Spoilers Star Trek: Picard 1x02 - "Maps and Legends"

[SolarisOne]

Receptionist: "I don't watch TV. It's a cultural wasteland filled with inappropriate metaphors and an unrealistic portrayal of life created by the liberal media elite."

 

[Alan Roi]

The idea that she would get so worked up from the interview. I'm sure people have said worse things than that.
She could have easily given him a small ship with a crew. He certainly deserves that much.

I expect Picard said worse things than that 15 years before, but his interview clarifies that's something that he hasn't changed his mind about in the least. And I doubt its just the interview, but the crap she's had to deal with since it was broacast.

 

[thribs]

I expect Picard said worse things than that 15 years before, but his interview clarifies that's something that he hasn't changed his mind about in the least. And I doubt its just the interview, but the crap she's had to deal with since it was broacast.

Good. It was a stupid decision to withdrawal and she should be questioned for it.

 

[Alan Roi]

Good. It was a stupid decision to withdrawal and she should be questioned for it.

I would think the crap has been more people complaining about Picard and what to do if Picard keeps trash talking Star Fleet.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Too many differences in our timelines for it to work now. Just say it was Gene's idea of the future from 1966 and leave it there. I get that's why Discovery is obsessed with holograms because of our advances in the field but that goes against continuity. You could easily explain it away by saying that the lurking third world war kept scientists from developing it further. That or the war caused all information about it to be lost.

So ignore the the "differences" and never mention them again. It's fiction not history. The idea of the future should keep up with the times

 

[Tarek71]

I can see some people saying what Kirk said about the Klingons after Praxis: "Let them die!" He then thought the better of that, but it's not crazy that some would have no interest in helping a violent, tyrannical, imperialist superpower from being crippled. I buy a hopeful vision of the future, but not a future populated by trillions of Mary Sues who always do the right thing.

 

[fireproof78]

So ignore the the "differences" and never mention them again. It's fiction not history. The idea of the future should keep up with the times

Exactly. There is not a dramatic retelling of history but an imagining based upon current knowledge.

Unless people are hoping that technology devolves for a bit.

 

[thribs]

So ignore the the "differences" and never mention them again. It's fiction not history. The idea of the future should keep up with the times

But what’s the fun in that? Part of the appeal of Star Trek is its fictional history. We shouldn’t be shoehorning actual events into it because they actually happened.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Exactly. There is not a dramatic retelling of history but an imagining based upon current knowledge.

Unless people are hoping that technology devolves for a bit.

People are too in love with the minutia

 

[thribs]

I would think the crap has been more people complaining about Picard and what to do if Picard keeps trash talking Star Fleet.

Who would complain about Picard? He’s a hero to the general public. More people would listen to him than her. How many times has she saved Earth?

 

[Nerys Myk]

But what’s the fun in that? Part of the appeal of Star Trek is its fictional history. We shouldn’t be shoehorning actual events into it because they actually happened.

Like said. Too in love with the minutia

 

[thribs]

Like said. Too in love with the minutia

And that’s a problem? Some people like that sort of stuff.

 

[Nerys Myk]

And that’s a problem? Some people like that sort of stuff.

In my opinion they're missing the point.

 

[Yistaan]

In another vein, the "isn't the future of our planet" argument is what annoys me when some fans complain and nitpick the fact that we didn't really have any Eugenics Wars in the 1990s or that we didn't develop cryogenic sleeper ship technology during that same decade so they insist we retcon both into the mid-21st century so it makes more sense to them.

That's not Trek's problem, yo. Your failure to think that a DY-100 sleeper ship fits into real life 1996 technology is pretty irrelevant and not worth taking very seriously. It fits into the Star Trek version of Earth in 1996 and that's all it has to do. Suspend your disbelief. It's entertainment, not a documentary program. Pick other and better battles with this franchise.

Bringing earth years into trek was a mistake from the start. If they had dated from years after formation of Federation, with the formation year being a continuously undefined future date, trek could always have been "our" future

 

[Guy Gardener]

If you listen to FOX News, hero turned loud crackpot shitting on every thing sacred, Jean-Luc Picard is John Bolton.

 

[Vger23]

In another vein, the "isn't the future of our planet" argument is what annoys me when some fans complain and nitpick the fact that we didn't really have any Eugenics Wars in the 1990s or that we didn't develop cryogenic sleeper ship technology during that same decade so they insist we retcon both into the mid-21st century so it makes more sense to them.

That's not Trek's problem, yo. Your failure to think that a DY-100 sleeper ship fits into real life 1996 technology is pretty irrelevant and not worth taking very seriously. It fits into the Star Trek version of Earth in 1996 and that's all it has to do. Suspend your disbelief. It's entertainment, not a documentary program. Pick other and better battles with this franchise.

You just made a lot of people's brains leak out of their ears.

 

[Lord Garth]

I think suspension of disbelief works both ways.

 

[fireproof78]

In my opinion they're missing the point.

Indeed. Looking at TOS, in particular, the tech was not the point. That humanity had worked together was the optimistic point.

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

We need that now, more than ever, instead of the constant sniping at people who disagree.

 

[Vger23]

I think suspension of disbelief works both ways.

What is that?

 

[Tarek71]

I never regarded Star Trek as our future. It's obviously not our Earth. But it's written by people from ours, and like any Sci-Fi (hard or soft or any other kind) it will likely be shown wrong in important ways as we get closer to the time in question. A Space Odyssey was only projecting from 1960s to 2001, and look how far off it was? No way we are getting the 23 Century right. I am sure we are wrong by a mile. But it's written for us, not them.