Series Picard and Movie Picard are very different.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Finally something we agree with.
Given Picard's emotional state from GEN to FC it is completely understandable and expected that his ability to distance himself may have been compromised. Trauma is not a one and done thing.
As in: that was the breaking point, Picard lost his shit after that? (Evidenced by the FC, INS, and possibly the NEM movies?)
Picard is, after all, as a 24th century human 'more evolved', by his own testimony.
Picard is, after all, as a 24th century human 'more evolved', by his own testimony.
I don't think he "lost his shit" so much as he lost a particularly strong rung in his support system in his brother, which impacted his ability to cope. I've read stories of people surviving concentration camps, come home, and find out they lost a family member and kill themselves.
And, personally, I don't think "evolved" means that one can move past trauma in any faster way. Things impact people in different ways and triggers can come from seemingly out of nowhere.
Being 'more civilised' does not make one immune from trauma
Star Trek is not very good at time tables.
Which is why the Romulans with brow ridges had to have had ancestors on Vulcan with similar ridges for there to be so many Romulans with that physical trait just 2,000 years later. I know Trek likes to add features to some aliens to make them more advanced-looking or cooler but sometimes there's no logical in-universe explanation for them.
Well, there was the whole "proto-Vulcan" with the Mintakans and they had the ridges. So, you're probably right that it was a trait at some point that became more dominant in the Romulan population.
Remans and cross breeding explain it fine.
I said brow ridges, not Nosferatu heads.
The Viceroy (Ron Pearlman) should have his own Star Trek show called Sons of Remus. He'll lead a Reman biker gang to kick Romulan ass.
Unless you secretly introduce it into the human population with minor changes here and there, ergo violating the Genetic Engineering bands.
Obviously the traits can't be enhanced TOO MUCH, or people will suspect something, but gradual change, just enough to be measurable, but not enough for society to notice it.
Over the span of a few hundred years, people's average standard for Speed, Reflex, Strength, Endurance will go up on a societal wide scale.
So let's give a example of enhanced human.
Let's take a supremely fit and trained martial artist / actress like Gina Carano.
Here in the 21st century she is considerably above your average human female in physical stats.
But many male atheletes of today are considerably stronger, faster, etc.
But imagine in the 24th/25th/26th century, same body, same training, similar size muscle mass and body shape, but she can have the strength of "In his Prime John Cena", reflex speeds of "In his Prime Jackie Chan", and the running speed of "In his Prime Usain Bolt".
Those would be HUGE physical stat boosts compared to where she is now.
Of course you still have to exercise and physically train to get to that point, but the upper limit is now higher because of genetic engineering.
What you can accomplish is greater than a 21st century stock human being.
Last edited:
Well, I was talking about evolution, natural selection, fueled by death, survival, and effective procreation. No human assistance.
It took millions of years for wolves to evolve from proto-mammals.
It took thousands of years of our progenitors' sloppy genetic manipulation to turn wolves into dogs.
It took hundreds of years for intelligent and calculated selective breeding to turn dogs into Dachshunds, German Shepherds, and Golden Retrievers.
It took only dozens of years for criminally irresponsible selective breeding to turn too many of those fine breeds into genetic time bombs.
It took millions of years for wolves to evolve from proto-mammals.
It took thousands of years of our progenitors' sloppy genetic manipulation to turn wolves into dogs.
It took hundreds of years for intelligent and calculated selective breeding to turn dogs into Dachshunds, German Shepherds, and Golden Retrievers.
It took only dozens of years for criminally irresponsible selective breeding to turn too many of those fine breeds into genetic time bombs.
My controversial opinion in 2009: "those boots don't do it for me"
It's an interesting theory, and somewhat credible, but of course there's very little TNG material we have to actually substantiate it. Also, in the GEN movie, he seems more devastated by the loss of his nephew than of his brother, and it seemed to have more to do with the idea that the Picard family line (and he, himself) had not much future left. But that could of course just have been his immediate reaction, the deeper trauma only manifesting itself a bit later (and not seen in the movie).
And the tv show Picard is a sequel to the movies and not the tv show.
Was that ever a question?
Similar threads
- Locked
