Why? Because a Star Trek writer told you they were, even though that makes zero sense. Now a Star Trek writer is telling you it's the same guy.
Was pretty excited for this show.. but ultimately underwhelmed...
- Thread starter Dar70
- Start date
Because one is bad...I can't find any other rationale at this point.
Picard was conscious while his mind was being transferred into the android body. Hence the talking to Data.
According to trek...
You can have Tuvok and Neelix merged into you and then remain the same person
You can turn into a lizard/monkey/invisible alien and then remain the same person
You can be aged into an old person, de-aged into a child and remain the same person
You can have Tuvok and Neelix merged into you and then remain the same person
You can turn into a lizard/monkey/invisible alien and then remain the same person
You can be aged into an old person, de-aged into a child and remain the same person
You can be split in to your good and evil halves.
When do we get Great trek? I got caught up by the thread title while perusing. Sorry to interrupt the Tuvix rehash, ha ha! (Janeway's a murderer, you know this to be so.)
ANYwho I hear ppl defending the show with, Aw, C'mon guys, it wasn't so bad, kind of attitude. And Here's how the convoluted plot makes sense and the squealing tentacles aren't generic scifi cringe.
I thought this was going to be beautiful, character drama. My bad. It was ok. Would watch it again before either DSC. Though to answer the recent thread drift, Picard's death scene was as pointless as Kirk's in STID. Hmm, I wonder if the star and title character will stay dead? Ish.
But...
Do we ever get a Trek that is commonly heralded/understood as awesome? Killer?! The general public saying This show is So! well written, you have to watch! Sopranos/Madmen/Thrones/Breaking Bad level of good?
I fear if I didn't get greatness with Chabon, I'm SOL.
ANYwho I hear ppl defending the show with, Aw, C'mon guys, it wasn't so bad, kind of attitude. And Here's how the convoluted plot makes sense and the squealing tentacles aren't generic scifi cringe.
I thought this was going to be beautiful, character drama. My bad. It was ok. Would watch it again before either DSC. Though to answer the recent thread drift, Picard's death scene was as pointless as Kirk's in STID. Hmm, I wonder if the star and title character will stay dead? Ish.
But...
Do we ever get a Trek that is commonly heralded/understood as awesome? Killer?! The general public saying This show is So! well written, you have to watch! Sopranos/Madmen/Thrones/Breaking Bad level of good?
I fear if I didn't get greatness with Chabon, I'm SOL.
Star Trek labors too much in its past to be great.
It is not uncommon for genuinely great works of art not to be recognized as such when initially released. It look over a decade for The Empire Strikes Back to achieve its current revered status. Citizen Kane and Casablanca were recognized as high-quality films initially, but it took decades for them to assume their status as considered among the top five greatest films ever produced. It's A Wonderful Life was consigned to public domain hell after bombing, and achieved its status as a perennial classic because stations could air it without paying a copyright owner. Moby-Dick and The Great Gatsby were nearly forgotten novels before experiencing critical reassessment. Shows like Twin Peaks, Firefly, and Veronica Mars struggled in the ratings before dying young and then being reborn in streaming or on DVD. Shakespeare was considered disposable pablum for the masses in his day. And of course, the original Star Trek struggled in the ratings for three seasons before dying and then being reborn in syndicated reruns.
Near-universal acclaim certainly happens -- The Dark Knight, Game of Thrones, The Godfather, etc all come to mind. But a lack of general consensus of greatness is not the same thing as lacking greatness.
For my money, Star Trek: Picard is the second-greatest Star Trek series ever produced, after Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. And PIC will probably surpass DS9 in my rating if it gets more seasons with the same level of quality or higher as season one.
If The Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi had been released during the social media age, the meltdown and fan hatred would have made the reaction to The Last Jedi feel like a shrug of the shoulders. If a creative vision doesn't align with fan expectation, expect meltdown.
That's why I'm perfectly willing to get over some of CBSTreks' creative choices, but the terrible writing, poor production and bland characters in DIS's case though, nah.
That's why I'm perfectly willing to get over some of CBSTreks' creative choices, but the terrible writing, poor production and bland characters in DIS's case though, nah.
Thoughtful post, thank you.
I have been thinking I should rewatch it. The plot was offputting to me. And I kept seeing moments that were near-misses. Character moments with Picard and someone that needed more space to breathe. Seriously, pauses. Like the editor felt under the gun.
DS9 to me is a near miss, which is frustrating. Maybe the best Trek, but it is so often comic-book-ish and predictable in dialog. We're at the end of S7 again, and man, does Jeffrey Combes overact. Breathing heavy when he bosses around Damar. And I like him generally as an actor.
It's like, it'll be very good for Star Trek, but just shy of full-on greatness.
Anyway, what to you makes PIC the best? Truly curious. Might guide my viewing.
That's fair. I love DS9 but, yes, once we get to the Dominion War it does contain elements of 19th Century-style melodrama. Which is not something I mind, but melodrama is not to everyone's taste.
When I think of what makes DS9 great, it's not so much those more melodramatic elements as the more ambiguous ones. My girlfriend and I are doing a watch-through of it -- her first time and a rewatch for me. We just saw Season Four's "For the Cause" last night and it is a damn-near perfect episode, building up the tension throughout the whole piece, bringing Sisko to the breaking point with a person he trusts most in the galaxy -- before giving us a sudden reversal at the end that reveals new layers to another recurring character, and all the while asking you if maybe Sisko isn't the one in the wrong.
And then there's "In the Pale Moonlight." I can't wait to get to that one.
Well, first off, I can't really talk about it without giving spoilers. So if you only watched "Remembrance," I'm going to put the more revealing things in a spoiler field.
First I would say that I don't have a problem with the pacing. I like the short-season structure, and I like the fact that the first three episodes take their time, and that the momentum builds and builds over the course of the season until reaching a fever pitch in season finale.
I love the fact that PIC is a show about being alienated from yourself and finding yourself again. That's the journey almost all of the characters are going on:
Picard, Soji, Raffi, Rios, Jurati, Seven, and even Narek and Nedar, arguably.
I love the fact that they constructed the season to explore these themes using plot devices designed to criticize Anglo-American culture's real-life degeneration into reactionary politics. I love the fact that PIC engages in some deconstruction of TNG utopianism; like DS9 before it, PIC is skeptical of utopia and deconstructs the idea that the Federation would never stray from the righteous path.
But it also seeks to put its toys back together after playing with them: The first half deconstructs the utopian belief that the Federation will never sin, but the finale re-affirms the value of Federation ideals and depicts a Federation now recognizes it needs to redeem itself. PIC is a "comedy" in the classical literature sense of the term: a story that begins in darkness and ends in light.
I love the fact that PIC explores Jean-Luc in a way that re-affirms his heroism and integrity, but also calls him out in ways TNG only rarely did for his arrogance, his blindness to his own privilege, and his deep-seated difficulty expressing love to other people and maintaining close relationships. Where TNG depicted him mostly as an unambiguous white savior figure, PIC is a story that depicts him as a flawed hero -- good at his core, with a level of integrity few can match, but not perfect and possessed of some very painful personal flaws, too.
And I love how he's working on it.
I love how PIC explores Romulan society and establishes such a rich diversity of Romulan cultures, and makes it clear that the different Romulan factions are competing for power in a way more meaningful than just TNG-style authoritarianism:
the Qowat Milat, the post-supernova refugees, the Free State, the Tal Shiar, the XBs, the Zhat Vash, all vying for power with varying agendas and levels of honor. I really like that the Romulan Free State is not just this mindlessly hostile body like the Star Empire -- that it's a regime that seems genuinely interested in closer relations with the Federation (abolishing the Neutral Zone, allowing Federates to serve on the Artifact), even as it also retains this underlying authoritarian streak that it needs to get rid of.
I love that PIC recognizes that the most important relationship Picard had in TNG was his ersatz father/son relationship with Data (two men with trouble expressing love for each other!), and that the most important trauma of his life was his assimilation into Locutus, and I love the fact that PIC recognizes that "The Best of Both Worlds" and First Contact were the two most important TNG stories in the minds of most of the audience, and follows up on both of those stories. In fact, PIC constructs its central conflicts around these two most important aspects of Picard's life on TNG, and in doing so grounds its conflicts in Picard's interior life in a way that wouldn't have worked with any other character.
The finale was not perfect; the XBs should have been better-integrated into the climax. But. I also love the climax. I love the fact that we realize both the Zhat Vash and the Coppelians have valid reasons to fear each other; I love the fact that the show implicitly compares the abandonment of empathy in relationships between cultures to the abandonment of empathy in interpersonal and familial relationships, how that loss of empathy transforms conflicts into existential threats and are driven by fear. I love how Picard resolves the conflict not through violence, but by taking a leap of faith in the Coppelians and being willing to sacrifice his life -- which is so true to his character, in a way that affirms TNG's depiction of his idealism without reinforcing TNG's tendency to depict him as flawless. I absolutely adore that line in the finale: "That's why we're here -- to save each other." That line is so beautiful I can't express it: it's the essence of my beliefs about life, and it's the essence of Star Trek's ethos. "That's why we're here -- to save each other."
I love the fact that the Zhat Vash's motivations are actually kind of sympathetic. These people are deeply traumatized, and they honestly, genuinely believe that synthetic lifeforms will endanger all life in the galaxy. The Zhat Vash honestly think that they're saving everyone, even the Federation, and there's a level of genuinely selflessness in that regard. On the other hand, I also like that PIC makes it clear that they have taken it too far, that their trauma has led them to abandon empathy, to abandon hope for the idea that they can find a better way. It's led them to become hard and, sometimes, genuinely power-hungry. I didn't like Narissa's and Narek's pseudo-incestuous relationship, but I did like Narek's relationship with Soji -- how Narek really did let himself fall in love with her before betraying her anyway, and how he never did seek redemption for his acts. That scene where they "ice-skate" on the Borg Artifact was absolutely magical.
I loved seeing Seven of Nine again for the first time in almost twenty years, and I loved seeing the journey she's been on and how it makes sense for her as a character. I was on the edge of my seat throughout "Stardust City Rag" wondering if she was going to take revenge on Bjayzel. I loved how PIC acknowledges that if it is being honest to the characters' core motivations, some characters will take revenge -- even knowing that it is wrong, that doing so will kill part of them, too. I loved that Seven tried to protect Jean-Luc from realizing that's the kind of person she's become. And I loved their final scene together:
"After they brought you back from your time in the Collective... do you honestly feel that you regained your humanity?"
"Yes."
"All of it?"
"No. But we're both working on it... aren't we?"
"Every damn day of my life."
I loved seeing Seven of Nine again for the first time in almost twenty years, and I loved seeing the journey she's been on and how it makes sense for her as a character. I was on the edge of my seat throughout "Stardust City Rag" wondering if she was going to take revenge on Bjayzel. I loved how PIC acknowledges that if it is being honest to the characters' core motivations, some characters will take revenge -- even knowing that it is wrong, that doing so will kill part of them, too. I loved that Seven tried to protect Jean-Luc from realizing that's the kind of person she's become. And I loved their final scene together:
"After they brought you back from your time in the Collective... do you honestly feel that you regained your humanity?"
"Yes."
"All of it?"
"No. But we're both working on it... aren't we?"
"Every damn day of my life."
I absolutely adore the cinematography, color pallet, mise-en-scène, and costume designs in this show.
I love that we finally get a glimpse of the world of Star Trek as viewed by Federates who are not part of Starfleet.
I love the acting. Obviously Sir Patrick Stewart just hits the ball out of the park from the get-go. "Have you ever been a stranger to yourself?" "Many, many times." But this cast is just full of amazing actors. Allison Pill is one of the most talented actors of her generation; I've thought so since I saw her in Scott Pilgrim vs. the World ten years ago. Michelle Hurd gives this wonderful, nuanced performance capturing both this command charisma and this deep brokenness in Raffi; they didn't use her enough in S1 and I really hope they use her more in S2. I thought Rios was a kind of cliched character at first, but over the course of the season, Santiago Cabrera imbued him with a level of depth and pathos that made Rios a much more interesting character by the end. Jeri Ryan once again proved what a powerhouse she is as an actor -- and thank God they let her dress like a normal person instead of a fetish object this time. Isa Briones is an absolute revelation -- she's so young, but she paints such a vivid canvass with each character she plays, and they're all distinct, believably different characters going on separate, believably different journeys. Orla Brady and Jamie McShane were absolute delights as Laris and Zhaban, and I hope they come back more next season. Harry Treadaway managed to take what could have been a very flat character and imbued him with a real sense of passion and zeal -- there's a genuine desire to connect there, hidden underneath all that trauma-driven Romulan authoritarianism;
he honestly fell in love with Soji, but still betrayed her.
Tamlyn Tomita managed to find the perfect balance between playing a stoic Vulcan and a menacing Romulan in Oh/Nedar.
I didn't like it at first, but I've come to love this part of the show: S1 ends with Picard dying and being reborn. He sacrifices himself to save the Coppelians and re-affirm their inner decency and the inner decency of the Federation; he leads them both back into honor and away from violence and nationalism. Like Orpheus or Jesus, he has a katabasis, where he travels into the (science fictional metaphor for the) Underworld, meeting (the sci-fi metaphorical soul of) his dead ersatz son and finally learning to let him go and thereby achieve new life, a reprieve from death (for now). I had initially thought that PIC should have ended with Jean-Luc's death, but in retrospect I've decided that the show needed to end in new life for the hero. Star Trek, you see, is a not a tragedy; it is a series that must always reaffirm life at the end even if it has delved into darkness to get there. So it is both right and necessary that Picard should be resurrected -- and that his resurrected form should be a dramatic irony: Where once a mechanical body had alienated Picard from himself (his assimilation into Locutus), now a mechanical body shall represent his new reconciliation with himself after his prior self-inflicted self-alienation (his time after Starfleet at the chateau).
And this new life means that Picard has found one of the things he was missing, his ersatz family. He will become a true grandfather to Soji and Elnor, who both desperately need him and his love, as this leader of The Next Generation learns how to finally contribute to his next generation.
And this new life means that Picard has found one of the things he was missing, his ersatz family. He will become a true grandfather to Soji and Elnor, who both desperately need him and his love, as this leader of The Next Generation learns how to finally contribute to his next generation.
Star Trek: Picard is not without its flaws (some of them major -- it needs more black people, and having the only black cast member be the one struggling with a substance abuse problem is problematic). But on balance, I see so much depth and heart and intelligence and insight that I remain bewildered at those who dislike it, and at the disproportionate weight they assign to relatively minor flaws.
Why does it "need more black people"?
It really isn't "problematic". For the same reason that killing a gay character in Culber isn't either. Gay and black people shouldn't get special treatment just because they're gay or black, and I say that as a gay, non-white man. And if you think they should then that's literally racial discrimination, something that's supposed to be a bad thing.
Yeah, in fairness I tend not to focus much on plot. My general attitude is that it's not what a story is about plot-wise, it's how it's about it. One example: When you think about it, Thor: Ragnarok and Black Panther have nearly identical plots, but their themes, tone, and framing are totally different to the point where most people never noticed. Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice and Captain America: Civil War also have very similar plots, but the other elements are so different that the former sinks where the other soars.
For me, I knew from the trailers that Star Trek: Picard would involve a mystery about a young woman needing Picard's help surviving unknown assailants tracking her down. I figured it would be a convoluted Rube Goldberg-ish plot because that's just the done thing with serialized prestige genre television these days, so I just wasn't surprised or put off by the twists and turns in PIC. Some of the plot elements were ones I predicted, but that didn't bother me.
For what it's with Evan Evagora is mixed race, his mother being Maori. So Michelle Hurd is not the only person of colour on the cast. As a person of colour I'm going to massively disagree with you here. The show 'needs more black people' does it? Do you realise how that phrase can make it sound like minorities are a commodity or pieces to be collected? Whichever show has the most is the wokest! Diversity should not be treated like a series of boxes that need to be ticked or like a quota that needs to be reached.
I also don't see anything 'problematic' with Raffi being portrayed as having drug issues and a poor relationship with her son, especially when we had a white person depicted as a murderer and a manipulator. I'm sure if Jurati had been a POC there would have been outrage about her being depicted this way. Newsflash, but people of colour are flawed and layered just like everyone else and should be depicted as such. The way some woke folks want people of colour to be handled in media is just swapping the helpful negro for the saintly negro, POC Characters who become caricatures by the inability to be depicted as real people with flaws.
Generally speaking I'm getting real sick of white saviours infantilising POC and thinking we need their help. We don't and we can very well decide for ourselves what is problematic and what isn't.
Well said, thank you. Restores my faith in modern society a little bit.
His "this show needs more black people" comment made me cringe. The same as when people saying killing off a gay character was "problematic".
Well said, thank you. Restores my faith in modern society a little bit.
His "this show needs more black people" comment made me cringe. The same as when people saying killing off a gay character was "problematic".
Yeah Culber croaking it didn't bother me either. Us gays might be fabulous but we're not fucking immortal. Most of the gay themed films I've seen over the years that are produced by LGBT studios are largely guilty of following the destructive gay/kill your gays trope.
What makes you think that? Agnes Jurati is not an Indian/Pakistani name.
Isa Briones is also mixed, her dad is Filipino. Plus Santiago Cabrera is Chilean and has talked in the past about how difficult it is to break through Latino typecasting in Hollywood. There are multiple ethnicities represented in the Picard cast.
Actually Jurati Is an indian surname but not a common one it's also similar to the brazilian surname Juraiti or Juratti. So either one of those could have been the inspiration for Agnes's surname. But it's entirely possible that Jurati was made up by Michael Chabon who didn't realise it was an actual surname.
In terms of a character named Jurati being played by a white actress, I'm not overly concerned. It's not uncommon for indian people to be light-skinned. The Anglo-indian community in particular (which is my background) are usually descendants of british colonial officers or portuguese which has lead to some indian people having english or portuguese/european surnames. I myself have a very english surname despite being pretty brown. Agnes could have had an indian father and a white mother. One of my cousins who clearly looks indian, married a white german man and there kids all look white european.
I really don't think surnames should matter in the 24th century considering by then humans would probably not only be a mix of races but possibly of alien species as well.
Similar threads
