Why is the Trek community so negative about Voyager?
- Thread starter ReadyAndWilling
- Start date
Saquist
Commodore
Oh I don't agree with that at all.
They put the Borg far enough away to not be a factor if they never wanted to use them again.
Notice how TNG dealt with them...Descent, Qwho and I Borg....always dealing with one or a segment, a scout ship a rogue ship. The story line dictated that strength on a one on one basis.
Voyager and First Contact tackled the borg on a stupendously large scale. That wasn't very realistic for the sole hero arc of Trek.
TNG did it right.
VOY didn't much choice, seeing how they were in the Borg's backyard. It wouldn't have made any sense for them to just run into one ship at a time anyways. If they didn't want to run into the Borg, then they should've just said that the Borg weren't from our galaxy at all or something.
And FC only had them fight two Borg ships. One of which was pathetically weak, basically an escape pod.
It was a bad idea to make the Borg so strong to begin with.
And FC only had them fight two Borg ships. One of which was pathetically weak, basically an escape pod.
It was a bad idea to make the Borg so strong to begin with.
Michael Piller was interviewed a few years before his death, and he stated that the people above he and Berman (i.e. Paramount bigwigs) gave the order for the crew to get along post "Caretaker". IIRC, he added that this was one of the core reasons why he left "Voyager" and as a regular creative contributor to the franchise.
I think Trek fans sometimes have the false belief that Berman operated in impunity with Trek, and that he answered to noone. The truth is is that Berman had people who he had to answer to.
I wouldn't go that far. While I do believe that B5 is the overall superior show, VOY hands down wins in the acting department.
Some of the cast were indeed excellent - Jurassik and Katsulas. Some were pretty good - Doyle, Furlan, Mumy, and Tallman.
But the majority of the main cast were freaking AWFUL - Boxleitner, Adams, Conaway, Monaghan, O'Hare, Thompson, Scoggins and especially Christian.
I'll gladly take the acting talents of anybody on VOY over those eight.
There were other worthwhile characters like Delenn, Marcus, and Lennier.
The problem was that they were outnumbered by bad actors. VOY, on the other hand, had everyone fairly well balanced in terms of acting abilities.
But God sent her.
Seriously, I hated that character.
I wouldn't go that far either.
I like Mira Furlen, I think she proved her skills as an actress on LOST. However, I found Delenn a huge disappointment as the series played out. All she ended up being was Sheridians concubine. I was even expecting him to make her walk 3 feet behind him anywhere they went.
Marcus was ok but cliche.
I kept expecting him to pull out a deck of cards and charge them with kenetic energy.
Lennier & Vir were awesome, so I agree with that.
B5's with me was like Voy. were they underwrote characters, however I found B5 was way worse. B5 didn't just underwrite for them but forgot about them completely. They had characters in the opening credits that you saw only once a season and then never again. It's a good thing Robert Beltran didn't work on that show, he might have burned down the set.
...and the Shadows & Vorlons being like children.
Seriously??
That was partly due to the show having such a low budget, there was a core group of characters contracted for all 22 episodes per season (Sheridan, Ivanova, Garibaldi and Delenn) while most were on 13 episode contracts. JMS had to plan at the start of each season which characters would appear in which episodes, he couldn't waste the likes of Lennier and Franklin in superfluous roles if he needed them for an important arc episode later in the season. As a result, there's only one episode in the whole show where the entire main cast (as listed in the openeing credits) appears.B5's with me was like Voy. were they underwrote characters, however I found B5 was way worse. B5 didn't just underwrite for them but forgot about them completely. They had characters in the opening credits that you saw only once a season and then never again. It's a good thing Robert Beltran didn't work on that show, he might have burned down the set.
There was only one situation where a main cast-member only appeared in two episodes, and that was Na'Toth in season 2. The original actress left, he didn't like the new actress, so the character was pretty much dropped even though she appeared in the title sequence.
EDIT: Regardless, JMS did more with characters like Lyta and Franklin than Voyager's writers did with characters like Harry and Chakotay, even though they had less screen-time. Just look at Vir, a character I absolutely loathed at the start of B5, I was shocked to realise in season 4 that I really liked the guy because of how well his character was developed. Compared to Harry Kim, Vir is a masterpiece of character-development, and it doesn't matter that he only appeared in 60% of the episodes because most of his appearances were used wisely.
Last edited:
It helps that Vir was a very sympathetic character to begin with, despite being a sort of bumbler, was played by an actor who was easy to like, and Londo became more militant and aggressive/darker as the show went on so it was easier to see Vir's goodness compared to Mr "Deal with the Devil". Plus being the aide to a major ambassador of a major Empire involved in the show is a good part to play.
Kim, on the other hand, was just some random ensign played by a substandard actor who really didn't have much of a role in the crew to begin with. He should have been a recurring character, not a central.
Kim, on the other hand, was just some random ensign played by a substandard actor who really didn't have much of a role in the crew to begin with. He should have been a recurring character, not a central.
It still doesn't make me like the show any better.That was partly due to the show having such a low budget, there was a core group of characters contracted for all 22 episodes per season (Sheridan, Ivanova, Garibaldi and Delenn) while most were on 13 episode contracts. JMS had to plan at the start of each season which characters would appear in which episodes, he couldn't waste the likes of Lennier and Franklin in superfluous roles if he needed them for an important arc episode later in the season. As a result, there's only one episode in the whole show where the entire main cast (as listed in the openeing credits) appears.B5's with me was like Voy. were they underwrote characters, however I found B5 was way worse. B5 didn't just underwrite for them but forgot about them completely. They had characters in the opening credits that you saw only once a season and then never again. It's a good thing Robert Beltran didn't work on that show, he might have burned down the set.
There was only one situation where a main cast-member only appeared in two episodes, and that was Na'Toth in season 2. The original actress left, he didn't like the new actress, so the character was pretty much dropped even though she appeared in the title sequence.
EDIT: Regardless, JMS did more with characters like Lyta and Franklin than Voyager's writers did with characters like Harry and Chakotay, even though they had less screen-time. Just look at Vir, a character I absolutely loathed at the start of B5, I was shocked to realise in season 4 that I really liked the guy because of how well his character was developed. Compared to Harry Kim, Vir is a masterpiece of character-development, and it doesn't matter that he only appeared in 60% of the episodes because most of his appearances were used wisely.
My aim was not to change your opinion, but to explain why things were so.
Personally, I don't think that a character needs to be on screen every week to be a good character, my favourite character in Star Trek only appeared in 33 episodes; Garak. And I've said in the past that one of the best character-arcs in the franchise is Nog's, but he was only in around a quarter of the episodes. What I don't like is when main characters appear in an episode, have a line or two, and then cash their pay-check, because you can sometimes see the writer pulling the strings in getting the character into the episode. The worst case of this I've come across is Mandy Hampton on The West Wing, a character that Aaron Sorkin clearly had no interest in writing for, but he kept having to find ways to include her in episodes because she was in the titles. Luckily, she was excised from the show in the second season (although I do wish that there had been an explanation as to where she went, as it is she just disappeared).
Personally, I don't think that a character needs to be on screen every week to be a good character, my favourite character in Star Trek only appeared in 33 episodes; Garak. And I've said in the past that one of the best character-arcs in the franchise is Nog's, but he was only in around a quarter of the episodes. What I don't like is when main characters appear in an episode, have a line or two, and then cash their pay-check, because you can sometimes see the writer pulling the strings in getting the character into the episode. The worst case of this I've come across is Mandy Hampton on The West Wing, a character that Aaron Sorkin clearly had no interest in writing for, but he kept having to find ways to include her in episodes because she was in the titles. Luckily, she was excised from the show in the second season (although I do wish that there had been an explanation as to where she went, as it is she just disappeared).
I know that. It doesn't change the fact that comments like "straight jacket" and "stiff as a board" are pure exaggeration. What you're expecting of the characters is far more unrealistic. Technological and social development may not be linked, but they are both real. To say that people will think and act the same in the 24th century is as ignorant as saying there won't be any technological development either.
Uh huh... and people like stj who rant about DS9 come off as missing the point. But let's not get into that here.
I agree. It needs a mascot. How about this.I like this thread, but for it to become legendary we need to create a Captain Robau style mascot for it. I nominate we use Lt Ayala:This thread is something else.
Lt Ayala is so badass that he doesn't need to speak, he communicates through facial expressions, and he only has two facial expressions; badass and harder badass.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
Adams and Monaghan were bit players at most, hardly "main cast".
Conaway was fun. He was just your general easygoing, everyday guy who had the "fortune" to work in a place where the extraordinary was a daily occurance, and the environment was anyting but easygoing.
Thompson (I'm assuming you mean Andrea [Talia Winters]) did a lot to bring warmth and empathy to a character who is all about control control control (like most Psi Corps members). Her story arc about bridging the gap with Susan over their differences about the Corps was well developed, which made what happened to Talia in the end all the more tragic.
Never have understood the Boxlightner hate. Sherridan is a great character and a great Captain. He's Kirk without the overabundance of swagger and without the "fooling around" factor.
Same with Christian. Everybody wants to take "I am death..." and toss the entire character on the scrap heap because of it. I just got done rewatching S2, where we get the big reveal as to exactly why she feels so passionately about Psi Corp. Great stuff. Later, when she mourns Marcus, more great stuff. Her arc with Talia likewise. Furthermore, her Russian/long-suffering Jew stoicism was a nice ethnic touch that JMS points out in one of his commentaries just isn't a common portrayal in much drama, let alone sci-fi.
O'hare the actor is good, but the low key nature of Sinclair means he's going to look stiff and bad compared to the much more colorful characters all around him.
Scoggins is the weakest of the bunch, but she was at a minimum good pretty much all of the time.
Vir, Franklin, Lyta need to go on that list as well.
And that's aside from the raft of bit characters and occasional show ups like Neroon who are always fun to watch.
Voyager had three stand-out actors: Russ, PIcardo and Mulgrew. (My problems with the Doctor [later seasons] and Janeway are writing based, not acting based.)
Beltran and Biggs-Dawson were OK (though I never really bought B-D as a "genuine" Klingon...she's just too girly and soft).
The rest of the primary cast was mostly adequate, but no more than that.
Hardly a "balanced mix".
[/QUOTE]
ONE bad speech does not a shitty character make. (see above)
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
Factual basis for this?
B5 won multiple Hugo awards, frequently beating out Trek episodes to do so. You don't get the Hugo by being "hack".
and Hugos weren't the only awards B5 won either
http://www.isnnews.net/babylon5/info/b5awards.shtml
Here's the best list I could find quickly on Voyager's awards:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112178/awards
Most of them are technical awards (music, editing, costuming, etc), most of the rest are best supporting actor/actress types. VERY few "best show" or "best story" noms, let alone nods.
Caveat: this list doesn't include the Hugos.
Last edited:
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
What he SHOULD have been was developed. The "episodic mandate" killed off any chance for him to be anything more than the "wet behind the ears ensign". I esp liked him in Caretaker, and clearly saw them setting him up for the "rookie officer gets seasoned" story arc, but that damned mandate cut it off at the knees, reducing him to the status of bit player akin to TOS Uhura.
Similar threads
- Sticky
