Why is the Trek community so negative about Voyager?

[exodus]

Picard said he hated kids? I thought he just felt uncomfortable around them.

Didn't he say in "Farpoint.." that he hated them for that reason?

 

[Anwar]

Well, I think there's a difference between hatred and being uncomfortable. He grew out of it as time went on though.

 

[exodus]

Well, I think there's a difference between hatred and being uncomfortable. He grew out of it as time went on though.

That only took most of his life time.
I guess he'll be dead before he over comes his fear of commitment.

 

[stj]

I think that BSG was a great, yet flawed, show. Lots of people feel that way. To claim that the show failed is absurd, it no more failed than Voyager failed, and Voyager didn't fail. There are things that I don't like about Voyager, but I'm not stupid enough to think that if I don't like a show then it must have failed. Voyager was trying to be something different than I wanted it to be, but it had plenty of fans that enjoyed it on its own terms. BSG may have been something different than you wanted it to be, but it had plenty of fans that enjoyed it on its own terms.

This is bullshit. It's stupid to pretend that BSG wasn't intended to succeed in dramatizing the lost potential of Voyager. There wasn't any natural development for Adama vs. Roslin in season one, it was mutiny against the bitch who thought she'd rule the ship because of some stinking regulations. Etc., etc., etc., ad nauseam.

To come into this thread with the blanket statement that "BSG failed" warns me that you're not the sort of person that's open to reasonable debate. That should not be misconstrued as me not being open to debating the relative merits of BSG and Voyager, I just don't wish to waste my time attempting to debate it with someone that appears to be approaching the situation from a standpoint that I consider to be flawed.

Also bullshit. If you don't discuss BSG when driveling about the potential you aren't honestly discussing the issue at all.

 

[TheGodBen]

Also bullshit. If you don't discuss BSG when driveling about the potential you aren't honestly discussing the issue at all.

You don't appear to have understood what I said, so I'll make my position more clear:

I have no issue with discussing BSG's merits/failings, I did so yesterday with YARN. I have no interest in discussing it with you because your attitude about the subject has indicated that you are not open to reasonable debate. You don't like BSG? That's fine. You want to discuss why you don't like BSG? That's fine too. You want to assert that BSG failed because you didn't like it? Sorry, not interested.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

^Preach on!!!

 

[exodus]

Also bullshit. If you don't discuss BSG when driveling about the potential you aren't honestly discussing the issue at all.

You don't appear to have understood what I said, so I'll make my position more clear:

I have no issue with discussing BSG's merits/failings, I did so yesterday with YARN. I have no interest in discussing it with you because your attitude about the subject has indicated that you are not open to reasonable debate. You don't like BSG? That's fine. You want to discuss why you don't like BSG? That's fine too. You want to assert that BSG failed because you didn't like it? Sorry, not interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSRMiC75Vws

 

[RyuRoots]

Also bullshit. If you don't discuss BSG when driveling about the potential you aren't honestly discussing the issue at all.

You don't appear to have understood what I said, so I'll make my position more clear:

I have no issue with discussing BSG's merits/failings, I did so yesterday with YARN. I have no interest in discussing it with you because your attitude about the subject has indicated that you are not open to reasonable debate. You don't like BSG? That's fine. You want to discuss why you don't like BSG? That's fine too. You want to assert that BSG failed because you didn't like it? Sorry, not interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSRMiC75Vws

And in reply to this statement, you attempt to mock him. Good job proving his point.

 

[zar]

Yes, and said "additional source" would have to be continually referenced every single time they used more torpedoes. And they'd keep mentioning how many torpedoes they had left every single time they used a single torpedo before and after said "additional source" was brought up; constant resupplying/referencing.

Sorry, but you are making absolutely no sense (which I'm starting to fully expect from you). Why would it need to be continually referenced? Why "every single" torpedo? There is no logic to this at all, let alone any indication that anyone other than you suggested anything remotely similar to it. If we are aware of the existence of a renewable supply of weapons, there is no reason for constant reminders every time one is used.

If you expect to be taken seriously you need to stop putting these ridiculous words in your opponents' mouths. I hope you realize that I'm being extremely gracious by humoring your nonsensical arguments and rewarding them with replies at all.

Can you cite some examples of events from other shows, comparative to the examples You_Will_Fail gave (like the Doctor creating a family), that were never followed up on? I'm sure there are some, but they are the exception to the rule.

Everything Picard went through in "The Inner Light", or the torture in "Chain of Command" or his mind meld with Sarek that was referenced only once after. O'Brien's 30 years of implanted prison time, Kirk getting married under amnesia and then his wirfe and unborn child are stoned to death, Riker and that false future in "Future Imperfect", etc.

I'm glad you're finally backing up your opinion, but I don't think these are good examples. Being tortured, being fooled by a hologram, and a mind meld hardly compare to the type of things seen in Voyager.

"The Inner Light" was referenced later.

O'Brien's prison time was only shown in the first 2 minutes of the episode; the entire rest of the episode dealt with the effects of that, weeks or months of counseling, attempted suicide, etc. This episode itself is in fact a good example of how the writer's don't forget about the pasts of their characters, as you can see from this line:

BASHIR: Listen, Keiko, he's been through some terrible things in his life, as you know. During the war on Setlik Three. That time he was taken prisoner by the Paradans. During his trial on Cardassia Prime. And he's always survived. In the long run, he's going to be okay. It's just going to take some time.

Hard Time
Those are references to not only DS9 itself, but TNG.
By the end of the episode, it's meant to be understood that he has finally recovered.

I don't remember the Kirk episode very well; no comment.

edit: I just remembered this very thing happens to Troi and Tucker, and I agree both of those episodes were silly.

But they DID happen, and no one cared.

Like I said, those are silly episodes and probably better off ignored or referenced only as an in-joke anyway -- but like I also said, there are bound to be exceptions to the rule. The other shows do a good job overall, but Voyager for some reason consistently ignored opportunities to develop its characters.

Please, you think the audience would settle for a few lines or one/two scenes? That they complained about it to begin with shows that they would always want it being spoonfed to them.

You're right, a couple lines telling us that Q gifted Janeway with a bottomless torpedo bay wouldn't satisfy us, because as I explained a few pages back, the real problem is the fact that Janeway has a bottomless torpedo bay at all. The writers screwed up what was meant to be the premise at the start. This was supposed to be the show where the heroes lose their comforts, become hitchhikers across the galaxy and have to beg for dilithium on the street. Instead it ends up just like TNG.

What I mean is that even if they WERE the best developed crew, it still wouldn't mean anything to the audience who would still demand dozens of background characters.

You're ignoring me again. Nobody demanded recurring characters. The issue is that certain characters were introduced who rightfully should have been recurring but never were followed up on. But why do I bother -- you probably just interpreted that as "So you want EVERY SINGLE guest star and extra who EVER appears in ANY episode to keep appearing in EVERY OTHER episode which would make the producers BANKRUPT in a NANOSECOND."

But if VOY has some guy get punched in the face, there's hell to pay if the next 5 episodes don't have references to some guy having been punched in the face.

More exaggeration.

And yes, all of that does make sense... but it doesn't change the fact that the Voyager writers decided to establish that they couldn't replace their stuff, because if that's how it had actually turned out it would have made their dilemmas more interesting and set it apart from the other shows.

Besides, on all the other shows they still sometimes had to return to starbases and shipyards or whatever, despite all their replicators and talented scientists on board...

The writers had also told us in TNG that Trills couldn't use transporters. On DS9 Dax used a transporter and nobody ever took the writers to the mat for it. Picard stated he hated children, in "Generations" his life long dream is to have 3 of them.

Yes, Trills were written for a single episode of TNG, and reworked when they decided to make one a main cast member on DS9. There's a huge difference between that and using one idea for Trills in season 1 and then throwing it all away for season 2.

Apparently you weren't watching TNG or Generations closely. Unlike in VOY, character development was not an alien concept in TNG. Picard slowly changed his attitude on children throughout the show. For example the interaction with Wesley and that episode where he gets stuck in the turbolift with a bunch of kids. In Generations his nephew dies and there is the scene where he's devastated because it's now solely his responsibility to carry on the Picard family line and now it's too late. There is no indication that it was his "life long dream", but it was what he wanted most at that time.

What? The writers write allot of things that later go through changes as the show plays out. If they wanted such dilemmas they would have written it that way, they didn't. Who's in charge of Voyager, the production staff or us?

First of all, it's in the production staff's best interest to care about "us".

Jeri Taylor said, "We knew we were taking some risks. We decided, in a very calculated way, to cut our ties with everything that was familiar." Would you say they succeeded at that? I don't think so. Are you suggesting that everything we see on screen is exactly what they "wanted"? There are many times when creators are as disappointed, or more disappointed, with their creations than the fans are. Their goals were clear in the beginning but they ended up twisting it beyond recognition, and I'm sure it's not only fans who were disappointed by that.

 

[Anwar]

Sorry, but you are making absolutely no sense (which I'm starting to fully expect from you). Why would it need to be continually referenced? Why "every single" torpedo?

Like You_Will_Fail said, "basic continuity". "Follow up" on every single event and all that other stuff.

If we are aware of the existence of a renewable supply of weapons, there is no reason for constant reminders every time one is used.

There where's the "basic continuity" if you don't reference everything, repeatedly?

I'm glad you're finally backing up your opinion, but I don't think these are good examples. Being tortured, being fooled by a hologram, and a mind meld hardly compare to the type of things seen in Voyager.

How so? The stuff they went through on VOY wasn't much different than the usual stuff every other ship crew went through.

"The Inner Light" was referenced later.

What, Picard knowing how to play the flute? If that the kind of "basic continuity" you guys want, I'm even more glad the writers didn't cave in.

O'Brien's prison time was only shown in the first 2 minutes of the episode; the entire rest of the episode dealt with the effects of that, weeks or months of counseling, attempted suicide, etc. By the end of the episode, it's meant to be understood that he has finally recovered.

Which was dumb, you don't just "recover" from that sort of thing. He should have been permanently affected by it. But he wasn't.

But of course, if DS9 or any other trek show has a character affected by something in one episode and deals with it in a half-a$$ed way it's okay. If VOY does, then it's bad.

You're right, a couple lines telling us that Q gifted Janeway with a bottomless torpedo bay wouldn't satisfy us, because as I explained a few pages back, the real problem is the fact that Janeway has a bottomless torpedo bay at all.

So if they found a way of replenishing torpedoes, any way of replenishing torpedoes, then your problem would be that they could replenish torpedoes AT ALL.

The writers screwed up what was meant to be the premise at the start. This was supposed to be the show where the heroes lose their comforts, become hitchhikers across the galaxy and have to beg for dilithium on the street. Instead it ends up just like TNG.

Which is why I think the premise needed more work to begin with.

 

[ramonasno]

So...

I'm new here and not a native speaker of the English language so please let's not focus on my grammar and/or spelling.

I am actually a bit confused about this whole thread. What's the deal with the fighting here?
I love a discussion, but I've actually read 17 pages of posts on which lots of them are something as: " My truth is the truth and what you're saying is nonsense" . Or is this the way people talk here? Maybe it seems odd for me not being American nor English because of the language, I hope you're not all really mad at eachother...

For me, Voyager is the first Star Trek show I've seen as a whole, therefore I've got a lot of good memories about it. Started out with TOS, saw some eps from TNG, and then VOY. Now I've seen it all

Let's see, the discussion about the supplying: I have actually thought about that myself for a bit while watching the show. Haven't counted the torpedo's, but did wonder if the supply was maybe bigger than I thought it was. To be honest, it didn't interfere with the global storyline of that episode, so I just thought: well ok.. (and yes, I said THAT episode, because for me Voyager was a from week to week different story , and the only " storyline" there really was was :" getting back to the Alpha Quadrant"

I did put some questionmarks (that is actually a Dutch expression I think, but you'll get it) with the whole Equinox crew dissapearing, and that Janeway got a little bit freakish with wanting to kill people(same with the Tuvix story) But for me it was more of a "I will literally do ANYTHING to get my crew back home" thing, than that it really bothered me.

Last but not least I guess in retrospective , so after I saw all the shows and movies, I can understand people expected something else from VOY. But I don't think that makes it a bad show per se.

I agree with the arguments made in this thread , but I still think VOY is a good show, and I actually think the characters did come alive during the show (ok maybe not Chakotay..).

Hope I can contribute in your discussion!

 

[AuntKate]

^^ I'm with you. Some of us have wandered far afield from the topic.

 

[Akiraprise]

zar and Anwar you may as well just stop arguing now. You're just going in circles and it's going nowhere good.

Anwar you are continuing behavior you've been warned for before and are really close to another trolling warning. Specifically for this. You are again exaggerating others posts that are critical of Voyager. I should just warn you and be done with it since you seem to have no intention of modifying your behavior but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

For all those wanting to talk about BSG go here.

ramonasno, you're right on. Welcome to the board.

Thank you. Go in peace.

 

[TheGodBen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSRMiC75Vws

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWRbfm5Ae1U

I don't want to fight. I don't mind disagreeing or debating different points of view, but at the end of the day I think we all have to come to an argument from the position that we may have to agree to disagree in the end. I'm not a big fan of Voyager and I am willing to express that, but I don't think that the show was a failure or that the fans of the show are wrong for liking it. If I come across someone that approaches the subject from that point of view then it's going to be impossible to agree to disagree, so engaging that person on the issue is a futile affair. I've made this mistake in the past, I'm trying not to repeat it.

O'Brien's prison time was only shown in the first 2 minutes of the episode; the entire rest of the episode dealt with the effects of that, weeks or months of counseling, attempted suicide, etc. This episode itself is in fact a good example of how the writer's don't forget about the pasts of their characters, as you can see from this line:
Hard Time
Those are references to not only DS9 itself, but TNG.
By the end of the episode, it's meant to be understood that he has finally recovered.

I have to disagree here. Hard Time is a great episode, as a standalone it's almost perfect, but as a part of DS9 it is a failure due to the lack of follow-up. You can't have O'Brien live a life in prison with the memory of murdering someone, and have him forget about it for the rest of the series. It's one of the biggest black marks on DS9's record, which is a pity because the episode itself is quality.

Yes, Trills were written for a single episode of TNG, and reworked when they decided to make one a main cast member on DS9. There's a huge difference between that and using one idea for Trills in season 1 and then throwing it all away for season 2.

The torpedo limit wasn't much of an issue until season 5, because the writers were rationing their use until that point. It was the season 5 opener (the episode where Braga became head writer) where the whole concept seems to have been thrown out the window, and they fired something like 13 in that episode alone. Until that point, they could have reached the end of the series without firing all their torpedoes, but Braga just didn't seem to care, and in the final 3 seasons they exceeded the limit almost threefold.

I love a discussion, but I've actually read 17 pages of posts on which lots of them are something as: " My truth is the truth and what you're saying is nonsense" .

Welcome to the TrekBBS!

Last but not least I guess in retrospective , so after I saw all the shows and movies, I can understand people expected something else from VOY. But I don't think that makes it a bad show per se.

I agree, Voyager was a good show (most of the time) in being what it was trying to be, but I happened not to be a huge fan of whatever that was.

Thank you. Go in peace.

To love and serve the mod.

 

[Anwar]

VOY just came at the wrong time. It needed to come when CGI was cheaper (1999 or beyond) and they could easily re-use past show props (so after DS9) with some minor modifications/redressings.

Also by then other shows like LEXX and Farscape would be on the air, so it'd be easier for the Producers/Showrunners to convince Paramount of the merit of the premise since those shows were getting them to work.

They'd also be able to use better fleshed out concepts, because a post-DS9 Maquis would have been better defined as Anti-Federation. Or they could just use Romulans.

So, right idea but wrong time.

Feel free to disagree.

 

[zar]

Which was dumb, you don't just "recover" from that sort of thing. He should have been permanently affected by it. But he wasn't.

I do agree, and while not perfect, this is completely different from VOY where they ignore followup outright. In Hard Time, the entire episode is the followup to an event that only actually happens in the teaser, and the dialog acknowledges all the shit they put O'Brien through.

So if they found a way of replenishing torpedoes, any way of replenishing torpedoes, then your problem would be that they could replenish torpedoes AT ALL.

No, not "AT ALL "; the thing is, after the first few seasons they were completely careless as if all the original discussion about rationing stuff never happened. It all started to go crazy after Seven showed up and they injected nanoprobes into their weapon supply. After that, I think Voyager alone ended up using more torpedoes than all the warships seen in the Dominion war put together.

Like You_Will_Fail said, "basic continuity". "Follow up" on every single event and all that other stuff.

I think we have spent enough time analyzing what You_Will_Fail said, especially without his own input. More than one person has explained it but you continue to reply by simply stating your exaggerations like that he wants "every single event" as if they're fact.

Until you have a real point to make, I'm not going to bother repeating mine.

The stuff they went through on VOY wasn't much different than the usual stuff every other ship crew went through.

And once again you're simply repeating your original opinion, without any backup, after I just finished explaining its flaws. This is the point where you doom the discussion to endless repetition. I accept that as your resignation.

Last but not least I guess in retrospective , so after I saw all the shows and movies, I can understand people expected something else from VOY. But I don't think that makes it a bad show per se.

I agree with the arguments made in this thread , but I still think VOY is a good show, and I actually think the characters did come alive during the show (ok maybe not Chakotay..).

Don't get the wrong idea from all the arguing, I like the show, and the characters aren't awful. I think the Doctor is one of Star Trek's best characters.

But I (and obviously others) have some negative beliefs about the show too, which is the topic of this thread. And I like to defend my beliefs when they're challenged. Wouldn't forums be boring if everyone thought the same?

 

[ramonasno]

Oh I didnt mean that actually, I meant the whole " it's A" " No, it's B " discussion over and over again.
I think forums are there to exchange different points of view, and a disscussion coming out of that is only logical .

Ontopic:

I guess for me, the flaws didnt interrupt my joy in watching the show? Because I do think it's weird that they didn't ressuply but still fired torpedos all the time, and I am wondering where some people went to, and why I don't always get the after the incident story (such as how does Kathryn feel when she killed Tuvix etc). But I just make up my own explanation and it works for me.

Maybe for some people it just doesn't matter that much?

To be honest, I thought it was more difficult for me to watch Miles never ever talk/being depressed/cry about his murder/prison time. Because they made a whole episode about it, and DS9 does normally follow up on stories, it was more disturbing for me there then with VOY.

 

[Anwar]

I do agree, and while not perfect, this is completely different from VOY where they ignore followup outright. In Hard Time, the entire episode is the followup to an event that only actually happens in the teaser, and the dialog acknowledges all the shit they put O'Brien through.

And then forget about it completely. Which actually makes it worse. It's one thing to just end the episode and not bother bringing some random event up again, it's another to base a whole episode like this is important and THEN drop it. VOY at least never treated any of the stuff they did as monumentally important.

No, not "AT ALL ";

You said you wouldn't like it if they explained how they could have torpedoes, so explain. Using them more liberally doesn't mean anything.

Until you have a real point to make, I'm not going to bother repeating mine.

I already told you, not letting yourself be altered by ever last weird things that happens to you is not ignoring "basic continuity". It just means you're as tough as all the other Starfleet members who didn't let everything get to them.

And once again you're simply repeating your original opinion, without any backup, after I just finished explaining its flaws.

No, you pointed out that YES the other shows also had "monumental" stuff happen that wasn't followed up. So VOY is just in the same boat and deserves no harsher treatment for it. There is NO difference between stuff like "Hard Times", "Inner Light", "Future Imperfect", "Frame of Mind", any other "Weird stuff happens to people" episode and what happened in VOY. None at all. You don't always need followup.

I mean seriously, if all the characters from every show let the "Mindscrew" experiences they went through get to them the way You_Will_Fail thinks they should've then they'd all be insane.

 

[zar]

...Which actually makes it worse. It's one thing to just end the episode and not bother bringing some random event up again, it's another to base a whole episode like this is important and THEN drop it.

Naturally then you think that if the two minute teaser had been stretched out to become the actual episode, and then his whole ordeal never mentioned in that episode nor in future episodes... that this would have been a better way to handle it.

To that, my only response is a raised eyebrow.

 

[Anwar]

No, if it turned out the entire episode was just his VR simulation and it ended with him obviously traumatized and unsure THEN it would've sucked hard if they just glossed it over.

But if they weren't prepared to make O'Brien a radically changed man then they shouldn't have done the episode.

None of the VOY episodes ended with the idea that they'd been permanently affected by their experiences, so there wasn't some big aura of "permanently affected".