No Right Answer: Best Space Series Ever

[DRTJR]

DS9: is the "best" series of Star Trek, my favorite is ToS but that series has no legitimate end.

Not unless you count the the sixth movie, but then they were only counting the shows themselves here. Anyone who likes Star Trek and hasn't seen that movie owes it to themselves to watch it, though. It's the best of the bunch, with TWoK unfairly getting more love because it came earlier in the series.

Wrath of Kahn is an amazing film! Undiscovered country is a fitting end to ToS and a proper send off but TWoK is everything that made Trek Great, an amazing story that was both old and new in SPACE!

I have to disagree though, because TWoK wasn't quite /everything/ that made Trek great, but TUC was. If one day it's the only piece of of the original series that still exists, future generations will still have a pretty darned good idea of what it was all about. Whereas Khan, while an excellent story told within the universe, kind of does its own thing with it.

Also, The Motion Picture is a better TNG movie than any of the actual TNG movies. VI and I are my two favorites in the whole series, then II, III, IV, V[footnote]For execution. On premise it's number 1[/footnote], with the TNG movies all far enough behind that it doesn't really matter how I rank them.

Edit: And I realize the TNG movies were generally better put together than The Final Frontier was (Generations aside, that is), but the problem is they fall into the same basic trap that Trek '09 does: they're well put together action movies, not well put together Star Trek movies, and especially not well put together Star Trek: The Next Generation movies.

TMP, The Final Frontier, and Nemesis all earn my ire for a singular reason, their failures were almost bad enough to sink the entire franchise. A franchise that I want back on the small screen. Doctor Who is alive and well bopping about time and space, and yet no one is boldly going were no man has gone before? Why is this? It's because Nemesis and Enterprise failed and we suffer from those.

I'll give you the other two, but TMP was actually a box office success that revitalized the franchise. It's remembered as a failure today because it picked up an undeserved bad reputation somewhere during the 80's or 90's, but it made close to three times its budget in the US alone. Source for the budget thing: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek.htm

Edit: Also, the biggest box office success until at least the '09 movie, adjusted for inflation, was actually The Voyage Home. Part of the reason The Final Frontier was so bad was Shatner wanted to do something serious, like The Search for Spock, but Paramount thought something sillier and more comedic, like The Voyage Home, would make more money. That infighting is why the tone is so schizophrenic.

Edit Edit: Correction, it turns out that TMP was actually the highest grossing in inflation adjusted dollars until Trek '09, with IV being the highest in un-adjusted dollars, and second highest in adjusted. Trek '09 is now the highest in both, but Into Darkness still ranks below IV. Source: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

The problem of TMP is that it tried to be 2001 a space odyssey as well as Star Trek. Leonard Nimoy hated doing TMP soo much his condition to signing on to TWoK was that Spock died. The studios were wearied that another Trek project would ruin them because TMP had a monstrous budget, the filming of TWoK did several great things not only on a budget but also with the fact that Ricardo Montalban and William Shatner were never in the same room during filming yet the those two actors shared such great chemistry despite that. That is what makes some of the best Trek, creating art under such great adversity, aslo the uniforms that appeared in TWoK became one of the most icon ones in franchise history.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

DS9: is the "best" series of Star Trek, my favorite is ToS but that series has no legitimate end.

Not unless you count the the sixth movie, but then they were only counting the shows themselves here. Anyone who likes Star Trek and hasn't seen that movie owes it to themselves to watch it, though. It's the best of the bunch, with TWoK unfairly getting more love because it came earlier in the series.

Wrath of Kahn is an amazing film! Undiscovered country is a fitting end to ToS and a proper send off but TWoK is everything that made Trek Great, an amazing story that was both old and new in SPACE!

I have to disagree though, because TWoK wasn't quite /everything/ that made Trek great, but TUC was. If one day it's the only piece of of the original series that still exists, future generations will still have a pretty darned good idea of what it was all about. Whereas Khan, while an excellent story told within the universe, kind of does its own thing with it.

Also, The Motion Picture is a better TNG movie than any of the actual TNG movies. VI and I are my two favorites in the whole series, then II, III, IV, V[footnote]For execution. On premise it's number 1[/footnote], with the TNG movies all far enough behind that it doesn't really matter how I rank them.

Edit: And I realize the TNG movies were generally better put together than The Final Frontier was (Generations aside, that is), but the problem is they fall into the same basic trap that Trek '09 does: they're well put together action movies, not well put together Star Trek movies, and especially not well put together Star Trek: The Next Generation movies.

TMP, The Final Frontier, and Nemesis all earn my ire for a singular reason, their failures were almost bad enough to sink the entire franchise. A franchise that I want back on the small screen. Doctor Who is alive and well bopping about time and space, and yet no one is boldly going were no man has gone before? Why is this? It's because Nemesis and Enterprise failed and we suffer from those.

I'll give you the other two, but TMP was actually a box office success that revitalized the franchise. It's remembered as a failure today because it picked up an undeserved bad reputation somewhere during the 80's or 90's, but it made close to three times its budget in the US alone. Source for the budget thing: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek.htm

Edit: Also, the biggest box office success until at least the '09 movie, adjusted for inflation, was actually The Voyage Home. Part of the reason The Final Frontier was so bad was Shatner wanted to do something serious, like The Search for Spock, but Paramount thought something sillier and more comedic, like The Voyage Home, would make more money. That infighting is why the tone is so schizophrenic.

Edit Edit: Correction, it turns out that TMP was actually the highest grossing in inflation adjusted dollars until Trek '09, with IV being the highest in un-adjusted dollars, and second highest in adjusted. Trek '09 is now the highest in both, but Into Darkness still ranks below IV. Source: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

The problem of TMP is that it tried to be 2001 a space odyssey as well as Star Trek. Leonard Nimoy hated doing TMP soo much his condition to signing on to TWoK was that Spock died. The studios were wearied that another Trek project would ruin them because TMP had a monstrous budget, the filming of TWoK did several great things not only on a budget but also with the fact that Ricardo Montalban and William Shatner were never in the same room during filming yet the those two actors shared such great chemistry despite that. That is what makes some of the best Trek, creating art under such great adversity, aslo the uniforms that appeared in TWoK became one of the most icon ones in franchise history.

Which is funny, because the only time they didn't look totally doofy was in that one episode of TNG where Picard had a vision of what his life would have been like if he had never needed an artificial heart. Somehow they finally managed to make the things look cool. But still not as cool as the ones in TMP

And for the rest, I do see what you're saying, I just personally prefer TMP and TUD (though not in that order) to TWoK. It's a good movie, but it really doesn't need to be a Star Trek movie to work. It could have just as easily been set in the 17th century and be about a marooned pirate trying to get revenge against the man who left him to die. You could give it points for being universal, but it's just missing something for me that keeps it from being the perfect Trek film. The biggest thing is the surface narrative really is the biggest thing the film has going. It explores themes of growing older, friendship, and revenge, but that's just it: they're themes, not a message. Star Trek without a message isn't really Star Trek.

Plus, you know, Kirk doesn't get into a fistfight with an alien twice his size or have sex with a weird alien chick. He does that in The Undiscovered Country

And then he gets into a fistfight /with himself/ (or rather, that alien chick shape shifted into a copy of him), which is just beyond awesome. And then there's that message about the end of the cold war and the collapse of the soviet union, which truly was the "undiscovered country" at the time and oh god I've got to rewatch it again, dammit XD

 

[LordLundar]

This is why I went off Trek, and I'm surprised I didn't go off it earlier. What's the point of putting characters in danger every episode when you know they're not going to die, ever? Half the B5 crew either died or left, and you didn't know who it would be. Tasha Yar was an exception but really, the characters in Star Trek were invincible.

Yeah see, that's where B5 had depth to it. Most other shows with key and/or favoured characters means they are largely untouchable. For B5 that simply means they were a bigger target. NO favored character got through the series untouched. Whether killed of physically, becoming emotionally dead or going dark persona, or suffering some mental breakdown that they have to work through, Everyone was affected over the course of the series.

 

[DRTJR]

DS9: is the "best" series of Star Trek, my favorite is ToS but that series has no legitimate end.

Not unless you count the the sixth movie, but then they were only counting the shows themselves here. Anyone who likes Star Trek and hasn't seen that movie owes it to themselves to watch it, though. It's the best of the bunch, with TWoK unfairly getting more love because it came earlier in the series.

Wrath of Kahn is an amazing film! Undiscovered country is a fitting end to ToS and a proper send off but TWoK is everything that made Trek Great, an amazing story that was both old and new in SPACE!

I have to disagree though, because TWoK wasn't quite /everything/ that made Trek great, but TUC was. If one day it's the only piece of of the original series that still exists, future generations will still have a pretty darned good idea of what it was all about. Whereas Khan, while an excellent story told within the universe, kind of does its own thing with it.

Also, The Motion Picture is a better TNG movie than any of the actual TNG movies. VI and I are my two favorites in the whole series, then II, III, IV, V[footnote]For execution. On premise it's number 1[/footnote], with the TNG movies all far enough behind that it doesn't really matter how I rank them.

Edit: And I realize the TNG movies were generally better put together than The Final Frontier was (Generations aside, that is), but the problem is they fall into the same basic trap that Trek '09 does: they're well put together action movies, not well put together Star Trek movies, and especially not well put together Star Trek: The Next Generation movies.

TMP, The Final Frontier, and Nemesis all earn my ire for a singular reason, their failures were almost bad enough to sink the entire franchise. A franchise that I want back on the small screen. Doctor Who is alive and well bopping about time and space, and yet no one is boldly going were no man has gone before? Why is this? It's because Nemesis and Enterprise failed and we suffer from those.

I'll give you the other two, but TMP was actually a box office success that revitalized the franchise. It's remembered as a failure today because it picked up an undeserved bad reputation somewhere during the 80's or 90's, but it made close to three times its budget in the US alone. Source for the budget thing: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek.htm

Edit: Also, the biggest box office success until at least the '09 movie, adjusted for inflation, was actually The Voyage Home. Part of the reason The Final Frontier was so bad was Shatner wanted to do something serious, like The Search for Spock, but Paramount thought something sillier and more comedic, like The Voyage Home, would make more money. That infighting is why the tone is so schizophrenic.

Edit Edit: Correction, it turns out that TMP was actually the highest grossing in inflation adjusted dollars until Trek '09, with IV being the highest in un-adjusted dollars, and second highest in adjusted. Trek '09 is now the highest in both, but Into Darkness still ranks below IV. Source: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

The problem of TMP is that it tried to be 2001 a space odyssey as well as Star Trek. Leonard Nimoy hated doing TMP soo much his condition to signing on to TWoK was that Spock died. The studios were wearied that another Trek project would ruin them because TMP had a monstrous budget, the filming of TWoK did several great things not only on a budget but also with the fact that Ricardo Montalban and William Shatner were never in the same room during filming yet the those two actors shared such great chemistry despite that. That is what makes some of the best Trek, creating art under such great adversity, aslo the uniforms that appeared in TWoK became one of the most icon ones in franchise history.

Which is funny, because the only time they didn't look totally doofy was in that one episode of TNG where Picard had a vision of what his life would have been like if he had never needed an artificial heart. Somehow they finally managed to make the things look cool. But still not as cool as the ones in TMP

And for the rest, I do see what you're saying, I just personally prefer TMP and TUD (though not in that order) to TWoK. It's a good movie, but it really doesn't need to be a Star Trek movie to work. It could have just as easily been set in the 17th century and be about a marooned pirate trying to get revenge against the man who left him to die. You could give it points for being universal, but it's just missing something for me that keeps it from being the perfect Trek film. The biggest thing is the surface narrative really is the biggest thing the film has going. It explores themes of growing older, friendship, and revenge, but that's just it: they're themes, not a message. Star Trek without a message isn't really Star Trek.

Plus, you know, Kirk doesn't get into a fistfight with an alien twice his size or have sex with a weird alien chick. He does that in The Undiscovered Country

And then he gets into a fistfight /with himself/ (or rather, that alien chick shape shifted into a copy of him), which is just beyond awesome. And then there's that message about the end of the cold war and the collapse of the soviet union, which truly was the "undiscovered country" at the time and oh god I've got to rewatch it again, dammit XD

TWoK isn't just about one man's (who read way too much Moby Dick) obsession over the man who left him to die, it's the story of one man feeling as if he is though and that gallivanting around the cosmos is a task for the young and Admiral Kirk feels old, and by meeting Carol Marcus and his son Kirk not only beats his greatest external enemy in Khan it's also about the greatest enemy off all men Time. If it feels as if the story of Wrath of Khan could have happened every were may be true but it is made stronger the fact that it's about James T. Kirk and Khan Noonien Singh, we know the history of these two men and Why Khan is so hell bent on killing Kirk. The fact the story stands on it's own makes it a good movie based on an existing proberty what makes it great is from where it builds it's foundations.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

DS9: is the "best" series of Star Trek, my favorite is ToS but that series has no legitimate end.

Not unless you count the the sixth movie, but then they were only counting the shows themselves here. Anyone who likes Star Trek and hasn't seen that movie owes it to themselves to watch it, though. It's the best of the bunch, with TWoK unfairly getting more love because it came earlier in the series.

Wrath of Kahn is an amazing film! Undiscovered country is a fitting end to ToS and a proper send off but TWoK is everything that made Trek Great, an amazing story that was both old and new in SPACE!

I have to disagree though, because TWoK wasn't quite /everything/ that made Trek great, but TUC was. If one day it's the only piece of of the original series that still exists, future generations will still have a pretty darned good idea of what it was all about. Whereas Khan, while an excellent story told within the universe, kind of does its own thing with it.

Also, The Motion Picture is a better TNG movie than any of the actual TNG movies. VI and I are my two favorites in the whole series, then II, III, IV, V[footnote]For execution. On premise it's number 1[/footnote], with the TNG movies all far enough behind that it doesn't really matter how I rank them.

Edit: And I realize the TNG movies were generally better put together than The Final Frontier was (Generations aside, that is), but the problem is they fall into the same basic trap that Trek '09 does: they're well put together action movies, not well put together Star Trek movies, and especially not well put together Star Trek: The Next Generation movies.

TMP, The Final Frontier, and Nemesis all earn my ire for a singular reason, their failures were almost bad enough to sink the entire franchise. A franchise that I want back on the small screen. Doctor Who is alive and well bopping about time and space, and yet no one is boldly going were no man has gone before? Why is this? It's because Nemesis and Enterprise failed and we suffer from those.

I'll give you the other two, but TMP was actually a box office success that revitalized the franchise. It's remembered as a failure today because it picked up an undeserved bad reputation somewhere during the 80's or 90's, but it made close to three times its budget in the US alone. Source for the budget thing: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek.htm

Edit: Also, the biggest box office success until at least the '09 movie, adjusted for inflation, was actually The Voyage Home. Part of the reason The Final Frontier was so bad was Shatner wanted to do something serious, like The Search for Spock, but Paramount thought something sillier and more comedic, like The Voyage Home, would make more money. That infighting is why the tone is so schizophrenic.

Edit Edit: Correction, it turns out that TMP was actually the highest grossing in inflation adjusted dollars until Trek '09, with IV being the highest in un-adjusted dollars, and second highest in adjusted. Trek '09 is now the highest in both, but Into Darkness still ranks below IV. Source: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

The problem of TMP is that it tried to be 2001 a space odyssey as well as Star Trek. Leonard Nimoy hated doing TMP soo much his condition to signing on to TWoK was that Spock died. The studios were wearied that another Trek project would ruin them because TMP had a monstrous budget, the filming of TWoK did several great things not only on a budget but also with the fact that Ricardo Montalban and William Shatner were never in the same room during filming yet the those two actors shared such great chemistry despite that. That is what makes some of the best Trek, creating art under such great adversity, aslo the uniforms that appeared in TWoK became one of the most icon ones in franchise history.

Which is funny, because the only time they didn't look totally doofy was in that one episode of TNG where Picard had a vision of what his life would have been like if he had never needed an artificial heart. Somehow they finally managed to make the things look cool. But still not as cool as the ones in TMP

And for the rest, I do see what you're saying, I just personally prefer TMP and TUD (though not in that order) to TWoK. It's a good movie, but it really doesn't need to be a Star Trek movie to work. It could have just as easily been set in the 17th century and be about a marooned pirate trying to get revenge against the man who left him to die. You could give it points for being universal, but it's just missing something for me that keeps it from being the perfect Trek film. The biggest thing is the surface narrative really is the biggest thing the film has going. It explores themes of growing older, friendship, and revenge, but that's just it: they're themes, not a message. Star Trek without a message isn't really Star Trek.

Plus, you know, Kirk doesn't get into a fistfight with an alien twice his size or have sex with a weird alien chick. He does that in The Undiscovered Country

And then he gets into a fistfight /with himself/ (or rather, that alien chick shape shifted into a copy of him), which is just beyond awesome. And then there's that message about the end of the cold war and the collapse of the soviet union, which truly was the "undiscovered country" at the time and oh god I've got to rewatch it again, dammit XD

TWoK isn't just about one man's (who read way too much Moby Dick) obsession over the man who left him to die, it's the story of one man feeling as if he is though and that gallivanting around the cosmos is a task for the young and Admiral Kirk feels old, and by meeting Carol Marcus and his son Kirk not only beats his greatest external enemy in Khan it's also about the greatest enemy off all men Time. If it feels as if the story of Wrath of Khan could have happened every were may be true but it is made stronger the fact that it's about James T. Kirk and Khan Noonien Singh, we know the history of these two men and Why Khan is so hell bent on killing Kirk. The fact the story stands on it's own makes it a good movie based on an existing proberty what makes it great is from where it builds it's foundations.

But like I said earlier, the difference between the way Khan does it and the way Star Trek usually does it is that it explores a theme, but it doesn't have a specific message that the entire thing is built around, except maybe that the good of the many outweighs the needs of the few, or the one. And that was a really small part of the movie as a whole, the stuff about getting older was much bigger, and even it was less central than, you know, Khan wanting revenge, for the sheer sake of getting revenge. The themes weren't really tied into the main story all that well.

 

[Skeleon]

You're joking, right? It still had magic gravity, engines that are always on, and the same ridiculous speed-of-plot nonsense as, well, pretty much every other show. At least Trek and its ilk had the indistinguishable-from-magic handwave option open: Firefly deliberately cultivated a low-tech look despite breaking some pretty fundamental principles of physics and engineering.

"More realistically" of course doesn't mean "realistically". Also, you're giving Star Trek the better treatment here because at least they were consistently using magic? I don't understand.
We get to see the magic gravity in Firefly shutting off when the engine breaks down, so it's clearly tied to their technology also. Just because at the ass-end of the Verse they act like bandits and cowboys, doesn't mean they don't have access to Alliance tech. Plus, isn't it better to at least get the sound-thing right? Magic technology or not, there shouldn't be sound in other space.
And for a show like Star Trek that prides itself (according to its creator) on scientific accuracy and consulting - unlike Firefly - to get that basic thing wrong - unlike Firefly - is pretty sad in my book. Hell, Firefly isn't even supposed to be scientifically accurate since it's basically Western in space.

 

[themyrmidon]

IMO: BSG is the better series for one simple reason, and you guys touched on it, but didn't really make a big enough deal of it. In BSG, there was a level of continuity that just wasn't there in TNG. For example, at some point around midway in the series, the Galactica is hit by a nuke. You see the large scar from that nuke for the rest of the series. It doesn't magically disappear like battle wounds did in TNG at the beginning of the next episode. By the end of the series, the ship itself was coming apart due to the battles it had been in and lack of materials to fix it. That's good stuff, it's way more realistic that TNG, where everything just magically resets for the next hour.

For that reason alone, I thought BSG told a much better story. I like Star Trek and all (I have all of the DVDs in boxed sets), but you always knew the main characters were going to make it through unscathed to the next episode (with a very few exceptions, looking at you Denise Crosby). That was not the case in BSG, where main characters could and did die from time to time, or might lose body parts. That gave the show an edginess that I liked a lot.

I agree with this completely. I've seen BSG 3 times over and am watching TNG right now. While the nostalgia is great (I remember several episodes I saw in my childhood) I don't think I'll ever care to run through TNG again. An episode here or there, sure, but it is more of a procedural than a series. I'll watch BSG every few years for the rest of my life because it tells a complete story, not hundreds of fractions of a story.

Despite its issues I'd put BSG up there with Game of Thrones and Sons of Anarchy. Multi-character centric shows that each tell an arching story with several running threads, a largely depressing atmosphere, tons of development, and not afraid to shy away from action or controversy. Because it is all one story people remember all of it, the good and bad. With Star Trek fans can choose to remember the best while ignoring the worst episodes. Because of the nature of the beast BSG is not going to be as well remembered as TNG, but it accomplished more and deserves more respect for having the balls to actually tell a story.

 

[Trunkage]

Star Trek TNG was a big waste of time. Characters could die so easily and come back, most episode were uninteresting so much that the show made space boring, the federation was almost always morally better than anyone else and each episode pretty much meant nothing. There is no point to a good show that resets every episode. (Yes I know it wasn't every episode) Even shows like Friends and Big Bang Theory has more continuity than TNG.
The same problem occurred with most of s1 of Babylon 5 until J Michael Straczynski was given the all clear to write most of it himself. And Sinclair was not a great character. Then things change for the best.
DS9 and sort of Voyager had things moving. But it still suffered from the same fate. Under the Pale Moonlight as an episode should have resulted more repercussions for Sisko, or a small change in character and his decision making processes. But no, it was star trek, and characters can't change. A robot, a hologram and a borg were the only ones that could.
Maybe the characters are like the federation, meant to be the epitome of humanity. But it misses the point of being human. Our greatest achievements happens when we overcome our weaknesses. Probably why I liked DS9 the best, the federation wasn't squeaky clean anymore. And Section 31 was great.

 

[Undomesticated Equine]

StarGate SG-1 is the best space series ever. You are all wrong except of those people who agree with me.

 

[ZZoMBiE13]

Michael Chriton was a great character.

Evidently not great enough for you to remember his name.

Michael Chriton became a better space pirate than Han Solo ever was.

Good grief!

First, it is John Crichton

Thaaaank you.

Guys. Michael Crichton was an author. He wrote Jurassic Park, The Andromeda Strain and a bunch of other stuff. Despite being a whacked out conspiracy nut, and a stubborn denier of climate change, he was a pretty cool guy.

He was nowhere near the level of John Crichton cool ;p.

OT: This is one of those time I'm very content with the name of the show describing the situation. There really is no right answer here. For me, if I absolutely had to pick I'd take Farscape. The fact that that means ruling out Firefly, Babylon 5, the first two series of BSG and the Dominion war arc of DS9 is immensely difficult. They're all great shows.

But damn, was Farscape awesome. They are still releasing movies that have less real looking and believable aliens/creatures than that show. And I don't think I've ever seen a protagonist as likably insane as John Crichton. And for the record, (plasma) pulse pistols that use tasty vegetable oil for ammunition are pretty much the coolest guns ever.

I'm actually at something of a loss these days. Between Mass Effect ending... the way it did, and the lack of any TV show that compares with any of the ones mentioned (man, I really did not appreciate the 90s/early 00s at the time) I am utterly starved for good sci-fi. I'm slowly working my way through Breaking Bad, and that's holding my interest. Agents of SHIELD has me intrigued, and I'll watch the new series of Homeland when it starts this weekend. But apart from that, I am dry of good current pop culture.

Man, I miss shows like this. Why can't JMS get off his ass and write some 'Babylon 5: Next Generation' or something?

Fair enough.

With Tom Clancy dying yesterday, my friend and I were having a chat about various authors and I guess my mind smooshed the two together.

 

[drthmik]

While I have many fond memories of several ST:TNG episodes I really liked the whole Battlestar Galactica Series...

...
Wait, that's that new unwatchably crappy knock-off of Battlestar Galactica!

Never mind Star Trek wins by 8,769,832,465,984,765,182,073,456,128,037,456,018,263,475,082,376,508,237,640,812,675 Landslides (that's 8.7698 vigintillion FYI)

Captcha: No I never eat at TGI Fridays

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

And Sinclair was not a great character. Then things change for the best.

I didn't think so either until my 3rd or 4th watch-through of everything, including the B5 movies. He was probably the most subtle character of them all, and really helped set the initial tone of the series even just by the helpless look on his face most of the time, as if he knew all the odds were stacked against him but he was playing his part knowing something would come of it later, which it did. Excellent actor too, better than Boxleitner (who I also like, but he just can't do "understated" to save his own life).

 

[Oroboros]

As far as I'm concerned Babylon 5 outmatches both. It's presents realistic handling of realistic situations in a sci-fi setting. There's no "perfect society" like Star Trek or "suddenly aliens that want to destroy us" like BSG or so many other alien Sci-Fi dramas. Nope, major story development is all based off real events that have actually transpired and could transpire again in a more natural evolution of what becoming a level 4 space society would be. It's not post apocalyptic but it's also not pristine perfection either.

To add, It is probably the only series that would come up with new methods of visual and auditory presentation, limit them to a couple of uses to give them the impact that's needed then stops using them so it doesn't water down the effect. I've lost track of how many times the same effects were used in either of your choices which got to the point of "this again?" level.

So yeah, narrative depth that derived from the real world without being about the the real world, a solid balance of visual and auditory effects to give it the most impact, and oh yes, A story with so many minor, major and critical arcs to make your head spin but structured in a manner to make it understandable. B5 wins my vote, hands down.

Absolutely. Might not have had the budget that or technology of either BSG or TNG, but it handled a continuous plot line far better than BSG (whose was obviously made up along the way) and did the whole 'galactic community' thing a lot better than Star Trek, where 60% of the aliens receive rudimentary to no prosthetics and are lucky to appear in one episode since most are never seen or referenced again.

 

[Skeleon]

B5 was great but suffer from year to year renewal which didn't like the creator handle the story arcs quite the way he wanted, he did a couple of season endings with the expectation that he might not get renewed (we have at least two episodes showing things well into the future both of which were later rendered non-canon by the show's continuation).

True; however, JMS even stated that he wouldn't continue B5 with that threat and low budget looming over him. But producers meddling and putting pressure on is nothing new for TV shows. All in all, it worked out well.

It also had a problem with some really uneven acting, I tend to think "Claudia Christian" (Ivanova) is pretty terrible as an actress even if the character is basically okay. Also they seemed to have difficulty keeping anyone around reliably for the "Resident Telepath" role.

I would've preferred Takashima to remain on, sure. Wasn't a big fan of Ivanova, at least at first. But I would say she grew into the role nicely and it was a big loss when she eventually left.

Also the follow up series ended in a bad place, which I didn't care for.... and I was always kind of surprised that Bester never seemed to get his (though I give them credit, that character was a magnificent bastard).

Crusade? Yeah. Also, while I know JMS took a lot of inspiration from Tolkien (including the rangers), I felt the overall feel of that follow-up show was perhaps too influenced by it. Like a big "quest" and too much focus on technomages. Weird.

 

[Locutus9956]

If you're going to select star trek, then at least go with the best version of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Superior storytelling to TNG.

DS9 is unquestionably the best Stat Trek series. I would argue that if the question is the best 'Space series' rather than just a series that happens to be set in space TNG wins out there as brilliant though DS9 was most of it's episodes and plots revolved around the characters interactions with each other and politics rather than the exploration of space.

I would argue though that the same could be said (even more so frankly) of BSG.

For my money TNG is the right choice to represent Star Trek in this regard and other shows that might give it a run for its money? Frankly it's hard to think of any really possibly Babylon 5 or Stargate SG-1/Atlantis though B5 comes back to that whole 'It's not really about Space for the most part' issue I mentioned before and Stargate despite having some very cool space related episodes is mostly set on planets surfaces and has more to do with modern military/politcs and ancient mythology.

REALLY I think the TITLE of the episode is flawed inherently unless you litterelly take it to mean any show set in space in which case TNG doesnt get a look in, it's between DS9, Babylon 5, Battlestar and Stargate for me.

 

[Lightknight]

If you're going to select star trek, then at least go with the best version of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Superior storytelling to TNG.

DS9 is unquestionably the best Stat Trek series.

Highly subjective. Ask ten Trekkies which is better and you'll get any ratio of answers without any kind of "unquestionable" result.

 

[Lightknight]

How could ANYTHING Star Trek lose to that GARBAGE REBOOT of a classic series?

It generally depends on which one you grew up watching.

 

[Fdzzaigl]

I'm a sucker for BSG as well.

I like Star Trek, I like Farscape, Firefly etc. as well. But really, none of them really came close to the excellent pacing and tension building of the redone BSG series for me.

 

[gorfias]

I'm a sucker for BSG as well.

I like Star Trek, I like Farscape, Firefly etc. as well. But really, none of them really came close to the excellent pacing and tension building of the redone BSG series for me.

IGN agrees with you: http://www.ign.com/videos/2011/02/18/igns-top-5-sci-fi-tv-shows

The original gets the #2 spot to BSG #1. STTNG? #7 which is still pretty impressive out of the top 50 sci-fi tv shows ever.

Next Gen had some really excellent episodes. It was also far more uneven than BSG. It's sweet spot was likely around seasons 3-5. Some good fun had later, particularly the Worf visits lots of different quantum universes but... the Enterprise had a baby?

And, much of it is hard to watch. It is supposed to be the product of enlightened people, yet it is arguably very sexist and non-multi-cultural. Yep. Went there. The problems was addressed in a Deep Space Nine episode where the Ferengi tells the Commander that his people are better than Humans. Honestly, the original series is more palatable as you understand it is the product of its time, yet still seems culturally progressive.

BSG was more consistently great, is still visually impressive and has flesh and blood characters (including cylons!) with understandable issues within the context of the show. And its final works at least as well as the very good "All Good Things"