Jump to content

Welcome to Nightly.Net
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Picard


147 replies to this topic

#101
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts
Is it weird that I was mad that they didn't re-use rando no-named actor from the 90s to reprise his role as Maddox?
  • Ryn +1 this

#102
Zathras

Zathras

    Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

 

If memory serves there's a nigh-incomprehensible action sequence and Jonathan Frakes just ... kicks him down a Jefferies tube? I know they mentioned the character again a few years later on Star Trek : Enterprise (2001-2005) which of course took place chronologically earlier so is no proof either way

I don't remember the Reman Viceroy ever being mentioned in Enterprise.  At least the Ron Pearlman character.  If it was mentioned, it might be "a" Viceroy, as in the Reman Head of State, who is subservient to the Romulan Praetor?

 

BTW, I am skipping over Picard plot points, so if I misunderstood, sorry.



#103
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts
Soong was finally name dropped, Seven was great-- but everything else was terrible. Still going downhill.
  • Ryn +1 this

#104
Ryn

Ryn

    Moonshadow

  • Moderators
  • 28,559 posts

Is it weird that I was mad that they didn't re-use rando no-named actor from the 90s to reprise his role as Maddox?

I kept checking IMDb. Still, I thought it was a great performance by actor with the time and material he had. Same thing with the Iched character. But we got nice bookends of the ep with the med-bed killings.


  • Tank +1 this

#105
D-Ray Kenobi

D-Ray Kenobi

    Member

  • Member
  • 15,347 posts

I don't really have any complaints about the plot structure of this show itself because it's fine to me, but I think my annoyance is that this is following the same structure as a lot of "Peak TV" these days.  With a lot of these shows with a long narrative over a single season, it's more about satisfying checkmarks that don't necessarily support a quality story.

This plot could have been a really great two hour film.  Picard comes out of retirement for one last mission with a makeshift crew to wrap up some sentimental history with Data.  A little cliche, but it works well enough.  When that story is stretched over eight episodes, it just comes across as thin sometimes.  You end up getting inessential melodrama with supporting characters, padding with implied history that we never really see fully contextualized, and a lot of meandering around with side quests until we get to the boss level of Hugh and the junkyard Borg Cube.

I think this would have worked way better as a movie, but Paramount / CBS would have never taken the risk on it.  It financially makes sense for them to spend a little less and market it as a show that they can piecemeal out and get subscriptions out of. 

I still like it a lot, but I recognize that the quality of the product has taken a dent because of all that.



#106
R.CAllen

R.CAllen

    walking

  • Member
  • 4,115 posts

- Goddamn, deep cut to Season 1 of Star Trek : Voyager right there @ the end. You'd think what with the long established idea of, like, subspace transporter platforms (I think that's what the evil Ferengi used in the final season of TNG to hop on board the ship and spook Picard when he was doing his evil son plan thing, hold on, is that guy Jason Whatshisname gonna come back and be on this show too? Calling it now, that guy or his mom is gonna get referenced sometime before the finale, you betcha) and the way that technology was used in two of the Abrams films for v. similar purposes that'd just be what they'd go for to establish how these two get away from the Romulans at the end but, nope, it's the stuff from the "how would YOU like to be Prime Directive-d, huh, guys? Not so fun when the shoe is on the other foot is it now!! This is an important lesson!" episode.
 
- is Picard sundowning? Is the thing that whatshername, Rafi, said about his unchecked id or whatever actually how Patrick Stewart is choosing to play him? He's clapping in praise, he's dishing out hugs for Hugh, wait isn't this kinda what David Paymer was talking about in the second episode? Yeah, I think it fits actually.
 
- Lots of dumb dumb secret ritual stuff and spooky dream nonsense and hidden true name (Chaya? Come on, Ayelet & Michael & Kirsten & Akiva! Chaya is a girl's name for girls!) stuff this week. I guess we were saved from having to see that happen last week. I didn't think I'd miss it and I guess I don't. Go back to cutting Robot Girl & Romulan Spy & Romulan Spy's Sister Who Was Roger Sterling's New Wife On Mad Men back out of the show!
 
- The thing about not letting the perfect be the enemy of good (which Picard was also mea culpa-ing to the Romulans a few weeks ago about) is a little bit extratextual, I think. They know they're making a badly structured show strung together with baling wire and missing bits and pieces (was there a scene with Agnes & Romulan Ninja Guy before where they established his idiosyncratic use of the phrase "in butting" and they just didn't air it? Wait, what happened to her? Was she completely missing from the second half of the episode?) but it's the best they can manage, they're trying their hardest, come on, have some sympathy for them! What else are you gonna watch? The other Star Trek show, or the new Star Trek show, or the other new Star Trek show, or the five other Star Treks they're planning on doing too?
 
- okay, the guy saying "Locutus!?", that was funny; I'll give them that. I think I'm actually liking the show more and more the longer it goes on and the faster I run on the treadmill while watching it.
 

I don't remember the Reman Viceroy ever being mentioned in Enterprise. At least the Ron Pearlman character. If it was mentioned, it might be "a" Viceroy, as in the Reman Head of State, who is subservient to the Romulan Praetor?


BTW, I am skipping over Picard plot points, so if I misunderstood, sorry.

 

Yeah, you're right! I checked the wiki and my wires got a little crossed there. There is a character I was thinking of who is a reference to that movie (played by Brian Thompson! The Alien Bounty Hunter on The X-Files!) but, yes, it's not the Ron Perlman-in-a-monster-mask dude.


 



#107
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts

When I heard we were getting this show, I was thinking we'd get Old Picard the way we got Old Kirk in TWOK. Former hero is facing his possible obsolescence, had to go on one more adventure for personal reasons, we'd see he still had it, but it would come at a cost he never paid in his youth...

 

I did NOT want Picard to be a feeble, bumbling old man who constantly acts like he's on a Shakespeare stage. P Stew was ageless for so long, it suddenly caught up with him.



#108
Zerimar Nyliram

Zerimar Nyliram

    Dude

  • Member
  • 3,241 posts

You know, do I have bad taste for really enjoying this show? I keep hearing how people hate it, and then I'll watch reviews where they'll point out things I hadn't considered when watching it, some of which I agree with. Am I not as smart as I thought I was? God help me, for the most part I am enjoying this show when I watch it.



#109
R.CAllen

R.CAllen

    walking

  • Member
  • 4,115 posts

Makes sense to me, man. Good taste, smarts, the works!

 

After all, what could anyone possibly NOT enjoy about, say, seeing Narek do the Zhal Makh on Soji while Narissa watches but during the Zhal Makh (which, of course, consists of Yut Makh, Lu Shiar, Qlam Wath, Vri Glam, and Rok Khan) Narek takes out his tan zekhran to kill Soji with but before he does so breaks his Zhat Vash training first and tells Soji his name is actually Chaya!?



#110
D-Ray Kenobi

D-Ray Kenobi

    Member

  • Member
  • 15,347 posts

When I heard we were getting this show, I was thinking we'd get Old Picard the way we got Old Kirk in TWOK. Former hero is facing his possible obsolescence, had to go on one more adventure for personal reasons, we'd see he still had it, but it would come at a cost he never paid in his youth...

 

I did NOT want Picard to be a feeble, bumbling old man who constantly acts like he's on a Shakespeare stage. P Stew was ageless for so long, it suddenly caught up with him.

I see why some people are coming away with this, but it just hasn't hit the wrong notes for me personally.  To me, it totally make sense why Picard would be a very different character in this stage of life.

Kirk was in his late 40's or early 50's for Wrath of Khan, so that setup makes sense for that movie.  Facing Khan and his own personal demons was just a late stage mid-life crisis for him.  Picard is in his 80's at least in this, deep into retirement.  It's not like he's facing obsolescence, he's long been there already.  It's more like he's trying to get his affairs in order before he can't even get off the vineyard anymore.

Dude saved the galaxy a handful of times, helped tons of civilizations, made tons of scientific discoveries, and the Federation still managed to turn into a pretty corrupt and stagnant thing in spite of all of his hard work.  After all he's been through, it makes total sense to me why he'd lose the militant side of his personality and become more of an empathetic grandpa.



#111
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts
It's less about the character and more about Patrick Stewart. The dude is a phenomenal actor (watch Green Room!) but he seems to be playing this way off.

#112
Zathras

Zathras

    Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

I am 4 episodes in, and considering abandoning this show, and to never  watch another episode.  The last 10 years of Star Trek, to me, has been frustrating to watch.

 

I would like to hear thoughts on anyone, but specifically Tank, why is it that modern Star Trek, especially Picard,  so terrible.  I have my theories, but since I am asking a question, I do not want to influence answers in any way.  This is NOT directed at fans of Picard or Discovery, or the Kelven universe for that matter.



#113
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts

It's because there has been a change of guard to a camp that does not understand Trek.

 

After Nemesis proved to be the second Trek feature in a row to underperform and disappoint, and Enterprise failed to make it requisite 7 seasons other Trek shows had, Paramount decided to take control away from Rick Berman. He'd run Trek, overseeing all four TV shows after Roddenberry died. The films with the TOS cast had been under Harve Bennett's care in the feature division, but with Generations, Berman took control of films as well as TV.

 

Truth be told, Trek had gotten a little stale. The formula was tired. We look back now with rose-tinted glasses, but the team of multi-cultural space people sitting in a round room of blinking lights was getting old. Paramount decided that they needed to go back to basics, and stop making niche programming for nerds, because fandom wasn't keeping the numbers up.

 

They wanted Trek to be a pop culture phenom again. The best way to do that was to do a reboot and go back to the simplicity of Captain Kirk punching aliens. That was the common denominator that everyone knew. JJ Abrams was chosen to head it up, writing and directing, and we know what Abrams does.

 

He's great at tone and image, not so much at story. But the reboot Trek was FUN, which was something Trek hadn't been in awhile-- and it was a hit.

 

But from there things went sideways. Abrams would be the first to admit he was never a big Trek fan-- and he was basically doing it because he couldn't make a Star Wars movie... and we know what happened then. In his stead, Robert Kurtzman stepped up.

 

Kurtzman was brought up by Abrams on Alias and Lost. And he had some hits. He and his writing partner had a penchant for nabbing beloved geek franchises and doing big brainless reboots of them. Just Lin directed Beyond, but the script was Kurtzman reworking a concept. Simon Pegg had submitted. They followed a pattern with the movies-- ACTION! BIGGER! BADDER! and those films are a spectacle-- but after a minute they started to feel hollow.

 

Meanwhile, Viacom, who owns Paramount restructured the company, and decided they needed Trek to launch their streaming service. Abrams had moved on to Star Wars, so there was longer an overall EP to shepherd things. A ton of high profile showrunners pitched to get the new Trek show. The winner was Bryan Fuller, who had planned a true Prime-verse prequel with Discovery. But in the development phase he and CBS had differences of opinion. which lead to him bailing.

 

At this point, they were too deep into development to pull the plug. On the feature side, things were dead, because rights issues had caused things to revert solely to CBS (again, even though Paramount is part of the same company). The reboot cast were all asking for too much money to return (it could be argued Chris Pine had no interest in returning), and despite that 10 minutes where Tarrantino wanted to make a Trek movie, the movies were effectively dead.

 

So CBS turned to Kurtzman to step in and take over Discovery. About this time he was quote at saying "I love Star Trek, but it never gave me that Star WARS type of feeling." So basically, he doesn't get Trek, and never will. He made Disco work, and it was a hit. That told CBS-- THIS IS OUR GUY! And he was basically put in charge of overseeing all things Trek, which at this point is 3 shows (Disco, Picard, and Section 31).

 

So there is now one voice at the helm of it all, and it is a dude who was not a true Trek fan. Which, on one hand is good-- you don't want nothing but fan wanking... but on the other hand, he is the most successful terrible writer out there (along with fellow Lost alum Damon Lindelof). He makes an average product that requires little thought, and that means success. We may hate it, but the truth is, it's all doing well numbers wise.

 

I know some people who worked on Picard and said it was one of the most contentious, chaotic, unorganized, and back-stabby writer's rooms ever, and that drama leaked into production. They cleaned house and Kurtzman has a whole new staff for Season 2.

 

So to answer your question-- like our government, there's a fool who doesn't get it at the wheel.


  • Ryn and Zathras +1 this

#114
R.CAllen

R.CAllen

    walking

  • Member
  • 4,115 posts

- I was watching (well, technically, re-watching : I did see it sometime ago in reruns and may even have caught it on first airing as a toddler, who knows) the Season 2 TNG opener "The Child" just before putting the latest episode up. Remarkable how the shakiest rendition of a dusted-off script by a show still finding its feet managed to just completely trounce what came after it, seriously, it was way better than what came out thirty-one years later. It's even kind of the same story, no matter the overlapping characters, both episodes are about people dealing with death, the sudden and unexpected insertion of a supranormal being into a settled status quo, and the making of conscious and deliberate choice as to what one's future will be! But "The Child" managed to do it in forty-five minutes while ALSO introducing two new characters (Guinan and Doctor Pulaski) and setting up so much else for the remaining series (Geordi as Chief Engineer, Wesley's ongoing character arc) and, crucially, didn't chose to cut away from the main narrative to indulge in thematically unrelated and incoherently shot martial arts 'action'! Oh boy, the Zhat Vash and the Qowat Milat are really throwing down! How 'exciting' is that? Literally less exciting than watching some ancient pal of Gene Roddenberry glancing at a repurposed prop and woodenly reciting a few lines about radiation threatening the entire ship, that's how exciting it was.

 

- I never really bought the idea of Troi & Riker getting shacked up and settling down (they're both such grown-ups on TNG about how, sure, they might have loved each other once but now they're different people who want different things and have this really sweet friendship instead - the marriage in Nemesis is so dumb, Worf being there for that wedding is so dumb, they didn't come to HIS wedding, actually if memory serves the plan was to bring in some of the crew for that specific DS9 episode but they couldn't get everyone to agree to show up, only Frakes & Burton & Spiner, so they scrapped it but as far as I'm concerned that's pretty much who'd pop by, Picard is too stuffy for any social event not mandated by his duties, Beverly is too work focused to take time off, Deanna wouldn't want to possibly cause offense by being the glamorous ex (she'd send a sweet gift, though, and her and Jadzia would probably have got along together great), but Riker would absolutely want to go to show there are no hard feelings and because he loves to party, he probably goes to every one he gets invited to, and Data would just not have the good sense to say no and Geordi would attend because he's a needy needy man who craves any excuse for human contact) but the idea that their first go at domestic bliss after so long apart really did not work out for the best, that they suffered this tremendous loss instead that just has reshaped their lives from that point forward, well, I liked that! I think that works.

 

- Okay, so I thought Riker explained away his home's advanced self-defense features to Picard by referencing their planet's trouble with the Xindi and for once I was going to praise this show for correctly deploying its deepcut references to unloved areas of the franchise (because the last time we've seen Troi and Riker was the ENT finale, and that was awful in all kinds of ways this particular episode just was not, so it serves as an acknowledgment of the damage repaired from that particular misstep) but a brief turn around the wiki shows he was talking about the Kzinti instead. It was just more of the same!

 

Predictions :

- I think it's obvious at this point we're going to see Brent Spiner again as a human version of Data and/or the resurrection of B-4. I mean, we might not see it this season but that's where the show is going.

- Still holding out hope for Michael Dorn! Even kind of want to see LeVar Burton in command of the Endeavour, just like in that one dumb episode of VOY!

- Human heart for Picard question mark


  • Zathras +1 this

#115
Zerimar Nyliram

Zerimar Nyliram

    Dude

  • Member
  • 3,241 posts

I thought the last episode was the best so far. I enjoyed the parts with Will and Deanna best, and I love how they are dealing with the death of one of their children. It really hits home for me personally when my family had to deal with my brother's death.



#116
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts
This was probably the best episode since the first.
  • Zerimar Nyliram +1 this

#117
Zathras

Zathras

    Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

It's because there has been a change of guard to a camp that does not understand Trek.

 

After Nemesis proved to be the second Trek feature in a row to underperform and disappoint, and Enterprise failed to make it requisite 7 seasons other Trek shows had, Paramount decided to take control away from Rick Berman. He'd run Trek, overseeing all four TV shows after Roddenberry died. The films with the TOS cast had been under Harve Bennett's care in the feature division, but with Generations, Berman took control of films as well as TV.

 

Truth be told, Trek had gotten a little stale. The formula was tired. We look back now with rose-tinted glasses, but the team of multi-cultural space people sitting in a round room of blinking lights was getting old. Paramount decided that they needed to go back to basics, and stop making niche programming for nerds, because fandom wasn't keeping the numbers up.

 

They wanted Trek to be a pop culture phenom again. The best way to do that was to do a reboot and go back to the simplicity of Captain Kirk punching aliens. That was the common denominator that everyone knew. JJ Abrams was chosen to head it up, writing and directing, and we know what Abrams does.

 

He's great at tone and image, not so much at story. But the reboot Trek was FUN, which was something Trek hadn't been in awhile-- and it was a hit.

 

But from there things went sideways. Abrams would be the first to admit he was never a big Trek fan-- and he was basically doing it because he couldn't make a Star Wars movie... and we know what happened then. In his stead, Robert Kurtzman stepped up.

 

Kurtzman was brought up by Abrams on Alias and Lost. And he had some hits. He and his writing partner had a penchant for nabbing beloved geek franchises and doing big brainless reboots of them. Just Lin directed Beyond, but the script was Kurtzman reworking a concept. Simon Pegg had submitted. They followed a pattern with the movies-- ACTION! BIGGER! BADDER! and those films are a spectacle-- but after a minute they started to feel hollow.

 

Meanwhile, Viacom, who owns Paramount restructured the company, and decided they needed Trek to launch their streaming service. Abrams had moved on to Star Wars, so there was longer an overall EP to shepherd things. A ton of high profile showrunners pitched to get the new Trek show. The winner was Bryan Fuller, who had planned a true Prime-verse prequel with Discovery. But in the development phase he and CBS had differences of opinion. which lead to him bailing.

 

At this point, they were too deep into development to pull the plug. On the feature side, things were dead, because rights issues had caused things to revert solely to CBS (again, even though Paramount is part of the same company). The reboot cast were all asking for too much money to return (it could be argued Chris Pine had no interest in returning), and despite that 10 minutes where Tarrantino wanted to make a Trek movie, the movies were effectively dead.

 

So CBS turned to Kurtzman to step in and take over Discovery. About this time he was quote at saying "I love Star Trek, but it never gave me that Star WARS type of feeling." So basically, he doesn't get Trek, and never will. He made Disco work, and it was a hit. That told CBS-- THIS IS OUR GUY! And he was basically put in charge of overseeing all things Trek, which at this point is 3 shows (Disco, Picard, and Section 31).

 

So there is now one voice at the helm of it all, and it is a dude who was not a true Trek fan. Which, on one hand is good-- you don't want nothing but fan wanking... but on the other hand, he is the most successful terrible writer out there (along with fellow Lost alum Damon Lindelof). He makes an average product that requires little thought, and that means success. We may hate it, but the truth is, it's all doing well numbers wise.

 

I know some people who worked on Picard and said it was one of the most contentious, chaotic, unorganized, and back-stabby writer's rooms ever, and that drama leaked into production. They cleaned house and Kurtzman has a whole new staff for Season 2.

 

So to answer your question-- like our government, there's a fool who doesn't get it at the wheel.

This is very much in line with what I believe, though I didn't have the detailed behind the scenes info as you obviously do.  Thank you for the back story on that.

 

Star Trek Picard offers nothing really new, and much of the stuff we see in that show, has been portrayed much better in either previous versions of Star Trek, or other shows like BSG, The Expanse, Stargate SG-1,yadda yadda.  Not that they are obligated in any way to use the backstory, and not that I play it myself, but Star Trek Online offers a far better story for the Post-Nemesis Star Trek era.  Like Star Trek Discovery, I consider Star Trek Picard an alternate timeline.  It just seems so dumbed down, or perhaps it's just very poor writing. 

 

Some complaints I have are:

  • Picard should have either had the bendii syndrome to explain why he was on the vineyard, or he should have been an ambassador or archeologist post starfleet.  This even contradicts Kurtzman's own Countdown comic!!
  • Why the eff does everyone disrespect Picard at every turn?  Then again he seems to pick fights :rolleyes:
  • This show is so murdery.  Where are the stun settings?
  • You can't tell me that Elnor is NOT a straight up rip off of Hugo Weaving's Elrond
  • Too graphic: I have no problem with profanity or explicit sex scenes that advance the plot, if done intelligently. In Picard, it seems so ham-fisted and forced, just for the sake of being edgy and cool.
  • The synth story line: just basically 1 part Blade Runner/2 parts BSG, and done much more poorly
  • Why the hell is 7 of 9 a space ranger?  The very concept of rangers in space is a straight up rip off of Babylon 5 if you ask me. 
  • Consistency: I don't know how many times so far I have watched a scene that gets contradicted later on, or said scene contradicts what has already been established as canon: EG if "X" is true, then why is Picard, Sochi, etc doing "THAT" now...makes no sense.
  • there is just no more nuanced allegorical story telling. It is all just right up in your face and blatant.  Everything is a thinly veiled criticism of modern politics.  This show won't hold up over time and won't age well. The worst I think was Raffi (a drug addict, in of itself ridiculous in the 24th century) berating Picard and calling him a 1%er because she chose to live in a cardboard box in the middle of the desert, and he has a vineyard and lives like a king with Romulan servants.
  • Where are the federation ships???!!  One thing I always looked forward to in every new Star Trek show or movie was what the next Federation ship design would look like.  Even Discovery, as terrible as it is, has at least interesting ship designs, if not cool ones.
  • Where are the Klingons?  Surely they would be salivating to fill the power vacuum  left after the Romulan Star Empire's demise?  Is it because the Discovery Producers painted themselves in a corner by changing the Klingons' look in Discovery and don't know how to introduce them into Star Trek Picard?  Worf's omission so far is pretty glaring.
  • And why is the Romulan Star Empire toppled anyway?  Sure Romulus was their capital, but surely there are many Romulan colonies to be chosen from to become the new Romulan Empire's capital.  If Washington DC was nuked, it doesn't mean the entire US just goes away over night, and 310 million people all of a sudden become refugees.
  • Did I miss something? In Star Trek 2009, Romulus is destroyed all of a sudden, and Spock barely had enough time to create red matter to attempt to save Romulus.  But in STP, it seems like Romulus had a pretty long time to prepare to evacuate. Why did the Romulans even need the Federation's help, anyway?  They are at least equal to the Federation technologically, if not more advanced.
  • All scenes that don't have Picard in them bore the eff out of me.
  • Biggest complaint: the FX look decent, but if this is the MOST EXPENSIVE Star Trek, and among the most expensive TV shows, ever, where the eff is all the money going?  In the pockets of Kurtzman and P-stew?  This is why I think Abrams and Kurtzman are the worst....they sell studios on all kinds of flash bang FX, but neither are even average-level writers or producers, IMHO.  I'm not a writer myself,  but I know bad writing when I see it. They are snake oil salesmen for sure, and they must be laughing all the way to the bank. 

This is why I have lost interest in modern sci fi/fantasy or other "genre" films.  I've been losing interest for a few years now, but I am now finally admitting I don't like modern Star Trek, or Star Wars for that matter.  It's sad that in an age that is more about spectacle than good writing, that genre entertainment is not made to be re-watched and cherished anymore, and instead is disposable.   It's like movies today are factory-produced rather than produced by artisans.



#118
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts

I actually have a lot of the same questions. Especially when it comes to feeling like the Federation and Starfleet are an entity bigger than just the show. It really started with Wrath of Khan, the idea of Starfleet as the military/science/exploration service of the Federation, and that our crew was a part of a big machine.

 

You could always look at the Enterprise, or Defiant for that matter, or Voyager, as part of a bigger fleet, even if they somehow always managed t be on the forefront of the most important events.

 

The post Nemesis Trek offerings don't have that feel. Sure we see admirals, and other fleets, but none of it feels real. There's no consistency in the structure or chain of command or anything. And when other Starfleet ships do show up they seem cut and paste, their design just random and "cool" with no though to the technology and aesthetic. There used to be a consistency in Starfleet designs that made sense.

 

I also don't like the smoking, swearing, and graphic violence-- it's just not Trek. And for a society that apparently doesn't use money, Rafi living in squalor seems awfully dumb... especially when a s somebody who lives about 30 minutes from Vasquez Rocks, that is some prime real estate.

 

Klingons-- I can only assume they don't want to confuse things given the overhaul they got on Discovery. You can't have Worf show up looking like a Disco Klingon... though they did explain the differences in Romulan make up over the years in Picard by implying that forehead differences are like skin colors on Earth. 

 

ANYWAY-- you mentioned BSG. In a lot of ways,. it was BSG that sort of broke Trek. Ronald Moore has said all the  the things they wouldn't let him do on DS9 he went crazy with on BSG. And you know, there, the swearing and graphic stuff worked. It was a different universe. It made space opera a lot different and when Trek was boring, it was fresh and fun.

 

But now we've had fifteen years of shows being influenced by BSG the same way that Star Wars influenced all scifi in the 80s, and TNG left its mark on other scifi stuff in the 90s. Expanse, Altered Carbon, Nightfliers, Los In Space-- all of them owe a lot to BSG... even Discovery.

 

Now that BSG's influence is getting thin, it's no wonder we craze something more old school... too bad they can only get it partially right.


  • Zathras +1 this

#119
Zathras

Zathras

    Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

 

I actually have a lot of the same questions. Especially when it comes to feeling like the Federation and Starfleet are an entity bigger than just the show. It really started with Wrath of Khan, the idea of Starfleet as the military/science/exploration service of the Federation, and that our crew was a part of a big machine.

I have a very minor disagreement there.  I feel that the Federation and Starfleet were always a bigger entity, going back to TOS.  That was made clear by episodes like Balance of Terror, the Corbomite Maneuver, Journey to Babel, Errand of Mercy, Trouble with Tribbles, The Enterprise Incident, among others, where the federation encountered or were at odds with other major powers, or on a diplomatic mission.  As for ships, episodes like Doomsday Machine, Omega Glory, The Ultimate Computer, and Tholian Web come to mind, that show other Federation star ships (albeit repurposed Enterprise models), that demonstrate a consistency in at least one class (Constitution class) of ships.  Kirk, and by extension, Starfleet, to me always seemed para-military.  The very names of the star ships themselves were named after famous historical (mostly military) vessels, and Starfleet always seemed subservient to the Federation (UFP). Starfleet, I think can be considered a combination of Lewis and Clark's Corps of Discovery (which was part of the Army), a Navy, and a UN peacekeeping force.



#120
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts

No-- it was definitely there in the TOS era, don't get me wrong. But that more militaristic edge that came into TWOK really changed the tone of things, and more or less made the standard for the rest of the films. When TNG debuted, it was Roddenberry, who hadn't been part of the films in awhile, and if you watch that first season of TNG, it's almost like a sequel to TOS and not the films-- but as it went on, and certainly after Berman took over, that more military vibe set in.

 

Also, in reference to the fleet itself, in TOS all they did was re-use the Enterprise model for other Starfleet vessels. In the movies, the Reliant, Excelsior, and Grissom were introduced. They were original designs, but you couldn't deny they had the same aesthetic and belonged to Starfleet.



#121
Zathras

Zathras

    Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

No-- it was definitely there in the TOS era, don't get me wrong. But that more militaristic edge that came into TWOK really changed the tone of things, and more or less made the standard for the rest of the films. When TNG debuted, it was Roddenberry, who hadn't been part of the films in awhile, and if you watch that first season of TNG, it's almost like a sequel to TOS and not the films-- but as it went on, and certainly after Berman took over, that more military vibe set in.

 

Also, in reference to the fleet itself, in TOS all they did was re-use the Enterprise model for other Starfleet vessels. In the movies, the Reliant, Excelsior, and Grissom were introduced. They were original designs, but you couldn't deny they had the same aesthetic and belonged to Starfleet.

Interesting take, and definitely valid, and I see your point.  In TWOK, David makes an overt reference to the military, when he thinks Kirk (due to a brainwashed Chekov) is on the way to take Genesis.  But I don't think the overall military tone changed that much post TWOK, compared to TOS.  I think it just feels that way because the movies (TWOK on) had clear antagonists, and they weren't focused on exploration, but rather conflict.  That, and the monster maroon uniforms.  I just don't think there was as drastic change in military feel between TOS and the TOS movies, as there was with TNG and the TNG films (or late seasons of TNG, for that matter).

 

As for the ships, agreed.  TOS just re-used the Enterprise because of budgetary concerns, and I don't even know that back in the 1960s they thought about such things, anyway  The reason we got the Reliant as depicted is because they wanted to differentiate the Enterprise from the Reliant. I remember reading somewhere, at one point, they wanted to use a Constitution class design for the Reliant, but the producers felt it would be too confusing to the viewer.  Every Federation ship follows pretty much the same general design, with a few exceptions (Constellation class, Defiant class, Prometheus class), in which you always have a saucer, and 2 nacelles, and usually a secondary hull.  But you are right, the movies started the ball rolling of different federation ship designs, but they all seemed part of the same fleet. 

 

As for the early seasons of TNG, it feels more like TOS because as we all know at this point, it was just a re-tooling of Star Trek Phase II.  Even the characters were just renamed: Picard was totally an analogue for an older, more seasoned Kirk, while Riker was a reworked Decker,  intended to be the young Kirk of the show, Troi was a reworked Illiya, Data was a re-imagined Xon, and so on. So I definitely agree early TNG was more of a direct sequel to TOS, than a continuation of the TOS movie era.  

 

Interestingly, and not to drift off topic too far, Aliens, which was still relatively new at the time also influenced TNG. Yar was inspired partially by Private Vasquez in Aliens. In fact, Sirtis was originally slated to be Yar, but named Macha Hernandez or something similar, if I remember right, and Crosby was supposed to be Troi (I think they made the right move changing those 2 around).  Data was made into an android, based on the  influence of Bishop from ALIENS.  When I saw Alien Covenant, it was almost like things came full circle, because David seems like Lore, and Walter seems like Data, except he loses.


  • Tank +1 this

#122
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,130 posts

Aliens was a great military sci-fi influence. There was nothing really like it before. The idea of a space sun that still shot bullets was cool. 


  • Zathras +1 this

#123
Zathras

Zathras

    Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

I missed these from a couple posts back

 

 

Klingons-- I can only assume they don't want to confuse things given the overhaul they got on Discovery. You can't have Worf show up looking like a Disco Klingon... though they did explain the differences in Romulan make up over the years in Picard by implying that forehead differences are like skin colors on Earth.

I missed that part,  but I had always assumed there were different ethnicities in Romulan culture.  And why not?  As they traveled from Vulcan, the ancestors of the Romulans could have intermarried with other races, or even some Vulcans could have just had ridges, too.  Who Watches the Watchers had Vulcanoids that looked more like TNG Romulans.

 

As for Klingons, I suppose there is room for an explanation like that too.  I wish Discovery had just used the STID version of Klingons, which look close enough to the TNG era to me (other than their uniforms and being bald).

 

 

 

 

ANYWAY-- you mentioned BSG. In a lot of ways,. it was BSG that sort of broke Trek. Ronald Moore has said all the  the things they wouldn't let him do on DS9 he went crazy with on BSG. And you know, there, the swearing and graphic stuff worked. It was a different universe. It made space opera a lot different and when Trek was boring, it was fresh and fun.

 

But now we've had fifteen years of shows being influenced by BSG the same way that Star Wars influenced all scifi in the 80s, and TNG left its mark on other scifi stuff in the 90s. Expanse, Altered Carbon, Nightfliers, Los In Space-- all of them owe a lot to BSG... even Discovery.

 

Now that BSG's influence is getting thin, it's no wonder we craze something more old school... too bad they can only get it partially right.

 

Which is so damn frustrating.  If they wanted to modernize Trek, especially Picard, and give it a BSG feel, they should have just hired Ronald D Moore!  I would have loved to see where he would have taken modern trek.



#124
Zathras

Zathras

    Member

  • Members
  • 147 posts

Aliens was a great military sci-fi influence. There was nothing really like it before. The idea of a space sun that still shot bullets was cool. 

I always thought so, too.  I wonder if that influenced Moore's BSG.  I always liked how the Vipers used guns, rather than lasers, and the ground troops were more like a near future military. 



#125
D-Ray Kenobi

D-Ray Kenobi

    Member

  • Member
  • 15,347 posts

As someone who enjoys Trek, but isn't a Trekkie, I've liked the direction they've gone in.  I think Discovery and Picard have kept the basic ethos and the things that make it Trek, but have modernized it enough to make it appealing.  If you want old school Trek, there's literally hundreds of episodes of the old shows to go get that fix from.

I live in a geeky town which may skew perception, but I know a ton of people who have been loving the new shows who hadn't really cared that much for Trek in the first place.


  • Zathras +1 this



Reply to this topic