Spoilers Let’s talk about the destruction of Trek utopia…

[Thomas Elliot]

yes, oh yes they do. they do it so much.

I haven't come across people explicitly saying that it should be a utopia but maybe I just haven't been on the forums that much.
I myself had a criticism of PIC's opening about the Federation, Starfleet and the use of synthetic slave labor, not to mention Raffi's situation. But I don't think I characterized TNG's premise of Earth's future as "utopia." But I can understand why people would be dismayed that the future of Earth that Star Trek: TNG previously depicted as something to aspire to is actually not too different from our own current society.
I did find it interesting to rewatch episodes like the one when Data created a child. Starfleet were assholes! Data creates another sentient, artificial life form on his own time, and Starfleet acts like it's their property? I reconcile it as they had no actual legal right to it, but that they essentially would kick Data and Picard out of Starfleet if they didn't comply.
I got the impression that Starfleet in general was a noble institution but that there were some bad apples here and there that tried to make trouble, but the ethics of the majority of Starfleet would prevail. So to find out that Starfleet (or is it the Federation?) was so hesitant to help Romulus seemed out of character.
But then again, rewatching TUC, I found it out of character for all these characters to start being so racist, just so the filmmakers could hit the audience over the head with commentary about racism and nationalism. The crew has been exposed to ALL these different cultures and species, and they're really going to point and laugh at the way Klingons eat? "Guess who's coming to dinner." Really? And then the Admiral saying that Klingons would become the space trash of the galaxy.
So there's inconsistencies here and there within the entire series itself that have faults, in my opinion.

 

[fireproof78]

It isn't difficult to imagine such a protective stance after suffering loss.

 

[Thomas Elliot]

It isn't difficult to imagine such a protective stance after suffering loss.

You mean after Mars got lit up by the synths?
Yes, I agree. Which, up to that point was fitting in with the themes in TNG and TUC. Yeah, some, or a lot, in the Federation or Starfleet were hesitant to help the Romulans, but Federation ethics prevailed as usual. It was only when they had their equivalent of 9/11 that Starfleet was like, "look we no longer have the resources, our shipyard got destroyed, and all to help our cold war enemies. We're out."

 

[fireproof78]

You mean after Mars got lit up by the synths?
Yes, I agree. Which, up to that point was fitting in with the themes in TNG and TUC. Yeah, some, or a lot, in the Federation or Starfleet were hesitant to help the Romulans, but Federation ethics prevailed as usual. It was only when they had their equivalent of 9/11 that Starfleet was like, "look we no longer have the resources, our shipyard got destroyed, and all to help our cold war enemies. We're out."

I don't Mars would have been so bad if the Dominion War hadn't taken such a toll.

 

[Thomas Elliot]

I don't Mars would have been so bad if the Dominion War hadn't taken such a toll.

Is the Dominion War referenced in PIC? If not, I think it would have benefited to mention that to more fully convey to audiences WHY the Federation was acting that way. If it was mentioned, it's still perplexing because didn't Romulus join the Federation in the war against the Dominion? Viewers like myself would think, "wait, didn't the Romulans and Federation become allies in the war? Wouldn't that be more reason to help them out?" I'm sure there's off-screen explanations or theories you could use to explain it, but I can see why it would be jarring to some viewers.

 

[Greg Cox]

Viewers like myself would think, "wait, didn't the Romulans and Federation become allies in the war? Wouldn't that be more reason to help them out?" I'm sure there's off-screen explanations or theories you could use to explain it, but I can see why it would be jarring to some viewers.

As has been noted before, as far back as DS9, Section 31 predicted that the Romulans would pose a major threat to the Federation once the Dominion War was over.

And you don't really need any offscreen explanations to account for it. You just need to remember history. The USA and USSR were allies in World War II, then became mortal enemies about five minutes after defeating the Nazis.

Wartime alliances can change rapidly. Allies become enemies and vise versa.

 

[Nerys Myk]

As has been noted before, as far back as DS9, Section 31 predicted that the Romulans would pose a major threat to the Federation once the Dominion War was over.

And you don't really need any offscreen explanations to account for it. You just need to remember history. The USA and USSR were allies in World War II, then became mortal enemies about five minutes after defeating the Nazis.

Wartime alliances can change rapidly. Allies become enemies and vise versa.

Not sure they waited that long.

 

[Thomas Elliot]

And you don't really need any offscreen explanations to account for it. You just need to remember history. The USA and USSR were allies in World War II, then became mortal enemies about five minutes after defeating the Nazis.

Wartime alliances can change rapidly. Allies become enemies and vise versa.

The difference is we're living real life, and we learn about WWII and the eventual Cold War through history, news, TV, etc.

This is a TV show and viewers don't have that benefit. I'm not saying it has to be one way or other as far as depictions go. The show is doing fine. But I can see it as a legit criticism being made by some people.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The difference is we're living real life, and we learn about WWII and the eventual Cold War through history, news, TV, etc.

This is a TV show and viewers don't have that benefit. I'm not saying it has to be one way or other as far as depictions go. The show is doing fine. But I can see it as a legit criticism being made by some people.

Some people lived through it. I was Cold War kid.

 

[The Old Mixer]

The USA and USSR were allies in World War II, then became mortal enemies about five minutes after defeating the Nazis.

Or five minutes before...IIRC, in the eleventh hour of the war, both sides had an eye on who could grab what in Germany. We were under no illusions as to what the situation would be after the war.

 

[fireproof78]

Is the Dominion War referenced in PIC? If not, I think it would have benefited to mention that to more fully convey to audiences WHY the Federation was acting that way. If it was mentioned, it's still perplexing because didn't Romulus join the Federation in the war against the Dominion? Viewers like myself would think, "wait, didn't the Romulans and Federation become allies in the war? Wouldn't that be more reason to help them out?" I'm sure there's off-screen explanations or theories you could use to explain it, but I can see why it would be jarring to some viewers.

I don't think it was as necessary though perhaps it might be jarring. I think it is more jarring for those expecting a direct follow up to TNG, which isn't accurate. Picard is truly doing an exploration of Picard as a character and the Federation/Starfleet as a whole in a post-Dominion War world, which means that it references a lot of Trek history. So, some familiarity would be helpful.

That said, the idea that the Romulans would remain allies after coming in to the war under duress and regarded with suspicion by Starfleet and Klingon leadership it is not surprising that relationships were strained.

 

[Qonundrum]

Suddenly I feel an urge to hatewatch this. How bad is it?

don't.
the youtube algorithm is unvorgiving

Watch one channel and you'll see suggested videos for others. Now, you might like SOME channels to CERTAIN extents, but others are just godawful. I'd mention names except I'm trying not to give free publicity to the nastier ones except Nerdrotic was already mentioned.

And you'll even see the occasional channel that tells an opposite viewpoint, just not as often. It depends on how middle-of-the-road one is and all the algorithm can do is match metadata based on statistical qualifiers.

 

[Greg Cox]

The difference is we're living real life, and we learn about WWII and the eventual Cold War through history, news, TV, etc..

But I think people can connect the dots just by remembering real-life historical analogies. It's not as though it's some shocking surprise that the UFP and the Romulans didn't become best buddies after defeating a common enemy. We didn't need to have it spelled out for us, IMO.

 

[fireproof78]

The difference is we're living real life, and we learn about WWII and the eventual Cold War through history, news, TV, etc.

This is a TV show and viewers don't have that benefit. I'm not saying it has to be one way or other as far as depictions go. The show is doing fine. But I can see it as a legit criticism being made by some people.

It's not like we live in the day and age where we have to wait for magazines or encyclopedias to be published.

 

[DarthTimon]

The closest we ever came to the idea of true peace between the Romulans and the Federation was one line in Nemesis, when Riker notes the new Romulan government wants to talk. However, Romulan governments are usually transitory, and simply talking is nowhere near a guarantee.

 

[Thomas Elliot]

But I think people can connect the dots just by remembering real-life historical analogies. It's not as though it's some shocking surprise that the UFP and the Romulans didn't become best buddies after defeating a common enemy. We didn't need to have it spelled out for us, IMO.

Also, if they did mention the Dominion War and fill in the blanks of what happened in the last 20 years it runs the risk of becoming too exposition heavy.
I think that Star Trek picks and chooses when to expect people to connect the dots. In ST VI: TUC they didn't feel people could draw parallels to racism and fear of the "other" without having overly racist language, and even direct references like "Guess who's coming to dinner."
And also, despite the problems we've seen a long the way with the Federation, I think many people were under the impression that it was more benevolent than the United States so that's where the real-life historical analogy might not be so apparent to people. Of course, PIC is definitely providing commentary on the current refugee crisis and the United States, and the Federation and the Romulans is a rough approximation of that. Social commentary is a hallmark of Star Trek. So while I get that some fans might find this presentation a bit jarring, and I personally think the first episode might have benefited from providing a little more context, there's only so much time during a single episode. And you gotta make break some eggs to make an omelette. Not everything is going to get covered, remembered, referenced, etc. They have to keep it moving while also providing a socially relevant story.

Another thing to, is that even if you think that Earth and the Federation was much more enlightened and benevolent in the future of Star Trek, if you're going to make a big part of the story take place ON Earth and within the Federation, it's hard to create a compelling story WITHOUT writing in some conflict. TNG for example takes place away from Earth and is focused on exploring strange new planets, so of course it's easy to say write that Earth is all peachy, because the conflict in the series takes place away from it.

And back to the money situation and its relation to Earth in ST. When I first heard it in TNG, I was like, "wait, cool idea, but that doesn't even make sense." I ended up warming up to the idea when I saw it referenced again in the TOS films, so I got used to it. But I still don't think that the writers really had any real in-story model for how this money-less society is supposed to operate. I believe that it was Roddenberry's idea to have this enlightened future without money, but in the context of The Voyage Home, I think it was just a part of the story to draw a contrast between our future Earth heroes, and the humans of the past. Same with TNG. It was only mentioned to show a contrast between either time-displaced humans, or maybe some primitive culture.

I'd rather they attempt to craft a story where the Federation doesn't use currency because I think that further separates Star Trek from other mainstream sci-fi properties and makes it more unique. But it's also like writing yourself into a corner unless you have this elaborate societal model or worked out.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Gary Buechler is the rear end of an ass. I've commented on his stupidity many times. He uses a rotating number of tactics that he tries to pass off as criticism.

First, he uses canards, all of which are dismissable. 1) ST PIC was supposed to be a TNG reboot. 2) The Federation was from the beginning a socialist utopia. 3) Star Trek never before addressed social and political topics except through very vague allegories. 4) The people who have watched Star Trek since diapers have the right to dictate what is Trek and what is not.

Second, he fails to use facts and evidence when talking about what is Trek and what is not. Even if we could come to a conclusion about the nature of the universe, everything must come from the episodes themselves, not some manifesto written by some dude in his basement. He never talks about episodes. He only talks in vague principles.

ETA: Third, he enables the worst instincts of the other members of the axis of stupid (the so called Fandom Menace). Dumbcock has used misogynistic and antisemitic slurs, which Buechler lapped up eagerly.

ETA: Fourth, like other members of the axis of stupid, he tries to pass off nitpicking at criticism. Who the fuck cares if they used the Anaheim Convention Center? Is that any different than the multiple reuses of the Tillman Water Reclamation Plant?

There are some critics whom I appreciate, especially Lore Reloaded, even as I disagree with them strenuously.

I watched a little of Buechler's recent videos in order to make sure that I was not being hyperbolic. The two videos I watched exhibited all of these characteristics, and one that I did not previously account for:

• Fifth, he actively looks for things to be offended by. Buechler went down a list of things by which he judged the episode, one of which was "Did have identity politics? Did it have "womansplaining?". This conclusively shows that he views new Star Trek as an activist. He actively looks for reasons to hate each episode.

I need to add a sixth element to this list, although it applies generally to all Fandom Menacers. Gary Buechler conflates franchises in order to produce a general swell of outrage among his viewers. The supposed ills of Star Trek are not all that different that the ills of Star Wars, DC, Doctor Who, whatever else Disney is doing, etc. Those supposed ills are all products of (1) the industry not respecting the past and (2) not respecting fans. The critiques, however, are not necessarily reactions to the specific cultural products, including Picard and Discovery, but a general attitude that he wants his followers to embody. The entertainment industry is a threat to what you love. It will destroy the universes you have admired in order to score political points in a way that will harm you personally. It is therefore important to fit Star Trek into the same box as they put all the other franchises.

 

[Dale Sams]

Its funny how one can agree with them on some stuff and then when you see they hate EVERYTHING...."What is wrong with you people?? Can you not tell true talent when you see it??"

Ex: I agree the most part with the 'menace' on the state of DC and Marvel,....but Hickman is a genius, and if you can't trust him to see through whatever is going on with X-Men??? Well....

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Lynx]

Wow, you deserve a double

Cheer up, life is not all about being hurt

No, I don't feel hurt, just p***ed off by all lousy doom-and-gloom crap.
I just can't stand all the crap which is produced today.

 

[Lynx]

I've got to say, the first two episodes of DS9's sixth season are darker than the first six episodes of PIC combined.

But with DS9, it's "okay" because it came out in the '90s and has now achieved Honored Old Show Immunity Status, complete with rose-tinted shades to gaze through. "But that was different!" It always is.

But DS9 was never just doom-and-gloom.
I agree that there were episodes which were dark, just like those you mentioned. But there were always some light episodes here and there to change the mood.

And it was never the constant depression we have to face in today's series where everything is dark and gloomy.

It's the same everywhere, not just in Star Trek. They have managed to mess upp Star Wars too.

And most of it outside SF too with doom-and-gloom, bad acting and political correctness.

Back in the 90's, there were a lot of good series: TNG, DS9, Voyager, CSI, CSI NY, CSI Miami, Stargate SG1, Stargate Atlantis, NCIS, The X-files etc.

And now: Nothing!

The only show worth watching now is NCIS. When they cancel that one, I will only keep my TV for the sports programs and for watching videos and DVD:s