My idea about Voyager actually being an Alien ship they get from the Caretaker?
Biggest problem with "Voyager" is that they didn't really take any chances.
- Thread starter Jayson1
- Start date
My idea about Voyager actually being an Alien ship they get from the Caretaker?
This part. I really like this idea that instead of just being trapped, they actually have to stay and choose to fight in order to protect the Alpha Quadrant. But, you also have suggested some other good ideas that I had missed, especially about Kes and the Caretaker.
Since it happened to Kirk and Picard before, the 70K LY distance did not feel like that big of a deal taking in the whole of the "Trek 'verse", especially once they got in to the meat of the show.
There are several ways to have a fun show, not just the one that ended up on screen.
That is subjective, and also, the majority on this board are amateurs, not professional writers. If you want a fully published pilot and treatise based upon some of the suggestions, I can work on a rough draft to flesh out the concepts.
The struggle I'm having right now is the acceptance of status quo and some how imagining something else is some how "wrong."
The struggle I'm having right now is the acceptance of status quo and some how imagining something else is some how "wrong."
That's interesting how it's always a "godlike being" responsible. Or at least some kind of ascended alien. The Traveller takes them far away, then brings them back. Q takes them far away, then takes them back. The Cytherian, Caretaker....It's like what if the Traveller, or the Cytherian brought them out to the Nethereaches, then had a sudden heart attack and died. I can just picture Picard, taking a seat in his big chair: "Well this sucks..."
I feel your pain. The struggle of imagining how something else is somehow wrong.. is the basis of this whole thread. The something else being Voyager as it screened. That Voyager had a problem. That the problem was it didn't take chances that weren't shown in the product . That we all saw the same problem.. that it would make a blind bit of difference. That this suggested problem opens the floodgates for wholesale change suggestions, premise, location, dialogue, characterization, technotalk..all offered up with very little substance in the way of seven season sustainable alternatives. Just rough suggestions of bits and pieces from other shows that if fleshed out would no doubt take the form of those other shows.
If the idea is to put together a Voyager like show I guess that would make sense but if it is to pick through the bones of Voyager to re-image it into something contrary to what it was.. I just don't get. I've discovered there is this whole novel/story component to Star Trek. I think that is something that could add to it and some of the posters here are very articulate. There's a tiny lack of humor I've noticed though..
Text based interactions are often difficult to communicate humor in.
Also, I trying to reimagine a different take on Voyager based upon the premise, rather than "planet of the week" adventures that were presented often, feeling very much like TNG again. That's the struggle I have, that and not connecting with the majority of cast. I see a lot of potential in many of the stories that were not explored to their fullest potential.
Also, I trying to reimagine a different take on Voyager based upon the premise, rather than "planet of the week" adventures that were presented often, feeling very much like TNG again. That's the struggle I have, that and not connecting with the majority of cast. I see a lot of potential in many of the stories that were not explored to their fullest potential.
You have a big problem then, don't you, lol. Conveying humor in text is doable. Re-writing Voayger to be un-Voyager like should be easier than you think though. If you think it was TNG like, (I didn't as such) but if you did then perhaps instead of planet of the week make it 'same' planet of the week. Alien of the week, go for 'same' alien of the week, like DS 9 did. Not connecting with the majority of the cast, change the cast. Don't like the stories, plagiarise the bits you like and redo the rest. Just don't call it Voyager. You could call it de-Voyager or something.
Why?
Why?
I said "difficult" not that it wasn't doable.
Voyager has potential, and it has the Star Trek optimism. As I said, there is a lot of potential that could be worked just a little bit differently and explore alternatives. Not sure why exploring alternatives, or personal preferences, is so distasteful.
Voyager has potential, and it has the Star Trek optimism. As I said, there is a lot of potential that could be worked just a little bit differently and explore alternatives. Not sure why exploring alternatives, or personal preferences, is so distasteful.
What is this whole with taking "taking chances" premise anyway?
That was why the production team wanted the setting that they did.
Nobody's saying they shouldn't. Just that it should be references to actual science, not just sciency-sounding gibberish whose existence is dictated purely by plot contrivance.
What the hell are you reading? NONE of that is in the post you quoted. Like, not even REMOTELY.
Obviously.
No, I really don't. That's actually my whole point. It doesn't add anything to storytelling quality to insert extra layers of technical jargon into dialog, which is why procedurals like cop shows and medical dramas usually leave alot of that jargon out entirely.
Voyager would be anomalous all by itself if it included a high level of scientific technical jargon; that's really hard to pull of in a drama, because the extra words suck some of the emotional energy out of the scene (everything you have to SAY is one less thing you have to ACT). Except, it isn't technical jargon, because none of the terms being used actually existed before they were written into the script, nor do they describe any real scientific concept that the writers are aware of or could even describe in the background. The technobabble is LITERALLY GIBBERISH.
Science fiction is flush with examples of technical jargon being used as part of the drama, and audiences connect the dots just fine. Alex Kamal says "Strap in, we're going for a high-gee maneuver!" most people realize the ship is about to accelerate really fast and that they're all gonna get thrown around a bit. When Kara Thrace tells her wingman "You've got one on your six! Break right and dive!" even if you don't exactly know what a "six" is, you still get the general idea. And if you went and asked the writers -- or better yet, asked an actual astronaut -- when any of those terms mean, they'd probably be able to tell you.
What the hell is a "sporocystian life form?" I have no idea. And neither do you. And neither do the people who WROTE that line, which is exactly the problem. If you don't even understand what you're talking about...
NEELIX: A singularity is a star that's collapsed in on itself. The event horizon is a very powerful energy field surrounding it.
... then how the hell did you write an ENTIRE EPISODE about it?But we didnt "work that out." Kes flat out TOLD us in an angry speech that wasn't actually half bad. It's just that the speech didn't have the dramatic foreshadowing it could have had because the story was too busy pretending to be clever to actually get its point across.
"The Gift" was unique, though, in a lot of ways. For one thing, Seven of Nine was still undergoing her transformation from Borg to Crewmember and Kes was transforming into a space butterfly or something. Considering this is a thread predicated on Voyager largely avoiding taking risks, "The Gift" is definitely one that deserves honorable mention.
Slightly related: Kes accidentally almost-killing Tuvok with her powers is one of the more memorable moments in that entire season, IMO. Where above I pointed out the many instances where bad/bullshit science is smugly trotted out as if it were real, this is an example of a really SIMPLE scientific concept (brownian motion and the heat of molecules) is converted directly into a plot device. Which was, frankly, AWESOME.
You worry too much about technical jargon interfering with the average viewer's perceptions. We are smarter than you give us credit for. My partner is the most intelligent nerd you could ever meet. I'm no slug either, maybe an English nerd and a literature one at that.. but people like us don't mind the technical jargon in our fiction, our science fiction. I love language and it often amuses me.Nobody's saying they shouldn't. Just that it should be references to actual science, not just sciency-sounding gibberish whose existence is dictated purely by plot contrivance.
What the hell are you reading? NONE of that is in the post you quoted. Like, not even REMOTELY.
Obviously.
No, I really don't. That's actually my whole point. It doesn't add anything to storytelling quality to insert extra layers of technical jargon into dialog, which is why procedurals like cop shows and medical dramas usually leave alot of that jargon out entirely.
Voyager would be anomalous all by itself if it included a high level of scientific technical jargon; that's really hard to pull of in a drama, because the extra words suck some of the emotional energy out of the scene (everything you have to SAY is one less thing you have to ACT). Except, it isn't technical jargon, because none of the terms being used actually existed before they were written into the script, nor do they describe any real scientific concept that the writers are aware of or could even describe in the background. The technobabble is LITERALLY GIBBERISH.
Science fiction is flush with examples of technical jargon being used as part of the drama, and audiences connect the dots just fine. Alex Kamal says "Strap in, we're going for a high-gee maneuver!" most people realize the ship is about to accelerate really fast and that they're all gonna get thrown around a bit. When Kara Thrace tells her wingman "You've got one on your six! Break right and dive!" even if you don't exactly know what a "six" is, you still get the general idea. And if you went and asked the writers -- or better yet, asked an actual astronaut -- when any of those terms mean, they'd probably be able to tell you.
What the hell is a "sporocystian life form?" I have no idea. And neither do you. And neither do the people who WROTE that line, which is exactly the problem. If you don't even understand what you're talking about...
NEELIX: A singularity is a star that's collapsed in on itself. The event horizon is a very powerful energy field surrounding it. ... then how the hell did you write an ENTIRE EPISODE about it?
But we didnt "work that out." Kes flat out TOLD us in an angry speech that wasn't actually half bad. It's just that the speech didn't have the dramatic foreshadowing it could have had because the story was too busy pretending to be clever to actually get its point across.
For some reason I just want to reply to this bit. Who are you to speak for me? 'We' didn't didn't work that out? Well I did. I didn't need Kes and her speech to covey the Caretaker was a er.. a CAREtaker. Even with my simplistic reasoning I got it. What.. do you really think the average viewer needs a fucking guide to all this?
Yeah. Who the hell is presumptive like that?
Oh.
And you got his point back to front. He's saying the writers constant use of 'tell' gives the impression that the writers think you're too stupid work out what's happening from just the 'show.'
Last edited:
It's limitless apparently..
