So, what’s the TL;DR of your DS9 criticism? I’m curious.
War. Star Trek is supposed to be about avoiding a conflict. I felt at the time and still do that DS9 was copying B5. B5 was about a war. What led up to it, the war itself, and the aftermath and I feel that DS9 decided to copy that. They’d already copied the format. B5 was offered to Paramount before WB picked it up. But the whole DS9 war storyline just felt contrived and against the principles of Star Trek. Plus, I really felt Star Trek fell off after TNG season 5. They divided the creative team and both series suffered. And when Trials and Tribbleations aired I just had this realization that it was sad that the best episode of DS9 was a callback to TOS. I stopped watching not long after.
My problem with Discovery is that they changed everything for change sake. And season 1 is about war. Not just that, but a war started by a student of Sarek. The first episode just felt like a common war SF with a Trek skin. And I just couldn’t get into season 2 and haven’t tried since.
I love Picard. I think it is the perfect follow on to TNG. Loved everything a out it. I love Strange New Worlds, but it is so obviously a reboot, but they went back and are telling TOS and TNG quality stories. I haven’t had a chance to watch the finale yet.
So my enjoyment of Obi-wan Kenobi probably parallels my enjoyment of Picard. The funny thing is that I’ve encountered so many people who love Discovery and hate Picard. I find that baffling on some levels, but on others it makes sense. As a 40 year Star Trek fan it just doesn’t make sense. But when I see what some fans say about various parts of Star Trek, I can see that there is some logic to it. They aren’t looking at it the same way I do. I’ve been trying to find what lies behind my differing views from many of you about TLJ, TROS, and now Kenobi.
The explanation is elementary, old friend. You are a masochist, who likes the emotional torment of watching bad films and shows. 😉