One of the difference is, Star Wars is all readt reaching the audience Paramount wanted Trek too. Lucas & FOX have liitle worries that SW won't reach out to the new/next generation of fan. ST can often to stiff for many, which it why it has a harder time reacting the next wave of fan...there were toys and videos games to made from Trek now, Paramount wasn't going to loose out on that momentum. Not with Star Trek: the Experance waiting to launch and a new network to compete with FOX and/or the WB. Trek was bigger then than it ever was. During that time, waiting just wasn't an option.
But even Star Wars knew better than to try and make TV shows at the same time they were making the Prequel movies, or try and make a TV show while they were making the OT.
With all that stuff, like the Experience and everything, did it occur to them that over saturation would end up halting the momentum anyways?
Why would they, TNG and it's film did very well. While DS9's viewership faltered next to TNG's, it still held strong for a show first run in syndication. There was very little at the time that showed signs of such trouble. I'm sure it was a concern but not one they thought they couldn't get out of. Voyager is still a success story, it endured to spite all that was set against it.
However, over saturation wasn't the only issue.
Local networks in major citys showed Voyager at the same time as DS9.
Some cities didn't show Voyager at all.
I live in the NYC area, which is considered one of the huge entertainment hubs.
It's also the most densely populated areas in the US.
NYC was one of those cities where Voyager was shown up against DS9.
How many Neilson households are in this area alone?
How many of them were Trek viewers?
How many of the viewing audience were divided upon which one to watch that night?
How does that effect the status of a show?
That's another factor.
Did Voyager disappoint due to stories or is a major part due to network scheduling?
During sweeps weeks, who got the bigger budget due to higher viewer turn out?
.......but in all fairness, with the amount of shows created every year by every network how many TV shows really do qualify as "great" honestly? IMO Voyager was a way better show than we got from HEROES, V, often more engaging that the Stargate spin-offs and better produced than B5. So yes, I agree it was a good show and often times better than many of the other sci-fi shows created today.One of the difference is, Star Wars is all readt reaching the audience Paramount wanted Trek too. Lucas & FOX have liitle worries that SW won't reach out to the new/next generation of fan. ST can often to stiff for many, which it why it has a harder time reacting the next wave of fan.But even Star Wars knew better than to try and make TV shows at the same time they were making the Prequel movies, or try and make a TV show while they were making the OT.
With all that stuff, like the Experience and everything, did it occur to them that over saturation would end up halting the momentum anyways?
Why would they, TNG and it's film did very well. While DS9's viewership faltered next to TNG's, it still held strong for a show first run in syndication. There was very little at the time that showed signs of such trouble. I'm sure it was a concern but not one they thought they couldn't get out of. Voyager is still a success story, it endured to spite all that was set against it.
However, over saturation wasn't the only issue.
Local networks in major citys showed Voyager at the same time as DS9.
Some cities didn't show Voyager at all.
I live in the NYC area, which is considered one of the huge entertainment hubs.
It's also the most densely populated areas in the US.
NYC was one of those cities where Voyager was shown up against DS9.
How many Neilson households are in this area alone?
How many of them were Trek viewers?
How many of the viewing audience were divided upon which one to watch that night?
How does that effect the status of a show?
That's another factor.
Did Voyager disappoint due to stories or is a major part due to network scheduling?
During sweeps weeks, who got the bigger budget due to higher viewer turn out?
Voyager had some excellent stories.
The problem to me was simply the show's production. Had Voyager been produced, relative to characters and character airtime, similar to TNG and DS9, it would have been a better show. I liked it, and think it was good, but certainly not a great show.
.......but in all fairness, with the amount of shows created every year by every network how many TV shows really do qualify as "great" honestly? IMO Voyager was a way better show than we got from HEROES, V, often more engaging that the Stargate spin-offs and better produced than B5. So yes, I agree it was a good show and often times better than many of the other sci-fi shows created today.
I love the opening post in this thread, which essentially states that the typical trekkie wears glasses and is either obese or sickly thin. Classic.
Allow me to introduce him to fellow poster & bodybuilder RAMA.I love the opening post in this thread, which essentially states that the typical trekkie wears glasses and is either obese or sickly thin. Classic.
Thanks for the heads up!
Apparently the OP was just too buff to be a Trekkie.
I love the opening post in this thread, which essentially states that the typical trekkie wears glasses and is either obese or sickly thin. Classic.
That said, I like VOY a lot and a friend of mine considers it the very best Trek series.
I love the opening post in this thread, which essentially states that the typical trekkie wears glasses and is either obese or sickly thin. Classic.
That said, I like VOY a lot and a friend of mine considers it the very best Trek series.
Yep, they live in their parent's dark damped basement all day wacthing porn when there is no Trek on TV. They stink up the basement foul oder of BO, fart, and manjuice.
I bring this up today because I just got home a little while ago from the local shopping mall. I walk into a great little store that sells basically everything science fiction. Books, DVD's, T-Shirts, memorabilia etc. So I immediately walk over to the Star Trek section and begin scouring over all the merchandise. I don't think I look like the typical Trekkie because I don't wear glasses, I'm not obese or sickly thin, but I'm muscular, with large arms and a large chest as I'm a competitive weight lifter. So anyway this guy walks up to me and asks if I'm a fan of Trek, I respond without haste, "Most definitely!". He asks if I preferred TNG or DS9. I say "Neither, Voyager is my favorite." He looks me up and down and makes a peculiar expression on his face like I just told him I believe the earth is flat. He says, "Oh, so you're obviously a fan of Jeri Ryan." Obviously he assumes I only watched the show because of her. I say "No, she did a great job with her character, but I just found Voyager the best of all the Treks." He looks at me and says "Oh." Then he just walked away.
I can't be the only one who has noticed the overtly negative perception Voyager has within the Trek community.
Voyager is my least favorite of the various Trek series, but there's still a lot I enjoy about it.
But anyways, the negativity to VOY these days has died down since it's main opponent (NuBSG) fizzled out rather poorly and it's attempts at making a franchise of its own have failed thus far too. Plus, seeing how easily it could have been worse (SGU) always defused things a bit.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.