First, I would like to state for the record that despite what I'm about to say, Voyager
is my favourite Star Trek, and Chakotay, my favourite character in it, mostly due to Beltran of course. (Which is probably true of most of you on this thread.)
I just watched the interview and I think the crack he took at the fans was mostly a joke. He called it being cruel. OK, he suggested that those who take it too seriously are dumb, but I'm sure he would admit to being stupid himself for going to work on Star Trek. Didn't
he like it at first?
Having discovered how much of a funny guy he is in person, I must lament that part of him couldn't show more on Voyager. Star Trek does take itself very seriously, 99% of the time.
For those who are annoyed by the usual comparison with Shakespeare as the only worthy thing, was it about the Skitz interview? Because I don't recall it being in his mouth, but only as a caption. And previous to Voyager at least, Beltran
did do a lot of theatre, including Shakespeare I believe.
About the way Chakotay was written, I must sadly add that already in season 1, at the beginning, there was this whole bunch of episodes where each time, he had a scene where he would simply be grinning back at Janeway like a Cheshire cat at the hope-of-the-week-to-get-home, before that fell through.
And having done Native American Studies and knowing my Native American culture, I must say I wasn't quite comfortable with the way that aspect of him was turned on and off, and the way it was handled some of the times it was on. Sorry, I find it hard to be specific. The instant vision machine perhaps, triggered by child play-like passes with the hands? Here I might be pointing also to Beltran's acting. He
was very committed in the episodes where he had a leading part. Too bad there wasn't puch to to with the rest. Or could he have done it?
So I have to ask two questions:
1) How much leeway does an actor have on Star Trek?
2) How poorly were the writers paid and what were their work conditions anyway? The recent and historical writers' strike drew attention on their complaints, which weren't new. They are as old as Hollywood. So let's shift a little blame back at the producers, shall we? Have you seen that David Duchovny movie where he's writing a show, along the lines of Six Feet Under, and the production turns it into a grotesque sitcom?
Now I can't sign off without saying this.
What the f*** was that preposterous love affair with Seven about? Titillating the audience? I preferred Janeway's affair with a hologram. That was a better match. Honestly, everybody thrashes that episode, I don't see why. Is it that they don't like way the Irish theme was handled? Or is it that they hate it every time she has sex or romance? Star Trek really needs more sex. That's one redeeming quality about Enterprise: you get to
see a wee bit more than usual. Sign of the times...
Which brings me to my closing statement: TV shows got SO much better in the 2000's (although Star Trek plays by rather different rules).
Maybe Voyager was done in the wrong decade... or just neglected to the benefit of DS9 - sorry if you've heard this many times before. I'm new.
