Maybe I should have qualified it "Berman thru both shows and Braga when he took over Voyager and then when he left to start up Enterprise", but that seemed a bit long.
I don't understand the hate Disco gets / still gets.
- Thread starter Gingerbread Demon
- Start date
- Status
Don't let facts get in the way of a good hate session.
I do recall the same kind of people who dislike Discovery for... certain reasons... having issue with a female captain. I even remember people suggesting it was her time of the month if she was cranky in an episode
VOY is kind of an interesting case for criticism because its own writers hated a lot of elements about it due to the desire by UPN to have "their own TNG" and the constant restrictions for syndication as well as reducing conflict.
So hating VOY is something that I rarely see but a lot of people who otherwise like it see it as flawed.
I also will never forgive them dropping Kes and keeping Neelix (and that's no shade on Ethan Phillips, it's shade on Neelix as a character they developed)
So hating VOY is something that I rarely see but a lot of people who otherwise like it see it as flawed.
I also will never forgive them dropping Kes and keeping Neelix (and that's no shade on Ethan Phillips, it's shade on Neelix as a character they developed)
Neelix...???
I certainly don't hate Voyager, but I never gave it the fair chance I gave all the other Trek series.
Time to go back and give it a red hot go I think.
It seemed to me back when the show aired, Voyager did better with casual viewers as opposed to the more hardcore fans (of which I considered myself). Biggest reason seemed to be that It betrayed its own concept by episode 2 and just seemed like TNG-lite. Plus DS9 was really picking up steam, so it was easy to compare if you were a fan of what they were doing there. Voyager hate really was a big thing back then, absolutely. I know I'd never watch it again, the one time through when it first aired was good enough. It had the best first episode of any Trek up to that point, had some good episodes here and there (anything with the doctor, really) but overall... definitely had its detractors.
I didn't watch much of VOY after the first 15 episodes when it first aired on UPN. I didn't "hate" it, but I certainly lost interest very quickly. I dumped it completely after watching "The 37s" except for maybe some "event episodes" (2-parters, etc).
But, those were different times. I recently did a complete watch/rewatch (I had only seen maybe 20% of the episodes prior to that), and I really enjoyed it. There are some highly underrated aspects of the show...and I found that I liked the characters and some of the sci-fi concepts much more than I did the first time around.
But, those were different times. I recently did a complete watch/rewatch (I had only seen maybe 20% of the episodes prior to that), and I really enjoyed it. There are some highly underrated aspects of the show...and I found that I liked the characters and some of the sci-fi concepts much more than I did the first time around.
Voyager Hatred was huge during the first two years of TrekBBS (1999-2001). To the point where it drove away the mods of the forum. It was that bad. One of the GTD mods said, "I'm not going to let this forum turn into the VOY Forum!" during one thread that was particularly heated over there.
Then Enterprise came along, the Haters shifted their hatred over there, and Voyager was forgotten about by those people. Even though the DS9 vs. VOY Sibling Rivalry continued for a few more years after that, it was among fans of those shows and wasn't the same as the hatred from the Haters who migrate from series to series.
Ron Moore's harsh critique of VOY at the beginning of 2000 (six months after he left and decided to speak out against B&B) was considered The Bashers' Bible here.
Since the Haters keep migrating, I don't take their comments about "This is the worst ever!" seriously. Because that's what they said last time. You can even see it recently. DSC Season 4 was "the worst season ever!" until PIC Season 2 became "the worst season ever!" [Insert episode here] was "the worst episode ever!" as if "Threshold" never existed. It's like The Boy Who Cried Wolf. The character of Comic Book Guy on The Simpsons exists for a reason. If someone's saying something that would sound like something he'd say, they need to take a step back.
Last edited:
Haha yeah, I think short term memories is one of the bigger problems with the haters. As bad as any episode is, it will never be a "Threshold" or "Code of Honor", not by a long shot.
And for the record since I didn't post anything about Discovery in this Discovery thread, season 4 started off very rocky for me but then MORE than redeemed itself by the end and knocked my socks off. I loved it so much.
If Discovery in particular - plus Picard and Lower Decks to a similar extent - all truly, objectively failed with most of their world audience and critics, there'd be none of the confidence and foundation for the blinding success of Strange New Worlds (and the quality and success of DSCO's S2 has been vindicated).
Most of the opinions from Angry Joe and RLM, etc, about ball 'n chain canon and the intergrity of fictional characters is pure trash, the Fandom Menace are pure trash (and possibly dangerous, deluded people).
DSCO's S4 is morbidly underrated and more memorable than most of The Book Of Boba Fett and S4 for The Expanse.
Most of the opinions from Angry Joe and RLM, etc, about ball 'n chain canon and the intergrity of fictional characters is pure trash, the Fandom Menace are pure trash (and possibly dangerous, deluded people).
DSCO's S4 is morbidly underrated and more memorable than most of The Book Of Boba Fett and S4 for The Expanse.
Last edited:
According to what I read recently, in addition to UPN insisting on standalone episodes, Brannon Braga and Rick Berman were butting heads about creative aspects of VOY storytelling.
Mainly in the sense that whenver opportunities arose to make a season long arc out of something (such as Year of Hell), Rick Berman was having none of that.
The best they could do is 2 parter episodes on some stories.
Just imagine if when VOY encountered the Equinox, the chase and resolution with the transdimensional aliens took longer than 2 episodes... the crew of the Equinox no longer being alone and maybe slowly coming back to previously abandoned SF ideals because of VOY.
The Equinox is NOT destroyed and VOY takes it along for the ride back... with some of the crew from VOY coming onboard the Equinox and Chakotay maybe being given command of it with Ransom and his first officer dead.
Over the next episode (once the whole situation with the aliens is resolved and Ransom dead), we see the Equinox being restored and upgraded even... with the following 2 seasons involving stories with both ships cruising back to the AQ at Warp 6 (what VOY was using anyway) or Warp 8 (after the Equinox is upgraded - the VOY crew experience with more advanced technology may come in hand in increasing sustainable Warp factor for Equinox - would also give Torres a chance to perform an equivalent of 'Trek miracle' (I definitely like Torres as a character, but I also think she was a bit underused as an engineer).
Last edited:
Basically, the Pegasus and Battlestar Galactica, which isn't me making a joke. It's probably what Ron Moore was thinking when he was producer of BSG.
I feel like that was him exorcising a lot of VOY demons.
I still think not destroying the Equinox would have worked out for VOY. That way the writers would have been able to focus a bit more on Chakotay as a character (and develop him better) because they'd be forced to to split the screen time between the two ships and crews.
Equinox was a fantastic story and would have really hit it if they had put that out for maybe a whole season. I like the way some of you think.
...How can there be canon violations in a brand new divergent timeline?
Yeah that's specifically why they did it, so they could mix things up without worrying about canon.
Besides, as I keep saying, Star Trek has never been too concerned with continuity before.
Brand new timeline/universe is one thing.
Continuity in the pre-existing prime-timeline should be adhered to as much as possible... and its not that big of a deal to do so when you have access to all information on past Trek at your fingertips.
Getting the technologies right, etc... making actual advancement (as opposed to the pithy attempt of what we saw in the 32nd century), and making better stories... but no, Disco writers just decided to 'do their own thing' (which would be fine if they pushed the ship into an alternate timeline future and it was no longer part of prime timeline - that's the only way you can get away with not paying attention to, or ignoring what happened before and bypassing canon altogether [which is what they wanted to do - push Disco far enough into the future to not worry about what happened before - but here's the thing, the future is inexplicably connected to the past... so you can't just ignore it - and no 'the burn' wasn't an adequate explanation by a LONG shot... it was a pithy excuse for poor storytelling if you ask me).
While Rick Berman did have a preference for standalone episodes in order to achieve success in syndication, there was no "butting heads" between him and Brannon Braga over long term story arcs lasting an entire season. Braga was still just an ordinary writer in Voyager's fourth season when he pitched the idea of Year of Hell as a season long story arc, and it was actually supported and endorsed by both Berman and Jeri Taylor (Voyager's showrunner at the time). But when Berman and Taylor went to UPN for approval, UPN were completely against that and wouldn't allow anything longer than a two parter. And even that concession supposedly took some greasing of the wheels since UPN at the time was even against two parters. Indeed, you'll note that from Voyager's fourth season onwards, and even for the first two seasons of Enterprise, with the exception of season ending cliffhangers, the only two parters that were done were the ones aired as two hour telemovies. Aside for some reason Year of Hell and Workforce.
By the time Braga did become showrunner in Voyager's fifth season, he knew UPN wouldn't budge and never bothered trying to pitch anymore season long story arcs. The only reasons UPN did allow a season long story arc for Enterprise's third season was Enterprise's sagging ratings made it clear they needed to reinvigorate the show somehow, and the popularity of 24 at the time provided proof that long term story arcs could be ratings hits.
Because they share the same past:
- any person or thing that is already born/exists before 2233, has to be identical in both timelines up to 2233. E.g. if AbramsKhan has miracle blood, so has the real Khan, since Khan was born in the 20th Century.
- especially all of ENT is the past of AbramsVerse, too. E.g. Jonathan Archer is born 2112. So, if AbramsScotty experiments with his beagle in Abrams2250s, Archer will have been ~140 years old at that time. Also, the NX-326 (as given by Abrams) is launched before the NX-01 (as given by canon). Anything in AbramsTrek that contradicts ENT is/would be a canon violation;
- all the astronomical settings are the same (regarding distances and so on; not including blowing up planets), e.g. if Vulcan has no moon in prime universe, then AbramsVulcan does not have any moon, too, and the distance from Qu'noS to Earth is the same in both universes - otherwise: canon violation.
- The setup in the movie at January 2233 shows things that have to be in the prime universe, too. E.g. if there is the survey vessel USS Kelvin with 800 crew members in January 2233 of the Abramsverse, then there is the same ship in the prime timeline where even the flagship only has 400 crew.
So, just saying "divergent timeline" and then thinking that nothing at all can be a canon violation, is very obviously wrong.
But yeah, I think it is quite clear that the authors and creators of Abramsverse are no "big thinkers", they brainstorm an idea and if they like something, then they don't even take a second look on the idea, just do it without considering anything about it.
Just from looking at the plot of the movie one can say: If they can't even put any thought on making the plot somewhat logical and believable, it is clear these people also won't be able to make something consistent to existing canon.
Adhering to canon does not automatically make a good movie/story. But "adhering to canon" and "editing the plot of a movie/episode in a way that it is in itself coherent, logical and believable" require very similar skills.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
