Sunday, March 6, 2022

Matrix within a Matrix debunked

I've always thought that Zion was a catch basin for those who couldn't accept the main Matrix program. 

After all, it presents the perfect scenario for skeptics and conspiracy theorists: a future in which they are persecuted and manipulated, with a clear enemy to fight against. 

That would distract them seeking out the ultimate truth: that they still have not emerged into The Real. 

This theory was pretty wide spread, apparently. 

It makes so much sense to me, I was convinced it was the case. 

Yet, if it were actually a thing, the Wachowski's would have put in a nod to it in the latest film. 

They did not. 

So much for my movie interpretation skills!



Monday, January 3, 2022

Matrix Resurrections: The poison pill anti-sequel sequel

Neo with hand out. Is he trying to tell us something?

Be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

I had high hopes for Matrix Resurrections. It paired Lana Wachowski (and Aleksandr Hemon) with David Mitchell, the writer of Cloud Atlas. I saw the film adaptation of that in the theatre, and while it didn’t quite work for me (maybe I didn’t really get it), I was blown away by how wildly ambitious it was. The Wachowski’s take big chances, which I really admire. 

 

Lana Wachowski also said she made the film as a way of processing grief over the death of her parents. 

 

Whoa. 

 

That sounds like one heck of a solid emotional core for a film.

 

Unfortunately, it wasn’t what I was hoping for (not that this is relevant, but hey… subjectivity). 

 

Resurrections is two movies in one, giving you more bang for your cinematic buck: it’s a metatextual commentary on the film industry loosely tied into a continuation of the story concluded in Revolutions.

 

The metatextual commentary is fascinating (even as a primal scream of frustration) but the continuation of the story… not so much.

 

It begins with a redo of the first movie’s opening sequence: agents closing in on Trinity. This time, Agent Smith is a younger Morpheus (what?), and the entire sequence is being observed by an interloper named Bugs. She seems to be our new protagonist, and sports blue hair. She knows the whole story of the Matrix, so she’s perplexed seeing a rehash of earlier events.

Turns out, it’s a 'modal', a training subprogram that endlessly runs a single scenario. Kind of like how fictional characters in mass media are forever trapped in an endless sequel/reboot cycle.

 

Clever! 

 

We go on to find Neo, now mere Thomas Anderson, at a software company (Deus Machina), where he’s the star programmer who created the revered Matrix video games. Agent Smith is his manager/partner. 

The Matrix: the video game

 

Clearly Anderson is an avatar for Lana Wachowski. 

 

Several drones are introduced, including Jude (Judas?), a sycophantic, blinkered, obnoxious and base being who is… I forget. The Creative Director? 

 

Neither Smith nor Anderson are aware of their previous life; it’s all just part of a video game now. 

 

Smith informs Lana/Anderson that Warner Brothers isn’t interested in the new game (‘Binary’) that Anderson’s working on; instead, they want a sequel to The Matrix trilogy. And they’ll do it without them if they don’t go along. The seated Lana/Anderson is stressed and appalled and begins clawing at his/her knees.

 

This kicks off a series of scenes that dive down the rabbit hole of the film making sequel sausage machine, where marketers present research documents (the two key words audiences associate with The Matrix are original and fresh, so make an unnecessary sequel… original and fresh. What?), and the development team engages in ‘brainstorming’ sessions, in which people throwing around obnoxious statements without thought or consideration. It’s the corporate idea of creativity and it’s nausea inducing.

 

They’re the most powerful in the film because they’re actually saying something. I bet they’re Lana Wachowski’s opinion of real life meetings with Warner Brothers, and oh boy, she was NOT happy with Warner Brother’s threat to make sequels against her (and her sister’s) wishes. 

 

Sure, Warner’s owns the property, and from a legal perspective I’m sure they’ve got plenty of lawyers to justify making a sequel (along with profit projections), but from a creative viewpoint I totally understand the Wachowski’s not being happy about it. As an audience member, I’m not happy about it either.

 

I’m also part of the problem, because I go and see sequels in the vain hope they’ll recapture the magic of the originals. The Same But Different! Rarely do you see a sequel switch into another genre (Alien to Aliens). The latest Star Wars sequels seemed to be generated by putting the first trilogy in a blender and hitting puree. They become meaningless recycled gibberish.

 

As an artistic statement, The Matrix films concluded with Revolutions. But the story cannot end because, thanks to people like me, studios can make money milking dead cows.


Walk (fly) away from explosions

Matrix Resurrections isn’t the red pill, it isn’t the blue pill: it’s the poison pill. 

 

It deliberately undermines itself and the originals, attacks the sequel machine, avaricious film corporations, obnoxious fans who completely misinterpret meaning, and obnoxiously inserts frames from the earlier trilogy as nostalgia pellets… akin to what a rabbit would drop. 

It feels like the film is trolling the audience. It’s our fault movie characters are caught in these endless, torturous loops, each more awful than the last. 

 

The Matrix was storyboarded up the wazoo. The new film? It was shot on the fly, and it shows. It looks like the high budget version of home video.

 

The epic aspects of the Matrix are pointedly deflated. Morpheus-Smith appears to Lana/Neo in a lavatory, lamely quoting his earlier self and desperately grasping for gravitas that isn't there. It's like Luke tossing away his lightsaber. 

 

Is Wachowski annihilating aspects of the original she feels we incorrectly latched on to? The original series fetishized violence; is that why it’s deemphasized/poorly done here?

 

People excuse Keanu’s lackluster fight scenes by blaming his age, which is nonsensical, because he kicks ass in John Wick. Here, Neo just holds out his hands to stop bullets; it's his power move. Over and over and over and over again.

Neo does this. A LOT.

 

The fight scenes in Cobra Kai are more compelling, at a tiny fraction of the cost. 

The Resurrection characters make a point of saying they no longer need to escape through phone lines, but they don’t establish new rules. Which makes the chase scene at the end confusing: what are they trying to escape to. 

 

The metatextual aspect of the film has much greater passion. 

I’d rather see a documentary by Lana about the whole Matrix phenomenon and her journey through the film industry, than this. 

 

The sequel… I get the desire to bring Neo and Trinity back. Hey, they become 'a binary' (wasn’t that Anderson’s new game?)! I enjoyed the idea of long lost love, of cosmic connection inevitably bringing two people together. But the rest of it doesn’t hold water, and devolves into a meaningless chase scene, where I don’t understand the stakes, where they’re going or why. 

They don’t need a phone line… so where are they going again?

Is the 'swarm' idea a commentary on social media mobbing? Herd mindedness? Zombie movies? 

I don't know and don't really care.

 

The Analyst was a step down from The Architect. I detected real anger coming through his character, contempt for both his POV and the target of his frustrations (us). Nasty as he is (and he turns conspicuously misogynist in the last scene), he’s not wrong about people believing our emotions validate our actions, and us being immune to facts when feelings run hot. 

I am as guilty of this as the next person.

 

It’s difficult to escape subjectivity (and hey, that’s what this review is). 

 

I cannot recommend seeing Resurrections in a theatre. On the other hand, I would be very interested in watching it again on TV, with a director’s commentary track. 

 

(As I walked to my favourite cafĂ© to write this review, a black cat crossed my path. I’ve walked this path for 10 years, and that’s never happened before. It made me laugh. A glitch in... you know.)

 

The leap of faith I couldn't make

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thursday, December 2, 2021

Matrix Resurrections trailers


The trailers are looking fantastic. They suggest heavy themes (Neo in therapy!), of lost loves and realities and lives (Chance meeting Trinity in a cafe!), and then goes whole hog into action jackson. 

The second trailer mixes footage from the first films with the new one: realities are mixing, new versions overwriting the old. 

Could be amazing, or... it could be like Lucas' story rhyming, where he blows up a Death Star every other stanza. 

Which way will it go?

Fingers crossed...


We know Morpheus has been replaced by a younger, better looking actor; the formerly suave Merovingian is now a bum, and Neo has an extra thick chord sticking out of the back of his head when he was in his battery pod.  

But what does it mean? Not a clue. 

My guess? The new Matrix is nearing collapse and requires a reboot, yada yada, unexpected complications. Then suddenly everything is subverted in the best possible way. 

We know the machines are keeping an eye on Neo this time with Doogie-therapist, and keeping him pacified with big blue pills. Which means... the machines may not be onboard with Neo doing his choice/reboot thing. 

Morpheus 2.0 is back provoking Neo again in the fight simulator, more annoying than ever. 


Peace between humans and machines has broken down.

Maybe the Oracle, seen reading Alice in Wonderland in the trailer, can shed some light. And if she's back, so is... The Architect?

We will see! Fingers crossed it will rock!

I have to say I loved all four films in the original Matrix trilogy.

You did not read that wrong: I love the whole set, not just the first film.

Everyone says it derailed, that it went to hell, that the sequels were failures.

They are like Jon Snow: they know nothing.

They’re challenging in ways that action flicks aren’t. No, they aren’t perfect, but what is?

Macho dudes shooting macho guns across macho realities

To me, they were engaging on both the superficial action level and a deeper one. 

The Wachowski's had something to say with the trilogy and their Trinity: Neo (One), Trinity and… Smith. 

Neo is tied to Trinity by the bond of love, whereas Smith is tied to Neo by hate. 

Neo's faith and hope, while Smith is cynicism and faithlessness. 

The Matrix simulation contained millions of minds. The ‘real’ world, however, was never real: it was a catch basin for those minds that the matrix rejected. Why? As the simulation progresses in time, the number of rejects rises, destabilizing the system and making a reset necessary.  

We have never actually seen the real real world, whatever that might be.

Business douchebag in the first trailer gets the no-mouth treatment in the second
 
That’s why Neo has super powers in both. 

Smith’s cynicism infects the whole matrix simulation, turning it into a bleak landscape of inescapable mono-thought, hate filled and cynical, until Neo returns daylight.

Robot harvesting 'eggs' (human pods)

The Wachowski’s are smart, ambitious filmmakers. They take big risks with their films, and sometimes they don’t work out as well as one might have liked. 

I’m hopeful that the new Matrix film, Resurrections, has something to say. 

The first trailer starts out incredibly strong, then descends into spectacular action rehash. Maybe they don't want to give too much away...

Merovingian is back, and he's looking worse for wear

Going by Lana’s comments, which tie the new film to personal events, suggest that yes, it’s going to have meaning beyond cash grab. But it also likely won't be what we expect.

"Maybe this story is not the one we think it is..."

Wachowski also told EW: "Art is a mirror. Most will prefer to gaze at the surface, but there will be people like me who enjoy what lies behind the looking glass. I made this movie for them."

Sounds good to me.

Ruins of a future city


Wednesday, December 1, 2021

Final Season of The Expanse inbound!




I love 
The Expanse

It’s gritty and uncompromising. Reminiscent of Ronald D. Moore’s Battlestar Galactica, it has a very down to earth (in space!) feel to it. 

Like BSG, there's a large cast of characters, and initially the Expanse cast is a little harder to get into. Hell, it’s difficult to tell who the main characters even are. That sorts itself out quick, but it can still be a barrier to getting into the show. 

I highly recommend sticking it out for at least 4 episodes before deciding to drop the show. Trust me. It’s worth the investment.

One advantage The Expanse has over BSG: it does have a plan. The whole program is one great overarching story, beginning to end, a grand narrative that’s been plotted in advance by a series of books (which are not actually finished yet… deja GOT). 

I have faith they’ll be able to bring the whole thing to a satisfying conclusion, although how I have no idea. So many threads! So many mysteries! Again, a little deja GOT. 

I’m not sure how much I can even really say about the program without giving important details away. 

I can say that the books were written in a highly unusual fashion. Also, the characters prove themselves to be awesome. They act intelligently, with solid motivations. 

The two are connected.

The reason why they have greater integrity? They're based on RPG player characters.

I shit you not: the book(s) were written based on role playing game sessions.

A writer (I believe it was Daniel Abraham) joined sessions being run by a fellow who was developing his own sci-fi game (and universe) named Ty Franck. Abraham thought it a blast,  that it would make a really good book series, and a collaboration was born (along with James S. A. Corey, their combined pen name).

My understanding is that there was originally going to be one more main character (the healer/doctor/medic), but he dropped out of the game (too busy to play). As a result, his poor character was unceremoniously decapitated while sitting in a prison cell during a space battle. 

That'll teach him.

What an interesting idea, though! Using the combined brain power of a team of players to test your plot. To show what people in that situation (or imagining themselves in that situation) would do. 

Brilliant! 

There are many shows where characters devolve into plot plotters, shuffling around not because they have any character need, but because the plot requires it. This creates unsatisfying stories, and I know (as an attempted author) it can be a real problem. 

Sometimes characters take on agency of their own, and disobey and derail your plot, all without needing external people to actually embody them. So... just think how much more authentic actions would be if taken by… real people! 

That’s just one of the unusual angles in The Expanse.

The science in the show is far more rigorous than in Star Trek (which isn’t difficult, admittedly, Trek is more sci-fantasy), and (possibly) a bit more than BSG. Except when you bring in the, um, yeah, stuff later in the series... but even then it's presented really well. 

So it's not entirely realistic. Travel time is compressed (oh, GOT) and some mundane concerns have been glided over, as there’s a lot to consider with space travel and colonies. Still, it takes a lot more into consideration than I’m used to in run of the mill sci-fi.

You get the sense that the people behind the show really Give A Shit. 

This show has a dedication to craft and authenticity that is unrivalled in sci-fi. It's the best sci-fi TV show on television, hands down. 

Thoroughly engaging, highly recommended.

And there’s still time to get a go on it before the final season arrives. Give it a try, you won't be sorry. 

I’m stoked!



Saturday, November 27, 2021

Space Babes, Seven of Nine and Magnum Thrax

Saviour of Voyager: Seven of Nine in silver catsuit and corset

Scantily clad, buxom women have been a part of sci-fi since its inception, often crassly so. A recent exhibit of film posters was filled with images of beautiful women imperiled by vampires, werewolves, tentacled aliens and even ancient mummies. 

The posters for The Day the Earth Stood Still, Forbidden Planet, Invaders from Mars, Invasion of the Saucer Men, Tobor the Great, Satan's Satellites, Creature from the Black Lagoon, Revenge of the Creature, Attack of the Crab Monster, Robot Monster and many, many more show monsters carrying a shapely damsel in distress. 



On the flip side are alien seductresses in human guise, predatory succubi and femme fatale sirens. 

I don't think that even begins to delve into truly exploitation cinema. Grindhouse is even more explicit. 

Why? We know why. The three main drivers of human behavior are: food, sex and fear.


A preying mantis woman hybrid monster would hit all three. Has that been done? Call my agent!

Seven of Nine, from Star Trek: Voyager, follows in the footsteps of space babes going back to even before Barbarella. Seven was brought on to Voyager due to flagging (har har) ratings. And what do you do when your ratings are collapsing? Bring in a busty woman clad in catsuit, corset and high heels. 

This did not sit well with Captain Janeway's Kate Mulgrew, and I can't say she was wrong, especially as the first woman to lead a Trek show. You'd think the ideals behind Trek would elevate it beyond such crass pandering. Nope. When your show's going to be cancelled, you don't stop to question. And after Seven of Nine joined the show, ratings spiked. Her figure hit magazine covers everywhere, and was prominently featured in promotional materials.

There's an argument to be made that she saved the show from an early cancellation. 

Here's the thing: there was no in-universe reason for her to be dressed like that. None, other than the Doctor's (understandably) pervy male preferences. But that's not enough of a justification in-universe: Janeway would never have stood for it. She'd have Seven dressed as a member of the Voyager crew, same as the former Maquis, in a Starfleet uniform. That, of course, would not show off Jeri Ryan's wonderful figure or boost ratings (quite as much). Bottom line, Trek is a commercial TV show; push comes to shove, any in-universe ethical integrity gets trumped by ratings, especially when cancellation looms.

Remind you of anyone? Bueller?

Seven was so successful at drawing attention that they added the shapely T'Pol to Enterprise right from the get go, also in a figure hugging catsuit. Was there any in-universe reason for this, other than it appeals to male viewers? 

Not that, on a certain level, I object. But such pandering to male sexuality can irk and alienate female viewers, who feel the effect of the male gaze everywhere males go. Mulgrew felt the pandering was beneath Trek, and I honestly felt kind of the same when Seven appeared. What franchise was I watching?

Don't get me wrong! As a male, I appreciate female beauty as much as the next guy. It's awesome! But such button pressing is often more than a little on the nose, and our male susceptibility to this is amusingly, if annoyingly, human. But there's a time and a place, too, and Trek I always thought to be inclusive, and from TNG on more sophisticated than TOS. Initially, it seemed like Seven would be more at home in Lexx, which never had any pretensions about what it was or where it was aiming. 


I don't think there was ever a reason in Barbarella for her to be dressed like that. Same goes for Heavy Metal, The She Creature!, Starcrash, Logan's Run, Cleopatra 2525, Queen of Outer Space, Barb Wire, practically any vampire movie (doubly so for space vampires) and endless others. None of them have a rationale for this. Look at the entire genre of superheroes, where women's outfits are anything but practical. 

A heavily armed and lightly dressed Barbarella

That was the inspiration for the satire that is Magnum Thrax. To satirize and the whole phenomenon, the underlying drives, while on another level eating its cake. The book does have an explanation for scantily clad and heavily armed 'space babes'. It's quite specific about it, the reasons are very pointedly satirical, and the book goes on to explore many themes, topics and tropes in a tongue in cheek way. 

This is our nature, as human beings: both sublime and base. 

For example, the internet was created by scientists to help spur collaboration and accelerate research. The big joke? As songs on the internet say: the internet is for porn. Humans take our greatest scientific achievements and turn them around to fill our base desires. 


What? You were expecting something different? What species are you from, again?


Think about how banana split sundaes hack our desire for sweets. All hunter gatherers would be able to find in the wild is some ripe berries. Our sweet tooth would compel us to eat them all at once. Fair enough: it was probably advantageous to eat berries immediately, whenever we found them. Thanks to technology, however, we can create a dish that indulges our base cravings for sweets and enter calorie heaven... and sicken ourselves at the same time.

Healthy? Of course not! Not in the least! But very human.

The book explores how ridiculous we are, how our behaviour is shaped by our underlying desires, and how our greatest aspirations often become entangled in our base nature. 

That's part of the humour of it!

Films like Amazons on the Moon also takes satirical aim at our penchant for space babes in sci-fi.


A lot of people can't see beyond a surface level reading. They are appalled by the very idea of repurposed sexbots, and see no satirical value or subversion. Fair enough, it's not for them, the humour is invisible. Humour is extremely subjective and I've no doubt I've gotten some things wrong; I readily admit my sense of humour is a bit different. Okay, maybe flat out weird. I don't know.

Yet a lot of other mainstream sci-fi properties exploit female sexuality without any acknowledgement whatsoever of what they're doing, with Seven of Nine being a case in point. 

I should note that Jeri Ryan gave a fabulous performance in Voyager; she became a compelling and fully realized character who transcended the crass reasoning behind her initial conception to the point where character dominated. I don't think T'Pol ever rose to that level. 

And times are changing, too: a Star Trek film received a lot of flak for including a gratuitous bikini shot.

Taylor Swift's satirical music video Bad Blood hits a lot of the tropes on a banana split sundae level

If you find humanity's flawed nature itself funny, you might enjoy Magnum Thrax, warts and all. 

Because having warts is human, just like the characters in Thrax.

Now if you will excuse me, I'm going out for a double bacon cheeseburger, poutine, carbonated liquid sugar drink and a banana split sundae, followed by a nap and a triple bypass.


Friday, September 24, 2021

Marvel's What if...?

Cap's been on a diet

What if they had endings?

No, seriously, what if?

In terms of visuals, the show's gobsmacking! Drop dead gorgeous. Looks like they animated art deco posters from the 1920's. I gather it's all done with filters over 3D models, but DAMN. Super impressive filters.

The only thing that gives me pause visually is the lip syncing. It just feels off, like I'm watching Ashley Simpson. Mouth and sound don't match. The 3-D model mouths don't seem to form the proper shapes.  

All the more irksome when so much else is so breathtaking visually!

The action sequences are impeccably staged... and yet, I find the show oddly lacking in tension. The action is feels perfunctory, something you expect, like fries and a drink. 


Captain Peggy Carter and Star Lord Panther

Maybe I'm just jaded after so much super hero spectacle. 

The stories aren't grabbing me.

For a What if show, I'd expect mind blowing concepts, like Wandavision and Loki had. Again, I'm probably just jaded and need to go on a diet of independent art films made on a laundry change budget. 

Peggy's ending was okay; having her pop up 70 years later echoes popsicle Roger's return. But it didn't have emotional impact. The zombie one just petered out into nihilism. 

Dr. Strange's outing was dark, had the strongest finish, and the most emotional heft of the entire series, however awful. 

And there's the rub: all the other episodes have felt like fluff, with lacklustre endings and bland humour. 

A series without teeth. 

Of course, humour is like the very essence of subjectivity, so what do I know?

Maybe they need to do the basic scenarios before they really go full Twilight Zone and really start playing around. 

Visually, I love it. A full feature with this look would be amazing. The Rocketeer would rock the look. So would Superman or Wonder Woman. 

Whoops, wrong franchise!

I think I need to take a break from Marvel for a bit...



Saturday, September 18, 2021

The Great Deep Space Nine Rewatch

DS9 (Deep Space Nine) is excellent. I haven't watched DS9 in something like twenty years, so I thought the COVID-19 lockdown might be a good time to re-acquaint myself with the show. 

I remember seeing a good deal of it during the initial run, but I know I missed some episodes. 

I just finished all seven seasons (over 7 days worth of content spread over two months), and I can say it holds up. It has an epic arc with The Dominion War, a fabulous set of nuanced, compelling characters and some of the best villains to grace a Star Trek show. 

Like the other two late Twentieth Century Trek shows (TNG and Voyager), it changes radically in season three. 

The first two seasons of TNG were, let's face it, kinda rough. Lots of great ideas were there, but they didn't gel. Season two is more in focus than the first, but it's not until season 3 that it all really comes together. It may have something to do with the new uniforms, which were no longer causing extreme crotch discomfort for the male actors (seriously, this is why they changed the uniforms: Starfleets key personnel were being rendered infertile). 

Voyager spent the first two seasons, if memory serves, dealing with the Kazon, who were (for me) a rather lacklustre foil for the crew. Season three sees the ship hit Borg space, and introduces Jeri Ryan in her sexy silver cat suit. I have some quibbles around that as an act of pandering to the lowest common denominator, but admittedly no objection to Miss Ryan's unquestionably riveting appearance.

DS9 starts out like typical Trek, solid and episodic. The first two seasons are a lot better than TNG's first two and on par with Voyager's start. The characters, however, stand out more with DS9: while Voyager also has a mix of Starfleet and non-Starfleet cast members (the latter half Maquis terrorists), the cast of DS9 is more eclectic. 

The big initial twist with DS9 is that it's set on a space station near Bajor. The crew isn't going anywhere, which means the villains and extras stick around, and the consequences of earlier episodes aren't so easily evaded. In the first episode, a wormhole leading to the Gamma Quadrant (far far away otherwise) appears beside the station. This opens up a whole new region of space to play in and populate. 

Planet Bajor was set up in TNG: it has just been freed from a long and oppressive Cardassian occupation. Initially the TNG character Ensign Ro was going to be the station's first officer, but she turned down the role, and it turned into the equally feisty Major Kira.

Kiera (Nana Visitor), a core cast member, is a spiritual former terrorist and understandably hates Cardassians. She's combative on every front, both personal and professional. It takes a little while to discover her softer side. Her struggles nicely nuanced right from the start: she's not needlessly violent, but like the French Resistance (and the parallels are deliberate) she'll fight and kill (including civilians) for her people's freedom. 

DS9 is headed up by the bold Commander Benjamin Sisko (Avery Brooks), who's suffering from PTSD after losing his wife at Wolf-359 (where the Borg slaughtered the Federation fleet). He's immediately proclaimed The Emissary by the Bajorans, adding an interesting mystical subplot to the show. 

He's joined on the station by his young son, Jake (Cirroc Lofton), who's an ordinary kid, unlike the almost superhumanly capable adults in Starfleet. 

Quark (Armin Shimerman), an openly, defiantly avaricious Ferengi, runs the station bar; his character is rounded out by flashes of empathy from time to time. Not that he'd ever admit to it. His brother Rom works with him, and is a peripheral character initially, but takes on new dimensions starting in season three, where he emerges as a gifted engineer. 

Rom's son Nog (Aron Eisenberg) is paired with Jake, and the two form an unlikely interspecies friendship. In fact, interspecies friendships abound on the station. 

Odo (Rene Auberjonois), the shape shifting station security chief, is an island, preferring not to have any close connections, but he has an antagonism with Quark, who's always got some illegal scheme going on, that has a fun interdependent angle to it. They're like the coyote and the sheep dog from the Warner Brother cartoons: friends but also enemies. 

Bashir (Alexander Siddig) is the brash young station doctor, who's a bit of a legend in his own mind, and he rubs the other crew members the wrong way at first, especially O'Brien. Bashir proves to be both brilliant and genetically enhanced, which is revealed around season three, and that adds a whole new angle to his character.

Miles O'Brien (Colm Meaney)is the station's chief engineer and responsible for keeping the aging Cardassian station operational, which is no small feat. He's put upon and disgruntled a lot of the time, besieged by requests and demands, and storylines regularly subject him to great suffering. In fact, this becomes something of a joke in the writer's room, where they have the saying: "O'Brien must suffer". And man, does he. In one episode, they actually kill him off, only to replace himself with an O'Brien from another timeline. 

O'Brien is a man down in the trenches, and Julian Bashir's attitude and endless chatter drive him bonkers. Over the course of the show, the two become fast friends, although there are some hilarious barbs exchanged between them over the years. 

Dax (Terry Farrell) is the station's sexy Trill science officer; she's had multiple lives, including several as men (Curzon, a former male host, was fast friends with Sisko). She's a little nebulous at first, character wise: early on she's very chill and balanced. Later on, they bring out her party hearty side, like a kind of space age science hippy. 

Garak (Andrew Robinson) is the station's tailor; an ex-Cardassian spy, he's endlessly dissembling, and mixes lies with truth so much you can't tell what's real and what's not. He develops a friendship with Bashir, and the two have lunch once a week together for almost the entire run of the show. There's even a little sexual subtext to their connection. 

Conflict is the order of the day on DS9. Character's are built to conflict, but they also work through their differences, which is a big theme of the show: that people with very different points of view can ultimately get along. 

Kiera (Nana Visitor) is a window into Bajor, Julian can explore all sorts of medical themes, Sisko gets both command and spiritual themes as The Emissary, Quark is a window into Trek's underworld, Jake and Nog into youth in the Twenty-fourth Century, Dax into balance, tolerance, change, and difference; while Odo is law and order, topped by his fabulous shape shifting, a topic that is mined extensively. In later seasons, it is revealed he is one of The Founders, the shape shifters who run The Dominion, the arch-foil of The Federation for the later half of the show's run. 

What's great about DS9's first two seasons of episodic shows is that it lets you get to know the characters really well before throwing them into the grand narrative arc of The Dominion War. 

This builds up over season three and then becomes a dominant aspect of the show all the way through to the finale. 

The show intersperses the Dominion Arc episodes with one-offs until towards the end of season 7, and it's jarring sometimes. You go from a life and death struggle with a relentless enemy one episode to funny problems in Quark's bar the next. You get a bit of whiplash with this. On the other hand, if all the one-off episodes were taken out, I think the show would get too dark. It's nice to still have side jaunts that explore the lives of the station's quirky characters. 

One thing the show does very well is convey a sense of a larger universe. The writers will seed clues to larger events in episodes earlier on in the season, or even whole seasons earlier, and then hit you with a big payoff that's all the bigger for the build up. You can look back at the clues and they all add up, which is awesome. I'm sure there's a lot of ad lib stuff, and retro fitting, going on as well, there always is in such a complex, ongoing narrative, but enough of it is so well planned out you can really invest in the show's reality. 

There are quibbles, of course, but they don't seriously detract from the show. Considering the scope and scale of it, and the likely onerous demands of higher level executives, I'm amazed it all holds together as well as it does. 

This is Trek as never before: no other Trek show at this point has had such strong, ongoing narrative threads. No other Trek show fleshes out it's villains as well as DS9, and they are worth mentioning: 

Gul Dukat (Mark Alaimo), the former leader of Cardassia's Bajor occupation, is a reptilian, Machiavellian schemer who likes to preen and pose as virtuous. He has enough of a conscience to need to justify his villainy to himself and others. What's great about him is that the writer's will let him be decent for a stretch, to the point you wonder if he's changed, if he isn't really villainous, but then he'll do something truly dastardly. It ties back nicely to a quote from Jean-Luc Picard: "Villains who twirl their moustaches are easy to spot. It's the ones who cloak themselves in good deeds who are the real threat." Or something close to that. 

Speaking of villains cloaked in virtue, Kai Winn (Louise Fletcher) is the epitome of this. She's one of the most vile characters I've ever seen on Trek, and I can't stand to watch her oily condescension and passive aggression. She keeps things just civil enough, masks her snide barbs just enough, to avoid direct confrontation. She lies and denies as well as Garak, perhaps even better, but with non of his charm. That said, the show will allow slivers of decency to show through from time to time. 

Later on there's Weyoun (Jeffrey Combs), the unctuous and smarmy Voorta diplomat. He's exceedingly polite and complimentary when he wants something from you, and turns snide, demeaning and sadistic when he doesn't. 

No other Star Trek show has ever explored villainy with such depth and nuance. It's great stuff!

The Founders are presented as deeply xenophobic, ruling an empire of solids out fo fear of them. The lead founder is motherly towards Odo, and seems decent and reasonable at first, but as push turns to shove, becomes monstrously punitive and genocidal. 

Speaking of which, DS9 introduces Section 31, a secret organization within The Federation that is dedicated to protecting it at any cost, including creating a plague to exterminate The Founders. Their methods are antithetical to everything the Federation stands for, the stick to the Federation's soft speech, and they run into conflict with DS9's crew. 

This is an area of contention with fans of Trek: many see it as undermining Roddenberry's hope for a better, gentler humanity. And to be fair, they have a point. Section 31 delves into the nasty side of international (interstellar) politics and implies they're necessary. It's disheartening that the Federation's decency is a lie, and that deceit, murder and even genocide are necessary for survival. That The Federation continues to exist at all could indeed be thanks to Section 31's hidden perfidy and mass murder. 

On the other hand, the storyline does pose the question loudly and effectively, and it pits the crew agains this viewpoint, to a degree (as we shall see next). Star Trek has always glided past how it's economy works, and how they've solved all of today's pernicious social and economic issues. Perhaps it is childish to view the future through rose coloured glasses. The show's writers are more hard nosed realists when it comes to interstellar politics. 

The important thing here, I think, is that the question is raised, and we are poised the question: at what price survival? What are we willing to countenance from our military and spy agencies? Where does one rightly draw the line?

This leads nicely into In the Pale Moonlight, for me the most memorable of all DS9's episodes. One of the hallmarks of great drama is characters making truly difficult choices: not between right and obviously wrong, but between lesser evils. Here Benjamin Sisko enters into a deception, aided by Garak, to bring the Romulans into the war with The Dominion, which The Federation is currently losing. Distressed by the weekly casualty lists, Sisko is intent on doing what he can to save his beloved Federation. With Garak's help, he concocts a fake hologram tape of The Dominion's agents plotting an invasion of Romulus. He passes it on to a Romulan senator, who discovers it is fake. Before he can get back to Romulus and expose Sisko's hoax, his ship explodes. The damaged data rod is then recovered by the Romulans, it's flaws hidden by the explosion, and they duly declare war on The Dominion. This is what Garak planned all along, and Sisko is complicit in the deliberate murder. 

The episode is presented in flashbacks as Sisko recounts events in his log, which he then deletes. He questions whether or not he can live with what he's done, with the compromises he has made, and in the end, he decides he can. 

Unlike TNG, DS9 never sugar coats, and moral absolutes are quickly muddied into shades of grey. The best thing I can say about it is that it's truly thought provoking. You can argue about Sisko's choices (as you can about those made by many of the other characters) because there are multiple sides to the issues. Where do you draw the line? Was Sisko justified? Why and why not? 

What Sisko does condemns millions of Romulans to death, but also saves the Alpha Quadrant. Does he have the right to make that decision? And yet, with your own civilization on the line, what would you do to survive?

It reminds me of The 100, which (before it flew off the rails and into orbit) was relentless in presenting it's characters with painfully difficult choices that would stain their souls. 

Some things don’t track if you think about them too much, and I’ll list a couple quibbles just to be pedantic:

Starfleet asking Sisko to plan the invasion of Cardassia strikes me as odd. He’s a field officer, not a staff officer. D-Day was led by Eisenhower, who was a five-star general, and he was supported by a large dedicated staff. Invading a planet is many orders of magnitude larger than D-Day; there’s just no way they’d give that responsibility to a captain. It’s beyond their pay grade and role. At very least, Sisko would be promoted, transferred to HQ, and have dozens of new characters assigned to support him. Sure, they could make DS9 their HQ, but where are Sisko’s staff officers? This is a monumental task!

Earlier, they had Sisko lead a fleet of six hundred ships (six hundred!) against the Dominion. Such a vast fleet would be broken down into sections, each commanded by an admiral, with at least a rear admiral commanding the lot. There’d be admirals coming out of your behind with that many ships. It certainly wouldn’t be led by a captain. 

Sisko is being screwed: his admiral managers are off loading tons of THEIR work onto him without proper compensation or recognition! Planning the invasion of a planet, leading a thousand ships, that’s what admirals are for!

Of course, the show is on a budget, and for narrative reasons they want a main cast member at the head of the story (ie. invasion plans, etc). 

Something else that irks is the ire Sisko gets from Starfleet for trying to be The Emissary and a star fleet officer at the same time. Hello?!? Surely Starfleet knows that the whole reason they have not lost the Dominion War is because The Emissary asked The Prophets very nicely to evaporate the Dominion fleet and prevent more from coming through the wormhole. 

Yet The Admiral keeps riding Sisko for trying to get along with The Prophets. Is this man oblivious? The greatest contribution to the war effort, by far, was made by The Prophets. They’re the only thing standing between The Federation and utter, total defeat. But you won’t allow even a little leeway for Sisko to deal with them, to keep them happy? 

It’s so monumentally short sighted, so transparently artificial, such a bit of drama for the sake of drama, that it knocks me out of the narrative a little. 

Then again, Starfleet admirals have a history of being boneheads, traitors, megalomaniacs, batshit insane or controlled by alien parasites. 

C’est la vie.

The Dominion is repeatedly shown to be crafty and resourceful, setting traps and starting wars between their enemies. They aren’t merely a bunch of tin plated imbeciles running into laser guns in order to aggrandize the heroes. They have agency, an instincts for self-preservation (well the Voorta do, not so much the Jem Hadar), and they can and will adapt to our hero’s plans. All of which makes them excellent foils.

On the progressive front, the show is no slacker: it tackles inequality, excessive greed and racism repeatedly. Of particular note is a two-parter in which Sisko goes back in time to 2023 and gets embroiled in a historic riot, as well as a dream episode in which he’s a writer in the 1950’s and is forbidden to publish a story about a black space station captain. Quark and the Ferengi are used to criticize the excesses of capitalism. 

Worf joins the show in season three, and has numerous episodes exploring Klingon warrior/honour culture.

DS9 also has a wonderful extended wrap up: the latte half of the seventh season is one big long story, and most of the story lines are suitably tied up with bows. 

Sisko sacrifices himself to destroy Dukat (who's the evil Pah-wraith's chosen one) and ascends into the wormhole in the sky. He tells Cassidy (a freighter captain he marries in season seven) that he may one day be back. The one quibble i have here is that he doesn't talk in a vision to his own son. But that's just a quibble. 

There's a great arc for Nog, who's joined Starfleet, only to be badly injured in battle (losing his leg), and finally returns to duty as a lieutenant. 

Rom becomes Grand Nagus, Odo merges with the Great Link, Kiera becomes station chief, Dax and Julian get together, O'Brien goes off to earth to teach at Starfleet academy and Worf becomes ambassador to The Klingon Empire. 

Of all the Star Trek shows, this one has the best wrap up. 

Thanks in large part to the ongoing narrative and nuanced, multi-dimensional (and compromised) characters, it feels the most like an evolving family, and it's the most sorely missed when it concludes. 

What show runner Ira Steven Behr, and talented symphony of writers, actors & crew, accomplished with DS9 is truly special. Thank The Prophets Paramount executives were too focused on micromanaging Voyager to notice the brilliance happening in the background. 

Count me a fan.

Try it, you may like it. It's the most approachable, immersive and innovative (after TNG initial setting up of the franchise's New Wave) of all the Trek iterations for me, thanks to a diverse cast of characters, including ordinary civilians. It shifts from episodic to serialization, explores spirituality/religion, war, morality and capitalism. 

It also has a bar.