It's perhaps the weakest of all Star Trek shows of that era. It didn't age well. It can't be remastered in HD (which is sad, 'cause production was probably more expensive than TNG) and the virtual absence of coherent story arcs doesn't meet the new standards of the streaming era. Instead, Voyager has this predictable pattern of recurring topics: one "Kim the Lover episode", one "let's get our hopes up, we're about to get home", "the silly holo novel" episode, the "holo character becomes sentient and endangers the crew" episode and so forth. This pattern becomes very dull very quickly. It's perhaps an unfair thing to say because that's how 2000's TV show were structured (for a good reason) but this prevents the show from being binge-watchable in the modern streaming era (it's a "reverse DS9" so to speak: DS9 never worked within the constraints of programmed TV schedules but gained popularity in the era of streaming). They never capitalized on the fact that they had a natural, clear story arch: a long journey back home. It's almost a perfect premise. But too often you feel that the show runners never wrote down a coherent vision and overarching story that is told throughout all seven seasons. The overall show is worse than many of its episodes. Ideally, it should be the other way 'round. But it's still classic Star Trek and I'd prefer to watch some selected episodes over Discovery or Picard every time.
Let's not talk about the first three seasons. They are weak. That's all I have to say 'bout them, but every new Trek show struggled in the beginning (not as badly as Voyager though). Seasons 4 to 7 are solid. 6th season maybe the best. Seven saves the show. She and the Doctor are responsible for the best moments in this show. All other main characters are kind of dull. Some have potential (Janeway, Tuvok, Kes, B'Elanna) but the writers never really knew how to tell their stories. Some characters are annoying most of the time: man-child Paris (originally some sort of renegade character), useless Mr. Vision Quest and the clown loitering in the mess hall. Worst character is maybe Kim: I couldn't care less whether he's there or not. He's just a dull guy and letting him appear in various romantic stories makes it all worse.. Most characters never show any kind of character development. They always seem to forget what has happened to them the previous week. Only exceptions are the Doctor and Seven (and perhaps Naomi) who exceed expectations and grow with every scene. Seven is remarkable. What probably was a desperate (and condemnable) attempt to infuse some one-dimesnional t&a tailored to nerds into the show, grew into one of the most complex, most funny, most interesting characters in Star Trek ever (before they murdered her in Picard) Plus, Voyager is very bad in telling romantic stories. They never got "Kim, the Lover" right, they tried various other romantic relationships (Paris/Kes, Neelix/Kes [that was outright disturbing], Janeway/Chakotay) but nothing worked. And the relationship they ultimately came up with (Paris and Torres) never felt credible, logical, emotional or romantic. Even worse, I often don't feel a basic chemistry between most members of the main cast. (Like the characters, the ship is invariable too. It virtually never shows permanent signs of degradation.)
On paper, Voyager was a good idea: a whole new and exciting quadrant to explore. A motley crew with lots of conflict potential (Marquis vs. Starfleet): An epic journey through hostile space with an uncertain outcome offered all the potential to bond with the characters by watching them working as a team and overcome enormous obstacles. A very intimate setting: the small crew was trapped on that ship and this offered the chance to show people socializing when off-duty. They never really capitalized on this setting. Instead they were limited by it: Star Trek was great when they told about the interconnected alliances, diplomacy, politics and trade. A utopia we created around Earth. Individual characters and ships were always embedded into the fleet and an interplanetary network. Every ship always represented this system and mankind.. Voyager is so distant from Earth, they often forget about the whole philosophy behind Starfleet. Writers could have used this in their favor though: the crew could have become more desperate, cornered, more ruthless but the writers were not willing to explore this idea (they only used the U.S.S. Equinox as a proxy to explore this dark possibility). Plus, the Alpha and Beta Quadrant (and thanks to DS9 even the Gamma Quadrant) offered this rich lore: Dozens of well-established species and unique empires. Voyager faced the monumental task to create all of this on their own... and they failed. All species and civilizations they invented were either uninteresting or they never invested enough time to explain how powerful/threatening they really are, what role their civilization/empire really play in the Quadrant and how complex their culture really is. They are all just one-dimensional "monsters of the week". Generic foes you know very little of. That's why they are so dull. When that became clear, writers resorted to the Borg as Voyager's main foe and isolated guest appearances of traditional characters (Barclay, Deanna, Ferengi, Zimmerman, Q, Klingons and Romulans). Don't get me wrong, the borgification of Voyager was perhaps a wise decision, given how lackluster every other race in the quadrant was, but the show also became almost too Borg-ish. Not only that: as if there were no other fascinating aspects of the Borg, most stories (just like Seven's story) were focused on the possibility of individuality within the hive. In turn, this demystified the Borg and in the end they were a minor nuisance necessary to get home. It's almost like they "sacrificed" the Borg in order to limp to season 7 and avoid early cancellation of the show.
