Antonia

[borgboy]

Not much chance of Carol Marcus or David Marcus showing up, as Merritt Butrick had died even before SIVI had been made. Bibi Besch was still alive and working, but she would die of complications from breast cancer in 1996.

And I think showing a younger Carol probably would've just made it look like Kirk was robbing the cradle.

I'm picturing the same idea of Kirk making breakfast, with like a five year old David and Carol in her late twenties. So they'd obviously cast a young child as David since they sadly couldn't do anything with an adult David.
Kirk having a bro camping trip with Spock and McCoy would've been sweet. Having him be forever the young captain of the original Enterprise would've made a lot of sense too.
And yes, Edith if they could have done it some way, some how, would've been amazing. I'd have cared when Kirk lost Edith again, it would've been devestating. Losing David again would've been devestating. I didn't give a damn about Antonia, so I didn't care about what Kirk was losing, and I don't think anyone did. I don't even think Kirk really cared that much.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I'm glad they didn't use Edith in the film. It would have cheapened the entire emotional impact of COTEOF.

 

[borgboy]

I'm glad they didn't use Edith in the film. It would have cheapened the entire emotional impact of COTEOF.

I don't think it would've cheapen the emotional impact. To me, I think it would've shown how much she meant to Kirk, how he never forgot her, never got over her loss.
That Kirk could have any life in the Nexus and he wanted Antonia instead of Edith, to me that cheapens her loss.
Same with David. He could have anyone with him and the one he wants is Antonia, whoever she is.

Just like it also disgusts me that Picard's ideal wife is some bland Victorian woman when it should've been Beverly.

 

[USS Triumphant]

Just like it also disgusts me that Picard's ideal wife is some bland Victorian woman when it should've been Beverly.

YES. And if not Beverly, then Vash, or Jenice from "We'll Always Have Paris". Or heck, maybe B.G. Robinson or Sonya Gomez caught his fancy. Since I refuse to think Picard's perfect life would be with some generic woman, he must have known that woman we saw. But that conclusion still sucks, because it leaves us with TWO mystery women for our two captains.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

Isn't that sort of the point of why they chose 2 unknown women for our Captains?
For all the names that are thrown about, they could be SO much better and we'll never even know. They literally could be their perfect women, the fact some people saying they aren't is strange since there's nothing to base that on.

And obviously Beverly sucks as an answer for Picard. It's why they get divorced in the alternate future. Since Moore and Bragga wrote both the episode and the movie, it's almost as if they knew about that little fact. But this Victorian women would have stuck with Picard for a lifetime as far as we know, loving him with all her heart.

There's no proof to the contrary.

 

[Greg Cox]

Heck, I would've settled for Janice Rand!

That's Janice "No Beach To Walk On" Rand.

Exactly.

 

[Gaith]

I don't think it would've cheapen the emotional impact. To me, I think it would've shown how much she meant to Kirk, how he never forgot her, never got over her loss.

Dude... it's Kirk. Of course he got over the loss.

For all the names that are thrown about, they could be SO much better and we'll never even know. They literally could be their perfect women, the fact some people saying they aren't is strange since there's nothing to base that on.

Exactly. Using established characters would have distracted from the point of the sequence, which is experiencing joy as an emotional high, not a rewriting of their actual lives and specific regrets.

 

[borgboy]

The future where Beverly and Picard divorced was negated as the true time line because of Picard's new knowledge of that alternate future. We have no reason to believe Beverly and Picard would divorce in the new timeline than Troi would die or any of the other fates we saw come to pass.
I was pleased with how Beverly and Picard's relationship had advanced thru season 7. They kissed in the finale. So it was disappointing that nothing was done with their relationship in the movie. Just acknowledging Picard's feelings thru Beverly being his wife in the Nexus would've been a nice touch to the fans.
Generations is pretty flawed in a lot of ways. The dissatisfying Nexus scenes for both Kirk and Picard makes me think the writers didn't understand the characters.
And if it couldn't be Beverly, then Vash, or one of the other women he had a history with that we knew. Bringing back his wife from The Inner Light would've been a nice touch even. The missed opprotunities are frustrating.

 

[Greg Cox]

For all the names that are thrown about, they could be SO much better and we'll never even know. They literally could be their perfect women, the fact some people saying they aren't is strange since there's nothing to base that on.

Exactly. Using established characters would have distracted from the point of the sequence, which is experiencing joy as an emotional high, not a rewriting of their actual lives and specific regrets.

But the problem with "Antonia" is that she's not supposed to be some idealized fantasy woman. She's portrayed in the movie as somebody who is supposed to mean something to Kirk, who is some great long-lost love that once meant a lot to him . . . .

So I think fans can be forgiven for wondering why, if she's such a big deal to Kirk, we've never heard of her before.

And, sure, you don't want to bog down the story with lots of unnecessary exposition about who "Edith" or "Carol" or "Janice" is, but I don't think that would've been required. If you're just going to use a random woman in the distance anyway, why not call her "Carol" or "Janice" instead of "Antonia"?

Casual viewers would still get the idea--"oh, she's some woman from Kirk's past"--while long-time fans would appreciate the Easter egg.

 

[Nightowl1701]

Between Antonia and Demora Sulu, the message that comes across (and I'm sure it was deliberate) was "You never really knew these people at all."

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The future where Beverly and Picard divorced was negated as the true time line because of Picard's new knowledge of that alternate future. We have no reason to believe Beverly and Picard would divorce in the new timeline than Troi would die or any of the other fates we saw come to pass.

I always assumed that, in the false future of AGT, Picard's erratic behavior (due to Irumodic Syndrome) is what contributed to his divorce from Beverly.

 

[borgboy]

The future where Beverly and Picard divorced was negated as the true time line because of Picard's new knowledge of that alternate future. We have no reason to believe Beverly and Picard would divorce in the new timeline than Troi would die or any of the other fates we saw come to pass.

I always assumed that, in the false future of AGT, Picard's erratic behavior (due to Irumodic Syndrome) is what contributed to his divorce from Beverly.

I just watched that episode and I figured that Picard divorced Beverly so she wouldn't be stuck caring for him as he deteriorated. They obviously still cared deeply for each other, so whatever caused them to divorce, they were still pretty amicable, so it must not have been anything really bad that either one did. I didn't get any hint of bad feelings between them at all.

For what it's worth, at the end Data says that there will already be changes to the time stream and that the future won't be the same as the one Picard saw. Also, according to dialogue in the episode, we know that Troi was supposed to die in less than 5 years after the series finale, and that the love triangle left Riker and Worf bitter enemies who each blamed the other for Troi's death, and neither one got together with Troi. We know that Troi doesn't die within five years of the finale and eventually marries Riker. Worf moved on from Troi before that and married Jadzia Dax. I don't get how some people still think that future is the "real" future of TNG.

 

[pfontaine2]

Those Nexus fantasies just made no sense whatsoever.

If the focus was to be Kirk's perfect fantasy, a cabin in the woods making breakfast for "Antonia" and caring for his horses really doesn't make any sense because we never had an inkling that Kirk cared for any of these things throughout the series or the movies.

Now, these things might be Shatner's perfect fantasy (especially given his love of horses) but not Kirk's. Kirk's perfect fantasy might involve being reunited with a true lost love such as Carol Marcus or Edith Keehler.

Personally, as a Star Trek fan, I always thought his one true love was being captain of the Enterprise. I would have loved to have Picard enter the Nexus only to discover himself on the original Enterprise. He finds himself on the bridge and finds Kirk sitting in the captain's chair, exploring the galaxy.

As far as Picard's fantasy is concerned, why a Victorian Christmas? It could have been Paris I suppose but not not Victorian England. Again, this might be Patrick Stewart's perfect fantasy (given his love of A Christmas Carol) but Picard's character never expressed any desire to live out this kind of existence.

 

[Greg Cox]

As far as Picard's fantasy is concerned, why a Victorian Christmas? It could have been Paris I suppose but not not Victorian England. Again, this might be Patrick Stewart's perfect fantasy (given his love of A Christmas Carol) but Picard's character never expressed any desire to live out this kind of existence.

Jean-Luc Picard: the most Anglophile Frenchman ever!

 

[EnriqueH]

I'm glad they didn't use Edith in the film. It would have cheapened the entire emotional impact of COTEOF.

Interesting. Why do you feel that way?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Because Kirk is supposed to know that Edith is meant to die.

He obviously can't take Edith back with him to the present, because the Guardian (implicitly) wouldn't allow it. Any way he actually saved her from dying would endanger the future.

 

[Nerys Myk]

But the problem with "Antonia" is that she's not supposed to be some idealized fantasy woman. She's portrayed in the movie as somebody who is supposed to mean something to Kirk, who is some great long-lost love that once meant a lot to him . . . .

So I think fans can be forgiven for wondering why, if she's such a big deal to Kirk, we've never heard of her before.

Pretty much every time we meet an ex-flame of Kirk's it's someone we've never heard of before.

 

[borgboy]

^ Because Kirk is supposed to know that Edith is meant to die.

He obviously can't take Edith back with him to the present, because the Guardian (implicitly) wouldn't allow it. Any way he actually saved her from dying would endanger the future.

I don't understand the objection. Kirk wouldn't in any way be really saving Edith. He'd be living a fantasy with her, no more real than a dream.

 

[borgboy]

But the problem with "Antonia" is that she's not supposed to be some idealized fantasy woman. She's portrayed in the movie as somebody who is supposed to mean something to Kirk, who is some great long-lost love that once meant a lot to him . . . .

So I think fans can be forgiven for wondering why, if she's such a big deal to Kirk, we've never heard of her before.

Pretty much every time we meet an ex-flame of Kirk's it's someone we've never heard of before.

That's true. But Antonia's not just another ex. The nature of the Nexus means this was the happiest Kirk had ever been, and thus Antonia is the woman who made him happiest. That's what I take exception to. If we weren't told that this is Kirk's ideal life I wouldn't care that much. It's the importance of the scene and thus Antonia that makes that scene so important and thus controversial.

 

[EnriqueH]

^ Because Kirk is supposed to know that Edith is meant to die.

He obviously can't take Edith back with him to the present, because the Guardian (implicitly) wouldn't allow it. Any way he actually saved her from dying would endanger the future.

Hmm, yeah, but isn't the Nexus about making your fondest dreams come true?

Just because something is a reality doesn't mean we couldn't change it if we could.

Kirk knows Edith is meant to die, but that doesn't mean he doesn't wish that she didn't have to.

But the problem with "Antonia" is that she's not supposed to be some idealized fantasy woman. She's portrayed in the movie as somebody who is supposed to mean something to Kirk, who is some great long-lost love that once meant a lot to him . . . .

So I think fans can be forgiven for wondering why, if she's such a big deal to Kirk, we've never heard of her before.

Pretty much every time we meet an ex-flame of Kirk's it's someone we've never heard of before.

During TOS and even up to around STII and III, it's like we're still learning about Kirk.

But by Generations, he's at death's door and we know it. Surely, we've witnessed or at least heard about the most important events and people in his life by this point?

^ Because Kirk is supposed to know that Edith is meant to die.

He obviously can't take Edith back with him to the present, because the Guardian (implicitly) wouldn't allow it. Any way he actually saved her from dying would endanger the future.

I don't understand the objection. Kirk wouldn't in any way be really saving Edith. He'd be living a fantasy with her, no more real than a dream.

Agreed.