Ok. What is the chance of a Picard spinoff?

[fireproof78]

Its not continuity that I for one have a problem with. Not at all. You need a level of continuity in whatever story you tell, particularly with a longstanding franchise such as Star Trek. For example, let's say in one series that you decide the Andorians are going to leave the Federation and they become the new baddie. Because of their more confrontational nature, that makes a lot of sense. You better have a good explanation as to why in story, but it generally tracks. Now same idea but this time with the relatively pacifistic, logical Vulcans? That might be a harder pill to swallow and need one DAMNED good explanation as to why. Both work even if you need to work hard in one case to get there.

Its using continuity as a crutch that I have a problem with. Same idea, but instead you discover that the Vulcans and the Andorians both have decided to leave the Federation and be the new baddies because of a multigenerational story, something involving, that prior to his disappearance, Spock and Tuvok discovered something from Shran's final mission with an aged Admiral Archer aboard Pike's Enterprise before Spock joined the ship. This led directly to Sarek and Sybok having another part of the story which in turn led to another side issue having to do with first contact with the Cardassians and the Bajorans by a young Picard aboard the Stargazer.

Indeed, I have similar issues. This idea that continuity is bad or not wanted is a gross simplification of my actual struggle. It's when continuity is used to basically shoehorn in various disparate items because of how it looks. There is ignoring the idea of a much bigger galaxy and instead assuming that the Trek world centers around known characters, allowing them all to interact across various stories, no matter what. It creates a "small universe" that becomes more and more convoluted to actually enjoy, rather than newer characters.

And, ultimately, it's characters that I watch this show for, not the imaginary history. Others might like all that history but then it makes Trek a series of data points to me, encyclopedia entries that make sure the boxes are checked for Trek continuity perfection. And that's frustrating to me because then it doesn't make the world feel more alive; it makes it feel way more artificial.

Continuity is an excellent tool, but it can become just as rigid and unyielding as it can be binding together and inviting.

 

[Campe]

Indeed, I have similar issues. This idea that continuity is bad or not wanted is a gross simplification of my actual struggle. It's when continuity is used to basically shoehorn in various disparate items because of how it looks. There is ignoring the idea of a much bigger galaxy and instead assuming that the Trek world centers around known characters, allowing them all to interact across various stories, no matter what. It creates a "small universe" that becomes more and more convoluted to actually enjoy, rather than newer characters.

And, ultimately, it's characters that I watch this show for, not the imaginary history. Others might like all that history but then it makes Trek a series of data points to me, encyclopedia entries that make sure the boxes are checked for Trek continuity perfection. And that's frustrating to me because then it doesn't make the world feel more alive; it makes it feel way more artificial.

Continuity is an excellent tool, but it can become just as rigid and unyielding as it can be binding together and inviting.

To bring it back to a case and point with Picard, you have a story designed to bring the TNG seven back onto the bridge of the Enterprise-D for one final adventure against the Borg. Fine. Its a reunion. Yeah, its going to be filled with fanwank and callbacks galore. I don't love that, but I get it and ultimately it set out what it intended to do. I still call it passable entertainment in itself. But...

Did we need the estranged son of Picard and Crusher?
Did we need the two big bads of the Berman era to team up?
Did we need to rename the hero ship the Enterprise?

I could name a dozen other things here that I don't know are necessary, but ultimately I can think of other ideas to bring the intended reunion without going down those roads.

 

[Lord Garth]

Did we need the estranged son of Picard and Crusher?

I think Crusher was conspicuous by her lack of mention in Season 1, when every other TNG character was seen or name-dropped. An even bigger red flag when Picard went to see his Doctor from the Stargazer and not the Enterprise. Even back then, it led me and others to wonder, "What happened to Beverly Crusher?" I think it needed to be something serious enough to keep her away for all this time. A son she didn't tell Picard about fits the bill. Is it an obvious rip-off of Kirk/Carol and David? You bet. But they mostly got it to work. Mostly...

It's ridiculous to hear that Picard and Crusher broke up five times. What the Hell was that? I expect better from them. Once, maybe twice, okay. But five times? Come on. Before someone says, "It happens all the time!" or "It happens with adults too!" Yes, I know. I know people in such on-again-off-again relationships. It's not healthy and usually one of those people are either toxic, clingy, or a piece of shit. I say the same thing over-and-over again to my friends who somehow end up back with these people, "If it didn't work out, it didn't work out for a reason."

Did we need the two big bads of the Berman era to team up?

Need? No. Want? I didn't ask for it, but I don't mind. What I do mind is that Vadic ended up being just a pawn.

Did we need to rename the hero ship the Enterprise?

I don't have an issue with the Titan being renamed the Enterprise. What I do a have an issue with is that this ship would make for a better Enterprise-B than an Enterprise-G. Seriously. This ship looks like it's from 2301, not 2401. There's no two ways about it. If this ship came after Kirk's, I'd have no problem with it whatsoever. But it comes after the Enterprise-F... and that's just weird.

It would be like someone in 2023 making something look like it's from 1923. "But it's a retro phase!" Retro today usually means the 1980s and 1990s, not the 1920s. But, anyway...

 

[fireproof78]

To bring it back to a case and point with Picard, you have a story designed to bring the TNG seven back onto the bridge of the Enterprise-D for one final adventure against the Borg. Fine. Its a reunion. Yeah, its going to be filled with fanwank and callbacks galore. I don't love that, but I get it and ultimately it set out what it intended to do. I still call it passable entertainment in itself. But...

Did we need the estranged son of Picard and Crusher?
Did we need the two big bads of the Berman era to team up?
Did we need to rename the hero ship the Enterprise?

I could name a dozen other things here that I don't know are necessary, but ultimately I can think of other ideas to bring the intended reunion without going down those roads.

This puts to my points together quite well. Was the story well told? Pretty much, but those added elements created a very meandering story that is reminiscent of more RPG style story telling, where the main character can't just move to the goal, but has to be sent back and forth on "fetch quests" to achieve the objective. It becomes needlessly convoluted to my mind.

The Enterprise renaming was annoying and unnecessary. It just feels tacked on.

 

[Sci]

To bring it back to a case and point with Picard, you have a story designed to bring the TNG seven back onto the bridge of the Enterprise-D for one final adventure against the Borg. Fine. Its a reunion. Yeah, its going to be filled with fanwank and callbacks galore. I don't love that, but I get it and ultimately it set out what it intended to do. I still call it passable entertainment in itself. But...

Did we need the estranged son of Picard and Crusher?

I don't mind Jack's existence being revealed per se. My problem with him is that his story arc echoes a few too many of the same beats as Soji in S1 -- the previously-unknown child of a TNG character with mysterious powers they didn't know about before being chased by unknown alien assassins who have seemingly infiltrated Starfleet itself.

If there were either some way to avoid re-using those beats, or to at least integrate the similarity of Soji's and Jack's stories together, I would have preferred that.

Did we need to rename the hero ship the Enterprise?

I mean... yeah, actually. I think that renaming it the Enterprise ties a nice bow on the whole thing and serves as a good button. And making Seven of Nine a captain of the Enterprise was also an important bit.

I think Crusher was conspicuous by her lack of mention in Season 1, when every other TNG character was seen or name-dropped. An even bigger red flag when Picard went to see his Doctor from the Stargazer and not the Enterprise. Even back then, it led me and others to wonder, "What happened to Beverly Crusher?" I think it needed to be something serious enough to keep her away for all this time. A son she didn't tell Picard about fits the bill. Is it an obvious rip-off of Kirk/Carol and David? You bet. But they mostly got it to work. Mostly...

Yes and no? I found the stated motivation for not telling Jean-Luc about Jack and cutting off all contact with the rest of the crew kind of hard to buy. Like, Jean-Luc was just sitting there in Labarre for most of the last two decades -- what would have been the harm in telling him about Jack? It might have gotten him out of his funk to know he had a child to help raise.

Something about the idea that Beverly would cut off all contact with Jean-Luc does work for me though, but not for the stated reason. I don't buy that she did it to keep him safe -- especially since she and Jack subsequently spent years having dangerous adventures as Mariposa members. What I would buy is that she cut them all off because she's just fundamentally afraid of having her heart broken by Jean-Luc and/or feels guilty about being in love with her first husband's best friend, and then cut off the rest of the TNG crew because of her guilt with Jean-Luc. I can buy her just running away from her life because of fear of the emotional consequences of her choices more than I buy "Romulans were trying to kill you that week."

It's ridiculous to hear that Picard and Crusher broke up five times. What the Hell was that? I expect better from them. Once, maybe twice, okay. But five times? Come on. Before someone says, "It happens all the time!" or "It happens with adults too!" Yes, I know. I know people in such on-again-off-again relationships. It's not healthy and usually one of those people are either toxic, clingy, or a piece of shit. I say the same thing over-and-over again to my friends who somehow end up back with these people, "If it didn't work out, it didn't work out for a reason."

That part, I buy. I'm sorry, but look at Jean-Luc and Beverly in TNG. They're assholes to each other. They're constantly sending mixed signals. They finally admit their feelings to one-another in "Attached" -- and then Beverly just refuses to explore having a relationship, no explanation given. They act like a couple, but then they refuse to actually commit to one-another and have these other one-again, off-again relationships seemingly without giving the other even a head's up. And Jean-Luc? I mean, Jean-Luc was a bachelor in his mid-50s who had never been married and never had a long-term relationship even though we know he was not aromantic or asexual. He clearly had commitment issues, which PIC S2 confirmed were the result of an attachment disorder stemming from his guilt over his mother's suicide.

So, I can completely buy that Jean-Luc and Beverly kept getting together and breaking up during the run of TNG and the TNG films. It absolutely rings true to me.

I don't have an issue with the Titan being renamed the Enterprise. What I do a have an issue with is that this ship would make for a better Enterprise-B than an Enterprise-G. Seriously. This ship looks like it's from 2301, not 2401. There's no two ways about it. If this ship came after Kirk's, I'd have no problem with it whatsoever. But it comes after the Enterprise-F... and that's just weird.

I mean, the exterior is intentionally supposed to look like they put 25th Century engines onto a 23rd Century hull. I don't mind that; the interior still looks late 24th/early 25th Century to me.

It would be like someone in 2023 making something look like it's from 1923. "But it's a retro phase!" Retro today usually means the 1980s and 1990s, not the 1920s. But, anyway...

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure there are people who put modified modern engines into classic cars. I can buy the idea that a culture with near-infinite resources might go through retro design phases sometimes, where they mimic the aesthetics of earlier eras while preserving modern functionality on the interior.

I don't think it's implausible. I just think the secondary hull of the Constitution III class looks butt ugly.

 

[UssGlenn]

It would be like someone in 2023 making something look like it's from 1923. "But it's a retro phase!" Retro today usually means the 1980s and 1990s, not the 1920s. But, anyway...

Hey, some of us actually prefer Art Deco as a design style, so 100 years back seems fine to me. But also, Starfleet's retro is referencing a specific era of Starfleet at its most legendary, not the era when the Admirals were in the Academy.

 

[Lord Garth]

Hey, some of us actually prefer Art Deco as a design style, so 100 years back seems fine to me. But also, Starfleet's retro is referencing a specific era of Starfleet at its most legendary, not the era when the Admirals were in the Academy.

Most of your post, I can see what you're saying...

... But then we get to that last bit! TWOK opens with Saavik taking the Kobayashi Maru and then Admiral Kirk making a grand entrance, complete with staged lighting and looking like a total badass.

 

[Danja]

I feel it has no effect. Everything is on pause. Terry Matalas doesn't strike me as the giving up type. He'll push for it until it happens, and cite where support for Legacy is versus where support for Strange New Worlds was. The thing that would effect it would be if Jeri Ryan, Michelle Hurd, Ed Speelers, and Ashlei Sharpe Chestnut (and somehow Todd Stashwick?) are still available by the time they're able to get things going.

Remember: DSC Season 2 finished airing in April 2019. SNW premiered in May 2022.

The SAG contract expires June 30th (the Director's Guild is voting on THEIR contract right now).

The AMPTP is counting on DGA rolling over and playing dead (again). They don't need the double whammy of the WGA AND SAG-AFTRA going on strike at the same time.

 

[UssGlenn]

... But then we get to that last bit! TWOK opens with Saavik taking the Kobayashi Maru and then Admiral Kirk making a grand entrance, complete with staged lighting and looking like total badass

Sorry should have been more specific. What I was trying to say is that Starfleet Retro references the late 23rd century because thays the most legendary period of Starfleet History.

Today's retro is 1980s-1990s because thats when the people in charge now ( and have the buying power) were young and cool. The 25th Century equivalent would be Starfleet Admirals referencing the ships they were serving on when they were junior officers. But it makes PR sense to reference when Starfleet was cool, not the Admirals, so that's why late 23rd is retro and not late 24th.

 

[Commander Troi]

Something about the idea that Beverly would cut off all contact with Jean-Luc does work for me though, but not for the stated reason. I don't buy that she did it to keep him safe -- especially since she and Jack subsequently spent years having dangerous adventures as Mariposa members. What I would buy is that she cut them all off because she's just fundamentally afraid of having her heart broken by Jean-Luc and/or feels guilty about being in love with her first husband's best friend, and then cut off the rest of the TNG crew because of her guilt with Jean-Luc. I can buy her just running away from her life because of fear of the emotional consequences of her choices more than I buy "Romulans were trying to kill you that week."

THIS I buy! Fear and guilt are powerful motivators. And the longer one is out of contact, the harder it is to reconnect.

 

[Lord Garth]

Sorry should have been more specific. What I was trying to say is that Starfleet Retro references the late 23rd century because thays the most legendary period of Starfleet History [...] it makes PR sense to reference when Starfleet was cool, not the Admirals, so that's why late 23rd is retro and not late 24th.

That works for me as in-universe reasoning. Especially since I like TOS Movie designs better than TNG Movie designs anyway.

 

[hellojane]

True, but I connected it more to a thread here about a month ago that covered presentism vs continuity / history in Star Trek. It seems many of the critics about a potential Legacy series is not wanting too much continuity.

My issue with the show is that the premise of the show that most fans want isn't exciting to me. IT's basically recreating TNG and using their kids in place of them. I don't trust Matalas to deliver anything original so I would expect the whole show to just be the TNG kids, Seven, and Raffi basically replaying Berman's eras greatest hits. I also don't think Jack is a character that can be compelling as a co-lead on a show. There's a thin line for me between paying homage and using nostalgia as a crutch. I think Matalas is too much of a fan and has too much hero worship for the show to be anything but nostalgia.

I can only speak for myself, but most of the ideas he and writers have given out in interviews and come up with don't excite me. I don't really care about seeing Alexander again. I don't really need one episode updates with Harry, Tom, Bashir, and Keiko. I don't need more stories about revisiting Thad's death yet again or resurrecting him or whatever. This season ruined any real desire I had in seeing romances between Picard & Beverly and Raffi & Seven.

I also deeply dislike the idea that he put in place, both with the finale and the potential Legacy series, that nobody is happy in this universe unless they're in Starfleet. All the TNG characters are back in apparently. Having Seven, Picard, Riker, and Troi out of Starfleet was one of the best things about the original premise of the show and that got ruined cause, of course, they're only happy on a starship. The best part about Jack was that he seemed uninterested in Starfleet, but that ended. I liked that the Kestra we saw in S1 didn't seem like the type to join, but nope she's there too. It's tired and it's uninspired. If that's what we're going to get in Legacy, then I'm just not that into it the idea.

 

[Citiprime]

From TrekMovie.com:

Akiva Goldsman co-created Star Trek: Picard and was co-showrunner on season 2. And he has high praise for season 3 showrunner Terry Matalas, offering his support for the idea of Terry’s “Star Trek: Legacy” spin-off, telling Cinemabland.​

Well, I think what Terry did with Season 3 is so extraordinary, and I think that the appetite for it is, I think, undeniable. So certainly, I am a huge advocate of some version of that continuing. It was so spectacular, I think, what he did. And so, you know, right now, there’s no pitching of anything. Right now the world is uh shut down [due to writer’s strike]. But, you know, I would really hope – let me put it like this: I signed the petition [for Star Trek: Legacy] too.​

The petition Goldsman is referring to is the one that is now approaching 60,000 signatures. This level of support is almost twice that for the post-Discovery season 2 petition calling for a show set on the USS Enterprise with Captain Pike which preceded the greenlight for Star Trek: Strange New Worlds.​

 

[Lord Garth]

One of the reasons I want to watch The 12 Monkeys is because I want to see what Terry Matalas does when he's not following up on 28 seasons and 10 movies' worth of old material.

I'll give my takeaways after I have.

 

[Danja]

I don't really care about seeing Alexander again.

The same goes for Kestra.

Shaw is dead. Let him stay that way.

I also deeply dislike the idea that he put in place, both with the finale and the potential Legacy series, that nobody is happy in this universe unless they're in Starfleet. All the TNG characters are back in apparently. Having Seven, Picard, Riker, and Troi out of Starfleet was one of the best things about the original premise of the show and that got ruined cause, of course, they're only happy on a starship.

Seven nearly DIED in S2.

Had she stayed with the Rangers, she risked either dying alone and/or being swallowed up by the Borg.

The best part about Jack was that he seemed uninterested in Starfleet, but that ended. I liked that the Kestra we saw in S1 didn't seem like the type to join, but nope she's there too. It's tired and it's uninspired. If that's what we're going to get in Legacy, then I'm just not that into it the idea.

I like the concept. I'm just not sold on Matalas being the guy to deliver. (It's for that reason that I haven't signed the petition.)

I'd prefer Akiva Goldsman or Kirsten Beyer running it over Matalas (Matalas seems too eager to recreate Berman-era Trek).

 

[Lord Garth]

I'd prefer Akiva Goldsman or Kirsten Beyer running it over Matalas (Matalas seems too eager to recreate Berman-era Trek).

Terry Matalas' biggest weakness is that he tries too hard to reach out to people who won't be happy until Star Trek is exactly like it was when Bill Clinton was President. He has to learn to accept that if they weren't won over by the end of Picard's third season, they won't be won over at all. They'll either stick to their reruns or watch that certain other Star Trek show.

 

[cal888]

My issue with the show is that the premise of the show that most fans want isn't exciting to me. IT's basically recreating TNG and using their kids in place of them. I don't trust Matalas to deliver anything original so I would expect the whole show to just be the TNG kids, Seven, and Raffi basically replaying Berman's eras greatest hits. I also don't think Jack is a character that can be compelling as a co-lead on a show. There's a thin line for me between paying homage and using nostalgia as a crutch. I think Matalas is too much of a fan and has too much hero worship for the show to be anything but nostalgia.

I wasn't very happy with the way season 3 ended, especially with 309 so rushed. But Legacy being the Berman era's "greatest hits" probably comes down to if you see following up on storylines a rehash or coming in with a new spin. Streaming seasons have larger budgets but shorter episode orders. Most of the live action Star Trek content in existence is from this era. Structural limitations prevented many ideas from reaching their full potential. Matalas is unique in that he would be aware of many of the low hanging fruit that was never plucked. And as someone who is very much a Berman era fan, only PICARD season 3 of the current output "felt like Star Trek" to me. If NuTrek wants to be very different things to different people, this seems like a significant portion to tap.

Jack wise, yes the character is a little underwhelming -- especially as he was trapped within a mystery box that took too long to open. But he's played by a great actor, so I can see a lot of potential there.

The petition Goldsman is referring to is the one that is now approaching 60,000 signatures. This level of support is almost twice that for the post-Discovery season 2 petition calling for a show set on the USS Enterprise with Captain Pike which preceded the greenlight for Star Trek: Strange New Worlds.

Haha I love that Goldsman claims to have signed the petition...

One of the reasons I want to watch The 12 Monkeys is because I want to see what Terry Matalas does when he's not following up on 28 seasons and 10 movies' worth of old material.

If you're in by like the 7th episode, the Blu-ray of the series is down to $22ish... well worth it for the deleted scenes and commentaries.

Terry Matalas' biggest weakness is that he tries too hard to reach out to people who won't be happy until Star Trek is exactly like it was when Bill Clinton was President. He has to learn to accept that if they weren't won over by the end of Picard's third season, they won't be won over at all. They'll either stick to their reruns or watch that certain other Star Trek show.

Luckily almost all prominent NuTrek critics were won over by season 3.

 

[fireproof78]

Terry Matalas' biggest weakness is that he tries too hard to reach out to people who won't be happy until Star Trek is exactly like it was when Bill Clinton was President. He has to learn to accept that if they weren't won over by the end of Picard's third season, they won't be won over at all. They'll either stick to their reruns or watch that certain other Star Trek show.

The question is will he continue to kowtow to them for the sake of positive reactions? If so, then it feels like a poor choice.

 

[Lord Garth]

The question is will he continue to kowtow to them for the sake of positive reactions? If so, then it feels like a poor choice.

It's a very poor choice. The last of the stragglers either went to SNW or PIC Season 3. If someone hasn't liked any Star Trek that's come out since 2005 at all, well, we're coming up on close to 20 years. Such people wouldn't have liked anything Star Trek's done in a LONG time. After two decades, it's time to cut them loose.

 

[Lord Garth]

Anyway, for those wondering if Strange New Worlds and Legacy would be too similar or cover too much of the same ground, I can tell you with 100% confidence: That is not going to happen. Without going into spoilers, SNW and PIC Season 3 couldn't be more different from each other. The same would apply to SNW and Legacy. Whatever you think of one or the other, they're not the same.