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

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

but "Michael Burnham" isn't an "diversity yeah!" air-punch

Who said it was It's a minor minor part of the show's premise, & one I happen to like. It really suits the character imo. If Discovery felt the need to tackle appropriate gender naming, I think the show would have big big issues.

pixelburp

I wasn't replying to you Inviere. Post updated with specific reply.

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

I wasn't replying to you Inviere. Post updated with specific reply.

Fair enough, though even in terms of the shows fans and its detractors, I think deriding the show because of the name is pretty small fry. It's a non issue imo.

I don't think there's a genuine Trek fan out there who has an issue with the notion of a "strong, unconventional, black woman" as a main character. It's the writing of said character that has polarised people in context of critique. I've said previously, I don't mind Burnham whatsoever...she's one character, she's flawed, interesting, isn't perfect, etc. I can see why though, it'd annoy people, that she has to be front & center of everything important going on. To me though, that's not a character fault....but a glaring writing fault.

odyssey06

Inviere wrote: »

Fair enough, though even in terms of the shows fans and its detractors, I think deriding the show because of the name is pretty small fry. It's a non issue imo.
I don't think there's a genuine Trek fan out there who has an issue with the notion of a "strong, unconventional, black woman" as a main character. It's the writing of said character that has polarised people in context of critique. I've said previously, I don't mind Burnham whatsoever...she's one character, she's flawed, interesting, isn't perfect, etc. I can see why though, it'd annoy people, that she has to be front & center of everything important going on. To me though, that's not a character fault....but a glaring writing fault.

Yep, I like Burnham as a Trek character, but it's too much to rest the series on her.
If we forgot the generational difference, I can imagine her as a character in TNG or DS9 or Voyager, just as a human following logic with a connection to Vulcan (rather than Spock).

And, looking at her IMDB credits I don't think Sonequa Martin-Green has been the lead in any other series or film or major theatrical production. I don't think the character or the actress have 'star vehicle' potential in a way you could do that.

Stark

I could agree with that. Tbh, she's as good as many of the secondary characters on TNG/Voyager/Enterprise so if they removed the focus from her a bit, she'd probably be perfectly likeable. I did hear her referred to as "Commander Burnham" a few times in the season 3 trailer so hopefully that means Suru is captain and gets a bit more focus in season 3.

odyssey06

Stark wrote: »

I could agree with that. Tbh, she's as good as many of the secondary characters on TNG/Voyager/Enterprise so if they removed the focus from her a bit, she'd probably be perfectly likeable. I did hear her referred to as "Commander Burnham" a few times in the season 3 trailer so hopefully that means Suru is captain and gets a bit more focus in season 3.

To continue the theme, I think Ensign Ro is a great character, and I know Trek producers wanted her for the 'Kira' role on DS9.
Now imagine if Michelle Forbes had taken the role, but as the lead rather than one in an ensemble. It would have distorted the whole show and narrowed what stories could be told.

TheIrishGrover

Some interesting posts there and while I don't totally agree, there is some truth to them. I'll start with Discovery but much of this post also applied to Picard.

It's the focus the main character is given. To the detriment of other, potentially more interesting characters.

First off, I like Discovery. I think the characters in general are much more enjoyable and interesting than the last two Trek series:

Doug Jones is the best prosthetic actor in the business and his performance is simply amazing. His character is easily the best non-human character since Garak (Although, since all you had inbetween was Neelix, Kes and Flox, that's not saying much)
I like Stamets and Culber and their relationship. They really had to jump through hoops to get the doc back but I like both actors (And the other doctor who has a couple of zingers. Don't know her name or if she had one)
I LOVE the new engineer. I think she's hilarious. ("I had a dream I played base with Prince. Weird". I almost spit me tea over the tele laughing at that)
I even like Tilly.

And I DO like Burnham. The actor is great and she's put in some very good performances (And, admittedly, some not so good but in general). I have no problem with her gender or the colour of her skin (And I'm not saying anyone in the previous posts has either). But her character is, by far, the blandest of characters on the show. She can do no wrong and the world seems to revolve around her. This is something that was fine in TOS: The world revolved around Kirk in TOS. But he was the captain and it was also a simpler time regarding TV shows. It was throw-away episode of the week stuff. The show was about a bunch of (mostly) Americans going out and sticking their noses in

But Burnham is NOT a captain, she is breathtakingly arrogant, seems to know EVERTHING and the cast seem to revolve around her (At one stage there is literally a scene where she walks onto the bridge in slow motion and everyone stops one by one to watch her pass).

Almost every episode revolves around her. I know she's our POV character but come on. Look at how many episodes of TNG focused on Data or Riker or Worf or even WESLEY! with Picard barely appearing. Hell, Lwaxxana Troi got her own episodes and while they were generally painful, they were there.

So it's kind of like Homer on Poochie on The Simpsons: "When Poochie is not on screen Itchy and Scratchy should reference him - 'Where's Poochie? Have you seen Poochie' etc. ". Even episodes that don't revolve around Burnham, they are STILL about her actions.

I am coming across harsh, I really like Discovery I just think they need to back off Burnham by about 20% and give the other characters some space...... Oh, and give us our Goddamn Pike Series! Now! and give "Number 1" more to do, Every one of her (few) lines was great

And....

The same goes for Picard. I know, I know, "The show is called PICARD! Who is is supposed to focus on?" But not to the detriment of all other characters. There was potential in each of the characters but they were smothered by the focus on Picard:

Raffi - Her whole career destroyed by Picard. She has good reason to hate him. And she does. For a whole episode then it's JL JL JL JL JL JL Jay...f*cking...Ell (Take note showrunners. EVERYONE hated it). Whole family she lost contact with? 10 mins. Back to JL JL JL JL

Rios - Initially thought he was going to be a one-note Han Solo wannabe. Then saw his TERRIBLE Oirish accent. Then accpeted that as intentional. Started to look interesting. Then Back to one note Han-Solo for you, baby.

Alison Pil - An actor I like and was expecting good things from. Was so all over the shop that people (Myself included) thought she might be an immature android.

Romulan Ronin - Brief interesting glimpses of more than noble warrior brutally quashed.

Romulan siblings: Were SO OTT that's I'd say half their bugdet went on sets after they ate the scenery. My God. All they were missing were thin mustaches to twirl and go "MWHAHAHAHA"

And the rest.

The only person that stood out was Seven's rage which was fantastic. And Riker's humanity.

Last scene seemed to be Picard and his motley crew go out and find adventure/solve mysteries....

I may be a little harsh on Picard because we are only 10 episodes in but I was SO looking forward to it.

Ballso

Picard doesn't focus on Picard though, he's an afterthought. A doddery aul fella constantly being belittled by poorly written female characters for some bizarre reason. Christ I'm still cringing from the Fox News lady bit. The character is unrecognizable from Picard in TNG.

Rawr

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

Romulan siblings: Were SO OTT that's I'd say half their bugdet went on sets after they ate the scenery. My God. All they were missing were thin mustaches to twirl and go "MWHAHAHAHA"

+1
Although....now that I'm imagining it, I might have actually liked them if they leaned into it and just became cartoon villians.

[On the artifact]
Brother: Let us fool that FOOLISH ANDROID GIRL to betray the location of her homeworld! Moo ha ha HA!

Sister: Yes, let us fool her for the sake of EVIL!"

Brother: Yes! FOR EVIIIIIL!!! Mooo HA HA HAH!

[They both bust into evil laughter while Hugh looks on from a nearby platform]
Hugh: .....the hell?

pixelburp

Getting back to updates on the second season, related to the current topic anyway, Patrick Stewart confirmed that Narek wouldn't be returning:

One of the open questions left from the season one finale was the fate of Harry Treadaway’s Romulan operative Narek, last seen being taken into custody by the Synths, although Michael Chabon said there was a deleted scene that showed him being handed over to the Federation. When talking about what it was like working with the rest of the Picard cast, Stewart indicated Treadaway may not be back for season two:

We have a dazzling group of actors. No matter who I find myself playing a scene with, it is interesting, unusual, challenging, and always exciting. And every one of us is back. Well, I think we may have said goodbye to Harry Treadaway, which I am disappointed about because I enjoyed working with him so much.

https://trekmovie.com/2020/05/13/patrick-stewart-talks-startling-events-for-star-trek-picard-season-two-hints-at-more-tng-guest-stars/

Stark

I'm actually sort of disappointed. On his own, he wasn't a bad actor/character. The sister was atrocious though, and dragged him down to her level in any scenes where they were together. Thought the end of season 1 left them with interesting places to go for him.

pixelburp

It did feel like they might have been building towards some kind of redemptive arc all right: Narek seemed to be legitimately conflicted about his feeings for Soji, hinting that he could yet come around. Wonder why he's not coming back - if it's the production team or the actor simply not wanting to return.

Evade

Redeeming Narek might be too close to retreading Tyler's arc on STD.

TheIrishGrover

Evade wrote: »

Redeeming Narek might be too close to retreading Tyler's arc on STD.

That's a VERY good point

Plus, I would imagine that they'll only do one more season. Stewart is no spring chicken.

Actually..... On that... They say they had (Pre-Covid) two live action series in early planning NOT counting Section 31 (Speaking of scenery-chewing. While I like the idea of a Section 31 series they REALLY gotta dial them ALL back from 11).

Now obviously things may have changed. Assuming that a Pike series is/was planned (I will eat my hat if it wasn't), I wonder if they were planning on something with Rios/Seven.

As I said, once given a little room, he became interesting and they seemed to spend a lot of time building up Seven's association with this Rangers group.

Meh, just a thought.

odyssey06

pixelburp wrote: »

Wonder why he's not coming back - if it's the production team or the actor simply not wanting to return.

If it's the actor they could hire his twin brother Harry (from Penny Dreadful)

Stark

Narek is already played by Harry. You must be thinking of Luke.

odyssey06

Stark wrote: »

Narek is already played by Harry. You must be thinking of Luke.

Doh... on the other hand, that indirectly proves my point!

So Luke was in Fortitude and upcoming Singapore Grip.
Harry has a much longer credits list... Penny Dreadful, Mr Mercedes, the Crown and ST Picard.

Evade

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

While I like the idea of a Section 31 series they REALLY gotta dial them ALL back from 11.

More of the Sloane/Bashir dynamic and less of the mustache twirling would be nice.

riggerman

Spock, Captain Pike and Number One are returning for new series Star Trek: Strange New Worlds

Stark

Honestly, I liked a lot of things about Discovery but the hatchet job they did of section 31 was not one of them. Have zero interest in watching that show. The section 31 series and Pike series should be called "Discovery: the bad parts" and "Discovery: the good parts" respectively.

pah

I liked pike and No1. Spock was ok, Peck did a good job but I really dislike the whole Burnham is the centre of spocks universe.

Hopefully it can be it's own thing. Possibly a way to get a shatner cameo if done well??

Rawr

Stark wrote: »

Honestly, I liked a lot of things about Discovery but the hatchet job they did of section 31 was not one of them. Have zero interest in watching that show. The section 31 series and Pike series should be called "Discovery: the bad parts" and "Discovery: the good parts" respectively.

I sort of hope that Section 31 goes away and they focus on this Pike show instead. Fans appeared to actually *want* this show compared to what I can only assume is indifference to a show about the cartoonish League of Galactic EEEEVIL that is their Section 31. They might be able to make something good from it, but personally I couldn't care less about this show at the moment.

But new Pike show? Could be loads of fun. Part of me hopes that they play with the fact that we never learned Number 1's name. Could they tease us with this for a whole show's runtime and never tell us as a sort of running joke? Might be fun :P

pixelburp

The complete absence of any news or traction (AFAIK), makes me wonder if the Section 31 show has been quietly shelved in favour of the Pike one.

Evade

Rawr wrote: »

the fact that we never learned Number 1's name.

It's

Una

AMKC

pixelburp wrote: »

The complete absence of any news or traction (AFAIK), makes me wonder if the Section 31 show has been quietly shelved in favour of the Pike one.

Maybe it has. Be no harm as I don't think anyone wanted it and it would be s huge flop. He would be a smart move if thay have dropped it and decided on the StarTrek:Stange New Worlds instead

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

The complete absence of any news or traction (AFAIK), makes me wonder if the Section 31 show has been quietly shelved in favour of the Pike one.

Fingers crossed anyway.

Brian?

Ballso wrote: »

The Mandalorian gave us some episodic style eps, alongside a series long story arc, similar enough to how DS9 did it. Mandalorian was MILES better than either of the recent Trek shows

I don’t even like Star Wars much and loved the Mandalorian.

I’m a huge fan of Samurai films and it has the same feel as early Kurosawa, which I’m sure was ok purpose.

Brian?

Stark wrote: »

Honestly, I liked a lot of things about Discovery but the hatchet job they did of section 31 was not one of them. Have zero interest in watching that show. The section 31 series and Pike series should be called "Discovery: the bad parts" and "Discovery: the good parts" respectively.

Section 31 are sceptically bad outside of DS9. I want them killed with fire.

AMKC

Brian? wrote: »

Section 31 are sceptically bad outside of DS9. I want them killed with fire.

They were done well in Enterprise as well but that's it.

Goodshape

Mr. Plinkett's (long) review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwF1iri1GjQ

Fairly spot-on as usual. You might call it cynical if it wasn't so well argued and backed up.