Spoilers Can we itemize PIC S2 canonical mistakes.
- Thread starter joe40001
- Start date
Hello old friends,
*Spoilers for all aired eps of Picard as they air*
I'm looking to make a video to express my STPIC views, because personally I have been extremely dissatisfied with Picard. If you are a huge STPIC fan, I have no animosity towards you, but I recommend you leave this topic. Because I truly have 0 wish to antagonize those who enjoy it.
For my video I want to itemize the large canonical mistakes that the show runners have made. And I want canon fans to help me make sure I haven't missed any.
So for those interested, let me know if there are other major ones. Here's what I have so far:
1. Guinan looks like TNG Guinan in Time's Arrow, in 1893, which means she would look the same in 2024
2. Guinan meets Picard in Time's Arrow so she should recognize him in 2024*
2a. I have heard the excuse that she does not recognize him because this is a bad timeline and thus in the future Picard never goes back to meet her, if this were true she literally could not possibly have knowledge of her future bar in deck 10, forward section, and thus would have no reason to pick a location that's a reference to her future bar.
2b. But this excuse cannot be true because we are watching a show that is hinged upon the idea that Picard and company can prevent the timeline from going bad, thus when they succeed the timeline they are currently in is the "Time's Arrow" timeline.
3. In Picard's mind, Picard's father looks like he does, and he says:
"You lived longer than I did, but I got to keep my hair. Not exactly a fair trade, is it?".
In Tapestry, Picard's father looks like this:
I would argue his line implies his father dies *somewhat young* as "You got to live to at least 90-ish, but I died as a slightly younger old man, Not exactly fair, is it?" I don't think is what they were going for. But even if it was, the hair statement is a indicator that they did not know or care about canon here.
What other ones am I missing?
Respectfully, I have thought them through. I allow that others might disagree with me. And like I said I have no interest in antagonizing fans of the show. Nevertheless, the counter-arguments I have heard in my estimation do not stand up to scrutiny.
As a fan of classic Trek, I know I am not alone in feeling like ST:PIC is not sufficiently reverent for the source material. I would like to make sure my criticisms when I present them are comprehensive. However, if the STPIC section of TrekBBS is not the recommended place to discuss STPIC criticisms I would be happy to recreate this topic elsewhere. If so let me know where else on the TrekBBS such a discussion should take place.
YouTube comment sections? You’ll get LOTS of response there…..
That's because you're not applying much scrutiny.
For instance:
"But this excuse cannot be true because we are watching a show that is hinged upon the idea that Picard and company can prevent the timeline from going bad, thus when they succeed the timeline they are currently in is the "Time's Arrow" timeline."
In the timeline they're in, the Europa mission is disrupted. That is the divergent event. It has yet to be reached since Picard & co travelled back; accordingly, they are in that divergent timeline until it's corrected.
As a fan of classic Trek (which pretty much all of us are here, incidentally), you'd know there are plenty of inconsistencies and outright retcons in "classic Trek". It's an odd choice to single out one series on this point, particularly when you have a bare handful of minor examples.
If you want a like-minded audience, just go to the video channels which are already built around negativity. Perhaps when you see what that corner of the internet is like, you'll understand why some of us might find it tiresome.
The main thing was that I was not looking to argue. It isn't that I need everybody to agree with me. Just to tolerate the existence of my opinion.
I could give all my counter-points to the counter-points, but that likely would transition into an argument. Which isn't my goal. Yes, old Trek had canonical errors, but it is my opinion that compared to nutrek it was infinitely better at respecting the spirit, characters, canon, and intelligence of what came before it. You are allowed to disagree, I would prefer people not attack my character or intelligence though.
I posted this on TrekBBS because I believe this is one of the places containing people most aware of, and respectful towards Trek's spirit, canon, and legacy. And to me, criticism is a valid part of that respect. We didn't give ENT a free pass back in the day in S1/S2 when it had bad eps. And this made it all the more meaningful when Coto came in and we gave it praise in S3/S4.
I could make a laundry list of why I think even S1/S2 of ENT was far superior to nutrek. But that is not my goal here. I am looking to be comprehensive in my criticisms. I will hear counterpoints, but most of them I have heard already and to my ear seem like fudgy excuses. I doubt even the diehard-est stans of STPIC think it is free of canonical errors. My goal of this topic is to itemize those errors.
Does that really matter though? If the entire thread is predicated on finding these nits to pick, then anyone who doesn't care to discuss them can just move on. He has an opinion on the show, as we all do. Hearing negative stuff about it will certainly be tiresome to some, but people complaining about other people complaining is just as tiresome.
I would argue that Trek has gone through this same loop throughout its life. New Trek show comes out, does something that seemingly breaks continuity with previous shows, fans declare it as terrible. Time passes, the continuity errors are more accepted, a new show comes out, repeat. Where once Rick Berman and Brannon Braga got the blame for everything, now it’s Alex Kurtzman.
I remember the early internet outrage when “Dark Frontier” aired and completely changed the perceived backstory on Starfleet’s history with the Borg. VOY got a rough ride in general actually, as did ENT as you mentioned. But 20 odd years later nobody is really bothered about the continuity issues caused by the earlier shows, they are all lumped together as “old Trek” as if they are one consistent, coherent narrative but that is far from the case. Now today a possible error about someone’s hair in the new shows causes outrage.
The problem now is the criticisms today come with ridiculous hyperbole in certain areas (claims that the production staff “hate Star Trek” etc).
Respectfully, you’re discussing Star Trek. On the internet. Yeah, people are gonna argue.
They also keep saying memoh instead of mamoh. But then they also always say Jean-Luke instead of Jean-Luc, and he called his brother Robert once instead of Robehr
The original intent for naming Ten Forward on TNG was meant to be a play on the term "10-4," a well known radio code. Seems plausible to me Guinan of 2024 could also use that approach to naming her own bar.On naming the 2024 bar Ten Forward I head cannoned that Guinan sensed the name had significance in her future, even though she wouldn't have known exactly why that name was important at the time. Or maybe she summoned Q like a genie and asked him what the name should be
As a fan of classic Trek there is no source material that deserves reverence.
Hello old friends,
*Spoilers for all aired eps of Picard as they air*
I'm looking to make a video to express my STPIC views, because personally I have been extremely dissatisfied with Picard. If you are a huge STPIC fan, I have no animosity towards you, but I recommend you leave this topic. Because I truly have 0 wish to antagonize those who enjoy it.
For my video I want to itemize the large canonical mistakes that the show runners have made. And I want canon fans to help me make sure I haven't missed any.
So for those interested, let me know if there are other major ones. Here's what I have so far:
1. Guinan looks like TNG Guinan in Time's Arrow, in 1893, which means she would look the same in 2024
2. Guinan meets Picard in Time's Arrow so she should recognize him in 2024*
2a. I have heard the excuse that she does not recognize him because this is a bad timeline and thus in the future Picard never goes back to meet her, if this were true she literally could not possibly have knowledge of her future bar in deck 10, forward section, and thus would have no reason to pick a location that's a reference to her future bar.
2b. But this excuse cannot be true because we are watching a show that is hinged upon the idea that Picard and company can prevent the timeline from going bad, thus when they succeed the timeline they are currently in is the "Time's Arrow" timeline.
3. In Picard's mind, Picard's father looks like he does, and he says:
"You lived longer than I did, but I got to keep my hair. Not exactly a fair trade, is it?".
In Tapestry, Picard's father looks like this:
I would argue his line implies his father dies *somewhat young* as "You got to live to at least 90-ish, but I died as a slightly younger old man, Not exactly fair, is it?" I don't think is what they were going for. But even if it was, the hair statement is a indicator that they did not know or care about canon here.
What other ones am I missing?
Think it's possible because of Guinan prefering some (state of the) timeline(s) over others, according to "Yesterday's Enterprise", that she may have had simply pretended not being able to remember the encounter in "Time's Arrow" for some reasons.
Especially as she seemed to have been able to remember their meeting in 2024 already in TNG:
From "Booby Trap":
"GUINAN: Maybe because a bald man was very kind to me once when I was hurting. Took care of me. "
And if, in the Confederation timeline, Picard never travelled back in time to do that...then how did Guinan survive?
Because the events that lead to her getting injured never happened.
Without Data going back to the past, she would have just kept doing whatever she was doing before he confronted her.
But wasn't that line retconned in TNG's 'Time's Arrow'? And then again in PIC S2?
Think it fits way better with 2024 Guinan than what happened in "Time's Arrow".
How did either of those retcon it?
(in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events, typically used to facilitate a dramatic plot shift or account for an inconsistency.
The added information in those later episodes still creates a different interpretation of her original comment, even if it's more nuanced.
Last edited:
Similar threads
