SNW and Lower Decks at least bring something new to the table and deliver some actual story content as well. Picard S3 is literally just "'Member TNG? I 'member."
This certainly feels like someone trying to make Matalas a religious icon.
"Star Trek: Picard" Scores at Saturn Awards!
- Thread starter Danja
- Start date
Decided to dip my toe into the cesspit, formally known as Twitter, to see what I could easily find in regards to the Cult of Terry. Didn't take much to find these gems amongst the many many others.....
Tell me again that a Cult of Personally hasn't formed around Terry Matalas.
Tell me again that a Cult of Personally hasn't formed around Terry Matalas.
Last edited:
From Terry Matalas's interview with Den of Geek:
There is knee jerk criticism of this kind of thing in big pop-culture franchises, with some armchair social media critics determined to write things off for “too much fan service” or “nostalgia bait.” For Matalas, this argument feels “lazy,” because with something as massive as Star Trek, it’s not just about Easter eggs and throwbacks, it’s simply the fact that the franchise has been around for five decades.
“If you ever sit down with somebody who’s 83, if you ever sit down with somebody who’s 46, we spend a lot of time talking about the past,” Matalas says. “Star Trek is 56 years old now.”
He continues, “If you go into somebody’s house and they’ve lived there for 56 years, do you point at everything on their walls and their furniture and the music they listen to and say, ‘Member Berries!’ Or is that just the world that they lived in, you know? I get that there may be some people who have that point of view, but you know, when you have this many people responding to it in some way, I don’t think you can thumb your nose at this stuff.” ... Matalas points out that for all the nostalgia, nothing about Picard season 3 was crafted to simply retell stories that had already been told.
“Nobody wanted to make TNG season 8,” he stresses. “None of these actors wanted to play their characters from that series. They wanted to play them differently and changed from the decades. They wanted to play them challenged and damaged and different, the way that [older] human beings are in their 70s and 80s."
No.
Prima facie commentary is the lingua franca of fandom. This board would be a ghost town...
Thing is, as has been pointed out before, the third season of Picard does many of the exact same things that the previous two seasons as well as every Disco season has done, which many in fandom have complained about. You got it all, padded story arc that takes too long to get to the point, a "Mary Sue" character who is instrumental to saving the day. Even the bridge crew being non-entities, which for some reason is condemned on Disco, but loved here. The only difference is that it was a TNG reunion which seemed enough for the vocal elements of fandom to give it carte blanche on things they have rallied against previously.
Hell, there are a lot of aspects the season just outright copied from earlier entries in the franchise, like the nebula battle in the third episode basically being the Mutara Nebula battle in TWOK complete with the viewscreen crapping out (which really makes no sense here given this viewscreen is in fact a windshield). Even Data's resurrection is markedly similar to how it was done in the novels. There was no real originality in the season at all.
Many reviewers, including those who are generally positive about the season have said the storyline was the weakest aspect of the season. The writing on the season makes it clear no one was really interested in a story which makes sense or is even particularly good. Everyone's coming back for the TNG reunion, capped off with a finale where they are back on the Enterprise D, just like the days of yore. Toss in more easter eggs, memberberries and just outright fanwank than you can shake a stick at and the end result is the rather embarrassing mess we have that for some reason is hailed as a masterpiece by many despite the fact that of this level of writing was done on anything other than a feel good nostalgia trip, it would ridiculed mercilessly, and rightfully so.
Exactly so.
Exactly so. Seeing this season praises while doing things previous seasons had been raked over the coals for is very strange to me. Being told the only reason I don't like it is because of some TNG bias ignores the fact that Season 3 did some things poorly with the characters.
It's not just knee jerk reaction but honest befuddlement at this dissonance.
Digging up an old post where I copy and pasted from Christopher Monfette's Twitter. He worked with Matalas on all four seasons of 12 MONKEYS and was on PS2/PS3 as a co-executive producer.
Yeah, that's my personal favourite. Season 3 isn't my favourite, I must hate TNG.
For someone who hates TNG, I sure had a funny way of showing it over the years. What with all the toys, models, figures, artwork, and such I've had throughout my life. Hell, I was Data for Halloween back in the early 90's. Wish I still had that picture.
I also question the idea that fans want to be serviced.
First and foremost I want to be entertained. I don't want my ears tickled.
First and foremost I want to be entertained. I don't want my ears tickled.
It might just be that people expect different things from different shows based on their expectations with those specific characters and actors. If I go into Picard season 3, where they've promoted it as a TNG reunion, I'm not expecting "New Coke." In fact, I would argue the appeal for many about season 3 is specifically because it feels as close as Paramount+ has gotten to Berman-era "Classic Coke."
That might not be the version of Star Trek that appeals to you or others, but it seems popular with a lot of people. I can't tell someone they're wrong for not liking something. But I can tell you why I liked this and why I think it did well and is winning awards.
The Borg reveal is NOT the story-arc of the season. The story-arc for season 3 is the reunion of the TNG characters and seeing how they've changed and become different. And that happens over the first 8 episodes.
Beverly living a life on the edge of space. Picard meeting a son he didn't know. Riker having to confront how losing his son changed him, and affected both his outlook on life and relationship with Troi. Worf, similar to how Spock learned to have balance, finding a version of Klingon honor that is able to have empathy for others, especially with Rashi. Geordi is now a family man that has to be pushed back into action. And we get a version of Data that is similar to his old-self, but not quite.
The Borg-Changeling stuff is only the MacGuffin that triggers the plot.
How is Jack a Mary Sue?
He's not perfect or portrayed that way. And in the end, he gets in over his head, almost dooms everything, and has to have his mother and father come save him
Did anyone expect the Titan bridge crew to be featured in their own subplots? Especially, in a season where the story has to serve the original 7 TNG characters, plus Shaw, Seven, and Rashi. Beyond that, I thought with what little time they did give those actors, they stood out as much as some of the characters that have been in dozens of episodes of Discovery.
I think Discovery gets banged for that also because it's called Star Trek: Discovery and not Star Trek: Burnham. And if you like the Burnham character, and think the show is great when everything comes down to her being the center of the action, it'll work for you. If you don't like the character or think sometimes it's overwrought, you start wondering why no one else on the ship is able to do anything but listen to Burnham update them on what's going on.
Could it possibly be the audience has more affection for the TNG characters than they do the Discovery and other Nu-Trek characters? That maybe when you like Michael Dorn and like watching Worf, some people are able to cut him some slack when he does something goofy that maybe you don't when it's Stamets.
I think we've reached the different silos talking past each other stage...
Everything from TOS to ENT was designed to appeal to a larger group of people. By the necessity of broadcast television, Star Trek viewers were bound to be a coalition of diverse interests, liking the franchise for different reasons. The Kurtzman era portion of NuTrek has specifically said they want to make very different shows to appeal to different portions of the fanbase (which would then ostensibly appeal to different types of new people as well).
No one hates Star Trek more than Star Trek fans. The fact that a few people that really seem to love SNW hate PS3 shows the strategy is working. SNW has next to nothing that I like about Star Trek in it, so I'm not going to like that show, let alone the whole rewriting continuity thing that makes me dislike it more than the usual NuTrek bete noire.
So, the fanbase is fractured. Therefore serve the segments proportionally. Some seem to want SNW to be the only game in town
Everything from TOS to ENT was designed to appeal to a larger group of people. By the necessity of broadcast television, Star Trek viewers were bound to be a coalition of diverse interests, liking the franchise for different reasons. The Kurtzman era portion of NuTrek has specifically said they want to make very different shows to appeal to different portions of the fanbase (which would then ostensibly appeal to different types of new people as well).
No one hates Star Trek more than Star Trek fans. The fact that a few people that really seem to love SNW hate PS3 shows the strategy is working. SNW has next to nothing that I like about Star Trek in it, so I'm not going to like that show, let alone the whole rewriting continuity thing that makes me dislike it more than the usual NuTrek bete noire.
So, the fanbase is fractured. Therefore serve the segments proportionally. Some seem to want SNW to be the only game in town
No slack is given if the story doesn't work. Affection or not. I don't cut slack for a story that doesn't work.
Who hates it here?
I don't think it's a 10. Or a 9. It uses the same storytelling plots as S1 yet S1 is panned. It's confusing as fuck, but it certainly is not hate.
And that's a foolish position to take.
Show us someone saying that. Beyond jokingly. You guys were all about the burden of proof the other night, so come on.....
Show us.
You might catch some people saying they prefer SNW. You might catch people saying if it came down to one or the other, they'd sacrifice this supposed "Legacy series" for more Strange New Worlds. But show me where a Strange New Worlds fan has said that Akiva Goldsman should be the only option.
If this fandom is fractured, there is certainly one said that is far more toxic than the other, and it ain't the "NuTrek" fans.
Last edited:
The only Trek series I dislike as a whole -- as opposed to "just not into" -- is Enterprise.
As far as "my side" vs. "your side", I was a moderator here for six years. "Old Trek" and "New Trek" meant something different back then, but I had to give out warnings to both sides, and I think it was pretty equal. I put aside my own opinions, tried to be fair, and that's how it ended up coming out. I remember complaining "both sides are just as bad as each other". Towards the end, that was one of the reasons I stepped down, besides changing life circumstances at the time.
Nothing's changed. Except the names of the series being argued about, and who's on which side.
As far as myself, a quick trip through time...
1990s: DS9 vs. VOY --> Sided with DS9
2000s: ENT vs. Farscape and BSG --> Sided with Farscape and BSG
2010s: Discovery vs. The Orville --> Sided with Discovery
2020s: Picard vs. SNW --> Sided with Picard
Darker-Looking and Serialized is what does it for me. Just the way it's always been. Doesn't really have to do with Old Trek or New Trek. That's just my specific tastes.
As far as "my side" vs. "your side", I was a moderator here for six years. "Old Trek" and "New Trek" meant something different back then, but I had to give out warnings to both sides, and I think it was pretty equal. I put aside my own opinions, tried to be fair, and that's how it ended up coming out. I remember complaining "both sides are just as bad as each other". Towards the end, that was one of the reasons I stepped down, besides changing life circumstances at the time.
Nothing's changed. Except the names of the series being argued about, and who's on which side.
As far as myself, a quick trip through time...
1990s: DS9 vs. VOY --> Sided with DS9
2000s: ENT vs. Farscape and BSG --> Sided with Farscape and BSG
2010s: Discovery vs. The Orville --> Sided with Discovery
2020s: Picard vs. SNW --> Sided with Picard
Darker-Looking and Serialized is what does it for me. Just the way it's always been. Doesn't really have to do with Old Trek or New Trek. That's just my specific tastes.
Last edited:
And yet it was teased for a majority of the season in the form of the mysterious red door seen in Jack's visions.
The same is true of Michael Burnham, and yet...
That still doesn't explain why people are constantly demanding characters that aren't even part of Disco's main cast should be getting attention, or why fans will accept and make excuses for the exact same situation happening on Picard.
If only we could be so lucky.
I mean, yes and no. The discourse over NuTrek has not exactly been friendly, especially with Discovery (and I'll own that as one who can be very insufferable as a fan). Part of that is my own personal frustration at being told what I'm liking is bad, and having dealt with that since I was a TOS fan and didn't get onboard with TNG. Life is weird sometimes.
But, the other side is something I think is very uncomfortable and that is this idea of a Trek not for me. People usually want Trek to appeal to them, and especially if the Berman era was that Trek there was a long standing run of shows that fit that mold perfectly. It didn't deviate to heavily, and it all felt relatively the same.
That's not the case now, and if that's the first time feeling like "Oh, this Trek isn't for me," it can be a bit dissonant to feel on the outside looking in. So, I think each part has played a part, while insisting the other is wrong.
I think the other side is simply that any disagreement in the past was not always so immediate and reactionary as now when technology is more freely available to chat, and put out your thoughts quickly. Now, we get the immediate reactions: "OMG! Best ever!" or "That was garbage." and then we argue over it. Things that were not black and white before suddenly become that way. And I think that works against us in a discussion format because, at least in theory, most of us here like Star Trek in some capacity. But, it feels very black and white now and its frustrating to be tossed in a box and not heard.
I tend to agree with this and its my biggest frustration. Pic Season 3 gets a pass and praised for things done in other NuTreks and they are criticized for it. The mystery box, the asshole character who don't fit in to Trek's view of humanity, and the use of previously unknown family members to try to force meaningful connection quickly.
Which Star Trek am I talking about?
Both Discovery and Picard
That's why I was glad Paramount+ had the five-series model while it lasted. They could probably get by with three. As long as there was a "TOS" Show, a "TNG" Show, and a "Future" Show, there'd be something for everyone and in theory everyone could leave each other alone and let them enjoy their shows in peace.
Debate and discussion is fine. But when labels start getting thrown around, "You're in a cult!" "You're starting to sound like you worship Lord Terry!" that's what makes me not want to participate in a discussion anymore. It makes me worry that if I want to talk about something I like, I'll have those accusations thrown at me. It makes me feel really uncomfortable about posting here any longer. It makes it not enjoyable and it makes it feel like this is not an environment where I can continue to discuss Star Trek I like.
Talks about cults. David Koresh had a cult. Charles Manson had a cult. The guy I know who tells me with 100% seriousness that China's making robots who will take over our society starting in 2025, I don't think he's in a cult, but that's the type of person I start looking at funny... Those are the cults. Those are the crazy people.
So, with here, I really wish things would just come back to down to Earth a little. We should all just be able to leave each other alone and accept that we all have different opinions.
I think the environment here is driving people away because they don't want to deal with it. Or don't feel comfortable posting here because of it.
Last edited:
We live in an age of extremes. Online and in the real world. I don't see things moderating back to normal ever.
That, and I don't ever see people understanding the definition of "Mary Sue" ever again.
Last edited:
