Why Voyager was a Disappointment

[Guy Gardener]

Yes, like the Emperor Palpatine.

You haters, you're as bad as the Emperor!

Palpatine was right.

Crossing the galactic void in planet sized generational star ships were the Vong, intent on emptying and colonizing the EVIL Galactic Empire.

(They really need to change that name.)

Palpatine had 40 years to get his shit together to build a fleet of death stars to hold the Galactic rim against unwanted penetration, but Luke Skywaker f###ed that right up.

What should have been an easy slaughter lasting minutes, turned into a four year long war.

 

[fireproof78]

Frankly, I've never seen the episodes Anwar listed being dissed by anyone, ever, Voyager fan or otherwise.

I had a big argument with Newtype_Alpha a few years back wherein he claimed it ruined the Borg completely by showing there was a single alien species out there that they couldn't defeat. Nevermind all other Treks repeatedly showing us such beings.

They're widely regarded as Voyager's greatest instalments, and in my experience are the episodes which are held up to relatively high acclaim even by those who might not be Voyager fans.

Like I said, Living Witness gets written off entirely because of that EMH Backup plot point (nothing else mattered, not the story or the acting or anything else) and Scorpion gets written off as ruining the Borg.

I don't know why VOY had such a hyper-critical reaction, compared to how easy all the other Treks had it (aside from ENT).

Written off by whom? See, there is a difference between being annoyed by a plot device (i.e. the EMH backup, mostly because it never came up before (such as in "Message in a Bottle" or again) and panning a show. As of yet, there has been little to indicate an audience wide rejection, beyond described fatigue with the franchise in general, and lack of interesting content on a consistent basis. I don't see a majority consensus, other than a lack of consistency.

Beyond that, as I have maintained, people react differently to different shows at different times. Telling me that VOY somehow had it more difficult when I have seen other shows endure similar problems does not make me sympathetic. Nor does telling me that anyone who disagrees is whining or complaining or being unreasonable.

So, there are disagreements about the quality of VOY. Some people liked it, some people just didn't care for it. The same can be said for every Trek iteration to date. It's funny because I see similar arguments in the Abrams Trek board both for against Abrams. Seen the same stuff all over the 'Net.

 

[Anwar]

Written off by whom? See, there is a difference between being annoyed by a plot device (i.e. the EMH backup, mostly because it never came up before (such as in "Message in a Bottle" or again) and panning a show.

DS9's "The Visitor" had a technobabble explanation for why Sisko was now unstuck in time and had a totally Dominion War-free future. Yet no one cared and accepted it all.

But no one can forgive the EMH Backup.

The double standard. is. incredible.

 

[fireproof78]

Written off by whom? See, there is a difference between being annoyed by a plot device (i.e. the EMH backup, mostly because it never came up before (such as in "Message in a Bottle" or again) and panning a show.

DS9's "The Visitor" had a technobabble explanation for why Sisko was now unstuck in time and had a totally Dominion War-free future. Yet no one cared and accepted it all.

But no one can forgive the EMH Backup.

The double standard. is. incredible.

Technobable and temporal incursions go hand and hand. The EMH backup comes in as a plot device and leaves just as quickly. It isn't the backup that is in question. It's that it was never important before and was not again.

By the way, the double standard can be seen in almost every aspect of Trek. Hardly new to VOY.

 

[Melakon]

DS9's "The Visitor" had a technobabble explanation for why Sisko was now unstuck in time and had a totally Dominion War-free future. Yet no one cared and accepted it all.

That's one episode I definitely dislike, because its message is the important relationship between fathers and sons. My dad died when I was about Jake's age, and I was 44 when it aired, and I'd known for 25 years my dad was never coming back. I hated that show and avoid it even though I have it on disk. It's now 44 years after dad died, and he's still not coming back. I suppose it's intended to be some big inspirational feel good story, but it sure as hell isn't for me.

 

[MacLeod]

Written off by whom? See, there is a difference between being annoyed by a plot device (i.e. the EMH backup, mostly because it never came up before (such as in "Message in a Bottle" or again) and panning a show.

DS9's "The Visitor" had a technobabble explanation for why Sisko was now unstuck in time and had a totally Dominion War-free future. Yet no one cared and accepted it all.

But no one can forgive the EMH Backup.

The double standard. is. incredible.

Technobable and temporal incursions go hand and hand. The EMH backup comes in as a plot device and leaves just as quickly. It isn't the backup that is in question. It's that it was never important before and was not again.

By the way, the double standard can be seen in almost every aspect of Trek. Hardly new to VOY.

Not to distract from "Living Witness" which was one of VOY's better episode, the EMH back-up module was a bad idea. It never came up before or after, and if they can build one they can build another, and another and another. So when the Doctor got his mobile emitter one version of the program could run that and another using the ship board emitters. All those times when another trained medical professional would be handy. Plus if he can just be restored from an earlier version of himself doesn't that detract from the character and any risk. Just hit the button restore from back-up should anything happen.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

DS9's "The Visitor" had a technobabble explanation for why Sisko was now unstuck in time and had a totally Dominion War-free future. Yet no one cared and accepted it all.

But no one can forgive the EMH Backup.

The double standard. is. incredible.

Technobable and temporal incursions go hand and hand. The EMH backup comes in as a plot device and leaves just as quickly. It isn't the backup that is in question. It's that it was never important before and was not again.

By the way, the double standard can be seen in almost every aspect of Trek. Hardly new to VOY.

Not to distract from "Living Witness" which was one of VOY's better episode, the EMH back-up module was a bad idea. It never came up before or after, and if they can build one they can build another, and another and another. So when the Doctor got his mobile emitter one version of the program could run that and another using the ship board emitters. All those times when another trained medical professional would be handy. Plus if he can just be restored from an earlier version of himself doesn't that detract from the character and any risk. Just hit the button restore from back-up should anything happen.

The backup is not a fatal flaw of the episode. A few changes to the explanation of how the Kyrians retrieved the EMH programs could have been made that would have affirmed that the EMH's personality and AI could not be replicated. Perhaps the Kyrians had developed special programming abilities that allowed them to recover the EMH from traces of blah blah blah. The writing in the episode was a little lazy, but it could have been easily fixed with a little forethought and care.

DS9's "The Visitor" had a technobabble explanation for why Sisko was now unstuck in time and had a totally Dominion War-free future. Yet no one cared and accepted it all.

But no one can forgive the EMH Backup.

The double standard. is. incredible.

An alternative timeline and a continuity error aren't really comparable.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I'm seriously curious how they sould have an episode called "The Visitor" when one of the actresses names was "Nana Visitor" when there wasn't also episodes called "The Meany" or "The Brooks"?

 

[Bad Thoughts]

^You mean "The Shaft-Lite," no?

 

[Shaka Zulu]

As for bad SF-series, I just have to write one name:

Stargate Universe

That show was so bad that it was almost funny.

Even the worst Voyager episodes (except a certain one in season 6 which should never have been made) are much better than any episode of Stargate Universe.

I thought SGU had its moments. The problem with it was that it relied too heavily on the typical drama tv tropes that tries to elicit emotional responses from the audience; Too much melodrama and music montages.

I quite enjoyed the main plot. I think the tone they were going for was a nice change of pace for the franchise, however their execution was cookie cutter. And I think Carlyle is a good actor. Some of the sub plots were the same sort of drivel we see in every drama show out now though.

That being said, while Voyager didn't have those issues, it had many others. And aside from being Star Trek, from a quality standpoint, for me, it's no better or worse.

I didn't mind SG:U (for the most part)but I think having Carlyle helped it.

Stargate Universe had a great premise but the characters were horrible.

What annoyed me most was the constant bickering. They spent the three-four first episodes just arguing and whining. Everytime I read some comments about possible Starfleet-Maquis tension on Voyager I actually bles Braga and his gang for not turning Voyager into the depressive mess Stargate Univerese became.

A relative of mine who's also an SF-fan admitted that he actually fell asleep on two occasions while watching the show. That made me start watching it again after not watching it for three episodes because it became a constant joke between me and my relative. "Oh, it's Saturday again and our favorites will see that we don't stay up too long!"

Rush was the only character I liked, mainly because of Carlyle who is a great actor. I must admit that he added another fun aspect for me because he looks like a dead ringer to a crazy person I worked with a couple of years ago and everytime he's some weird character in some movie or series, he reminds me of that person.

The only characters I liked in the series were those pale blue aliens who showed up in the middle of season 1. They added some action to the series which it had been nothing of up to that. Sadly, we didn't see so much of them in coming episodes.

About SGU and BSG, and how people wanted characters on Voyager to act like them-yes, let's have naval officers and crew persons act like idiots, be drunk and disorderly, and always arguing (or in the case of Baltar, feeling up himself and talking to himself.) That really goes over well.

It worked on BSG because the civilization in the show was gone (or going) and they had to build a new one. On Voyager, they had a home to get to, and being like what the characters were on BSG and SGU would have derailed that goal (not to mention piss off the viewers that were watching and who were making it a success-it did last seven seasons, after all) And I say that as a person who likes both Voyager and BSG, and can accept the differences of each show. Also, be glad that Voyager wasn't as shitty as Lost In Space (of which all I can stand is the 1998 movie.)

In my experience, ENT received far worse treatment from both the fandom and the casual audiences alike, both then and now, than Voyager.

I can still remember countless articles, in places like The Onion and others, bagging the crap out of Enterprise before it even went on the air-waves.

Even near the end when it was winding down, I've never seen Voyager receive the kinds of vitriol anything like Enterprise did (and still does, in some circles).

Plus, The Nation had to add in its $00.2, beating up the show for showing the early (semi-antagonistic) relationship between humans and Vulcans.

 

[Jedi_Master]

I loved Voyager, and so did at least 20 of the Star Trek fans I know personally. So that's something.

 

[Anwar]

The writing in the episode was a little lazy, but it could have been easily fixed with a little forethought and care.

Then the audience shouldn't have let such a minor thing ruin the episode for them.

An alternative timeline and a continuity error aren't really comparable.

Why not? Why does DS9 get a pass?

Plus if he can just be restored from an earlier version of himself doesn't that detract from the character and any risk. Just hit the button restore from back-up should anything happen.

It makes him an expendable tool and less a character. At least in NuBSG it's made clear that when a Cylon gets "reborn" it's really just them transferring to a new body instead of a new being.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

The writing in the episode was a little lazy, but it could have been easily fixed with a little forethought and care.

Then the audience shouldn't have let such a minor thing ruin the episode for them.

An alternative timeline and a continuity error aren't really comparable.

Why not? Why does DS9 get a pass?

There is no pass. An alternative timeline is a possibility that does not occur.

 

[Richard Baker]

Personally I think Voyager did a lot to set up for disappointment. Their basic premise of being stranded and without renewable resources, working their way across unknown space full of new alien races and a partial crew of rebels who Voyager was initially sent to hunt down was an intriguing premise. They carefully laid out how limited things were down to the number of irreplaceable torpedoes.
Voyager then just then set most of that aside and told stories which could have fit in any generic Trek episode. The first adversaries were the Kazon, whom I felt were just boring. Yes, the ships looked different, but they just did not seem to be a match and were almost comic relief.
I had trouble remembering the names of the crew and just did not care enough to try harder. The stories were good, sometimes great, but some I do not recall at all. When it was on and I happened to have nothing to do I watched it, but I did not set aside time to do so as I have dome with other shows.

Star Trek Equinox
This was what I was expecting- a ship in desperate straits, damaged and held together with what ever they could find, making hard choices on how to make their way across the Delta Quadrant. People who did not always get along, making mistakes and screwing up royally, but still determined. 'The Year of Hell' was similar and one of the best shows, regardless of the weird Captain Nemo and the super-ship. The NX-01 in the Xindi season is another- not lost, but in over their heads and adapting. The ship was getting banged up and people coping with impossible odds- you could feel their struggle.

Yes, these ships accumulated hull damage, but that is what helped make you feel for what they were going through as well. When TPTB decided to have every episode in Voyager have a reset button you lost the important part of the show. It is hard to accept these people are struggling to get home in a ship that looks like it just came from the shipyard with fresh paint. I did not care for the NuBSG that much but when you saw that Battlestar moving across the screen you new at a glance those people have been going through some shit.

I do not hate Voyager, but I wish they had kept the original premise and tried to work up some stories. Could they have gone 7 years that way?- don't know. The stories would have been difficult to write, but that would have made them stand out instead of looking like TNG-light. DS-9 showed you could do a big story arc with good episodes, Voyager did not seem to even try...

 

[Lynx]

I loved Voyager, and so did at least 20 of the Star Trek fans I know personally. So that's something.

I loved Voyager too-for three seasons.

Then they managed to mess it up but I still love the characters. The best in Star Trek.

 

[MacLeod]

Well there is the rather famous Ron Moore interview in which he discusses VOY

Moore notes, "I’ve said this to Brannon for years, because he and I would talk about the show when it was first invented. I just don’t understand why it doesn’t even believe in itself. Examine the fundamental premise of VOYAGER. A starship chases a bunch of renegades. Both ships are flung to the opposite side of the galaxy. The renegades are forced to come aboard Voyager. They all have to live together on their way home, which is going to take a century or whatever they set up in the beginning. I thought, This is a good premise. That’s interesting. Get them away from all the familiar STAR TREK aliens, throw them out into a whole new section of space where anything can happen. Lots of situations for conflict among the crew. The premise has a lot of possibilities. Before it aired, I was at a convention in Pasadena, and [scenic illustrator, technical consultant Rick] Sternbach and [scenic art supervisor, technical consultant Michael] Okuda were on stage, and they were answering questions from the audience about the new ship. It was all very technical, and they were talking about the fact that in the premise this ship was going to have problems. It wasn’t going to have unlimited sources of energy. It wasn’t going to have all the doodads of the Enterprise. It was going to be rougher, fending for themselves more, having to trade to get supplies that they want. That didn’t happen. It doesn’t happen at all, and it’s a lie to the audience. I think the audience intuitively knows when something is true and something is not true. VOYAGER is not true. If it were true, the ship would not look spick-and-span every week, after all these battles it goes through. How many times has the bridge been destroyed? How many shuttlecrafts have vanished, and another one just comes out of the oven? That kind of bullshitting the audience I think takes its toll. At some point the audience stops taking it seriously, because they know that this is not really the way this would happen. These people wouldn’t act like this."

http://www.lcarscom.net/rdm1000118.htm

And I would tend to agree with him.

 

[Anwar]

Ron Moore is a whiny bitch who has no idea what it's like to write for Network TV. And his own attempt at doing a "Lost Ship with desperate people" show ran out of steam after only 2 seasons and needed a literal deus ex machina to wrap up (and drive most of the plot!).

This was what I was expecting- a ship in desperate straits, damaged and held together with what ever they could find, making hard choices on how to make their way across the Delta Quadrant. People who did not always get along, making mistakes and screwing up royally, but still determined.

And that story logically ends with the ship destroyed and everyone dead. That's how that plot will usually always end.

The NX-01 in the Xindi season is another- not lost, but in over their heads and adapting. The ship was getting banged up and people coping with impossible odds- you could feel their struggle.

And no one cared the ship was fine once that arc was over.

If Voyager had done a real Year of Hell and then gone to an alien drydock to get fixed up, all you'd hear is nothing but endless wailing of how it's a reset button.

Could they have gone 7 years that way?

No, not at all. That's only enough plot for 1 or 2 seasons. After that you drop it entirely and do something else.

 

[MacLeod]

Ron Moore's point stands whether you are writting for syndication or network.

Sure there might be different pressures involved but how does that change the point he was making?

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Again, nobody wanted the Starfleet and Maquis crew to be constantly bickering at each others' throats. There is a big distance between constant bickering and instantly completely putting aside deep seated philosophical differences.

If Voyager is 0 and Stargate Universe is 100, people wanted more around 30. Starfleet and the Maquis working past their differences while still acknowledging they exist.

Also, other than a small hint in Good Shepherd we never saw any stories of the stress caused by people who thought they signed on for something temporary and now signed on for a life sentence. Voyager did not respect the premise.

@Anwar

Do you have any Voyager defenses in your arsenal besides straw man attacks arguing against the extreme and repeated insistence that being on a network somehow demands lame disposable writing?

You are not arguing that Voyager is a good show, you are arguing that it is justified in being mediocre.

 

[Anwar]

If Voyager is 0 and Stargate Universe is 100, people wanted more around 30. Starfleet and the Maquis working past their differences while still acknowledging they exist.

And if they did that, then the audience would just say "It should've lasted the entire series!" no matter how crazy that sounds.

They'd be better off systematically killing all the Maquis until there's only a dozen left who quietly fade into the background.

Also, other than a small hint in Good Shepherd we never saw any stories of the stress caused by people who thought they signed on for something temporary and now signed on for a life sentence. Voyager did not respect the premise.

That's like saying Kirk's Enterprise and Picard's Enterprise should've collapsed under stress when the same thing happened to them. Or in DS9 have the station crew mutiny and try to join the Dominion to escape the war.

@Anwar

Do you have any Voyager defenses in your arsenal besides straw man attacks arguing against the extreme and repeated insistence that being on a network somehow demands lame disposable writing?

You are not arguing that Voyager is a good show, you are arguing that it is justified in being mediocre.

I'm arguing that it did the best it could given its circumstances and a plot that's only good for 2 seasons.

And an audience that hated nearly anything different the show tried to do.