Seriously - why? Sure, it's not as good as most of the other series', but it's STILL pretty darn good.
Why So Hated?
- Thread starter Captain Zog
- Start date
Seriously - why? Sure, it's not as good as most of the other series', but it's STILL pretty darn good.Well, I can only speak for myself, but I think it was the Characters. They just weren't as interesting as any of the TOS, TNG, or DS9 characters. I mean, I liked Voyager just fine (though I have only watched, maybe, two seasons worth) but it never connected with me, emotionally, the way TNG and especially DS9 did.
It's still my favourite series but I think it lost it's way due to exec influence. If it had maintained it's original premise of low resources, conflict within the crew, bartering with aliens for supplies, new and different species, ongoing storylines, Kes instead of catsuit lady, then it might've been a better show.
A continually beaten up starship, as we'd seen in Year of Hell or Equinox, would've been a better ship to see.
A continually beaten up starship, as we'd seen in Year of Hell or Equinox, would've been a better ship to see.
The show just didn't make any sense to me on any level - except for some minor cosmetic things, nobody acted like they were stuck on the other side of the universe.
Everytime, they'd stop to check something out, I kept waiting for the crew mutiny - it never came.
I wondered what would happen once the ship started to break down - it never came.
Most of the characters were largely unchanged from the first episode, it just made no sense to me.
Everytime, they'd stop to check something out, I kept waiting for the crew mutiny - it never came.
I wondered what would happen once the ship started to break down - it never came.
Most of the characters were largely unchanged from the first episode, it just made no sense to me.
I was hoping the throwaway line in season one about not having a councilor on board was gonna come back and bite them in the ass.
Instead they threw the storyline away.
Instead they threw the storyline away.
1.) The writers never capitalized on the potential for mistrust and conflict between Starfleet and Marquis crew members. There was so much potential for good drama there that was just wasted... 
2.) The ship was magically repaired by the beginning of the next episode, no matter how badly it was damaged in the last episode. Torres is a good engineer but, she can't refit the ship on-the-go in a week after Voyager fought off a squadron of Borg cubes. That's one of Scotty's miraculous super powers.
3.) Too much reliance on Borg stories for ratings.
4.) Too much reliance on Jeri Ryan in a tight outfit for Ratings. (Not that I'm complaining about seeing her in a tight outfit...
)
And finally...
5.) They explained the Borg too much, even going so far as to make them easier to defeat. The Borg are supposed to be an almost irresistible force of nature. Take that away from them and they are no longer scary. The Borg are ALWAYS supposed to be scary.
Hope that helps,
msbae
2.) The ship was magically repaired by the beginning of the next episode, no matter how badly it was damaged in the last episode. Torres is a good engineer but, she can't refit the ship on-the-go in a week after Voyager fought off a squadron of Borg cubes. That's one of Scotty's miraculous super powers.
3.) Too much reliance on Borg stories for ratings.
4.) Too much reliance on Jeri Ryan in a tight outfit for Ratings. (Not that I'm complaining about seeing her in a tight outfit...
)And finally...
5.) They explained the Borg too much, even going so far as to make them easier to defeat. The Borg are supposed to be an almost irresistible force of nature. Take that away from them and they are no longer scary. The Borg are ALWAYS supposed to be scary.
Hope that helps,
msbae
Good Will Riker
Admiral
Inconsistency.
And, I seriously don't need Robert Beltran and Garrett Wang to confirm this in interviews.
The proof is on the screen.
And, I seriously don't need Robert Beltran and Garrett Wang to confirm this in interviews.
The proof is on the screen.
While I agree that the premise of Voyager was ignored and that the potential conflicts between the two crews and the problems caused by a lack of engineering support were never properly exploited, I'm not sure these are enough to explain the animosity some Star Trek fans feel toward the series. In spite of these flaws, there were some excellent science fiction stories told by Voyager, stories that are right up there with some of the best Trek episodes ever.
I think the animosity comes more from the competition that developed between Voyager and Deep Space 9, which was still in production when Voyager premiered. UPN touted Voyager as its flagship series while DS9 languished in syndication, moved around in the viewing schedule at the whim of the stations that aired it. For example, in my viewing area, DS9 ended up making its first run at midnight or 1 a.m. Monday mornings because what had been an independent station changed to NBC and had no better times to use for the program. Even worse, those times fluctuated if a NFL game went into overtime, which made it difficult to tape for later viewing.
UPN spent more effort and money advertising Voyager, while DS9 was sort of the step-child, by comparison. The DS9 cast never got the exposure that the TNG or VOY cast did on the talk shows or magazines, and when you consider that DS9 also started toward the end of TNG's run, the series never really had the full attention of Paramount's publicity department. That rankled, especially when there were more consistent story arcs and character development in DS9. However, IMHO, DS9 writers/producers were able to develop its storylines because they didn't have the "suits" at the network breathing down their necks the way Voyager did.
I wonder how Voyager would have fared if it, too, had been syndicated (as DS9 and TNG were) so that all markets could have seen the show in its first run. Because UPN refused to run Voyager unless a station joined the UPN network, there were huge markets that never saw the program until after it went off the air (St. Louis is one that didn't). I also wonder how Voyager would have done if the UPN execs weren't constantly trying to "fix" the show to increase its appeal to the mythical 18-35 males that supposedly keep Trek shows afloat (including getting all hyper about the fact that Voyager's captain was a woman). If left alone, the series would have been better able to follow those challenging story lines that UPN didn't want their "flagship show" to explore.
I think it's interesting to note that the series that were produced by a network (TOS, VOY, ENT) were the ones that probably failed to prosper as they should have. TOS ended after just three seasons. VOY barely managed to finish its seven-year span. ENT was terminated just as it began to deliver good episodes. Maybe Trek (and other sci-fi programs) are better off if they are produced independent of network "suits" and sold to syndication?
Just a thought.
I think the animosity comes more from the competition that developed between Voyager and Deep Space 9, which was still in production when Voyager premiered. UPN touted Voyager as its flagship series while DS9 languished in syndication, moved around in the viewing schedule at the whim of the stations that aired it. For example, in my viewing area, DS9 ended up making its first run at midnight or 1 a.m. Monday mornings because what had been an independent station changed to NBC and had no better times to use for the program. Even worse, those times fluctuated if a NFL game went into overtime, which made it difficult to tape for later viewing.
UPN spent more effort and money advertising Voyager, while DS9 was sort of the step-child, by comparison. The DS9 cast never got the exposure that the TNG or VOY cast did on the talk shows or magazines, and when you consider that DS9 also started toward the end of TNG's run, the series never really had the full attention of Paramount's publicity department. That rankled, especially when there were more consistent story arcs and character development in DS9. However, IMHO, DS9 writers/producers were able to develop its storylines because they didn't have the "suits" at the network breathing down their necks the way Voyager did.
I wonder how Voyager would have fared if it, too, had been syndicated (as DS9 and TNG were) so that all markets could have seen the show in its first run. Because UPN refused to run Voyager unless a station joined the UPN network, there were huge markets that never saw the program until after it went off the air (St. Louis is one that didn't). I also wonder how Voyager would have done if the UPN execs weren't constantly trying to "fix" the show to increase its appeal to the mythical 18-35 males that supposedly keep Trek shows afloat (including getting all hyper about the fact that Voyager's captain was a woman). If left alone, the series would have been better able to follow those challenging story lines that UPN didn't want their "flagship show" to explore.
I think it's interesting to note that the series that were produced by a network (TOS, VOY, ENT) were the ones that probably failed to prosper as they should have. TOS ended after just three seasons. VOY barely managed to finish its seven-year span. ENT was terminated just as it began to deliver good episodes. Maybe Trek (and other sci-fi programs) are better off if they are produced independent of network "suits" and sold to syndication?
Just a thought.
Exactly. The much-loathed Braga even wanted a year-long "year of hell", but the UPN geniuses vetoed it. They vetoed anything that would have moved the show away from what they considered TNG-like, as if they could somehow re-create TNG's ratings success. It's the main reason the show "didn't make use of its premise", the ship "magically repaired itself", and most of the other criticisms Voyager's detractors advance as reasons for loathing the show.
Like many of its fans I accept that the show was flawed and could have been better. In spite of that I enjoyed it back in the day and enjoy it now. The characters - Chuckles excepted - grabbed me from day one and I ended up liking them more than any of the other casts. Voyager just works for me. I don't much care if it doesn't work for others. To each their own.
Public Drunkeness.
The number of times that Kim, not Wang, but Kim was off his tit when he was supposed to be on duty was just damn unprofessional and made me want to cry that this is not how Sisko would have allowed things to continue on his watch.
The number of times that Kim, not Wang, but Kim was off his tit when he was supposed to be on duty was just damn unprofessional and made me want to cry that this is not how Sisko would have allowed things to continue on his watch.
It did manage to get home, it got it's seven seasons, it's has characters that are icons in Trekdom, it had the first female Capt in a regular series, it has the coolest ship in the fleet. So much negativity about Voyager, I Love Voyager, so what if it's not like TOS, TNG, DS-9 or even Ent. Loved the concept of being on the far side of the Galaxy, running into some pretty cool new species, checking out astronomical phenomena that you could only find in the DQ--Voyager was about a StarShip lost 75,000LY's from the Federation, the premise worked for me then and it work's for me now.
So, you will have to excuse me..It VOYAGER time
Resistance IS Futile
So, you will have to excuse me..It VOYAGER time
Resistance IS Futile
Here I have to disagree. I like the Voyager characters best ofall Star trek characters.
While the other series mainly were composed by Starfleet cut-outs (you know the loyal, efficient types), Voyager had a mixed cast of interesting characters with different and interesting background stories.
I think that the problem is that those in charge of the show never cared to use the potential of the characters, it was all about "playing safe" and copy TNG.
I also guess that the erratic and sometimes sloppy writing with constant continuity errors and a tendency (in the later seasons) to solve everything with Seven's Borg knowledge made many fans dissapointed. The original premise about a mixed Starfleet and Maquis crew lost in the Delta Quadrant were lost somewhere down the road.
Add to that some decisions which really p***ed off many loyal fans (Kes being "deleted", "Fury", C/7 and the lame final episode).
Voyager had also the disadvantage to be the last in a row of good series, I mean TNG already had a big core of ardent fans and DS9 had got it's core of ardent fans too. Not to mention TOS which still has many loyal fans as well of which some never really cared about the "newcomers". Many of the fans of those shows had already decided what to like and probably saw Voyager as just a sequel to their favorite shows.
Still Voyager has its loyal followers. And I must also add that a series which made so many loya fans dissapointed in the long run and whose fanbase is split up when it comes to liking different parts of the series while still being able to to keep those fans and maintain the interest for the show among those fans must have some great qualities as well.
If a show can be measured by the loyalty of its fans, then Voyager is truly a great series.
It is interesting, indeed, since this is the point Roddenberry made so clear in his insistence on syndicating STNG when it debuted. Those who don't heed history are doomed to repeat it, as they say.
Great point. I love the characters, the actors are real pros, and the stories are good; I'm a big fan of VOY.
Thanks to the fans for taking time to write down the viewpoints, once again.
I liked voyager but there were a lot of things that I didnt like about it.
The main thing was the storylines. Some of the episodes were good but for the most part a lot of the stories were weak, copies of TNG stories, were inconsistent and unbelievable.
Janeway was a law un-to herself, one minute she'd be going on about starfleet rules and prinicples and the next minute she was flouting those same rules.
I found it quite unbelievable how the ship managed to stay in one piece throughout the enitre 7 years without any need for major repairs. And any repairs needed were easily fixable by B'elanna and the rest of the crew. Everything they needed they just created themselves, like the delta flyer which turned out to be better than what starfleet had at the time. I mean comeone I know they had to be resourceful, but that took it a bit too far. I mean did they even need to go back to the Alpha quadrant they seem to be able to take care of everything by themselves.
Also in their position, a single ship alone in the delta quadrant I would have expected a lot more people to die.
The main thing was the storylines. Some of the episodes were good but for the most part a lot of the stories were weak, copies of TNG stories, were inconsistent and unbelievable.
Janeway was a law un-to herself, one minute she'd be going on about starfleet rules and prinicples and the next minute she was flouting those same rules.
I found it quite unbelievable how the ship managed to stay in one piece throughout the enitre 7 years without any need for major repairs. And any repairs needed were easily fixable by B'elanna and the rest of the crew. Everything they needed they just created themselves, like the delta flyer which turned out to be better than what starfleet had at the time. I mean comeone I know they had to be resourceful, but that took it a bit too far. I mean did they even need to go back to the Alpha quadrant they seem to be able to take care of everything by themselves.
Also in their position, a single ship alone in the delta quadrant I would have expected a lot more people to die.
Well the problem with that is the fact that Voyager is one of the later series, and there's bound to be some similar episodes.
And Janeway's going on about the rules and then breaking them? That's part of her character, how she is. It makes her 'Janeway'.
The ship didn't survive for 7 years without severe damage: There were a few episodes where it got completely obliterated, like the one where Chakoty and Harry were in teh Delta Flyer and the rest of Voyager's crew were still onboard. The ship crash-landed on a planet, and then froze solid. They only managed to retreive it by going back in time. Also, there was the time when Voyager was split into two. One sustained terrible damage while the other was fine. One of them had to be destroyed, and a I recall, the damaged one was. As well, in that episode, two characters--important characters, namely Harry and Naomi--died. Then there were a few times when the entire crew died and time travelling saved them.
Just so there's no confusion, I do like this series. The flaws I named do tend to keep it from being a show I want to watch over and over like TOS & TNG, though.
Me too. I liked the characters and the premise but the execution was flawed.
Compare that with DS9, whose characters didn't sit well with me, but had great stories and execution, and I still prefer Voyager over DS9.
Similar threads
