Killing off long time characters

[Takeru]

Hugh wasn't even a long time character, he was a short time character who appeared a long time ago in two episodes before Picard. He was memorable but not exactly a big part of the franchise, it's not like they killed off a legacy character off for shits and giggles. They brought brought him back, gave him some meaningful scenes and even let him die a hero, that's pretty good for what was initially just supposed to be a one off appearance.

 

[Orphalesion]

Hugh wasn't even a long time character, he was a short time character who appeared a long time ago in two episodes before Picard. He was memorable but not exactly a big part of the franchise, it's not like they killed off a legacy character off for shits and giggles. They brought brought him back, gave him some meaningful scenes and even let him die a hero, that's pretty good for what was initially just supposed to be a one off appearance.

My best guess is that Hugh probably does something in the novelverse (like becoming Federation-Borg ambassador or the chief science officer of the Enterprise or something like that) and a portion of the fanbase is cranky that the new shows dare to contradict that.
So to them he might be a "long term character", they just forget that he isn't to anybody else.

 

[fireproof78]

Don't remind me of Gene's vision on Character's death. Because it reminds me on Tasha Yar death episode. The most horrible Star Trek TNG episode, as she was sooooo chatty even before she died and left. Why don't she just died and shut up? Her good bye speech was so horrible that make the episode the worst Star Trek TNG I ever watch. Really tarnish my good memory on Star Trek TNG

Honestly, I'm the opposite. Tasha was one of the few highlights of early TNG and her death pretty much left me uninterested in TNG going forward. The rest of the crew was nearly insufferable and not worth spending more time with.

And, yeah, I have no issue with Gene's vision on character death. Space is supposedly dangerous and yet people don't die.

 

[JesterFace]

Meh. Everyone dies.

We don't know that. We might be the first generation of survivors who end up as magical dust floating around for eternity.
Or maybe everyone does long before us. That's just part of the human experience, first we think we won't life forever but we will.

 

[Omega-Trekker]

My best guess is that Hugh probably does something in the novelverse (like becoming Federation-Borg ambassador or the chief science officer of the Enterprise or something like that) and a portion of the fanbase is cranky that the new shows dare to contradict that.
So to them he might be a "long term character", they just forget that he isn't to anybody else.

Hugh was Borg, so maybe not all of his nanites were deactivated. In the Voyager series they were used on Neelix to essentially bring him back from the dead, so it might be possible that Hugh didn't really "die" after all. Just a thought.

 

[Orphalesion]

Hugh was Borg, so maybe not all of his nanites were deactivated. In the Voyager series they were used on Neelix to essentially bring him back from the dead, so it might be possible that Hugh didn't really "die" after all. Just a thought.

Of course.
It would completely ruin all the narrative gravitas from his death, for really no gain whatsoever, but why would we want any lasting consequences, eh?

 

[fireproof78]

but why would we want any lasting consequences, eh?

We don't. We clearly want happy, go lucky stories, where people turn out OK in the end.

 

[Omega-Trekker]

Of course.
It would completely ruin all the narrative gravitas from his death, for really no gain whatsoever, but why would we want any lasting consequences, eh?

Well, you get the impact in the original watching, and you can satisfy Hugh fans later on.. it's... The Best of Both Worlds (pardon the pun).

 

[Jinn]

My best guess is that Hugh probably does something in the novelverse (like becoming Federation-Borg ambassador or the chief science officer of the Enterprise or something like that) and a portion of the fanbase is cranky that the new shows dare to contradict that.

Oh, Novelverse Hugh died nineteen years earlier

 

[Omega-Trekker]

We don't. We clearly want happy, go lucky stories, where people turn out OK in the end.

I can agree with that! For me Star Trek was uplifting entertainment, with hope for the future. If I want to be depressed, I'll watch the evening news.

 

[Orphalesion]

We don't. We clearly want happy, go lucky stories, where people turn out OK in the end.

*sigh* it's relaly so sad that New Trek just doesn't know what the Fans(tm) want.
That's probably why it is so unsuccessful and all it's shows get cancelled.

 

[fireproof78]

You got two kinds of people in the world, the living and the dying.

It sucked that Hugh and Icheb and Tasha and Jadzia, <record scratches> well it sucked 3 of them died. I could not wait for Jadzia's deathbed scene to end. How could someone so close to death not die for so long?!

Must be the first time watching a Hollywood death.

I can agree with that! For me Star Trek was uplifting entertainment, with hope for the future. If I want to be depressed, I'll watch the evening news.

Sarcasm was missed. I don't find it depressing in films when people die. It's how people manage through that I find inspiring, not the lack of consequences.

*sigh* it's relaly so sad that New Trek just doesn't know what the Fans(tm) want.
That's probably why it is so unsuccessful and all it's shows get cancelled.

Clearly these new shows will never make it.

 

[Orphalesion]

Sarcasm was missed. I don't find it depressing in films when people die. It's how people manage through that I find inspiring, not the lack of consequences.

I mean, as long as the death had some point/meaning (in-universe and/or in the narrative) and was written well, I agree.
And Hugh's death fits those parameters.

 

[fireproof78]

I mean, as long as the death had some point/meaning (in-universe and/or in the narrative) and was written well, I agree.
And Hugh's death fits those parameters.

Agreed. Death, like many other narrative constructs, can be handle very effectively and so can resurrections. But, like a good spice, it has to be wielded appropriately to compliment the flavor of the story told. Tasha's death fits in that it illustrates space is very dangerous. Hugh's fits in that ongoing struggle to maintain good work in the face of horrible obstacles. Even Picard's works on a larger thematic idea, because his choices to risk death show his commitment, rather than hiding away.

It's all in how it is wielded. And Hugh coming back would have to be wielded very well to work.

 

[dupersuper]

We don't. We clearly want happy, go lucky stories, where people turn out OK in the end.

You say that like it's a bad thing...

Of course.
It would completely ruin all the narrative gravitas from his death

And Hugh's death fits those parameters.

How????

 

[Orphalesion]

How????

His last act was one of heroic defiance, saving and protecting others, proving himself to be a hero rather than a victim, which, I think is a very impressive achievement for a former Borg drone (as Borg drones are by default constantly victimized by the collective)

 

[fireproof78]

You say that like it's a bad thing...

When it's the only flavor wanted yes. I don't believe in comfort food new TV. I want comfort I go to old shows.

 

[Turtletrekker]

You say that like it's a bad thing...

It may not be a bad thing, but it doesn't necessarily make for compelling television either.

 

[Orphalesion]

When it's the only flavor wanted yes. I don't believe in comfort food new TV. I want comfort I go to old shows.

I do believe in comfort food new TV. That's why I like Lower Decks. But I agree it shouldn't be the only flavour.

And I rather have two shows that each specialize into being a serious drama and a heart-warming comedy, respectively, than go the way of many older genre shows that tried to be an awkward hodgepodge of all of those things.

 

[fireproof78]

I do believe in comfort food new TV. That's why I like Lower Decks. But I agree it shouldn't be the only flavour.

And I rather have two shows that each specialize into being a serious drama and a heart-warming comedy, respectively, than go the way of many older genre shows that tried to be an awkward hodgepodge of all of those things.

Fair enough. I personally find more comfort in the familiar, so shows I have watched multiple times over engage that comfort for me, vs. a new show where I might find something new, but not necessarily comforting.

But, I'm also the extremely odd person who doesn't really want comfort food TV as the main reason I watch shows. I watch very few things so if I am going to watch it I would rather there be something new to explore rather than safe and familiar.