Braga simply did not watch the show

[DevilEyes]

So, rather than BSG (which had head and shoulders better ratings than TNG ever had)

Hmm, oldBSG or newBSG?

NewBSG never had great ratings, at some points it would dip below 2 million viewers compared to TNG's consistent 9-11 million viewers, SciFi just pushed it because of its critical success.

Or because DVDs sold well and it was one of the most downloaded shows. Nielsen ratings don't really reflect a show's popularity today, at all.

Paramount didn't take into account that TNG came about after a nearly 15 to 20 year absence of Trek on TV. So folks who had only grown up watching reruns of TOS, TNG was like Christmas morning. By the time Voy. aired, the novelity of Treks re-birth had long faded causing TNG, DS9 & Voy being back to back was too much Trek too soon. By ENT. nearly everyone was burnt out on Trek.

Nonsense. I hear this argument over and over again, and I still don't buy it. Later seasons of Voyager tanked because they were crap. Enterprise tanked because it was crap. TNG succeeded because it was not crap. Audience burnout had nothing to do with either.

TNG season 1 was the crappiest season on any Trek show ever. Season 2 of TNG was better, but not by much. By your logic, TNG should have tanked badly and been cancelled after season 4, despite seasons 3 and 4 being excellent....which is exactly what happened to ENT.

 

[TheGodBen]

Or because DVDs sold well and it was one of the most downloaded shows. Nielsen ratings don't really reflect a show's popularity today, at all.

But BSG still can't compare to TNG in terms of popularity or recognisability, most people will know of Captain Picard if you mention him, I doubt they would if you mentioned Admiral Adama. Case in point, I've heard a radio presenter referring to the station's chief engineer as their Geordie La Forge, if he had been called the station's Galen Tyrol even I'd have to think for a second to get the reference and I love Tyrol, beer-belly and all.

 

[exodus]

Paramount didn't take into account that TNG came about after a nearly 15 to 20 year absence of Trek on TV. So folks who had only grown up watching reruns of TOS, TNG was like Christmas morning. By the time Voy. aired, the novelity of Treks re-birth had long faded causing TNG, DS9 & Voy being back to back was too much Trek too soon. By ENT. nearly everyone was burnt out on Trek.

Nonsense. I hear this argument over and over again, and I still don't buy it.

That's your choice but refusal to believe the facts doesn't make them untrue. Everybody even Rick Bernan himself was aware of the burn out of Trek which he's stated in several interviews even before ENT. premiered.

 

[Withers]

Wait, wait, wait...


The point wasn't really to compare nuBSG to TNG. The only reason that was ever brought up was because UPN wanted TNG-like ratings on Voyager. There were two approaches to making a show about a bunch of humans headed from uncharted space to Earth; one was nuBSG and one was Star Trek Voyager. I don't think anybody can argue that nuBSG was both more popular and more critically acclaimed than Voyager ever was, right?

That's your choice but refusal to believe the facts doesn't make them untrue. Everybody even Rick Bernan himself was aware of the burn out of Trek which he's stated in several interviews even before ENT. premiered.

I honestly think that is their cop out for making quite a bit of lackluster Trek. The early seasons of all of the modern shows were pretty weak. Would there still have been "burn out" if they had all hit the ground running? If Voyager and Enterprise picked up the things that worked on DS9 rather than ignore them? I think if they'd made better stuff people wouldn't have "burnt out" on it... but even Cubs fans get sick of striving for the underdog after a while, ya know what I'm sayin?

-Withers-​

 

[DevilEyes]

Wait, wait, wait...


The point wasn't really to compare nuBSG to TNG. The only reason that was ever brought up was because UPN wanted TNG-like ratings on Voyager. There were two approaches to making a show about a bunch of humans headed from uncharted space to Earth; one was nuBSG and one was Star Trek Voyager. I don't think anybody can argue that nuBSG was both more popular and more critically acclaimed than Voyager ever was, right?

Yep, we know that now, but in the 1990s, in the pre-Lost era, networks - which tend to play safe - didn't believe that serialized storytelling would get them high ratings... for that matter, SciFi channel didn't believe it during the Lost era, while BSG was on air - they kept pressuring Moore & co. to make more standalones - which resulted in lame episodes like "Black Market" or "Woman King".

 

[exodus]

Wait, wait, wait...


The point wasn't really to compare nuBSG to TNG. The only reason that was ever brought up was because UPN wanted TNG-like ratings on Voyager. There were two approaches to making a show about a bunch of humans headed from uncharted space to Earth; one was nuBSG and one was Star Trek Voyager. I don't think anybody can argue that nuBSG was both more popular and more critically acclaimed than Voyager ever was, right?

Yep, we know that now, but in the 1990s, in the pre-Lost era, networks - which tend to play safe - didn't believe that serialized storytelling would get them high ratings... for that matter, SciFi channel didn't believe it during the Lost era, while BSG was on air - they kept pressuring Moore & co. to make more standalones - which resulted in lame episodes like "Black Market" or "Woman King".

Exactly.

They also tried to stay away from serialized programming because they were less likely to be bought by syndicated networks to show as re-runs. Syndication like shows that have mostly stand alone eps. because it appeals more to the casual viewer and can be shown out of order. It's why TNG, TOS & Voy can still be found in re-run while DS9 isn't. It's also why synidacted networks love to invest in re-run sitcoms over serierized dramas.

 

[exodus]

I honestly think that is their cop out for making quite a bit of lackluster Trek. The early seasons of all of the modern shows were pretty weak. Would there still have been "burn out" if they had all hit the ground running? If Voyager and Enterprise picked up the things that worked on DS9 rather than ignore them? I think if they'd made better stuff people wouldn't have "burnt out" on it... but even Cubs fans get sick of striving for the underdog after a while, ya know what I'm sayin?

-Withers-​

Sorry for the double post but....


Are you aware that a large portion of TNG viewers didn't watch DS9? DS9 numbers were dropping while it was on the air too. DS9 wasn't doing enough "right" or they wouldn't have needed to bring in the Defiant or Worf for a ratings boost. DS9 only gained popularity in hignsight and only amoung Trek fans. All the casual viewers of Trek skipped DS9 because they felt TNG was enough and weren't interested in watching more Trek. So yes, the audience Paramount was looking to keep was becoming burnt out on Trek. The decline of every Trek after TNG including DS9 shows it.

It has little to do with how good the shows were.
The success of TNG was just a fad and that audience wasn't interested in watching more Trek. Treks fanbase isn't as big as people online believe.

 

[Withers]

Alright, that makes sense to me. I guess the only question I have at this point is how did DS9 come into existence as what it was? Obviously, after Voyager, I can understand how Enterprise got more leeway but it seems like if that thinking was going to kill the possibility of Voyager being more serialized it would have killed it for DS9 too? Or is that just UPN being more heavy handed than... whatever DS9 originally aired on?

Edit

No, I actually didn't know that. I would've been less than 10 at the time all of this was going on (I would've been like... 7 or 8 I think) so I don't have a good frame of mind for how shows were doing or who was watching them (especially since the computer was solely for Doom and MS paint back then). I still think the original point stands; they made 2 to 3 seasons of "weak Trek" per show before they started getting good (including DS9.) If they'd made the shows stronger I don't think the fanbase would've grown tired of it so quickly, if anything, I think it would've grown by attracting new viewers. But instead we got seasons 1 through 4 (arguably) of Voyager, 1 through 3 or 4 of DS9, the first two seasons of Enterprise and some kind of boring movies (First Contact being the only real exception.)

-Withers-​

 

[TheGodBen]

Wait, wait, wait...


The point wasn't really to compare nuBSG to TNG. The only reason that was ever brought up was because UPN wanted TNG-like ratings on Voyager. There were two approaches to making a show about a bunch of humans headed from uncharted space to Earth; one was nuBSG and one was Star Trek Voyager. I don't think anybody can argue that nuBSG was both more popular and more critically acclaimed than Voyager ever was, right?

It depends upon how you define popularity. Voyager's ratings were higher than BSG on average, but comparing the two shows is very difficult because Voyager was on a network (albeit a crap one that only reached 85% of US households) while BSG aired on a basic cable station at a time when network television ratings declined. Critically BSG was probably more successful, I don't think Voyager was included in as many top ten lists for TV shows of the decade as BSG was, and the UN never had a panel to discuss issues brought up by Voyager.

Comparing Voyager to BSG is silly anyway, BSG came much later, it would have made much more sense to compare Voyager's ratings to DS9, a show which was heading down the path of serialised storytelling. DS9 started out with the highest viewing figures that an episode of Star Trek ever had, Emissary, but after that DS9's ratings continually declined. The show usually beat Voyager in the ratings, but that doesn't take into account the fact that UPN could only reach a smaller audience or the fact that some stations pushed new episodes of DS9 into the early hours of the morning to make room for regional programming. Whatever way you look at it, DS9's ratings were always going the wrong way, so it made no sense back in the 90s to let Voyager go the same route as DS9, to suits who only care about money and have only a basic understanding of art it made more sense to try and make Voyager like TNG.

EDIT:

Or is that just UPN being more heavy handed than... whatever DS9 originally aired on?

DS9 wasn't on a network, it was a first-run syndicated show just like TNG. That means there was far fewer suits dictating what DS9 should be. And don't forget, Voyager wasn't just a network show, it was supposed to be the flagship show of a brand new TV network. They had a lot of pressure on Voyager to perform whereas Paramount could have kept on making DS9 so long as the episodes sold.

 

[exodus]

Alright, that makes sense to me. I guess the only question I have at this point is how did DS9 come into existence as what it was? Obviously, after Voyager, I can understand how Enterprise got more leeway but it seems like if that thinking was going to kill the possibility of Voyager being more serialized it would have killed it for DS9 too? Or is that just UPN being more heavy handed than... whatever DS9 originally aired on?

-Withers-​

Paramount saw the decline of veiwership on DS9 and got worried. Their answer was to make a TNG clone by creating Voy., however they didn't consider the wise saying: lighting doesn't strike twice. You can't make people love something they simply lost interest in.

"Law & Order" & "NCS" are perfect examples of how spin-off's often loose the audience the originals had.

 

[Withers]

and the UN never had a panel to discuss issues brought up by Voyager.

That might be the best idea for a real-world Fanfiction about Voyager I've heard in my entire life. The thought of someone with an Eastern European accent asking "And what should we do about disappearing robotic babies?" brings tears to my eyes.

Okay, so ultimately, because DS9's ratings were never strong enough to prove the methodology of serialized story telling worked and because the people at Paramount were essentially... retarded? Voyager was always kind of damned to be what it became, am I getting that right?

-Withers-​

 

[TheGodBen]

Yes and no. It was forced into being an episodic show by the network despite attempts by Michael Piller to serialise it in season 2, but TNG was an episodic show that I still enjoy while Voyager... it had its moments, but I wouldn't put it up there with TNG. There's no reason why the show being episodic meant that Harry and Chakotay were neglected in seasons 3-7, being episodic is no excuse for Janeway marching into the centre of Borg space and rescuing Seven, it's no excuse for completely neglecting the presence of the Equinox crew. TNG was episodic while still having callbacks to important episodes, and they had recurring characters like O'Brien, Barclay and Ro, so there's no reason why Voyager flubbed in many of these areas.

The show is unfairly criticised a lot of the time, as is Braga, and the network is to blame for preventing the serialisation of the show, but there are still areas where the writers are open to valid criticisms. It's just important to know when to criticise the writers and when to criticise the network, and it is also important to know that a throwaway line that contradicts the series' continuity isn't such a big deal.

 

[brcarthey]

due to the premise and setting for VOY, it more than TNG or DS9 probably should have been serialized. it would have certainly been interesting in other ways. with TNG or DS9 they had the flexibility to be episodic due to their respective locations (people being able to come and go on the ship or station, supplies not being an issue, etc.) being in federation space.

however, i don't believe it needed to become a nuBSG (full disclosure: i'm not a fan of it in the least) style of show either. that's not what trek is about, IMO. but, other than that i am fine with 90% of VOY's outcomes.

 

[Withers]

If you think about it... it wasn't as though Deep Space Nine was Star Trek: Lost. They had two major arcs (where, upon first viewing, one might be lost were they seen out of order), one consisting of six episodes and one consisting of nine. Other than that they just had on-going elements happening in the background (not so unlike Voyager had the theme of trying to get home going on in the background.)

They didn't necessarily need to serialize it to make certain things make sense (I don't care what anybody says- the infinite supplies/instant-fix crap could have been explained if they'd wanted to do so without serializing anything.)

There's no reason why the show being episodic meant that Harry and Chakotay were neglected in seasons 3-7, being episodic is no excuse for Janeway marching into the centre of Borg space and rescuing Seven, it's no excuse for completely neglecting the presence of the Equinox crew. TNG was episodic while still having callbacks to important episodes, and they had recurring characters like O'Brien, Barclay and Ro, so there's no reason why Voyager flubbed in many of these areas.

Then there's, ya know, alllll that. I've come to terms with the fact that a lot of the things that would have made the show better were stymied by suits... but in sitting here watching episodes there just aren't excuses for some of the..."mistakes" that were made.

-Withers-​

 

[exodus]

Yes and no. It was forced into being an episodic show by the network despite attempts by Michael Piller to serialise it in season 2, but TNG was an episodic show that I still enjoy while Voyager... it had its moments, but I wouldn't put it up there with TNG. There's no reason why the show being episodic meant that Harry and Chakotay were neglected in seasons 3-7, being episodic is no excuse for Janeway marching into the centre of Borg space and rescuing Seven, it's no excuse for completely neglecting the presence of the Equinox crew. TNG was episodic while still having callbacks to important episodes, and they had recurring characters like O'Brien, Barclay and Ro, so there's no reason why Voyager flubbed in many of these areas.

Sure there is:

I wouldn't take the time to continue writing for two cast members that weren't taking their jobs seriously. Wang was a goof off & Beltran refused to learn his lines. I can only image how much production time and money those two wasted on retakes just because they wouldn't do their jobs.

I'd march Janeway thru the center of hell if it sounded like good enough drama to make folks tune in.

The Equinox crew were being punished and are all accessories to mass murder. I'd lock them away the darkest, deepest depths of Voyager, never to be seen again too for what they did.


See, everything has a reason.

 

[I am not Spock]

^Yeah, when you slag off the show, when you're still working on it, no wonder they never gave Chakotay or Kim anything to do. It's a job, and they should have been more professional. Actors are very lucky to get seven years income on a series.

 

[Withers]

Isn't that really a case of lackluster writing meets lackluster acting? I don't know to blame really because it seems like (in their cases especially) all they had to do was either look Asian or look Native American. If the actor in those roles could accomplish that then they were doing about as much as the writing ever allowed them to do.

-Withers-​

 

[Anwar]

It's more a case of them simply not being very good actors in the first place, nor very professional.

 

[DevilEyes]

Beltran was wooden even when he did have something to do. Equinox part 2 comes to mind, I remember thinking that he looked indifferent and bored during the scene of confrontation between him and Janeway.

The Equinox crew were being punished and are all accessories to mass murder. I'd lock them away the darkest, deepest depths of Voyager, never to be seen again too for what they did.

Sorry, but that's not what happened, and they were not being punished. There's absolutely no reason why we wouldn't see them again.

And if they had been punished, which they hadn't, then the lack of follow-up would have been unexcusable, rather than just lame. In that case, we definitely should have at the very least heard about where they were and what had happened to them, if not seen the ongoing story of their fate on the Voyager. Voyager didn't normally have prisoners, Suder is the last/only I can think of (not counting people being in the brig for a limited amount of time, like Tom in Thirty Days). So, you've just provided another example of VOY's failings.

 

[exodus]

Beltran was wooden even when he did have something to do. Equinox part 2 comes to mind, I remember thinking that he looked indifferent and bored during the scene of confrontation between him and Janeway.

The Equinox crew were being punished and are all accessories to mass murder. I'd lock them away the darkest, deepest depths of Voyager, never to be seen again too for what they did.

Sorry, but that's not what happened, and they were not being punished. There's absolutely no reason why we wouldn't see them again.

And if they had been punished, which they hadn't, then the lack of follow-up would have been unexcusable, rather than just lame. In that case, we definitely should have at the very least heard about where they were and what had happened to them, if not seen the ongoing story of their fate on the Voyager. Voyager didn't normally have prisoners, Suder is the last/only I can think of (not counting people being in the brig for a limited amount of time, like Tom in Thirty Days). So, you've just provided another example of VOY's failings.

Ummm, no.
....and being discipline and being a prisoner aren't even close to being the same thing. So you're already impling an askewed point of view.

At the end of the ep. Janeway strips them of rank and sends them to work in the lower decks and tells them they must earn their privliages back. There is no reason to see them again.

That's disciplinary punishment.