Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Star Trek: Picard - Amazon Prime [** POSSIBLE SPOILERS **]

Options
16768707273122

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    Writing should be like effects, better in the 20's than the worst examples of the 80's.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,373 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    As I alluded to in a previous episode thread, the problem with Picard is that it was too short.

    There was a beginning and an end, but no middle.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,234 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Was Brent Spiner type cast after Star Trek ? I was always surprised that he wasn't a bigger actor..... I remember he appeared in the Aviator... that was about it


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    He was in both Independence day movies and Threshold. Looking at his IMDB he seems to do a lot of voice work which isn't surprising since he can imitate people well enough to fool their wives over the phone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,234 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Evade wrote: »
    He was in both Independence day movies and Threshold. Looking at his IMDB he seems to do a lot of voice work which isn't surprising since he can imitate people well enough to fool their wives over the phone.

    He was great in Independence day... thought that performance would have gotten him some more big movie roles


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 54 ✭✭Griselda


    He was great in Independence day... thought that performance would have gotten him some more big movie roles

    he never kicked on. Shame.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,907 ✭✭✭✭AMKC
    Ms


    I agree Brent Spinner is an excellent actor and should have had more roles but maybe he was just happy with the odd role in film and like Patrick Stewart probably preferred acting on stage.

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,503 ✭✭✭✭Also Starring LeVar Burton


    Finally got around to finishing the first season of Picard.

    Says a lot that I've been stuck in the house for weeks now with the ability to watch whatever I want whenever I want and it still felt like a chore to sit down and watch this, but I wanted to at least see it through to the end of the season.

    Did Picard have some great moments? Sure.
    Did I enjoy seeing certain characters again? Definitely.
    Did the writers earn all the character beats and construct a compelling story? They didn't even come close.
    Did the whole experience lack charm and ultimately feel like a big waste of time? Yes.
    Can they improve the show and make a solid second season? It is possible, but I'm not holding my breath.
    Will I watch a second season? As things currently stand, I'm not inclined to bother. If it comes back and starts getting rave reviews, I may be persuaded to give it a look.
    Would I be happier if they had had Geordi in it? Always great to see LeVar Burton, but doesn't matter who they had brought back if the show isn't enjoyable.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,084 ✭✭✭✭Kirby


    Wasn't a fan of Alison Pill but only because I found her character in The Newsroom to be really annoying so I was trying to seperate that.

    Yeah I'm with you on that.

    You know that thing where everyone raves about an actor/musician/"beautiful" person and you just don't get it? Alison Pill is one of them for me.

    People talk about how good an actor she is but I find it hard to seperate most of her characters. That Trek Doctor just felt like Maggie in space. Nobody wants that surely? Her mannerisms don't change, the stilted goofy way she talks and that derpy smile she gives. It's all the same. On paper these characters should be leagues apart.....but I dont see it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,394 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    I just remember her as the creepy pregnant teacher in Snowpiercer

    All Eyes On Rafah



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    I always see her as the drummer in Scott Pilgrim.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,168 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Evade wrote: »
    I always see her as the drummer in Scott Pilgrim.

    Jesus, how did I miss that! I won't ever be able to unsee that.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    WE ARE LA SIRENA, ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,382 ✭✭✭FFVII




  • Registered Users Posts: 29,313 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Patrick Stewart will be on Graham Norton tonight, *ahem* beaming in from home...
    https://www.thejournal.ie/sofa-watch-chat-shows-whats-on-tv-tonight-weekend-5076830-Apr2020/

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,503 ✭✭✭✭Also Starring LeVar Burton


    FFVII wrote: »

    Click bait mate, I've not signed anything official yet... ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,177 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    Just finished watching ST Picard. It's in the same style as STD, visually, pacing, editing, overt focus on tedious plot exposition at the expense of a slower paced unfolding of character and through that, the narrative. As one review put it, the show explores corrupt and evil parts of the known galaxy rather than an voyaging into the unknown. And that's the last part that really irritates me, Star Trek is about discovery, science and rational morality, it is about rising above the barbarism of our current era in history right now rather than playing into it.

    This fixation on being "dark" and "edgy" is really conformist to the absence of hope and the knuckle dragging pragmatism of our current time period right now. Contrast it with TOS era Trek, there was massive racism in the US and elsewhere, less civil rights etc but there was hope for a better future, which was the zeitgeist within the public consciousness and TOS reflected that. Now the zeitgeist is "everyone is scum and the world is a horrible place". Yes, couldn't agree more but there's no solution offered, it's just accept the status quo through nihilism, well fck that. This is my problem with modern Trek and with Picard (although in fairness Picard's speechifying and point of view is ultimately validated, just about).


    The plot is basically ripped from Battlestar Galactica. I'm getting bored of the idea that AI is our enemy. The worst enemy of the human race thus far has been the human race. I doubt AI could do any worse than us, we're going to go extinct anyway unless we have a Ray Kurzweil singularity event where an AI magically invents a solution to the climate change crisis. It would ultimately be a great thing if humans were to evolve into synthetic life forms with less primitive emotional drives and governed by advanced logic.

    I didn't particularly enjoy Data's fate, although I guess it grants closure to the events in Nemesis but I find it dubious that death gives meaning to life. These were however the best scenes in the show, the few philosophical discussions which reminded me of old TNG in that they weren't rushed and the characters weren't merely in the service of plot points.

    The outcomes for Echeb and Hugh annoyed me, horrible endings for likeable characters, the torture and murder scenes were contrary to the vibe established in TNG and Voyager. Apparently there are a group of writers in Hollywood who basically write all the scripts for TV shows, which is why they're quite similar, this would be comparable to the music industry; there are essentially just a few song writers who produce all that mass manufactured pop crap. I think could Picard fit into that quite a bit as it's more like Game of Trek, ditto for STD.

    I rank Picard above STD, which is one of the worst shows ever produced. If there is a season 2 bringing Q into the mix is a necessity. The show should not be about how awful people are (I get reminded about that on a daily basis), or about the corruption of various factions. It should be about as Q puts it "exploring the unknown possibilities of existence". Or secondary to that, exploring positive and rational solutions to political crises like in The Undiscovered Country. That is Trek, not this pandering to the demands of the lowest common denominator audience for conflict and action with added cynicism/nihilism to reinforce their unimaginative world view. Screw that. I want cerebral Trek back.

    The good things about the show: reuniting characters, Picard's speeches which were always on point, the cast were likeable enough, some effort made at characterisation (but not enough)

    The bad things: Marvel-esque editing/plot pacing, too much focus on plot/lore building, not enough on the characters (a feature of a lot of shows and movies these days), being dark and edgy at the expense of Trek's real purpose, exploration, too much swearing.

    Edit: Further to that, I don't believe this took place in the prime-verse. The aesthetic obviously points to the Abram's retcon, ergo just as with STD, we are watching a Picard who exists in a parallel universe set in motion by the events of Abram's Trek. Star Trek as we knew it lasted from 1966-2005, this is zombie Trek in the same way that zombie Simpsons started with the Armin Tamzarian episode. The Simpsons lasted from 1989-1997, anything post Armin Tamzarian is not canon in my opinion. Therefore, I do not consider anything post Ent to be canon. Data's fate remains open to speculation.

    Secondary edit: What happened to Seven's dermal regeneration suit? She almost died when her ocular implant began to fail and she needed a backup on from Icheb, so how could she survive without the outfit the Doctor designed for her?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,853 ✭✭✭Rawr


    Secondary edit: What happened to Seven's dermal regeneration suit? She almost died when her ocular implant began to fail and she needed a backup on from Icheb, so how could she survive without the outfit the Doctor designed for her?

    +1 on your summation of Picard. Nicely done :)

    Regarding Seven's suit. I had always assumed that repairing her skin was one of the easier jobs to de-Borgify her, but that heavy duty modifications such as her Cordical Node could not be replaced. My guess is that in-universe, the cat-suit was more of a choice after the first couple of years as an ex-Borg.

    But production-wise, I think I read once that the cat-suit was so tightly put onto Jeri Ryan that she'd have a lot of difficulties during shoots, possibly even resulting in her fainting on some occasions. I'd understand with them doing away with a costume what was primarily geared towards into turning this new character into eye-candy. She's well established now as a character in her own right.

    Much like T'pol should have after she had joined Starfleet, I feel like Seven should have probably switched from her catsuit to a standard Fleet uniform once it was possible (I think she was officially a "Crewman" / NCO on Voyager)


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,177 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    Rawr wrote: »
    +1 on your summation of Picard. Nicely done :)

    Regarding Seven's suit. I had always assumed that repairing her skin was one of the easier jobs to de-Borgify her, but that heavy duty modifications such as her Cordical Node could not be replaced. My guess is that in-universe, the cat-suit was more of a choice after the first couple of years as an ex-Borg.

    But production-wise, I think I read once that the cat-suit was so tightly put onto Jeri Ryan that she'd have a lot of difficulties during shoots, possibly even resulting in her fainting on some occasions. I'd understand with them doing away with a costume what was primarily geared towards into turning this new character into eye-candy. She's well established now as a character in her own right.

    Much like T'pol should have after she had joined Starfleet, I feel like Seven should have probably switched from her catsuit to a standard Fleet uniform once it was possible (I think she was officially a "Crewman" / NCO on Voyager)

    Hahaha, yeah, that makes sense. I didn't know she fainted though! I always thought the catsuit was ridiculous, in the same way that Troi's was, T'Pol's was a bit more subtle as I remember it.

    Another thing Picard did well, was something that could be called "late style". Insofar as I understand it, a lot of writers when they get really old start to have a "late style" where they contemplate mortality, the way the world is vs what they wanted it to be in their younger days, their life's work etc and it's coloured by melancholy. I think Picard is really about that and although I wonder why Data can't just be downloaded into a new body or why he actually wanted to die because he somehow concluded life only has meaning through death (there's no reason to think this), I thought his send off was a resolution to what went down in Nemesis.

    The show conveyed a kind of continuity/legacy aspect to the generational dimension of humanity. Picard et al used to be the "next generation", they tried to improve their universe and they're kinda bowing out now for the next generation but not until they've "taught them lessons by example". That's another positive, they actually have good new characters to work with, vastly better than those in STD, but to realise their full potential there needs to be a better show runner who has respect for Trek canon and principles and who is also talented, not a hack and listens to the fans.


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,974 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    I think the Doctor mentioned in Voyager that over time, Seven's human systems would heal and she would become less dependent on Borg technology. Regenerating in a Borg alcove every day was meant to be temporary for example.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    ST: Picard was basically a Star Trek movie told slowly. If they had made another film after Nemesis, I could easily expect it to have a lot of the same story as this series. "The Search for Data", essentially.

    In that context I think it was fine. It was a decent Star Trek TNG movie plot.

    Problem is that even the best Star Trek TNG movie plots, and even the TOS movie plots, just don't compare to the series. They never have. I think everyone acknowledges that Star Trek works best on the small screen. Episodic adventures. New worlds. New discoveries. Some variety each week.

    Now, very unfortunately, we do have Star Trek back on the telly – but it's movie Star Trek, just told slowly. Discovery is pretty much the same.


    My other major complaint is that I bloody well liked the "no conflict among the crew" and idealised utopia of TOS and TNG. I know DS9 gets a lot of praise but I think it was the first one to really break the mould on that. And you see some of the great Trek writers like Ronald D. Moore scoffing at Gene's no-conflict rules and how liberating it was to abandon those... but **** it, go write a different show then (and he did, in fairness! <3 BSG!).

    DS9 was a good show but I really missed that vision of what we could become, as unrealistic as it might have been. The movies never cared about that because there wasn't enough time for it in the ~2 hour blockbuster. And these new series are less interesting for having abandoned it altogether.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    Goodshape wrote: »
    My other major complaint is that I bloody well liked the "no conflict among the crew" and idealised utopia of TOS and TNG. I know DS9 gets a lot of praise but I think it was the first one to really break the mould on that. And you see some of the great Trek writers like Ronald D. Moore scoffing at Gene's no-conflict rules and how liberating it was to abandon those... but **** it, go write a different show then (and he did, in fairness! <3 BSG!).
    It depends what you mean by conflict. Rodenberry's idea of no conflict was everybody gets along and there's rarely even disagreement beyond "ye cannae break the laws o physics cap'n." There's a lot of scope between that and outright mutiny.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,674 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    What was great about DS9 episodes like In the Pale Moonlight was how they wrestled with the utopian ideas of TNG. In doing so DS9 built on and expanded the universe of TNG. That's because it was written by people who had an intimate knowledge of TNG and the ideas Gene tried to present in it.

    Picard acts like those utopian ideas never existed. It never engages with them or even acknowledges that it's breaking with them. I would have been fine with a show that continued in DS9's footsteps and explored the breakdown of Gene's idealised utopia, but that's not what we got.

    The problem isn't that the writers were outsiders or wanted to do something different either. Meyer and Bennett pushed TOS in directions that Gene didn't approve of it, but in many ways they also demonstrated a better understanding of what TOS really was than Gene did. That was because they took the time to absorb themselves in it. Picard seems like it was written by people who barely watched TNG.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    Evade wrote: »
    It depends what you mean by conflict. Rodenberry's idea of no conflict was everybody gets along and there's rarely even disagreement beyond "ye cannae break the laws o physics cap'n."

    To be fair, and it might not be the popular opinion, but yeah – that is what I mean.

    TNG is such a nice place to be. There's no shortage of interesting things to do and learn, and exciting adventures to have, and we're never bogged down with interpersonal problems. The future for humanity is bright and wonderful and how it got there – or the cracks along the edges – isn't really the point. And that's absolutely fine.

    There's no other show like it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    Picard acts like those utopian ideas never existed. It never engages with them or even acknowledges that it's breaking with them. I would have been fine with a show that continued in DS9's footsteps and explored the breakdown of Gene's idealised utopia, but that's not what we got.

    That's kinda what I meant with my first point too. Similar to the movies, ST:Picard doesn't have time (or give itself time) to deal with anything beyond it's central plot.

    There's not really any world building. You either know about Star Trek going in, or they make sure that it doesn't make much difference if you don't. Everything exists just to drive the plot forward and in the end, it all feels a bit hollow.

    You're absolutely right about DS9 too. I did miss the TNG utopia, but at least it took the time to explain itself within the context of the universe in which it exists.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,177 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    This review is excellent, best part "when did Star Trek become so fcking mundane and petty" (basically the early 21st century right now). And yes to his analysis of seven, she really does go from a cool, reserved and rational character to a cynical, sarcastic alcoholic. STP is not Star Trek, Alex Kurtzman is just taking the name and abusing it for his own show (except he lacked to imagination to create his own universe).



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    As much as I hate that angry, ranty, know-it-all YouTube delivery, yeah – he's not wrong. Maybe a little over-blown, though.

    I'm not angry at the show. It just wasn't great. Would have made a better and less objectionable 2-hour movie.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,177 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    He's right about Seven though. She's a completely different character and worse for it. And the way Picard is treated with such contempt by myopic, cruel minded idiots. Or the fact that Picard himself is hapless. One of the comments envisages him as the junior science officer Picard from Tapestry and STP takes place in that universe! Not far off, this isn't even the Picard I know. He's been reduced to a pathetic King Lear figure (maybe Stewart wanted that element in the show???). Picard is not someone who would ever end up like this.

    I think it's ok to be angry at the show, not only for what it does to the characters we've grown up with and come to know as if they were real people, but for the fact that it perpetuates this utterly toxic, lamentable ends justifying the means culture we're saddled with in an increasingly grim, dystopian 21st century.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,282 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I tried watching that author's videos before, but his style is cynical and abhorrent. In fact it feels rich that he'd comment on this more dystopian view of Treks world, when its channels like his that perpetuate the cycle of negativity within the pop culture zeitgeist. Negativity sells. YouTube is awash with "critics" or outrage merchants who get off on slamming everything, screaming about SJWs, picking holes, pulling up supposed "plot holes" or what have you. There are about 2, 3 channels I'll watch re. pop culture criticism who have decidedly sober, thoughtful approaches like Lindsey Ellis or Patrick H Willems. The rest is just screeching white noise as unpleasant as any number of Trek admirals saying "F*ck". Picard has its problems, but so has the wider world of entertainment.

    Sorry. If that sounds like a rant, then good; it was absolutely meant to be one :D


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,500 ✭✭✭pah


    At the end of the day it's his opinion same as anyone here. He needs an angle to stand out from the YouTube crowd of he's trying to make money from it.

    I find his delivery humorous most of the time and agree with his take on a lot of things. He over does the diverse female character argument alright but he's more balanced than some of the other critics.


Advertisement