The tale of the 2 Picards

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by los2188, Nov 1, 2012.

  1. los2188

    los2188 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    North Carolina
    My question for this thread has to do with the "tale of the 2 captain Picards." You have TV captain Picard that we all know and love on The Next Generation TV series, and then there's the movie captain Picard that some seem to love or dislike. I've read and watched (Red Letter Media's Star Trek movie reviews) a lot of criticism about how different Picard is in the TNG movies. My question is this....doesn't Picard need to be bigger than life in those movies. It seems to me, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that TV Picard just wouldn't draw the same appeal as action Picard. Am I wrong? I mean I could point out that Insurrection is an example of TV Picard not working out on the big screen despite the inconsistency of Picard in Insurrection vs Picard in TNG TV episode of Journey's End. Also, we had an action packed movie Picard in Nemesis that obviously did very little ratings wise for that movie. But all in all, didn't we need Picard to somewhat action packed and as I stated earlier, larger than life in the TNG movies? I do agree that the movies didn't need to necessarily be centered and focused on him seemingly at all times. What do you think?
     
  2. Nerys Myk

    Nerys Myk Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Location:
    Down in the tube station at midnight
    You're probably right. the central character of a big screen sf action flick has to be different than the lead in a TV series. Kirk underwent a similar transformation when he hit the big screen ( TMP excluded)
     
  3. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    I never saw a difference between TV Picard and film Picard. Starship Mine comes to mind immediately. It's Die Hard On A Spaceship With Low Budget.
     
  4. bluepicard27

    bluepicard27 Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    maybe it shows evolution of the character;by the time of the movies he has become less patient and tired of everyone giving him a huge ballache
     
  5. jayrath

    jayrath Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2001
    Location:
    West Hollywood, Calif., USA
    No, it was a mishandling of TNG's fundamental dynamics. Movie Picard out-Kirked Kirk, and it got worse with each movie installment. It came at the expense of the ensemble cast (except Data).

    Thank God Kirk didn't shout and maniacally laugh in a dune buggy. That alone would have killed Trek before TNG even had a shot at the movies.

    But Stewart had script approval -- and power, and odd ideas.
     
  6. SchwEnt

    SchwEnt Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Sure there were exceptions in certain eps and certain situations.

    But TV Picard really wasn't a fisticuffs action hero. And by extension, TNG series wasn't primarily an action adventure series, it was more a science fiction drama.

    I suspect TV Picard and TV TNG really weren't cut out for motion pictures--at least, not what Hollywood considers a "big screen sci-fi" movie.

    Yet they kept trying to fit TNG and Picard in particular into sci-fi action flicks. That doesn't really ring true. And then going back to that again and again for each film only makes it worse.
     
  7. los2188

    los2188 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Okay, with that said, would you agree that Insurrection had more of a TV Picard which didn't really work, but of course we had movie Picard in First Contact that did work and even to a lesser extent in Generations? I mean do you think there was a way to keep TNG as it was on TV, but to the big screen with a few added bells and whistles? When I ask that, I also mean couldn't the story of the movie alone be enough to carry the movie into a successful one? I think, however, it's safe to say that the stories in Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis weren't, in my humble opinion, very good. Do you not agree?
     
  8. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    But there are enough episodes where he is.


    Do you want a film to be only the average of the entire show?
     
  9. Trek Survivor

    Trek Survivor Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    Why are people so fixated on that scene as if it ruined the entire movie? Picard was just having a bit of fun. He'd lightened up a fair bit over the seven years of the series. Good Lord, he's allowed to crack a chuckle or two or must he always be the deadly serious, stuffy captain?
     
  10. SchwEnt

    SchwEnt Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    TNG movies may have had good core ideas but always needed to include Big Space Battles and an Evil Villain and a Doomsday Weapon and Picard grappling hand-to-hand with the bad guy every time.

    How often did we see Picard like that in the series?
    How is that true to the series?

    Think about some of the best and most popular TNG eps. Okay sure, BOBW with battlin' Borg and 'splosions.

    But I think of "The Drumhead" "The Offspring" "The Inner Light" "The Big Goodbye" "The Measure of a Man" "The First Duty" other highly regarded eps.

    If those are exemplary of TNG at its best, imagine those stories in big screens versions, with more bells and whistles as you suggest.

    Imagine a great story like "The Measure of a Man" used for a TNG movie. Maybe fans like us would love it.

    But I can't see Hollywood suits going for it, and then trying to market it as a big screen sci-fi flick that has no space battles or evil bad guy. The sci-fi flick that's really a courtroom drama! The general public would maybe be expecting a space adventure and instead get disappointed when Picard gives a speech at the climax rather than using his fists to pummel Maddox. Imagine if Picard was able to defeat Soran or Ruffalo or Shazam with a particularly eloquent speech at the end rather than violence? (Of course, the upcoming Blu-Ray cinema airing of this eps got me here).

    You see where I'm going with this. I think the best and most highly regarded TNG TV stuff didn't involve diabolical evil villains and big space battles and kewl explosions. Yet every movie had to shoehorn TNG into that mold and it never seemed to fit all that well.
     
  11. AggieJohn

    AggieJohn Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2010
    Location:
    Lake Jackson Tx
    I have to agree with the view that Picard changed as a character. Some of that was bad writing but The death of his nephew and his PTSD as a result of the Borg impact his personality. That was one thing I really liked about FC, it did continue to explore what the Borg did to him. I was really moved when they explored it in the TNG. The pain, guilt, shame, and down right trauma of the experience effected him and the Movies in a lot of ways better represented that, the show, out side a episode or two just wash over that kind of trauma. And lets not forget what the Cardasians did to him with the four lights.
     
  12. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
    this is an often-heard criticism but in my view, it's a false one. There's no "character shift." In Generations Picard first tries persuading Soran verbally to find another way. In NEM, he tries to persuade Shinzon that he can try to be better than he is and to give up his plan. In both cases, he only turns to violence after talking fails.

    In FC, it's the Borg. Who are trying to take over his ship. Of course he's going to be action guy.



    I'll leave INS alone for this thread, because Picard's the villain in that movie.
     
  13. Joker

    Joker Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2005
    Location:
    The North
    :lol:

    Oh... so that's what it was.
     
  14. los2188

    los2188 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I have to admit, I never sat and really thought hard about his attempts to verbally settle thing and trying to get the villains to "see the light" so to speak. Good points. Actually, when I think about it, Picard did attempt to save his own crew by "taking his place willingly" at the Borg queen's side in order to let Data go, but it was more of an action Picard. Actually, I didn't mind action Picard. I really didn't and I still have a hard time understanding why others seem to have an issue with it. Maybe there's something I'm missing....
     
  15. The Grim Ghost

    The Grim Ghost Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Location:
    Thee Olde Spook Shack
    What's odd about it is that they had two characters who make sense as action star types already in the cast, with Riker & Worf. And they both did see some action. It just doesn't make as much sense using Picard for this sort of thing, with those other guys around.

    But obviously Stewart was the star and arguably the biggest draw, and had more clout to make Picard into a fun character for him to play, doing action-y stuff.
     
  16. CoveTom

    CoveTom Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2003
    Location:
    CoveTom
    IMHO, it's okay for Picard to be the badass action hero. We've seen him do that in TNG on occasion when the situation called for it. The oft-cited "Starship Mine" comes to mind. The problem for me is that's not the core of who Picard was. It was an exception. It was enough of an exception that we cheered loudly when we saw that side of his personality.

    The problem is that the movies played that note over and over again. Yes, it made total sense in FC fighting the Borg that there would be a very personal, emotional connection; that Picard would go "action hero"; and that Picard wouldn't use the same good judgment at times as he normally would. But to play that same note for four films got old fast, and made it seem as if the writers had forgotten about any other aspect of his character.

    Star Trek had a six-film history of being able to do a variety of stories on the big screen. There was "high concept" sci-fi, there was action/adventure, there was comedy, there was intimate drama. But for some reason, when TNG leaped to the big screen, suddenly every movie had to be a big action movie.
     
  17. slappy

    slappy Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 10, 2001
    The TNG movies would've worked better had the truly emphasized the ensemble rather than just Picard and Data. That was the strength TNG had over TOS. TOS had the big three with everyone else chipping in, but TNG was a true team effort. They should've had the action rotate between Picard, Data, Work and Riker.
     
  18. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    I never get why people compare that episode with Die Hard. Picard wasn't kicking ass and taking names in that episode. He was resorting to tricks and misdirection to outmaneuver his opponents. It was more like Home Alone in space. That chick beat his butt quite handily actually.
     
  19. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Any "one man against terrorists in a confined space" scenario is the Die Hard scenario. Maybe it was something different before, but ever since Die Hard, it's the Die Hard scenario.
     
  20. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    That's the first time I heard that "definition." Is that just your opinion or some collective consensus?