What is this, the goddamn episode 11 thread?
Spoilers Did Picard finally ''right the ship'' with Picard season 3?
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
- Status
That hypothesis is non-falsifiable because it relies upon hidden information.
Maybe that means most audiences liked the course The Last Jedi took and didn't want to see the course change in The Rise of Skywalker.
Makes me happy we got Picard and friends reunited one last time in a satisfying 'TNG movie' of sorts that audiences loved. Sorry Luke, Han and Leia.. it's never going to happen now.
I'm not convinced getting Luke, Han, and Leia back together one last time was necessary. Their joint story had already come to a fairly satisfying conclusion in Return of the Jedi -- unlike TNG's previous joint finale, the awful Nemesis. Sure, we got to see each of them back individually and in pairs, but their story as a trio was over. I don't really think they needed an encore.
Look at how well Coto's Enterprise Season 4 holds up, and how fans still want more aspects of that show to play into modern Trek.
Not including "These are the Voyages" though. Near 20 years later, that finale still remains quite reviled by cast, crew and fans.
Very true. Matalas did a much better job of channeling nostalgia for TNG in PIC S3 than Berman & Braga did in "These Are the Voyages..."
That hypothesis is non-falsifiable because it relies upon hidden information. Who talks like that, lol.
Jokes aside. Disney course corrected, so they recognized that something didn't work with TLJ. In all likelihood, it was probably the 700M less it did. Investors couldn't care less about the story. When they see diminishing returns, studios panic and make decisions like this.
I mean... that's not exactly high praise.
They didn't, but the fans would have loved it. And it will never happen now, so as Star Trek TNG fans we can enjoy the schadenfreude
I do.
And then their course correction also did not work, so it's just as likely that they misinterpreted how common audience dissatisfaction with The Last Jedi actually was because of how loud its harshest critics were.
Again, this is impossible to prove.
It's not meant to be praise or an attack. It's supposed to be an acknowledgment that the same motivating theme -- nostalgia for TNG -- can be executed in a manner that's well-done or in a manner that's really badly-done.
They didn't, but the fans would have loved it. And it will never happen now, so as Star Trek TNG fans we can enjoy the schadenfreude
I don't enjoy any schadenfreude over it. I feel pretty neutral about it, actually. Like I said, their story as a trio was over. And I absolutely adored Luke's arc in The Last Jedi, so I'm okay with the trio's reunion never happening. My only sadness is over the loss of Carrie Fischer.
Again, this is impossible to prove.
Whether it was a misinterpretation or not (Disney has far more data on this), they course corrected... and it was a rather drastic and jarring course correction.
For that to have happened, Disney must have had some concerns about TLJ's reception with the audience.
I'm happy we got what we got with Picard S3 and there was no drastic subverting of expectations with these characters. They ended off on a way that made fans happy, and that's why I don't even mind if Legacy never happens. It's not needed.
Many Star Wars fans would have loved the trio to have gotten something like that, especially with the popularity of the Zahn trilogy and novels. However, it won't happen.
We're lucky we got what we got with TNG.
I'm curious ... since people have been asked to explain "why" Picard season 1 was "bad" in this thread, might I ask all the people whom either don't like, or seem to be "concerned" about the excitement of Picard season 3, to give a cogent argument for why it's bad or why they feel the need to effectively tell people: "no, you're wrong to think that's good television"?
The problem with a lot of the comments about season 3, for me, is that its detractors don't so much argue how it's narratively worse than any other season of Star Trek. Just saying "nostalgia" is weak when 1) there were a million ways they could have screwed this up or leaned even more into nostalgia (e.g., they could have put them on the Enterprise-D in episode 2 and just skipped the Titan), 2) it's odd to argue nostalgia as a negative on a series whose entire point is to revisit a legacy character in their established universe again, and 3) there's character arcs and growth over the season. People may not like the choices Matalas made, but to argue all he did was plop them together on the Enterprise-D and that's why people like it, is not being fair to the show.
Moreover, I get the feeling that some are more concerned about what liking this season means. Most of the negative comments about season 3 are more that people seem threatened by its popularity and what that might mean for their favorite version of Star Trek in the future, and the implications for the decisions that have been made on the other shows than just enjoying a TV show for being a TV show. Reading between the lines, I get the feeling that some think to like season 3, or to support what Matalas wants to do going forward, is a tacit admission that all of those people who complained about ship designs not matching or looking close to what they did 30 years ago were right. And that engenders a lot of the "concern" about the excitement of season 3.
The problem with a lot of the comments about season 3, for me, is that its detractors don't so much argue how it's narratively worse than any other season of Star Trek. Just saying "nostalgia" is weak when 1) there were a million ways they could have screwed this up or leaned even more into nostalgia (e.g., they could have put them on the Enterprise-D in episode 2 and just skipped the Titan), 2) it's odd to argue nostalgia as a negative on a series whose entire point is to revisit a legacy character in their established universe again, and 3) there's character arcs and growth over the season. People may not like the choices Matalas made, but to argue all he did was plop them together on the Enterprise-D and that's why people like it, is not being fair to the show.
Moreover, I get the feeling that some are more concerned about what liking this season means. Most of the negative comments about season 3 are more that people seem threatened by its popularity and what that might mean for their favorite version of Star Trek in the future, and the implications for the decisions that have been made on the other shows than just enjoying a TV show for being a TV show. Reading between the lines, I get the feeling that some think to like season 3, or to support what Matalas wants to do going forward, is a tacit admission that all of those people who complained about ship designs not matching or looking close to what they did 30 years ago were right. And that engenders a lot of the "concern" about the excitement of season 3.
Honestly, don't bother with detractors. There's so few of them at this point, so it ultimately doesn't make a difference.
The show did well. Positive word of mouth. It did what Matalas wanted it to accomplish.
Like he said, be 'loud' if you want him to continue as a Trek showrunner. There's some solid support for this now, and Trek fans being more united than I've seen from them in decades. So I'm curious how this will play out with Paramount.
Sure, but it does not necessarily follow that their concerns were actually justified.
There are two rival hypotheses for the lower box office performance of and audience reaction to The Rise of Skywalker: 1) your hypothesis, which is that Lucasfilm accurately accessed that audiences were dissatisfied with The Last Jedi and course-corrected, but that course-correction was not enough to overcome audience distaste for Last Jedi; or 2) my hypothesis, which is that Lucasfilm may have inaccurately assessed how large a percentage of the audience objected to Last Jedi, course-corrected on Rise of Skywalker, but then alienated a large percentage of the audience with Rise of Skywalker because most audiences had actually been fine with Last Jedi.
Neither hypothesis is falsifiable, because neither of us has access to detailed mass audience polling data.
I think PIC S3 is mostly good television. I enjoyed it for the most part. There were certain discrete choices that I felt were bad, but I did not feel that they overwhelmed the season in general. I felt that S3 achieved its artistic goals. However, I would have preferred a season constructed around a different set of artistic goals -- something more in line with S1 and its themes.
I would indeed be sad if S3-style populism means less of the more cerebral, more melancholy type of Star Trek that S1 represented.
I don't want Matalas-style ST to go away. I want more of it. But I also want more Chabon-style Star Trek. I want them both.
My only "concern" is being told to like it, and to sit in the back of bus because this what the "fans want." It's unnecessary in its exclusionary tactics.
Moreover, the season reminds me of one and two in structure. The character work was a little better, but those moments are left behind in the name of nostalgia. That's my struggle.
The other frustration is that characters like Shaw are accepted blindly, despite being written like a 21st century character, or that the action is considered better despite being similar to previous seasons.
It just hits like a double standard and it hits sideways.
Exactly.
And this ruins any support I would have. Being dismissed out of hand for having the wrong opinion is not what I want.
And this ruins any support I would have. Being dismissed out of hand for having the wrong opinion is not what I want.
There's no wrong opinion. I'm just being brutally honest to the person who wrote that. No one is going to change their mind, so it's a waste of time arguing in circles with a select few. Picard S3 did what it did. It was received well. We'll see what the future holds.
Until then, maybe JJ will give us the Special Edition to Pic S3;
This misses every single point of discourse. Unfortunate and disappointing.
I don't think it's bad. Like I've said multiple times, I enjoyed it mostly. It succeeded in giving them a happy ending and a better farewell than Nemesis. I think the character work from a lot of the TNG cast, especially Geordi, Data, Riker, Troi, and Ro, was great. The season was worth it for me in all those aspects. I'm not too cool and jaded to admit that a lot of those scenes got to me. I was thrilled to see them all together again.
My issues with this season though are that we're universally told this is the greatest Trek ever, it's a return to form, and basically anybody who has issues with the season are basically called haters cause Terry Matalas is a genius who brought Trek back. I didn't know Trek had "gone away" or needed to be "brought back". There's some stuff I haven't always enjoyed over the years, but it's all been Trek.
As for the story, I think it was mostly fine but there were some baffling decisions and glaring issues. Data is brought back for the umpteenth time after we had said goodbye to him a second time just two seasons ago. Troi and Riker bring their daughter up multiple times which is fine. I don't need a deep dive on where she's at if they're not going to commit to anything. However, they both think they're going to die multiple times in the season and their reactions amount to basically "lol sucks for Kestra, but the kid who's really important to us is our son". When Matalas gets push back on where the daughter is, he says she's at the Academy so it's fine. Except in episode 1, Riker says he left home because the daughter needed space away from him. If she's at the Academy, isn't she already getting space from him? Jack has no character to speak of outside of vague magical Han Solo criminal and he's immediately accepted no questions asked. If he was any other character, the reception would not be kind. Shaw is fine and I enjoyed him, but he's a ripoff from Jaws. Again if they pulled such a blatant ripoff on any of the other shows, the reception would not be so kind. Geordi sees his kids get turned in Borgs, leaves them on a ship that's basically down to just Seven and Raffi as cover, and five minutes later is like fine and showing off the Enterprise D. Um okay? Beverly gets no pushback for hiding Jack outside of ten minutes from Picard. Everyone else is like fine that she just reappeared out of nowhere and drug them all into danger? Those are just a few examples.
We're told canon is so important and sacred and must never be broken and this is the problem with all other new Trek seasons. This season takes a bulldozer to so many canon things and it's like "oh it's fine. We got to see them all together again". Again, okay I guess?
None of those things ruin the show for me but totaled up, it makes me feel like the story was kind of basic and not plotted well. That's where my issue is. Sure again, I enjoyed it for the most part! I had a good time. I teared up. It got me. I'm happy they got a proper farewell. However, I can't help but wish the story had been better and up to what it could have been.
Last edited:
Paramount+ wants the money of Star Trek fans. I stopped watching DISCOVERY and SNW, so they won't get hate watch view counts from me anymore. Now, if I'm just a lonely voice crying out from the wilderness, sure. But it seems like there's a critical mass of fans unhappy with the current direction. If season 3 punches above the weight of the other NuTrek seasons, finally people like me will have a contrasting data point to identify, and hopefully more pluralism in the variety of Star Trek on offer results from it.
I'd liken it to fans of a sports franchise with bad management wanting the ship to be righted.
Assuming you're asking a question in good faith, no. But, for the past decade, I've mostly interacted with people online I'd already met in real life, so for all practical purposes this is my first time really posting on a "faceless" BBS over contentious issues over a period of weeks and weeks. Maybe I treat it too much like work email? Maybe I've opened myself up to sea lioning, or being bullied in other areas of the BBS? Well just hit the ignore button and move on.
But back to the point, and to use the sports team analogy again (even if it is a bit tribal, but let's be honest, the fracturing of the Star Trek fanbase does have tribal parallels)... imagine your team has lost for several years, and finally gains a win. That's what season 3 felt like to me. Finally we get right characterizations, canonical/tone & aesthetics right... I was watching new live action Star Trek for the first time since ENT season 4. So I can see why so many people were genuinely happy about it.
Not to knock STLD and PRODIGY, but those are more like Star Trek novels, audio books, or games.
I have soundtracks on repeat all the time. I can't think of anything from the Abramsverse that stood out to me. And not everything in season 3 is a rehash either.
But if you move it too far away from being Star Trek, it's no longer Star Trek. And people have the right to be unhappy if the structural foundations of the franchise are being destabilized.
Having seen 12 MONKEYS, I can see where many things went wrong.
Season 3 was overcompensating for the lack of nostalgia in earlier PICARD seasons. I'd imagine Legacy would be more even handed while "feeling like Star Trek". Just look at the post-NEM Star Trek novel line. So much new was done rooted in prior continuity.
Jack was conceived after NEM. So aside from having to buy he's early 20's, it doesn't mess with canon. And I'd rather he have aged quickly than be cast with a less capable actor.
Nothing misfires with her character. She has nuance. She has positive energy. Makes a good initial impression that you want to see more with the character, and hopes she's part of a realized Legacy.
&
He did have input at the beginning of the season, but not the final say. I'm not saying Terry's completely blameless for season 2. Just that he was never the ranking showrunner for the compete season. For DISCOVERY season 1, Bryan Fuller can be blamed for redesigning the Klingons etc, but not the spore drive.
Akiva Goldsman rewrote enough of Christopher Monfette's script for the season 2 finale to share "and" credit.
I'm so glad I didn't watch season 1 during the depths of the pandemic, and had the safety valve of knowing a good season 3 was coming soon when I finally tackled that one.
The only way I got through season 1 was taking notes and trying to process everything I was viewing. 15 pages... if you want themYeah no. There's no rules saying that's how it works here. This isn't the court. I'm not going to waste time defending that when there's plenty of well-expressed criticism for that season out there, which I'm sure you've watched.
Besides, in all honestly... the list would be too long.
Yeah several weeks back I gave up on trying to relitigate season 1. Michael Chabon is highly likely not coming back, and seasons 2 and 3 have now closed off what they could.
It gives an example of what Star Trek done right looks like that isn't two decades old. It suggests that the Star Trek that many like could still be both possible and successful.
Exactly. The point that keeps getting missed is that people can enjoy something and still be critical of it. I think Picard season 3 is a passable season of television. It even has some fun moments and the nostalgia and for sure the legacy characters for the most part worked for me. But, for me, it is far from perfect, particularly in the plotting and some of the newer characters.
What I kept getting told throughout the run and into two weeks later is that I can’t feel that way. It is perfect because so many people say so. No, no, no, first of all, I was told that it was perfect because YouTubers with “big audiences” said it was perfect even though the people telling me it was perfect hadn’t seen the whole thing. And even some of the YouTubers hadn’t seen the whole thing. But perfect. Then I got the being wrong about not thinking it was perfect because everyone else thought it was perfect thing.
Still? Not perfect. And I can think that. And I am not wrong about my opinion. Because art? Including long run sci-fi franchises? Art is subjective.
- Status
Similar threads
