Spoilers Star Trek: Picard General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
Isn't the villain supposed to be new?
It's already been confirmed that the villain is a brand new character and actor for trek.
my guess is some kind of hologram memorial on the saucers bridge.
I doubt it's Sela, but it's also possible TPTB are just trying to misdirect so we're not spoiled.
If it's a well-known actor playing the villain, as they've stated, it probably would have leaked by now.
We're at that point regardless.
Not necessarily.
Not necessarily. In season 1 they managed to keep a lid on Jeri Ryan until she was revealed in the trailers. In season 2 they kept a lid on Wil Wheaton until his episode actually aired.
Honestly Sela coming back would make a certain amount of sense. TNG didn't have a lot of recurring villains, but she was one, and she has a personal connection to the crew. If PIC S3 is gonna be about coming back to the TNG part of Picard's life and giving that set of characters closure, then Sela being in S3 makes sense.
I'm not sure if you've got cause and effect right there. I always heard that Bryan Fuller essentially wanted to re-think the entire Klingon design for the 2010s, to make them more threatening and alien-looking. If that was his a priori, then the idea of having the actor to play Ash start off by playing Voq may have been developed around the prior decision to change the makeup design.
I mean, the fundamental flaw of PIC S2 is that S1 built up Jean-Luc's relationship with Soji as his ersatz granddaughter into this new foundational relationship of his life, even making their acceptance of one-another as family members the pivotal climax of the season ("That's why we're here: to save each other"), but then only gave her a cameo in S2. S2 basically broke the promissory note S1 made -- and did so for no real reason, since Soji could easily have played the role of hypercompetent sidekick that Tallinn played (sans romantic subplot, obviously).
I get the strong impression that Terry Matalas and Michael Chabon just have incompatible visions for what Star Trek: Picard should be, and that PIC S2 was very much Matalas trying to transition from Chabon's S1 vision into his own vision, with problems resulting from his trying to transition between incompatible creative visions.
This isn't a problem, it's just a meaningless nit-pick.
Yeah, that bit was sloppy, but it's also not really that important to the story. PIC S2 really isn't impacted by whether the Stargazer is a new ship or is an extensively-refitted old ship.
Star Trek: Insurrection does not contradict "Journey's End" in any way, shape, or form. Both stories are about the idea that it is immoral for large hegemonic powers to forcibly relocated smaller, less-powerful cultures. "Journey's End" is about Picard and the UFP realizing that they had no right to force the Native American settlers to relocate against their will; Star Trek: Insurrection is about Picard engaging in mutiny rather than be party to the forced relocation of a weaker culture again. If anything, the subtext is that Picard learned his lesson from "Journey's End" and decided mutiny was the better option from the start this time.
Really I'd have more respect for fans like that if they'd just be honest with us and themselves and say, "Listen, I don't like this. I feel threatened by change because it reminds me that I'm not immortal, so I'm going to sublimate my anger into a YouTube rant about how a television show made in 2022 does not adhere to every creative conceit and decision for a television show made in 1992."
It’s obvious whey they made the Klingon prosthetics so full on and concealing of human features. It was because one of the plot points in season one of Discovery was disguising Shazad Latif as a Klingon. The normal prosthetics would not have done this and everyone would have guessed the twist.
I'm not sure if you've got cause and effect right there. I always heard that Bryan Fuller essentially wanted to re-think the entire Klingon design for the 2010s, to make them more threatening and alien-looking. If that was his a priori, then the idea of having the actor to play Ash start off by playing Voq may have been developed around the prior decision to change the makeup design.
I mean, the fundamental flaw of PIC S2 is that S1 built up Jean-Luc's relationship with Soji as his ersatz granddaughter into this new foundational relationship of his life, even making their acceptance of one-another as family members the pivotal climax of the season ("That's why we're here: to save each other"), but then only gave her a cameo in S2. S2 basically broke the promissory note S1 made -- and did so for no real reason, since Soji could easily have played the role of hypercompetent sidekick that Tallinn played (sans romantic subplot, obviously).
I get the strong impression that Terry Matalas and Michael Chabon just have incompatible visions for what Star Trek: Picard should be, and that PIC S2 was very much Matalas trying to transition from Chabon's S1 vision into his own vision, with problems resulting from his trying to transition between incompatible creative visions.
This isn't a problem, it's just a meaningless nit-pick.
Yeah, that bit was sloppy, but it's also not really that important to the story. PIC S2 really isn't impacted by whether the Stargazer is a new ship or is an extensively-refitted old ship.
Star Trek: Insurrection does not contradict "Journey's End" in any way, shape, or form. Both stories are about the idea that it is immoral for large hegemonic powers to forcibly relocated smaller, less-powerful cultures. "Journey's End" is about Picard and the UFP realizing that they had no right to force the Native American settlers to relocate against their will; Star Trek: Insurrection is about Picard engaging in mutiny rather than be party to the forced relocation of a weaker culture again. If anything, the subtext is that Picard learned his lesson from "Journey's End" and decided mutiny was the better option from the start this time.
Really I'd have more respect for fans like that if they'd just be honest with us and themselves and say, "Listen, I don't like this. I feel threatened by change because it reminds me that I'm not immortal, so I'm going to sublimate my anger into a YouTube rant about how a television show made in 2022 does not adhere to every creative conceit and decision for a television show made in 1992."
They had her walking through Universal CityWalk wearing a robe and a hood over her head!
Sorry. They kept a hood on it.They had her walking through Universal CityWalk wearing a robe and a hood over her head!
Her "hovel" looks at least as good as quarters on the D.Concept art for the interior of Raffi's trailer. Looks practically luxurious. I would love to live in one.
That's about the size of TOS senior officer's quarters. Not bad for living in a late 24th century trailer out in the middle of the desert.
I'll take it.Concept art for the interior of Raffi's trailer. Looks practically luxurious. I would love to live in one.
I'm not sure the total square footage, but it doesn't look much smaller than my house.Concept art for the interior of Raffi's trailer. Looks practically luxurious. I would love to live in one.
Concept art for the interior of Raffi's trailer. Looks practically luxurious. I would love to live in one.
Headcanon accepted. To me this preserves the idea that the Federation is a post-scarcity, classless society where there is no such thing as poverty. Raffi might be upset that she doesn't literally live in a chateau like Jean-Luc, but her living conditions are still extremely comfortable by our standards.
Similar threads
- Poll
