Voyager - right show at the wrong time?
- Thread starter Nyotarules
- Start date
I think that the person who wrote the article is missing the point.
I don't think that Voyager had been better if it had been made some years later, on the contrary it could have been much worse since doom-and-gloom was on its way to enter all kinds of movie making and serie making then.
The problem with Voyager wasn't the timing, it was who were in charge of it.
Berman and Braga shouldn't have been in charge. They were burned out after TNG and were basically out of ideas, something which started to show up in season 3 when they no longer had the Kazon and the Vidiians to build stories around.
After a season with "what shall we do now", they decided to flog the dead horse, which was the Borg.
The Borg were actually done after TNG, they were no longer the serious threat they had been in Q Who and Best Of Both Worlds. They had become just another hostile alien species.
And I see no reason to blame the Kazon either. They were good villains but were actually supposed to be along for one or maybe two seasons. The fact is that Berman's gang started to lose the inspiration they had after the Kazon and the Vidiians were out of the picture.
Unfortunately Berman, Braga and the others had lost the inspiration then and the solutions they came up with weren't good. It was all about bringing in the Borg ("the viewers love the Borg"), bringing in a sexy babe ("the viewers love sexy babes"), TNG characters (the viewers love TNG") instead of doing something like what the DS9 writers and producers did, come up with new, interesting species and make good stories about Voyager's journey through those uncharted territories.
In fact, they had this scenario with all possiblities to make something very exciting out of it and they did blow it all.
At the end, it was all about "Let's get out of this as soon as possible and let's also insult certain groups of fans who love this series and its characters. Then we can make our version of TOS, the way TOS should have been made from the start".
And please don't come up with wishes about arguments and conflicts between Starfleet and Maquis members as something which should have made Voyager better!
Stargate Universe gave us that scenario and look what it became, a dull and totally unwatchable series which only lasted for two seasons.
I don't think that Voyager had been better if it had been made some years later, on the contrary it could have been much worse since doom-and-gloom was on its way to enter all kinds of movie making and serie making then.
The problem with Voyager wasn't the timing, it was who were in charge of it.
Berman and Braga shouldn't have been in charge. They were burned out after TNG and were basically out of ideas, something which started to show up in season 3 when they no longer had the Kazon and the Vidiians to build stories around.
After a season with "what shall we do now", they decided to flog the dead horse, which was the Borg.
The Borg were actually done after TNG, they were no longer the serious threat they had been in Q Who and Best Of Both Worlds. They had become just another hostile alien species.
And I see no reason to blame the Kazon either. They were good villains but were actually supposed to be along for one or maybe two seasons. The fact is that Berman's gang started to lose the inspiration they had after the Kazon and the Vidiians were out of the picture.
Unfortunately Berman, Braga and the others had lost the inspiration then and the solutions they came up with weren't good. It was all about bringing in the Borg ("the viewers love the Borg"), bringing in a sexy babe ("the viewers love sexy babes"), TNG characters (the viewers love TNG") instead of doing something like what the DS9 writers and producers did, come up with new, interesting species and make good stories about Voyager's journey through those uncharted territories.
In fact, they had this scenario with all possiblities to make something very exciting out of it and they did blow it all.
At the end, it was all about "Let's get out of this as soon as possible and let's also insult certain groups of fans who love this series and its characters. Then we can make our version of TOS, the way TOS should have been made from the start".
And please don't come up with wishes about arguments and conflicts between Starfleet and Maquis members as something which should have made Voyager better!
Stargate Universe gave us that scenario and look what it became, a dull and totally unwatchable series which only lasted for two seasons.
Voyager had a lot going for it.
The Star Trek franchise was proven.
The premise was promising.
The ship and sets were attractive.
The cast was composed of actors ranging from competent to amazing.
The characters had considerable story potential.
But it was placed in the hands of showrunners who didn't respect their viewers' intelligence, didn't understand the nature of Trekkies, didn't seek to make VOY its own show, and responded to viewer concerns by basically giving them the finger. It's only because of the charisma of the cast snd some good stories that the show was able to limp to the 7th season finish line.
The Star Trek franchise was proven.
The premise was promising.
The ship and sets were attractive.
The cast was composed of actors ranging from competent to amazing.
The characters had considerable story potential.
But it was placed in the hands of showrunners who didn't respect their viewers' intelligence, didn't understand the nature of Trekkies, didn't seek to make VOY its own show, and responded to viewer concerns by basically giving them the finger. It's only because of the charisma of the cast snd some good stories that the show was able to limp to the 7th season finish line.
Last edited:
Agreed. I can still recall reading in teen magazine (remember those?) with interviews, showing off the make up and all about the characters.
While not a TNG fan, I knew enough to know about Ro and the Maquis so the conflict really appealed to me. Torres and Tuvok were great characters I wanted to see.
And the show just didn't go that way. Conflicts ended quickly, Seska was just annoying rather than interesting and the story lost me by episode 5.
So much potential and it just landed flatter than a snake's belly in a wheel rut.
Voyager started after Babylon 5 and Deep Space Nine, and overlapped Farscape for three seasons, so if the show did air at the wrong time then it aired too late. Sci-fi television had already evolved past what Voyager was doing at the time, that's what made it frustrating.
Stargate Universe's problem was that the conflict came out of the characters making dumb choices and once they worked that out by season 2 it became a much better show. It doesn't prove that having Starfleet and the Maquis butt heads was a bad idea, but it does show what goes wrong if you mess up the execution.
It's funny how Battlestar Galactica was in some ways a reaction to Voyager, while Stargate Universe was a reaction to Battlestar. I think Battlestar's legacy has been tainted a bit by how it began to meander and couldn't stick the landing, but overall it did show how several of Voyager's problems could've been fixed. It set its characters up for natural conflict and to make hard decisions, while also testing their morality and asking if they were worthy of survival, basically having its cake and eating it.
Stargate Universe's problem was that the conflict came out of the characters making dumb choices and once they worked that out by season 2 it became a much better show. It doesn't prove that having Starfleet and the Maquis butt heads was a bad idea, but it does show what goes wrong if you mess up the execution.
That and... how could they screw up Harry Kim? Given where he is on his journey, they vould have developed him in numerous directions. The only wrong thing to do with him was nothing. And guess what they did?
I'm more bothered by what they did with Seska to be honest. Or what they didn't do with her, to be precise. First DS9 hires Martha Hackett play a Romulan on the Defiant's crew, but the writers decide they don't know what to do with her and never bring her back. Then Voyager hires her to play a Cardassian spy, a former enemy who disagrees with Janeway, and those writers didn't think it was worth keeping her on the crew either!
And then we got Seven of Nine, a former enemy who disgrees with Janeway, and it turns out that there was a bit of mileage in the concept after all.
And then we got Seven of Nine, a former enemy who disgrees with Janeway, and it turns out that there was a bit of mileage in the concept after all.
Unfortunately, the doom-and-gloom we have in many series of today was starting to show its ugly head at that time, therefore I'm happy that Voyager was filmed and aired when it was.
In fact, when it comes to Voyager, it had its fair share of character destruction which was bad alreay as it was.
Personally I liked farscape and Babylon 5 but i couldn't stand Battlestar Galactica even if that series was acceptable compared to Stargate Universe. As for Battlestar Galactica I found it a typical doom-and-gloom series about a bunch of people who had ruined their homeworld and now set out in space with all their faults and bad sides to ruin other worlds as well.
Later on I got the chance to watch the Original Battlestar Galactica from the 70's and found it much better.
As for Stargate Universe, I don't think it got any better in season 2. The only reason that I kept watching it after taking a short break after the fifth episode in season 1 was that it became a joke between me and a person who worked at the same place as I did.
Last year I found Season 1 of Stargate Universe in a shop where they were selling used DVDs. I bought it for a very decent price just to see if it really was as bad as I thought it was back then.
It was!
In this I totally agree!
Unfortunately they destroyed kes too and made Chakotay, Paris, Torres, Tuvok and Neelix became like Broik and Morn were in Quark's bar at Deep Space Nine. Visible characters with the only purpose just to be there.
Seska was really a waste. They should have let her survive and be captured when they re-took the ship from the kazon. They should have put her in the brig and later on created a situation in which she could have been important for the ship. If they had a character who could have had some conflict with the others, then it was Seska.
A good character who could have been used better.
Last edited:
Between Voyager and Battlestar Galactica we have one extreme and the other. I can't imagine VOY, as is, in any other time besides when it was made. Any earlier, it would've been TNG. Any later, it would've been ENT. And thanks to the likes of BSG, I don't need to ever imagine "what could've been", because it's right there.
I think Voyager and the tech boom of the '90s are synonymous with each other.
I think Voyager and the tech boom of the '90s are synonymous with each other.
Conflict that Voyager desperately needed.
I don't know if I ever felt that Voyager actually needed more conflict for its own sake, but the premise pretty much demands it. It's got crews from two opposing ships working side by side in a situation none of them have been trained to deal with, if they agree on everything then what was the point? Plus I like the idea of Seska having to work within Starfleet rules to be invited to the table, but giving them ideas too good to ignore.
I actually explored that in my "Roads Not Taken" timeline. Seska ends up serving as Janeway's spymaster.
There is a flaw in the premise of that article. "Imagine if Voyager had come a decade later, when BSG normalized serialized sci-fi with tension amongst the characters." Thing is, BSG only happened because of Voyager. Specifically, Ron Moore's bad experience during his brief stint on Voyager's writing staff led him to vent his frustrations with Voyager and the Trek franchise in general by crafting BSG as we know it.
Now, yes, we can argue that eventually a BSG-like show would happened regardless. Certainly the late 90s and early 2000s had no shortage of sci-fi writers desperate to make "the anti-Trek," indeed, I've seen Stargate described by many as "anti-Trek before it was cool to be anti-Trek." And maybe we'd even get this hypothetical BSG-like show in around the same time period BSG aired anyway. That still doesn't negate the fact that one can't really imagine what Voyager would have been like in a post-BSG TV world when it's because of Voyager we even got BSG.
Besides, being stranded and cut-off from home is hardly a unique premise in fiction, and Voyager wasn't the first to do it, nor was it the last. Are there ways they could have handled the concept better? Definitely. But there are also worse, and even if the show were done ten, twenty years later or even if it were done today you'd have no real guarantees they'd handle the concept any better. After all, the oft-criticized decision to abandon the Starfleet-Maquis conflict came about as a result of studio suits demanding it be dropped since they felt character conflict was the reason DS9 was doing worse ratings than TNG. The only thing being done today would have changed is that rather than trying to imitate TNG, IE the Popular Trek they'd probably be trying to emulate popular contemporary television, Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Yellowstone or whatever. You'd probably still end up with mixed results, indeed one criticism I share regarding Disco's first season was how hard it was trying to be Game of Thrones.
Before I finish, though it is often a common target for criticizing Voyager, I really don't see what else they could have done with the Starfleet-Maquis conflict beyond what was done on the show anyway. Yes, there'd be some tensions at first, but I doubt it would take very long before both sides realized "the political situation at a home we may never see again doesn't really matter when we got alien street gangs trying to capture our ship or alien organ harvesters wanting to take our livers."
Now, yes, we can argue that eventually a BSG-like show would happened regardless. Certainly the late 90s and early 2000s had no shortage of sci-fi writers desperate to make "the anti-Trek," indeed, I've seen Stargate described by many as "anti-Trek before it was cool to be anti-Trek." And maybe we'd even get this hypothetical BSG-like show in around the same time period BSG aired anyway. That still doesn't negate the fact that one can't really imagine what Voyager would have been like in a post-BSG TV world when it's because of Voyager we even got BSG.
Besides, being stranded and cut-off from home is hardly a unique premise in fiction, and Voyager wasn't the first to do it, nor was it the last. Are there ways they could have handled the concept better? Definitely. But there are also worse, and even if the show were done ten, twenty years later or even if it were done today you'd have no real guarantees they'd handle the concept any better. After all, the oft-criticized decision to abandon the Starfleet-Maquis conflict came about as a result of studio suits demanding it be dropped since they felt character conflict was the reason DS9 was doing worse ratings than TNG. The only thing being done today would have changed is that rather than trying to imitate TNG, IE the Popular Trek they'd probably be trying to emulate popular contemporary television, Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Yellowstone or whatever. You'd probably still end up with mixed results, indeed one criticism I share regarding Disco's first season was how hard it was trying to be Game of Thrones.
Before I finish, though it is often a common target for criticizing Voyager, I really don't see what else they could have done with the Starfleet-Maquis conflict beyond what was done on the show anyway. Yes, there'd be some tensions at first, but I doubt it would take very long before both sides realized "the political situation at a home we may never see again doesn't really matter when we got alien street gangs trying to capture our ship or alien organ harvesters wanting to take our livers."
I think it would have helped to have an outside of Starfleet perspective and even unique problem solving outside of Starfleet doctrine.
Especially since these should not be people folding in to Starfleet procedure and uniforms.
Especially since these should not be people folding in to Starfleet procedure and uniforms.
One problem was that they chose the wrong group for conflict in Voyager.
Instead of the Maquis, or even being a Federation starship at all, Voyager should've been an alien vessel all along with the Fleeters as just one group on it and the other crew members being various Delta Quadrant alien races.
The complains of how the DQ wasn't developed enough or thought out enough? Well in Farscape they had most of the cast actually be Aliens FROM the area of space the show took place in. Voyager should have done the same with the "other crew" being DQ aliens who were being held on the Caretaker's Array. That way they could be how the area was expanded on through them.
Voyager's biggest issue was that it was rushed into production with a partly completed concept, it didn't just come out "at the wrong time", it was literally a half baked show to start with compared to how much time was put into TNG and DS9's development.
Instead of the Maquis, or even being a Federation starship at all, Voyager should've been an alien vessel all along with the Fleeters as just one group on it and the other crew members being various Delta Quadrant alien races.
The complains of how the DQ wasn't developed enough or thought out enough? Well in Farscape they had most of the cast actually be Aliens FROM the area of space the show took place in. Voyager should have done the same with the "other crew" being DQ aliens who were being held on the Caretaker's Array. That way they could be how the area was expanded on through them.
Voyager's biggest issue was that it was rushed into production with a partly completed concept, it didn't just come out "at the wrong time", it was literally a half baked show to start with compared to how much time was put into TNG and DS9's development.
I recently rewatched Caretaker and I that episode really had a great premise in many ways, a premise which those in charge didn't stuck to later on.
I mean, here we had a fantastic and interesting scenario with a ship and crew which all of a sudden was stuck on the other side of the Galaxy. Now that could have opened up a lot of opportunities for a lot of different adventures and encounters with new species.
And Berman's gang should have been up to it since they actually managed to come up with TNG which brought in a lot of new, interesting races and scenarios in TNG.
But no! They ran out of inspiration in season 3 and from there, Voyager became just a very bleak copy of TNG and also a weak copy of what it could have been.
If we look at the characters, there were a lot of what they showed up in Caretaker which disappeared and were smoothed out already in the first season.
JANEWAY: Actually an interesting character in the first seasons in which she ended up with probably the most difficult task of all the Star Trek Captains, to bring home a lost ship from the other side of the galaxy.
I liked Janeway in the first three seasons when she actually managed to carry the burden she had with a lost ship and crew. I also liked the compassion she had for the different crew members and her willingness to sacrifice herself to save a crewman if necessary. Unfortunately they made her Superwoman later on and also something of a psycho which damaged the character.
CHAKOTAY: Definitely meant to be an action character who could ram his Maquis ship into a Kazon cruiser, question Janeway's decision and have an attitude like Captain Kirk when it came to solving difficult situations. As such, he could have been the best First Officer ever.
Instead, he was slowly shoved in the background and became nothing more than a yes-sayer to Janeway before becoming only a moving image in the background. I can understand that Robert Beltran was angry and frustrated.
TUVOK: He did actually keep most of his premise as the calm Vulcan officer, sort of counselor to Janeway and sometimes at odds with Chakotay. Unfortunately, he also disappeared in the background later on.
PARIS: Definitely meant to be another action character and from time to time he was used in that way, especially in the first three seasons. But he was also slowly shoved in the background to be nothing more than the ship's pilot. Funny guy with a lot of funny comments and ideas but became boring later on. They had to come up with the Paris/Torres relationship just to show that he still was a member of the crew.
TORRES: Here we had the odd crewmember in the gang, someone who was dead against becoming a Starfleet member in the first place. It doesn't bother me that she was transformed into a responsible Starfleet Officer and superb engineer. The problem was that it happened too fast. She should have had at least five episodes before starting to transform. Still a good character who had her moments in the spotlight but also shoved in the background as the show continued. The same scenario for her with the Paris/Torres relationship, just to show that she still was there.
KIM: Was probably meant to be the computer whizz kid on the ship, solving difficult computer problems in the same way as Torres solved engineering problems. In the Voyager books from seasons 1, 2 and 3, he actually was that!
But he was sadly put in a corner as "young Ensign Kim" and never got out of it. At hios best, he was a good sidekick to Paris but most of the time just "young Ensign Kim". One of the worst sadly wasted characters in Star Trek. And of course he should have had a promotion!
KES: If we look at Kes in Caretaker, she comes out as much tougher than she did in many later episodes. Her little speech to Toscat, the Ocampa leader when she totally dismiss him is one of the high spots in the episode. I would have liked to see more of that.
Definitely a character who could have been used better. She did have some great episodes, like Persistence Of Vision, Cold Fire, Warlord and The Swarm in which she showed up her determitation and courage. But the silly nine-year lifespan was hampering to the character and should never have been made or at least altered at an early stage.
Her relation with Neelix was logical to start with but should have been broken up much earlier, most likely in season 2 and in a more realistic way than what we saw in Warlord. Still a character whit great premise which never was used. Instead they dumped her and destroyed her which make her the wost treated character ever in Star Trek.
NEELIX: Supposed to be the funny guy, sort of "Quark on Voyager" but was never as devious as Quark which had been necessary to make that work. Instead we got his tragic background in Jetrel which actually was good for the character because it showed why he was behaving as he did.
Due to that tragedy he became irrational. A suffering guy who tried to be happy by making other people happy in which he was great, but also a jealous and neurotic character. As such, he was actually interesting but he was also shoved in the background later on, becoming nothing more than a baby sitter to Naomi and then dumped with only three episodes left in one of the most ridiculous plots ever in any Star Trek series. Let's hope that he did find his way to Federation space and rejoined with his friends there.
THE DOCTOR: Quite annoying in Caretaker but definitely more likeable and inteeresting later on with his sarcastic humor and funny comments. Probably the only original character to have a positive development, even if the whole thing with a hologram becoming more and more sentient was a bit over the top.
But how the hologram all of a sudden became the third most important character of them all is a question I still ask.
SEVEN: She wasn't in Caretaker but brought in later on in season 4 for dubious reasons. Still a character with a lot of premise which could have been even better if they didn't have put her in a catsuit to make her "Sexy Seven", given her superpowers and made her all of a sudden to the main star of the show.
As I see it, she would have been more interesting as just one of the gang, learning to adapt to human life after all those years as a Borg with a little help of her friends on the ship. Still, I found her more interesting in PIC than she was in VOY.
Personally, I've concluded that Voyager's very premise was a real Kobayashi Maru.
Always being on the move meant a minimum of recurring alien characters, let alone species. It was a space adventure show, so it needed danger and battles and stuff, but if there'd been too much danger, and too many losses, it wouldn't make sense for them to keep going, instead of retiring to a nice tropical beach on an isolated or friendly planet somewhere.
This would ideally have meant far more interaction between the senior staff and the rest of the crew, with lots of ongoing character dynamic plot lines. But locking down charismatic actors for on-call availability is expensive, and really, there's only so much drama a ship can handle while still functioning smoothly. Too much romance soap opera, and the core male nerd fanbase feels alienated. Too many ongoing relationship plot lines, and casual viewers tune out. (And don't get too loose with traditional gender roles, or casual viewers might get weirded out.)
Sure, we can say there should have been more focus on repairing and maintaining the ship. But really, what do they have to barter with alien species, apart from their media library? How many times would working with friendly aliens to repair this or that plasma conduit be interesting? How many aliens with slightly different forehead ridges can they wow by playing them The Beatles' White Album?
Did we mention the Borg? One can't not use the Borg, what with the Delta Quadrant and First Contact and all. But don't use them too much, or they'll become lame, and don't use them too little, or they'll seem weak. And don't change their character too much, or they won't be the Borg anymore. Also, they have a Queen with emotions and a personality now. So, y'know, work with that. (But not too much.)
Remember, TNG is re-run multiple times a week, so don't re-use too many of their sci-fi plots, or the nerds will ding you for it. And you'll have to compete with both that and DS9. And the general writing and production values of network TV are getting better and better - see NYPD Blue, ER, The West Wing... not to mention HBO. So, keep sharp. And, don't do any kind of major galaxy-wide threat from any single species/coalition, or make a big deal out of a wormhole that could get you home right quick, because DS9's already doing that.
Oh, and the episode count? 26 per season. That's an average of an episode every two weeks, all year, for over six years.
Was Voyager a great show? Nah. Was the writing often pat and regressive, with formulaic plots and an acute lack of continuity? Aye. But, at 26 episodes per season, and the reality of anti-serialization studio mandates, maybe it's a wonder it's as good as it is at all. Could it have been a bit better? Sure. Could it have been a lot better, at 26 eps/year and not be cancelled? Impossible to say, but very plausibly not.
Always being on the move meant a minimum of recurring alien characters, let alone species. It was a space adventure show, so it needed danger and battles and stuff, but if there'd been too much danger, and too many losses, it wouldn't make sense for them to keep going, instead of retiring to a nice tropical beach on an isolated or friendly planet somewhere.
This would ideally have meant far more interaction between the senior staff and the rest of the crew, with lots of ongoing character dynamic plot lines. But locking down charismatic actors for on-call availability is expensive, and really, there's only so much drama a ship can handle while still functioning smoothly. Too much romance soap opera, and the core male nerd fanbase feels alienated. Too many ongoing relationship plot lines, and casual viewers tune out. (And don't get too loose with traditional gender roles, or casual viewers might get weirded out.)
Sure, we can say there should have been more focus on repairing and maintaining the ship. But really, what do they have to barter with alien species, apart from their media library? How many times would working with friendly aliens to repair this or that plasma conduit be interesting? How many aliens with slightly different forehead ridges can they wow by playing them The Beatles' White Album?
Did we mention the Borg? One can't not use the Borg, what with the Delta Quadrant and First Contact and all. But don't use them too much, or they'll become lame, and don't use them too little, or they'll seem weak. And don't change their character too much, or they won't be the Borg anymore. Also, they have a Queen with emotions and a personality now. So, y'know, work with that. (But not too much.)
Remember, TNG is re-run multiple times a week, so don't re-use too many of their sci-fi plots, or the nerds will ding you for it. And you'll have to compete with both that and DS9. And the general writing and production values of network TV are getting better and better - see NYPD Blue, ER, The West Wing... not to mention HBO. So, keep sharp. And, don't do any kind of major galaxy-wide threat from any single species/coalition, or make a big deal out of a wormhole that could get you home right quick, because DS9's already doing that.
Oh, and the episode count? 26 per season. That's an average of an episode every two weeks, all year, for over six years.
Was Voyager a great show? Nah. Was the writing often pat and regressive, with formulaic plots and an acute lack of continuity? Aye. But, at 26 episodes per season, and the reality of anti-serialization studio mandates, maybe it's a wonder it's as good as it is at all. Could it have been a bit better? Sure. Could it have been a lot better, at 26 eps/year and not be cancelled? Impossible to say, but very plausibly not.
Last edited:
