What about Prodigy?
Why the hate for Alex Kurtzman?
- Thread starter HotRod
- Start date
I haven’t watched it to be honest. Not sure it be for me.
It was Patrick Stewart himself who said "we're not here to have fun." It seems Trek fandom has turned that into a Holy Edict.
Orchestral and pop music appearing out of nowhere as somebody decides to start singing. Be reasonable, that is pretty stupid. There’s no shame in calling a spade a spade.
I thought everyone brought this up. That there were no rules and made no sense and Picard could have used it to save his brother or Kirk could have gone back to the Enterprise-B. Mr. Plinkett's review brought it up and even before people used to joke that everything after Generations was just Picard's dream.
They had to leave the Nexus to stop Soren though. Sure I guess they could have saved Robert and Rene and the B but it wouldn't have been real and Kirk makes it very clear that it isn't the same as the real thing. Picard could have brought dreamed up a facsimile of his family but it wouldn't have been the same for him.
Not everyone would be happy in a perfect happy fantasy. I'd be happy in a dream land where everything I wished for came true but not everyone would.
Unless you mean they could have left to those specific points but then there'd either be two Picards for a while or he would just randomly disappear from the Enterprise mid sentence one day but they'd get a head start on Soren and could just arrest him on the Amigosa station and warp away.
Generations pretty much felt like a first draft script. I don’t think RM and BB took the necessary time to sit down and really think about the implications of the Nexus storyline. One of the biggest plot holes in Trek history is: why didn’t Picard just go back to prior to the start of the film, warn his brother and Rene to evacuate and, at the first sign of Soren, chuck him in the brig with extra security. I know, I know, artistic license and all that but…it makes no sense.
People keep forgetting that Moore and Braga were writing "All Good Things..." at the same time as GENERATIONS. Plus the two were, outside of Jeri Taylor, the most experienced people in the TNG season 7 writers room. (Which was not a great deal, mind you, since both basically got their start on TNG only a few years prior.)
I think it was more a case of burning out for them.
All that said, whatever flaws were in GENERATIONS, it's still not a bad film. And "All Good Things..." is still one of (and for many, the) best finale in the franchise to date.
I think it was more a case of burning out for them.
All that said, whatever flaws were in GENERATIONS, it's still not a bad film. And "All Good Things..." is still one of (and for many, the) best finale in the franchise to date.
It came from the fissure/anomaly/rift. As did the need to sing.
I don't understand why it seems like so many aren't getting this. The episode explains it and once it establishes the rule, it sticks with it.
Is it just that people hate the musical genre and don't understand the episode followed all the rules of said genre?
More like people aren't allowing themselves to like SNW. I guarantee, had there been a musical episode on a Trek series where Terry Matalas was showrunner, everyone who says they hate Subspace Rhapsody would be tripping over themselves to say it was the best Trek EVER!!!
Last edited:
I dunno. Some folks just don't like musicals.
Not necessarily. It's no different than people loving TNG but hate horror, so horror themed episodes like "Phantasms", "Night Terrors", or "Schisms" are not liked by them. Or love all the shows but hate courtroom dramas, so ones like "The Drumhead", "The Measure Of A Man", and "RULES OF ENGAGEMENT" are episodes at the bottom of their lists.
I love SNW. But I hate "Subspace Rhapsody" because it's a musical. And I hate musicals. It's as simple as that. Doesn't matter which series would make a musical. I'd feel the same way about it. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Not sure why this is a difficult concept to grasp.
It's because it doesn't make any sense to me. It's an explanation that doesn't explain anything.
Most musicals don't need to establish a reason for the music and singing, because people aren't really singing, it's just the way the story is presented. But Star Trek decided that it was really happening which means every single thing that happens has a big question mark over it.
Space anomalies aren't a magic spell, they don't just manipulate people into coming up with lyrics on the fly and singing along with music that everyone else is hearing. You can't just use that as a technobabble answer and expect people to be satisfied with that. Even The Flash came up with a more plausible reason for its musical episode, and that used literal super powers.
In fact, they should've used that as their inspiration instead of Buffy, and had crew members connected up with a neural link that put them into someone's dreamworld for Star Trek reasons. They're hearing music the person already has in their head and singing their own inner thoughts because of the direct connection to their subconscious, or whatever. Dreams don't need so many explanations.
Last edited:
Similar threads
