aceofwands:

dgcatanisiri:

ds9vgrconfessions:

Follow | Confess | Archive
[I agree with many people that DS9 was the best Trek because it was the only one that had a plot. Voyager thought it had a plot, but it actually only had a premise. TNG and TOS didn’t have premises; they had settings.]

I’d argue that with Voyager, there was a push and pull between plot and premise, with the people who are in charge of money, and thus the paychecks of everyone involved, backing premise and silencing those who wanted to focus on plot. Because Voyager had MOMENTS. Occasional scenes, occasionally full episodes… They knocked it out of the park. But those were often in spite of the way that people upstairs were trying to run things, rather than because of.
DS9 benefited from the fact that it literally could not be TNG. The executives wanting money, wanting a Star Trek getting the ratings of TNG in its heyday, refused to look at DS9, which effectively gave their writers a freer hand, the ability to push the boundaries because they weren’t being observed under a proverbial microscope. But with Voyager, being another starship-based Trek, they saw a way to get a repeat of TNG, and pushed it to BE TNG, rather than letting it be Voyager. When Voyager got the rare opportunity to be Voyager, it told some really good, really strong stories - I’d put a handful of Voyager episodes in my top fifty episodes of Star Trek (assuming I ever sat down and put one together). But too often Voyager, as deeply under scrutiny as it was from the number-crunchers, couldn’t take full advantage of its plots.
It’s a damn shame is what it is.

Reblogging for both the OP’s sentiment AND the spot on commentary!

aceofwands:

dgcatanisiri:

ds9vgrconfessions:

Follow | Confess | Archive

[I agree with many people that DS9 was the best Trek because it was the only one that had a plot. Voyager thought it had a plot, but it actually only had a premise. TNG and TOS didn’t have premises; they had settings.]

I’d argue that with Voyager, there was a push and pull between plot and premise, with the people who are in charge of money, and thus the paychecks of everyone involved, backing premise and silencing those who wanted to focus on plot. Because Voyager had MOMENTS. Occasional scenes, occasionally full episodes… They knocked it out of the park. But those were often in spite of the way that people upstairs were trying to run things, rather than because of.

DS9 benefited from the fact that it literally could not be TNG. The executives wanting money, wanting a Star Trek getting the ratings of TNG in its heyday, refused to look at DS9, which effectively gave their writers a freer hand, the ability to push the boundaries because they weren’t being observed under a proverbial microscope. But with Voyager, being another starship-based Trek, they saw a way to get a repeat of TNG, and pushed it to BE TNG, rather than letting it be Voyager. When Voyager got the rare opportunity to be Voyager, it told some really good, really strong stories - I’d put a handful of Voyager episodes in my top fifty episodes of Star Trek (assuming I ever sat down and put one together). But too often Voyager, as deeply under scrutiny as it was from the number-crunchers, couldn’t take full advantage of its plots.

It’s a damn shame is what it is.

Reblogging for both the OP’s sentiment AND the spot on commentary!