• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Star Trek: Picard General Discussion Thread

When us "Older" Trek fans nitpick, it almost always involves finding creative ways to make what we've been presented with "FIT" into canon, not decry that the Producers don't give a damn.

That is a Hell of a lot more fun, than just tossing ones hands up in the air and figuratively walking away shaking ones head in disgust.
The latter is not being a "Fan", it's being a bitch and has no intrinsic value.
This is my experience as well. I'm recycling old points, which is not surprising in the least, considering the same kind of nitpicking repeats itself over and over, but I couldn't help but notice that when we're nitpicking older shows, it's usually light-hearted poking fun at the failings of something we love. But whenever I see any nitpicking about the Kurtzman era shows, it has a far more negative and acerbic, sometimes downright accusatory tone, presented as genuine faults and flaws distracting from enjoying the episode in question as a whole. If we see the Enterprise-D shoot phasers from its torpedo launcher or Voyager having a fleet's worth of torpedoes and replacement shuttlecraft, they're funny bits that are pointed out and laughed at. But Discovery launching torpedoes from its nacelle tips or a starbase described as 100 AU away from Earth being shown orbiting it are unquestionable proof that Discovery is an unwatchable manure pile that damages the franchise, and its creators are talentless hacks who don't have an ounce of respect for Gene's vision and don't know the littlest bit about Star Trek. Whenever Chakotay is described as a piece of wood, Sisko as fundamentally angry or Worf as the loser who always gets shot down by Picard and has his ass handed to him by the alien-of-the-week, it can be understood as "and we love them that way." But Michael Burnham is constantly described as this fundamentally unlikeable person without a single redeeming quality whatsoever who is diagnosed with every single personality disorder imaginable and her entire body consists of tear ducts, while Sylvia Tilly is so monumentally incompetent at literally everything that it is a miracle she even survived into adulthood without forgetting to breathe, and that's when we're not mocking the appearance of her actress.
 
Oh, I don't disagree, it does seem a lot more... enflamed. But as with political debate these days, it seems clear that the internet has had no small part in this.
Well, there is a measure of anonymity factor to it. Things that are said via letter, text, or on a online are divorced from humanity. There is no human element to remind us, no face to a name, to empathize with. We can dehumanize our online opponents merely focusing on their words, rather than who they are.

Now, it cuts both ways because this newer Trek is cutting in to older fans' and their views of what Trek "should" be. I use quotes because I personally think that Trek's definition is a pretty vast one and have thought it provided a variety platform for multiple people to explore within. But, more and more that box has been shrunk by virtue of online polemics that don't actually welcome anyone in.

There's not room for equality in terms of viewership. Stick to the Trek talking points and you'll be fine. Veer out of line and you'll be mocked, and laughed out and mostly by people saying "Hooray for our side!"

Yes, the internet made it worse, but it also allowed us a consequences free zone that dehumanizes us and allows the lesser aspects of our nature to shine through.
But Michael Burnham is constantly described as this fundamentally unlikeable person without a single redeeming quality whatsoever who is diagnosed with every single personality disorder imaginable and her entire body consists of tear ducts, while Sylvia Tilly is so monumentally incompetent at literally everything that it is a miracle she even survived into adulthood without forgetting to breathe, and that's when we're not mocking the appearance of her actress.
Yeah, it's a little too mean spirted at this point.
 
Was reading this interview with Terry Matalas, and he reveals how the parasites were indeed on the table for the villain this season. However they decided against it because:

"I do like the conspiracy bugs, I did consider for a hot minute, the conspiracy bugs. The issue with the conspiracy bugs is they kill their host. So that would mean anyone that you saw with a bug in them was dead, and you wouldn't be able to do the paranoia thriller that you wanted to do if it was somebody you loved, that meant they were dead."


Except, they don't. Admiral Quinn was alive and well at the end of that episode, despite having been infested with one of the parasites.
 
Was reading this interview with Terry Matalas, and he reveals how the parasites were indeed on the table for the villain this season. However they decided against it because:

"I do like the conspiracy bugs, I did consider for a hot minute, the conspiracy bugs. The issue with the conspiracy bugs is they kill their host. So that would mean anyone that you saw with a bug in them was dead, and you wouldn't be able to do the paranoia thriller that you wanted to do if it was somebody you loved, that meant they were dead."


Except, they don't. Admiral Quinn was alive and well at the end of that episode, despite having been infested with one of the parasites.
Heresy! Destroy the infidel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Was reading this interview with Terry Matalas, and he reveals how the parasites were indeed on the table for the villain this season. However they decided against it because:

"I do like the conspiracy bugs, I did consider for a hot minute, the conspiracy bugs. The issue with the conspiracy bugs is they kill their host. So that would mean anyone that you saw with a bug in them was dead, and you wouldn't be able to do the paranoia thriller that you wanted to do if it was somebody you loved, that meant they were dead."


Except, they don't. Admiral Quinn was alive and well at the end of that episode, despite having been infested with one of the parasites.
and the gills would give them away, unless they have mini spacesuits now or tap into the lungs :D
 
Heresy! Destroy the infidel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I guess Crusher was too liberal with the pain meds again and blamed it on the parasite!

UR4VdeM.jpg
 
Was reading this interview with Terry Matalas, and he reveals how the parasites were indeed on the table for the villain this season. However they decided against it because:

"I do like the conspiracy bugs, I did consider for a hot minute, the conspiracy bugs. The issue with the conspiracy bugs is they kill their host. So that would mean anyone that you saw with a bug in them was dead, and you wouldn't be able to do the paranoia thriller that you wanted to do if it was somebody you loved, that meant they were dead."


Except, they don't. Admiral Quinn was seen alive and well at the end of that episode, despite having been infested with one of the parasites.
I don't quite remember the specifics of the episode, but Memory Alpha more-or-less says the parasites cannot be removed surgically without killing the host as long as the mother creature is alive. Which would be a good enough explanation, but then... it also says the parasite will simply vacate its host and return to the mother creature if the host is incapacitated. Which is exactly what happened to Quinn and would be done before doing surgery anyway.
 
It's a real shame that the sets were struck. Industry-wide belt tightening underway.

SNW may be the only live-action Trek for a while. How spoiled were we?!

Different strokes for different folks but having 3 live-action series was pretty damn cool for the history of the franchise.
 
Last edited:
Yup. I knew that as well. Hence why I wasn't keen on a Titan series.

If Paramount is game for another live Trek show, a new ship is the way to go.

Enterprise-F Refit perhaps, no longer Odyssey class. Something new.
 

Well, that idea doesn’t make sense anyway unless its going to a be a longer arc (and Chabon planned for a longer Confederation arc). And if the arcs going to be longer, they may as well bring in Prime Chakotay instead of Confederation Chakotay.

If the goal was to reference the relationship only, I'm sure a passing line from Seven while Rios or Jurati explain to her why their relationship ended would have sufficed.

Good for Beltran on turning it down.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top