Spoilers Are the first two seasons of 'Picard' unnecessary?

[gvn2fly]

Considering events from season 1 are a major part of the season 3 plot I don't think season 1 is unnecessary. I actually really appreciate season 1. I've rewatched it and liked it better the second time and would rewatch it again.

Season 2, while I found things to like about it I do not think it is good television. First two episodes are fine, there's a mix of good stuff throughout, but there's a lot that's poorly written and nothing is done with the ending. That one I would tell people they could skip and I actually wish I had so I could stop wondering why no one asked Jurati for help during the last 2 episodes (and I don't buy that her scanning an anomaly indefinitely is more important that potentially saving the federation - of which she is a provisional member of). I rewatched season 2 before starting season 3 and I'm honestly not sure I ever want to watch it again.

 

[tomalak301]

but we definitely could've used a dash of Elnor (him, Raffi, and Worf together would've been sensational) and Soji (further emphasizing the family theme of season 3).

Elnor was kind of a nothing character after his introduction though. He was probably the show's biggest missed opportunity.

 

[Nyotarules]

No, how else you going to explain Picard looking at his dead body?

 

[The Wormhole]

No, how else you going to explain Picard looking at his dead body?

Sequel to Time Squared

 

[Therin of Andor]

I remember when people used to talk about TNG, some would say you can skip the first two seasons.

Since the first season takes so much from GR’s setups from “The Questor Tapes” and “Star Trek: Phase II”, I enjoyed Season One TNG very much. Week by week, I enjoyed catching episodes (sent on video by a US penpal).

something that you could write off as unnecessary?

I enjoyed all three “Picard” seasons very much. I looked forward to each new episode and was glad to have Amazon Prime Video streaming so I did not have to rely on the airfreighted parcel this time. I loved the mystery of Data’s new daughters, the acting from all the new cast members and homages to the past, such as more Hugh and a proper send-off for Data.

If I can have all three seasons, why settle for just one?

 

[Therin of Andor]

I don't even know why they put Laris in season 3. Her brief appearance was even stranger by its inclusion.

Because it added to the tension of Picard seeing Beverly again.

 

[Lord Garth]

I don't think the first two seasons are unnecessary, just that each season is largely disconnected. Similar to how the TNG Movies are all disconnected.

 

[Kzinti]

Based on how well-received the return of the Enterprise-D was, I think the SNW Enterprise will eventually be wrecked in a battle in its next-to-last episode and turned into the TOS Enterprise.

i really, really hope not

 

[Richard S. Ta]

What a silly thread.

 

[Lord Garth]

i really, really hope not

It's probably a good thing the first Star Trek series didn't come out in the 1890s. "What's wrong with Victorian-looking Star Trek?!"

 

[El Maestro]

Probably late to this but...

They're not unnecessary...it just feels like everything is out of order. S3 should've been first. Get the band back together, bring out the ol' E-D so we can see her back in action, kick some butt, and then retire in grace like she did....

THEN introduce the next phase of JLP's exploits and introduce new characters. But that's just me!

 

[vulcancicada]

Never understood the Raffi hate. I thought she was a great addition. I actually identified more with her right off the bat than I did any of the TNG characters.

I love her in season 1. I thought she was a great character that season. Season 2 the fighting between her and Seven was annoying (because it was the pandemic and I was trapped in my house fighting with people) and that was all I remember her doing in the season so, she was under-utilised. Season 3 they wrote her as kind of a caricature of herself and I felt like it was unnatural compared to the writing from season 1.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

I thought she was a great character that season. Season 2 the fighting between her and Seven was annoying

I agree with this. Raffi is a combative character and I get that's part of what makes her who she is, but in Season 2 I felt she and Seven were just continually sniping at each other... When I found they had broken up in Season 3 it was less a feeling of sadness and more... well, I can see why that toxic relationship ended.

There's more to Raffi than sniping, but even in Season 3 we got a bit of it with her and Worf. It seems several dimensions were shaved from the character after Season 1 and a superlative actor like Michelle Hurd was... not wasted as such, but as you say, under-utilised.

 

[somebuddyX]

I remember when people used to talk about TNG, some would say you can skip the first two seasons. Or they would give you a list of episodes to check out from the first two seasons (e.g., "Measure of a Man," "Q Who," etc.) and say you can skip to season 3.

If you were trying to get someone to give Picard a try, would you tell them to skip the first 2 seasons? Is it the equivalent of seasons 1 and 2 of TNG, and something that you could write off as unnecessary?

It's an interesting question but I personally think with TNG that people should start with Season 3 but skip intermittently back to 1 and 2 occasionally. There's a bunch of good episodes in there but also since they're standalone it doesn't matter what order really. Whereas with Picard because of serialisation it's not the same thing. I have thought about suggesting Picard Season 3 to my mum and dad who haven't seen 1 and 2 (nor have I but watched clips on Youtube) because it sounds like more to their tastes. I watched Game of Thrones Season 7 and 8 with only having seen a bunch of clips of the previous seasons. I did okay.

 

[Space Socialist]

the dark tendancies of the federation we saw in Season 1 would not have bothered me, if there had not been some kind of resolution that the Federation was back on course to improve itself and try harder to achieve its ideals

but then we got season 2

and then we got season 3 which just seemed to dial everything Matalas cherry picked from other series (or even this series) to 11. Sec 31 sketchy with changelings in ds9? We'll have them torturing babies in Pic3. You like that crabby guy Lorca? Meet Shaw. He's an asshole! You'll love him! Discovery kind of dark for you? You'll need a flashlight to see around Titan. Remember incompetent corrupt admirals? Ours destroys half the fleet and potentially anyone under 25! Remember when TNG didn't know what to do with Crusher and had her in inexplicable emtionally disturbing scenarios? We just made her a bat shit crazy paranoiac that hid Picard's son from him. So she'll be the next Admiral, obviously.

The old optimistic Trek as we know it’s dead. It’s all darkness, a borderline dystopian and xenophobic Federation, characters using violence as the first not last resort, deep-state conspiracies, the whole rotten lot. The entire ‘message’ of Trek 1966-2005 has been ignored, if not deliberately flushed away.

 

[Shat Happens]

I watched S1 but I did not like any character including the bald leading man that resembles Captain Picard from Star Trek. Watching it felt like a chore.

(The scene with 7 taking control of the Cube was extremely cool and exciting, though. Great stuff. But they promptly did the Decompression Massacre and couldnt 7's reign last more that just A FEW FUKING SECONDS?)

I ignored S2 but I still watched half of one episode of it because I wanted to see Punk on Bus. That was cool.

I completely ignored S3 until a few days after the release of the penultimate episode and I saw half the internet amazed at the return of the Enterprise-D so watched that episode and the finale. That at last looked like Star Trek, hooray.

(I still dont care for the new strange characaters: Raffi, Jack and Riker's wife)

So I watched the rest of the S3 backwards. It's alright, I'm used to it. I like Star Wars too.

 

[fireproof78]

The old optimistic Trek as we know it’s dead. It’s all darkness, a borderline dystopian and xenophobic Federation, characters using violence as the first not last resort, deep-state conspiracies, the whole rotten lot. The entire ‘message’ of Trek 1966-2005 has been ignored, if not deliberately flushed away.

Nope. Everything in current Trek happened in past Trek. From conspiracies, to violence as a first resort or used as a threat, or darker stories.

The shows still demonstrate optimism, but it is optimism that must endure and be earned. As Kirk would say, "No, no, Bones, this time we walked out on our own. Maybe we weren't meant for paradise. Maybe we were meant to fight our way through, struggle, claw our way up, scratch for every inch of the way. Maybe we can't stroll to the music of the lute. We must march to the sound of drums."

 

[Tuskin38]

The old optimistic Trek as we know it’s dead. It’s all darkness, a borderline dystopian and xenophobic Federation, characters using violence as the first not last resort, deep-state conspiracies, the whole rotten lot.

Strange New Worlds, Lower Decks and Prodigy are not any of those things.

Discovery Season 4 wasn't any of those things either.

 

[Tuskin38]

...the bald leading man that resembles Captain Picard from Star Trek.

...and Riker's wife

So people aren't allowed to change in your world?

It's been several decades in universe since we last saw these characters, things happened to the characters off screen.

 

[fireproof78]

So people aren't allowed to change in your world?

Star Trek characters are not.