Spoilers Star Trek: Picard General Discussion Thread

[Lord Garth]

I don't believe I'm someone who should weigh in on this, but: does PIC having shown the NX-01 was refitted mean that TATV's holodeck depiction of 2161 is no longer the canonical version? Or was the NX-01 in service for longer than we were led to believe, and it was refitted after those events?

 

[James Cole]

I don't believe I'm someone who should weigh in on this, but: does PIC having shown the NX-01 was refitted mean that TATV's holodeck depiction of 2161 is no longer the canonical version? Or was the NX-01 in service for longer than we were led to believe, and it was refitted after those events?

I think it's a lot like Kirk and Project Phoenix, leaving the door open for some kind of follow up. And if the ENT era is ever revisited, I doubt TATV's account of what happened with Trip will stand. Even Paramount licensing let Pocket Books retcon that.

 

[Tomalak]

The ship in TATV could have been the refit. We don't see it from outside.

But it's just a holodeck programme anyway, it's an unreliable narrator.

 

[Quantum21]

1923 was the first Paramount Plus original show in the Nielsen streaming charts.
Paramount Plus only started to submit data to Nielsen a few weeks ago.
Update: The week from February 27 to March 5 was the first week Paramount Plus submitted data to Nielsen.

The reality is all the Trek shows have good metrics. Do a search on the Googles and they've always done well. Picard season 3 may well have hit a new level though.

 

[Quantum21]

NOOO NOT SHAW!!

SHAAAAAAAAWWW!!!

He deserved treatment not death, but he was an awful captain.

 

[Campe]

The reality is all the Trek shows have good metrics. Do a search on the Googles and they've always done well. Picard season 3 may well have hit a new level though.

Maybe. But is it sustainable? Let’s say a Matalas-run Star Trek: Legacy becomes a thing and as opposed to focusing on TNG, which let’s be fair, has been the most popular televised Star Trek focuses more on revisits to things and characters from DS9 or Voyager or the lesser characters from TNG. Members of the TNG cast might drop in on occasion but are not the focus of this series. Is that as such going to be successful? That’s a hard pill for me to swallow personally.

 

[Lord Garth]

Syndicated TV in the late 80s was complete trash, and the ratings significantly went up as the show improved, and they went down as the show got worse. What I said stands. Every episode was do or die.

This is spin on your part. I'll show the list for the average ratings.

Fall 1987 – Spring 1988: 8.55 Million TNG S1
Fall 1988 – Spring 1989: 9.14 Million TNG S2
Fall 1989 – Spring 1990: 9.77 Million TNG S3
Fall 1990 – Spring 1991: 10.58 Million TNG S4
Fall 1991 – Spring 1992: 11.50 Million TNG S5
Fall 1992 – Spring 1993: 10.83 Million TNG S6 (DS9 S1 Debuted in Spring 1993)
Fall 1993 – Spring 1994: 9.78 Million TNG S7 + DS9 S2


And you must be young. No one in the early-'90s thought TNG was ever in danger of being cancelled. It wasn't "do or die". I remember reading in early-1992 that the plan was for TNG to run seven seasons, and it would overlap with the then-just-announced DS9 for a year-and-a-half. By the end of 1992, beginning of 1993, a TNG Movie was also confirmed.

The franchise was expanding during this period. If TNG was in danger of ending at any time, that never would've been the case. Anyone who's old enough and was a fan at the time knows this. TNG was extremely popular, and some people don't like to hear this but, for a while, it eclipsed TOS. I don't say this easily, because I actually like TOS better than TNG, but that's what the situation was.

I was there. You were not.

The first time Star Trek was ever in danger of being cancelled -- after the 1960s -- was in 2003. ENT's ratings had sunk to the point where UPN gave Paramount and Rick Berman an ultimatum to revamp the show for its third season or it would be cancelled. That was the actual "do or die" situation. And the third season would've been the last if Paramount hadn't cut a deal with UPN and the budget wasn't slashed for the fourth season, so they could get the episode count up to near 100 for syndication purposes.

.
.
.

And anyway, DS9 lost half its audience during its first season, and then another half gradually by the seventh season. So its audience was quartered. Yet DS9 is still highly regarded on TrekBBS and by a lot of fans in general. Try telling them that DS9 wasn't anywhere near as good as TNG because it only had a fraction of the ratings. See how far that gets you.

 

[Lord Garth]

Maybe. But is it sustainable? Let’s say a Matalas-run Star Trek: Legacy becomes a thing and as opposed to focusing on TNG, which let’s be fair, has been the most popular televised Star Trek focuses more on revisits to things and characters from DS9 or Voyager or the lesser characters from TNG. Members of the TNG cast might drop in on occasion but are not the focus of this series. Is that as such going to be successful? That’s a hard pill for me to swallow personally.

When you put it that way, I agree with you. But I guess we'll see. Or not see.

 

[Alexander Corrino]

Maybe. But is it sustainable? Let’s say a Matalas-run Star Trek: Legacy becomes a thing and as opposed to focusing on TNG, which let’s be fair, has been the most popular televised Star Trek focuses more on revisits to things and characters from DS9 or Voyager or the lesser characters from TNG. Members of the TNG cast might drop in on occasion but are not the focus of this series. Is that as such going to be successful? That’s a hard pill for me to swallow personally.

The fandom will start to complain in no time about how plots are being rehashed and old enemies re-appear, etc etc. There IS such a thing as too much nostalgia, which IS what the show would heavily rely on. There will be the usual hype around a guest appearance of a TNG character, yes, but even those will eventually be shunned like "ugh who are they pulling out of their hat NOW, can this show ever stand on its own or what".

In short: It will be ENT all over again at some point, with people going down the "been there, done that, got the t-shirt, can we have something new and innovative now please" road.

 

[Campe]

In short: It will be ENT all over again at some point, with people going down the "been there, done that, got the t-shirt, can we have something new and innovative now please" road.

And then they’ll whine that it’s too different. There is literally no pleasing Star Trek fans.

 

[Alexander Corrino]

And then they’ll whine that it’s too different. There is literally no pleasing Star Trek fans.

Well, you know the old saying - "nobody hates Star Trek like Star Trek fans do"

 

[Ronin'sCreamyCandle]

He didn't do anything. It's simply the circus act of having the original cast back. That's literally the only reason it's been better received. People wanted a nostalgia trip, apparently, and they got it. The writing is just as horrific as it was the first two seasons.

I disagree.

 

[cooleddie74]

The writing's not great but to say it's not an improvement is just patently ridiculous.

 

[fireproof78]

He deserved treatment not death, but he was an awful captain.

We did not see him at his best for painfully obvious reasons. Calling him an awful captain is premature since we have limited information.

 

[Lord Hierarch]

He deserved treatment not death, but he was an awful captain.

He seemed like a fine captain when he was in charge.

At worst, he has a shit personality when he's had his ship hijacked, shot at, blown up, and hunted, all at the behest of the guy who gave him one terrible, bad, no-good, day.

 

[Campe]

The writing's not great but to say it's not an improvement is just patently ridiculous.

An uptick from season two (and the very end of season one) is not a high bar. But point taken.

 

[Quantum21]

We did not see him at his best for painfully obvious reasons. Calling him an awful captain is premature since we have limited information.

The actor himself acknowledges that Shaw was playing it safe and timidly due to trauma. He should be in counseling for years and nowhere near a starship.

The answers the show gives us is that he's an asshole because of his experiences. He needs to deal with those experiences.

 

[fireproof78]

The actor himself acknowledges that Shaw was playing it safe and timidly due to trauma. He should be in counseling for years and nowhere near a starship.

No, not years. Yes to therapy but not in the way that people seem to think. Taking him out of the captain's chair because of trauma is the same attitude that basically sidelined Picard in First Contact. Shaw would have been fine if he had done his actual mission, and not Picard's errand and getting members of his crew killed.

 

[Quantum21]

No, not years. Yes to therapy but not in the way that people seem to think. Taking him out of the captain's chair because of trauma is the same attitude that basically sidelined Picard in First Contact. Shaw would have been fine if he had done his actual mission, and not Picard's errand and getting members of his crew killed.

But it raises a question how Starfleet can allow such a person in the chair. It reflects badly on them.

 

[Steve Martinez]

Okay so I must have missed something. In one of the episodes of this season Worf states that he's the slayer of Gowron. When did this happen? I don't remember this happening on TNG. Was it on DS9 or something?