Discussion in 'Star Trek: Picard' started by pst, Jan 9, 2020.
I'm so tired of dealing with death comments.
That was me. I can look at the scene again, but I’m almost positive that Excelsior II’s registry was 42037, not 42026.
Edit: I see that there was updates to the ship info since I last posted. It looks like Blass is correct that the ship is the Mestral 42027 (And another Excelsior II that has a lower registry number than the class ship.)
Dave admitted the names in the render were a mistake in the comments. The names he gave in the tweet are correct, it's just the pictures that are wrong.
Well, it does raise the question why a 23rd century Constitution class starship in Picard looks so different to the 23rd century Enterprise depicted in Strange New Worlds if they're supposed to exist in the same timeline...
Dramatic presentation of logs, vs. archival footage or literal history.
Or just recasting, if that's easier to parse.
They cast a younger actor in SNW.
Except that younger actor isn’t going to look like the older actor once 2265 hits.
Depends if he gets a major facelift.
Unfortunately I don’t think he’s going to be on television for five more years for us to find out.
if the show ends before they hit TOS, I could see them doing a time skip in the series finale.
You mean "refit"?
I think @Tomalak understands the concept of a refit more than the current showrunners do
It's unimportant. If one must have a rationalization, all that's required is to note that the ship shown in Picard is not any version of the Enterprise, but a vessel identified as the U.S.S. New Jersey.
Nor, for that matter, was the TOS-style ship shown as a model in Marcus's office in an outtake from STID the Enterprise. It was the Biddeford.
Yep. If I recall, he said something along the lines of wishing Kurtzman was in a coffin.
It really doesn't.
I may be getting less tolerant of certain turns of phrase in my old age, or working in the mental health field, but can people just stop wishing ill and death upon people they disagree with? Fucking aggravating and it doesn't send a good message at all.
Neither would Chris Pine's Kirk.
I'm about as TOS-centric and warm and fuzzy about visual continuity as anyone on this board and even I know where to draw my limits. Just let some of it go.
Thanks for your valuable input to the conversation.
I have nothing to ‘let go.’ Sometimes a response to a post is just a response to a post.
Indeed. If it's that important the events occurred but didn't look exactly right, just like Abraham Lincoln didn't sound like Daniel Day Lewis.
Five different actors who looked different played THE EXACT SAME James Bond in one continuity. In-universe the other important characters knew it was the same man from year to year even if the audience saw different people.
Just take the James Bond approach from 1962 to 2002. If and when we get another new timeline announced by Paramount then it'll be time for the Daniel Craig approach.
Separate names with a comma.