Spoilers Star Trek: Picard 2x04 - "Watcher"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Or there was always that space there for an observation room with those windows and it was modified for the bar once Picard knew his old friend Guinan was joining the ship. It was just a happy coincidence that it was on Deck 10 and at the front of the saucer section.
It's possible, but let's face it, this is cringey. It's like how in the reboot Trek they offered an 'explanation' to why a doctor was referred to as 'Bones,' even though much more obvious explanation already existed.
I thought it was hilarious.
vive la difference
Much better than the lazy, “doctors are referred to as Sawbones!”
It sounded just so natural to me.
It's supposed to be a fun little "Ha, look at that" reference and then you move on, but of course we're Trekkies and we have to beat the ever loving snot out of everything that's fun and lighthearted and make it not that.
David Mack explains Picard's Temporal Mechanics.
https://davidmack.pro/blog/2022/03/26/star-trek-picards-temporal-mechanics/
https://davidmack.pro/blog/2022/03/26/star-trek-picards-temporal-mechanics/
Considering, that outside of “The Tholian Web”, no one referred to McCoy as Bones outside of Kirk, it makes sense that the nickname would be about something between the two and not a generic moniker.
Retirement homes work like this (sometimes): You give them your house, maybe a few other large assets, and then they look after you until you die, even if the cost of looking after you exceeds how much they make from selling your house.
Sanctuary districts could be similar to that, at least for the nice ones, or in the beginning before they all turned into Escape from New York?
What if the Sanctuary Districts are there to manipulate the next election? The people inside could have been striped of their right to vote, or signed it away in exchange for social services. Further more what if Sanctuary districts are Congressional districts?
I just watched it, so sorry if what I write is a little bit redundant after 85 pages:
It was filler.
It was better when filler episodes in Trek were one-off stories. That way, we got more interesting plots per season.
In this episode, there was a LOT of movement, but in the grand scheme of things, the only plot-important parts are the last two scenes (What is Laris? / Why did Q loose his powers?)
Small nitpicks:
Overall, I didn't like this episode. It was by no means a "bad" episode. I just don't care much about Star Trek characters being in the present day. TVH worked because of the eye-winking, and because it didn't take itself so serious. I just think as a concept, it's too thin to support a full season arc. I hope next week - with the introduction of the watcher - we're going back to having more science fiction concept stuff in there.
It was filler.
It was better when filler episodes in Trek were one-off stories. That way, we got more interesting plots per season.
In this episode, there was a LOT of movement, but in the grand scheme of things, the only plot-important parts are the last two scenes (What is Laris? / Why did Q loose his powers?)
Small nitpicks:
- "search NPC to get next quest marker" is a good plot to move a video game along - for a full hour of televised drama it's a bit lacking
- Young "Guinan" was...something? Why put Whoopie Goldberg in your plot, if you're not going to put Whoopie in your plot? Doesn't help that THE EXACT SAME THING already happened on TNG, just better.
- I like the Guinan actress. I would have preferred her to be another "secret alien" on Earth. But I liked her.
- The Raffi/Rios/Jurati-stuff was just filler. Nothing was bad. I just don't really care about present day stuff in Star Trek.
- The whole "watcher"-thing was interesting. At least it's something Science Fiction-y in my SF. Even though it feels more like "MARVEL" than "Star Trek".
- Jurati/Borg queen was intereting last episode, this one it felt just a bit dragging
- Lot's of "social commentary". Very hamfisted. But had it's heart at the right place.
Overall, I didn't like this episode. It was by no means a "bad" episode. I just don't care much about Star Trek characters being in the present day. TVH worked because of the eye-winking, and because it didn't take itself so serious. I just think as a concept, it's too thin to support a full season arc. I hope next week - with the introduction of the watcher - we're going back to having more science fiction concept stuff in there.
Beating a dead horse?
One thing I didn't get:
Why are all the characters so angry/emotionally invested in the social injustices of present day Earth? It's history for them! They should have some witty snide remarks how awful everything is, and how comparatively better they have it in their time.
They wouldn't be that emtional when they see Gladiatiors dying in the Colloseum for Entertainment in ancient Rome, or seeing the trans-Atlantic slave trade during time-travel, or, heck, any present day war area.
Yes, San Francisco in 2024 isn't the greatest place on Earth. But it's by no means the darkest place of humanity, not even in the year 2024 itself.
Why are all the characters so angry/emotionally invested in the social injustices of present day Earth? It's history for them! They should have some witty snide remarks how awful everything is, and how comparatively better they have it in their time.
They wouldn't be that emtional when they see Gladiatiors dying in the Colloseum for Entertainment in ancient Rome, or seeing the trans-Atlantic slave trade during time-travel, or, heck, any present day war area.
Yes, San Francisco in 2024 isn't the greatest place on Earth. But it's by no means the darkest place of humanity, not even in the year 2024 itself.
Wouldn't it be the difference between reading about it and seeing it?
Kinda', but not like this.
If I were put into the Middle Ages for example, I would plenty complain about the conditions. But - knowing history - I wouldn't exactly feel the urge to change the world or anything. I would be glad as fucking hell to get out of there. But not loosing my hope for humanity, knowing what the next few centuries will bring.
I just wouldn't be seeing the injustices with the same eyes I see present day injustices, where action is necessary and I'm deeply emotionally invested. I still would see them historically. Probably more aware of how bad the conditions really where (instead of being just "booksmart"). But my whole connection would be a very different one.
Because they are being presented with the suffering face to face and not in a history text. Same reason Sisko and Bashir were non too fond of the Sanctuary Districts when presented with the reality of what went on.
They are there interacting with the people the injustices were visited upon.
That might be a difference in personality. For many, injustice is injustice, period. History doesn't matter.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll