Picard spoileriffic discussion of the actual episodes

[Mithrandir]

Well, I had to return to this site after a bit of "travelling"...
What brought me back? Star Trek Picard.

Boy oh boy oh boy am I torn about this show. I really, really, really want to like it. The character "Jean-Luc Picard" has been one of my favourite TV characters of all time and yes, something like a role model. When I saw the trailers for this series I really, really, really hoped the creators would not screw this up. So far, the story is interesting enough to keep me watching, but the turn-offs are accumulating for me...
To paraphrase Lady Galadriel: "This series stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail [for me]."

There are many little things that bug me, culminating in the last two episodes: Gruesome violence and (bad) 21st century language with lots of swearing. A kind of post-"Make Amerika great again", post-Brexit isolationist Federation. No real character building. Who are those people travelling with Picard? What motivates them? Halfway through the season I do not really know the names of or care for half of them. Jeri Ryan as Seven was great. I'd love to see a spin-off with her as lead. She has the energy and acting skills needed to do so (and Sir Patrick sadly is really showing his years by now...).

In the end it comes to this: The core of Star Trek, its unique selling point (for me, but I think for many others) was its positive outlook for humanity. Yes, there were troubles, there was war, there were rough edges. But as a whole, Star Trek showed different people, different species overcoming their differences and joining their resources for the bettering of society. The 22nd and 23rd century was a time and place I could phantasize myself into with ease - I could SEE my living then and there.
I'd rather not want to live in the Picard-Timeline.

Well, it may be that I'm just a sentimental old Trek-dinosaur with 25 years of watching Trek behind me. I know that Voyager, Enterprise and the TNG movies were far from perfect and that an infusion of fresh ideas for the Star Trek franchise was really neccesary. But if it means going further in the direction ST-Picard is taking - heck, I've got hundreds of old episodes to watch and re-watch for years to come.

[Graham Kennedy]

Well, I had to return to this site after a bit of "travelling"...
What brought me back? Star Trek Picard.

Boy oh boy oh boy am I torn about this show. I really, really, really want to like it. The character "Jean-Luc Picard" has been one of my favourite TV characters of all time and yes, something like a role model. When I saw the trailers for this series I really, really, really hoped the creators would not screw this up. So far, the story is interesting enough to keep me watching, but the turn-offs are accumulating for me...
To paraphrase Lady Galadriel: "This series stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail [for me]."

There are many little things that bug me, culminating in the last two episodes: Gruesome violence and (bad) 21st century language with lots of swearing. A kind of post-"Make Amerika great again", post-Brexit isolationist Federation. No real character building. Who are those people travelling with Picard? What motivates them? Halfway through the season I do not really know the names of or care for half of them. Jeri Ryan as Seven was great. I'd love to see a spin-off with her as lead. She has the energy and acting skills needed to do so (and Sir Patrick sadly is really showing his years by now...).

In the end it comes to this: The core of Star Trek, its unique selling point (for me, but I think for many others) was its positive outlook for humanity. Yes, there were troubles, there was war, there were rough edges. But as a whole, Star Trek showed different people, different species overcoming their differences and joining their resources for the bettering of society. The 22nd and 23rd century was a time and place I could phantasize myself into with ease - I could SEE my living then and there.
I'd rather not want to live in the Picard-Timeline.

Well, it may be that I'm just a sentimental old Trek-dinosaur with 25 years of watching Trek behind me. I know that Voyager, Enterprise and the TNG movies were far from perfect and that an infusion of fresh ideas for the Star Trek franchise was really neccesary. But if it means going further in the direction ST-Picard is taking - heck, I've got hundreds of old episodes to watch and re-watch for years to come.

I agree strongly with all this. It's such a shame because modern Trek is clearly being made by people who don't get - or don't like - the thing that made Trek such a great show. I watch Picard and I'm putting serious effort into liking it, but to me it has no heart. Honestly I'm getting by on thinking of it as "generic sci-fi show" that's not anything to do with Trek. On that basis, it's... okay. But honestly, I'm just not that interested.

I feel like Kirk in ST VI. Like the Trek world has changed into something different, and I'm left behind. I honestly wonder if I can even call myself a Star Trek fan any more, if this is what Trek is now.

[DSG2k]

You are, because this isn't. The Star Trek Original Universe is not changed by these new continuities.

Or, put another way,

"Land of song, said the warrior-bard,
Though all the world betrays thee,
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard,
One faithful harp shall praise thee."

You and I know the scene that comes from. We know the characters, the ship they served together on, the class, the context. We know those things because the show itself had meaning. Thirty years from now, no one will know or care similarly about the current shows, because, unlike Star Trek, they are nothing more than entertainment products.

[Graham Kennedy]

You are, because this isn't. The Star Trek Original Universe is not changed by these new continuities.

Or, put another way,

"Land of song, said the warrior-bard,
Though all the world betrays thee,
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard,
One faithful harp shall praise thee."

You and I know the scene that comes from. We know the characters, the ship they served together on, the class, the context. We know those things because the show itself had meaning. Thirty years from now, no one will know or care similarly about the current shows, because, unlike Star Trek, they are nothing more than entertainment products.

But that's the thing. One of THE best things there ever was about Trek is that it was a massive interconnected universe. When Bones walked the corridors of the Enterprise-D, when Picard met Scotty on the holo bridge of the Enterprise, when Ambassador Spock went to Romulus... all these things said that it's all a whole. And whilst it surely did have flubs and inconsistencies, it hung together as one thing.

And now that original Enterprise has been written out of history. Now we know that Sarek was hostile to Spock for joining Starfleet - whilst loving and supporting Burnham's decision to do the same thing, making him a hypocrite. I can't ever look at the Enterprise or Sarek again and see them only as what they are in real Trek.

I don't see the shows as islands. What happens on one affects them all.

[DSG2k]

That's how the STOU worked, yes, at least in principle. However, the CBS shows should be thought of as equivalent to novels. Sure, they affect our conception of OU Trek. My favorite Trek example is some novelist's claim that Vulcans are offended by unexpected touch . . . a logical-but-unfounded claim based on their touch telepathy. I know it isn't so, but I still feel uncomfortable for blind Tuvok when Janeway hugs him in "Year of Hell".

But it still isn't 'real' OU.

[AlexMcpherson79]

the bit about vulcan touch telepathy...

I guess I can see how the idea comes about... but that presumes their touch telepathy is like, an autonomic response to contact, and not something that has to be consciously initiated, the latter of which is my impression of original timeline vulcans... and why a romantic couple might simply touch fingers for a moment - they are consciously communicating feelings in privacy, that as logical as they are, they still hold appreciation for family.

And "Any one show isn't an island"... that's the opposite of the intent if you think about it. Voyager suffered from the non-serialized nature they were going for, the idea that you could watch out of order, and whilst yes, you CAN tell that an episode is, season 4, versus season 2, or season 7... it shouldn't matter that you watch... Hope and Fear, but then watch The Gift. That you could watch that episode immediately prior Basics, and then watch The 37s.

TNG Had that same. You could watch... symbiosis, then Haven, then Angel One, Then Lonely Among us. Though there the actual chrono release order is Lonely, Haven, Angel, Symb.

DS9 was a strong departure, but not anywhere near BSG, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones "Serialized" natures.

Literally, the last nine (ten) episodes of DS9's seventh season were a serialized story.

What You Leave Behind... to understand that Odo had the cure, you had to see Extreme Measures (23), But they have the Defiant and if you watched The Changing Face of Evil, you also need to watch Dogs of War before WYLB....
Literally, all seven have to be watched in order, because there is a flowing story there.

Earlier could be enjoyed out of order, but character and plot developments still could cause issue to doing that. "Wait they're getting married when was this?"

Enterprise, for the first two seasons were, as Berman and Braga placed on Voyager, episodic with a "and at the end of the episode, all was status quo" thing that was a weakness for Voyager. It was also a weakness for Enterprise.

So in this new era of serialized television, were there is some clear progression that means syndication now has to play those back in order or the viewers will miss something and not understand... also, the era of the Binge-watch...

It means that they're going "Hang on, we dont need 20-something individual stories, we just need a few and stretch them out"... and for character-driven... unfortunately, that means MORE drama for the characters, where drama = dark.

Imagine for a moment that Deep Space Nine was produced for our era. Each season would have chucked out the filler, and simply focused on the core of each seasons of "main plot" story. Season 1, Sisko's grief and basic rejection of being emissary because he is a starfleet officer. Kira's rejection of starfleet seeing it as a "smile and handshake occupation". We wouldn't have self-contained stories like Q visiting because Vash came. Hell.. Duet, one of the best episodes of the early season... and the pilot would have been trashed a bit (as it stands it is the BEST pilot of any of the shows, in my opinion. 'But you remain here. This is not linear'. Goddamn bringing tears to my eyes already.)

Season 2 would have gone darker than canon focussing on the Maquis and rising rumors of the threat of the dominion.
We wouldn't have Lionel Luth- I mean John Glover as Verad trying to steal the Dax symbiote. Melora and the low-grav sequence.

[DSG2k]

With a ballpark average of 24ish episodes per season rather than the current ten or fifteen, and with runtime requirements that are sometimes not met by the new shows (e.g. there are at least two STD eps that only hit the high 30s rather than the high 40s), there is a lot more time for both character development and unique plots and elements.

To be sure, sometimes it seemed the writers had too much time available, other times not enough, and a serialized format can potentially smooth that out. However, modern storytelling also allows a basic plot to be dragged out episode after boring episode, necessitating about as much filler as we saw before.

[DarkMoineau]

With a ballpark average of 24ish episodes per season rather than the current ten or fifteen, and with runtime requirements that are sometimes not met by the new shows (e.g. there are at least two STD eps that only hit the high 30s rather than the high 40s), there is a lot more time for both character development and unique plots and elements.

To be sure, sometimes it seemed the writers had too much time available, other times not enough, and a serialized format can potentially smooth that out. However, modern storytelling also allows a basic plot to be dragged out episode after boring episode, necessitating about as much filler as we saw before.

You clearly show TV has changed it's way... the world has changed.

It would be surprising theses changes doesn't affect Star Trek.... Specially when Star Trek always followed or started the changes in the past.

[DSG2k]

Well, sure, but it could still be good Star Trek. It doesn't have to be hopeless, poorly expository, unnecessarily gory, undercutting previous universe-building, and otherwise resemble badly written fanfic of some other show with Star Trek terms pasted over what was originally there.

[DarkMoineau]

Well, sure, but it could still be good Star Trek. It doesn't have to be hopeless, poorly expository, unnecessarily gory, undercutting previous universe-building, and otherwise resemble badly written fanfic of some other show with Star Trek terms pasted over what was originally there.

unnecessary gory has never been part of Star Trek, sure....





For the other comments it is a matter of opinion but the writing is clearly better in Picard than Discovery and the show if you find that show hopeless better not watch The Expanse...

Yeah it's dark compared to TNG or Voyager... But to be honest, Voyager would have been a lot better if darker. And situations aren't more hopeless and dark thab the dominion war were Federation faced the risk of extinction...

And at least Picard goes outside the comfort zone. It's not going where everyone else has gone before like Discovery S1 and 2.

[DSG2k]

Had you just posted the Remmick pic without the preceding bit of a straw man, I'd have said "touche!", and made reference to other icky bits like the Ceti Alpha eels or the bloody worm choke of ST3.

Of course, the producers heard a lot of protest about the TNG exploding head, with the episode banned, edited, or forced to include a warning. But, I guess I can agree that this new crop can be said to be improving. After all, I haven't seen a single decapitated baby head, though I'd be leery if rumors or previews suggested a scene in a maturation chamber.

As for "hopeless", Star Trek never suggested a perfect future, just one where mankind would've grown out of the worst habits or beliefs of the day. Instead, STP shows us racism, substance abuse, yellow journalism, petty jealousy, and so much more, following on from STD's similar displays. It's unfortunate, at best.

[Graham Kennedy]

Had you just posted the Remmick pic without the preceding bit of a straw man, I'd have said "touche!", and made reference to other icky bits like the Ceti Alpha eels or the bloody worm choke of ST3.

Of course, the producers heard a lot of protest about the TNG exploding head, with the episode banned, edited, or forced to include a warning. But, I guess I can agree that this new crop can be said to be improving. After all, I haven't seen a single decapitated baby head, though I'd be leery if rumors or previews suggested a scene in a maturation chamber.

As for "hopeless", Star Trek never suggested a perfect future, just one where mankind would've grown out of the worst habits or beliefs of the day. Instead, STP shows us racism, substance abuse, yellow journalism, petty jealousy, and so much more, following on from STD's similar displays. It's unfortunate, at best.

I had this discussion with somebody lately. Yes, Trek never depicted the Federation as a perfect utopia where nothing bad ever happened and nobody ever had an impure thought. TOS had Stiles, and his dislike of Romulans and of Spock.

Bones was arguably racist towards Spock, though I see that more as banter than actual hate, since the two deeply respected one another under the taunts.

Pulaski didn't exactly treat Data with respect, and Worf let a man die rather than help him.

O'Brien, whilst definitely NOT a hater of Cardassians in TOS, was retconned into one in DS9. And so on.

But these things were usually treated as bad, as something to be overcome. People would criticise them or make clear that they were not acceptable. Often the hater would learn a lesson - Stiles learned to respect Spock.

Now in Picard, they are the norm. And criticising them is met with "well you're just out of touch", and that's the attitude that wins the day. Trek said "we've gotten a lot better, and we can keep getting better." Now it's "the future will have the exact same problems, they'll never go away and they'll never lose."

I guess that's the "modern" attitude by some lights.

[DarkMoineau]

Had you just posted the Remmick pic without the preceding bit of a straw man, I'd have said "touche!", and made reference to other icky bits like the Ceti Alpha eels or the bloody worm choke of ST3.

Of course, the producers heard a lot of protest about the TNG exploding head, with the episode banned, edited, or forced to include a warning. But, I guess I can agree that this new crop can be said to be improving. After all, I haven't seen a single decapitated baby head, though I'd be leery if rumors or previews suggested a scene in a maturation chamber.

As for "hopeless", Star Trek never suggested a perfect future, just one where mankind would've grown out of the worst habits or beliefs of the day. Instead, STP shows us racism, substance abuse, yellow journalism, petty jealousy, and so much more, following on from STD's similar displays. It's unfortunate, at best.

I had this discussion with somebody lately. Yes, Trek never depicted the Federation as a perfect utopia where nothing bad ever happened and nobody ever had an impure thought. TOS had Stiles, and his dislike of Romulans and of Spock.

Bones was arguably racist towards Spock, though I see that more as banter than actual hate, since the two deeply respected one another under the taunts.

Pulaski didn't exactly treat Data with respect, and Worf let a man die rather than help him.

O'Brien, whilst definitely NOT a hater of Cardassians in TOS, was retconned into one in DS9. And so on.

But these things were usually treated as bad, as something to be overcome. People would criticise them or make clear that they were not acceptable. Often the hater would learn a lesson - Stiles learned to respect Spock.

Now in Picard, they are the norm. And criticising them is met with "well you're just out of touch", and that's the attitude that wins the day. Trek said "we've gotten a lot better, and we can keep getting better." Now it's "the future will have the exact same problems, they'll never go away and they'll never lose."

I guess that's the "modern" attitude by some lights.

What you forget is that Stiles, Pulaski, O'Brien were the minority... of the heroïc crew... and despite Kirk words to protect Spock, he wanted to let Klingon dies after Praxis...

We have always been presented with the best of Starfleet. When civilians were shown, well they were clearly as Quark describe humans.

Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, Nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people, as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people... will become as nasty and as violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon. You don't believe me? Look at those faces. Look in their eyes.

Picard show us former Starfleet officers, and they have flaws, but they are what we expect of them. When Starfleet officers are shown, they are competent officers who made tough choices because of political pressure or infiltrated spies. The only civilians we clearly learned about where relatives of our heroes.

We never truly saw basic federation citizen... but we saw EMH Mark I being used as slave labor without a thought... So yeah federation citizens are like real words humans... They are wonderful as long as they have food and holosuites... but when threatened they are as bad as us.

From the start, I treat Picard as a redemption story... Maybe am I wrong, but I think we will see both the redemption of Picard, who failed the Romulans, and the redemption of the Federation, that will become more like we want to see it, and not like Federation was.

Remember Federation always acted badly... It's nothing new. The media evolved, but the thematic of Picard is not far from the one of Insurection: Federation is wrong and Picard will make things right.

[Graham Kennedy]

Even what we've seen of the civilian government was little different. You might get the occasional Vash, but the enormous majority of Federation folk were the "good guys" of the universe.

And I don't think you're going to get your Federation redemption. I'm not even sure the Federation will still exist when this show is done.

[Graham Kennedy]