posted
First of Two has voiced my main thoughts on this already:
quote:I STILL say the the primary reason Voyager's ratings are low is because it's shown on so few stations, not the other way around. I think it was a height in hubris to start a network that was essentially based around one show, moreover a network that was only accessible on a few stations (Voyager around where I live is ONLY visible to people with cable, the nearest station is too far away for anything but the fuzziest snow-picture. I can't watch THAT, can I?)
If you look at all the factors against Voyager, it looks pretty good that they get the ratings they do...
And Kosh said it for me, too:
quote:Voyager suffers from being on UPN, a network that covers little of the country. I think it's ratings would be similar to DS9's if Voyager had been in syndication. I'll grant you that that's way down from TNG, but they would still be respectable.
(Although some of TNG's seventh-season ratings could be low enough to overcome.)
And I have a question: Why is it when people come down on DS9 and Voyager, that people like Fabrux and I "have our knickers in a knot" (or whatever expression you choose to use) because we happen to like all four series; and yet the people who blast the shows for not "being Star Trek" never "have their knickers in a knot"? I've noticed this at the Trek BBS, too.
More clarification of my opinions seem to be in order. First and foremost, I never claimed that DS9 is a COPY of B5, only that the idea popped into Rick Berman's vacant skull only after he got hold of the synopsis for the show. You won't catch me making comparisons between these shows.
Secondly, I did not intend to suggest that Star Trek could only be successful if it were about a Starship Enterprise and crew, only that the starship-based exploration theme works best FOR ME. This was only an OPINION. Other venues would work equally well if such creations could benefit from consistently great writing and producers who cared about the fans. Is everyone really so indifferent towards Brannon Braga's claim that trek fans have "too much time on their f***ing hands"? He's talking about all of us, you know.
Simri, I would agree with your intimation that many Trek fans place Gene Roddenberry on a pedestal higher than he deserved. The "Great Bird" was not so great in many capacities and was as profit-minded as anyone in the business. After all, Spock's IDIC-pin thing in TOS was Gene's haphazard attempt at Trek merchandising. Fascinating point about Cochrane, but neither Berman nor Braga are sharp enough to use Cochrane as a metaphor for Roddenberry. I doubt either knows what a metaphor is... In actual fact, Braga didn't know anything about Cochrane to begin with and considered making the character Picard's LOVE INTEREST until he was told who Cochrane was... Trek can certainly continue without Gene, but not without the proper care. It takes talent, and a good measure of vision to create a new series, talent which I believe is a bit lacking in the current production staff.
Concerning Voyager's ratings and UPN, point well taken. I would agree that the numbers must be skewed somewhat by the fact that Voyager is not syndicated. Yet this goes to one of my points in a roundabout way. Paramount used Star Trek to jump start their fledgling network, instead of giving the show its due by allowing it to be syndicated like it's predecessors. And then there is the nastiness that the parent company, Viacom, likes to perpetrate against harmless, non-profit, personal web pages that are in any way Trek related. The people in charge these days are not very fan-friendly.
Lastly, I would like to apologise to Fabrux for apparently insulting him YET AGAIN. It was not my intention to suggest that your opinion at age 15 is any less valid than mine at age 143 (seems like that long, anyway) or that you are any less a fan. I would be happy to watch Star Trek in any form for as long as its around so long as it is under the creative control of someone truly creative and insightful. Remember, I'm not bashing DS9 or Voyager. I like both shows. I merely stated that each series seems to be getting farther and farther away from what I believe made Trek successful.
Here are the facts: For a number of debatable reasons, Trek has lost a lot of its audience. Fewer viewers mean fewer profits. Fewer profits mean less network support for the show. Pass this point and it means another letter-writing campaign. I DON'T want to see this happen. Cancellation of any Trek series could mean a death-knell to the legacy.
In short, my beef is with the producers. I don't trust them. I don't like them. I love Star Trek, however, and always will. Thanks everone for the kind welcome. I am really looking forward to being a member of such a superb forum.
posted
Where Fabrux and I come from, it's "knot." So there!
quote:Is everyone really so indifferent towards Brannon Braga's claim that trek fans have "too much time on their f***ing hands"? He's talking about all of us, you know.
You're trying to turn us all against Braga. Fascinating...
quote:I doubt either knows what a metaphor is...
Of course not. They're only English/film school majors...
quote:In actual fact, Braga didn't know anything about Cochrane to begin with and considered making the character Picard's LOVE INTEREST until he was told who Cochrane was...
I've heard of this, but since no one has ever given me proof (or close enough to it) of this, it's just a rumour to me.
(Edit: Actually, now that I think about this... What's wrong with having Cochrane being Picard's love interest? Aren't we accepting of bisexuality in the 24th/21st centuries? Mind you, if he thought Cochrane was a female, that's something different altogether.)
quote:Concerning Voyager's ratings and UPN, point well taken. I would agree that the numbers must be skewed somewhat by the fact that Voyager is not syndicated.
"Somewhat"?!
Let's see... A 40% or greater difference in total national coverage when comparing DS9/TNG and Voyager. Guess which one's lower! (That in and of itself is a major difference.) Only one station counted per area, whereas syndication counts multiple stations per area. Voyager's ratings are for one showing of the episode per station/area only, whereas syndie shows are multiple airings on the same station all added. And some people aren't motivated to watch that one showing as about 4/5ths of the UPN stations rerun Voyager on Sunday, IIRC.
UPN stations (like the one in Boston, as Fabrux will easily tell you) will oftentimes reschedule airings of Voyager. Then there is a rating of 0 submitted for that area. Ouch, huh? If this rescheduling happened to a syndie show, the rescheduled airing would actually count.
"Somewhat" is not the way to describe it.
[This message has been edited by Elim Garak (edited March 18, 2000).]
posted
For me personnally, my favorite is TOS. However, I don't discuss the show or the details of the show (there are subjects that I would like to talk about, such as Gary Mitchell's service aboard the USS Enterprise) here or at TrekBBS because I find that people don't know or don't care to know the show. The issue I find is similar to another issue-this with my mother. We are watching a show and she can't seem to want to like the show because of a bad special effect, the plot, the moral behavrior of a character, etc. I find fans of the modern Star Trek who when speaking of the original speak of the outdated ideas and concepts, the weak acting, and the bad special effects. I chose to ignore these facets of the show (this is the best that could be done in the 60's and on a limited budget) and I find for myself that there ideas and concepts which I find still relevant. In "Conscience of the King", there is talk of a computerized society. The price for having a computerized society is our humanness. I could argue in a thread that the USA is becoming such a society if people cared to discuss it in relation to the fears raised in the original. Also, I find that many people will take the time to study, build, and debate the technology of Star Trek than they do of the characters or their motiviations. One of the primary effects of the lower budget on TOS is that the actors were given more to do in terms of the plot. And for me there is the richness of TOS. The producers of Star Trek give the modern Star Trek fans enough technology-ships, technobabble-happy. Further, many of you are willing to pay eight (for the Star Trek magazine) to sixty (For the encyclopedia) dollars for information that you could in your time find and perhaps you may learn more and question more. The information in these texts is a summary-and sometimes not very complete summary-of the information seen in the episodes and films. By buying the merchandise with every dollar you earned or are given, you are telling the studio that you are pleased with the products. With every viewing of a show you may tolerate or dislike, you are informing the producers that there are four million individuals who like Voyager and want the status quo. When a people don't like a political decision or figure, they petition or vote to change or substitue that political decision or figure. If you don't like the current state of Star Trek, make a petition asking for change. Otherwise, stop the bitching and accept the status quo or stop buying the products and turn Star Trek off. I did the latter-this is how I spoke and voted against the status quo. (By the way, you will never see from me another TOS related topic. I have learn that enough of you don't care about this show or ideas for me to invest the time in writing a thread. I do care about TOS.)
------------------
takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory
[This message has been edited by targetemployee (edited March 18, 2000).]
posted
Okay, targetemployee, time for me to defend....
You want to know why I don't watch TOS? I'll tell you. It's because the only time it's aired on stations that I get is at 2 AM on Saturday! I don't know about you but that's a little too late for me. Why don't I record it? Because my VCR is rather noisy when it starts to record and would probably wake me up from my slumber. I care about TOS, but I won't go to extremes to watch it.
And why do I buy books and ST: TM? Because knowledge is power!
------------------ "Yes. I have seventeen brains! And eleven legs. And a pecan." -Frank Gerratana, March 3, 2000
[This message has been edited by Fabrux (edited March 18, 2000).]
posted
Another reason why I don't watch TOS is because I grew up on TNG. Most of us here did. Some of the more senior members of the board grew up on TOS. And in a few years there are going to be people who grew up on DS9 and VGR. These people won't like TNG as much as they like DS9, just like people who grew up on TNG don't like TOS as much as TNG, DS9, or VGR. And it's kind of the same way for people who grew up on TOS. They prefer TOS and believe that TNG, DS9, and VGR aren't on par with TOS.
------------------ "Yes. I have seventeen brains! And eleven legs. And a pecan." -Frank Gerratana, March 3, 2000
posted
If knowledge is power... and power corrupts... Uh-oh... :-)
------------------ "To make the merry-go-round go faster, so that everyone needs to hang on tighter, just to keep from being thrown to the wolves." -They Might Be Giants, "They Might Be Giants"
posted
I first watched Star Trek when I was a kid in the late 1970's. My mother introduced me to the first movie and that started my fascination with the series. I have stayed with TOS since then for I feel comfortable with the characters. One of the difficulties I have with Voyager is that there doesn't seem to be a community, a teamship amoung the crew. There are small cliques aboard the ship that are forced to interact with each other because of the demands placed upon them by an authoritive and caring figure. In a small part, I feel this reflects our society. I was sick with depression. This made me isolated, cut off from others. At the hospital, I learnt that being isolated is not a normal condition of being human. Yet in our society, isolation is becoming more of the norm. Voyager reflects this growing trend toward isolation in our society. And for me this is the primary reason I stopped watching the show. Now, each generation imprints his or her marker on Star Trek. The generation that created TOS was of the WWII era. The generation that created TNG was of the Vietnam Era. And the generation that created DS9 and VOY was of the post-Vietnam Era. The generation that creates the next show will be of a later one-Gen X. They will focus on the issues important to them. Has Star Trek gone farther away from its roots? Yes, just as a grandchild is separate from a grandparent in the way he or she thinks, behaves, and the range of tolerances that he or she exhibits about societal issues. For some reason, I feel more comfortable with the grandparent, I like the parents, and I don't feel comfortable nor accept fully the grandchild. (I see DS9 as a parent. Both TNG and DS9 were the origins of Voyager more than TOS.)Yet as I stand next to the grandparent, I see people fascinated, intrigued, and puzzled by the grandchild. I hear there might be a great-grandchild. The next member of this family is unknown to me. Will I like? I don't know yet. Will it be farther away from the grandparent? Yes. Will it be as good as the grandparent? Maybe, maybe not. I know the parents were nearly as good as the grandparent. The grandchild is the black sheep of the family-independent of the familial traditions, struggling to find its own niche, yet always returning to one of the parents for comfort and support and recognition. There have been more missed potential and mistakes for the grandchild than for the others. Yet, in a few instances from I what hear, there is some growth. Will the next one learn from the mistakes? Hopefully. Though I will not be watching Voyager in its last season and a half, I wish all the best for the series. And I have my fingers crossed that the next series will be closer to the traditions established by TOS-good, consistent characterization; strong plots; and a reliance on character motiviation, not plot motivation, for episode momentum.
posted
You know, perhaps the reason Braga mentioned Trek fans having too much time on their hands is because...we have too much time on our hands! I mean, sweet mother of God on a henhouse, have you READ some of the things we discuss around here? Not a single one of us is hurting for time to devote to things. And I'm lovingly and willfully a part of that! It isn't necessarily a value judgement.
Futhermore, I take issue with this us vs. them mentality when it comes to fans and the producers. First of all, I know as much about Brannon Braga's life as I do that of Ulchan Maro, crack Mongolian horse trainer. In other words, zero. Zipski. I can only judge him or any of the powers that be in terms of what they create. And seeing as how the present "evil regime" has provided me with over a decade of entertainment that ranks as Damn Fine on the Sol System Definitive Scale of Things, I don't see where there is much of a case for violent revolution.
Let's take Braga, shall we? Under his no doubt Stalinesque command, Voyager has enjoyed what many fans, including, I think, many of the more vocal detractors, would call its best seasons. Is this divine intervention? Sure, Braga wrote such things as The Episode Which Dare Not Speak Its Name. But he also wrote Frame of Mind. (Which is a TNG episode, but I mention it only because I liked it a great deal and my mind is not actively stocked with writing credits for Voyager at the moment.) Is Braga a soul-sucking jerk? Possibly. But to be brutally honest, I don't care, so long as that doesn't interfere with the quality of the show.
Post-mortem Script: I'd add "doesn't make the working environment a living hell for coworkers" to the above, but a bit of thought leads me to conclude that were such a thing endemicly true, the end product would suffer.
------------------ "What did it mean to fly? A tremor in your soul. To resist the dull insistance of gravity." -- Camper Van Beethoven
posted
Targetemployeee sneaked in while I was writing, and there is something specific I want to address from his post.
There are many arguments you could level against Voyager, and while a certain lack of...sense of the crew as a whole does exist (And existed for all the other series except DS9, really), I don't think the notion of "independant cliques" is a fair one. That is, we basically see one rather cohesive group to the exclusion of all others.
Voyager has tried to address this, to varying degress of success. The shows largest problem in this arena is the lack of followthrough. There's nothing wrong with having each episode stand wholly on its own, but it's not easy to address issues like this in that sort of format.
------------------ "What did it mean to fly? A tremor in your soul. To resist the dull insistance of gravity." -- Camper Van Beethoven
posted
"You want to know why I don't watch TOS? I'll tell you. It's because the only time it's aired on stations that I get is at 2 AM on Saturday! I don't know about you but that's a little too late for me. Why don't I record it? Because my VCR is rather noisy when it starts to record and would probably wake me up from my slumber. I care about TOS, but I won't go to extremes to watch it." - Fabrux
/start crotchety-bitter-old-man-speak/ Now, back when I first started watching Trek all we had was TOS, and it was on at 1 AM on a PBS station with reception so bad I thought Spock was an ugly woman for the first year I watched it, and we didn't have VCR's to record it, and I STILL watched it every week until I'd seen every episode enough times to tell you the title just by the color of the planet the Enterprise was over in the opening scenes... /end c-b-o-m-speak/
Actually, except the part about thinking Spock was a woman and the part about knowing the title by planet color, that's a true story. Fabrux, I think your Star Trek experience would be made more profound if you'd stay up a little bit and watch TOS. In other words, get your priorities straight and know your roots.
Oh, and just to set the record straight, while I DO have a favorite series, I also love them all, plus all the books, all the feature films, etcetera etcetera ad infinitum. I am a self-admitted Star Trek junkie; I'll watch just about anything they put out. I will, however, quit watching for good if Picard ever gets a male love-interest.
------------------ Dane
"Mathematicians have long held that a million monkeys banging on a million keyboards would eventually reproduce the collected wisdom of the human race. Now, thanks to the internet, we know this is not true." -- Robert Silensky
Printer-friendly view of this topic
