I'm not crying, your crying.

[Alan Roi]

I am also a TOS born fan, but the desperate need to elevate Picard through the trashing of Disco doesn't hold any water except if nostalgia and nothing but is what makes one a fan. Come back to me when Picard actually does anything to challenge the franchise moving forwards, because as of now, people are reacting the same way they did with The Orville vs Discovery, and that doesn't impress me much. Didn't magically make The Orville a better show, and doesn't make Picard a better one either, especially when we see the shows do the same thing, which is praised on one show and vilified on the other.

 

[Reyman]

Apart from using some Bermen era cast, Picard is playing very little on nostalgia. If anything season 2 Discovery plays far more on nostalgia.

I'm only comparing how the 2 shows have tried to tell their stories and so far Picard has done a far better job of it. Would love nothing more than season 3 of Discovery stepping up and matching it. The more Trek I can repeat watch and enjoy the better!

 

[fireproof78]

I am also a TOS born fan, but the desperate need to elevate Picard through the trashing of Disco doesn't hold any water except if nostalgia and nothing but is what makes one a fan. Come back to me when Picard actually does anything to challenge the franchise moving forwards, because as of now, people are reacting the same way they did with The Orville vs Discovery, and that doesn't impress me much. Didn't magically make The Orville a better show, and doesn't make Picard a better one either, especially when we see the shows do the same thing, which is praised on one show and vilified on the other.

It is tiresome. I get it that people are excited to have Picard, to have Trek that appeals to them. But, the comparison game is unnecessary and comes across as mean spirited

If Picard is that good it should stand on it's own. I think it should be allowed too.

 

[Alan Roi]

Cool.
Another thread that’s about one thing, but quickly turns into a Discovery hating thread

Apart from using some Bermen era cast, Picard is playing very little on nostalgia. If anything season 2 Discovery plays far more on nostalgia.

I'm only comparing how the 2 shows have tried to tell their stories and so far Picard has done a far better job of it. Would love nothing more than season 3 of Discovery stepping up and matching it. The more Trek I can repeat watch and enjoy the better!

Deconstruction isn't nostalgia. Picard has plenty of nostalgia on board and doesn't deconstruct it at all. It's there to make people yearn for the good old days. That's not what Disco has done, with the exception of having a father knows best kind of Captain in season 2 with Pike, but its not like they didn't challenge his legacy as well, as they also did with Spock and others. Few nostalgists have been pleased with Disco.

 

[Reyman]

Deconstruction isn't nostalgia. Picard has plenty of nostalgia on board and doesn't deconstruct it at all. It's there to make people yearn for the good old days. That's not what Disco has done, with the exception of having a father knows best kind of Captain in season 2 with Pike, but its not like they didn't challenge his legacy as well, as they also did with Spock and others. Few nostalgists have been pleased with Disco.

As far as for challenging legacies is concerned, based on the second episode it looked like they were laying the foundations to do just that with Picard. We can be pretty certain how that will turn out, but I guess it's about the journey.

Also other than some of the cast, very little about Picard has made me think this was a return to good old days. If anything it feels more like a Discovery episode than a TNG one.

As someone mentioned Discovery s2 and Picard are both AI based storylines. You could swap the Data storyline with the Control/sphere story and it would work the same in Picard. The issue with Discovery for me is that the storyline was poorly set up and hopped about all over the place far too much for my liking. 2 episodes into Picard and it's already done more to get me on board with the story. It took me maybe half a dozen episodes to feel the same way with Discovery.

 

[Terok Nor]

Discovery is the only other Trek on TV right now. Of course we're going to compare them. TNG was compared to DS9 and DS9 to Voyager. The difference is Discovery is a dumpster fire whereas the other shows at their worst still had characters you could invest in. Discovery is just Michael Boreham and the little people. It has no substance but thinks it's so profound. They literally did everything they could to piss hardcore fans off and then had to dial it back and send the whole show a thousand years into the future when they started kicking back. Yes, we all know the angry nerd fanboys are annoying and whiney but it doesn't mean they aren't right about Discovery. It doesn't mean it doesn't have its fans (Picard and upcoming spin offs have it to thank for their existence) but it's easily the worst show in the franchise. The writing is not up to scratch and Sonequa Martin Green, who the whole series is based around, is an appalling actress. It deserves to be torn down when compared to all the other Treks apart from perhaps Enterprise which wasn't great either but at least had some compelling characters.

I speak only for myself. If you love Discovery I'm glad but it doesn't hold a candle to Picard for me.

 

[Alan Roi]

I enjoyed Discovery and was just happy for new Trek, but the last 2 episodes of Picard make Discovery look like trash.

I'll still check out season 3. Considering the behind the scenes drama of the first 2 seasons I'm hopeful it will find is feet now.

If only DISCO had a mysterious vulnerable girl get killed off from the getgo, if only there were more CSI-like scenes and if Admirals used fuck in their discussions with main characters maybe certain fans would have found DISCO to have been written more elegantly.

 

[fireproof78]

Why compare? Seriously, why? Enjoy one, both or the other. It comes across ad pretty, in a "my dad can beat up your dad" school yard argument kind of way.

 

[Terok Nor]

Why compare? Seriously, why? Enjoy one, both or the other. It comes across ad pretty, in a "my dad can beat up your dad" school yard argument kind of way.

It's a discussion forum. Everyone is free to discuss anything they want within the rules including their likes and dislikes.

 

[Lord Garth]

Calling Star Trek: Discovery nostalgic -- with one exception that I'll get to -- is like calling Batman (1989) nostalgic or the Dark Knight Trilogy nostalgic. They're not. They took ideas from before and updated them for a modern audience. Except for "If Memory Serves", DSC doesn't look or feel like '60s Star Trek at all. Nor was it intended to.

The Klingons in DSC don't look or feel like Klingons from before. The only thing "TOS" about them is that they were the enemy in the first season. That's it. Nothing else about them is like the Klingons from the '60s, '80s, or '90s. They were updated. In "Lethe", they were the scariest they'd been since TMP. In "The Vulcan Hello" and "Battle at the Binary Stars", the concept of peace with them at all felt totally, completely, and utterly foreign. Nothing like the Klingons from TNG/DS9/VOY. And they don't look like anything from TOS. That's not nostalgia. That's the opposite of nostalgia.

The Mirror Universe doesn't look or feel like the TOS, DS9, or ENT versions. It feels like a super amped-up version of the one we saw on DS9 with the critical difference being that the Terran Empire still existed and was in its prime. They went further with the Mirror Universe on DSC than they ever would've on those other series. Again, that's the opposite of nostalgia. The only similarity is that it could get campy, but it was a dark campy. Which makes it closer to the DS9 Mirror Universe than the TOS one.

Sarek's relationship with Burnham is completely different from his relationship with Spock. So even though we see Sarek, we see him in a different context. Not the same one. We see more of Amanda than we ever got to see in TOS and she felt more fleshed out.

Harry Mudd is arguably nostalgic. I can see that. But he's also portrayed as being more deadly. The Harry Mudd in DSC is like the Joker in the 1989 Batman while the Harry Mudd in TOS is more like the Joker in the Adam West Batman. Before someone takes that last bit out of context, hear me out: He's a horrible person but he seems harmless. Seems. Either way, the Joker was updated. And so was Harry Mudd.

When the Enterprise appears, that feels nostalgic. But only arguably so. They updated the look of it. It's not the '60s Enterprise. If it were truly nostalgic, every old-schooler would love it. That's not the case here. They didn't like the changes. In nostalgia, you're longing for things that haven't changed. The Enterprise did change. So I argue it's not as nostalgic as some would say.

Pike. He was only in two episodes of TOS. One as an invalid and one where he actually had vitality. All well and good. But Anson Mount didn't play Pike strictly like Jeff Hunter. He combined Jeff Hunter's version, Bruce Greenwood's version, threw in a little bit of Shatner's Kirk while he was at it, and then added in a lot of his own take. He made the role his own.

Spock. Ethan Peck's Spock is sufficiently different from Leonard Nimoy's that I didn't feel like we were getting more of the same.

Number One. Rebecca Romijin's take on the character was different from Majel Barrett's, even though they both effectively convey a hyper-efficient First Officer who does her homework, stays on top of things, and can give Spock a run for his money.

Anson Mount, Ethan Peck, and Rebecca Romijin didn't feel like they were just regurgitating Jeff Hunter, Leonard Nimoy, and Majel Barrett whereas something truly nostalgic would've. This wasn't nostalgia. It was an update.

Then there's Talos IV. That's the exception I was getting to. Even though the production values were updated, they still tried to make it feel like TOS as much as they could. It's like the Disco Enterprise, which also tried evoke TOS while still trying to adhere to the same aesthetic as DSC. But it seems as if Talos IV went over better with the more resistant. Even people who don't like DSC felt nostalgic when they watched "If Memory Serves". It's the episode that actually struck that chord.

.
.
.

Picard, on the other hand, has Jean-Luc Picard played by Patrick Stewart. Having the same actor play the same character is closer to being nostalgic than having different actors play the same characters in updated form. Except they also put Picard in a different place. We're not seeing Picard as he was when TNG was on in the '80s and '90s. Nostalgia would be ignoring the passage of time. PIC is tackling it head on.

So DSC updated TOS concepts for the 21st Century while PIC took TNG and has advanced it by 20 years. Either way, DSC and PIC didn't stick to keeping things exactly as they were in TOS and TNG.

 

[Reyman]

If only DISCO had a mysterious vulnerable girl get killed off from the getgo, if only there were more CSI-like scenes and if Admirals used fuck in their discussions with main characters maybe certain fans would have found DISCO to have been written more elegantly.

Why go and quote that post? I mentioned nothing about the quality of the writing on either show in that post, just that Discovery had issues behind the scenes which probably hurt it the end product.

 

[Alan Roi]

Why go and quote that post? I mentioned nothing about the quality of the writing on either show in that post, just that Discovery had issues behind the scenes which probably hurt it the end product.

Do you not think that Picard is written more elegently than Discovery? I mean, you called Discovery trash.

 

[Reyman]

Calling Star Trek: Discovery nostalgic -- with one exception that I'll get to -- is calling Batman (1989) nostalgic or the Dark Knight Trilogy nostalgic. They're not. They took ideas from before and updated them for a modern audience. Except for "If Memory Serves", DSC doesn't look or feel like '60s Star Trek at all. Nor was it intended to.

The Klingons in DSC don't look or feel like Klingons from before. The only thing "TOS" about them is that they were enemy in the first season. That's it. Nothing else about them is like the Klingons from the '60s, '80s, or '90s. They were updated. In "Lethe", they were the scariest they'd been since TMP. In "The Vulcan Hello" and "Battle at the Binary Stars", the concept of peace with them at all felt totally, completely, and utterly foreign. Nothing like the Klingons from TNG/DS9/VOY. And they don't look like anything from TOS. That's not nostalgia. That's the opposite of nostalgia.

The Mirror Universe doesn't look or feel like the TOS, DS9, or ENT versions. It feels like a super amped-up version of the one we saw on DS9 except the Terran Empire was in its prime. They went further with the Mirror Universe on DSC than they ever would've on those other series. Again, that's the opposite of nostalgia. The only similarity is that it could get campy, but it was a dark campy. Which makes it feel more like the DS9 Mirror Universe than the TOS one.

Sarek's relationship with Burnham is completely different from his relationship with Spock. So even though we see Sarek, we see him in a different context. Not the same one. We see more of Amanda than we ever got to see in TOS and she felt more fleshed out.

Harry Mudd is arguably nostalgic. I can see that. But he's also portrayed as being more deadly. The Harry Mudd on DSC is like the Joker in the 1989 Batman while the Harry Mudd in TOS is more like the Joker in the Adam West Batman. Before someone takes that last bit out of context, hear me out: He's a horrible person but he seems harmless. Seems. Either way, the Joker was updated. And so was Harry Mudd.

When the Enterprise appears, that feels nostalgic. But only arguably so. They updated the look of it. It's not the '60s Enterprise. If it were truly nostalgic, every old-schooler would love it. That's not the case here. They didn't like the changes. In nostalgia, you're longing for things that changed. The Enterprise did change. So I argue it's not as nostalgic as some would say.

Pike. He was only in two episodes of TOS. One as an invalid and one where he actually had vitality. All well and good. But Anson Mount didn't play Pike strictly like Jeff Hunter. He combined Jeff Hunter's version, Bruce Greenwood's version, threw in a little bit of Shatner's Kirk while was had it, and then added in a lot of his own take. He made the role his own.

Spock. Ethan Peck's Spock is sufficiently different from Leonard Nimoy's that I didn't feel like we were getting more of the same.

Number One. Rebecca Romijin's take on the character was different from Majel Barrett's, even though they both effectively convey a hyper-efficient First Officer who does her homework, stays on top of things, and can give Spock a run for his money.

Anson Mount, Ethan Peck, and Rebecca Romijin didn't feel like they were just regurgitating Jeff Hunter, Leonard Nimoy, and Majel Barrett where as something truly nostalgic would've. This wasn't nostalgia. It was an update.

Then there's Talos IV. That's the exception I was getting to. Even though the production values were updated, they tried to still tried to make it feel like TOS as much as they could. It's like the Disco Enterprise, which also tried evoke TOS while still trying to adhere to the same aesthetic as DSC. Even people who don't like DSC felt nostalgic when they watched "If Memory Serves". It's the episode that actually struck that chord.

.
.
.

Picard, on the other hand, has Jean-Luc Picard played by Patrick Stewart. Having the same actor play the same character is closer to being nostalgic than having different actors play the same characters in updated form. Except they also put Picard in a different place. We're not seeing Picard as he was when TNG was on in the '80s and '90s. Nostalgia would be ignoring the passage of time. PIC is tackling it head on.

So DSC updated TOS concepts for the 21st Century while PIC took TNG and has advanced it by 20 years. Either way, DSC and PIC didn't stick to keeping things exactly as they were in TOS and TNG.

Appreciate the post, but I didn't call it nostalgic. I said it played on nostalgia. What I meant by that is that Discovery was revisiting known established events in Trek history and filling in gaps/adding more lore to those events.

 

[fireproof78]

It's a discussion forum. Everyone is free to discuss anything they want within the rules including their likes and dislikes.

Comparing the two is the not the same as saying "likes and dislikes." Comparing the two is a competition, to my mind. Maybe others treat it differently, but if we are going to talk about disliking DSC shouldn't that go in the DSC sub-forum?

Is DSC so sour that it must absolutely be castigated at every turn? Because, that's not interesting discussion to my mind. Especially on a forum about a different show. Reminds me of when Abrams' Trek came out.

 

[gblews]

Come back to me when Picard actually does anything to challenge the franchise moving forwards, because as of now,

Yes, I’m really liking PIC, but that has a lot to do with Patrick Stewart. The show itself, so far, is playing like a TNG episode. I liked TNG, generally, so that’s not really a criticism.

The franchise has been trying since Ent TaTV to tap back into that vast TNG audience. Who can blame them? But it came as no surprise that the second ST show on CBSAA targeted the TNG crowd. It was a no brained.

But, as Alan points out, it’s going to be interesting to see if PIC really makes a bold move. DSC presented the first gay romance, the first Trek show to feature a lower ranked character as the lead, not too mention the first Trek with a black female lead. Not suggesting that PIC has to repeat the same concepts or anything “new” at all, indeed, the show will be fine, I’m sure, as is, but if PIC continues to play it safe, I’ll consider it a big missed opportunity.

 

[Reyman]

Do you not think that Picard is written more elegently than Discovery? I mean, you called Discovery trash.

Again that's not quite exactly what I said and I have already explained what my reason is for preferring Picard. Maybe season 3 of Discovery won't suffer in the same way as its earlier seasons and finds its sweet spot. If that happens I'll be more than happy to say that it makes Picard look like trash.

One Man's Trash is another Man's Treasure. We won't all like the same things in the same way.

 

[Lord Garth]

Appreciate the post, but I didn't call it nostalgic. I said it played on nostalgia. What I meant by that is that Discovery was revisiting known established events in Trek history and filling in gaps/adding more lore to those events.

Sorry, I got carried away. I haven't posted in the DSC Forum in a while (long story). And I've been so focused on Picard when I'm here.

 

[The Old Mixer]

- STP S1:

Spoiler

Beloved Main character has connection to another beloved original character (Data). Second beloved character has an A.I 'duagher' created. An Evil Admiral conspires with Romulans to capture or destroy the A.I daughter because a secret sect of Romulan spies despise A.I. and don't want them to propigate. (Oh and said Sect or a rogue A.I. may have been responsible for an A.I. attack on the Mars Shipyards which ended a Federation plan to evacuate Romulus before a supernova exploded.) Main character is ciontact by te A.I. daughter, but she is destroyed. He uses his connection with the second beloved (but dead) character to discover that there were two daughters - the second one which he feels he must save...but he won't ask any of his old 1701-D crewmates to help because he likes them and they like him, and heknows they'd all do it in a second; but since this might get them all killed...to do this...he turns to a person he knows hates him...and in the process will certainly foil the Evil Admiral's plan and save the A. I.

A reminder that this thread isn't spoiler-flagged, and that was a massive dump of plot info for episodes that aren't two weeks old yet.

 

[fireproof78]

One Man's Trash is another Man's Treasure. We won't all like the same things in the same way.

If only we had some sort of way to describe such a philosophy. Something simple, with a medallion to go along with it...

 

[Alan Roi]

Yes, I’m really liking PIC, but that has a lot to do with Patrick Stewart. The show itself, so far, is playing like a TNG episode. I liked TNG, generally, so that’s not really a criticism.

The franchise has been trying since Ent TaTV to tap back into that vast TNG audience. Who can blame them? But it came as no surprise that the second ST show on CBSAA targeted the TNG crowd. It was a no brained.

But, as Alan points out, it’s going to be interesting to see if PIC really makes a bold move. DSC presented the first gay romance, the first Trek show to feature a lower ranked character as the lead, not too mention the first Trek with a black female lead. Not suggesting that PIC has to repeat the same concepts or anything “new” at all, indeed, the show will be fine, I’m sure, as is, but if PIC continues to play it safe, I’ll consider it a big missed opportunity.

IMO, TNG was successful by playing it safe. Compared to TOS it pushed few envelopes, and tended to reinforce and reassure than challenge. It very much the reason that The Orville has been so successful and why, so far, Picard has garnered a lot of Berman era nostalgists. These are people who like having TNG on in the background, as a comfort blanket. It remains to see if Picard will offer something like that in the end, or if it challenges them. But the larger audience aren't people who like to be challenged.