With two Bill Murray characters in the EMH and Seven. They actually managed significant growth and change.
Abandoned ‘Star Trek: Voyager’ Finale Ideas Could Have Given the Sendoff It Deserved
- Thread starter USS Excelsior
- Start date
With two Bill Murray characters in the EMH and Seven. They actually managed significant growth and change.
Both of these assertions are incorrect.
I do not believe and have never believed that Voyager and her crew getting home was ever in doubt, and so I don't need to see what happens after they accomplish that goal.
Endgame got the ship home, which means it did exactly what it needed to.
How exactly did the characters grow and change? Aside from the Doc, Seven, and maybe Tom and B'Elanna?
Was S1 Janeway that different from S7 Janeway? Did Chakotay grow from a rebellious, discontented rebel leader to a trusted ally? Did Harry Kim go from terrified and inexperienced kid to seasoned spacefarer? Did Kes experience the ups and downs of the journey of life? Remember that she experienced a third of her expected lifespan over the show, that's like 25-30y for a human.
I didn't see it that way. I didn't consider that a necessary end for the series at all; in fact, I viewed it as a predictable avenue to take. I would have been fine with an "and the adventure continues" ending. I would actually have liked that better, I think.
But okay, you never questioned that that would be the resolution. So what you're saying is, they did exactly what you expected, and that's all you wanted. They didn't surprise you, they didn't expand on that ending, and that's all you wanted.
Me, I would have liked a little more.
The conclusion of Caretaker made it crystal clear that the series' entire premise was going to be centered on the ship and her crew getting home, but even if it hadn't, the writers reiterated that goal numerous times, to the point that any other outcome would've been a "jump the shark" moment.
@DigificWriter , you don't need to remind me of what happened on Voyager, thanks, and certainly not of any of its overarching themes. I watched the series from start to end, and many episodes more than once. And while it was an obvious assumption (and one that many fans I knew at the time shared) that the ship would get home by the end of the series, it always seemed a little too pat, too obvious, to me. I would have liked to see them go for something a little less predictable -- perhaps something like "embracing the journey," realizing that they already were home, that they were each others' family. Did I expect it? No. Voyager was never that bold. Did I want it? Well, yes.
That may have been Voyager's chief problem right there. They played it safe too much.
It's interesting you say that. I'm making my way through Agents of SHIELD currently, and that show in my estimation does progressively crazier things the farther one gets into it. In particular it almost lost me at the beginning of S5 when it seemed to be changing premises entirely. I imagine a fair number of viewers may have considered that a shark-jump moment, but I stuck with the show and I do think it managed to not go entirely off the rails. Love the risks or hate them, it certainly keeps you wondering WTH is going to happen next.
There's a difference between taking risks in your storytelling and completely ignoring or changing what you've set up.
Voyager not getting home would have been an example of the writers completely ignoring/changing what they'd set up and would have, IMO, resulted in the kind of backlash that has forever torpedoed the legacy of Game of Thrones.
Voyager not getting home would have been an example of the writers completely ignoring/changing what they'd set up and would have, IMO, resulted in the kind of backlash that has forever torpedoed the legacy of Game of Thrones.
That's most other time travel episodes too.
I don't know about most of them. Some, certainly. But a good deal of them are about putting things back correctly.
"THE CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER", "Yesterday's Enterprise", STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT, "TIME AND AGAIN", "FUTURE'S END" both parts, "YEAR OF HELL" both parts, "RELATIVITY", "SHOCKWAVE, PART II", and "STORM FRONT" both parts.
All are examples of fixing altered timelines. In almost all those cases, it's fixing things in a major way, like stopping the Borg from assimilating Earth's past or making sure the Federation actually gets created.
"THE CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER", "Yesterday's Enterprise", STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT, "TIME AND AGAIN", "FUTURE'S END" both parts, "YEAR OF HELL" both parts, "RELATIVITY", "SHOCKWAVE, PART II", and "STORM FRONT" both parts.
All are examples of fixing altered timelines. In almost all those cases, it's fixing things in a major way, like stopping the Borg from assimilating Earth's past or making sure the Federation actually gets created.
^Perhaps it's unfair, but those also weren't final episodes of the series.
My second major complaint would be that we didn't get to see what happens to anyone after they return to Earth (with a minor quibble being why it has to be Earth in particular that's such a big deal - surely Tuvok is more interested in Vulcan, for instance).
My second major complaint would be that we didn't get to see what happens to anyone after they return to Earth (with a minor quibble being why it has to be Earth in particular that's such a big deal - surely Tuvok is more interested in Vulcan, for instance).
As I said earlier, what happened after Voyager made it home wasn't important; getting home was.
And they identified Earth as 'home' because that's where Starfleet and Federation HQ are.
Last edited:
Not important to you. Evidently not important to TPTB either, which I'd say was one of possibly many ways in which they failed to appreciate their audience.
You might find people less critical of your posts if you made more of an effort to present them as your opinions rather than as matters-of-fact.
You might find people less critical of your posts if you made more of an effort to present them as your opinions rather than as matters-of-fact.
Similar threads
- Locked
