“Jean-Luc Picard is back”: will new Picard show eclipse Discovery?

[Longinus]

Exactly. There's a reason Julie Andrews isn't starring in the new MARY POPPINS movie, even though it's apparently a direct sequel to the original movie and not a reboot.

No actor owns a role forever. Someday another actor will play Picard. That's just how it works.

You can do that. But you then can't pretend that nothing happened. It literally is not the same.

This whole discussion is getting really absurd. Like it would be completely immaterial who plays the roles, the actors having no impact at all.

 

[Tuskin38]

You can do that. But you then can't pretend that nothing happened. It literally is not the same.

This whole discussion is getting really absurd. Like it would be completely immaterial who plays the roles, the actors having no impact at all.

They have impact, but we shouldn't retire the character if the actor dies, or is too old. That is absurd.

 

[Nerys Myk]

You really need to get your vision checked soon, you're seem to be practically blind.

But I try to help you, I hope the pictures are big enough for you:

THESE TWO ARE DIFFERENT!

THESE TWO ARE THE SAME!

And yet

THESE ARE THE SAME!!!!!!

 

[Longinus]

And yet

THESE ARE THE SAME!!!!!!

No they're not. One is Kirstie Alley, the other is Robin Curtis. You must be really confused. I mean most people noticed that the actor changed. There has even been numerous debates on whose version of Saavik was better, as they're pretty different!

 

[DaveyNY]

Exactly. There's a reason Julie Andrews isn't starring in the new MARY POPPINS movie, even though it's apparently a direct sequel to the original movie and not a reboot.

No actor owns a role forever. Someday another actor will play Picard. That's just how it works.

They did get Dick Van Dyke back to play the old bank president though.

 

[Discofan]

And yet

THESE ARE THE SAME!!!!!!

You're kidding.

 

[Nerys Myk]

No they're not. One is Kirstie Alley, the other is Robin Curtis. You must be really confused. I mean most people noticed that the actor changed. There has even been numerous debates on whose version of Saavik was better, as they're pretty different!

I guess I am. Was someone saying they thought no one would notice there are different actors in the role????

You're kidding.

About Curtis and Alley playing the same character? No, I'm not.

 

[Discofan]

I guess I am. Was someone saying they thought no one would notice there are different actors in the role????
About Curtis and Alley playing the same character? No, I'm not.

Your responses don't make any sense.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Your responses don't make any sense.

What's confusing about them? Curtis and Alley played Saavik. Yet they do not look alike. Different actors same role. Happens all the time in movies and TV.

 

[Discofan]

What's confusing about them? Curtis and Alley played Saavik. Yet they do not look alike. Different actors same role. Happens all the time in movies and TV.

I answered to a post where you said that they are the same... hence the not making sense part.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I answered to a post where you said that they are the same... hence the not making sense part.

They were playing the same character. Just like Peck and Nimoy. It was a riff on Longinus' post.

 

[Discofan]

They were playing the same character. Just like Peck and Nimoy. It was a riff on Longinus' post.

Ok

 

[Longinus]

They were playing the same character. Just like Peck and Nimoy. It was a riff on Longinus' post.

Yes, we all know that. But surprisingly enough Peck and Nimoy are actually two different people, while Patrick Stewart is actually just a one person. Tuskin somehow had trouble understanding this, I really don't know how.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Yes, we all know that. But surprisingly enough Peck and Nimoy are actually two different people, while Patrick Stewart is actually just a one person. Tuskin somehow had trouble understanding this, I really don't know how.

Does he?

 

[Longinus]

Does he?

Apparently.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Apparently.

Didn't really get that from his posts.

 

[Longinus]

Didn't really get that from his posts.

I got that he is being intentionally obtuse so I decided to play along.

 

[Greg Cox]

You can do that. But you then can't pretend that nothing happened. It literally is not the same.

This whole discussion is getting really absurd. Like it would be completely immaterial who plays the roles, the actors having no impact at all.

Why do you need to pretend that nothing happened? Why not just go, "Oh, a new actor? Interesting. Wonder how they'll interpret the part?"

And, yes, they could not be as good as Stewart, or they could be better, or they could just be different. The point is, famous roles tend to be played by by multiple actors over the course of generations. That's how it's worked since ancient Greece at least. It's not like they retired "Oedipus" after the original actor retired.

And no one is saying that the actors don't matter. Nimoy and Stewart brought a lot to their parts. Just as, someday, another actor may bring something else to the part. Doesn't mean Stewart needs to be forgotten or anything. Just mean future generations may have their own Picard.

It's not complicated. Same character, different actors. Variations on a theme.

 

[Longinus]

Why do you need to pretend that nothing happened? Why not just go, "Oh, a new actor? Interesting. Wonder how they'll interpret the part?"

I am not trying to do that, Tuskin is. He is literally refusing to understand why Spock being recast is a different thing than Stewart reprising his role.

And, yes, they could not be as good as Stewart, or they could be better, or they could just be different. The point is, famous roles tend to be played by by multiple actors over the course of generations. That's how it's worked since ancient Greece at least. It's not like they retired "Oedipus" after the original actor retired.

And no one is saying that the actors don't matter. Nimoy and Stewart brought a lot to their parts. Just as, someday, another actor may bring something else to the part. Doesn't mean Stewart needs to be forgotten or anything. Just mean future generations may have their own Picard.

It's not complicated. Same character, different actors.

Yes, all this should be obvious. This was ultimately not about whether recasting is good or bad, but it having a marked effect, a difference. It matters that it is Stewart, and yes, some other actor could be good, but it still would be a different thing. And in this particular instance we are talking about very iconic roles. To me it is a huge deal that one of my favourite actors return to reprise his role. Picard was my childhood hero, it is like seeing a dear friend after a long time. And if it was someone else in the role, it wouldn't have the same impact. Spock likewise was my childhood hero, and his reappearance in Disco does not fill me with similar excitement, because it is not Nimoy, it's not really the same Spock. Sure, I am interested in seeing how Peck will do and learning to know this new Spock, but it isn't the same thing at all; even if he would be absolutely stellar in the role it would be a different Spock, amazing in his own way.

 

[Tuskin38]

I got that he is being intentionally obtuse so I decided to play along.

I’m not not being obtuse on purpose.

I guess I just misunderstood your point.

I’m just saying Peck Spock and Nimoy Spock are still the same character. A different actor doesn’t mean he isn’t a younger version of TOS Spock.