Better if they had allowed main cast to die?

[Crazyewok]

I was thinking yesterday that voyager would have been a lot better if they had killed some of the main cast off every now and then.

I think it could have added more suspense as you would never have known what would happen each episode rather than know that the main cast would always pull through ok.

 

[R. Star]

I was thinking yesterday that voyager would have been a lot better if they had killed some of the main cast off every now and then.

I think it could have added more suspense as you would never have known what would happen each episode rather than know that the main cast would always pull through ok.

The problem with that is, the main cast only really ever dies in Trek if the actor quits. So they end up getting killed by a tar monster or the Dukat demon randomly. That really doesn't add suspense.

I would've liked Voyager more if they didn't create so many falsely dramatic situations that kill the crew only to hit the reset button. Even the little people like Hogan and Carey just randomly die to show how dramatic a situation is and not to serve some greater purpose in a coherent plot.

 

[Crazyewok]

The problem with that is, the main cast only really ever dies in Trek if the actor quits. So they end up getting killed by a tar monster or the Dukat demon randomly. That really doesn't add suspense.

Well thats my point they should have allowed the contracts so that they could kill off the main cast and in a meaning full way.

Take year of Hell. Maybe Chakotay could have died takeing out the time ship ? Im sure the actor would have loved to have parted ways from what I heard.

In Unimatrix Zero someone could have been left to the borg ect

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

^The problem with killing off characters is that it may not be possible to bring them back if new ideas for them surface later. On DS9, it worked out perfectly that Dax could be used again because Jadzia happened to be a joined Trill, so another actor or actress could follow Terry Farrell. But Voyager would not have offered options like this. A cameo for one or two episodes would have worked, but nothing more than that.

--Sran

 

[Lynx]

I was thinking yesterday that voyager would have been a lot better if they had killed some of the main cast off every now and then.

I think it could have added more suspense as you would never have known what would happen each episode rather than know that the main cast would always pull through ok.

No! No! And no again!

I did stop watching when Kes was kicked out. That shows my opinion of changes among the main characters.

As I see it, the most important things for a series is good stories and likeable characters. If the storytelling is bad and those in charge starts to replace good characters now and then, then I lose interest. Which is one reason that I don't like the current Voyager books. Too many good characters missing and too many uninteresting characters who have replaced them.

Voyager's main characters were good and likeable, none of them should have been replaced.

 

[MacLeod]

Killing off characters like anything has pros and cons. SG:A killed off at least two of it's leads Beckett and Weir, was it a good move that's open to debate. But in the case of Beckett the fallout was so bad they had to bring the character back (via a clone).

 

[Relayer1]

I'd have killed Janeway and Tuvok...

 

[Timewalker]

For decades, soaps have killed off characters, only to bring them back months, years, sometimes decades later. The audience accepts it, for the most part. Since Voyager already had two characters from an alternate universe after the originals died (Harry and Naomi), why consider the rest of them sacrosanct?

And character death, even if the audience loved the character and is angry at the death, can be a powerful story. As an example, on Babylon 5, when Marcus gave his life for Ivanova (I assume people in general know this by now?)... I bawled through that whole thing, and his death actually meant something.

Even a current storyline on General Hospital had a character die, except not really. The audience knows the character is alive, in captivity somewhere in Europe. The character's family does not, and her husband is moving on with a new girlfriend who their daughter would love as her "new Mommy." The audience is eagerly waiting for the time when the RL actress' work commitments will allow her to return to finish out this story - I have no idea how it will be resolved, but I'm looking forward to it.

They could have done something like this on Voyager, with a several-episodes' story arc where a character is presumed dead, but is eventually brought back.

 

[Lynx]

Killing off characters like anything has pros and cons. SG:A killed off at least two of it's leads Beckett and Weir, was it a good move that's open to debate. But in the case of Beckett the fallout was so bad they had to bring the character back (via a clone).

I actually like Stargate Atlantis but I never saw the point in killing off those two characters.

Crazyewok wrote:

Well thats my point they should have allowed the contracts so that they could kill off the main cast and in a meaning full way.

Take year of Hell. Maybe Chakotay could have died takeing out the time ship ? Im sure the actor would have loved to have parted ways from what I heard.

In Unimatrix Zero someone could have been left to the borg ect

Beltran wasn't that frustrated at that time "Year Of Hell" was filmed. That came later when his character had been even more pushed in the shadows.

But maybe they could have killed off all the main characters in season 2 or 3, replacing them with uninteresting no-no's, just like in the recent books. Then we could have been spared from the dilemma of having favorite characters in a favorite series. Then we could have done more meanigful things in life, like watching wet paint dry or get bored to death by watching BSG or Stargate Universe.

 

[Anwar]

I don't see why. DS9 only killed off Dax and even then she didn't totally "die" since Ezri was brought in. And DS9's cast was in a position where it made sense for them to die more than VOY's crew.

 

[Guy Gardener]

DS9 didn't kill off shit.

Terry got offered a part on Becker, because she auditioned for a part on Becker and took the job.

Now, this is where I get sketchy: Did she quit Becker or get fired?

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Killing off characters like anything has pros and cons. SG:A killed off at least two of it's leads Beckett and Weir, was it a good move that's open to debate. But in the case of Beckett the fallout was so bad they had to bring the character back (via a clone).

I actually like Stargate Atlantis but I never saw the point in killing off those two characters.

I loved Beckett's death. Possibly because I somehow managed to be totally unspoiled for it so it shocked me. I got teary. This happens so rarely that I was quite pleased.

Elizabot, glad to see her go. Terrible acting, AWFUL.

And really how well did it work out! We got Beckett back, we got Kaylee and we got Bob Picardo.

 

[MacLeod]

I think even the producers of SG:A later said it was a mistake to kill off Beckett.

 

[Crazyewok]

in. And DS9's cast was in a position where it made sense for them to die more than VOY's crew.

I would say being trapped 70,000 light years from home was about as dangrous as it can get!

That why voyager is at my bottom for best startrek. It never really sold the "we are lost" part. They may have well been on a jolly jaunt round the alpha/beta quadrant like TNG.

 

[dahj]

The problem with that is, the main cast only really ever dies in Trek if the actor quits

...or if the show is over and Berman and Braga decide to write "a valentine to the fans".

 

[DonIago]

It might have been interesting if there'd been more shake-up in the VOY cast, but it bugs me when people insist that the deaths must have some sort of meaning. I'm not against the concept in general terms, but the reality is Death doesn't work that way and I think there's a lot to be said for exploring the concept that sometimes it just happens and doesn't have a higher purpose.

One thing I liked about Lost is that, IMO, they did a good balance of the deaths that meant something versus ones that were random and pointless.

What was Voyager's casualty rate, anyway?

 

[eskyliz]

I would have cried forever and ever and never forgiven the creators. I like it just the way it is.

 

[MacLeod]

I must have missed that valentine to the fans.

 

[Crazyewok]

I would have cried forever and ever and never forgiven the creators. I like it just the way it is.

This is why startrek Prime universe failed.


No one wanted to change anything and it stagnated.

 

[Timewalker]

I don't see why. DS9 only killed off Dax and even then she didn't totally "die" since Ezri was brought in. And DS9's cast was in a position where it made sense for them to die more than VOY's crew.

I was glad when they killed off Jadzia Dax. I never liked the character, and the actress had such a snooty attitude toward her fellow cast members (how DARE they give storylines to the supporting characters!). And it seemed there was nothing Dax couldn't do. She knew it all, had done it all, had not one weakness or flaw. She was just so damn perfect!

And perfect characters are annoying.

It might have been interesting if there'd been more shake-up in the VOY cast, but it bugs me when people insist that the deaths must have some sort of meaning. I'm not against the concept in general terms, but the reality is Death doesn't work that way and I think there's a lot to be said for exploring the concept that sometimes it just happens and doesn't have a higher purpose.

One thing I liked about Lost is that, IMO, they did a good balance of the deaths that meant something versus ones that were random and pointless.

What was Voyager's casualty rate, anyway?

Remember how upset the Tasha Yar fans were at her first death? I know I was upset, since Tasha was my favorite TNG character.

There would have a hell of a fuss made if Spock hadn't died heroically in TWOK (not that they wanted him to die at all, just if he had to, let it be for a purpose).

Most of the times the Doctor has died/regenerated, it's because he's given his current life to save others, whether a Companion, or the entire Universe. Sure, TPTB could have had him need to regenerate after being run over by a bus in traffic, but where's the heroism in that?