Excessive Criticism of “STAR TREK VOYAGER”

[seldonp38]

Comments

[lindahoyland]

I loved Voyager.

[beatrice_otter]

A lot of it is exaggerated, and there's quite a bit of misogyny in it (Voyager is, after all, the one with the female captain). And there's a lot of tribalism involved in what "your" Star Trek show is, which always punches up the wankery.

My objection to the series isn't that it was bad or had no potential; but that it (and Enterprise) were the two Trek series with the most WASTED potential. There were so many very interesting things they could have done with that basic premise and that crew, but they usually chose the "safe" choice, the predictable choice, the one I knew they were going to make. There were too many episodes where I got about half-way through and realized, "oh, yeah, I've seen Star Trek episodes with this basic plot four or five times before, and they were all more interesting and original than this one." It's not that they were bad, just ... not very good, either. And then, every so often, they'd try to shake things up and do something "cool" or "edgy" and it usually a) was still something I could predict

[beatrice_otter]

I do totally agree with you that Voyager gets way more shit than it actually deserves. You get people talking like it was the most horrible thing evar, which it wasn't.

[kerkevik_2014]

All the shows have flaws, but the show that most wasted it's potential was Voyager.

It had the best cast from the start with only one regular whose character felt devoid of originality; the best Captain; for people forget that Sisko was only a commander at the start; as well as an incredible potential for the telling of stories aboot two crews with vastly divergent beliefs trying to meld themselves into a unity that could get them home, all the while struggling to survive while finding their way home.

All wasted.

That's why I don't rewatch it very much, if at all. Even Enterprise finally achieved something of what it could have been by the end; once all the 'Time War' material was finished with. If only it could have gone without that.

Only DS9 bettered Voyager for minor, or one-shot characters that deserved several reappearances.

kerk

[brtmh]

For me, the show with the most potential was "STAR TREK DEEP SPACE NINE". It had the potential to be the best show, thanks to its premise. But I don't think that series ever reached its potential, thanks to the occasional sloppy writing. This became more evident as the series went into the Dominion War story line. It just never really reached it. I think "DEEP SPACE NINE" needed a J. Michael Straczynski. Sure, it had Ronald Moore. But considering how he screwed up "BATTLESTAR GALACTICA" in the end, he was not enough.

That's why I don't rewatch it very much, if at all. Even Enterprise finally achieved something of what it could have been by the end;

Really? What? Aside from a first-rate Mirror Universe episode, I don't know exactly what "ENTERPRISE" had achieved.

[seldonp38]

It had the best cast from the start with only one regular whose character felt devoid of originality; the best Captain; for people forget that Sisko was only a commander at the start; as well as an incredible potential for the telling of stories aboot two crews with vastly divergent beliefs trying to meld themselves into a unity that could get them home, all the while struggling to survive while finding their way home.

All wasted.

The conflict between the Starfleet and Maquis aspect of the crew more or less played out in Season One and lingered occasionally in Season Two. After the ship had been temporarily captured by Seska and Hirogen, the crew finally operated as one, starting in Season Three.

So, what did you want? Consistent conflict between the Starfleeters and Maquis throughout the series?

You know, the above arguments only solidify my belief that this fan penchant for heavily criticizing "VOYAGER" more than the other shows is basically a reaction to sexism and misogyny. This idea that the premise for "VOYAGER" gave