Jar Jar Binks wrote:
A rotating cast would certainly be more realistic than having the same crew together for seven years.
Yeah, I liked this idea as far back as Babylon 5, which had more than the usual character changes. The mindset with the Trek franchise always seemed to be "Look how iconic our original crew became....so let's try to recreate that, no matter if it's not working or not."
So you'd end up with characters like Harry Kim, or Travis Mayweather.....characters which got stuck in a Catch-22 limbo. The writers didn't do much interesting with them, so the fans never really cared much for them, so the writers didn't do anything interesting with them.
So then they're just sort of "there" because, hey, that's how it's supposed to be on a Trek show. My philosophy was and still is "If you can't write numerous interesting stories about a cast member on an ensemble, then get rid of them and bring in someone that you can do this for."
7 of 9 is an example of one time when they actually did something like this......but they never really repeated that, and if they had, then they could've gone back to a more ensemble like show instead of having so many 7 of 9 eps.
The original crew is iconic and their place is aboard the Enterprise.....the rest? It should be more like Babylon 5 in the sense that when all is said and done, their time on the ship or station is simply one part of their lives. Not the end all be all of it. Like real life.