Star Trek: Picard
- Thread starter renaissance_man
- Start date
I find it interesting that when they used the 'F' bombs on STD the apologists didn't seem to mind in the least. He we go again with 24th Century people doing what 21st Century people do. Whatever happened to the utopian worlds of Star Trek? I know they never really existed but you could at least pretend.
I just read a review of the 3rd episode, it sounds like some of the contemporary aspects that have hampered the believability of the first two episodes continues in episode three.
I'll soldier on and watch episode 3 then make a decision on whether to keep investing time in another Kurtzman creation.
I'll soldier on and watch episode 3 then make a decision on whether to keep investing time in another Kurtzman creation.
“I’ll take what I can get...”
I’ve seen this comment regarding both STD and STP—but most especially regarding the dangling of Patrick Stewart in front of our faces. From these mouths to Bad Robot’s ears, this accepting of mediocrity enables them to keep producing product that is inferior, frustrating, derivative, and as dumbed-down as possible.
I have yet to have a moment of reflection following an episode of STD, STP, or the Short Treks, that came from great character development and clever storytelling that added anything of value to my appreciation for the franchise.
I’ve seen this comment regarding both STD and STP—but most especially regarding the dangling of Patrick Stewart in front of our faces. From these mouths to Bad Robot’s ears, this accepting of mediocrity enables them to keep producing product that is inferior, frustrating, derivative, and as dumbed-down as possible.
I have yet to have a moment of reflection following an episode of STD, STP, or the Short Treks, that came from great character development and clever storytelling that added anything of value to my appreciation for the franchise.
Last edited:
This is part of the problem now with immediate metrics from online streaming services, unlike the days of estimates from the Nielsen days, studios know how many people are watching.
Even if you are watching out of curiosity or plain hope that this modern Trek improves, your viewing figure counts.
Whether you enjoy it or dislike it, just watching boosts numbers and numbers talk regardless of quality of content.
If the mediocrity is to end, people need to just stop watching.
I realise that may sound slightly silly and those who are enjoying this new brand of Star Trek may have their favourite show cancelled but there have been many series that were cancelled prematurely that were of higher quality.
I realise there may still be potential for Picard to improve but how many chances do you give team Kurtzman/JJ before you have to accept that they aren't quite getting the core concept and keep making this weird neither one thing or the other Star Trek. They are writing with their mindset set firmly in modern times, they need to take the universe set before them and work within that universe one set 300 or 400 years from now.
Star Trek needs more experienced, intellectual and knowledgeable hands on the wheel, someone who isn't afraid to work within the Roddenberry basic idea that the future is a hopeful, better place where you can still tell high quality stories without having to twist everything to a darker place.
I wonder if CBS is counting viewers or just subscriptions.
IMO the only reason there is any shows at all associated with Star Trek is that they are cynically betting on the name of the franchise to draw people in, what show flies under that banner is most likely secondary
IMO the only reason there is any shows at all associated with Star Trek is that they are cynically betting on the name of the franchise to draw people in, what show flies under that banner is most likely secondary
kalkamel
Master Member
Despite being set at the end of the 24th century, the sense of dress, the mannerism, the vernacular, the bad habits and even the profanity are very much rooted in the late 20th/early 21st century. That's why STP feels dated already. Just look at Raffi in Episode 3. Everything about her just screams of our present. And even though she's waving left and right at her holographic display while continuing the CSI vibe, the UI on the display itself doesn't look futuristic. Gone are the Okudagrams and its place, something that we would see present day hackers on TV would see when they're doing whatever it is they're doing when they're infiltrating a network.
They pretty much did. We never spent much time there under Roddenberry's watch because he knew perfection was boring. There was a forward in his novelization of The Motion Picture written as by Admiral Kirk, where he ruminates on the nature of the member of Starfleet versus the general population, being something of an evolutionary throwback. It fits Star Trek as space western. In 19th century America, as the Eastern end of the country grew more civilized, those who chafed under such strictures, or wanted excitement and adventure headed West. Same here, but substitute upward and outward for Westward. The people on the show aren't as "civilized" as those they've left behind at home -- but they're still professionals.
I can't really imagine a contemporary Admiral breaking protocol in such a way around a civilian or subordinate. The h-words and s-words and d-words (not sure how nitpicky the profanity filter on here will get with people) are low-key enough that their understated (usually) use helps convey the stress of a difficult situation. I was one of the ones for whom Data's expletive in Generations fell flat. Handled differently, it probably would've been more natural and fitting. But in none of those would I expect to hear, say, Kirk cussing out a subordinate with profanity, or Admiral Riker angrily yelling at Picard to **** off when the latter came to him for help in "All Good Things...". Not even Sisko, in his impassioned, vehement speeches or dressings-down. People cite the holographic DaVinci in Voyager, but I'd like to remind folks he's a figment of the computer, and not a member of Starfleet -- let alone top brass.*
[*Although, I did think at the time, and still do, that it might have been a nice way to help set the Maquis crew members apart from the Starfleeters on DS9 and Voyager -- a way to emphasize the difference of Humans who are fighting for their homes out on the frontier as opposed to the ones safe and cushy back on Earth.]
Earth and most of the early Human colonies, Vulcan and theirs, other founding and core members -- thanks to replicators and effectively limitless (and therefore cheaper than dirt) energy -- they've got that utopia. Hunger and want are nonexistent. People are free to pursue whatever passions fire their life. Technology is pervasive but unobtrusive. So much is automated, there's minimal need for anyone to do the dirty work. And there are always people who enjoy being of service, so there will always be chefs and restaurants and mechanics and such. Just not as many, and not because they have to. There are other essays out there as to how it all works, but it does. There's an economy and trade and money (but not cash), but it's usually invisible to the average citizen.
That's the gist behind Pike's reminiscences of the world outside Mojave in "The Cage", Kirk's comments to aliens about his homeworld in TOS, his comments to Dr. Taylor in TVH, Picard's reminiscences of Paris, his visits home to the vineyard, Sisko's to New Orleans, his dad's restaurant, Harry Kim's family, the San Francisco we see when he's in the alternate timeline where he didn't go on Voyager, and so on and so on. We've seen a lot of glimpses of Earth from the 2250s to the 2400s in the original canon, and it's pretty consistent in that depiction. Between unprofessional Starfleet people and established utopia abruptly being dystopia (even at the height of the Dominion War, we retained our civility and people like Admirals Leyton and Dougherty stand out as aberrations, rather than the norm), "Trek" for the last decade has been a harsh abnegation of everything the original canon was about.
That's why people who are longtime Trek fans who like Discovery and Picard leave me utterly baffled and dismayed. I cannot grasp how they can view these shows and find it good. A friend's mom said of Picard that "It's some of the best Star Trek [she's] ever seen", and I just boggled, at loss for words. And, as you can see above, that takes some doing.
Last edited:
What I find interesting is that I have yet to hear of any props from this show that anyone is dying to replicate—and that is a first for a Star Trek series that is three episodes in.
By the time of episode three of all the preceding Trek series, there was already a long list of props that had caught people’s attention.
By the time of episode three of all the preceding Trek series, there was already a long list of props that had caught people’s attention.
This is not even good television. It doesn't make any sense. I was shrugging my shoulders, shaking my head and scowling constantly during the 3rd episode. Almost from the beginning, when Picard says 'straight up. I laid it all out'. I burst out laughing. I mean...this is some is fundamentally stupid #$&@. It's 'pay-television' too? Yikes. I truly hope not many people are paying a single dollar for this. It's almost as if I'm starting to feel embarrassed for what Star Trek has become. I have this cynical view in my mind that the producers are just laughing at any of us over a certain age, who held Star Trek on the highest pedestal throughout our daily lives as an ideal future to strive towards. Stories by better and smarter writers who shared and respected eachothers' ideas and visions at a time where studios executives, dare I say, took more chances and possibly believed in artistic merit? To me, I just think these producers are businessmen and nothing more. I don't believe they have any inspirational messages or visions to convey to us at all, other than selling us a product that borrows on a tried-and-tested brand name yet stays well over 25% different. Going a step further, I'm really starting to think this is their general attitude right now: 'Ya like what I did to your Star Trek buddy? huh? chump? what'chya gonna do about it huh? it's here to stay so, take that'. And it gets eaten up and accepted as cutting edge television and the media outlets do nothing but praise and award this mediocrity. ******...I'll take some Voyager and Enterprise, anytime...anywhere...over this junk. And, seriously guys, how good does it feel now when you throw on your fav episode of TOS or TNG or DS9 and think to yourselves...'Wow...I forgot how awesome Star Trek is'. And I say 'is', because at least we can go back to the stuff we like, so this new junk will never take that away.
And for those that like the new stuff, good for them. I'm hearing about millenials who grew up with Trek post-2009 who started watching the old stuff and their minds are blown by how different it was and they still like it! So it probably evens out in the end.
And for those that like the new stuff, good for them. I'm hearing about millenials who grew up with Trek post-2009 who started watching the old stuff and their minds are blown by how different it was and they still like it! So it probably evens out in the end.
Sadly, that's what producers are -- even the ones who have creativity. Gene was a producer. When he saw the writing on the wall about Star Trek's fate, he pulled back from it to work on other things. Rick Berman got his job on TNG because he's a skilled Hollywood chameleon -- he's good at parroting back to the creative what they're pitching in his own words and they think (as Gene did), "My god! They get it!" When you step back and look at his tenure, latter-TNG was Piller's vision, as was early-DS9; early Voyager was Jeri Taylor's vision, latter was Brannon Braga's. Berman had a little creative input, but it was few and far between. JJ went in to Trek09 having been bored by Star Trek growing up and wanting to make it more exciting, like Star Wars. That's... the wrong attitude to come at Trek with. And the less I say about Les, the better.
I can quote that in my own life. Close friend had her first exposure to Trek -- like, more than just vaguely being aware of its existence -- being the '09 film. She liked it and its sequels well enough, but it got her curious where it came from and she started with TNG and utterly fell in love with it. She's splitting her time now between Voyager and TOS, the latter requiring some contextual discussion because of how dated some of it is (moreso than it felt growing up with it forty years ago). But she absolutely was floored by the blink-and-you-miss-it moment in "The Naked Time" where Sulu whisks Uhura into his off-arm to "protect" her, declares, "Fear not, fair maiden!", and Uhura offhandedly says, "Sorry -- neither".
DS9 is going to leave her poleaxed.
You can bet they're checking viewers.
When they watch, how long they watch an episode for, whether they pause or stop it.
Joek3rr
Master Member
I got play devils advocate real quick.....
This is the 24th century. Surely they could make smoking devices that don't have any ill health effects?
John Eaves would beg to differ. He was working on Discovery and was told to make things 25% different.
Here's a quote from the comicbook.com site.
"Back in April of 2017 the task of the Enterprise making an appearance came to be and work was to start right away,” Eaves says. “The task started with the guideline that the Enterprise for Discovery had to be 25% different otherwise production would have most likely been able to use the original design from the 60's but that couldn't happen so we took Jefferies original concepts and with great care tried to be as faithful as possible".
And the link.
25% difference in JJ Trek
I wanted a Tricorder and in the case of Enterprise a Starfleet issue hand scanner, T'Pol's scanner and Phlox's medical scanner as soon as I saw them.
There aren't any props in the Picard series that I want, there's nothing interesting or memorable.
We aren't likely to see a Tricorder or Phaser as they seem intent on focusing on the more civilian side of things.
Last edited:
