Biggest insulting slap-in-the-face episode for fans?
- Thread starter I am not Spock
- Start date
Yet they were more than happy to shell out money on actors, prosphetics and CGI on the numerous occasions that the Borg turned up? They even bought Alice Krige back for Endgame, how much did that cost?
So, basically, Voyager is woeful, but at least we have a reason as to why it was so poor? To be fair, I'm not that bothered why it was as bad as it was, just that it was.
Re: The DVDs, I've got S1 TOS which was free (mix up at the checkout :thumbsup
, DS9 seasons 1-7 which I paid £18 apiece for (about $36), and TNG Seasons 1-7 (which again I paid about £18 for).Paying anything near the extortionate prices that they originally released them at is just madness IMO (sorry Darth Tom !)
What part of end of the/premiere season or sweeps did you not get? Didn't dawn on you that Krige showed up for the last ep. of the entire series when the budget no longer mattered?
Exactly how much do you think the actors made?
Never considered why some actors on Trek become directors because more money is involved, did ya?
After the actors are paid and budget is made for sets, lighting and make up alone, exactly how much money do you think is left over to do CGI? Which once again is why eps. like "Year of Hell", "Future's End", "Prey" & "the Killing Game" to name a few all were shown during sweeps.
....and a night with a hand shake as well as a greatful "Thank You!". I don't know what you be thinkin' is going happen.DarthTom said:
exodus said:
If you got money like that too spend, I'd like a 103 inch LCD screen TV with X-Box 360. Thanks.
And you know how to get it - it involves a trip to Atlanta and a night with [well I'll leave the rest out as you know full well what is means]
You seem to have completely circumvented the point. Your original statement was that they couldn't afford to do Species 8472 stories. Quite obviously if they replaced the gimmick Borg episodes, they could. What part of that escapes you?
How much the actors are paid is irrelevant. The cost of using Species 8472 is at least comparable to that of using the Borg, hence whether the actors are paid pittance, or whether they're paid a fortune has little bearing on whether it's the Borg, or Species 8472 that appear. Again, not quite sure how this eludes you, it's certainly not rocket science.
Your point regarding the cost of CGI being a limiting factor is equally as erroneous, given that the Borg are hardly CGI-light themselves, yet on top of that you have the cost of employing actors, and kitting them out in prosphetics. Your argument that this is somehow massively cheaper than CGI-ing in Species 8472 is frankly, ridiculous.
Essentially, they COULD afford to do either. Wheel either out during sweeps. They chose to carry on wheeling out the Borg, time after time, after time. Hardly surprising though, it pretty much summed up how sloppy the series was, and how lazy the creative think tank were.
Everything that explains how a show works based upon a budget you called irrelevant or ridiculous. If that's your mind set, then it's understandable that you aren't even open mindedly willing to understand the hows and whys that CGIing a soild object like a Borg cube over a moving "life like one" such as Species 8472 is more costly nor that fact that a budget for an production determines how and what that production is afforded to do. How much actors/workers are paid isn't irrelevant. Anybody that runs a company or understand simple accounting knows that. It all factors into how the show/job is run.
BTW, you say actors payment is irrelevant, then use the actors payment as reasoning behind cost to use the Borg, which is it? You also imply it's more costly to use Borg over Species 8472, so your saying for a show that was loosing it's audience & sponsors, it's more cost effective to keep spending more money on the Borg than (what you think) is the cheaper Species 8472? That doesn't make one lick of sense. Who would spend a budget they don't have on a more costly production?
No, I actually called the context by which you were using the argument ridiculous. Learn to read FFS.
Obviously, the use of CGI alone costs more than utilising actors, prosphetics AND CGI. Or at least it does in a completely illogical world.
Again, payments for actors was ridiculous in the context you were trying to paint it, although I would point out that I used the factor to highlight why they SHOULDN'T have continually used the Borg. They couldn't afford Species 8472, but COULD afford the Borg? That makes practically no sense whatsoever.
Obviously, the use of CGI alone costs more than utilising actors, prosphetics AND CGI. Or at least it does in a completely illogical world.
Again, payments for actors was ridiculous in the context you were trying to paint it, although I would point out that I used the factor to highlight why they SHOULDN'T have continually used the Borg. They couldn't afford Species 8472, but COULD afford the Borg? That makes practically no sense whatsoever.
I should point out that they brought back Alice Krige because a scheduling conflict prevented them from using the other person (I think that's why they used the other person in the first place too). She's not exactly Tom Cruise here.
DarthTom said:
If you were a shareholder of Viacom you'd demand they milk that cow until there was none left. That's what people do when they want a return on their investment.
How about the novel idea to actually care for the cow, feed her well and give her nookie from time to time?
The result would be a strong cow that gives milk seemingly forever rather than using her until she can give no more.
Leaving metaphors aside the entire Trek franchise was doomed when the creative and corporate teams weren't in balance anymore (if that is even possible).
Sure that Viacom/Paramount want to earn back their investment but somehow they neglected to make the product worth it so they ran with it as far as they could and then dropped it like a hot potato.
Imagine if they actually let the creative team flex their muscles a bit and spread their wings.. i often hear how Voyager initially was developed as really being Lost in Space and the crews not getting along like they were best friends forever rather than the one chasing the other to get them inside a prison.
The problem is that this approach seemed to risky and they saw that TNG was highly successful but failed to realize that TNG came on when TV SF wasn't widespread, it had Trek in its name and it was the 80s so the style was par for the course.
Times have changed yet the style of Trek didn't (with the exception of DS9) and ultimately it failed creatively and thus in the end also financially.
Had Paramount risked a bit more they might have been burned though i doubt it. Maybe Trek would have been a bit more expensive but it would have been still going today generation revenue.
I don't by "viewer fatigue" for a second.. it was a lame excuse to justify the failure of Enterprise and redirect blame to the viewers. You can't get fatigued if a show is good..
Sure it does.
It takes more people and software to run and animate 8472 than the Borg. Most of the Borg footage on Voyager is old stock footage re-editted. They are barely using any new CGI in any Borg ep. All the Borg images are all ready stored in their data base from times we've seen them before in BOBW & First Contact. You can tell it's old & looped footage because you can see a set pattern when Borg walk by in the background. The costumes they're using are left overs from "First Contact", hell even some of the Viidian clothes are re-used from "Who Watches the Watchers". The latex attachments on the Borg are also re-used from "First Contact". They aren't using or GCIing new stuff or spending any money. Background actors aren't wearing any new latex because they won't be in any close up shots for anybody to notice. Actors that don't have speaking parts get paid way less than those that do. These are all ways that impact the budget and cut down on production costs.
8472 requires new software, it took a design team to create it and then one to animate it each time we see it. Then another team to edit him into a scene. That requires a team & software that costs more than a Borg production because they aren't reusing old footage and re-editing it. While the image of 8472 is also in their data base, it requires time and money to animate it.
I can read just fine, I wouldn't know all of what I'm trying to explain to you if I hadn't taken an interest in TV & film production, done some reading up on it as well as a taken college courses about it. It's also allowed me to know people in the field and who also have knowledge of the subject.
^^ Wow was I in a bad mood yesterday!
I'll take the above as read and concede the point. Apologies if I came across as being argumentative. I have to admit, I still hold the same opinion around Voyager's treatment of the Borg, and think they were over-exposed. Anwar's previously, and repeatedly made the point that no one really gave Voyager's new races a chance. The Kazon, suffered from Ferengi-itis IMO, they were difficult to take seriously as a credible threat, and even at their height in the series, they came across as rarely anything but lightweight villains. The Vidiians, were interesting, but apparently brushed under the carpet, and other than that for the first few seasons it was pretty much aliens of the week.
IMO, none of them were terribly charismatic as a new race. Obviously it's difficult coming up with a new race from scratch and having them hit the ground running, and perhaps to a certain extent we were spoiled with DS9's creation of the Dominion, but they really should have been able to come up with something better before reverting back to the Borg. Obviously, given the location, the Borg were always going to appear at some point, but as a viewer, I have to admit, after Scorpion, the introduction of the Borg, and their increased prominence, was where my interest really started to wane.
Again, apologies. I've really enjoyed the Voyager discussions with both yourself and Anwar of late, even if that might not have been evident yesterday!
I'll take the above as read and concede the point. Apologies if I came across as being argumentative. I have to admit, I still hold the same opinion around Voyager's treatment of the Borg, and think they were over-exposed. Anwar's previously, and repeatedly made the point that no one really gave Voyager's new races a chance. The Kazon, suffered from Ferengi-itis IMO, they were difficult to take seriously as a credible threat, and even at their height in the series, they came across as rarely anything but lightweight villains. The Vidiians, were interesting, but apparently brushed under the carpet, and other than that for the first few seasons it was pretty much aliens of the week.
IMO, none of them were terribly charismatic as a new race. Obviously it's difficult coming up with a new race from scratch and having them hit the ground running, and perhaps to a certain extent we were spoiled with DS9's creation of the Dominion, but they really should have been able to come up with something better before reverting back to the Borg. Obviously, given the location, the Borg were always going to appear at some point, but as a viewer, I have to admit, after Scorpion, the introduction of the Borg, and their increased prominence, was where my interest really started to wane.
Again, apologies. I've really enjoyed the Voyager discussions with both yourself and Anwar of late, even if that might not have been evident yesterday!
Yes, you were unusally bitchy yesterday. Which is very unlike you judging from our past conversations.Don't worry about it, no harm was done. I've had alot worse said to me in this place for far more trivial things, as sad as that sounds. I will never forget being almost cursed out because I said: "Superman can't stop a war between two nations".
Yes, someone actually took that personally. 
I try to gloss over much of it.Shit happens, we all have bad days..............just don't do it again.
BTW, I really liked the Hirogen. My only quam was, the more we saw them the less violent and aggressive they became. I founding a contradiction the the ep. was called "The Killing Game" and yet the Hirogen never actually killed anybody.
^^ The Hirogen weren't bad. Again though, from memory, they weren't really around for very long were they? I must admit, for a two-parter, I never really cared much for The Killing Game. When viewed against the likes of Scorpion or Year of Hell, it pales into almost insignificance. Having said that, I haven't seen it for a while....
Superman - You know, it really doesn't surprise me at all! I once got embroiled in a massive argument with some muppet over an April Fool's day prank. They fell for it, I called them on it, and then apparently I was the one who'd been tricked!
Superman -
You know, it really doesn't surprise me at all! I once got embroiled in a massive argument with some muppet over an April Fool's day prank. They fell for it, I called them on it, and then apparently I was the one who'd been tricked! I think I liked TKG simply because (even though is was still the holodeck) any setting other than seeing the walls of Voyager corridors was welcome change of pace. Seeing only the inside of the ship every week was depressing and I welcomed any change in scenary by that point.Angel4576 said:
^^ The Hirogen weren't bad. Again though, from memory, they weren't really around for very long were they? I must admit, for a two-parter, I never really cared much for The Killing Game. When viewed against the likes of Scorpion or Year of Hell, it pales into almost insignificance. Having said that, I haven't seen it for a while....
Superman -
Humor is a very......."limited" concept around here.
^^ Re TKG, that's a fair point. I've always enjoyed the episodes that take place in a different environment. I don't know what it is specifically that puts me off TKG, I just remember the feeling I had when watching it was one of ambivalence. I'll have to try and view it again soon to get a better idea of what narked me.
I think humour, depends on where you look, but people taking offence will happen no matter what view you put forward. This is a relatively high-traffic set of boards, the number of people about, someone's bound to take exception to something you say. At the end of the day, this is just a forum, it's difficult to take things too personally, but I've seen already that some do. Perhaps I'm not the best advocate for rational reasoning after yesterday!
I think humour, depends on where you look, but people taking offence will happen no matter what view you put forward. This is a relatively high-traffic set of boards, the number of people about, someone's bound to take exception to something you say. At the end of the day, this is just a forum, it's difficult to take things too personally, but I've seen already that some do. Perhaps I'm not the best advocate for rational reasoning after yesterday!
Similar threads
