Does Prodigy's semi cancellation make Legacy more likely?

[Christopher]

Beverly was around 55 at the time of Nemesis. The simplest explanation for her and Jean-Luc not using birth control is that they didn't think they had to.

The issue for me isn't whether there's an in-story explanation, but whether the writers should have at least acknowledged that in the 24th century, an unplanned pregnancy should be an exceptional rarity that needs justification onscreen. DS9's writers acknowledged it 24 years ago. These writers were more careless about the issue.

It doesn't matter if we can imagine a way to fill a plot hole. The fact that we need to means that the writers failed to. It was their responsibility to address it, not ours.

 

[CorporalClegg]

The writers didn't put much thought into anything regarding Picard beyond "What is thing, and how can we mine thing for more nostalgia?"

 

[Mudd]

Maybe societies evolve such that unanticipated pregnancies aren't widely viewed as contraceptive failure.

 

[Dukhat]

The writers didn't put much thought into anything regarding Picard beyond "What is thing, and how can we mine thing for more nostalgia?"

Not to mention, "Who can we bring back as a guest star just to kill off?"

 

[Lord Garth]

Obviously, I'm a fan of Picard but, trying to look at it from the other point-of-view: I think it's less "nostalgia" in and of itself and more "How are they going to fuck up bringing them back?" and "They're going to present them in a way I don't like or outright hate!" That seems to get more to the heart of the matter, from the way I see it. I won't go into spoilers, but SNW has many TOS elements as PIC has TNG elements. But one gets a pass with certain people and the other doesn't.

If there wasn't the fear of "How are they going to fuck it up?" people wouldn't get so worked up over seeing things from TNG/DS9/VOY in PIC. Like they don't seem to mind (and actually seem to look forward to) when there's TOS stuff in SNW. People seem to love seeing how SNW connects to TOS. But those same people freak out whenever PIC made any type of connection to TNG/DS9/VOY no matter what it was, even though PIC continues out of TNG, just like SNW continues into TOS (or at least a hypothetical version of what TOS would be like in the 2020s).

The easy answer to say is, "People are just biased as Hell and not even trying to hide it!", but I'm not going to go that way. I'm trying to peel the layers of the onion, so work with me here.

 

[Christopher]

Obviously, I'm a fan of Picard but, trying to look at it from the other point-of-view: I think it's less "nostalgia" in and of itself and more "How are they going to fuck up bringing them back?" and "They're going to present them in a way I don't like or outright hate!" That seems to get more to the heart of the matter, from the way I see it. I won't go into spoilers, but SNW has many TOS elements as PIC has TNG elements. But one gets a pass with certain people and the other doesn't.

That's not true. The difference is that SNW is mostly using TOS characters that were underdeveloped before and fleshing them out in new ways. That's not mere nostalgia, it's innovation. PIC season 1 had innovation, but seasons 2-3 stripped it away in favor of rehash. SNW is about "What can we do with these characters that hasn't been seen before?" PIC season 3 was about "How can we coast on the audience's fondness for things they have seen before?"

Yes, how they bring someone back matters, but it's petty to dismiss it as merely a matter of personal dislike. It's more about the skill and integrity of how it's done, whether it serves a purpose beyond exploiting the audience's nostalgia. I'm not fond of nostalgia for its own sake, but I can be won over if it's done in a way that adds something meaningful to it -- for instance, I was skeptical of including Chapel in SNW, but they've enriched her character and her relationship to Spock so much that it actually improves TOS. But the way PIC went about it was pandering, forced, and deeply unintelligent. The only parts that worked for me were Worf's evolution and the Data/Lore resolution, because those did advance the characters in meaningful ways.

If there's something that concerns me about SNW season 2, it's that there weren't really any strange new worlds. There were good stories, but they mostly relied far too much on continuity rather than novelty. That's a trend that concerns me, and I hope it doesn't worsen.

 

[Mudd]

Not to mention, "Who can we bring back as a guest star just to kill off?"

Yep.

 

[Lord Garth]

Anyway, all of this seems to be a lot to go through, so I'll just post what the thought process was behind Picard and Crusher having a son from Terry Matalas' own words.

Cutting and pasting from this this thread:

Terry said, "What's the last unexplored relationship in the life of Jean-Luc Picard? His son. It felt like [the series] had done a daughter with Soji. How can we have a son that's reasonable?" "You go to Vash, you go to all these people, but the goal was it was a Next Generation reunion. And so in the back of your head, you go: Beverly. But how can that make sense?" Terry went over to Patrick Stewart's house to talk about it and didn't mention his idea about Beverly. He wasn't going to bring it up. Then Patrick Stewart said, "What if it was Beverly?" Terry says, "We never thought he would go there!" Terry told Patrick, "I have to figure out how that would make sense for both of those characters."​

Terry went to his writing staff and posed the question, "Why would she keep his son from him? The first thing for me you go to is: she lost Wesley Crusher. She let her kid go off into the stars. That's got to do some psychological damage to a person to just let their son just leave her life. Then you start digging into her husband, her mother, and also this relationship. You go back to how harsh it was for Wesley in those early seasons and how he feels about family. It seemed less contrived the more you talk about. It's not going to feel good; it's going to feel messy, but that's what streaming television is and how it evolves. Would it make for some interesting scene work? As you see where this show goes, eventually you can feel good about this again, and you can earn it back."​

 

[Lord Garth]

That's not true. The difference is that SNW is mostly using TOS characters that were underdeveloped before and fleshing them out in new ways. That's not mere nostalgia, it's innovation. PIC season 1 had innovation, but seasons 2-3 stripped it away in favor of rehash. SNW is about "What can we do with these characters that hasn't been seen before?" PIC season 3 was about "How can we coast on the audience's fondness for things they have seen before?"

Yes, how they bring someone back matters, but it's petty to dismiss it as merely a matter of personal dislike. It's more about the skill and integrity of how it's done, whether it serves a purpose beyond exploiting the audience's nostalgia. I'm not fond of nostalgia for its own sake, but I can be won over if it's done in a way that adds something meaningful to it -- for instance, I was skeptical of including Chapel in SNW, but they've enriched her character and her relationship to Spock so much that it actually improves TOS. But the way PIC went about it was pandering, forced, and deeply unintelligent. The only parts that worked for me were Worf's evolution and the Data/Lore resolution, because those did advance the characters in meaningful ways.

If there's something that concerns me about SNW season 2, it's that there weren't really any strange new worlds. There were good stories, but they mostly relied far too much on continuity rather than novelty. That's a trend that concerns me, and I hope it doesn't worsen.

Nostalgia is when people are in the exact same position they were and acting as if no time has passed. Nostalgia is writing and shooting things in the exact same way. The TNG characters weren't in the same places they were during TNG. And, as much as some people like to ignore it, PIC was shot like an Alex Kurtzman production, looks darker than TNG ever did, and is fully serialized, which TNG never was. Nostalgia to me would mean PIC would be exactly like TNG from 1987 to 1994. It wasn't.

The closest it got was the final episode with the TNG crew all back together and on the Enterprise-D. But people like to act as if the entire series was like the last episode.

.
.
.

As far as Crusher's pregnancy, it was the 24th Century, if they can get people to live longer, they can find ways to make it possible for women to have children later in life if they so choose. That's an easy one.

 

[Christopher]

Nostalgia is when people are in the exact same position they were and acting as if no time has passed. Nostalgia is writing and shooting things in the exact same way. The TNG characters weren't in the same places they were during TNG.

Of course not, but it's facile to pretend the problems can be boiled down to a simple binary of nostalgia vs. not-nostalgia. Nothing is ever explained by dumbing it down to a one-word label or a simple coin flip. Quality is not about what label you can stick on a thing, it's about the details of the execution, and that's a far more complex discussion.

 

[Lord Garth]

Of course not, but it's facile to pretend the problems can be boiled down to a simple binary of nostalgia vs. not-nostalgia. Nothing is ever explained by dumbing it down to a one-word label or a simple coin flip. Quality is not about what label you can stick on a thing, it's about the details of the execution, and that's a far more complex discussion.

I wasn't talking about quality, but people's biases.

And nostalgia isn't complex. It's about going back to things you remember and them being what you remember. In a world of change, it's something that doesn't.

What I like about PIC was seeing Berman Era characters presented in a non-Berman way.

I feel like when I'm talking to some people here about PIC, it's like we're speaking two different languages.

And if there is nostalgia, as in actual nostalgia, that doesn't make it automatically bad. If they're going to a Fleet Museum, it makes sense to have a bunch of old ships. If the TNG crew is back together, and they're on an Enterprise, giving them the D makes for the most powerful impact.

And how is the TNG crew fighting the Borg in PIC Season 3 any different from the TOS crew fighting the Klingons in TUC, which was their swan song? The Klingons were the biggest enemy in TOS, the Borg were the biggest enemy in TNG. And Kirk probably fought the Klingons more than Picard fought the Borg, if we run through the actual numbers.

It just feels like a lot of double-standards, which, again, I attribute to bias.

If I look at the history of this board, there are people here who don't seem to accept any type of new Star Trek unless it's a TOS Reboot.

 

[Lord Garth]

Anyway, I understand the whole pushback against people who worship Terry as a God, that's why I've laid relatively low, but... after a certain point, it's a bit much. There are some of us who like PIC S3 who aren't Terry Trekkers. For one thing, my liking DSC and not liking ENT disqualifies me from that group. As well as not wanting Berman back.

 

[Christopher]

I wasn't talking about quality, but people's biases.

And it's petty and ad hominem to accuse people of having biased opinions just because you don't agree with them. Your assumptions are wrong and unfair.

And nostalgia isn't complex.

That's exactly the point. Your pretense that nostalgia is the exclusive issue here is a dumbed-down straw man and is not a truthful assessment of the criticisms. It's nothing so simple-minded as nostalgia vs. not-nostalgia. It's about how well a story is told. It's always about how well a specific instance of a thing is done, but people keep wanting to avoid that and reduce it to some generic category or concept like "nostalgia."

I feel like when I'm talking to some people here about PIC, it's like we're speaking two different languages.

Yes, because you're making up straw men rather than hearing and respecting what other people are actually saying.

It just feels like a lot of double-standards, which, again, I attribute to bias.

The bias is yours, because you're not listening to people who disagree with you and just making insulting assumptions about their motives.

 

[Lord Garth]

This could go on forever, if I let it.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

This could go on forever, if I let it.

Don't let it. Nothing will stop him from getting the last word (or 1000) in once he's stoked up.

 

[Lord Garth]

Anyway, no one wants a show that they think is shit. No one. We just all have different ideas of what's good and what isn't. But that's what makes this place interesting, for better or worse.