Picard 1x10 - "Et in Arcadia Ego, Part 2" [** SPOILERS WITHIN **]

Bobtheman

Brian? wrote: »

Virtue signalling is a insult, made up to through at people with a socially progressive mindset. Having LGBT+ people in a TV show isn't virtue signalling, it's inclusiveness.

You know best

Evade

Brian? wrote: »

I didn't define virtue signalling in my post, so how can you disagree with me?

This sounded like a definition to me.

Brian? wrote: »

Virtue signalling is a insult, made up to through at people with a socially progressive mindset

pixelburp

What's the opposite of "virtue signalling" then? That first world problem of those who cry and whinge at the merest suggestion of a variance to the norm? Or the specific irony in the tedious complaints of inclusion In a show historically famous for inclusion? Trek is one big virtue signal then, given its big claim to fame was how inclusive it was through Nichelle Nichols et al. Again I suppose, easy to discount with 50 years in the rearview

Presumably Discovery has caused outright apoplexy by having a gay man in its cast, whose plot has nothing to do with their sexuality. Though I've seen some try to claim that plot is "fridging", but that's another level of inanity.

That scene with Seven was garbage writing, but reading offence into held hands is particularly brittle triggering.

Brian?

Evade wrote: »

This sounded like a definition to me.

More of an opinion.

Evade

pixelburp wrote: »

What's the opposite of "virtue signalling" then? That first world problem of those who cry and whinge at the merest suggestion of a variance to the norm? Or the specific irony in the tedious complaints of inclusion In a show historically famous for inclusion? Trek is one big virtue signal then, given its big claim to fame was how inclusive it was through Nichelle Nichols et al. Again I suppose, easy to discount with 50 years in the rearview

Presumably Discovery has caused outright apoplexy by having a gay man in its cast, whose plot has nothing to do with their sexuality. Though I've seen some try to claim that plot is "fridging", but that's another level of inanity.

That scene with Seven was garbage writing, but reading offence into held hands is particularly brittle triggering.

The opposite of virtue signalling would be doing what's right despite the risk, a bit like the casting in the 60s.

If they wanted LGBT inclusion in Picard why not change Rios and Jurati to Raffi and Jurati and show more of it instead of a last minute scene out of nowhere with characters that had never had any meaningful interaction. It's no guarantee it would be better written because the series isn't particularly well written but at least it couldn't be easily be edited out in regions where that isn't allowed like a similar scene in the most recent Star Wars. Even in STD Stamets and Culber could be edited to be friends rather than married without impacting much of the plot.

pixelburp

Evade wrote: »

.... Even in STD Stamets and Culber could be edited to be friends rather than married without impacting much of the plot.

Not really, given Stamets and Culbers entire arc in season 2 was centred around a love lost, then tentatively restored. Any romantic pairing could be rewritten as platonic friends sure, but would completely lose the entire emotional core of the story within the plot.

Evade

pixelburp wrote: »

Not really, given Stamets and Culbers entire arc in season 2 was centred around a love lost, then tentatively restored. Any romantic pairing could be rewritten as platonic friends sure, but would completely lose the entire emotional core of the story within the plot.

It would obviously impact their story but overall it wouldn't make much difference.

pixelburp

Evade wrote: »

It would obviously impact their story but overall it wouldn't make much difference.

Unless the story is the romance, is the relationship, is the second chance given to both men. Of course that's impacted, the difference is the change. You can't change the nature of a relationship without knock on effects in the story. That's literally human nature and writing 101.

TheValeyard

Stamets and Culbers, sigh.

It just doesn't work as a match.

Stamets is a very interesting likable grump.

Culber has the personality of a damp cloth.

Bobtheman

Star trek was ahead of the curve. In the 1960s. Inclusive yes. But putting in gay characters is often tokenism now. It's over done in tv. Consider the percentage of the population that is LGBT and ask yourself proportionally Is tv proportionate ?
Even the original SULU actor thought it uncessary to have
the new SULU being gay.
Just an opinion.

Stark

Dunno, is the percentage of gay posters on this very thread proportionate or just tokenism? :rolleyes:

pixelburp

Bobtheman wrote: »

Star trek was ahead of the curve. In the 1960s. Inclusive yes. But putting in gay characters is often tokenism now. It's over done in tv. Consider the percentage of the population that is LGBT and ask yourself proportionally Is tv proportionate ?
Even the original SULU actor thought it uncessary to have
the new SULU being gay.
Just an opinion.

So inclusivity was ok then, but not now? You think Nichelle Nichols wasn't token? Ha. She was literally the only named castmember who was black. Written as a mere totem of inclusivity. What you plead as ok was a far more cynical, surface decision and were homosexuality not illegal or taboo, there would have been a gay character. Guaranteed.

Stamets at least had a character and arc. That's not tokensim, that's just being another character in an ensemble. That he's gay is just a statistic of a character sheet. Uhura, Sulu were tokens.

What possible harm is this causing? A further strata of modern life is represented in a show famous for representation, and is a nice acknowledgement to the many who are gay, bisexual or whatever. It has no effect on the output so your problem is ... ... ... what? It's disproportionate? According to what statistics of demographics Vs fiction?

Sounds like you're arguing for quotas TBH which is very tokenistic really

AllForIt

As a gay person I find it apt to have gay ppl in Star Trek. I mean, if you don't have a gay character in Star Trek of all series, but you have talking androids and all variants of aliens of many different varieties, it would just seem silly that there were no gay characters in Star Trek. It would be these days a glaring omission.

However, with Discovery and it's first gay characters, I just wish they didn't make a soap opera out of the gay relationship, that it was just a fact that a character was gay, that was made apparent though dialogue or however. Making a soap opera out of it just leaves the show being open to accusations of having an agenda, and frankly, I have some sympathy for that view, in the sense that I can see how someone might hold that view. I don't think it's true but I can see how some might think it is.

CramCycle

AllForIt wrote: »

As a gay person I find it apt to have gay ppl in Star Trek. I mean, if you don't have a gay character in Star Trek of all series, but you have talking androids and all variants of aliens of many different varieties, it would just seem silly that there were no gay characters in Star Trek. It would be these days a glaring omission.

The only thing annoying is the fans making a deal about it, it is centuries from now. The fact that it is a discussion point is weird as I can't imagine it is one in the future.

However, with Discovery and it's first gay characters, I just wish they didn't make a soap opera out of the gay relationship, that it was just a fact that a character was gay, that was made apparent though dialogue or however. Making a soap opera out of it just leaves the show being open to accusations of having an agenda, and frankly, I have some sympathy for that view, in the sense that I can see how someone might hold that view. I don't think it's true but I can see how some might think it is.

This is what annoyed me about the Sulu thing (the fans not the movie), no one made a deal about it in the movie, in fact, if you hadn't been told, it wasn't noticeable, a guy drops off his daughter. Could have been a friend, child minder whatever. The way the media went on about it I was expecting some soft core action, not a man letting go of a kids and and letting them run to their Dad. Same with Discovery, the relationship was introduced as a casual thing with no trumpeting. They brushed teeth together, it was normal and only noticed by those looking to make noise. It was normal because you could have replaced it with any relationship and it would have been basically the same. I have no sympathy for that point of view as in neither of these shows was it a grandstanding thing. The main issue was Stamets character changed so drastically personality wise that I thought it was the writers being lazy and tring to imply he came from the other universe.

It is no different to the people making a deal about Raffi, fair enough, there was no hint of it before but then again I got the impression that the Cap and Brainbox were off the cards because she could lie well enough to convince body reading synths and killed the person she loved, and no one seems slightly on edge about her. She's psychotic. The 7of9 thing was bad because we know from Voyager and Picard that she still feels alone and not part of the human race despite trying, not that it was Raffis hand but that it was anyones hand. Raffi is believable as she is desperate for someone to love her despite her issues which she can't control.

Bobtheman

Anyway I enjoyed the series. I'm still confused why Data wanted to die. He wasn't even a 100 was he ? I will watch season 2. Then again I would watch stewart as Picard painting a room. Die hard fan !

Stark

From the looks of it, he was stuck in that simulated environment with no-one for company.

ixoy

Evade wrote: »

It would obviously impact their story but overall it wouldn't make much difference.

Well sure going by the logic, I assume you don't want any straight characters to have relationships beyond friendship either? So when someone is in peril, they're just worried about the loss of their friend. Just remove romance across the board, right?

Evade

ixoy wrote: »

Well sure going by the logic, I assume you don't want any straight characters to have relationships beyond friendship either? So when someone is in peril, they're just worried about the loss of their friend. Just remove romance across the board, right?

Yeah, straights only, that's definitely what I want. It's not like in my post just before the one you quoted I wrote that more screen time for a gay relationship that couldn't easily be edited out so you can sell your series in China would be better. No, I would never write something like that.

Evade wrote: »

If they wanted LGBT inclusion in Picard why not change Rios and Jurati to Raffi and Jurati and show more of it instead of a last minute scene out of nowhere with characters that had never had any meaningful interaction. It's no guarantee it would be better written because the series isn't particularly well written but at least it couldn't be easily be edited out in regions where that isn't allowed like a similar scene in the most recent Star Wars. Even in STD Stamets and Culber could be edited to be friends rather than married without impacting much of the plot.

moonlighting_1

Bicentennial Man Vs. Star Trek Picard Final Data Scene . Comparison Video

Bobtheman

I am annoyed at the way PICARD just tosses away the developments in the novels and comics . I read the odd novel and in some of these Picard has married and had a child with Beverly. In others Data is very much part of B-4.
Data is essentially reborn in B 4

Stark

None of the novels or comics are canon. Although the show did retain elements from the Picard countdown comics (Raffi, USS Verity and his Romulan companions) as well as the novel Picard: Last best hope.

Anyway, I'm defintely glad they abandoned the idea of Data in B4's body. I think that would have gone against the values Star Trek stood for.

Bobtheman

Stark wrote: »

None of the novels or comics are canon. Although the show did retain elements from the Picard countdown comics (Raffi, USS Verity and his Romulan companions) as well as the novel Picard: Last best hope.

Anyway, I'm defintely glad they abandoned the idea of Data in B4's body. I think that would have gone against the values Star Trek stood for.

Explain? About Data in b 4. How would that go against values? Look at resurrection of Spock.

CramCycle

I haven't read the books but from the movies/show was B4 not inferior technically to Data, he could never hope to achieve the same things or work at the same level, or so I not remember it right.

Slydice

Someone has done up the fleet into the previous shows style:

Stark

Holy **** that looks so much better

Evade

That looks great.

pixelburp

Looks more in keeping. Though it wasn't the look that annoyed me, but the sheer numbers. 100s of ships, purely for empty spectacle and narrative hyperbole.

Wonder if this is all down to the rights issue between CBS and Paramount? That was resolved though, right? Maybe they weren't able to use existing designs, bar the brief cameo agreed as a nod.

FGR

Stark wrote: »

Holy **** that looks so much better

Absolutely! Those ships still look the absolute business - and they can still justify them given their intended lifespan!

I have no doubt the creator of this fix had a much lower budget than the show's producers too; and still presented superior visuals!

Brian?

FGR wrote: »

Absolutely! Those ships still look the absolute business - and they can still justify them given their intended lifespan!

I have no doubt the creator of this fix had a much lower budget than the show's producers too; and still presented superior visuals!

Isn’t it mostly from DS9? The last nigh battle before heading to Cardassia.

With Runabouts for some reason.

Evade

It's a new shot. DS9 didn't have Sovereign or Intrepid class ships in the battle scenes and there's not nearly enough Miranda class ships.