Picard: wishing for a thing does not make it so.
Yeah, so just my two cents.....
The Ship Of Theseus really does apply to the E-D we see in Picard. It made me cry, and I accept her as the D. But atleast half the ship isn't the original ship, with a completely new Engineering hull. So there's that already.
As for the entire saucer section......
Part of me feels that, yes, the bottom few decks MUST have been compressed. When Voyager crashed in Timeless, I believe Future Kim says something like 'decks 11 through 15 are now deck 10' or something. So I would assume that happened here as well.
Playing devil's advocate though.... These things are often under a lot of physical stress, they're built to take a hit. Plus, there's the SIF. If, and that's a big IF, that held, I am willing to turn a blind eye and say in universe, PERHAPS they held. I don't think they did personally, but let's play along here.
And yes, by all logical reasons, the ship is most definitely unsalvageable. It makes sense to remove it from the planet, but honestly, having ships in orbit with huge cargo transporters that simply beam up sections and materialize it in bulk cargo bays to be used as scrap for raw material would make more sense, and easier.
Now.... Ok... The hull did survive AND it was lifted off the planet. Today we would call it a financial total loss. Sure, all the buckling on the hull could be repaired, the entire interior redone. Build a new Engineering hull, slap on some decals with the registry and name and there we go.
But the effort, time, resources it would take to do that would make no sense for Starfleet. Better to just build a new ship. And sure, because of what the ship/name ment, we can put the Saucer section in the Fleet Museum. Why not.
And yes, we're two decades along, 2391 and Geordi is now atleast a captain, perhaps Commodore already, and just like how some people that rebuild classic cars that financially aren't worth it but no hobby really is but it's because of passion, start to rebuild her. In his own time. Starfleet will allow resources and material IF he can find it, but it can't get in the way of other projects.
Now, a lot of that is based on HUGE in universe leaps that really make no sense, but a lot of stuff often doesn't make sense in Star Trek.
Personal opinion, as happy as it made me to see her fly, no.... the E-D was unsalvageable. If the impact Voyager had compacted 5 decks like that, something similar must have happened with the saucer. And the work needed to rebuild THAT??
Let's say a car had a full head on collison on the chassis was bent and warped atleast 1 third, almost half way through. Imagine what that did to the bodywork. The chassis is most likely unreliable IF you could get it straight, and chopping it in half and using half a chassis from a donor car would make it unsafe. It's not just restoring seperate panels, you'd have to cut halfway through the roof of the damaged car, do the same with a donor call, line that up perfectly, weld it all AND make it look good.
Again, nope.
I mentioned several times already that I love season 3 of Picard, despite all the flaws. It made me smile and feel happy seeing so many faces and all the little memberberries. It wasn't a well written story, half of it didn't make sense. But seeing Data and Geordi together again, Ro, the entire crew on the bridge of the D....
So yeah, this is simply another thing that doesn't make sense. I still get a tear in my eye when those doors open and she's revealed.
The Ship Of Theseus really does apply to the E-D we see in Picard. It made me cry, and I accept her as the D. But atleast half the ship isn't the original ship, with a completely new Engineering hull. So there's that already.
As for the entire saucer section......
Part of me feels that, yes, the bottom few decks MUST have been compressed. When Voyager crashed in Timeless, I believe Future Kim says something like 'decks 11 through 15 are now deck 10' or something. So I would assume that happened here as well.
Playing devil's advocate though.... These things are often under a lot of physical stress, they're built to take a hit. Plus, there's the SIF. If, and that's a big IF, that held, I am willing to turn a blind eye and say in universe, PERHAPS they held. I don't think they did personally, but let's play along here.
And yes, by all logical reasons, the ship is most definitely unsalvageable. It makes sense to remove it from the planet, but honestly, having ships in orbit with huge cargo transporters that simply beam up sections and materialize it in bulk cargo bays to be used as scrap for raw material would make more sense, and easier.
Now.... Ok... The hull did survive AND it was lifted off the planet. Today we would call it a financial total loss. Sure, all the buckling on the hull could be repaired, the entire interior redone. Build a new Engineering hull, slap on some decals with the registry and name and there we go.
But the effort, time, resources it would take to do that would make no sense for Starfleet. Better to just build a new ship. And sure, because of what the ship/name ment, we can put the Saucer section in the Fleet Museum. Why not.
And yes, we're two decades along, 2391 and Geordi is now atleast a captain, perhaps Commodore already, and just like how some people that rebuild classic cars that financially aren't worth it but no hobby really is but it's because of passion, start to rebuild her. In his own time. Starfleet will allow resources and material IF he can find it, but it can't get in the way of other projects.
Now, a lot of that is based on HUGE in universe leaps that really make no sense, but a lot of stuff often doesn't make sense in Star Trek.
Personal opinion, as happy as it made me to see her fly, no.... the E-D was unsalvageable. If the impact Voyager had compacted 5 decks like that, something similar must have happened with the saucer. And the work needed to rebuild THAT??
Let's say a car had a full head on collison on the chassis was bent and warped atleast 1 third, almost half way through. Imagine what that did to the bodywork. The chassis is most likely unreliable IF you could get it straight, and chopping it in half and using half a chassis from a donor car would make it unsafe. It's not just restoring seperate panels, you'd have to cut halfway through the roof of the damaged car, do the same with a donor call, line that up perfectly, weld it all AND make it look good.
Again, nope.
I mentioned several times already that I love season 3 of Picard, despite all the flaws. It made me smile and feel happy seeing so many faces and all the little memberberries. It wasn't a well written story, half of it didn't make sense. But seeing Data and Geordi together again, Ro, the entire crew on the bridge of the D....
So yeah, this is simply another thing that doesn't make sense. I still get a tear in my eye when those doors open and she's revealed.
More like it was way way better than season 2 and Discovery and because it was good. Good can be seen as great when you have lower expectations. I don't think many have argued that it was better than SNW or Prodigy. I think SNW,Prodigy and Picard season 3 are seen as the best of Kurtzman Trek. Lower Decks as well but that is seen as a pure comedy and I guess maybe some for Picard season 1 though Picard season 1 is rarely put in the top level of shows.
Section 31,Discovery,Picard season 2 and Academy are sort of seen as the real bottom dwellers. Though I think Academy probably should be bumped up a little more to Picard season 1 level. Not good enough to be elite but not bad enough to be at the very bottom. Perhaps people will be more kind on the show in time.
I'm okay with fannish offerings being fannish. Unfortunately, that is all the official productions are now.
Which is ridiculous to me. You're not engaging with the art in an honest way with what it presents but just as it stands against another art piece.
Art should stand on its own.
I don't think it's done intentionally. It's just something that happens gradually over time. It is something also I think can be isolated to some extend. LIke someone might have lower expectations when it comes to Star Trek shows and potential if they think the new stuff is bad but still appreciate how good a show like 'Widow's Bay" or " Pluribus" is.
Especially when dealing with something that people go in really wanting to like vs something they watch with a kind of "I sure hope it's good but if not then off to watch something else." Soon as you become a fan of something then comes desired expectations. It's probably easier I think for most people to enjoy new stuff that doesn't come with any of those desired expectations and you can just take it for what it is and not also for what it isn't.
I did? Why did no one ever tell me!?!
Competent storytelling? Or is that just a pipe dream?
Living up to fan expectations is the first priority. Then competent storytelling. It was in the latest fan memo.
See, if I didn't like TNG or VOY it's because of my fan expectations. That's just science!
If you take away the nostalgia, what is the story? That's the problem with much of the CBS live-action shows. There is very little there beyond "remember when?"
Nostalgia should be the frosting on a well-made cake. Not the cake itself.
I do not think it was competently done and Shaw was a terrible character. It started out well done and utilized a mystery box story that was not ultimately interesting.
This.
The story was thin. It's not the story that gets praised but the TNG reunion tour and the excitement over these characters coming back together. Which, ok, fair enough, but the story felt secondary to characters.
Me I was kind of interested in the mystery and I kind of liked that the TNG characters were all in different places in their life. They weren't still flying around on the Enterprise like time had never passed. Hated the Borg connection at the end. But hey we got the gang on the old Enterprise-D for the last time and that made it okay enough for me.
I definitely liked Shaw better than you did. He was about the only redeeming thing about Picard season three.
Then it really wasn't the actual story that engaged you. Which is fair enough. We're all different. Me? I just want a little more originality in what I'm watching, I want to feel like they're adding something new the tapestry as opposed to just exploiting what came before.
Which is why I was completely stunned by "Valles Marineris" (SNW). It was very good and wasn't leaning on nostalgia to tell its story.
Which just proves out what Kirk told Picard in Generations that the only way to make a difference is refusing promotion and more responsibility and being on the bridge.
Which is why the story rubs me the wrong way. The characters do start out semi interesting but it's quickly overshadowed.
Which, in all honesty, waters down whatever death he had. Which is just another problem Trek has, an inability to have any real, lasting consequences to anything.
Though that is more a general Trek problem, CBS is just following the tradition.
Similar threads
