I'm confused, how is Michael Burnham more understandable?
Is it just me, or is Star Trek going the wrong way?
- Thread starter LunaticBurnout
- Start date
Her trauma history makes her more understandable for me. Picard basically feels like an aristocratic figure who was taught these ideals without fully recognizing possible variation. Michael has a struggle that is interesting and engaging. Picard gets there too little too late for me.
I don't know. These days they both seem about the same level of unobtainable...
Your mileage may vary indeed...
Ok. How about I want a story about people who feel like people not talking points espousing philosophy of how great they are. Humanity may have a long way to go but I at least see humans moving to TOS from where we are. I can't say the same about TNG.
Yup, still very varied.
To each their own.Which is why I primarily watch the show for Seven of Nine.
It'd be interesting to see ST:P's Picard in a discussion with someone who remembers the events of episodes like "Pen Pals" and "Homeward." Would he still stand by that twisted notion of the Prime Directive that dictates that it's better to let a pre-warp civilization be wiped out than risk culturally contaminating it?
Yeah, in Homeward he tried to kill Kasidy Yates (and Dr Claire Finn)!
Last edited:
Shhh. Don't tell that to Sisko. It would only swell his resentment
against Picard. He already blames Picard for the death of his first wife.
Mirroring the United States then, which Trek's Federation often has.
It's one reason Sir Patrick wanted to do the series (that and Brexit).
And quite possibly, that means TNG will eventually become dated because the TNG Picard never went through what Burnham did.
Last edited:
It's funny, in TNG's time it was still very much 42-minute reset and limited character growth. PIC Picard is like classic movie Kirk, the reset button is finally gone and they're allowed to evolve.
IMO TNG is very dated now, like TOS. And it's fans invested in that dated method of storytelling who are struggling with these people suddenly having consequences and making choices that matter beyond the end of the current episode.
If anything, I find TNG is perhaps more dated than TOS these days.
Well, Elbrun had definite social anxiety.
Elbrun was a mess of a person who should've been sent to Vulcan as a child just like Miranda Jones had been sent, so that he could learn how not to read minds and shut out the thoughts of others, like her.
Betazoids are far more powerful telepaths than Vulcans - it's as basic as talking to them, and its woven into every aspect of their society. There's no reason to think that problems that would confound them would be something that Vulcans could better handle. Jones was sent to the Vulcans because they knew more about such problems than humans. That logic would not apply here.
No, a lot of people just don't like how badly written shows like STD are.
No, a lot of people just don't like how badly written shows like STD are.
The current live action shows simply haven't made me care enough about the characters or universe to care about the consequences of what is going on. It is all very bland and unimaginative, from my point-of-view.
Imagine if the Next Gen crew got to remember and grow from the events of a whole season. They'd all be emotional wrecks and fans would be furious that shit episodes like "The Chase" and "Sub Rosa" were actually part of something that mattered the following week.
Now imagine what the TNG people could have created having had four years to churn out a mere 40 episodes at $8m a pop.
Similar threads
