Spoilers Was Picard Season 3 an Allegory for anything?

Not yet, but it's true. It was Picard who told Q those fateful words, "We're prepared for anything." Then Q snapped his fingers.

 

Janeway poisoning the Borg, Picard agitating them over and over... as an allegory, it holds up perfectly for older people saying the youth of today are terrible because they struggle with the problems they themselves created.

 

I don't know about allegory, but yeah, it's about the importance of past and legacy. From what Varis says in the beginning to what Picard says on the museum bridge at the end.

 

I think the shows orient towards who's in them. PIC S3 is today's version of a late TOS Movie, so the old people save the day. PRO is about kids, so it's the kids who save the day. The Kelvin Films had the 20-somethings save the day. DSC, LD, and SNW have the more traditional ages, so not too old, not too young.

 

They're equally as lazy with the Boomer label. In fact, I think it's silly that someone born in 1946 and graduated from high school in 1964 is considered to be part of the same generation as someone who was born in 1964 and graduated from high school in 1982. If anything, I think a younger Boomer would have more in common with an older Gen Xer.

When people look at "generations", especially something like Generation X, I think they underestimate how truly sharp the divide between the '80s and '90s really was. Or the '60s/'70s and '70s/'80s divides, for that matter. We haven't had anything like that in the 21st Century, where change is so much more gradual and incremental.

But, while we're at it: Gene Roddenberry (born in 1921) is credited with creating TNG (and thus Picard and Q), Maurice Hurley (born in 1939) wrote "Q Who", and Patrick Stewart was born in 1940. John DeLancie (born in 1948) is the only Boomer part of the fateful little exchange in that episode, which led to Picard encountering the Borg for the first time. So, really, it's the Greatest Generation and the Silent Generation who conceived of the ideas and wrote the scenario... and then a Boomer really only just happened to be the catalyst who brought it all to life.

 

Some of the factions that post about Star Trek on Twitter.

&

I guess my ideal model here would be how the Stargate franchise handled continuity. Each season had a loose serialized arc, there would be stand alone episodes, and a random episode from season 2 might have a follow up in season 8. And they were comfortable about using the "previously on____" to refresh old plot points, even if it might spoil something in the upcoming episode.

Let's say Legacy goes with semi-serialization. They could avoid the exposition heavy as you know, the Changelings are shape shifters from the Gamma Quadrant that fought a war you should be well aware of by just doing a "previously on____" from TNG/DS9/VGR. Plus this would encourage them to spend the money to remaster DS9 and VGR. Each series could be done for the price of three NuTrek episodes.

To be fair, the lighting was a Paramount+ app problem. When I rewatched the entire season just before my P+ sub ran out, the early episodes did look surprisingly brighter. And, I wouldn't be surprised in the final BD release has some revised color timing.

On the fuck... I think people object for two reasons. The first, they might have gotten into Star Trek as kids, and don't like the idea of a TNG follow up that isn't say PG-13 that they themselves couldn't show their kids. The second, a more Watsonian one, that Star Trek never used fuck before, that in TVH Kirk and co weren't familiar with that type of cursing, and that it thus knocks people out of the narrative.

I'd say split the difference, and if you really want an F-bomb, have two audio tracks with and without it.

It does have the more Nick Meyer / Harve Bennett elements that Gene Roddenberry and Rick Berman would have both vetoed out of the gate.

If anything, P+ should have curated themed Star Trek playlists a la those Blu-ray sets that only had the Q episodes, the Borg episodes, the Klingon episodes etc.

If I remember correctly (this is a BBS, not a submitted paper...) Boomers were originally attached to the 1946 to 1964 dates based on the post WW2 surge in birthrates, that only returned to normal baseline in 1964. One reason the 1960s was so disruptive is there were just a lot more young adults about, and able to win arguments just based on their generational size.

And yes, culturally there is no easy beginning or end point with Gen X. On my side of it, older millennials have the Xennial or Oregon Trail labels. And all Millennials come up against elite overproduction and the lack of jobs we'd be fully qualified to fill.

Haha, I remember the first time a Gen Zer told me about our respective different generations. Was a shock.

The major pivot point for the transition from Millennials to Gen Z (at least in the US) was access to a smartphone. There was a major spike in mental health problems in 2014, which has been tied to social networking apps, increased bullying, and feelings of alienation / inadequacy.

This hit at different times in different countries.

And, to bring the post full circle... Season 3 has a very Gen X mentality -- NCC-1975 anyone? Whereas Akiva Goldsman and Michael Chabon were born respectively in 1962 and 1963.

 

Could work. That was nowhere near my point but I do like this idea.

The hell does this even mean?

 

Todd Stashwick on Captain Shaw’s Unique “Gen X” Appeal

And the season is fairly pragmatic, with the already identified 80's vibes.

 

Terry Matalas, born in 1975, created PIC Season 3. Lord Garth, born in 1979, loves PIC Season 3.

It computes.

I didn't think about this before now. They really should've. This seems like it would've been an easy thing for Paramount+ to do, if they'd have been inclined.

 

Pragmatism is a Gen X thing?

I swear that this whole generational thing is just made up bullshit to sell tickets. That article clarifies it all of it about as clear as mud.

 

Do you realize that the idea of there being factions in Trek fandom literally goes against one of the biggest core tenets of the entire franchise?

 

Yes, which is why Legacy is the most logical choice. It satisfies the needs of the many, while marginalizing the less popular opinions by showing them to be less popular, and therefore less acceptable.

 

Needs? Let’s try wants.

 

How dare you suggest that Star Trek is not a need!

 

I know. I’m a terrible human being for such awful crimes against my fellow Trekkers.

 

There's also the allegory of this season representing the Star Trek franchise as a whole.

Matalas' perspective (shared by many) that the best of Star Trek is the 90s era. The quality peak of the franchise is the Last Generation (the 90s). The Berman era.

Therefore the modern era looking back to the past for direction and salvation. Ignoring Discovery, LD, SNW, Pro, and to an extent the earlier seasons of Picard.

 

Wouldn't that make Lord Terry a somewhat... hubristic person? He's assured in his knowledge that 90's Trek is best Trek, so to hell with everything else?

 

You could apply a similar hubris (or 'sheer f*cking hubris') to the other producers of Nu Trek as well, based on many of the controversial and divisive choices made.