Well he'd have to be the ultimate technophobe if he doesn't even have a damn sprinkler system in his house.
Should Robert/Rene have died?
- Thread starter jim-jean-ben
- Start date
Well he'd have to be the ultimate technophobe if he doesn't even have a damn sprinkler system in his house.
They didn't specify.
See? Even Picard didn't care that much.
You don't drag TNZ bullshit into this forum and flame another poster at the same time.
Warning given for flaming and I could give another for the TNZ poke but I'm feeling generous at this moment.
Granted, but, every system fails. It is usually a string of little, meaningless glitches, none of them dangerous in themselves, which align to create tragedy. For example, look up the record of every major, shocking human-made disaster ever.
A failure of fire-detection/suppression/escape systems will, presumably, be vanishingly rare in the Trek-style 24th century. But it is only people with crazed, unrealistic notions about the way things work who believe that they will never happen.
At that, it isn't even specified Robert and René were the only people to die. It might have been a theater fire or a catastrophe at the market or something like that; it's just those were the people relevant to Picard.
(I think it also plainly incorrect to say ``Picard didn't care that much''. He's keeping a stoic appearance because that is who he is.)
I see where they were coming from on getting him to consider his mortality and stuff, but no, I think they went the wrong way about it, I don't think they should have been killed.
Just seemed a cheap death of his family for a point in the film then after that it just seems to get forgotten. Could they not have just had the house and vineyard burn down so the characters remained? I'd think that losing a family home would be enough to get upset about, and would preserve the characters perhaps for later things.
Just seemed a cheap death of his family for a point in the film then after that it just seems to get forgotten. Could they not have just had the house and vineyard burn down so the characters remained? I'd think that losing a family home would be enough to get upset about, and would preserve the characters perhaps for later things.
Personally I blame Q.
Seriously, seems like exactly the kind of thing Q would do just to mess with he favorite little toy.
Q never came across as cruel. But, if he did kill Picard's brother and nephew, he would want Picard to know.
We have no idea what the circumstances were. The alarms or fire suppression equipment could have malfunctioned, Robert and Rene could have died rescuing others from a fire, or perhaps it was more of an explosion (which might have killed the Picards instantly) than an actual fire.
And there's no way Q could ever be responsible for this. Q doesn't want people to suffer - he does like to tease and goad Picard, and wants to shake people out of their complacency, but Q is not heartless; he isn't a sadist or a killer. In fact I like to think Q might have even visited Picard privately sometime after this and offered condolences. (I suppose Q could have resurrected Robert and Rene, but the rules of the continuum probably wouldn't allow it anyway.)
Also, just to be clear, Robert was not a total luddite. He wasn't opposed to ALL technology, just replicators.
It seems to me, that if at all possible, Q would've save Picard's family and used as a means to get what he wanted/needed from Picard somewhere down the road.
I could totally see early Q killing Picard's family to make some kind of point. But he would show up to gloat about it afterwards. But by the end of TNG Q is pretty friendly towards Picard.
Anyway yeah I thought it was lame thing to kill them just to set up the nexus stuff. It's just weak in all aspects, the movie audience doesn't remember them and it makes Family a little worse for the TV audience. Just another thing that doesn't quite come together very well for Generations.
Anyway yeah I thought it was lame thing to kill them just to set up the nexus stuff. It's just weak in all aspects, the movie audience doesn't remember them and it makes Family a little worse for the TV audience. Just another thing that doesn't quite come together very well for Generations.
It will probably say on Robert's tombstone, 'I still don't like technology, Jean-Luc.'
And yes, Luddite is the correct term.
I've never once posted in TNZ. No idea what you're talking about. Could you be confusing me with somebody with a similar screen name? I use a shortened version of this screen name on some other forums but not the full version.
In response to the thread title directly:
Short answer, no. Longer answer; both characters were well developed, and were almost literally ripe for future storytelling. Killing them off, especially offscreen the way they did, was an abject waste. They, along with Lursa and B'etor, had far too much potential to be killed off for shock value alone the way they were.
Short answer, no. Longer answer; both characters were well developed, and were almost literally ripe for future storytelling. Killing them off, especially offscreen the way they did, was an abject waste. They, along with Lursa and B'etor, had far too much potential to be killed off for shock value alone the way they were.
I disagree. TNG was over and the producers saw no use for the characters in the feature film franchise.
I think if Q was somehow involved, he would have made Picard go through some kind of really elaborate and difficult test of character to avoid it. But since that's basically the plot of All Good Things, I doubt that Q was going to be any where near Generations just to avoid that kind of problem, doing the same thing over again right in a row.
It was basically a family version of a redshirt death.
It was basically a family version of a redshirt death.
Similar threads
