Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Sedulous

macrumors 68030
Dec 10, 2002
2,530
2,577
I have already offered my opinion on this matter and/or others have already better stated a response. But I will offer a more organized list of my thoughts on why ST Picard fails for me.

1: Too many characters for format. A large ensemble cast works in episodic shows where different challenges arrive each episode. STP is a single long story arc that leaves many characters with nothing to do (including Picard himself) or with pointless side threads. If you have to look for things for characters to do then those characters should be written out.

2: Much of the material has already been done and done better even in other Star Trek episodes. The result is something that feels slow, convoluted, and self-indulgent.

3: Offensively distorted established characters. Picard was a living legend. He was thoughtful, diplomatic, and a respected strong leader who now is ineffectual, persistently frightened and confused, and without purpose. Picard is jarringly shocked by things he has experienced many times before. Seven of Nine went from a reserved and logical character to a hard-drinking wise-cracking mercenary (and also suddenly gay). And we see so little of other established characters I am either grateful they too have not been ruined or otherwise annoyed they were used to bait viewers.

4: ST Picard is not Trek for the reasons previously offered. I think the use of contemporary slang like “dude”, dropping f-bombs, and how characters behave like present day people does not fit. And although we “know” this is Trek because they mention a few familiar names/places, the culture and everything has too much conventional grittiness. Quite honestly this show is so generic that with just a few name changes, I would not have guessed it was Star Trek. Star Trek had always presented a more evolved and better version of humanity.

If you enjoyed Star Trek Picard or Discovery, there is nothing wrong with that... it just isn’t “my” Star Trek.
 

Obi Wan Kenobi

macrumors 6502a
Mar 9, 2011
502
338
London, UK
In general, actors are generally not who you want to be directing the content of scripts.
In general, but I don't think that's a good point re Star Trek.

We must remember that although the writers write the dialogue, plot the story and often the 'stage' directions. The directors view then overrides the writers when it's portrayed for the camera. They can also direct script changes, or re-write part of it themselves (many directors were previously writers, inc Oliver Stone, among others).

Star Trek actors that have directed include:
Leonard Nimoy - Search for Spock, Voyage Home
William Shatner - Final Frontier
Jonathan Frakes - First Contact, Insurrection, Nemesis

The cast of TNG, and Voyager have also directed an awful lot of episodes of Star Trek and its many iterations since TNG.
 

turbineseaplane

macrumors G5
Mar 19, 2008
14,859
31,780
The cast of TNG, and Voyager have also directed an awful lot of episodes of Star Trek and its many iterations since TNG.

...and if you listen to audio from Rick Berman, that absolutely did not work out well in many many cases.

Ultimately the list above is one of exceptions that shows that, yes, some can do it, but it’s an extreme subset of those that can both do it, and still execute at the highest of levels in terms of the big picture of the story and how it’s all coming together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire

Huntn

macrumors Core
May 5, 2008
23,516
26,631
The Misty Mountains
I have already offered my opinion on this matter and/or others have already better stated a response. But I will offer a more organized list of my thoughts on why ST Picard fails for me.

1: Too many characters for format. A large ensemble cast works in episodic shows where different challenges arrive each episode. STP is a single long story arc that leaves many characters with nothing to do (including Picard himself) or with pointless side threads. If you have to look for things for characters to do then those characters should be written out.

2: Much of the material has already been done and done better even in other Star Trek episodes. The result is something that feels slow, convoluted, and self-indulgent.

3: Offensively distorted established characters. Picard was a living legend. He was thoughtful, diplomatic, and a respected strong leader who now is ineffectual, persistently frightened and confused, and without purpose. Picard is jarringly shocked by things he has experienced many times before. Seven of Nine went from a reserved and logical character to a hard-drinking wise-cracking mercenary (and also suddenly gay). And we see so little of other established characters I am either grateful they too have not been ruined or otherwise annoyed they were used to bait viewers.

4: ST Picard is not Trek for the reasons previously offered. I think the use of contemporary slang like “dude”, dropping f-bombs, and how characters behave like present day people does not fit. And although we “know” this is Trek because they mention a few familiar names/places, the culture and everything has too much conventional grittiness. Quite honestly this show is so generic that with just a few name changes, I would not have guessed it was Star Trek. Star Trek had always presented a more evolved and better version of humanity.

If you enjoyed Star Trek Picard or Discovery, there is nothing wrong with that... it just isn’t “my” Star Trek.
I have no issue with your post. However for the sake of discussion would you lump both Picard and Discovery together? :)

For myself, Discovery Season 1 knocked it out if the park. Season 2 epitomizes the ideals and values of Star Trek, although it has several moments of gratuitous, over the top action, some poor decision making displayed by Capt Pike, I’d describe it as too willing to put his ship in danger (although I really like this character played by Anson Mount), and a story facilitated by unrealistic convenience such as people magically appearing on Discovery, like Michael Burnham’s adopted parents appearing on the Discovery, or Ash Tyler dissapering off the Discovery to reappear with his Klingon girl friend in a Klingon warship, unless the teleporter can now transport to the next system. :rolleyes:?
 

turbineseaplane

macrumors G5
Mar 19, 2008
14,859
31,780
Anybody here take in For All Mankind from Ronald Moore?

I know there will probably never be a re-kindling of his interest in Star Trek at this point, but my oh my does the ST universe miss this man.

The writing is dramatically better than what was done with STP, at least in my opinion.

The seasons were both 10 episodes but somehow the storytelling and all that you learn and take in and how it was all executed were just so much better in FAM.

I thoroughly enjoyed FAM Season 1 (just finished it last night) and am very excited for S2, whenever that is finished and releases.

FAM had me engaged and on the edge of my seat throughout...including some truly well done *highly* emotional episodes -- whereas STP just confused & frustrated me and barely kept me interested enough to keep watching.

It's amazing how different the experiences were considering they had essentially the exact same amount of "screen time" to work with me as a viewer. It's a phenomenal A/B test of how writing and production can vary so wildly.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire

BigMcGuire

Cancelled
Jan 10, 2012
9,832
14,027
Anybody here take in For All Mankind from Ronald Moore?

I know there will probably never be a re-kindling of his interest in Star Trek at this point, but my oh my does the ST universe miss this man.

The writing is dramatically better than what was done with STP, at least in my opinion.

The seasons were both 10 episodes but somehow the storytelling and all that you learn and take in and how it was all executed were just so much better in FAM.

I thoroughly enjoyed FAM Season 1 (just finished it last night) and am very excited for S2, whenever that is finished and releases.

FAM had me engaged and on the edge of my seat throughout...including some truly well done *highly* emotional episodes -- whereas STP just confused & frustrated me and barely kept me interested enough to keep watching.

It's amazing how different the experiences were considering they had essentially the exact same amount of "screen time" to work with me as a viewer. It's a phenomenal A/B test of how writing and production can vary so wildly.

I will start watching this tonight, thank you. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane

turbineseaplane

macrumors G5
Mar 19, 2008
14,859
31,780
I will start watching this tonight, thank you. :)

Make sure to stick around for a few episodes - I was sort of "'eh.....ok I guess" after just one episode.
I was having a good time midway through the second one...and then the hook set in quick after that.

REALLY happy I kept going and I predict you will be also.
[automerge]1587500497[/automerge]
Also, just an FYI to all - this is totally free to watch right now on AppleTV+

(in case one doesn't have a brand new device or whatever it was that triggered the "free year" from Apple)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire

iAssimilated

Contributor
Apr 29, 2018
1,228
5,990
the PNW
I totally dug on Picard.

Ditto! I liked this show a lot, but I am sure me being a big fan of JL helped (sorry, couldn't help myself :p ... or should I say John Luck Pickerd).

I am waiting to rewatch the series before over analyzing all the aspects of it. First time through thought though, maybe they added too many characters to the show (ie maybe the story would have unfolded more evenly if we didn't have so many characters introduced in a 10 episode season)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: D.T.

Huntn

macrumors Core
May 5, 2008
23,516
26,631
The Misty Mountains
Neither do I ...


... other than it's totally wrong. :p As I fan of all-things-Trek for about the last ~40 years or so, I totally dug on Picard.
I did not dig, so there, and I watched the original Star Trek when it televised! ? My Mother thought it was too adult of a show for a 13 year old to watch, but I got my way. :D
 

D.T.

macrumors G4
Sep 15, 2011
11,050
12,460
Vilano Beach, FL
Ditto! I liked this show a lot, but I am sure me being a big fan of JL helped (sorry, couldn't help myself :p ... or should I say John Luck Pickerd).

I am waiting to rewatch the series before over analyzing all the aspects of it. First time through thought though, maybe they added too many characters to the show (ie maybe the story would have unfolded more evenly if we didn't have so many characters introduced in a 10 episode season)?


Yep. For me, at the end of the day: emotional impact / experience > enumerated plot point scrutiny / long-winded YT analysis
 

nicho

macrumors 601
Feb 15, 2008
4,217
3,210
I did not dig, so there, and I watched the original Star Trek when it televised! ? My Mother thought it was too adult of a show for a 13 year old to watch, but I got my way. :D

I wonder what she'd think of Picard...
 

VictorTango777

macrumors 6502a
Oct 28, 2017
890
1,626
The writers can't seem to figure out what world they want to be in.

Are we hyper advanced holographic input with tools that just "do the repair you are thinking of" land?
Or are we "human brain disease stuff still bogs us down" and smoking stogies and drinking at every opportunity?

The same could be said about the Vulcans or the Jedi in Star Wars - they both have advanced technology yet dress like monks and practice mystic arts.
 

Sedulous

macrumors 68030
Dec 10, 2002
2,530
2,577
The same could be said about the Vulcans or the Jedi in Star Wars - they both have advanced technology yet dress like monks and practice mystic arts.
I am not sure traditions/clothing style has anything to do with the point of the post.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.