Star Trek reboot starring Patrick Stewart is CBS' latest All Access offering-where's the audience?

[gblews]

They're bringing back Picard because Patrick Stewart is famous, and people have an attachment to the character. Its only relevant that he's white and male because that was the norm back when TNG was made. Wait 20 years for the nostalgia wave for shows of the late 2010s and we'll be seeing them bring back female and nonewhite characters to cache in on audience recognition.

So, you're expecting that in 20 years, the appearance of women and minorities will have diminished to the point that they will become an element of nostalgia.

Gee, I sure hope TV and movie executives don't think this way, it's a bit racist and sexist.

 

[Burning Hearts of Qo'nos]

Gee, I sure hope TV and movie executives don't think this way, it's a bit racist and sexist.

Someone get me a cup of tea so I can do an appropriate spit-take

 

[Gepard]

So, you're expecting that in 20 years, the appearance of women and minorities will have diminished to the point that they will become an element of nostalgia.

No, I'm expecting that the characters of today that young people are attached to feature many more women and minority leads compared to TV of the 1980s, and so when the day comes that the Brain Download CBS Channel (or whatever) taps 2010 era entertainment for it's nostalgia factor, they'll resurrect all those diverse characters. My point is there's no political motive behind what characters and actors they bring back, just reality of TV demographics from 20+ years prior.

 

[Vger23]

This article reminded me of a small, wet pile of rat feces.

 

[plynch]

One of my best friends ever was a rat. Still miss her.

 

[Vger23]

One of my best friends ever was a rat. Still miss her.

Makes sense.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

They're bringing back Picard because Patrick Stewart is famous, and people have an attachment to the character. Its only relevant that he's white and male because that was the norm back when TNG was made. Wait 20 years for the nostalgia wave for shows of the late 2010s and we'll be seeing them bring back female and nonewhite characters to cache in on audience recognition.

So, you're expecting that in 20 years, the appearance of women and minorities will have diminished to the point that they will become an element of nostalgia.

Gee, I sure hope TV and movie executives don't think this way, it's a bit racist and sexist.

That is so clearly NOT what he was saying that it almost feels like a deliberate attempt at provocation and creating false controversy, much like the baseless clickbait article in the OP. The part about 2010s-era shows eventually experiencing a wave of nostalgia (like most things do) was not saying greater diversity in TV series would become a thing of the past that people would reminisce about.

 

[sttngfan1701d]

I read this "article" when it first popped up on my Google feed on my phone back when it was written. And my exact reaction was "What the actual @#!$?!" Two things are very telling here: (1) the author is a "professional blogger" (i.e. talentless hack) and (2) the article rather conveniently doesn't have a comment section. So readers can't call the author on the absolute baseless nonsense s/he subjected them to.

I felt the same way when Vanity Fair ran a scathing critique of Amazon's new "Jack Ryan" series. The author was so busy taking things out of context and getting offended that she completely missed the point of key scenes and had glaring inaccuracies in her own writing. But again, no comment section, so no opportunity to correct or rebut.

Best not to, anyway. If you do, you'll just be an "angry white male" to them, no matter what you say.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

This article questions whether we need a new show with Stewart as Picard, who's the audience for it, and if this is just a way to placate white fans who can't stand Discovery:

New 'Star Trek' reboot starring Patrick Stewart is CBS' latest All Access offering. But who's the audience?

Personally, I too wonder why this is happening, especially considering how many fans (and the actor in question who portrays said character) wanted (and expected) a show about Captain Hikaru Sulu to be made, yet nobody could do so. And why does Stewart want this now when he said he was tired of Captain Picard originally?

Everything you need to know about this ridiculous false controversy clickbait article is encapsulated in the following two lines:

But it also represents a retreat by CBS from the progressivism of its first series on All Access, “Star Trek: Discovery.”

Though there are no public scripts as yet...​

So, "we know nothing about the show beyond it starring Patrick Stewart and the setting being 20 years after Nemesis, but we're going to assume that it represents a retreat from progressive values for... reasons." This despite going into detail about Stewart's own progressivism in the same article and saying they know nothing about the demographics of the rest of the unknown cast yet, which can be every bit as diverse as Discovery for all we know given the new setting.

The reason this show features Stewart is that TNG is still by far the most popular Trek series in terms of ratings, and Picard the only character to come close to rivaling Kirk and Spock in terms of being known to casual or even non-fans. Stewart has also managed to remain popular in the genre playing Professor Xavier and has maintained a strong presence on TV and in social media, and Logan has shown the potential dramatic appeal of portraying an older and more vulnerable version of one of his beloved characters, which they may be playing upon here with Picard, considering this would be approaching his All Good Things... age. Not saying they have to give him full space Alzheimer's again, just that they'll likely explore how aging has affected him.

And besides the casting diversity and certain (over)reactive fans who complain about SJWs, Discovery was unfortunately not even that progressive in tone or subject matter (at least not in most of the first season), with TNG being far more progressive in nature, IMO. So casting is not remotely the only determinanation of how progressive or not a show is, though they should absolutely strive for greater diversity wherever possible. But just happening to feature a white male lead who is one of the most popular characters in the franchise does not necessarily mean a retreat from that policy of diverse casting for the rest of the show. More diverse casting also doesn't mean you can't ever use a white male lead in a show again, especially when you are launching multiple Trek shows to build up your streaming channel.

 

[johnjm22]

They're bringing Picard back for the same reason they're bringing back Spock.

There is no controversy about Discovery's diversity.

 

[USS Firefly]

It's not a reboot. It's a continuation of Picard's story 20 years after Nemesis. Right off the bat, the article is wrong. I didn't bother reading past that.

Yeah it is riddiculous that almost every sequel movie is a reboot, "a new predator or star trek?" Then it must be a reboot no matter what the story is about.

 

[gblews]

That is so clearly NOT what he was saying that it almost feels like a deliberate attempt at provocation and creating false controversy, much like the baseless clickbait article in the OP. The part about 2010s-era shows eventually experiencing a wave of nostalgia (like most things do) was not saying greater diversity in TV series would become a thing of the past that people would reminisce about.

Bullshit, I was doing nothing of the kind.

No, I'm expecting that the characters of today that young people are attached to feature many more women and minority leads compared to TV of the 1980s, and so when the day comes that the Brain Download CBS Channel (or whatever) taps 2010 era entertainment for it's nostalgia factor, they'll resurrect all those diverse characters. My point is there's no political motive behind what characters and actors they bring back, just reality of TV demographics from 20+ years prior.

I don't think your original post was this clear, but I get you now. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[Brainsucker]

This is about Star Trek Picard, and the problem of placating white guy. So why is it here?

 

[DS9-31]

Discovery is just as polarizing among non-white male fans, str8 or gay. This writer has to be white and/or steeped in geek culture to not be aware of this. Discovery is not a benchmark in diversity either and its treatment of certain characters and themes can be interrogated or seen as problematic just like any other Trek series.

Unfortunately, the Captain Sulu or even Captain Worf shows never happened and I doubt they are in the works as one of the new shows. The Picard series or any new series is going to hinge on good storytelling(and hopefully good continuity), the gender or color of the captain or crew won't make any difference to the audience if the show isn't any good.

DS9 came out when I was in highschool and I immediately gravitated to the show and one "friend" of mine told me DS9 sucked and the only reason I liked the show was because I was black. Of course, he was projecting his own bias on to me... but in a few years, DS9 became his favorite show. I doubt his racialist views changed, he just couldn't deny how good the show was anymore. Just like the white fanboys that complained about a "black Vulcan", Tim Russ as Tuvok shut that down fairly quickly with his great performance. Racist geeks are always going to be there but the complaints about recent Trek, Star Wars or modern sci-fi/comics is more nuanced than white males just being upset about "Mary-Sues" or SJWS".

 

[Locutus of Bored]

This is about Star Trek Picard, and the problem of placating white guy. So why is it here?

Because the article tried to imply that the Picard show was created due to an alleged backlash against the diverse casting of Discovery (which never amounted to more than a small but loudmouthed minority of fans) and that it represented a step backwards in that regard to placate white male fans.

The whole article is clickbait nonsense with no evidence to support its viewpoint, and despite a small connection to Discovery, you are correct that the connection is peripheral at best. I won't burden the mods in the other forums with such a contentious thread though, especially one with no factual basis to support its assertions, and there are already other open threads about the Picard show here, so I'm closing this.