Spoilers Did Picard finally ''right the ship'' with Picard season 3?

[Citiprime]

I think that grossly oversimplifies some people's positions. For me, the story and characters are the most important part. The interconnectivity is something I enjoy, and in fact make various "head canon" (to borrow to popular turn of phrase) to make it all exist as one continuity. To me that is part of the fun is finding creative solutions for apparent discontinuity. It isn't that it isn't important; it's that it takes a second-tier importance to if the characters are enjoyable.

I dismiss nostalgia just because it's meant as a "feel good moment." Which is fine but does it add to the story will be my first question? And if not then I'm less inclined to give it a pass, because it feels like it is pandering to a specific emotional part of me, and I do not find pandering endearing.

Mileage will vary as to how people rate such things.

Mileage will vary is true. I'm different in that I get pulled out of the story by the differences.

When a character says or does something that conflicts, or an event occurs where it doesn't fit, as a fan that watched the other shows, I see that as bad storytelling. I don't want to have to do headcannon to rationalize how things fit together in what I'm watching, because I feel the writers and everyone producing the show should have done that in the first place when they were developing the story. I feel like good storytelling within a fictional universe builds on what's come before, instead of dropping something different in the audience's lap, without much explanation, and expects the viewers that care about the details of that fictional universe not to care.

Like you wrote, mileage will vary, and I totally get the other side that likes the ambiguity and freedom to imagine that different variations bring. But it doesn't work for me in a lot of the situations we've seen in the franchise.

 

[fireproof78]

Mileage will vary is true. I'm different in that I get pulled out of the story by the differences.

When a character says or does something that conflicts, or an event occurs where it doesn't fit, as a fan that watched the other shows, I see that as bad storytelling. I don't want to have to do headcannon to rationalize how things fit together in what I'm watching, because I feel the writers and everyone producing the show should have done that in the first place when they were developing the story. I feel like good storytelling within a fictional universe builds on what's come before, instead of dropping something different in the audience's lap, without much explanation, and expects the viewers that care about the details of that fictional universe not to care.

Like you wrote, mileage will vary, and I totally get the other side that likes the ambiguity and freedom to imagine that different variations bring. But it doesn't work for me in a lot of the situations we've seen in the franchise.

Unfortunately, I've had to do this with multiple shows that I love, MASH being the chief example. There are a variety of inconsistencies, incongruities or just flat out contradictions. To not work within the fiction as presented means that I would largely give up on a show that I genuinely love.

Same with another comedy show I really enjoyed, Rules of Engagement. One episode establishes a strong character trait, and then they later on reverse it. That is the nature of episodic fiction when different writers will come and go and things will not always translate over.

I do care about the details; that's why I head canon them. To me that's the give and take of fiction. I personally am closer to JRR Tolkien, than his son who would fixate on the color of Frodo's eyes or the door.

 

[Captain B.84]

In my opinion, I think most of these debates revolve around what people value in seeing something called Star Trek.

The Transformers comparison is actually pretty apt. There were Generation 1 fans who HATE the Bay films because they changed the look of the characters and they feel like they ripped the heart out of Optimus Prime's character (i.e., for a lot of children of the 80s, Optimus Prime was their surrogate TV father that they watched die in the movie). And there are fans who got into Transformers because they just want to watch giant transforming robots fight each other, and they don't get hung up on the characterizations and visual consistency.

Same dynamic here.

I think there's a contingent of fans that don't really care whether there's visual consistency in Star Trek, and don't get hung up on conflicting elements of canon that drives others crazy. They just care about whether there's an interesting story and themes. The other side loves seeing the connections between old and new, and feels it enriches the experience to have that consistency, but that is dismissed by the other side as just "nostalgia" that's not good storytelling for them.

The Transformers produced under Michael Bay, didn't have a beginning, middle, and end. It is mostly guns blazing and explosions. But if you are a Transformers fan, be thankful that it did well at the box office because it allowed the brand to flourish into what it is now. But as far as movies for Transformers lore, it wasn't good, IMO.

Picard Seasons 1 and 2, showed a different part of Star Trek that wasn't explored in storytelling before, and being open to that led to the excitement. Hope most of the Trek shows do well.

It's time for the next generation of characters to emerge while paying respect to past history.
Kirk, Picard, Sisqo, and Janeway had their moments (and all those casts that supported the story), time for the new captain to earn their stripe.

 

[Spike730]

No, it did not right the ship. At least not for me. There very few emotional moments overshadowed by many more cringeworthy ones.

the good:

1. reuniting the TNG crew (although there was some unnecessary conflict at times and it ended just like "All Good Things")
2. nobody of the main cast was killed off
3. seeing the Enterprise-D again (although like Worf I prefer the Enterprise-E)
4. the leather jackets

the bad:

1. a preposterous storyline riddled with plot holes and convenient coincidences
   
2. the anachronistic Titan-A and the fanwanky rechristening to Enterprise-G
   
3. Vadic, the most annoying villain in Trek history
   
4. the character assassination of Beverly Crusher
5. the return of the Borg
   
6. Jack Crusher
7. killing off Legacy characters
8. very often felt like very bad fanfiction
9. Matalas's inappropriate social media behaviour

 

[Campe]

I still don’t think the ship needed righting. And if it did, while this season was perfectly acceptable, mindless entertainment, it didn’t right any ships.

 

[NCC-73515]

Now that the season is complete: Yes.

 

[SolarisOne]

Did it "right the ship"? No. Did it give the ship a (mostly) honorable decommissioning. Yes.

It's time for the next, next generation to take the reins.

 

[gweeps]

I think that grossly oversimplifies some people's positions. For me, the story and characters are the most important part. The interconnectivity is something I enjoy, and in fact make various "head canon" (to borrow to popular turn of phrase) to make it all exist as one continuity. To me that is part of the fun is finding creative solutions for apparent discontinuity. It isn't that it isn't important; it's that it takes a second-tier importance to if the characters are enjoyable.

I dismiss nostalgia just because it's meant as a "feel good moment." Which is fine but does it add to the story will be my first question?

Sometimes feel good moments do add spice to a story. But I agree characters should come front and center. Obviously plot matters, but to strike a balance within the framework of the story is a thing to strive for. And it's not easy. For instance, Stephen King is fantastic at creating characters, building suspense, etc but when it comes to longevity, he often has a hard time sticking the landing of his endings. Juggling continuity is a bitch.

 

[Quantum21]

Didn't need righting. Season 1 was much better than this. Not the Titan. No. Did Matalas just ruin season 2 with this ending?? I'd almost say season 2 was better than this but not quite.

I was carried along by the nostalgia and crashed right into the space dock doors. Should we have known better?

 

[gweeps]

I still don’t think the ship needed righting. And if it did, while this season was perfectly acceptable, mindless entertainment, it didn’t right any ships.

Exactly. I wanted to see more of the original cast. Have some TNG cameos, fine. But to basically toss out all the nuance that was being built, at least at the beginning of Season 1, was unfortunate.

 

[Tosk]

Did it right the ship?

Mmmm, sort of? The ship stopped taking on water, but the bilge pump never really kicked in properly. It just sort of turned on and off sporadically. The ship still listed 'til the very end, IMO. Just maybe not as badly as it had at times previous.

 

[Scionz]

100% righted the ship. And fixed a lot of Trek problems and loose ends going back 35 years. It was expertly executed.

Season 1 and 2 might as well be a side story. Really, I think Season 3 is undermined by still carrying the Picard subtitle. It should be retiled to "The Next Generation" and be Season 8, or "The Last Generation" miniseries. But that may be a hollywood thing at work. Several other shows that had big changes in direction had to keep their original names for one reason or another.

 

[locborg]

• a preposterous storyline riddled with plot holes and convenient coincidences

• the anachronistic Titan-A and the fanwanky rechristening to Enterprise-G

• Vadic, the most annoying villain in Trek history

• the character assassination of Beverly Crusher

• the return of the Borg

• Jack Crusher

• killing off Legacy characters

• very often felt like very bad fanfiction

• Matalas's inappropriate social media behaviour

This season’s storyline might have had its plotholds, but so did every serialized season of nutrek. You can’t compare this to Disco season 3/4 which contained the epitomes of nonsensical plotlines.

The rechristening of an already rechristened vessel is indeed kinda asinine (i love this word). But i guess the next 25th century show is supposed to have its setting on an Enterprise.

I liked Amanda Plummers performance , she was possibly the best actress on the whole show. They rushed her storyline though…

As for Crusher, well her character has bern treated worse in the past. At least she had something to do in this season, much to the liking of McFadden i might presume.

Yep, Star Trek Picard is indeed overborged, with every season centering around them.

Jack is a cool character, keep him for the Legacy show.

About the killing of Legacy characters, well Ro was a B-List character at best, she had a cool episode. The others were kinda C-list, so their death shouldn’t be too concerning for future instances.

Fanfiction: yeah it was kinda over the top at times, but not completely out of line. Only really crazy fanfiction could have revived the Enterprise-D though…

Whats wrong with Matalas on twitter? Yes he is chatty, i found that rather sympathetic…

 

[Spike730]

You can’t compare this to Disco season 3/4 which contained the epitomes of nonsensical plotlines.

I actually stopped watching TMBS after season 3.

The rechristening of an already rechristened vessel is indeed kinda asinine (i love this word).

The rechristening isn't the problem. I just don't feel that the underdog Titan is worthy of the Enterprise legacy.

I liked Amanda Plummers performance

Well, I thought her comic-book villain theatrics quite grating.

As for Crusher, well her character has bern treated worse in the past.

I don't know. Hiding Picard's son was a pretty dick move. All to keep him save she said, but on the other hand she raised him to be a rogue.

Whats wrong with Matalas on twitter? Yes he is chatty, i found that rather sympathetic…

He's rude to people who criticize (and I mean in a polite way, not some toxic insults) the show or just blocks them outright. There was also an incident where he tracked down the girlfriend of a critic and complained to her about her boyfriend. Pretty inappropriate in my book.

 

[The Wormhole]

And, pray tell, in what way is S3 of Picard any more “deep meaning” than Transformers?

Picard has old people talking about being old. That's deep, philosophical meaning of life stuff. Probably. I think. Transformers is just robots fighting and hot girls posing. Probably. I think.

 

[Tosk]

He's rude to people who criticize (and I mean in a polite way, not some toxic insults) the show or just blocks them outright. There was also an incident where he tracked down the girlfriend of a critic and complained to her about her boyfriend. Pretty inappropriate in my book.

He (and several of the other people who worked on the show) seems to have a very thin skin sometimes. I don't know if he always did or if the fawning praise made him less accepting of criticism, but it's something I definitely noticed over on (ugh) Twitter.

I didn't know about the incident though, that's some bullshit.

 

[Visitor1982]

Personally, I liked season 3 better than I did season 2 and maybe even season 1.

For me, Star Trek - Picard is a bit of a mixed bag, just like Discovery is.

What I don't understand however is people claiming Terry is God and he has brought Star Trek back to the good olden days, whatever that may be. When you look objectively at season 3 of Picard, it still is very much NU-Trek or Kurtzman-Trek, which is fine, but it really isn't all that different from the storytelling of Discovery or any other recently produced Star Trek show. So I really don't understand what some of us are seeing what I'm not seeing.

 

[eschaton]

What I don't understand however is people claiming Terry is God and he has brought Star Trek back to the good olden days, whatever that may be. When you look objectively at season 3 of Picard, it still is very much NU-Trek or Kurtzman-Trek, which is fine, but it really isn't all that different from the storytelling of Discovery or any other recently produced Star Trek show. So I really don't understand what some of us are seeing what I'm not seeing.

There are two areas where it's better, IMHO:

• They clearly knew the ending of the story when they were writing the beginning, so the mystery box writing paid off properly. Admittedly, this stopped being an issue with Discovery with seasons 3/4 as well, they are coherent from start to finish.
• The show is mostly well-paced, other than a bit of a slump around episodes 7/8.

That doesn't mean it's fantastic writing though. Scripting is sometimes pretty clunky. It's plot-based, not character-based writing as well, and you don't need to look hard to see where the characters are made to say or do out-of-character things just to move the plot along.

That said, it holds together as a serialized season of Star Trek better than anything that came before in the Kurtzman era, with the possible exception of the first season of Prodigy (though that's more properly semi-serialized).

 

[Visitor1982]

There are two areas where it's better, IMHO:

• They clearly knew the ending of the story when they were writing the beginning, so the mystery box writing paid off properly. Admittedly, this stopped being an issue with Discovery with seasons 3/4 as well, they are coherent from start to finish.
• The show is mostly well-paced, other than a bit of a slump around episodes 7/8.

That doesn't mean it's fantastic writing though. Scripting is sometimes pretty clunky. It's plot-based, not character-based writing as well, and you don't need to look hard to see where the characters are made to say or do out-of-character things just to move the plot along.

That said, it holds together as a serialized season of Star Trek better than anything that came before in the Kurtzman era, with the possible exception of the first season of Prodigy (though that's more properly semi-serialized).

I don't know... I think season 3 lost some of it's magic after episode 6. The writing isn't all that good. True, they did know how to end it, but the road to that ending felt sloppy and a bit too fan servicey at times, if you ask me. But as a whole, I still don't think it's that different from any other recent Star Trek show, at least not the way some fans are claiming that it is.

 

[gvn2fly]

I think familiar characters and production design let people gloss over a lot of things that would have bugged them otherwise. I may sound like a broken record here but I remember al the complaints after the season 4 discovery trailer indicated another threat to the federation. This season was about a complete threat to the federation/ starfleet and other than a few fans pointing out that that it’s been done, you just don’t see the same level of complaints about it. That’s just one example. I also think a lot of people watching this season may not have truly given the other seasons or shows a chance because they “looked different”