Excellent work by Admiral UrkelWho said it was accidental?
Kurtzman intentionally killed Legacy?
- Thread starter Beyerstein
- Start date
The guy who I have blocked and others simply seem to be unable to understand that Jack Crusher chose his own path in the end when he was a grown man, Bev gave him that choice. It was literally spelled out. There was a really well done episode or scene where he almost went to meet his father and decided against it.
Crusher didn't put her son in danger, she respected his choices once he was of age. It is really really simple and yet the snark brigade have decided something many parents go through was bad writing.
For some reason, there are people here who comment on stuff but clearly didn't watch the show.
I watched the show, and I thought It was ridiculous. And you really need to stop being so touchy.
There are people confused about the difference between a baby being dragged along on the Enterprise-E saving the galaxy after she'd already seen what Wesley went through.
I think Bev made the wrong call with Picard, but it wasn't exactly illogical or out of no where or not in the script. It was spelled out and you get people on here laughing and being snarky cause they think a baby is the same as a grown man.
In-universe he's a maximum of 21 or 22 years old in Season 3 of the show. Even Beverly knew she couldn't keep a grown man of Starfleet Academy or freshly-minted Ensign age in a cage and force him to live the way she wanted.
Exactly. It's the whole take the baby and hide because life with Picard is so dangerous that is a head scratcher. Because most of us assumed Bev and baby Jack were out living an equally dangerous life as part of the Mariposas. Though for a time they seem to have lived in London.
Picard didn't correct her.
The Picard tie in novels/comics also have it as the Romulus home star. While they're not canon, they were given background information for the show to work from.
Works in my head canon since the 2009 movie and the streaming content don't do a good job at explaining the differences between the two events if any.
Last edited:
I would guess it was originally intended to be set later, as a lot of things point to a longer gap between S2 and S3 than the year (tops) that was eventually decided on. Jack, Geordi's kids, the Enterprise-F, Seven's Starfleet career, Picard and Laris, Raffi's assignment, Riker/Troi all could have benefitted from another five or so years having passed since the previous season.
But I guess someone worked out that the Frontier Day anniversary meant it had to be 2401. Even though they could have called it Federation Day and set it ten years later with a 30 year old Jack.
Speleers was great in the role, but the whole "Picard's secret son" thread was so hackneyed and cliched even by Star Trek standards. That the character just about worked in spite of that was really testament to the performances.
Terry has said that he wanted someone who looked "world weary."
Seven and her extensive military/engineering experience more than qualified her for a direct commission (her expertise with Borg tech was the reason Picard gave her a Captain's field commission).
Clearly not everybody in the year 2401 can be a Paul Rudd. 
Yes, he's a grown man who can now make his own decisions which is why she gives him all of those opportunities and doesn't keep babying him. When he was a baby, she keeps him away for various reasons explained in the show.
I suppose if I can look at pictures of college-aged hockey and football players from the early 20th century that look like they’ve got a mortgage and three ex-wives, maybe it’s not quite the stretch with Jack…Clearly not everybody in the year 2401 can be a Paul Rudd.
Wiford Brimley in Cocoon was almost exactly the same age I am now.
The Silent and Greatest Generations could be cigarette ads and warnings but made flesh.
The Silent and Greatest Generations could be cigarette ads and warnings but made flesh.
I am now nine years older than Sean Connery was in Diamonds Are Forever, yet that man clearly consumed little but cigarettes and whiskey between 1967 and 1971.
So once she realized that her son was going to voluntarily put himself in danger all the time anyway, why didn't she let Picard know of his existence then, if the only reason she kept Jack's existence from Picard a secret was because she feared Jack would be in danger?
Sorry, but no. I have yet to hear any plausible reason why Beverly would keep Jack's existence from Picard (and everyone else) a secret. It's not like Picard was some rogue who constantly put himself in danger anyway. It was just a silly plot device that made no logical sense.
Similar threads
