• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Star Trek Picard is not Star Trek

Let's say you're right, and STD really is a Star Trek series (yes, I know it's called Star Trek, I'm however not convinced, or fooled, if you like), why is it called "Discovery"? What is it they are discovering?
The Mycelial Network, the Mirror Universe, who the Red Angel was, what the Red Signal thingies were, a colony of humans abducted in the 21st century, a planet-size (?) sentient being that gave them all its knowledge, the secret of the relation between Saru's people and the Ba'ul and a very big tardigrade.
 
This show on the other hand is dealing with a myriad of different things, with Picard being almost a supporting role in his "own show".
Are you serious? Have you never watched Star Trek?

Maybe you never noticed, but the general formula is procedural. The Enterprise warps up to a planet or into some region of space where there is a problem to be solved. Most of the episode is the guest characters, whose intentions are not entirely clear, taking actions. Our heroes attempt to grasp what is happening, but they only come to conclusions near the end of the episode. The only pre-Discovery series that deviated was DS9.

ST Picard has JL not reacting, but acting. He has an imperfect understanding of what is going on. Most of the series he is not aware that Soji is in trouble: he is merely extrapolating from what he knows of Dahj's situation.
 
The Mycelial Network, the Mirror Universe, who the Red Angel was, what the Red Signal thingies were, a colony of humans abducted in the 21st century, a planet-size (?) sentient being that gave them all its knowledge, the secret of the relation between Saru's people and the Ba'ul and a very big tardigrade.
... don't forget that Spock has a Step-Sister. ;)
 
I guess that explains the other negative criticism and reviews of Picard (and also of the STD) at IMDb, for example. And there's a ton of it. What do they have to gain? Clicks too?
According to auntie Wikipedia:

"Fuck is a profane English-language word which often refers to the act of sexual intercourse but is also commonly used as an intensifier or to denote disdain. While its origin is obscure, it is usually considered to be first attested to around 1475."

The most interesting part here is its use as an intensifier. The part that's unrealistic to me is that "fuck" is still a swear word 300 years from now, not that it's abso-fucking-lutely still in use. I expect it to go the way the German word "geil" (roughly: horny) went. When I was little I better not be caught saying it by my grandparents, but by now it's used to say that something is (roughly) "fucking awesome" just as often if not more often than its original meaning.
 
The most interesting part here is its use as an intensifier. The part that's unrealistic to me is that "fuck" is still a swear word 300 years from now, not that it's abso-fucking-lutely still in use. I expect it to go the way the German word "geil" (roughly: horny) went. When I was little I better not be caught saying it by my grandparents, but by now it's used to say that something is (roughly) "fucking awesome" just as often if not more often than its original meaning.
I find it funny that the swearing and the gore, which were not entirely absent in pre-2005 Star Trek, were imposed on the franchise from without. They were not something internal to its values. When people complain about them, they are imposing a view of conservatism on Star Trek that does not entirely reflect what creators and producers would have preferred. When they say they would prefer less gore, they are saying they want violence without consequences. When they are saying they want no swearing, they are saying that they want to limit manners to form rather than intention.
 
So I did hear the F word the other night....wife argues they would never say than on Star Trek. It's kind of sad actually.
 
According to auntie Wikipedia:

"Fuck is a profane English-language word which often refers to the act of sexual intercourse but is also commonly used as an intensifier or to denote disdain. While its origin is obscure, it is usually considered to be first attested to around 1475."

The most interesting part here is its use as an intensifier. The part that's unrealistic to me is that "fuck" is still a swear word 300 years from now, not that it's abso-fucking-lutely still in use. I expect it to go the way the German word "geil" (roughly: horny) went. When I was little I better not be caught saying it by my grandparents, but by now it's used to say that something is (roughly) "fucking awesome" just as often if not more often than its original meaning.

Irish singer Rea Garvey invented the Englisch-German terms "Unfucking-fassbar" (meaning: unbelievable) and fun-fucking-tastic.
 
Yes, we did.
There were?
Yes, there were.
Like, for example, having characters saying "fuck" every now and then for no reason but to just utter some profanity? Yeah, that is so Star Trek.
Yes, it is. It just only pushed it so far because of censorship rules.
The idea that words like fuck and shit will be part of the vernacular in, like, 300 hundred years from now is absolutely silly.
Bullshit. As illustrated below
The word fuck, or variations thereof, has been around since approximately the year 1475 it has shown no sign of slowing down. I wouldn't be surprised if by the cusp of the 25th century if it weren't considered a proper noun.
Somehow, this particular word has endured centuries. What is unbelievable is the idea that it will just up and vanish once 300 years have passed.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top