It provided a moment of schadenfreude for a select few viewers, though. That’s…something?
Spoilers Star Trek: Picard 3x09 - "Võx"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Three times, actually.
In "Legacy", they phasered into the ground so the transporters can beam the away team into Alliance territory.
In "A Matter Of Time", they phasered a bunch of holes to create a greenhouse effect because that planet was going through an induced ice age.
And in "Inheritance", where they phasered deep into the planet's core to help reliquify it.
I completely agree: Icheb’s and Ro’s deaths had dramatic impact, Hugh’s and Shelby’s were just gratuitous. Maddox’s was a complete mess.
It showed us a ship being taken over, the scale of the problem, and showed the audience that yes, this is every ship being violently taken over. From a certain perspective, there are now hundreds if not thousands of Picard/Locutus, and there will be even more people like Shaw. So what are we going to do?
The level of influence on Sevens motivations is overstated — is she so cold that it has to be personal? — and the level of influence on the TNG crews motivation is understated here, I feel.
Ugh this really sucks. I work in a creative field and intentionally do not engage in projects with people like this.
But the ships all being connected has nothing to do with Starfleet getting assimilated and her being killed. The events at Frontier Day would have happened the exact same way without the connected ships except for the Excelsior being destroyed the way it was.
The excelsior showed precisely *why* the networked ships were part of the plan. They may even have been the only part of the plan if they hadn’t laid tubules on Jack.
The implication is that the Borg were behind the push for networking for this purpose
Re: Icheb - It is the same level of motivation that audiences have been given for many male protagonists to justify their actions, etc. - "this time it's personal" -wife/girlfriend/pregnant wife/girlfriend/child murdered. Rarely is it asked why doing the right thing for the male protagonist has to be personal to make it worthwhile.
And I would have made the same point.
In fact I obliquely hinted at this when I mentioned Ro.
I am of that generation and subcultural influence that will happily take the pee out of ‘This time it’s personal!’ and consider the use of it, or the avoidance of it, to be unrelated to the sex/gender of the character.
It’s a fine trope in an action B-Movie, especially one a little tongue in cheek, but it does not work everywhere.
See for example how poorly a version of it worked out in the last Terminator film, not least in part because of the stories that had preceded it.
Historically speaking, it strongly applied to as many female characters in myth and legend as to men. There’s whole sub-genres of women going off to avenge or rescue their menfolk, or being motivated in some way by that same concept, for centuries.
That we ignore those is daft, and speaks more to sexism than when the trope is used in popular entertainment.
WIll this characters Death move the story forward. Is there a reason for it happening?
Now, sometimes, If I was running the show, I'd just randomly take somebody out for the only reason of.. space is dangerous, and your number could come up at any time for any reason. And definatly not for any reason, or story, just Tasha/redshirt them occasionally.
Just like Shaw, there was no point to it, The story could have progressed without his "Death" He was Tasha'd..
Now, sometimes, If I was running the show, I'd just randomly take somebody out for the only reason of.. space is dangerous, and your number could come up at any time for any reason. And definatly not for any reason, or story, just Tasha/redshirt them occasionally.
Just like Shaw, there was no point to it, The story could have progressed without his "Death" He was Tasha'd..
Yeah, Shaw’s death was so irrelevant I had already forgot about it. Like Hugh, he was killed to avoid having him around in the finale. And since he’s been pretty much useless since half season they probably should have gotten rid of him sooner.
While this is true, the TNG cast all had plot armour and the only reason Data was killed to to add some emotional impact. They definitely won't kill Data off after all the effort to bring him back and Picard has already died once already! Like it or not Shaw doesn't have the privilege of being a member of the TNG cast and his death was planned from the beginning. His character arc was well written despite what some people might want say about his treatment of Seven. He came to respect her and look past her borg background to respect her for the starfleet officer she is. Shaw wasn't Tasha'd. Tasha was killed off becsuse she didn't like what the producers were doing with her character. In the context of the show yes it was meaningless but Shaws death wasn't.
While I didn't like that Tasha was killed off, it did underline the fact that space is dangerous. And it also highlighted her dying doing what she was trained to do and wanted to do... protect her crew. Dying in an attempt to save others, I would argue, is not a meaningless death. There have been far better examples of meaningless deaths in the franchise.
"AND THE CHILDREN SHALL LEAD" - 2 security officers beamed into space.
"FRIENDSHIP ONE" - Joe Carey.
"UNITY" - Ensign Kaplan.
"Lonely Among Us" - Singh.
To name just a few.
"AND THE CHILDREN SHALL LEAD" - 2 security officers beamed into space.
"FRIENDSHIP ONE" - Joe Carey.
"UNITY" - Ensign Kaplan.
"Lonely Among Us" - Singh.
To name just a few.
I have a suspicion he may only be mostly dead.
Matalas said he’s dead.
Of course future projects might decide to resuscitate him. I actually liked his character, it was a fresh take on the captain.
oh, I heard he said he’s in every episode, and there was muttering about his potential in spin offs. Must have been a false trail
Matalas also said if they did a follow up series to Season 3 Shaw would be involved in some way.
This was after he was killed in Episode 9.
Brent Spiner asked for Data to die (in his mind, androids weren't supposed to age).
Is this a "you're sexist too" response? Because I don't think that was necessary to get your point across. Unless that was your primary point.
I agree that it's a bullshit motivation for any character. It devalues their humanity in a way. And I think we're all mostly in agreement that as a motivator for right action "this time it's personal" trope is stupid. But I would argue with the idea that the trope in myth can be called up to illustrate your point here since the average modern audience would probably not make the connection. "Wait a minute, this is just like those women/goddesses in mythology." The trope in modern entertainment media over the past 75 years or so is primarily used as a motivator for male protagonists. They still use this stupid-ass trope in broadcast television in nearly every cop show/procedural (at least in the US) - more than once! If it's been used as often for women as men over the past 75 years, I'd really like to see the numbers.