What is your favorite Star Trek series

[Greg Bernhardt]

What is your favorite Star Trek series and why. Who was your favorite character?

I go with Next Generation because it's what I grew up on however Spock as best character.

 

[BL4CKB0X97]

To be honest I hate the star trek series( bring the hate!) but I Love the movies.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

To be honest I hate the star trek series( bring the hate!) but I Love the movies.

Added that option :)

 

[fresh_42]

I go with Next Generation however Spock as best character.

That's exactly the point where it gets hard to answer. E.g. I like Scott Bakula very much, but TNG better. And besides Leonard Nimoy, I also liked James Doohan and Nichelle Nichols. TOS was fine when I was a kid, but as of today it has some severe disadvantages. And although I'm not a big fan of DS9, I like Armin Shimerman's role. Someone give me a die.

 

[George Jones]

What is your favorite Star Trek series and why.

You mean there was more than one series?

I go with Next Generation because it's what I grew up on

And thus I have to go with TOS. The Enterprise floats over my desk every day.

 

[XZ923]

I love TOS but it's a little too heavily earth-politicized for my taste. I was born in 1986 so some of my earliest childhood memories are TNG. Because of this, I ended up viewing TOS well after I was acquainted with TNG and found a lot of the plotlines (i.e. a planet just like Earth where the Roman Empire never fell) a little too much of a social commentary for my liking. I don't mind political plotlines in fiction (even when they're allegories of real-life events) but I'd much prefer the "chess game" with the Romulans to literally finding a planet ruled by Nazis.

That said, in a fair fight with all else being equal, Kirk would take Picard to the woodshed. I also love Spock and McCoy more than Data or Crusher (Scotty vs. La Forge is a wash, Riker doesn't really have a counterpart since Spock was technically the first officer). So TOS characters are better but TNG plotlines are better.

EDIT:
I voted for TNG for the above-stated reason but then realized I had forgotten TNG comes with Wesley Crusher (the Jar Jar Binks of the Star Trek universe) and would like to change my vote...

 

[verschrankung]

Wesley Crusher as the ST Jar Jar Binks is incredibly accurate thank you hahhaha

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Same as XZ I grew up with TNG, TOS never really gelled with me. It seemed as subtle as a brick and too far on the silly side of things, having said that voyager is probably my favourite, I'm a sucker for the castaway story (and am pining for a similar series, it could be done so much better today) and the crew becoming family was great to watch. Above all though Picard rules.

 

[DrClaude]

Only question I ever thought was hard
Was do I like Kirk or do I like Picard

(Probably the only music video containing the Schrödinger equation.)

 

[fresh_42]

(Probably the only music video containing the Schrödinger equation.)

But we have Heisenberg compensators in Star Trek! If I remember correctly, at least twice.

 

[pixel]

...having said that voyager is probably my favourite, I'm a sucker for the castaway story

I didn't particularly like the Voyager series, and even the basic concept was flawed. They were stranded 70,000 light years from Earth. Now if you watch their ship move through space, stars fly by fairly quickly. Let's say on average stars are 5 light years apart and the ship traverses this distance in one second. So to traverse 70,000 light years would take 70000/5 = 14000 sec or about 4 hours.

 

[pixel]

TOS was the first series I watched, and as with most things that tends to give it more weight, e.g., Sean Connery is the real James Bond !

I think acting-wise, things peaked with TNG, and while Spock will always retain his place in the Star Trek pantheon, I thought Data was an intriguing character.

I tended to dismiss the subsequent series, admittedly without giving them much of a chance, but recently I started getting into Enterprise and found it interesting, especially the early relationship with the Vulcans. After a while, however, it grew a bit tiresome as there was hardly an episode where ships weren't firing on each other a la Star Wars or there wasn't a shootout with phaser pistols, and it seemed every encounter with aliens ended up badly.

 

[Janus]

I love TOS but it's a little too heavily earth-politicized for my taste. I was born in 1986 so some of my earliest childhood memories are TNG. Because of this, I ended up viewing TOS well after I was acquainted with TNG and found a lot of the plotlines (i.e. a planet just like Earth where the Roman Empire never fell) a little too much of a social commentary for my liking. I don't mind political plotlines in fiction (even when they're allegories of real-life events) but I'd much prefer the "chess game" with the Romulans to literally finding a planet ruled by Nazis.

The whole reason Roddenberry created the original Star Trek was to do social commentary. At the time it originally aired, there were a lot of issues that were "verboten" to discuss on a TV series. Gene thought that if he could coat such social commentary with a SF "sugar coating", he might be able to slip it past the TV censors. For the most part, it worked.

For me, TOS will always have a special place, as it the only Star Trek I ever had for a long time, though as a show, TNG was probably better. A part of the reason for this was that TOS was sold to the network as an "action-adventure" show, and this limited somewhat what type of episodes they could make. TNG was allowed to be a drama. TNG was what TOS could have been if some of its fetters had been removed.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I didn't particularly like the Voyager series, and even the basic concept was flawed. They were stranded 70,000 light years from Earth. Now if you watch their ship move through space, stars fly by fairly quickly. Let's say on average stars are 5 light years apart and the ship traverses this distance in one second. So to traverse 70,000 light years would take 70000/5 = 14000 sec or about 4 hours.

Of all the things that shouldn't be taken seriously in Star Trek I think warp drive takes the biscuit. They never use it consistently, despite having behind-the-scenes lore about how fast each warp factor is exactly. The captain will yell out a number and they'll travel at the speed of plot. My head canon for warp was that cruise speed and max speed were very different. Sure you could gun the engines to tens of light years an hour but the wear and tear/fuel use scales disproportionately, to the point where it will blow out after a few hours/days travel. Taking a more sedate pace (like merely 1,000x light speed) means you can run near indefinitely, aside from fuel and routine maintenance.

Speaking of which the political maps always annoyed me in Star Trek. The federation was apparently 150 planets but was drawn to be over 8,000 light years wide at its widest point. Unless each planet was a state capital presiding over hundreds of stations and other minor colonies that means they are claiming millions more systems than they actually use (or could police). Not to mention it should take years to get from one side to the other.

 

[Janus]

I didn't particularly like the Voyager series, and even the basic concept was flawed. They were stranded 70,000 light years from Earth. Now if you watch their ship move through space, stars fly by fairly quickly. Let's say on average stars are 5 light years apart and the ship traverses this distance in one second. So to traverse 70,000 light years would take 70000/5 = 14000 sec or about 4 hours.

The stars flying by was more of a bowing to psychology than anything else. You saw the same effect in TOS with stars showing apparent motion on the viewing screen. Even at the highest warp factor, the apparent motion of the stars would be too slow to be noticed. However, people are psychological predisposed to associate visible movement with fast speed. If you were to show the stars for all intents and purposes motionless in these scenes, the audience would have no sense of the ship moving and these establishing shots would be lacking. They ran into the same problem when shooting the opening credit sequence for the Original series, where the Enterprise flies by with a "swish". They knew full well that it would not have made a sound in the vacuum of space, but when they previewed the shots without the "swish" it came out flat. We expect something flying by quickly to make a sound, and when it doesn't, no matter whether you know that is accurate, it just doesn't "feel" right.
So the answer is to show moving stars when they really wouldn't be and a spaceship making swish as it flies by.

 

[fresh_42]

 

[pixel]

The stars flying by was more of a bowing to psychology than anything else. You saw the same effect in TOS with stars showing apparent motion on the viewing screen. Even at the highest warp factor, the apparent motion of the stars would be too slow to be noticed.

I didn't know that there was no connection between the maximum speed the ship was capable of and the displayed motion of the stars. I was going by the latter, but have since read numerical estimates for the different warp speeds. So I guess the basic story line now makes more sense (while the view from the ship's windows makes less ).

 

[Aufbauwerk 2045]

I voted for the original series.

I wonder if anyone will vote for Enterprise. I never watched it until a colleague recommended it. For me it ranks second only to the original.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

The stars flying by was more of a bowing to psychology than anything else. You saw the same effect in TOS with stars showing apparent motion on the viewing screen. Even at the highest warp factor, the apparent motion of the stars would be too slow to be noticed. However, people are psychological predisposed to associate visible movement with fast speed. If you were to show the stars for all intents and purposes motionless in these scenes, the audience would have no sense of the ship moving and these establishing shots would be lacking.

The warp effect from the latest film was quite good. It showed a literal warp bubble around the ship that distorted the background like a lens. Combined with some flaring at the back it gave the impression of rapid movement without real stars whizzing by

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

TNG also had "Q" which was a great character. Was he in any of the other series?

 

[fresh_42]

TNG also had "Q" which was a great character. Was he in any of the other series?

TNG (8), Voyager (3) and Deep Space 9 (1).

John de Lancie also played a role on Stargate SG-1 (5).

 

[Janus]

TNG also had "Q" which was a great character. Was he in any of the other series?

He showed up in a couple episodes of "Voyager".

 

[Noisy Rhysling]

I watched the show when it was on TV the first time around. I almost never sat through the whole show.

 

[XZ923]

TNG also had "Q" which was a great character. Was he in any of the other series?

Voyager and DS9. In Voyager he wanted very much to father a child with Captain Janeway. She refused him and he went back to his ex-wife to mate; however, Janeway did agree to be the child's godmother.

 

[UsableThought]

So the answer is to show moving stars when they really wouldn't be and a spaceship making swish as it flies by.

This is one reason (among many) why Kubrick's 2001 still lingers: he depicted space as silent and made it work. But agree w/ all your other points; the sci-fi genre for TV and movies modifies reality in favor of story-telling.

 

[Noisy Rhysling]

This is one reason (among many) why Kubrick's 2001 still lingers: he depicted space as silent and made it work. But agree w/ all your other points; the sci-fi genre for TV and movies modifies reality in favor of story-telling.

Well, vacuums have nothing to add to a story.

;)

 

[enorbet]

I grew up on TOS and like Dr Who defended it against morons who didn't get that it took place on many levels. "You want Monstahs? We got Monstahs!" but if you pay attention the real plot is underneath, subversive and ...well... fascinating. That said the fact remains that as a network television show that was actually canceled for a time for low confidence in return on investment, it wasn't until the groundswell of popular support changed all that and Gene Roddenberry got as close to a Blank Check as any TV producer can get which gave him the freedom to stop so much pandering and get serious with TNG. Enterprise and especially Deep Space Nine and Voyager were quantum leaps in entropy falling back largely to pandering again but I watched them pretty faithfully anyway but then I'm not immune to Testosterone and Oxytocin. ;)

 

[StatGuy2000]

Voyager and DS9. In Voyager he wanted very much to father a child with Captain Janeway. She refused him and he went back to his ex-wife to mate; however, Janeway did agree to be the child's godmother.

Could someone point me to the episode of DS9 where Q appeared? I remember watching DS9 from the beginning, but I don't have a clear recollection of Q appearing.

I do recall Q appearing in the 3 episodes of Voyager (btw I have read somewhere that Kate Mulgrew and John de Lancie are good friends in real life).

 

[StatGuy2000]

As for myself, I grew up watching TNG so naturally that show was my favourite, although I greatly enjoyed watching the Star Trek films. I should note that I first started watching seriously TOS after I started watching TNG, as well as after seeing the first three films of the Star Trek films.

As for the characters on the Star Trek series, while on the one hand I greatly liked Spock (and really enjoyed the camaraderie between Spoke, Kirk and McCoy), my favourite Star Trek characters were Captain Picard and Data. Also found Q to be a greatly entertaining character too!

As for DS9, I wasn't too fond of the show at the beginning, but it grew on me, and especially enjoyed how the show changed once the nature of the threat of the Dominion came to the fore, and always enjoyed the episodes where Quark and Odo came to the fore.

Voyager was kind of hit-and-miss -- some episodes were entertaining while others were just so-so. I felt that the show improved once Seven of Nine entered the series.

I tried watching episodes of Enterprise, and ended up hating that show, with bad writing and poor acting from Jolene Blalock (as Vulcan T'Pol) and especially Connor Trinneer (as Commander Trip Tucker, who I found irredeemably irritating) just ruining it for me.

 

[fresh_42]

Could someone point me to the episode of DS9 where Q appeared?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708586/

 

[StatGuy2000]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708586/

Thanks for the link. This must have been the one episode of DS9 that I don't recall seeing (not sure why).

 

[fresh_42]

Thanks for the link. This must have been the one episode of DS9 that I don't recall seeing (not sure why).

Strange. Me neither.

 

[newjerseyrunner]

TNG for me, however I really like TOS as well. Voyager was okay, but I didn't like DS9 or Enterprise at all.

I hate the new movies. The reason I like Star Trek is the sense of action/adventure. This iteration is just action, but completely lacking in adventure. It boldly goes where we've seen The Federation go before... booooring.

 

[Ettina]

I'm afraid that I can't get into TOS. I can't stand how flat and stereotypical the female characters are, and Kirk pisses me off. Spock is OK, but he never had much appeal to me.
Some of my favorite characters are:
Odo
Data
Seven of Nine
Dax, both Jadzia and Ezri
Nog

 

[Buzz Bloom]

I prefer the movies primarily for their production values and their plots. My clear favorite is IV - The Voyage Home. My second favorite is First Contact. (I think First Contact was helped by my previously seeing the Borg episodes of the Next Generation series.)

Close 2nd choice is the original series. It's plot originality at the time was fantastic. Favorite character: Spock.

Close 3rd choice: Next Generations. Favorite character: Picard.

Not close 4th choice: Enterprise. Favorite character: Kirk.

5th choice Voyager. Favorite character: Janeway.

Did not like at all: Deep Space Nine: Worse character: Sisco - Avery Brooks did not understand this character at all. He was much much better as Hawk in the Spenser series.

 

[pixel]

Not close 4th choice: Enterprise. Favorite character: Kirk.

Kirk?

 

[fresh_42]

Kirk?

Archer. I just don't understand why it's not T'Pol.

 

[Noisy Rhysling]

Kelvin timeline.

 

[clope023]

Next Generation with Deep Space Nine as a close second; TNG had the better captain (though Sisko is definitely a cool cat), but you can guess from my avatar that DSN had the better villains. Favorite characters overall tend to be Picard, Kirk, Spock, Data, Riker, Sisko, Bashir, Quark, Nog, Q, O'Brien, Odo, Garak and Dukat; honorable mentions to Worf, Quinan, Martok, and Gowron.

 

[Vanadium 50]

No love for the animated series?

 

[UsableThought]

No love for the animated series?

The special effects were too hokey. The one episode I tried to watch, the alien spaceship they were checking out looked like a giant flower or seed pod or something.

 

[jim hardy]

Given my decades old crush on Mariette Hartley

i have to vote for original TV series episode "All Our Yesterdays" .

 

[Buzz Bloom]

Since this thread is about favorites, and I voted for movies, my favorite movies are:
1. (By far my first choice) Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home
2. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
3. Star Trek: First Contact

 

[XZ923]

Since this thread is about favorites, and I voted for movies, my favorite movies are:
1. (By far my first choice) Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home
2. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
3. Star Trek: First Contact

1. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
I
I
I
[empty space to emphasize how far above the rest ST2 is]
I
I
I
2. Star Trek: Insurrection
3. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

 

[fresh_42]

Since this thread is about favorites, and I voted for movies, my favorite movies are:
1. (By far my first choice) Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home
2. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
3. Star Trek: First Contact

Yep. And it contains my most favorite quote [McCOY]:

The bureaucratic mentality is the only constant in the universe.​

This is so true. I always had been inclined to claim my country is the worst, but then I discovered, all others aren't much better. O.k. I haven't checked all, but some major ones, so the hypothesis appears to be justified.

 

[jim hardy]

Yep. And it contains my most favorite quote [McCOY]:

The bureaucratic mentality is the only constant in the universe.​

This is so true. I always had been inclined to claim my country is the worst, but then I discovered, all others aren't much better. O.k. I haven't checked all, but some major ones, so the hypothesis appears to be justified.

British writer C N Parkinson wrote at length on Bureaucracy in the 1950's. His "The Law of Delay" is a classic and management curricula are beginning to recognize his contributions to the science. I highly recommend that book to anyone working for an outfit of significant size . From my position at the bottom of the organization it gave me great ability to make light of the all too often self defeating machinations of middle management.
I sent a copy to our CEO .

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0345225651/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[OmCheeto]

British writer C N Parkinson wrote at length on Bureaucracy in the 1950's. His "The Law of Delay" is a classic and management curricula are beginning to recognize his contributions to the science. I highly recommend that book to anyone working for an outfit of significant size . From my position at the bottom of the organization it gave me great ability to make light of the all too often self defeating machinations of middle management.
I sent a copy to our CEO .

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0345225651/?tag=pfamazon01-20

for going so off topic, and, for not telling me about this book when I was employed by an outfit of significant size.

ps. I'm forwarding your book recommendation to my young protege, as she got caught up in such machinations, and is probably still there, wondering how to deal with it.
pps. OMG. Middle management...

 

[jim hardy]

Hmm. Yes, i digressed...

Surely there was a Star Trek on this thought ...

When any organizational entity expands beyond 21 members, the real power will be in some smaller body. C. Northcote Parkinson
www.brainyquote.com/authors/c_northcote_parkinson

?

 

[Borg]

I don't have a favorite. They each had their own merits and I enjoyed them equally.

 

[OmCheeto]

Hmm. Yes, i digressed...

Surely there was a Star Trek on this thought ...
?

Glad you did. I made many "trekkian" connections with Parkinson's thoughts.

As I see it:

Parkinson: "Here's what's wrong with the way we run things."
Roddenberry: "Here's how people in the future run things."​

I may have to get that book, and read it myself.

ps. Here's the portion I deleted from my post yesterday:

ppps.
Fast rewind to OmCheeto in the Navy:
Captain; "We've got a problem."
Om; "I'm pretty good with problems. Would you like me to work on it?"
Captain; "Make it so, OmCheeto!"
Me; "Ok. [scratches head. solves problem.] Done!"
Fleet Admiral; "Give that Om kid a medal or something."
[true story]

Slow rewind to civilian life:
Om; "You could make this a lot more efficient if you..."
Middle management; "Shut up! I'm in charge here."
[true story]

Is the book anything like that?​

Analysis of my situation in the navy: Everyone is judged by their problem solving abilities, regardless of social/rank status. Very Trekkian.
Analysis of my situation in civilian life: Everyone is judged by their social/rank status.

pps. I also had about a thousand other thoughts. Most of which involved me thinking about how "adolescent" of a species we still are.