Vicious circle, actor stopped caring and bitched all the time so the writers didn't bother to give him the shiniest toys to play with and so when Chakotay heavy episodes came along he delivered bla to bad performances so the writers cared even less.
The problem is that you can make that argument for the whole series.
It's a much more tenuous argument with the whole series though. We know the finale was just on the holodeck. It's a flimsy premise to try and apply it to every episode, there's just enough for someone to headcanon it that way if they so choose but not enough for me personally to entertain it as a viable theory. It mostly stems from people just wanting to decanonise ENT.
But that's also the motive for thinking of the finale as not representing actual events—it was just as much the intent of the creative team that Trip died on that mission, in that way, as it was that the rest of the series happened the way it did.
The finale wasn't meant to open either door.
By not showing the real events as we were used to seeing them that one episode does have that vulnerability that allows it to be reinterpreted but you're right I utterly loathe that insulting episode and that is entirely my motivation for entrenching myself in this exploit.
Im with both of you there. You're not wrong. It has nothing to do with nostalgia and everything to do with having higher standards. Star Trek was a show I watched for compelling stories with interesting characters that I wanted to see every week. DS9 was the epitome of this, even in its darker moments,and the Kurtzman era makes fools of themselves when trying to reference it. All they end up accomplishing is reminding me of a time when writers understood how to create good character driven stories. This creative team arent skilled enough to do an "In the Pale Moonlight" or "The Siege of AR 558". I'm sorry, but they are not on that level.
Last edited:
Yeah, but that was also in a time when shows could get canceled before the first season had completed. Even the great Lucille Ball had her last show cancelled after just 7 episodes because of bad ratings. Back then, past glories meant nothing. If a show stank, it got yanked and replaced pretty quickly.
Its not like now where the suits go " We like it, so let's go ahead and fund a second season before we know how the audience reacts to the first" A 26 episode per season show lasting 7 years is nothing to sneeze at no matter which era it was in.
Last edited:
Ok.
I don't think that's what they're hired to do. I'm ok without the moral duplicity of some of DS9, or the sheer torture porn of some of the Dominion War episodes. But, the fact that these are held up as a standard is why we keep getting war stories because that's what fans say they like.
Life with Lucy was indeed pretty bad. It had one good episode - the one with John Ritter appearing as himself. The rest of the series is eminently forgettable, so much so that only one episode of a Lucille Ball sitcom is even worth remembering.
I don't understand why Beltran gets so much criticism.
I can understand why he was unhappy with what the writers of VOY came up with.
No, I didn't watch it.
I gave up on ENT after five episodes. Simply too much which was wrong with the series for me.
I just read later that Trip had ben killed off and also read about fans complaining over it.
Maybe those in charge of PRO did a better job than Berman and his gang.
I agree.
And you gave up on basically every modern Trek in the past decade.
It’s very hard to take any criticisms seriously from someone who largely gave up on the franchise 25 years ago.
Sometimes it’s just better to move on.
So typical.
Many people HAVE moved on. That's the problem. Maybe instead of brushing off or dismissing criticism from fans, try listening for once. You know, IDIC and all that?
So typical.
And yet, so many wonder why the franchise doesn't have the same fandom it once had. Maybe instead of brushing off or dismissing criticism, try listening for once.
I have no problem with criticism. I have plenty of it. I agree with others’ criticisms that are leveled at the franchise. But if one continues to tune out of the show after a few episodes, maybe it’s not for them. Maybe they’ve outgrown the franchise. That’s okay. It really is. But FOMO looms large over fandom as a whole. Therefore it’s really hard to take people’s criticisms seriously of episodes or entire series they haven’t even watched.
So stop playing the card of “Typical studio shill not listening to people who have criticisms.” It doesn’t look good on you.
Can we just sticky this…all across the internet?
Criticize something one has actually experienced? Not a problem. Otherwise? Feel free…but it’s unlikely to have any useful insights to offer.
Wooden performance, stereotypical dialog, inconsistent details.
His own disinterest in the scripts for the series after Jeri Taylor left, something he admitted to when a guest on the D-Con Chamber podcast.
I remember watching Here's Lucy with Gale Gordon but not Life With Lucy.
I was a TV nerd even at twelve, and even I barely watched it.
Only when the insults towards production teams stop and the declarations of perfect Trek are recognized as being subjective not objective fact. Fans are too busy insulting production teams for "lazy writing" so much that it's become cliche and meaningless, like the word hate.
So typical.
Many people HAVE moved on. That's the problem. Maybe instead of brushing off or dismissing criticism from fans, try listening for once. You know, IDIC and all that?
IDIC doesn't mean I don't get to comment and maybe say I like something you don't and that doesn't make whole eras bad.
The poor faith argumentation is centered around false dichotomies, straw men, and conservative viewpoints on the franchise to actual nuance discussion. A lot of broad sweeping generalizations of eras, fans, and producers. Berman isn't all bad and he isn't all good. Kurtzman isn't all bad and isn't all good. No, Star Trek will not rise to heights in the 90s because the whole media landscape has changed.
It's like sports fans who insist modern players could never compete in the 80s. What a meaningless discussion point.
Or maybe, just maybe, the people creating these new shows aren't able to grab him the way the creators of the previous FOUR shows did. Give me a break. We're not talking about a guy who only liked one incarnation of Star Trek and hates everything else.
I don't recall him saying he didn't watch them. He said he stopped after four or five episodes, which is more than enough time to give a show a chance. The fact he keeps coming back to watch the newest incarnation shows he still cares and is still a fan. His opinion is just as valuable as the person who watches everything regardless if he likes it or not.
If the shoe fits
Similar threads
- Locked
