Did Voyager get better or worse when Kes was replaced with 7 of 9?

[teacake]

DS9 didn't need the Borg, they had the Cardassians.

[exodus]

Lynx wrote:

---

First of all, I've worked in the entertainment business myself so I know a lot about what sort of business which goes on behind the curtains, not only nice things.

Business is about making profit to maintain it. It can't always be about being nice.

I don't see the dumping of Kes as a personal insult to be or the Kes fans. I see it as a cruel, stupid and unnecessary decision which they tried to cover up with vague statements. "Fury" is another story, that one was a deliberate insult to the Kes fans.

Another part of running a good business is knowing to can't please everybody. This is why producers listen to fan feed back but they can't allow all of it to affect how they run the show.
There was no reason bring back fans that may or may not have still been watching the show to begin with to "deliberately" insult them. There is no point and nothing to gain from that. What would be the purpose?
Sorry, I don't see the entire writing staff and producers all sitting around saying: "Well, we have 5 stories written. What should we go with?"
" Pulp them all, I want you to write a story that will personally and deliberately piss off Kes fans." "
"..but Kes isn't in the show anymore."
"WRITE IT!!!"
......and then they ALL agreed on it.
Highly unlikely that would waste a budget and resources on something that wasn't going to make them a profit due to further alienation of viewers. Especially since they were trying to gain more viewers by using that gimmick of bring her back, not push them away. What really happened was it was a script that sounded better on paper but ended up being poorly executed during filming. Nothing more, nothing less.

As for liking, Neelix was clearly the most disliked character on the show but they didn't dump him. Kim wasn't that popular either. So much for "fan feed back"! And if they really cared for the fans, they shouldn't have come up with such an insulting episode as "Fury".

Seems like everyone that worked on the show from Paramount, their marketing researchers and production staff all had gotten enough statistics to say differently.

So you mean that if Kes had stayed, the viewers would have abandoned Voyager. Now that is qualified rubbish! And the dumping of Kes was "for the greater good". That's actually cruel. But of course, I didn't know that Kes was the reason for all that's bad in Star Trek. Obviously it was her fault that TOS was abandoned in 1969 and "Enterprise" was dumped after three seasons. Silly me who didn't realize that.

Never mind, I see talking business economics is pointless with you.
I was under the impression we could actually have an mature adult conversation.

As for dumping Kes "for the greater good", that reminds me of certain "big political bosses" who also "dumped" people "for the greater good", for the building of socialism and who knows what. Isn't it a nice society we have created?

I don't even know how this relates to anything.

[Lynx]

[QUOTE=exodus;7475797]

Lynx wrote:

---

First of all, I've worked in the entertainment business myself so I know a lot about what sort of business which goes on behind the curtains, not only nice things.

exodus wrote:

---

Business is about making profit to maintain it. It can't always be about being nice.

Maybe. But aren't there higher and more valuable things than pure profit, such as honesty, decency and respect for other people? Or have our civilization lowered ourselves to the same level as the Ferengi?

Lynx wrote:

---

I don't see the dumping of Kes as a personal insult to be or the Kes fans. I see it as a cruel, stupid and unnecessary decision which they tried to cover up with vague statements. "Fury" is another story, that one was a deliberate insult to the Kes fans.

exodus wrote:

---

Another part of running a good business is knowing to can't please everybody. This is why producers listen to fan feed back but they can't allow all of it to affect how they run the show.
There was no reason bring back fans that may or may not have still been watching the show to begin with to "deliberately" insult them. There is no point and nothing to gain from that. What would be the purpose?
Sorry, I don't see the entire writing staff and producers all sitting around saying: "Well, we have 5 stories written. What should we go with?"
" Pulp them all, I want you to write a story that will personally and deliberately piss off Kes fans." "
"..but Kes isn't in the show anymore."
"WRITE IT!!!"
......and then they ALL agreed on it.
Highly unlikely that would waste a budget and resources on something that wasn't going to make them a profit due to further alienation of viewers. Especially since they were trying to gain more viewers by using that gimmick of bring her back, not push them away. What really happened was it was a script that sounded better on paper but ended up being poorly executed during filming. Nothing more, nothing less.

No, you can't please everyone. But you can at least avoid insulting too many. As for "Fury" I see no reason at all to come up with that horrible episode at all if it wasn't meant to be a deliberate "finger" to the Kes fans, especially those who dared to defy the gods by participating in a letter campaign for re-instating of the character. The story in "Fury" had no importance of effect at all to the ongoing Voyager story and it didn't affect or mean anything to later events in the series. There was no reason to come up with it in the first place.

Lynx wrote:

---

As for liking, Neelix was clearly the most disliked character on the show but they didn't dump him. Kim wasn't that popular either. So much for "fan feed back"! And if they really cared for the fans, they shouldn't have come up with such an insulting episode as "Fury".

exodus wrote:

---

Seems like everyone that worked on the show from Paramount, their marketing researchers and production staff all had gotten enough statistics to say differently.

Another evidence that they had little contact with and no interest of the world outside their own little group for internal admiration.

Lynx wrote:

---

So you mean that if Kes had stayed, the viewers would have abandoned Voyager. Now that is qualified rubbish! And the dumping of Kes was "for the greater good". That's actually cruel. But of course, I didn't know that Kes was the reason for all that's bad in Star Trek. Obviously it was her fault that TOS was abandoned in 1969 and "Enterprise" was dumped after three seasons. Silly me who didn't realize that.

exodus wrote:

---

Never mind, I see talking business economics is pointless with you.
I was under the impression we could actually have an mature adult conversation.

It's a bit difficult to have a mature adult conversation with someone who constantly blame the character Kes for everything that was possibly wrong with Voyager. First of all, there was no reason to dump Kes due to low ratings. Since Voyager was the third in a row with Star Trek series, they should have realized that Voyager never would reach such high ratings as TNG. Second, adding Seven did only temporary increase the ratings for the show, after season 4 they became lower than they had been in season 1-3. Third, they could have added Seven and kept Kes, fourth, they could have dumped Kim or Neeelix who were less popular than Kes, fifth, the actors who played Naomi, Icheb and Vorik didn't work for free so why have them in each and every episode if they were so tight on money and sixth, they could have kept the season 1-3 crew unchanged since Voyager after all did have decent ratings and there was no risk that it should be cancelled.

Lynx wrote:

---

As for dumping Kes "for the greater good", that reminds me of certain "big political bosses" who also "dumped" people "for the greater good", for the building of socialism and who knows what. Isn't it a nice society we have created?

exodus wrote:

---

I don't even know how this relates to anything.

It has everything to do with this. Are we no better than Ferengis?

[exodus]

[QUOTE=Lynx;7477864]

exodus wrote:

---

Maybe. But aren't there higher and more valuable things than pure profit, such as honesty, decency and respect for other people? Or have our civilization lowered ourselves to the same level as the Ferengi?



No, you can't please everyone. But you can at least avoid insulting too many. As for "Fury" I see no reason at all to come up with that horrible episode at all if it wasn't meant to be a deliberate "finger" to the Kes fans, especially those who dared to defy the gods by participating in a letter campaign for re-instating of the character. The story in "Fury" had no importance of effect at all to the ongoing Voyager story and it didn't affect or mean anything to later events in the series. There was no reason to come up with it in the first place.




Another evidence that they had little contact with and no interest of the world outside their own little group for internal admiration.




It's a bit difficult to have a mature adult conversation with someone who constantly blame the character Kes for everything that was possibly wrong with Voyager. First of all, there was no reason to dump Kes due to low ratings. Since Voyager was the third in a row with Star Trek series, they should have realized that Voyager never would reach such high ratings as TNG. Second, adding Seven did only temporary increase the ratings for the show, after season 4 they became lower than they had been in season 1-3. Third, they could have added Seven and kept Kes, fourth, they could have dumped Kim or Neeelix who were less popular than Kes, fifth, the actors who played Naomi, Icheb and Vorik didn't work for free so why have them in each and every episode if they were so tight on money and sixth, they could have kept the season 1-3 crew unchanged since Voyager after all did have decent ratings and there was no risk that it should be cancelled.

It has everything to do with this. Are we no better than Ferengis?

"is there anything higher or more valuable than pure profit"
I think if you have to ask that when talking business and economics, then it just shows how important a good education is for the how and whys of the world around us.

[Lynx]

^^
If you didn't know it, I'm well-educated and have a very good knowledge of politics, history, geography, economics and events all over the world.

I know a lot about what's going on in the business world and the official and unofficial rules of that world. But that doesn't mean that I have to like what's going on. And when I don't like certain things, I question them and speak out against them. And do you know why? Because if no one speaks out against injustice, corruption and what's wrong in this world, nothing will change or get better. That's why I think it's everyone's duty to speak out against what him or her find wrong in this world.

[teacake]

BUT we all find different things wrong with the world. If you have enough contrasting wrongs speaking out you end up with war.

[Lynx]

^^
That might happen in some unfortunate cases.
But keeping the mouth shut and accepting injustice is no guarantee for peace. Look at WWII.

And what would the world have been without environment movements, civil right movements and people like Vaclav Havel, Aleksandr Solshenitsyn etc?

[teacake]

Yeah I'm just poking at you here lynx because of the comparisons between Lien getting fired and the holocaust

[teya]

Lynx wrote:

---

And when I don't like certain things, I question them and speak out against them. And do you know why? Because if no one speaks out against injustice, corruption and what's wrong in this world, nothing will change or get better.

There are two problems with this, Lynx.

First, when I first met you on this board, you were using nasty hearsay to make your point: and you trashed the reputation of a perfectly lovely woman to do it. Not cool. I certainly hoped you learned your lesson when you discovered how incredibly wrong you were.

Second, can anything be done about this injustice?

I am deeply involved in some political issues, so yes, I do know what it means to fight for something. But these are issues where I can make a difference. I can educate people on the dangers of fracking or GMO crops. I can encourage people to buy their food from small farms in their area. I can make a difference--even a small one.

Your efforts yield nothing. Voyager is no longer being filmed. There are no new episodes coming down the pike, no Voyager movie will ever be made.

So comparing this "cause" to human rights or environmental movements is absurd. You cannot change the past & there is no future for Voyager. You're fighting a battle that can never be won. That's the essence of futility.

And, well, it's rather insulting to someone who lost family in the Holocaust to have an actress losing her job be compared to that.

[teacake]

To be fair it was me that leaped from lynx's mention of WWII to the holocaust. While it's a natural leap to make I was deliberately hyperbolizing his hyperbole. But I would not want Lien = Holcaust to enter into the board's memory and get regurgitated for the next five years as a lynx thing because that's not strictly accurate.

[JirinPanthosa]

Accepting the reality that the producers want to make money does not mean you have to like it.

Also if their goal was to increase ratings and make more money, they didn't do such a great job with that. Adding Seven was clearly a good business decision, as it briefly increased their ratings. But Voyager's constant focus on short term ratings grabbing over quality writing and long term fan loyalty was clearly a poor business decision.

Lien, well, her gimmick was the least 'Sexy' out of all the characters gimmicks, so it was probably the short term 'Safe' decision, the statistical best bet.

And with Fury, I'm pretty sure Berman actually thought the fans would enjoy that. Just like how he said with Enterprise's borg episode how fans would be pleased with the 'Continuity'.

Voyager is one of those shows that proves when you choose ratings over fan loyalty you end up with neither.

[teya]

teacake wrote:

---

To be fair it was me that leaped from lynx's mention of WWII to the holocaust. While it's a natural leap to make I was deliberately hyperbolizing his hyperbole. But I would not want Lien = Holcaust to enter into the board's memory and get regurgitated for the next five years as a lynx thing because that's not strictly accurate.

He did make the connection first, you just named the Holocaust.

But even just using WWII as the reference, I still fail to see how an actress losing her cushy $20K a week job is comparable to a war.

Call me stupid, but I really don't get it.

[teya]

JirinPanthosa wrote:

---

Also if their goal was to increase ratings and make more money, they didn't do such a great job with that. Adding Seven was clearly a good business decision, as it briefly increased their ratings. But Voyager's constant focus on short term ratings grabbing over quality writing and long term fan loyalty was clearly a poor business decision.

I do believe that I'm not alone on this board in thinking that the stories improved when Seven came on board or that Jeri was a fine addition to the cast.

[teacake]

He's not comparing Lien to WWII. He's saying that people have to speak out against injustices and listing real events where people either did or didn't speak out. He's picked really big events but he could have told some story that began "in the office last week.."

Now I agree with you that you can't compare current injustices that speaking out on will help remedy to complaining about what you perceive to be a past injustice that nothing can be done about. However I suspect he sees it as an ongoing issue, money versus people so it's not a single incident solely. He's bitching about the B's as happens here all the time, it's just he's focused on one incident and rather passionate about it. That most people don't give a fig or agree with his interpretation makes him easy to ridicule.

[Guy Gardener]

Seven stories about the Borg and regaining her humanity were easier to tell, and easier to find.

Borg stories almost write themselves and in truth don't have to be very good.

They could write worse stories that are better received because Borg is preloved.

This was an opportunity to become very lazy.

It was too hard to write exciting Ocampa stories because no one cared, and the stories actually had to be good on their own merits and not inheriting some magical legacy secret handshake roufie to borggoggle ratbristle into mink pelt.

There was a writer, who claimed that to write a good story, you must always kill off your favourite charcater first.

No idea who the hell that was.