Am I the Only One Who Desperately Craves a Captain Shaw Series?
- Thread starter aeverett
- Start date
This character sucks. He's supposed to be a STARFLEET CAPTAIN, but because it's a lame TV show written by dumb people, we get another character who acts like an unprofessional teenager instead of a naval officer.
And no, it's not cute that he and every other character on this show is written like Joss Whedon would write characters in an Avengers movie. Yeah we get it. You foolishly think that if you write "hip" (even though it isn't), informal, quirky dialogue that you'll expand your audience past elderly TNG fans. Won't work. Only utterly unshakeable TNG fans (rubes, really) will pay for this swill.
And no, it's not cute that he and every other character on this show is written like Joss Whedon would write characters in an Avengers movie. Yeah we get it. You foolishly think that if you write "hip" (even though it isn't), informal, quirky dialogue that you'll expand your audience past elderly TNG fans. Won't work. Only utterly unshakeable TNG fans (rubes, really) will pay for this swill.
I genuinely enjoyed it when LD poked fun at that.
But I can seriously see Seven using her Borg tech to save Shaw.
But I can seriously see Seven using her Borg tech to save Shaw.
Your inability to criticize a television program without personally insulting its writers is not a substitute for a personality.
Neither is your inability to accurate identify different writing styles.
Have him get an Artificial Heart, just like a certain Starfleet Legend, and we're set for the sourest version of Shaw.
Could "dumb" be articulated? Look at Commodore Decker from "The Doomsday Machine" - he broke down, too. While I agree earlier seasons of PIC were hit or miss or not feeling quite right, that doesn't mean everything and everyone involved was "dumb". Maybe misplaced or not grafted in fully or properly given the universe they live in with replicators and so on, but before I digress--
Pandering to informal use of language, colloquialisms, and slang, I can't disagree. Did 1960s Star Trek use diminutives? (Did 1980s/90s Trek?) Nope.
Did 1960s Trek have Kirk saying "Groovy" all the time? Well, no - thankfully! McCoy had his quips about being a country doctor and not a railway station, but he was more defining of a trope than coasting on one, and this leads into:
Did 1960s Trek use slang and colloquialisms? Apart from McCoy and even then he still has a more formal approach to present his sarcastic quips with, there aren't any that I recollect as it's been way too long since I've rewatched TOS, but early TNG incontrovertibly had - the hipster fluff, including sophomoric scripts were clearly there in 1987. (Some I like, some I like despite the moments because of how well the episode is overall, but those moments are still detracting. It happens. Never mind individual preferences; sometimes one has to roll with the differences, but I digress: ) Geordi used a golf reference about a bogey and it's a head-scratcher. Another involved a sleigh, or was Riker the one who mentioned that? Those moments still feel off, sure and there's no argument from me that it's no less cringey just because it was made in the past, but even in those seasons it's pretty obvious that those moments were more exceptions than the rule. Now add in how TNG was finding itself and, guess what, modern Trek - in all its incarnations - also have had to find itself and find ways to be its own thing without being too far out from what makes Trek unique to other shows/franchises/etc. What failed then could possibly work in the future. Indeed, "Wink of an Eye" isn't my favorite TOS episode, but "Blink of an Eye" takes the same premise and makes it as bulletproof as it is engaging. A failure from the past can still be made better. Look at Lower Decks and how they turned the Pakleds into a formidable force. That was an awesome reveal.
Jonathan Frakes himself had a valid point in comparing DSC's detractors (which includes me, as some of the scripts were bad or hollow, but I did like Mudd, the actors definitely are good with the material, and before I digress again-- ) to Trek fans circa 1987. And he was right.
LD never ceases to amaze me, what it pokes at, how much I love it all, and while expanding the lore in clever ways. I love this show. I don't get all the references from old Trek, and for most that I do get they don't come across as 25 solid minutes of "see what we're pointing at, nudge nudge!" The references aren't the plot; if the plot was a cake, then the references are the icing. Makes for a far tastier cake than a cake made solely of
It's not impossible, but it'd be more fun if they used a different tactic that felt authentic and not rely on what 90s Trek (VOY) did too often and rely on Treknobabble/Borgieblab for way too many things. Even "Timeless", a classic, has one moment of cringe with Borgieblab that stretches things a tad.
I enjoy the hell out of it too. I still hope there's a big reveal at the end of the series that explains it was actually a 24th century entertainment program. The series finale could a Riker heavy episode that ends with Riker and Troi in real life sitting in their quarters on the Titan watching the credits roll and Will complaining about how cartoonish they make him out to be.
Normally I would agree but given the way they set Shaw up as being massively damaged psychologically by his experiences at Wolf 359, it would be a heck of an arc to throw at the character. Especially now that, with his seeming last breath, he actually called Seven by her Borg name.
Of course, any idea has the potential to be executed well. But I question how a prequel series would work. I don't want to rewind Shaw back to before his character development in this season of Picard. He's just an ass all the time with no redeeming qualties?
Guess what, it apparently still could happen. Assuming there's even a future for Terry Matalas Star Trek amidst Kurtzman's current output.
It's a much easier fix than resurecting Data.
They kept what happened to Shaw quite vague and not definitive. Likely intentionally. So many ways for him to be saved.
I don't think we'll ever get Shaw as a series lead. But instead as an Admiral supporting character... in the unlikely chance that this Star Trek timeline continues.
It's a much easier fix than resurecting Data.
They kept what happened to Shaw quite vague and not definitive. Likely intentionally. So many ways for him to be saved.
I don't think we'll ever get Shaw as a series lead. But instead as an Admiral supporting character... in the unlikely chance that this Star Trek timeline continues.
Make him the suffering Commodore that has to deal with Captain Seven all the time.
Shaw is dead. His whole character arc served the pathway for 7of9 becoming captain of the Titan. I mean he received a fatal phaser shot, uttered dramatic last words, for me this looks like a clear case of a character who is supposed to stay dead.
Also Stashwick is a moderately successful actor, if CBS decides to greenlight a new Star Trek 25th century series, he might just not be availabe. Jeri Ryan on the other hand would probably accept about every Trek series/movie/special involvement.
Also Stashwick is a moderately successful actor, if CBS decides to greenlight a new Star Trek 25th century series, he might just not be availabe. Jeri Ryan on the other hand would probably accept about every Trek series/movie/special involvement.
*looks at Spock*
*Look at Picard, repeatedly*
I'm just saying, if Seven still has some Borg nanoprobes in her bloodstream, she might be able to pull a Neelix on him.
Shaw suffering because Borg technology saved his life seems strangely appropriate.
I'm just saying, if Seven still has some Borg nanoprobes in her bloodstream, she might be able to pull a Neelix on him.
Shaw suffering because Borg technology saved his life seems strangely appropriate.
Similar threads
