That is not what I said nor implied and you know it.Um.
DS9 had a larger plot, each of which eventually carried a season and showed the evolution of the entire run. There were important stories toward the larger story and then there was filler.
Voyager didn't have a larger plot. Everything was filler.
If Nogs development is unimportant because it was filler, then everything from Voyager is unimportant because it was all filler inbetween the pilot and the finale. Nothing of consequense happened in between Caretaker and Endgame, except Janeway changing her hair cut, the mobile emitter, Seven swapping out with Kes and the delta Flier, which are all quite superficial.
Basically all of my problems with Voyager were outlined by Ronald D. Moore after he quit the writing staff at Voyager in this interview
http://www.lcarscom.net/rdm1000118.htm
It’s a fantastic read and outlines completely how wasted the concept became
If Voyager had a larger plot it wouldn't be Voyager.
TNG didn't have a larger plot and it was fine.
DS9 was a progression from TNG, and then Voyager was a regression from DS9, which would only be justifiable if DS9 was a HUGE failure.
Which it sort of was.
Worf and the Defiant were brought into DS9 to help boost ratings, just like Seven was introduced into Voyager for that same reasons. Ds9 was also on a syndicated network, Voyager was on a major one. The value of syndicated ratings aren't even in the same ratings system as ones from major network TV. While DS9 held strong for syndication, if it was on a major network like Voyager it might have been canceled.If Voyager had a larger plot it wouldn't be Voyager.
TNG didn't have a larger plot and it was fine.
DS9 was a progression from TNG, and then Voyager was a regression from DS9, which would only be justifiable if DS9 was a HUGE failure.
Which it sort of was.
How so? DS9 was only a failure in terms of publicity, apparently it was quite successful in hindsight, even exceeding Voyager's ratings in the end, I believe.
Success or failure in these terms is about money.
If they can't sell their advertising, because a show is not generating of maintaining a THE RIGHT sort of audience, then the powers that be will not play that show.
There's a number in dollars, which is acceptable that 1 cent less is unacceptable to maintain the pulse on a TV show no matter how "good" artistically it might be.
DS9, not that it lost money, did not make enough money to be seen as a success.
Neither did Voyager.
Enterprise was cancelled midrun, probably because it was losing money.
Hell, Enterprise did not earn it's final season for being good enough. Season Four of Enterprise only came though because there was enough foresight to consider syndication. Week to week Enterprise was a faliure. There was no immediate justification to have it on air losing money for another 22 weeks after season three. However three seasons is too small a bundle for syndication which means that they would lose out on billions over the next few decades if Enterprise was just shelved and forgotten about like every other unsyndicatable TV series.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.