I think more fan interpretation than a direct retcon.
Spoilers Can we itemize PIC S2 canonical mistakes.
- Thread starter joe40001
- Start date
Maybe go to the threads about those episodes and discuss your criticisms there like everyone else does? Every "item" has been discussed ad nauseum in those threads. Frankly, "help me make a bitch list, so I can make a kewl video" isn't worthy of it's own thread and is a turn off.
Hmm. you seem to want discussion, yet immediately all counter arguments are dismissed as not standing up to scrutiny. Yet, without the requisite scrutiny.
which is also pretty minor since Picard was dreaming
you really lose all credibility by using the term “nutrek”. By using that term we know you have made up your mind about all the new shows and are just looking to criticize them. We also know them because your list on page 1 of this thread is so silly that there’s a reason most of us are not taking it seriously.
Yes, it's a convenient shorthand that I don't think is implicitly pejorative.
Yes but NuTrek has been going since 2009. Current Uhura warched Zoe Saldana's Uhura in the cinema as a kid.
It's oldTrek now. And we're on, like, nuNuNuTrek
MidTrek for JJ's take.
What about K-Trek (for Kelvin), and nowTrek for current shows?
(Now thinking of K-Pop as Kelvin-Pop.)
Fair point.
I'm ok with people going "here are my counter points to that item on the list". If there was something that completely explains a mistake I don't want to be oblivious to it. That said I don't think it's productive for the few people who starting to attack my motives or judgement because I didn't subscribe to their explanation for the errors.
Again, people who love STPIC likely aren't going to have a fun time in a topic whose purpose was to itemize the errors. Even so, I do think it is a discussion many of us could value/appreciate, particularly those who have been frustrated with the show.
Since a few people seem to repeatedly interrogate my motives, I will share my personal opinion rant:
(some of you might just want to skip this)
To their credit, one thing that I think they actually did ok with in Ep 8 was addressing the "why can't they just beam Picard/Guinan out of captivity?" question. When they were worried about losing Rios to ICE, to me it was like "why not wait until he's alone and then beam him out of the facility?" They have found and beamed people out of planets, they can do that for a small facility. I don't think they had any excuse for this line of "we'll lose him for good" or whatever seven said in that ep.
So it was good that in ep 8 picard didn't have his communicator, so they didn't really know he was in trouble, and then also their ability to use their ship to scan and beam was limited if not blocked. In theory Romulan woman could have found and smoke beamed them out, but maybe her tech is more limited, or maybe they just didn't realize they were in danger yet. (Them not checking in with each other is a bit of silly choice, but whatever)
As a comfort to those who might think me a hater, I think both S2E8 and S2E1 weren't horribly written. In S2E8, Holo-Elnor gets a precise dig in at Raffi. And other lines of dialogue seemed to address how juvenile some of them seem to act much of the time. I bet there likely a few writers on staff who actually care about Trek/good writing. My opinion is that it's not all 100% terrible, but it can (and should) be so much better, and what it would take is just taking the time to care more.
I am of the opinion that we get things like GoT S8 because when they ran out of the source material and just started to phone in the writing, nobody really called them out of it. If fans aren't critical of bad writing, they have no reason to expect the writing to improve. There is no reason we can't have a modern version of Trek just as mature, intelligent, inventive, and exciting as classic trek. But they will never give that to us if we rubber stamp them not caring. S2 is better than S1, and I think that is directly because of things like the Plinkett review and other detailed fan outcry. Many shows are run like businesses, and so some of them will first try to produce a product in a lazy fashion. And if you say "that's great" they will keep churning out that crap.
Caring takes effort or passion, I don't think the showrunner(s) have that passion. Not for classic trek at least. In my view they are using the IP to make "content" and as long as the content gets views and seems to be likely to continue to get views, they don't give too much of a crap. And so if we want better we have to call out what's wrong. It's not rude, it's respectful.
People will say "yeah but we did this for ENT and VOY" and sure, we did. But that's not because people will always hate regardless of quality, it's because ENT and VOY had some issues (not nearly as many as nutrek, but some). That said, I doubt there was much "hating" going on during prime TNG or DS9. I remember how happy were all were during much of S3 and S4 of ENT (excluding a finale that didn't happen
)Classic Trek created some of the greatest sci-fi stories ever that inspired and entertained so many of us. If you are inheriting that legacy, I think you should expect to be held to that standard.
If there was the greatest burger house of all time, and after 30 years you were put in charge of it, and you produced lukewarm semi-stale McDonalds burgers, people should criticize it. Is it edible? Sure. But it's not respecting the legacy that was inherited.
When I see them make canonical errors that show that they almost certainly didn't watch some of the most important episodes of the show (let alone watch and treasure the whole show) it upsets me. Kurtzman and company were giving a huge gift and responsibility when entrusted with this IP, so why shouldn't I be upset and critical when they phone it in?
I honestly think most people on this forum and most people passionate about classic trek would do a million times better job they did. I personally think it is disrespectful to trek to pretend juvenile, clunky, and prone to error trek is satisfactory, just because it isn't quite as miserable and stupid as last season. The more we let half-assed CW quality writing pass as "good trek" the more we dilute what Trek is in the first place.
If there was a way to test true reality, and not just what people say:
- I would honestly bet money that they made Guinan younger in 2024 than she was in 1893 and made her not know Picard, because they didn't know or care about Time's Arrow.
- I would honestly bet money that they made Picard's father say that line about "dying younger but with hair", because they didn't know or care about Tapestry.
- I would honestly bet money that they did the 10 forward street thing, because they didn't know or care that 10 forward was named after it's location on the ship.
There is an infamous line one of the showrunners said about a moment of S8 of GoT: it was
"Daenerys kinda forgot about the iron fleet".
But that claim by the showrunner didn't fit with her character or the things she cared about at all. And so it was clear to all the fans that what really happened was that the showrunners themselves forgot or didn't care.
It's like that with nutrek. There are these mistakes, and yeah you can rewrite quantum time travel theory to excuse it, or you can go with the more likely option: The showrunners didn't know or care.
I hope that one day I will live to see good trek again, that future generations will see good trek again, but the only way that will every happen is if the fans care, and if the fans demand those in charge ACTUALLY CARE. I personally strongly strongly strongly believe those in charge don't care nearly enough.
You can love the hell out of this show, clearly we see this differently. But a back and forth "nuh-uh" isn't going to serve anybody.
I want to create my video editorial. It probably won't get any views or make any impact or get seen by anybody involved in the production of the show. But it still matters to me, and so if I'm going to hold them to a high standard of caring, I too want to make sure I care myself. I want to be comprehensive and accurate about the errors of the show. Because I want them to do better.
If anybody doesn't want to participate in this topic, that's fine. But I'd really like to move past the people saying I'm ignorant or inattentive or just looking to hate or pander to yt. I want to make this video because I care deeply about trek, and know it can and should do better.
I'm a fan of classic Trek. I think Star Trek: Picard is reverent of its source material, particularly in "The Star Gazer."
The problem isn't where you posted. The problem is that all but one of your complaints is without merit -- and the one that has merit doesn't really matter.
Why do you think that? How do you quantify "respecting the spirit, characters, canon, and intelligence of what came before?"
One thing that immediately makes all of Star Trek: Enterprise inferior to all of Star Trek: Discovery, Star Trek: Picard, Star Trek: Lower Decks, and Star Trek: Prodigy, is the incredible misogyny of the series. The way the producers treated the character of T'Pol and her actor Jolene Blalock -- and to a lesser extent, the way they treated Hoshi Sato and Linda Park -- is genuinely horrifying. She's routinely objectified, sexualized, and demeaned for being a woman. This never happens in modern Star Trek.
I got the impression that Guinan's loyalty to Picard was inspired by something he did to help her earlier in his normal life in the early 24th Century, not something he did whilst time-travelling to the 19th Century.
The hair issue is such a weird thing to point out. In Star Trek Nemesis, Picard looks at a picture of himself at the Academy, and he's bald in the photo. But we know he was not bald in other flashbacks to his younger days, like in "Violations" and "Tapestry" (which I think is where we saw older Maurice as well). And yet, most of us think, looks like an error. Guess he was trying out baldness, or lost a bet, or later got his hair "fixed" and it was only a temporary solution, or whatever, if we need an explanation at all. Pointing out the Maurice hair thing as such a grievous "error" as one of the few evidences of nuTrek being disrespectful of old Trek is pretty weak. I suppose it might work for a video, but expect similar reactions from other Trek fans there as you do here.
Rios didn't have his communicator/badge so they had no way to locate his exact location for transport. Even if they knew what facility he was eventually going to be in how would they pinpoint which person was Rios?
Kurtzman is the overall executive in charge of franchise, but he wasn't a Picard showrunner and didn't write any episodes this season.
I doubt it. Complaining about something on a forum isn't the exact same thing as writing *and producing* a season of
television during a pandemic.
The young Guinan actress is around the same age Whoopi was when she first appeared on TNG. She looks different because she's played by a different actress. It wouldn't make sense for her to have met Picard in the 1800s because the timeline where that happened is different. You don't have to like it, but people involved with the show are fans. And complaining about a character's hair that has been recast and is in a dream sequence where things are abstract is just nitpicking to the extreme.
That's not the most likely option. That's just the one you want to believe. Even after the people involved with the show have publicly explained it.
I've been watching good Trek since 2017 and have been generally happy with all the new shows so I'm happy with the state of the franchise. If you don't like it that's fine but I think it's better now than in the Voyager - Enterprise years, much of which I found very difficult to watch.
All the evidence is to the contrary.
Not true.
Also the actress who plays Guiana here is the same age Whoopi was when she first started on TNG.
Sweet shit, it is extremely surreal to hear an adult talking about seeing a movie in 2009 being "when she was a kid."
Also, doesn't exactly make me feel young when someone who is in the current Star Trek series talks about being a kid back in the year when I was 24 years old.
If you want to make a video of yourself ranting about a show that you hate, by all means do so. Fifty million other people are doing the same thing. But why are you asking us to do your work for you? You already hate the show and seem to be able to make (debatably) negative points about it. So why involve us? Just make your video and get in line behind all the other internetz haters.
Oh, and just to clarify a point: I thought it was abundantly clear why they cast a younger actor for Guinan in 2024: because there’s no way Whoopi Goldberg today would have been believable as the same Guinan in 2024 as 2401, unless they de-aged her to look like she did in TNG. But like with Q, you can only do that for so long before it starts to look fake. They could get away with using the same actor in Time’s Arrow back in 1992, but not in 2022.
Oh, and just to clarify a point: I thought it was abundantly clear why they cast a younger actor for Guinan in 2024: because there’s no way Whoopi Goldberg today would have been believable as the same Guinan in 2024 as 2401, unless they de-aged her to look like she did in TNG. But like with Q, you can only do that for so long before it starts to look fake. They could get away with using the same actor in Time’s Arrow back in 1992, but not in 2022.
Last edited:
I disagree with Memory Alpha's interpretation. Nothing Picard does for Guinan in "Time's Arrow" strikes me as important enough to base a lifelong friendship on. I think a young Jean-Luc helped her through something in his early life.
It's startling, yeah, but it makes sense! She was born in 2000 and would have been about 9 when it came out, and she just turned 22 back in February.
The world just keeps on turning...!
Oh, I know the math checks out. I'm just starting to feel my age is all.
Similar threads
