Internet said this about the new Picard series: Alex Kurtzman confirms that the upcoming series will be set after events shown in the 2009 reboot film. Does this mean that the Jean-Luc Picard we know is not going to be in the new show, instead we'll see a "reboot Picard"?
There are Prime Universe events established in that film even though it's set in the Kelvin Universe. Remember how old Spock from the Prime Universe was trying to save Romulus with his little spaceship, but failed and ended up in the Kelvin Universe? So from that film we know that Romulus was destroyed and Spock disappeared in the Prime Universe. What Kurtzman is saying is that the Picard show takes place after those events.
He's basically confirming that the destruction of Romulus counts in prime canon, and saying that the Picard show takes place after all that in the prime timeline.
Yeah, that's how I read it as well. The nu-TNG show takes place in the prime timeline, about 20 years after Nemesis and is in the same universe as everything that came before. Or put another way, this does not take place in the same universe as the 3 Abramsverse movies after Nero goes back in time.
If I interpret this right, the new Picard series will take place in the same universe / timeline as TNG did. Picard of the new series will actually be the same one we've known for a long time, only 20 years older. If this new Picard series would take place in a different reboot reality than TNG, I'm not sure if I would be that interested. In a way the Picard we know wouldn't even be starring the new show, some alternate version of him.
If the new Picard series takes place in the Abramsverse, then I'm not sure if I will watch it. The same if the Abramsverse stupidity with the destroyed Romulus will count as "canon".
You will, at least a little bit, you cannot resist. No matter what the new series will be like, resistance is futile. I bet very many here, if not all, will watch it, at least a little.
IMHO, it's not the show but the new writers, who are trying out new ideas after glancing at synopses of characters from TOS, but aren't always hitting the bullseye. "Discovery" just doesn't feel like Prime Universe Trek because of that and a prequel is not the best place to do it in. "Enterprise" and the prequel Star Wars films also floundered for often the same reasons. Put ST-D in the Kelvinverse and that alone makes the show feel more authentic. But we've been told it's Prime, and while continuity in a prequel will never align to the older shows 100%, some things go so far beyond the scope of the older eras that people can make a legitimate case that the feel is all wrong. and if ST-D is trying to outdo the comedy of "The Orville", why not try to copy the feel and depth of character instead?
If it helps, Abramsverse is a tangent of the Prime timeline since now the actions of his first movie created a separate, distinct timeline that Spock got thrown into. So moving forward would still have the Prime timeline, as much splintered as Kelvinverse is. Splintered, yet inseparable. Whatever that means, I just hope it comes across as being melodramatic and campy. What remains of this series is how Picard is followed up on, but the fact that the same bloke who said he'd never play Picard again was lured back suggests there's something that piqued his interest. That alone makes watching even the premiere worthwhile.
Not if I have to subscribe to CBS All Access to watch it. I would have watched Discovery had it been on regular TV. They can take their streaming service and suck it.
Yes pretty much, but everything will look 25% different because very complicated reasons. And they'll probably pretend certain things in his past didn't happen if they clash with whatever story they're planning to tell.
I really really doubt that "Picard" is set in the Kelvin Timeline because 1. The split between CBS and Paramount 2. A new Picard might be a big disapointment for many fans and create a massive backlash. 3. All the talk before suggests that we see "our" Picard in a later stage of this life. By the way, wasn't the rule that everything needs to be 25% different already officially denyed?
In much of the post-publicity for Nemesis, he made motions towards never returning to the role. He had Professor X to lean on by then Of course, attitudes can always change over time. Leonard Nimoy resisted many attempts to woo him back to Spock until the Abrams movie gave him a role he found fascinating enough Stewart may have simply needed time to feel nostalgic about good ol' Jean Luc, and a character story interesting enough that he couldn't say no
It's a harsh truth, but sometimes actors are not simply interested in revisiting a character they've played before if there isn't somewhere new to go with that character. Some actors revel in doing the rounds as a fan favourite and playing a 'greatest hits' and collecting the paycheck, but Sir Patrick doesn't strike me as one of those people. Stewart always praised TNG and talked of how proud he was of the work everyone did on that show, but he never seemed particularly attached to Picard in the sense of it being particularly important to him as an actor. I recall one interview with the BBC where he spoke of how the fans have a tendency to attach significance to the fiction of the world, for example, the Enterprise bridge, when to *him* as an actor, that bridge was merely plywood walls in which he played a part for seven years, and it had no more emotional resonance to him than that. To Patrick Stewart, that set meant nothing more than what it physically was: a stage on which to ply his craft and act.
Orville has about as simplistic characters as you get. Fun, likable ones, but not a lot of depth. Why are people so opposed to different writers bringing different perspectives to Trek? TNG had different perspective on the universe than TOS. Why *shouldn't* the show evolve and be targeted at the current times it's written in? I know DSC has flaws, but that it feels different is not one of them.
I think most people can agree that the destruction of Romulus was a terrible way to simply give a third-rate villain a motive. Romulus and its people's importance to Trek history, especially the TNG series, cannot be overstated. To Abrams, who knew nothing about Trek, Romulus was just a "Star Trek planet" that could be destroyed to motivate his villain. The Picard series is apparently going to deal with the impact Romulus' destruction has had on Picard's life. This is also pretty contrived: outside of the encounters he had with Romulans over the years, helping to stop Sela from stopping Spock's reunification efforts, and the events of Nemesis, what does Romulus' destruction really mean to Picard? He would be saddened, of course, but outside becoming the Federation ambassador to Romulus, I don't see the point in building on this ill-conceived plot point. Of course, many have felt over the years that Picard might have very well left Starfleet to become an ambassador, and yes, we saw that in future timelines and the Countdown comics. On screen, however, Picard turned down romantic possibilities, promotions, and civilian research opportunities to stay in command. He took Kirk's advice and when we last saw him in Nemesis, he was looking forward to moving on with new members of the crew after the Enterprise was repaired and refit. If we learn that he eventually did leave the command chair, it seems very contrived to me. Like Kirk, command was his "first, best destiny." If all the horrible things and wonderful things he experienced over the years (assimilation by the Borg, cushy promotion offers, losing the Enterprise-D, a romance with a metamorph, life with a beautiful woman on a planet with a Fountain of Youth, the death of Data and departure of most of his crew) didn't get him out of that chair, I find it hard to believe anything else would. At the end of the day, I fear we're looking at one of the problems I always had with Star Trek VI: humans in the 23rd and 24th centuries live far longer than they do now. Age 60-80 wouldn't mean what it does now. McCoy was still out and about well over a century old! If we get a series based on the notion that Picard was getting too old to command a ship and decided to become an ambassador or retire, there's a missed opportunity to explore a person's value as they age. Imagine if Picard is the longest-serving captain of not only a ship named Enterprise, but also any Starfleet vessel in its history? It would be intriguing to explore what that means for Picard and humans in the 24th/25th century in general. It's far more interesting than yet another "guy retires but wishes he hadn't (Kirk)" or "guy suffers tragedy and leaves everything behind (terrible development used for Luke Skywalker)" and it would offer lots of opportunities for worldbuilding the 25th century through Picard's POV and experience.
A reboot. I believe in way where the Star Trek universes become one universe and Picard is the key to merge the bullsh*t, so called "Prime" and the JJverse.