Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Some Comments

This is topic Some Comments in forum General Trek at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/3/891.html

Posted by Individual 5748 on :

I just have to get a few things out in the air. Primarily, concerning people's treatment of this show.

I read reviews for Voyager despite the fact that they irritate me because I still like to hear others' perspectives. But I just have to say that some people just really piss me off (don't be offended by that, please). But they really do. (This isn't directed towards anyone in this forum, so don't think I'm singling anyone out or anything, I'm just venting.)

One argument I hear over and over is that Voyager isn't original. Let start off by saying that hardly anything is original. Nuances and details makes stories different from each other, but most basic stories are based around a series of events that have been written down before. Let's face it, even when Voyager started there were over 200 hours of Trek already made - come on, people, how many stories about a ship in space can there be before similarities crop up? Yes, there are similarities between Voyager and other episodes of other series. GET OVER IT! Voyager never was nor ever will be COMPLETELY ORIGINAL. There is a precedence for everything. Like my English professor says: literature (and other stories) are driven by three main things - sex, death, and control. I think ALL Trek stories could relate to one of those, but it seems that just because Voyager happens to tell a story similar to one already done on TOS or TNG that it is shunned. It's ridiculous.

Another thing I'm sick of is people who watch Voyager merely to criticize it. If you don't like it, don't watch it. Don't waste our time by writing about how every aspect of every episode is so horribly awful and stupid and ignorant, and what have we. GET A LIFE!

Another thing, this 'consistency' thing a lot of people keep complaining about. I'm sure TNG and TOS and DS9 have just as much inconsistency as Voyager does. So Voyager gets a few stardates or whatever off the mark. At least Voyager doesn't have a ship that has eighteen different lengths and deck numbers and what have we (and we all know what ship I'm referring to).

I also hear a lot about how Voyager isn't real enough. Too many shuttles, too many torpedoes, should be in the Beta Quadrant. People, its called fiction. If this show were reality, Voyager and everyone on board would have been dead a LONG TIME AGO! But its not real, so DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT!

I don't know why, but people just can't seem to sit down and simply watch an episode. Just watch it. People are so bent on nitpicking Voyager to death. Any series would come up a little short under intense scrutiny. But the only show that seems to be on the other end of that scrutiny is Voyager.

I guess what I want to know is, what's so wrong with it. I enjoy it very much, and maybe that's all that's necessary. But what I want to know, how come these people can just sit aroung and b*tch about something knowing that if they had to run the show that they couldn't come up with anything any better. If they could, they'd be writing the show!

A lot of people seem to be out just to bash Voyager, and to be frank, it's getting old. I guess all I'm asking is to just ease up on it and simply enjoy it for what it is. It's not perfect, I know. But it could be a lot, lot worse.

------------------
"Questions, comments, bring them to me. Problems, take them to Kinis."

Posted by KXZ (Member # 119) on :

Everyone saw the detail ST:TNG had and then they thought future shows would go even furhter. I do admit I have been surprised about the continuity problems with Voyager, but it happens. If everyone thinks Voyager is not original or bad they should pitch what they think are good ideas to the show.

------------------
All hands, abandon ship! All hand, abandon...
BOOM!

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

5748: You mention the thing about the shuttles and torpedoes and say that, since it's fiction, it doesn't matter. So, are you saying that, if a shuttle blew up, someone said "That was the last shuttle we had", and then they got into a shuttle and flew off, you wouldn't care because "it's fiction"? It may be fiction, but that doesn't mean just anything should be able to happen.

------------------
Rimmer: "Holly, put a trace on Paranoia."
Holly: "What's a trace?"
Rimmer: "It's space jargon. It means 'find him'."
Holly: "No it doesn't. You just made it up to sound cool."
-Red Dwarf: "Confidence & Paranoia"

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :

I don't mind the fact that Voyager is "not original". The only thing I mind in fiction is blatant copying, creative disrespect for continuity, and when a show is just really boring.

I site an example. "Threashhold" broke a fundamental rule that has been laid down all along and in the process destroyed the premise of the show. If they can get a shuttle to go warp 10, they can get it to go warp 9.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 and ferry everybody home in a few weeks.

When stuff like this happens consistantly, good idea or not, it simply implies a lack of respect on the part of the creators for the forum in which they are creating.

But all that aside, I think Voyager is and can be a good show.

------------------
"Resolve and thou art free."

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

I agree with TSN. If they can have all the shuttles they want, who cares when they blow up?

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"We've got some new songs here that are not even on the MP3 thing. They're not available in any format, except of course the bootlegs that seem to proliferate all through our audience, as we watch people lip-synch along to songs that HAVEN'T BEEN RELEASED! DAMN YOU!" - John Linnell

Posted by Individual 5748 on :

True, the show to some degree should stick within the confines of the parameters it is set in. However, it has NEVER been established just how many shuttles Voyager originally had. For all we know, half or more of the cargo bays could have been filled with spare shuttles. No one ever said, "Hey, this is our last shuttle." Therefore, it can't be said the Voyager has violated its parameters.

------------------
"Questions, comments, bring them to me. Problems, take them to Kinis."

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :

Considering how many shuttles have been lost and Chakotay's line (iirc) saying they had a full compliment of shuttles. This would suggest that they are able to build new shuttles, which really wouldn't be that difficult.

But I disagree with you 5748. If something is established they shouldn't change their minds and change it. Also, just because it is science fiction that doesn't mean consistency is not important.

------------------
Calvin: "I'm a man of few words."
Hobbes: "Maybe if you read more, you'd have a larger vocabulary."
Federation Starship Datalink - Now with a pop-up on every page...damn you Tripod!

Posted by Individual 5748 on :

I'm not saying the incosistency is acceptable. What I'm saying is that it shouldn't become the focus of the show. It's not called "Star Trek: Voyager- Let's only pay attention to how many shuttles they use."

I'm not saying that if in one episode Chakotay says, hey there's three shuttles left, and two episodes later, someone else says there are five left that it's ok. What I'm saying is - there should not be so much attention placed on something on which the series isn't based. The show wasn't created with 'let's keep perfect count of shuttles' in mind. The writers simply want to tell stories. We know by watching the show that the writers aren't going to follow shuttle count, so why is it necessary to constantly bring it up knowing that nothing is going to change? Why can't some people just accept it and move on?

------------------
"Questions, comments, bring them to me. Problems, take them to Kinis."

Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :

I agree wholeheartedly with 5748's first post.

I would even go that far and say that concerning single episodes Voyager is both the most creative and the most consistent of all Trek shows.

One problem is that few single episodes are crap because at a high creativity tolerance the risk of making mistakes is high (you know, the warp 10 thing, for instance). Another problem is that the consistency cannot be maintained over a large number of episodes. The shuttle, torpedo, ship repair and crew restrictions are hard, as opposed to TNG and DS9 where everything can easily be replaced.

------------------
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way."
A somewhat different Janeway in VOY: "Living Witness"
Ex Astris Scientia

Posted by Saboc on :

I think Voyager is a great show. It is different from other shows. I think reason why I like it best, yes, better than the TOS, TNG, and even DS9, is that none of the characters are arrogant. I hate arrogant people. I like Tuvok the most. I'm a Vulcans fan!!!

------------------
-Father of Vulcan phylosophy(forgot his name): "Nothing unreal exists"
-Spock: "Logic is the beginning of wisdom..."

Posted by The First One (Member # 35) on :

I'm noticing a trend here. The people who don't think there's anything wrong with Voyager are also the ones who want a fifth series. . .

Posted by Saboc on :

So any words from Paramount regarding the 5th series? No?

------------------
-Father of Vulcan phylosophy(forgot his name): "Nothing unreal exists"
-Spock: "Logic is the beginning of wisdom..."

Posted by Individual 5748 on :

That's because there is nothing wrong with Voyager when you look at it from the point of view of watching it for entertainment. It's only when the nitpicking begins that it begins to unravel. But that could be said for any number of series, including the other Trek series.

------------------
"Questions, comments, bring them to me. Problems, take them to Kinis."

Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :

Saboc:
About your sig: it was T'Planna Hoth, matron of Vulcan philosophy, IIRC.

------------------
Meddle not in the affairs of Dragons; for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

Posted by Michael Dracon (Member # 4) on :

That Hath, not Hoth.

BTW: That's also the name of the Vulcan ship in FC.

------------------
"Scan that ship Mr. Worf!"
"Aye sir, 600 DPI?"

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

Yes, the Encyclopedia spells it "T'plana-Hath" with one apostrophe, one hyphen and two capital letters. Strangely enough, this is one spelling they haven't managed to pollute with spontaneously appearing "e"s and "r"s (see Jenol*n and Shi*Kahr). I was half expecting "Tr'plane-Hath" or something (would that be the famous WWI flying ace, secretly of Vulcan origin?).

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by Saboc on :

That was my first thought but then someone (I think a friend of mine) told me that it was wrong. So I listen to her...Oh well....I'll change it accordingly...

Thanks guys...

------------------
-Surak: "Nothing unreal exists"
-Spock: "Logic is the beginning of wisdom..."

Posted by Saboc on :

I was watching Voyager's season premier and I'm confused about something. Does captain Janeway know that that blonde lieutenant did help captain Ransom in the end? I mean she's not all bad. Captain Janeway shouldn't have made her a crewman...so so sad..."sniff"

------------------
Spend all your time waiting for a second chance, a break that would make it ok...

Posted by The First One (Member # 35) on :

*taps foot* Now, what have we forgotten?

Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :

Sorry, just realized I was wrong. T'Planna said "Logic is the foundation of our civilization", or words to that effect. I don't think I ever caught the author of the first law of metaphysics.

------------------
Meddle not in the affairs of Dragons; for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :

Some comments I would like to add:
People keep complaining about Voyager's consistency or bad writing while essentially the same is tolerated without any complaints for DS9. I mean, the DS9 flaws are noted and criticised as such, but they are not commonly regarded as "typical". Of course, it's a matter of taste, and if someone just says "I don't like Voyager" I can accept it. However, this is too often "corroborated" by global judgements like "bad writing" or specific but exceptional things that apply to DS9 as well. I sometimes wonder if the people really watch the episodes or just take notice of their existence, and if they do watch it, if it is only to find all the mistakes.

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

The difference between DS9 and Voyager is the characters. On DS9, there are more and more varied characters than on Voyager, which adds a lot to the show.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Stuff" - Nobody

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :

SABOC: USE DOLLARSIGNS BEFORE YOU SPOIL RECENT EPISODES, or there'll be used containers of whop-ass all over this place. OK? Nothing personal!

------------------
-You are crazy.
-I thought I was pisces.

Posted by Alshrim Dax (Member # 258) on :

We must all remember that the makers, writers, producers .. etc. pride themselves in creating a science FICTION show that can be almost believable.

Where I agree to some extent to the original complaint, I must also be devil's advocate and say that details must be recognized by the writers to keep true the passing of time. If a shuttle blows up.. well.. that's one less that Voyager owns. They have to build another one using the scraps.. maybe make mention of that during the course of one ep or something.

I believe that the distances must be closely monitored... Just for realism sake. Remember that Gene Roddenbury wanted STAR TREK to be believable, and I firmly believe that this fact has set the standard for sci-fi shows today. This is what makes STAR TREK the superior Space Sci-fi show on the air today. IT's what I love about it.

You can tell all of us to get a life.. but this is the greatest hobby for some people.

------------------
Alshrim Dax

[This message has been edited by Alshrim Dax (edited November 22, 1999).]

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

If Roddenbery wanted Trek to be believable, he must be spinning in his grave. Although I think he was more interested on commentary about humanity anyway.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Anarchias de meizon ouk estin kakon." - Creon

Posted by Alshrim Dax (Member # 258) on :

Well if you look at half of the gadgets that they had in TOS, you'd find yourself looking at a whole lotta those gadgets in use today.

Communicators = Cellphones
Data Disk = 3.5 floppies
LaserScalples = Laser Surgery
Laptop computers.

Jezzus, there saying if we, rather, when we break the light barrier, they're going to call it WARP drive, for crying out loud.

Gene was a visionary.

------------------
Alshrim Dax

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

Communicators are essentially long-range walkie-talkies, which existed at the time TOS was made. They work nothing like cell phones. Portable data storage existed also, in the form of tapes.

When were laser surgery or laptops used on TOS?

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Anarchias de meizon ouk estin kakon." - Creon

Posted by Alshrim Dax (Member # 258) on :

TOS is not the only STAR TREK series Roddenbury had a hand in. In the mid-eighties, Laptops weren't being used en masse, when TNG came to be.

When in the sixties did you see people talking real-time as they walked down the street of a city.. NOWHERE... Walkie-talkies are one way only.. Then.. in the early nineties...BAMM... Motorola flip phone.

And if you look at the data disks in the origial series... there was nothing in that time that was able to store ANYTHING in a unit that small until now.

I'm saying that he saw things happen before they actually did happened and he used that AND CALLED IT SCIENCE FICTION. Whose to say that the rest of the, yet, unprooven stuff won't actually come into exsistance..

------------------
Alshrim Dax

[This message has been edited by Alshrim Dax (edited November 22, 1999).]

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

Laptops still existed at the time of TNG, though.

Not even $10 store-bought walkie-talkies are one-way only, and certainly police radios aren't. And, again, cell phones use a network of ground-based antennas and similar equipment in a grid-based overall structure. Trek communicators operate nothing like this; they're just glorified radios.

I predict that jet engines will be half their current size 20 years from now. If this happens, do I get to be a "visionary" too?

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Anarchias de meizon ouk estin kakon." - Creon

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Tell you what, Frank. You inspire a future generation of scientists, and when we're all gathered around at the 15th Annual Frankian Convention we'll see what we can do.

------------------
"And if we weren't good to you, Dave, you shouldn't take it all the way to your grave."
--
Will Rigby

Posted by Alshrim Dax (Member # 258) on :

What I meant by one way is that they're not REAL TIME... you have to wait your turn to speak.

And I'm not talking about the type of technology used for Cell Phones... I was referring more to the esthetics of the phone.

Thanx Sol for the support!!!!

------------------
Alshrim Dax

Posted by Alshrim Dax (Member # 258) on :

For the original poster??? Point well taken!!

:0
------------------
Alshrim Dax

[This message has been edited by Alshrim Dax (edited November 23, 1999).]

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

And with cell phones, you can all talk at once, and everything will make sense?

What something looks like is irrelevant...you could build headphones that look like Trek communicators if you wanted to. Ooh, I know...Roddenberry invented books! And clams! They open and close! Besides, the Motorola phones are help up to the ear, whereas the communicators are held in front of you. I honestly don't see any connection between them at all, at this point.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Anarchias de meizon ouk estin kakon." - Creon

Posted by Diane (Member # 53) on :

Here's a link to another forum to argue with the guy who wrote that article that Bernd posted in the other thread: http://www.wittybanter.com/wbforum/Forum1/HTML/000188.html

I'd argue with him personally, but I gotta read all of Great Expectations (43 pages down, 447 to go)over the Thanksgiving weekend.

------------------
--Then, said Cranly, do you not intend to become a protestant?
--I said that I had lost the faith, Stephen answered, but not that I had lost self-respect. What kind of liberation would that be to forsake an absurdity which is logical and coherent and to embrace one which is illogical and incoherent?

James Joyce, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.

Posted by Alshrim Dax (Member # 258) on :

Point taken Monsieur Frank a.k.a. Shadow!!!

I stick to my guns when I say... Gene was a visionary..

And the rest of us Star Trek die-hards want the details... THEY SUSTAIN US MAN..

However, I can over look the odd error. .. after all.. it is fiction.

------------------
Alshrim Dax