Did Voyager Just Fail to Adapt The Changing Landscape of Televsion

[ThankYouGeneR]

Re: Did Voyager Just Fail to Adapt to The Changing Landscape of Televs

A common criticism of Voyager, at least at first, was that it felt like a rehash of TNG, rather its own thing. The big problem is, TNG came out in 1987 and Voyager came out in 1995. By the mid 90s, television was starting change: episodic Sci-Fi series were being replaced by ones with ongoing plots: X-Files, Babylon 5 and of course DS9. Trying to recreate a popular show from 1987 in 1995 and ignoring what was going on in television at time seemed like folly, perhaps that's what Voyager from the onset.

Do you think Voyager failed to adapt to changing landscape of television from the on set?

Gosh. I never noticed anything was wrong with it. From the very first episode I saw I thought it was brilliant. It gave me everything I look to Trek for; philosophical discussions, characters I admire and care about, social commentary, Real World analogies, a set that was awesome, ethical conundrums, stories I respect, a lot of my favorite episodes ever, and a whole lot of entertainment.

I thought Voyager was entirely different from TNG, which I had loved in its day. I even thought it was closest to Star Trek in its exploration of new life forms, new civilizations, traveling space where we had never gone before. And it was the updated version of Star Trek in that the Prime Directive, Vulcans, Starfleet, etc. were fully fleshed out and not in flux anymore while writers were figuring them out, and it had a budget that gave us a good, and believable, updated starship.

It lasted seven years. Enough people liked it to keep it going seven years. Maybe it wasn't a fit for everybody but it sure was a fit for a lot of us.

Somebody made a really valid point that I just read in the threads (whom I'm sorry I can't remember, or where I read it) mentioned that during this time the use of the Internet and video games were exploding. And the Internet and video games can be wonderfully additive, especially with something bigger and better coming along every six months.

I watched TV during those years and don't see that Voyager was not keeping up. The first season was fine and steadily improved during each season. So I don't think it was competing with 'better' television shows. More likely the explosive Internet, video games, and the younger sci-fi demographic that was moving into dating, college, changing tastes, marriage, and building new families that distracted from hanging on to the next episode of Voyager more than anything as the ratings declined.

But it lasted seven years. Enough Voyager fans were interested every week to keep it going that long. Don't ya think?

 

[Guy Gardener]

Voyager didn't "last" seven years.

It was a seven year project that completed criteria before the next seven year project began.

Oh.

Does that make DS9 the failure, because no new seven year project followed after DS9s completion?

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

-delete- does anyone know how I can actually delete my post?

You 'were' taking to me? Let me see if I can put my post back then.

The first thing was that I asked it you were responding to my post. Yours followed mine but the tone confused me. So I honestly didn't know.

But just in case I apologized to you if my lack of knowledge about a 7 year project had been offensive because I wasn't intending to offend in any way.

Then I thanked you for the information about 7 year projects because it was new information I did not have and thought was interesting.

I then said I was confused by the DS9 reference since I had not spoken of DS9, and assured you I would never imply or infer DS9 was a failure in any way or for any reason that it just wouldn't occur to me to do that kind of thing.

And ended by mentioning I thought DS9 ran as long as Voyager and even had a few more episodes so I had honestly thought this spoke highly of DS9 too.


So that was the post. Sincere confusion as to whether I was being address. Sincere apology if I had offended in any way. Assurance it would never occur to me to say anything negative about DS9.


Then I read previous posts and thought surely I had made a mistake thinking you were indeed talking to me, so decided to delete it.


Now that all these following posts are surely talking about my now edited to remove content since I couldn't figure out how to just toss it, let's get a coupe of things straight here:

Telling me to grow a pair is offensive.

I do not show disrespect about anything in Trek, and I do not show disrespect to any posters.

I do not get in heated debates, I do not flame, I do not consciously intend offense in anything.

This is not my personality or interest.

Thank you for the information on deleting posts in TBBS. I am still learning this board's functions.


And now that I've had this disturbing interaction with you I will simply forget you and read nothing by you, and you may carry on as you wish with anything I post. I will never know.


And, yes, please do quote post this so it is never within my power to delete or edit it.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Yup, talking to you.

Nope, not even trying to gently graze your feelings.

Grow a pair.

(Still only being friendly.)

To clarify...

Why do you think that ds9, Voyager and TNG all ran for seven years?

Voyager clearly replaced TNG, and Enterprise clearly replaced Voyager.

DS9 sprung up because TNG was awesome and had fantastic numbers, that at the time were on the rise and only getting fantasticer.

Voyager, DS9, and Enterprise were pulling %25 to %10 of TNG, which is a farcical thing to say since although true, would allow a devious person to contrast ratings from these four serieses from anywhere between 1987 to 2005 without context. TNG got almost a 20 when it started and Enterprises last season measured out at about a mostly consistent 1 or less than 1 in the Nielsons.

Berman did not deserve a second show and couldn't be trusted to run two shows into the ground, when it was bad enough that he was running one show (Yoyager, then Enterprise.) into the ground, especially after he tanked the movie franchise. God help me if I could have withstood another one of Berman's shit sandwiches after choking down Nemesis.

If DS9 had been getting a 15 consistently in it's last season, rather than a 5 and lower, then a new Star Trek Series would have been running in tandem beside Voyager Season 6 and Season 7, and maybe still yet there would have been a second show running along side Enterprise as well... But would it have also been set in the 22nd century?

 

[Guy Gardener]

-delete- does anyone know how I can actually delete my post?

In the first five minutes you can delete your post by going to the advanced edit. Just keep pushing buttons. In the first 5 minutes you can also edit a thread title if you get the i and e around the wrong way and don't notice till after you've published. After 5 minutes it's locked. You can't delete, and you can't edit a thread title. Oh, and if your edit you post in the first 5 minutes, the post is not marked as edited.

You can only edit your post for 48 hours, and then it's locked.

That's called the asshole rule, since assholes used to Orwell themselves to win arguments, changing the past so that they had suddenly always retroactively been right to win amazingly petty arguments.

I've never done it, but maybe you can review edits made to a persons post?

 

[Lance]

-delete- does anyone know how I can actually delete my post?

In the first five minutes you can delete your post by going to the advanced edit. Just keep pushing buttons. In the first 5 minutes you can also edit a thread title if you get the i and e around the wrong way and don't notice till after you've published. After 5 minutes it's locked. You can't delete, and you can't edit a thread title. Oh, and if your edit you post in the first 5 minutes, the post is not marked as edited.

You can only edit your post for 48 hours, and then it's locked.

That's called the asshole rule, since assholes used to Orwell themselves to win arguments, changing the past so that they had suddenly always retroactively been right to win amazingly petty arguments.

I'm only ashamed that it would never have occured to me before now to do that myself.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

-delete- does anyone know how I can actually delete my post?

In the first five minutes you can delete your post by going to the advanced edit. Just keep pushing buttons. In the first 5 minutes you can also edit a thread title if you get the i and e around the wrong way and don't notice till after you've published. After 5 minutes it's locked. You can't delete, and you can't edit a thread title. Oh, and if your edit you post in the first 5 minutes, the post is not marked as edited.

You can only edit your post for 48 hours, and then it's locked.

That's called the asshole rule, since assholes used to Orwell themselves to win arguments, changing the past so that they had suddenly always retroactively been right to win amazingly petty arguments.

I've never done it, but maybe you can review edits made to a persons post?

I knew that.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

IF you think someone is going to edit their slander into something more decorous, but of course everyone read their slander before that happened in a fast moving thread, you should copy (not quote) their post and paste it elsewhere. Then after they have edited and are all "I thought better of my words, I am a temperate and thoughtful person" you hit the quote button and paste in what they said. Then it stands forever because they cannot take back what you have posted.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

IF you think someone is going to edit their slander into something more decorous, but of course everyone read their slander before that happened in a fast moving thread, you should copy (not quote) their post and paste it elsewhere. Then after they have edited and are all "I thought better of my words, I am a temperate and thoughtful person" you hit the quote button and paste in what they said. Then it stands forever because they cannot take back what you have posted.

That will teach them!

 

[Guy Gardener]

The asshole rule is because of Neutral Zone shenanigans.

That place is a cesspool.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

The asshole rule is because of Neutral Zone shenanigans.

That place is a cesspool.

I believe we've had this argument before and I won.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

-delete- does anyone know how I can actually delete my post?

You 'were' taking to me? Let me see if I can put my post back then.

The first thing was that I asked it you were responding to my post. Yours followed mine but the tone confused me. So I honestly didn't know.

But just in case I apologized to you if my lack of knowledge about a 7 year project had been offensive because I wasn't intending to offend in any way.

Then I thanked you for the information about 7 year projects because it was new information I did not have and thought was interesting.

I then said I was confused by the DS9 reference since I had not spoken of DS9, and assured you I would never imply or infer DS9 was a failure in any way or for any reason that it just wouldn't occur to me to do that kind of thing.

And ended by mentioning I thought DS9 ran as long as Voyager and even had a few more episodes so I had honestly thought this spoke highly of DS9 too.


So that was the post. Sincere confusion as to whether I was being address. Sincere apology if I had offended in any way. Assurance it would never occur to me to say anything negative about DS9.


Then I read previous posts and thought surely I had made a mistake thinking you were indeed talking to me, so decided to delete it.


Now that all these following posts are surely talking about my now edited to remove content since I couldn't figure out how to just toss it, let's get a coupe of things straight here:

Telling me to grow a pair is offensive.

I do not show disrespect about anything in Trek, and I do not show disrespect to any posters.

I do not get in heated debates, I do not flame, I do not consciously intend offense in anything.

This is not my personality or interest.

Thank you for the information on deleting posts in TBBS. I am still learning this board's functions.


And now that I've had this disturbing interaction with you I will simply forget you and read nothing by you, and you may carry on as you wish with anything I post. I will never know.


And, yes, please do quote post this so it is never within my power to delete or edit it.

 

[Guy Gardener]

In your usercp is a button called "Ignore".

You can designate any number of people to become invisible who you will never have to acknowledge the existence of again because you will not see their posts any more.

Push the ignore button once, and you might have a good reason.

Push it more than 40 times and you might be a giant wuss.

I have this theory, that if someone uses the ignore function to remove every other person on this BBS from posting, that the only "entity" left is going to be god, and then you might have time to ask god one question before she runs away.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

In your usercp is a button called "Ignore".

You can designate any number of people to become invisible who you will never have to acknowledge the existence of again because you will not see their posts any more.

Push the ignore button once, and you might have a good reason.

Push it more than 40 times and you might be a giant wuss.

I have this theory, that if someone uses the ignore function to remove every other person on this BBS from posting, that the only "entity" left is going to be god, and then you might have time to ask god one question before she runs away.

I would never use the ignore button. I am not afraid of words.

You know: "sticks and stones... and all that.

 

[hux]

The first thing was that I asked it you were responding to my post. Yours followed mine but the tone confused me. So I honestly didn't know.

To be fair, i rarely know who Guy Gardener is talking to and find it works best if i just assume it's always me (unless Teacake is around in which case i assume it's her) That way, you're either right or you're wrong but you get involved in an interesting discussion

Telling me to grow a pair is offensive.

It wasn't that bad. He could have said....check your mum's purse and see if your balls are in there (i would have gone with that one.....i prefer the classics)

I do not get in heated debates, I do not flame

Honestly, you should try it once in a while (it can actually be a lot of fun.....but only in a room where you couldn't give a shit.....and preferably just before you're about to go on holiday so a ban won't matter)

And now that I've had this disturbing interaction with you I will simply forget you and read nothing by you, and you may carry on as you wish with anything I post. I will never know.

If we all left because we had a disturbing interaction with Guy Gardener, the Voyager board would be empty. After you stick around for a while, you discover that he's actually a genius with encyclopedic knowledge and never a dull post

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

They went into the creation of Enterprise with a much greater ability to tackle those changes from the get-go (and make the case to UPN that viewers expected something more from their television these days).

To me, this is an argument that Voyager did something right, not despite of but because of it's limitations. If Voyager had the stop/false start/start/false stop continuity of the Enterprise story arc(s), I wouldn't be watching episodes right this second.

When I read what Lance wrote I had that same thought. It was the Enterprise format that was one of the main things, if not indeed the 'main' thing that made me lose interest in the series.

hmm... Even as much as Voyager's characters and stories have become my most enjoyed and re-watched I'm now wondering if I would have cared for it as much or even at all if the series had implemented the mentioned needed changes.

It is all academic, but it is an interesting thought.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Enterprise switched formats twice.

When did you give up?

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Enterprise switched formats twice.
...

What do you mean?

 

[Guy Gardener]

Season one and two was basically the same as Voyager. 24 or 25 stand alone episodes. More continuity than Voyager but more than zero isn't so much of an improvement.

Season 3 was one big massive arc. Badly executed, but a B minus for effort.

Season 4 was several multipart stories.

Observe

Stand alone...

#403 Home

#410 Daedalus

#411 Observer Effect

#417 Bound

#422 These Are The Voyages

2 Parters...

#401 Storm Front, Part I
#402 Storm Front, Part II

#415 Affliction
#416 Divergence

#418 In A Mirror, Darkly - Part I
#419 In A Mirror, Darkly - Part II

#420 Demons
#421 Terra Prime

Three parters...

#404 Borderland
#405 Cold Station 12
#406 The Augments

#407 The Forge
#408 Awakening
#409 Kir'Shara

#412 Babel One
#413 United 02/04/05
#414 The Aenar

Arguable 5 parter...

#404 Borderland
#405 Cold Station 12
#406 The Augments

+

#415 Affliction
#416 Divergence

In season one Enterprise had 1 and half mulitpart stories. The pilot and the cliff hanger at the end. Although their several detours to get their end away on Risa were somewhat hilarious. Season two had 1/2 a multipart story. Shockwave II.

Enterprise completely shifted their paradigm between season 2 and 3, and then again between season 3 and 4. I mean if the full season arc was such a success, then surely they'd try that again and hopefully learn from their mistakes last year and actually tell a cohesive 24 part story for their fourth season.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Enterprise completely shifted their paradigm between season 2 and 3, and then again between season 3 and 4.

And it was all planned this way from the beginning to keep Star Trek fresh! And to keep we, the viewers, on the edge of our seats wondering what twists would be upon us next chunk of Trek.

It was really genius.