It's such a perfect example of a repetitive epic that Garak would unironically praise it as one of the grandest Cardassian novels ever written.
Star Trek Picard is not Star Trek
- Thread starter AnotherGalaxys
- Start date
Perhaps Star Trek no longer offers a vision for humanity, but historically speaking it once did. In fact, Star Trek's positive vision of the future used to be what fans often pointed out when asked why they were so into Star Trek. It's a shame Star Trek can no longer claim that.
To respond to your question, modern Star Trek presents a dystopian future, whereas the original Star Trek presented a utopian future. That's probably the broadest basis for calling it an antithesis. Another reason is that in the original franchise, humanity had evolved past many of its current issues like racism, greed, the need for revenge, among other negative traits. That's no longer the case in Picard. There are other reasons why I feel that modern Trek is an antithesis, but instead of spending a lot of time rehashing points that others have already made, I'd direct you to the multitude of youtube reviews that have covered the same ground.
I appreciate your point about how a society struggles to maintain its values, and the heroes that arise to restore those values, but from what I've seen of the producers of this series, I'm afraid you might be giving them too much credit. I do hope that they show how things are restored, but again, I think that's giving them too much credit. I hope they prove me wrong!
historically, that's bullshit
Personally, I think you're being TOO HARD on DS9's - "In The Pale Moonlight"...
Well, shit...if Jonathan Del Arco said so......it must be true!!!
In the premiere episode of TNG we learned a nuclear war had devastated Earth sometime before the year 2079. And that was during the Roddenberry Era of Star Trek. How again is Trek from back then nothing but inspirational and upbeat?
Hey. The idea that Earth would be a nuclear wasteland gave me something I thought I could look forward to when I was 100. Who doesn't want to be their own light bulb? Do you know how much people in the future will save on electricity?
Plus I get the chance to be a warlord guarding a supply of gasoline.
I respect that people like the show, and am glad they can enjoy it. I'd argue that it's not only bad Trek, it's bad storytelling. I found myself going between being annoyed and feeling bored. I can't even hate watch it. The show has so many unearned moments and eye rolling cliches that it's hard to sit through. I wanted to like it, and I gave it a fair chance. The show looks great, it sounds great, the acting is great, there's nothing wrong with the production, except the writing! It's just badly written and not engaging.
I always thought the Nuclear War retcon provided by TNG was so that GR could claim: "Hey. "Genesis II/Planet Earth" is part of my STAR TREK Universe!"
Last edited:
Either this is a mind- boggling level of hyperbole, or you don't actually know what "dystopian" means.
"Evolved past" meaning, what, exactly.? That they'd been genetically modified out of the species? Or that social structures had been developed which successfully repressed such behaviors? Picard shows the latter case.
Worse that those Discovery ones?
Yes.
Sorry Hythlodeus, I don't know anything about you, but it seems you might be unfamiliar with the history of the Star Trek franchise and/or its fandom. If you're interested I'd recommend researching the matter, you might be surprised by what you find.
Then perhaps don't watch it. Not all Star Trek is for everyone. Doesn't make it less Star Trek.
From the 56 year old STAR TREK fan who been watching first run STAR TREK episodes since 1969 (I was 6 and started with TOS S3 - "Elaan Of Troyius" I would say, maybe you should take your own advice and dig a little harder yourself to see that your 'familiarity' isn't as accurate as what you may believe.
Hyperbolic, perhaps. I was just trying to keep it short and sweet. I think I got my thought across, and I'm pretty sure I know what dystopian means, but if my usage was wrong, please enlighten me.
Come on, if you've ever watched Star Trek then you should know exactly what I mean. It's not like it wasn't pretty explicit. Just how human society "evolved past" its lesser qualities is never really spelled out, but I'd bet it has something to do with a little television show called Star Trek.
Last edited:
I say this as a fan to whom DSC is my all-time least-favorite Trek series so far. Yes.
Similar threads
