Star Trek Picard is not Star Trek

You like Star Trek very much but it is not the hell your franchise.

 

Can we just all pretend that "Turnabout Intruder" never existed?

(Although, honestly, seeing Shatner unleashed is still terrific campy fun. And I've always thought that it would have been great if Kirk had stayed in the Lester body for a season 4.)

 

Yes.

 

I am currently on a rewatch and I've seen this episode 5 hours ago. I can confirm there are some heads around and you can even see a brain being dissected

 

Of course, "no need to be used" implies that such content shouldn't be used unless needed. This is a bar which other content doesn't need to pass. It's trying to build a bias in favor of your preferred outcome into the structure of the argument.

 

I'll concede that, to some degree, this a matter of taste. I prefer the more colloquial approach used on TOS and, when writing TOS, will miss no opportunity to "de-elevate" the language among the crew members. "Get a move on, Scotty, we're burning daylight." "Mind lending me a hand, Lieutenant?" "Well, I'll be damned, talk about a sight for sore eyes!"

That kinda thing.

A lot of depends on the individual characters and their voices. A Vulcan high priestess is likely to use more elevated language than, say, McCoy, Scotty, Chief O'Brien, or some other similarly plainspoken "everyman"-type character. Indeed, ideally, you want a mix of speech patterns and voices, ranging from eloquent to smart-alecky. Depending on the character or the situations. On PICARD, I particularly like the way Jurati tends to talk like a civilian, not a Starfleet officer, to extent of occasionally taking the piss out of the more "elevated" dialogue. "Does anybody else think that the 'Way of Absolute Candor sounds kinda annoying?"

Loved that!

As for Picard, it's not as though he's suddenly picked up a whole new voice and is now cursing right and left. He still sounds like Picard to me, and the occasions when people have employed "bad" language seemed perfectly appropriate -- if you make the perfectly reasonable assumption that human beings still swear in the future.

And that it is not "non-utopian" to say "fuck" on occasion.

 

But really, the "DSC is not about discovery" argument is dumb as fuck

First of all, the show is called after the ship name, it's not about actual discoveries. It's about the USS Discovery.
And those who cannot understand this simple associations are dumb as hell. Because if Star Trek Discovery were to be about discovery because of it's name, then why isn't Star Trek Enterprise about a big corporation trying to earn money? There show is called enterprise!!

Secondly, the ship is actually a science vessel and they are doing a very important scientific discovery: the galaxy has a built-in network that could be exploited for space travel

 

Clutches pearls and faints while muttering "Won't someone think of the children".

 

Well, we do have him as Garth.

 

I'd argue that it's dumb as hell not to recognize the possibility it's a play on words and meant to infer a sense of space exploration, since "Discovery" was the name of a NASA space shuttle after the Challenger.

There's two definitions of "enterprise."
1. a project or undertaking, typically one that is difficult or requires effort.

It also might have been a reference to the first line of American Naval ships, which started with the USS Enterprise from 1775.

So the show IS about discoveries? So what's the argument. If it is about Discovery, shouldn't you're argument be that the name of the show fits?

 

I will convince some of my friends to do with me a TOS era episode to upload on youtube.

All the actors will be white cisgender males, we will not swear and we will not show any kind of gore. There will also be a white cisgender guy with the face painted brown that will interpret a klingon, but since he will be different from us he will be the bad guy and we will stun phaser him.

The story will be a classic trek adventure, our sensor will hear a distress signal from a planet called in a exotic fashion, like Zectar VII or Xerephion III. We will go there and since there will obviously be an atmosphere and gravity identical to Sol III we will be able to teleport to the surface.

The only female of the cast will be a white blonde girl, her face painted green to look like an alien. She will speak english with a better accent than us boys, she will be saved by the captain and somehow a red shirt will die (BUT NO BLOOD).

At the end of the episode our doctor (or any scientific officer that is clearly not a philosopher) will make a deep statement about how technology and computer changed our lives like it happened today, when in reality he is referring to a 200 years long process that could have been already over 5 to 10 generations ago.

The guy that interprets the captain of the ship will remind him that no matter how humanity changed, we are still humans with humans needs.

Curtain calls, the ship warps away

Written by: Gene Roddenberry


We might or might not say something very racist or misoginist during the episode.

 

Person A: "See that?! Alex Kurtzman is defiling Star Trek! They may call it Picard but it's still STD to me!"
Person B: "Actually, that's from an episode of Voyager."
Person A: "... "

 

The show is still about the ship no matter how you look at it.

Naval names means nothing, I could buy a boat tomorrow and call it "USS Pussyslayer" and that would not define in any way the crew view on women.

The in-lore explanation could be that the ship is called discovery because it is about discovering the mycellar network, but then we have the other ship called USS Glenn who is doing the same, so...

Yeah names are more like a "wow cool" thing and they have no other purpose than to identify the ship we are talking to.
If you call the TOS ship USS Constitution everything that happened to Kirk would still make sense

And by comparing the DSC to the ENT we can also understand why the show is not that much about discovery: the constitution class is the first class of ships that could have endured a 5 years missions without returning to any kind of space dock... The discovery should not be able to do the same

 

*not that much about planetary discovery

 

It's also the name of the ship from 2001, FWIW.

 

Sorry I was rude and I was wrong to be, but english is not my native language and I find difficult to express some concepts with more polite words that those.

I guess I am not really in-tune with the Roddenberry vision and therefore I could never be on star trek