Best Novel in 1969, which kind of cut the rug right out from under that claim.

Every character in the flashback to the 50s cast is based on someone real. O'Brien's role was based on Isaac Asimov, Quark Harlan Ellison, and Julian Henry Kuttner. Most notable of the homages though is Kira taking on a role based on C.L. Moore, who hid that she was a woman because publishers didn't think anyone would buy stories written by one, a trend that effected a lot of women in the field, including several who would write Star Trek episodes for TOS and TNG.

The episode is steeped in the history of science fiction writing, so I don't feel comfortable equating it to a cliche even if the basic premise of the episode is hardly original. Given that TOS got and still gets recognition for it's inclusive cast, it did put DS9 in a unique situation of making an episode about inclusion, especially considering that diverse casts were still not very common in the 90s, and black leads equally so.

I'd agree on the Maquis conditionally. I think they were underdeveloped as a element of the show. The very same season that introduced them also introduced the Jem'Hadar and the Dominion six episodes later and we all know how DS9 went after that.

So, I have not seen this show yet but got it on my list on Netflix, but I'm curious, do I need to watch any of the other shows in order to "get" this show, or can it be watched on its own?

..be helpful if you've seen the Next Gen. episode where Picard....

..... goes quite pale and techno-gothy , but that's all explained.

The pretty awesome sounding documentary has, alas, been delayed.


again.

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2018/12/22/ira-steven-behr-shares-deep-space-nine-doc-update-first-hd-clip/

 BrookM wrote:
So, I have not seen this show yet but got it on my list on Netflix, but I'm curious, do I need to watch any of the other shows in order to "get" this show, or can it be watched on its own?

You don't really need to have seen much else save have a general idea what Starfleet is, what a Klingon is and such. If you've got the basics like that then you'll likely be totally fine.

The first Startrek Series established some themes, but many of its weekly episodes were "alien of the week" with little having a long lasting effect on the crew. It was that "everything's the same at the end as it was at the start" TV formula.

The Next Generation got a lot lot more serious in terms of its approach and style and also had some long story lines. They also broadened out the crew a bit more so that it wasn't just focused on 3 core characters.

DS9 is the next evolution and goes further with a lot more support characters and shifts even more away from the "alien of the week" approach and by the time its into its last seasons its fully into its own built up story.

 BrookM wrote:
So, I have not seen this show yet but got it on my list on Netflix, but I'm curious, do I need to watch any of the other shows in order to "get" this show, or can it be watched on its own?

It's perfectly watchable on it's own, though a few TNG episodes notably play into the story, and you could track them down to get the maybe 5% of the picture that you won't get out of DS9.

That said, there are several TNG episodes that preceded DS9, that you can watch if you want to because they play into it. It might help to watch the Star Trek: Next Generation episodes The Best of Both Worlds (part 1 is the season three finale, and part 2 the season four premire). These episodes explain the events before, during, and after the Battle of Wolf 359, and will make Sisko's background more clear. He doesn't appear in the episodes mind you. DS9's first episode might provide enough context to understand what's going on with him, though his antagonism toward Picard might be confusing if you haven't seen related TNG episodes.

The Wounded, also in TNG's fourth season, and the season seven episode Journey's End directly connects to conflicts between the Cardassians and the Federation and the origins of the Maquis. The former is also a good primer for the character of Miles O'Brien, a supporting character in TNG who became a main character in DS9. The season five episode Ensign Ro provides the early details of the Occupation of Bajor and the Bajoran Resistance. The two parter, Chain of Command in season six also deals with the Cardassians.

 LordofHats wrote:

The 'circumstances' were simply that no other scifi show had a black lead.

I think it's two different ways of saying the same thing.

Ira Behr btw, was the one who pushed the episode, after rejecting an earlier idea focused on Jake. It wasn't something Avery Brooks pushed for, though he was picked as director because he loved the idea and wanted to direct the episode.

I think it's also worth pointing out that Far Beyond the Stars, while awkward in Star Trek canon imo, is to good to simply call a cliche. Behr based a lot of the story on experiences of Octavia Butler and Sam Delany. Delany notably had a book rejected in 1967 for the very reason that the publisher didn't want to publish a novel with a black protagonist. They even said "readers aren't ready for it," the same excuse given to Benny Russel in episode. He eventually did get it published and it won the Hugo Award for Best Novel in 1969, which kind of cut the rug right out from under that claim.

Every character in the flashback to the 50s cast is based on someone real. O'Brien's role was based on Isaac Asimov, Quark Harlan Ellison, and Julian Henry Kuttner. Most notable of the homages though is Kira taking on a role based on C.L. Moore, who hid that she was a woman because publishers didn't think anyone would buy stories written by one, a trend that effected a lot of women in the field, including several who would write Star Trek episodes for TOS and TNG.

The episode is steeped in the history of science fiction writing, so I don't feel comfortable equating it to a cliche even if the basic premise of the episode is hardly original. Given that TOS got and still gets recognition for it's inclusive cast, it did put DS9 in a unique situation of making an episode about inclusion, especially considering that diverse casts were still not very common in the 90s, and black leads equally so.


I'd agree on the Maquis conditionally. I think they were underdeveloped as a element of the show. The very same season that introduced them also introduced the Jem'Hadar and the Dominion six episodes later and we all know how DS9 went after that.

I didn't know any of that about Far Beyond the Stars, but it's pretty obvious on reflection, and a really nice touch. Thank you for sharing that.

 BrookM wrote:
So, I have not seen this show yet but got it on my list on Netflix, but I'm curious, do I need to watch any of the other shows in order to "get" this show, or can it be watched on its own?

Not... really.

There are a handful of Next Gen episodes that establish the Cardassians, Bajorans and Maquis, but DS9's first season does well in fleshing the first two out right away. The Maquis don't actually matter for a while (and overlaps with/undercuts the Bajorans a bit, imo).
The broad strokes of Bajorans and Cardassians have enough real-world parallels that encyclopedic Star Trek knowledge is unnecessary. And the Maquis are literally named for their historic inspiration, though arguably diverge a fair bit, and get oversimplified.


Picard's presence in the series pilot really doesn't matter. It was emphasized to ease the transition to the new show, but while the fallout of Wolf 359 is a big part of Sisko's character for the first few seasons, Picard really isn't.

I maintain my previous view - DS9 is great TV, but gakky Star Trek, at least after season 3.

There's a difference between showing the difficulties that arise from the Federation's positions(The Maquis, their non-interference prior to the Cardassian withdrawal, Bashir's genetic issues, having to interact with religious extremist whackaloons on a regular basis as supposed allies) and undermining the basic concept of the Federation as an entity and even the basic concept of the show itself(In The Pale Moonlight, the attempted Starfleet coup, everything to do with Section 31, a lot of the background stuff surrounding the Dominion War arc).

DS9 is a great show right up to the point where Sisko goes baldie, at which point it's only worth watching for the supporting characters and side stories IMO, and even then I struggle because for my money it's the start of the rot that ended with the Kelvinverse and STD, this idea that Star Trek has to be "more than just monster of the week", and that a show can't be interesting unless it's filled with action and growling arseholes doing terrible things.

Voss wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I didn't like it when I was a young'un as much as Voyager or TNG, but as the years have gone on I've come to appreciate it greatly. DS9 was ahead of its time in a lot of ways, and more than a few episodes seem almost prophetic 20 years later (Home Front and Paradise Lost in particular). In the Pale Moonlight is probably my favorite Star Trek episode period full stop, and one of my favorite 45 minutes of syndicated television. Easily one of the greatest lines of television ever devised and delivered.

Quark I feel is almost a landmark character in ways, a greedy conniving businessman humanized through humor and more than a few really biting lines cutting right to the heart of the optimistic utopia of the Federation. Garak as well. Few television shows can boast a cast of characters as well acted and written as the DS9 cast, and the series managed to tackle broad themes deeply without going into JLP style speeches.

Oh, and I forget the name, but the stunning episode with Sisko as a storywriter back on earth exploring racism

Far Beyond the Stars.

This was also a really good episode, though it feels out of place in the Star Trek canon in a lot of ways. It doesn't really fit, and I suppose in ways it was never really meant to. Kind of a "seize the moment" episode thrown together by a unique combination of circumstances and no other scifi series was really in a position to make that kind of television.

Eh. Its actually something of a cliche, the character is another character writing or believing he or she is another character. (Though one of the later season prophet episodes took it to it's absurd extreme). Buffy did it around the same time, for example.

But several of the racism episodes happened because Sisko's actor (I'm thinking the name Avery for some reason?) insisted they happen, and the show was established enough at they just couldn't ignore him. The 'circumstances' were simply that no other scifi show had a black lead.


I did really dislike the Maquis as an idea. These are federation people with no real needs, playing terrorist apparently for the giggles, after refusing to give up land claims on newly settled worlds as if it were 19th century America. I found no particular reason to find them sympathetic and a lot of reason just to despise them as murderers.

You should rewatch "Blaze of Glory" S5 E23. The Maquis are not what you think they are, and Eddington makes some really, really good points as to what they actually are in that episode. Basically ST was taking a look at itself, and poking a bit of fun about the absurdity of the Federation and its principles.

Speaking of Section 31, I feel like even as DS9 has aged well, Section 31 has not.

If only because Section 31 is freaking everywhere now, whether it makes sense or not *glares at Star Trek: Discovery* and wow that idea had a lot less longevity than I would have thought.

 Yodhrin wrote:
I maintain my previous view - DS9 is great TV, but gakky Star Trek, at least after season 3.

There's a difference between showing the difficulties that arise from the Federation's positions(The Maquis, their non-interference prior to the Cardassian withdrawal, Bashir's genetic issues, having to interact with religious extremist whackaloons on a regular basis as supposed allies) and undermining the basic concept of the Federation as an entity and even the basic concept of the show itself(In The Pale Moonlight, the attempted Starfleet coup, everything to do with Section 31, a lot of the background stuff surrounding the Dominion War arc).

DS9 is a great show right up to the point where Sisko goes baldie, at which point it's only worth watching for the supporting characters and side stories IMO, and even then I struggle because for my money it's the start of the rot that ended with the Kelvinverse and STD, this idea that Star Trek has to be "more than just monster of the week", and that a show can't be interesting unless it's filled with action and growling arseholes doing terrible things.

It's interesting how two different people can have a different view, I see it as the continuation of TNG, the final maturing of ST as a franchise. Even Voyager still gets high marks from me, because it maintained a lot of the atmosphere, and in the shadow of DS9 and its Dominion arc and plot, Voyager returned us to the exploration side of ST we last saw in TNG. There are so many well rounded episodes in the later seasons, that interpose daily life during wartime with the bigger plot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:
Speaking of Section 31, I feel like even as DS9 has aged well, Section 31 has not.

If only because Section 31 is freaking everywhere now, whether it makes sense or not *glares at Star Trek: Discovery* and wow that idea had a lot less longevity than I would have thought.

S31 was an interesting villain for DS9. I always felt as though it was basically tailor made for that show, and I was so glad it never showed up in Voyager.

 Yodhrin wrote:
I maintain my previous view - DS9 is great TV, but [bleep] Star Trek, at least after season 3.

There's a difference between showing the difficulties that arise from the Federation's positions(The Maquis, their non-interference prior to the Cardassian withdrawal, Bashir's genetic issues, having to interact with religious extremist whackaloons on a regular basis as supposed allies) and undermining the basic concept of the Federation as an entity and even the basic concept of the show itself(In The Pale Moonlight, the attempted Starfleet coup, everything to do with Section 31, a lot of the background stuff surrounding the Dominion War arc).

DS9 is a great show right up to the point where Sisko goes baldie, at which point it's only worth watching for the supporting characters and side stories IMO, and even then I struggle because for my money it's the start of the rot that ended with the Kelvinverse and STD, this idea that Star Trek has to be "more than just monster of the week", and that a show can't be interesting unless it's filled with action and growling arseholes doing terrible things.

See I saw it as totally differently. I DS9 was the first ST to explore all the different cultures and show how they can exist.The exploration of different cultures with each of their different valid points of view were great.

I am hoping to see the documentary and would love for the show to be transferred to HD on day (https://ds9documentary.com/).

Just adding this from the thread I started prematurely without seeing this one.

I have been watching ST since I was a small child, going on about 25 years or so now. I saw the original broadcasts of the final two seasons of Next Generation as a child, grew up with the entire runs of both DS9 and Voyager, suffered in silence through Enterprise, and cried alongside my father as JJ Abrams took a colossal dump on the franchise, not once, but twice. While we were all down, Brian Fuller came and started kicking us over and over and over all while laughing about stealing our lunch money.

But, all that aside, I've just completed a re-watch of all of DS9. It was always my favorite of the shows, growing up I had such a great time watching it with my father. You know what I've learned from my reviewing?

Some of the best, written and acted episodes of the entire franchise are set right here in this extension of the show. There is a wealth of personal growth, confrontations on highly charged topics, and well played schemes hiding throughout the show.

From the friendship between Miles and Julian, to the eventual relationship between Odo and Kira, and the friendship between Nog and Jake, we see constant examples of good writing helped only by even better acting. Even the rivalry between Hudson, Sisko and Eddington is something of a cinematic masterpiece.

There are a ton of episodes that come to mind that extol the good writing and acting of the show, but I think there are even more out there than just the most well known ones.

Last night I was watching one of my favorite episodes, "The Magnificent Ferengi" S6 E10. As I watched the episode, I couldn't keep my mind of the humor of the plot and how strange it was that the longer the story went on, the more I found myself rooting for Quark and his little band of misfits in their quest to free their mother from the dominion. At that moment, I realized how wonderfully written this episode is.

Anyone else out there have any examples of underrated trek episodes, from the franchise as a whole or from DS9 specifically?

I don't know if any were really underrated. But it might be that I don't super follow ST fandom that much. I loved the episode when O'Brien was placed in virtual prison (Hard Time). I liked how it explored how the prison system can change someone and be a super traumatic experience.

Heck I loved the O'Brien episodes as he was a family man, Non-Commissioned Officer, placed in crazy situations and continued to be somehow get through it with his grit and hard work.

Edit: Geek.com has a list of some the crazy he had to deal with. Be warned that is full of spoilers:

https://www.geek.com/television/10-horrible-traumas-experienced-by-chief-miles-obrien-1701450/

On reflection, I feel DS9’s successs I’m expanding the politics of the Alpha Quadrant, and how it went about it, was squandered by Voyager.

The Maquis were built up to be if not merciless, heavily principled. They were True Believers, Fighting The Good Fight. The way they jut folded into Federation normality so easily always irked me.

Imagine how much better Voyager could’ve been had it been a show about internal conflict, and Janeway’s ideals being challenged by the sheer pragmatism of how to best get home. Make it more a BSG than TNG-but-like-over-there.

 AdeptSister wrote:
I don't know if any were really underrated. But it might be that I don't super follow ST fandom that much.

Without delving into which opinion is right or wrong, during DS9's original run and airings a lot of people didn't like it. The show would get criticized for leaning too much on danging plots from TNG, and for abandoning established elements of the franchise (a focus on exploration and "boldly going"). It didn't help that season 1 was weak, and season 2 shaky at times. I don't think DS9 found its real footing until it the end of the second season, when the series' serial story lines really got started. Until maybe 10 years ago DS9 was arguably the second least favorite Star Trek series after Enterprise among fans.

Since then though DS9's reputation has improved (notably Voyager's popularity has declined in that same time), for a lot of the reasons people watching during the original run didn't like it. I feel an influx of new fans has played a big part, watching reruns on TV or binging on Netflix. Others like me have simply come around over time and appreciate the show more now than we did during the original run.

I watched DS9 during its original run, but my circle was totally into it. I guess I had heard of it as the "black sheep" of ST (until Enterprise came a long.)

I would totally watch Discovery if it was not on CBS All Access.