As I understand, there are many hard core ST fans who hate the show and its producers. I have to admit that I really enjoyed Voyager and I found it much less cringeworthy than TNG or DS-9 (oh, man...i hated Odo so much, great show though, loved Bashir-O'Brien relationship).
What's, in your opinion, wrong with Voyager?
It's often considered a retread of TNG, it's like if TNG was Thriller then Voyager is Golimaar where it looks like Thriller it's trying to be Thriller but it's a shameless rehashing so it can make Thriller dollars, same with Voyager it's rehashing and fan servicing so it can make TNG dollars.
shareI think someone on Quora said that originally there was at least one or more talented writers on staff that were going to take the story in a different direction, but the studio made them want to quit, so we ended up with the equivalent of a "poor man's TNG" instead. Even worse, the studio making the show wanted to use it as one of its flagship programs to start out a new channel called UPN, which is a really bad idea when you're using a sci-fi show that only a portion of America's gonna watch, and then putting it in a group of shows with a lot of equally crappy writing.
It's not the worst Trek I've ever watched, and I enjoyed parts of it and liked the characters. But the writing just wasn't exactly on par with TNG or DS9.
Now compared to Shitscovery, it's lightyears ahead in quality, but that's not saying much.
Because we were spoiled in the 90s by an embarrassment of riches when it comes to TV science fiction, including the far superior TNG and DS9. I wouldn't call it bad Star Trek, more like lesser Star Trek.
share