What's with the Inner Light bashing?

[Tiberius]

The episode was tainted by the idiotic decision to let the viewer know something Picard does not - that its all fake and he's actually on the Enterprise bridge - way to take us out of the story. It would have had far more effect if we too had been questioning "is it real?" the whole time.

Who in the audience would believe that the last few seasons were the dream and Picard really was Kamin? This was series TV mid-run, not a crappy final episode like St. Elsewhere where the autistic kid dreamed the last 5 years. It's like wondering if "Picard is gonna die of the Omegan Plague this week." Of course he's not. It's a good narrative device that covers the time jumps and shows us that the crew was doing stuff to help him in the meantime. Knowing it isn't "real" doesn't take away from the effectiveness because it's real to Picard.

Are you serious? This is science fiction, Star Trek science fiction. All kinds of ridiculously crazy universe bending things can happen. Let the viewer try and figure out the mystery.

Yeah, coz everyone believed that Kira was actually a Cardassian...

 

[mswood]

The episode was tainted by the idiotic decision to let the viewer know something Picard does not - that its all fake and he's actually on the Enterprise bridge - way to take us out of the story. It would have had far more effect if we too had been questioning "is it real?" the whole time. I didn't need to hear Beverly randomly spouting medibabble on the Bridge thanks

I agree, this would probably have been an improvement over the perspective. While I don't consider "Inner Light" to be a bad ep or concept, by any means, having Picard essentially gaining his experiences by living someone else's recorded life doesn't quite make the same impact. YMMV.

Absolutely agree, and why tapestry is better. The portion in Picard's mind gets an A grade from me. The various intercuts back on the Enterprise geta D from me and it's enough time to lower from a classic to just really damn good.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

They never said he lived a prerecorded life. His decisions might be his own. It could be interpreted either way. Like the best science fiction, the writers didn't connect every dot, they let the viewer wonder what really happened.

 

[Cyke101]

I agree with ssosmcin
Having the crew work on it and then revealing the secret to the audience a bit early actually makes Picards realization more powerful. Usually, it wouldn't but somehow it does..

Could you explain the rationale? I don't think I quite understand this point, seeing as how the bulk of the action is (rightfully) on Picard/Kamin, and every time the Kamin storyline develops, we're back on the bridge and thus taken AWAY from the primary narrative. Just as the crew had nothing to do with saving/reviving/returning Picard, they also had nothing to do with the revelation at the end, either.

I can't speak for everyone here, but I think most fans of the episode would agree that the viewer's interest for this episode lies in Picard/Kamin, not in Riker, Crusher, and co.

They never said he lived a prerecorded life. His decisions might be his own. It could be interpreted either way. Like the best science fiction, the writers didn't connect every dot, they let the viewer wonder what really happened.

I honestly don't think that's the crux of the problem, seeing as how the complaint being addressed (the Enterprise-D crew) has nothing to do with whether Kamin is a precorded life or not. The crew doesn't factor into that determination, whereas Picard and his actions as Kamin help the viewer make that determination for themselves -- Picard/Kamin create that speculation, not the crew.

 

[The Castellan]

Because there's not enough stuff blowing up or some battle/fight going on, I bet.

We're in the Michael Bay, JJ Abrams/reality programing era of film and TV, unfortunately. If there's no explosions, f-bombs, gunfire, bad actors whispering their lines, or double D's flopping around, most people won't bother watching it.

 

[Cyke101]

Because there's not enough stuff blowing up or some battle/fight going on, I bet.

We're in the Michael Bay, JJ Abrams/reality programing era of film and TV, unfortunately. If there's no explosions, f-bombs, gunfire, bad actors whispering their lines, or double D's flopping around, most people won't bother watching it.

I don't mean to sound rude or trollish, but your concerns were voiced by others, almost verbatim, on page 1 several days ago.

 

[Start Wreck]

So how is the Blu-Ray of the episode? I haven't seen it.

Excellent. Grainy, but crystal clear, to the extent that the ageing make-up looks a little more obvious that they probably would have liked.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Could you explain the rationale? I don't think I quite understand this point, seeing as how the bulk of the action is (rightfully) on Picard/Kamin, and every time the Kamin storyline develops, we're back on the bridge and thus taken AWAY from the primary narrative. Just as the crew had nothing to do with saving/reviving/returning Picard, they also had nothing to do with the revelation at the end, either.

It's an emotional note, something that can't be qualified.

First, as far as storytelling goes, it reminds us, without simply a cheating reveal at the end, of the contrast between the timelines. The story on the bridge is minutes long, while' Kamin's is decades. This is not just told to us at the end of the episode... it's shown to us by how much progress Riker and the crew have made. I believe it's the end of the first act that Riker finally says "Sickbay, the captain's hurt.' If the narrative had stayed with Picard for the whole episode, and then at the end Riker says "oh, you've only been out for a half hour" the audience would be like "Oh really, you could have fooled me.' but this way, we are shown both timelines at their relative pace. Plus, the crew story line is the one we usually follow every week, what the crew does, so using it hear interspersed with the Kamin stuff serves as out familiar touchstone, and the writers were smart to have it gradually become less predominant in the narrative. Taking it away entirely, however, would have left us asking 'What's the crew doing?' instead of thinking 'Wow, he's living many years in thirty minutes' which is what we should be thinking to ourselves. Indeed, revealing this a bit early helps with our sense of wonderment. We know a bit more than Picard, so when his epiphany comes, we see him react to it, we are crying because we wish we could have told him decades ago.

From Jammer's review:

Interestingly, we are given all the information necessary to solve this puzzle well before the story's true moment of epiphany where Kamin/Picard himself realizes the nature of his existence on Kataan after 30 years with them.

Fascinatingly, this has the effect of making Kamin's/Picard's epiphany more poignant rather than less. We realize what's happening to Kamin's world before it occurs, and it's that foreknowledge that makes both the value and the tragedy of Kamin's life all the more profound and heartbreaking.

It's an intelligent story telling technique. Sure, a case can be made to keep it all in Kamin's point of view. But the writers have forty minutes to tell a story, and this is what they chose, and they gave us a few touchstones for setting up it's pace., Otherwise we'd be asking the wrong questions throughout the episode like "where's the crew" and "what's happening on the ship" rather than thinking about the deeper issues. It allows us to see as man come to an epiphany that we already know, and we couldn't tell him. I think that's a pretty neat. Most stories would have the epiphany be revealed to us and to Kamin at the same time, but the - instead of forcing it, instead of thinking of us as fools and trying too hard too pull the wool over our eyes -0 the writers have shown us how Kamin must get lost in his new life, and then we, from afar, get it see the veil lifted. It's just a interesting technique. i found it more emotional.

 

[Cyke101]

Could you explain the rationale? I don't think I quite understand this point, seeing as how the bulk of the action is (rightfully) on Picard/Kamin, and every time the Kamin storyline develops, we're back on the bridge and thus taken AWAY from the primary narrative. Just as the crew had nothing to do with saving/reviving/returning Picard, they also had nothing to do with the revelation at the end, either.

It's an emotional note, something that can't be qualified.

First, as far as storytelling goes, it reminds us, without simply a cheating reveal at the end, of the contrast between the timelines. The story on the bridge is minutes long, while' Kamin's is decades. This is not just told to us at the end of the episode... it's shown to us by how much progress Riker and the crew have made. I believe it's the end of the first act that Riker finally says "Sickbay, the captain's hurt.' If the narrative had stayed with Picard for the whole episode, and then at the end Riker says "oh, you've only been out for a half hour" the audience would be like "Oh really, you could have fooled me.' but this way, we are shown both timelines at their relative pace. Plus, the crew story line is the one we usually follow every week, what the crew does, so using it hear interspersed with the Kamin stuff serves as out familiar touchstone, and the writers were smart to have it gradually become less predominant in the narrative.

Taking it away entirely, however, would have left us asking 'What's the crew doing?' instead of thinking 'Wow, he's living many years in thirty minutes' which is what we should be thinking to ourselves. Indeed, revealing this a bit early helps with our sense of wonderment. We know a bit more than Picard, so when his epiphany comes, we see him react to it, we are crying because we wish we could have told him decades ago.

From Jammer's review:

Interestingly, we are given all the information necessary to solve this puzzle well before the story's true moment of epiphany where Kamin/Picard himself realizes the nature of his existence on Kataan after 30 years with them.

Fascinatingly, this has the effect of making Kamin's/Picard's epiphany more poignant rather than less. We realize what's happening to Kamin's world before it occurs, and it's that foreknowledge that makes both the value and the tragedy of Kamin's life all the more profound and heartbreaking.

It's an intelligent story telling technique. Sure, a case can be made to keep it all in Kamin's point of view. But the writers have forty minutes to tell a story, and this is what they chose, and they gave us a few touchstones for setting up it's pace., Otherwise we'd be asking the wrong questions throughout the episode like "where's the crew" and "what's happening on the ship" rather than thinking about the deeper issues.

I honestly don't think anybody would be asking "Where's the crew," given the strength of the Kamin storyline. Let's remember that many of the complaints in this thread are more about "Forget the crew! Give me more Kamin." If that's the case, then few are asking where's the crew. And the point about the familiarity further removes the uniqueness of the episode precisely because Picard's doing the actual exploration here, while the crew struggles to maintain the status quo -- which by default doesn't have a lot of dramatic tension to it. If Picard is our concern, let's stick to focusing on Picard, and not something manufactured because traditional plot structuring calls for it. The story is pretty unique for Trek, and therein lies one of its better strengths. Go with it, run with it.

Thus, it's simultaneously a praise and a criticism of the episode -- the writing for Plot A was so engrossing that Plot B became unnecessary. If anything, reducing Plot B to just the bookends not only maintains the temporal comparison to both sides of the story ("Riker, you're teling me I've been out for 20 minutes? But I lived several decades in a 40 minute show!" That comparison only needs Riker in the end, not every 10 minutes or so), but it also gives the writers more time to work on Kamin, which would build upon an established strength. The viewer is already thinking for themselves while watching Kamin's story unfold (as the main concern is watching Picard evolve on a personal level), and the viewer never forgets that they are, after all, watching Star Trek, so there's no need to hammer in the crew. So you want to keep the fate of the planet on the viewer's minds? State that near the opening, before Picard gets shot and turns into Kamin. Just as the viewer doesn't forget that they're watching Star Trek, they won't forget that very important plot point. Have the crew determine it early on so that they don't interrupt the Kamin storyline later in the episode.

To wit, other Trek episodes have centered on few characters with the main casts relegated to just bookends (if even that!), and in very few of the cases, the viewer asks where they are. Oftentimes it makes, say, a rescue all the more dramatic. In this case, the writers would have time to actually use drama as study -- life is hard and wondrous, after all. Life is worth exploring, and life makes an impact.

As for pace, as mentioned earlier, I thought the pace was just fine, up until it came time for the message to end. Removing the bridge scenes could help streamline the pacing at the end. I feel like 95% of the episode was finely crafted but once the writers realized they had time constraints, they had essentially pull up the curtain game show-style on Picard.

I believe had this episode been made later, the writers probably would have taken more risks or reduced the crew to book ends. TOS and TNG had their tried and true plot structures, but the later spinoffs would take more gambles for dramatic purposes. Additionally, we probably would have gotten more of a conscious follow-up, too -- Kamin deeply affected Picard, as the episode keenly shows us in the end with the flute. But this episode only gets referenced twice, once perhaps accidentally. If Picard behaved differently from that point of the series on -- perhaps less rigid yet even wiser -- then there'd be a bit more consistency.

 

[You_Will_Fail]

Yeah, coz everyone believed that Kira was actually a Cardassian...

Actually when I was watching "Second Skin", I was kind of on edge and didn't know what the explanation was going to be. Sure I was pretty new to Trek at the time and didn't know all the conventions but that episode would have been nowhere near as good if we'd been told beforehand. Just like with the Inner Light - you must have a really limited imagination if you can't see how that life might REALLY have been happening to Picard somehow. As I said, its Trek for goodness sake, all sorts of parallel universe/time travel hijinks occur.
Let the viewers ask the questions and pose the mystery to them, don't just answer it outright. Not everyone watching is going to be a cynical seasoned Star Trek fan who'll figure it out right away you know.

 

[BillJ]

Why do some people seem to hate The Inner Light? I always thought it was an incredibly touching episode? And yet I've seen it described here as "a cure for insomnia". Why? Why is it so bad?

I'm actually honored by this thread because as far as I know, I am the only one who actually actively dislikes The Inner Light. The "a cure for insomnia" is directly from one of my posts.

Because there's not enough stuff blowing up or some battle/fight going on, I bet.

We're in the Michael Bay, JJ Abrams/reality programing era of film and TV, unfortunately. If there's no explosions, f-bombs, gunfire, bad actors whispering their lines, or double D's flopping around, most people won't bother watching it.

Perhaps you care to point to the "explosions, f-bombs, gunfire, bad actors whispering their lines, or double D's flopping around" in episodes like Where No One Has Gone Before, 11001001, Lonely Among Us, The Drumhead, We'll Always Have Paris, The Measure of a Man, The Royale, Sarek and many others.

If you can't then you should probably shut the fuck up as you have absolutely no idea what your talking about and are simply embarrassing yourself.

I simply dislike The Inner Light. It DOESN'T WORK FOR ME.

 

[YARN]

I find the point of that elaborate probe baffling.

You put it in space so that one day (maybe) ONE MEMBER another humanoid species will get mind-raped and feel nostalgic and sad for a long-dead world?

Think about it. They put a lot of effort into that probe. This is their farewell note the to universe. Pharaohs built pyramids, which are a conspicuous message to the ages ("Time only fears the pyramids" and all that). When Picard dies, on the other hand, so does the last link to this culture. Building a monument which delivers a message to one person, is a bit like campaigning by visiting one house.

And then there's the ethical ramifications of the whole thing. Whoever the poor sap is who gets stuck with these memories has his/her identity changed. Their brains are now stuck toting around memories they didn't ask for. Let's not even talk about the crushing weight of the knowledge that you are the last person alive who carries these memories, so you're stuck with guilt and responsibility you didn't ask for. If Picard really wanted to learn to play the flute, I'm sure the Enterprise has an app for that.

 

[Sindatur]

I find the point of that elaborate probe baffling.

You put it in space so that one day (maybe) ONE MEMBER another humanoid species will get mind-raped and feel nostalgic and sad for a long-dead world?

Think about it. They put a lot of effort into that probe. This is their farewell note the to universe. Pharaohs built pyramids, which are a conspicuous message to the ages ("Time only fears the pyramids" and all that). When Picard dies, on the other hand, so does the last link to this culture. Building a monument which delivers a message to one person, is a bit like campaigning by visiting one house.

And then there's the ethical ramifications of the whole thing. Whoever the poor sap is who gets stuck with these memories has his/her identity changed. Their brains are now stuck toting around memories they didn't ask for. Let's not even talk about the crushing weight of the knowledge that you are the last person alive who carries these memories, so you're stuck with guilt and responsibility you didn't ask for. If Picard really wanted to learn to play the flute, I'm sure the Enterprise has an app for that.

Eh...they had to balance out all the mind-raping Troi went through

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Could you explain the rationale? I don't think I quite understand this point, seeing as how the bulk of the action is (rightfully) on Picard/Kamin, and every time the Kamin storyline develops, we're back on the bridge and thus taken AWAY from the primary narrative. Just as the crew had nothing to do with saving/reviving/returning Picard, they also had nothing to do with the revelation at the end, either.

It's an emotional note, something that can't be qualified.

First, as far as storytelling goes, it reminds us, without simply a cheating reveal at the end, of the contrast between the timelines. The story on the bridge is minutes long, while' Kamin's is decades. This is not just told to us at the end of the episode... it's shown to us by how much progress Riker and the crew have made. I believe it's the end of the first act that Riker finally says "Sickbay, the captain's hurt.' If the narrative had stayed with Picard for the whole episode, and then at the end Riker says "oh, you've only been out for a half hour" the audience would be like "Oh really, you could have fooled me.' but this way, we are shown both timelines at their relative pace. Plus, the crew story line is the one we usually follow every week, what the crew does, so using it hear interspersed with the Kamin stuff serves as out familiar touchstone, and the writers were smart to have it gradually become less predominant in the narrative.

Taking it away entirely, however, would have left us asking 'What's the crew doing?' instead of thinking 'Wow, he's living many years in thirty minutes' which is what we should be thinking to ourselves. Indeed, revealing this a bit early helps with our sense of wonderment. We know a bit more than Picard, so when his epiphany comes, we see him react to it, we are crying because we wish we could have told him decades ago.

From Jammer's review:

Interestingly, we are given all the information necessary to solve this puzzle well before the story's true moment of epiphany where Kamin/Picard himself realizes the nature of his existence on Kataan after 30 years with them.

Fascinatingly, this has the effect of making Kamin's/Picard's epiphany more poignant rather than less. We realize what's happening to Kamin's world before it occurs, and it's that foreknowledge that makes both the value and the tragedy of Kamin's life all the more profound and heartbreaking.

It's an intelligent story telling technique. Sure, a case can be made to keep it all in Kamin's point of view. But the writers have forty minutes to tell a story, and this is what they chose, and they gave us a few touchstones for setting up it's pace., Otherwise we'd be asking the wrong questions throughout the episode like "where's the crew" and "what's happening on the ship" rather than thinking about the deeper issues.

I honestly don't think anybody would be asking "Where's the crew," given the strength of the Kamin storyline. Let's remember that many of the complaints in this thread are more about "Forget the crew! Give me more Kamin." If that's the case, then few are asking where's the crew. And the point about the familiarity further removes the uniqueness of the episode precisely because Picard's doing the actual exploration here, while the crew struggles to maintain the status quo -- which by default doesn't have a lot of dramatic tension to it. If Picard is our concern, let's stick to focusing on Picard, and not something manufactured because traditional plot structuring calls for it. The story is pretty unique for Trek, and therein lies one of its better strengths. Go with it, run with it.

Thus, it's simultaneously a praise and a criticism of the episode -- the writing for Plot A was so engrossing that Plot B became unnecessary. If anything, reducing Plot B to just the bookends not only maintains the temporal comparison to both sides of the story ("Riker, you're teling me I've been out for 20 minutes? But I lived several decades in a 40 minute show!" That comparison only needs Riker in the end, not every 10 minutes or so), but it also gives the writers more time to work on Kamin, which would build upon an established strength. The viewer is already thinking for themselves while watching Kamin's story unfold (as the main concern is watching Picard evolve on a personal level), and the viewer never forgets that they are, after all, watching Star Trek, so there's no need to hammer in the crew. So you want to keep the fate of the planet on the viewer's minds? State that near the opening, before Picard gets shot and turns into Kamin. Just as the viewer doesn't forget that they're watching Star Trek, they won't forget that very important plot point. Have the crew determine it early on so that they don't interrupt the Kamin storyline later in the episode.

To wit, other Trek episodes have centered on few characters with the main casts relegated to just bookends (if even that!), and in very few of the cases, the viewer asks where they are. Oftentimes it makes, say, a rescue all the more dramatic. In this case, the writers would have time to actually use drama as study -- life is hard and wondrous, after all. Life is worth exploring, and life makes an impact.

As for pace, as mentioned earlier, I thought the pace was just fine, up until it came time for the message to end. Removing the bridge scenes could help streamline the pacing at the end. I feel like 95% of the episode was finely crafted but once the writers realized they had time constraints, they had essentially pull up the curtain game show-style on Picard.

I believe had this episode been made later, the writers probably would have taken more risks or reduced the crew to book ends. TOS and TNG had their tried and true plot structures, but the later spinoffs would take more gambles for dramatic purposes. Additionally, we probably would have gotten more of a conscious follow-up, too -- Kamin deeply affected Picard, as the episode keenly shows us in the end with the flute. But this episode only gets referenced twice, once perhaps accidentally. If Picard behaved differently from that point of the series on -- perhaps less rigid yet even wiser -- then there'd be a bit more consistency.

It's a narrative technique. Sure there were episodes since then where scenes on the ship/station would only bookend the events within. It's important to note that the story of the Inner Light demands jumps in the narrative. After all, while there is no jump for Kamin, there are jumps for us, so that we could see that while he is living for decades, it's only a few minutes. If there were no jumps, and no crew scenes, the viewer might ask "so has it been decades for the crew as well?" That is the wrong question they should be asking. The episode puts aside the questions that shouldn't be asked for those questions it's more interested in. In Hard Time, the story lays out all the cards ahead of time for us, how long O'brien has been under, what the doctor can and can't do, all of that. We already know the prison time never really happened. Does that lessen the episode's effect on us? No, not one bit. Not here either. By the same token cutting the regular crew at random times for Far Beyond the Stars might have lessened that episode's impact. It's a case-by-case basis type of thing/

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Yeah, coz everyone believed that Kira was actually a Cardassian...

Actually when I was watching "Second Skin", I was kind of on edge and didn't know what the explanation was going to be.

I wasn't new to Trek and I thought it might actually be true the first time I watched it. DS9 had already stepped outside the formula that we had in TNG and TOS so I was up for it to radically change a character.

 

[Tina Lawton]

...in episodes like 11001001...

Well, "11001001" did have one of the hottest babes ever to guest star on any Trek show. So, you know, it had that going for it.

 

[AdmiralScreed]

Yeah, coz everyone believed that Kira was actually a Cardassian...

Actually when I was watching "Second Skin", I was kind of on edge and didn't know what the explanation was going to be.

I wasn't new to Trek and I thought it might actually be true the first time I watched it. DS9 had already stepped outside the formula that we had in TNG and TOS so I was up for it to radically change a character.

That's a terrific episode, and I feel the same way as both of you. For awhile I thought Kira really was a Cardassian. Like teacake mentioned, DS9 took a lot of risks and departed from the formulaic storytelling of TOS and TNG, so a life altering revelation like Kira being a Cardassian wouldn't have surprised me one bit.
Sorry to stray off topic. The Inner Light is one of my all time favorite Trek episodes, but with that said I can understand why some people wouldn't like it. That doesn't detract from the quality of the episode, though. It's a true a classic, and one of TNG's finest.

 

[Cyke101]

It's an emotional note, something that can't be qualified.

First, as far as storytelling goes, it reminds us, without simply a cheating reveal at the end, of the contrast between the timelines. The story on the bridge is minutes long, while' Kamin's is decades. This is not just told to us at the end of the episode... it's shown to us by how much progress Riker and the crew have made. I believe it's the end of the first act that Riker finally says "Sickbay, the captain's hurt.' If the narrative had stayed with Picard for the whole episode, and then at the end Riker says "oh, you've only been out for a half hour" the audience would be like "Oh really, you could have fooled me.' but this way, we are shown both timelines at their relative pace. Plus, the crew story line is the one we usually follow every week, what the crew does, so using it hear interspersed with the Kamin stuff serves as out familiar touchstone, and the writers were smart to have it gradually become less predominant in the narrative.

Taking it away entirely, however, would have left us asking 'What's the crew doing?' instead of thinking 'Wow, he's living many years in thirty minutes' which is what we should be thinking to ourselves. Indeed, revealing this a bit early helps with our sense of wonderment. We know a bit more than Picard, so when his epiphany comes, we see him react to it, we are crying because we wish we could have told him decades ago.

From Jammer's review:
It's an intelligent story telling technique. Sure, a case can be made to keep it all in Kamin's point of view. But the writers have forty minutes to tell a story, and this is what they chose, and they gave us a few touchstones for setting up it's pace., Otherwise we'd be asking the wrong questions throughout the episode like "where's the crew" and "what's happening on the ship" rather than thinking about the deeper issues.

I honestly don't think anybody would be asking "Where's the crew," given the strength of the Kamin storyline. Let's remember that many of the complaints in this thread are more about "Forget the crew! Give me more Kamin." If that's the case, then few are asking where's the crew. And the point about the familiarity further removes the uniqueness of the episode precisely because Picard's doing the actual exploration here, while the crew struggles to maintain the status quo -- which by default doesn't have a lot of dramatic tension to it. If Picard is our concern, let's stick to focusing on Picard, and not something manufactured because traditional plot structuring calls for it. The story is pretty unique for Trek, and therein lies one of its better strengths. Go with it, run with it.

Thus, it's simultaneously a praise and a criticism of the episode -- the writing for Plot A was so engrossing that Plot B became unnecessary. If anything, reducing Plot B to just the bookends not only maintains the temporal comparison to both sides of the story ("Riker, you're teling me I've been out for 20 minutes? But I lived several decades in a 40 minute show!" That comparison only needs Riker in the end, not every 10 minutes or so), but it also gives the writers more time to work on Kamin, which would build upon an established strength. The viewer is already thinking for themselves while watching Kamin's story unfold (as the main concern is watching Picard evolve on a personal level), and the viewer never forgets that they are, after all, watching Star Trek, so there's no need to hammer in the crew. So you want to keep the fate of the planet on the viewer's minds? State that near the opening, before Picard gets shot and turns into Kamin. Just as the viewer doesn't forget that they're watching Star Trek, they won't forget that very important plot point. Have the crew determine it early on so that they don't interrupt the Kamin storyline later in the episode.

To wit, other Trek episodes have centered on few characters with the main casts relegated to just bookends (if even that!), and in very few of the cases, the viewer asks where they are. Oftentimes it makes, say, a rescue all the more dramatic. In this case, the writers would have time to actually use drama as study -- life is hard and wondrous, after all. Life is worth exploring, and life makes an impact.

As for pace, as mentioned earlier, I thought the pace was just fine, up until it came time for the message to end. Removing the bridge scenes could help streamline the pacing at the end. I feel like 95% of the episode was finely crafted but once the writers realized they had time constraints, they had essentially pull up the curtain game show-style on Picard.

I believe had this episode been made later, the writers probably would have taken more risks or reduced the crew to book ends. TOS and TNG had their tried and true plot structures, but the later spinoffs would take more gambles for dramatic purposes. Additionally, we probably would have gotten more of a conscious follow-up, too -- Kamin deeply affected Picard, as the episode keenly shows us in the end with the flute. But this episode only gets referenced twice, once perhaps accidentally. If Picard behaved differently from that point of the series on -- perhaps less rigid yet even wiser -- then there'd be a bit more consistency.

It's a narrative technique. Sure there were episodes since then where scenes on the ship/station would only bookend the events within. It's important to note that the story of the Inner Light demands jumps in the narrative. After all, while there is no jump for Kamin, there are jumps for us, so that we could see that while he is living for decades, it's only a few minutes. If there were no jumps, and no crew scenes, the viewer might ask "so has it been decades for the crew as well?" That is the wrong question they should be asking. The episode puts aside the questions that shouldn't be asked for those questions it's more interested in. In Hard Time, the story lays out all the cards ahead of time for us, how long O'brien has been under, what the doctor can and can't do, all of that. We already know the prison time never really happened. Does that lessen the episode's effect on us? No, not one bit. Not here either. By the same token cutting the regular crew at random times for Far Beyond the Stars might have lessened that episode's impact. It's a case-by-case basis type of thing/

Point of contention: the events of Hard Time DID happen, maybe not in reality, but to O'Brien, and that counts. And does knowledge lessen the episode's effect? I'd argue that for the Inner Light, yes it does, or else there wouldn't be several posters here criticizing the bridge crew's effect here (So does it lessen the episode's effect? I'd rather bluntly say, "Speak for yourself."). In Hard Time, O'Brien is an active participants in both the A and B Plots -- Picard is not active in the Plot B line. And Far Beyond The Stars employs the same technique I said would work better for the Inner Light, which is that the DS9 scenes are only bookends (another reason why I mentioned earlier that had Inner Light been written a few years later, it would probably be the same risky structure). In Hard Time, the crew's failure to help O'Brien throughout the episode increases the mystery. The mystery of Inner Light from the crew's side is secondary, almost superfluous, and thus not important because of the focus on Kamin. Lastly, the three episodes in question may have similar storylines, but they have different goals: Hard Time is far more plot-driven of the three, Inner Light is about remembering a good life, and Far Beyond The Stars is more about social commentary and the history of race relations in the US.

I should also note that Far Beyond The Stars ends on an even *more* ambiguous note than the Inner Light ever dreamed. You can argue which episode is superior, and that's fine, but I'm more concerned about the creative choices both episodes take. At that point of the episode's airing, before the sequel episode, the writers never told us what really happened to Sisko or how he received those visions. The only thing we get is the pastor mentioning the Prophets, but even then we're not sure if it's Sisko's mind saying that or if it's really them -- that's only answered in a later episode. In the end we just get an image of Benny Russell. But the episode doesn't explain anything nor answer anything concretely, only that Sisko lived another life. Nothing is spoonfed during the primary action, no answer as to why the crew was imposed onto Russell's life (rather, the episode flips the concept around by positing that maybe Russell invented DS9 with his coworkers in mind. So the crew's inclusion is purposefully done here in a mindbending way), nothing interrupts the action until the episode needs to end. No one is concerned about Jake and Kassidy's worries or Bashir's efforts, so the episode doesn't devote time to them until the end. What we get is smooth, uninterrupted tension that keeps drawing the viewer in.

The jumps can come via commercial breaks, and Trek has had no problems before and after this episode when denoting shifts of time over the breaks. But if it's a case-by-case basis type, and if we agree that Inner Light stands out because it's a unique episode, why do we insist on stamping old Trek staples on a unique episode? If anything, while it's a narrative technique (I believe the name of the technique you're looking for is "framing device"), it's used in a way that spoon-feeds the audience -- and if we're asking the episode to have faith in the audience and allows the viewers freedom to come to their own conclusions about Picard/Kamin (ie, is it a prerecorded life? Did Picard make his own choices as Kamin? Did these events really happen?) then spoon-feeding the audience is not only contrary to that, but it kind of insults the viewer's intelligence. The episode has a lot of weight and nuance behind it; babying the viewer should be one of its last concerns. Has it been decades for the crew as well? Well, seeing as how the episode makes the viewer forget about the crew, I doubt anyone would ask that question -- hence an answer at the end would be more fitting. In this case, if the narrative technique is a framing device, then I'd make it a bit more figurative -- have the technique actually border the episode at the beginning and end, not through the middle.

If someone is asking the wrong questions, then frankly, they're not really watching the episode. Why should anyone be concerned about Riker and Co? No one rewatches this episode to focus on the crew's problem solving skills at work, but anyone and everyone who rewatches the episode does so because of the Kamin storyline. Bashir and Co. try to help O'Brien because he's suffering, so there's weight there. Riker and Co. trying to help Picard is fruitless for the viewer because the viewer is far more engrossed on Picard living the kind of deep and meaningful family life that he never had, which is why Bashir and the others get very little screen time in Far Beyond the Stars.

 

[M-Red]

After reading through this thread, my opinion hasn't changed one bit.


A beautiful episode that's magnificent just the way it is --- to me.


10/10

 

[Cyke101]

After reading through this thread, my opinion hasn't changed one bit.


A beautiful episode that's magnificent just the way it is --- to me.


10/10

It's a great episode to be sure, but I think it's an episode that's a couple steps away from being a superb episode. And it's fun to deconstruct our faves.