I mean they literally memory hole the whole season
Q's death - Undone.
While I agree that the rest of the stuff being undone, or at least ignored makes no sense within the setting, just because Q, a being who is able to move to any point in time and space in an instant, chose to spend the last moments of his near infinite life with Picard doesn't mean that his younger self couldn't visit points in time past that moment. Honestly I'd be disappointed if the show implied that just because he died at one point in linear time meant he would never be able to visit the time after that moment.
It makes sense in the setting and all that, but it does undercut the emotional impact. The run from Khan to the end of Whales where they lose Spock, then the Enterprise had those losses carry some weight because they weren't immediately undone, and bringing back Spock cost the crew and Kirk a lot.
Having Q just pop up with timey-wimey think outside of linear time shiz is... not great.
That's fair, although considering the thing Picard did that impressed Q that humanity might be worth keeping was navigating a temporal paradox it seems appropriate for him to continue to mess with time with him. Having his death be the latest point in Picard's timeline that he'll interact with him, moving on to bugging his son instead would leave his death as the last time Picard sees him at least. It's one of the aspects of time travel that's not often touched upon, but there's certainly stories you can mine dealing with a person's death, only to then encounter their younger self. Admittedly a lot of those stories would be a lot different for a being as powerful and elusive as Q, there's no reason to think you warning him ahead of time when he'll die would change anything, and knowing that his death is a fixed point in time meaning there's no danger he'll die before that doesn't matter since he's an omnipotent godling, there's no chance he'd have died anyway.
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Dr. Who did interesting stuff with River Song, but that particular plot thread started off with a banger that was never quite undercut, no matter the timey-wimey. It's tough to do serious amounts of timey-wimey without ending up in Bill and Ted land.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Dr. Who did interesting stuff with River Song, but that particular plot thread started off with a banger that was never quite undercut, no matter the timey-wimey. It's tough to do serious amounts of timey-wimey without ending up in Bill and Ted land.
"Silence in the Library"/"Forest of the Dead" is still one of my all-time favorite episodes of Doctor Who. The premise of "someone the Doctor knows intimately well, yet they meet in backwards order, so that this, our first experience meeting the character through the Doctor's eyes, is the last time the character will meet the Doctor, and all the drama that that implies" was such an amazing premise, and Alex Kingston plays it so damned well (along with David Tennant putting out his typical best).
It's the example I immediately thought of with the whole Q/Picard/non-linear time point. Except that every subsequent attempt to bring back River in Doctor Who bungled it more and more (IMHO) until the concept was lost completely. The problem of writing a story (or multiple) regarding non-linear time is that we are all experiencing time linearly, and it's rare to find a writer capable of imagining all the consequences and nuances of non-linearity to be able to capture that properly in a story.
"Let's take a look at the scores! The girls are at the square root of Pi, while the boys are still at a crudely drawn picture of a duck. Clearly, it's anybody's game!"
Dr. Who did interesting stuff with River Song, but that particular plot thread started off with a banger that was never quite undercut, no matter the timey-wimey. It's tough to do serious amounts of timey-wimey without ending up in Bill and Ted land.
"Silence in the Library"/"Forest of the Dead" is still one of my all-time favorite episodes of Doctor Who. The premise of "someone the Doctor knows intimately well, yet they meet in backwards order, so that this, our first experience meeting the character through the Doctor's eyes, is the last time the character will meet the Doctor, and all the drama that that implies" was such an amazing premise, and Alex Kingston plays it so damned well (along with David Tennant putting out his typical best).
It's the example I immediately thought of with the whole Q/Picard/non-linear time point. Except that every subsequent attempt to bring back River in Doctor Who bungled it more and more (IMHO) until the concept was lost completely. The problem of writing a story (or multiple) regarding non-linear time is that we are all experiencing time linearly, and it's rare to find a writer capable of imagining all the consequences and nuances of non-linearity to be able to capture that properly in a story.
Trying to do it in a way that wouldn't put the audience off completely would require an even rarer writer.
Especially when both intertwined timelines are constantly being given new loops and tangles.
Telling a story you are personally overseeing the entirety of and have totally locked down start to end, I could see a few writers being able to pull off. Multiple writers taking their own crack at the concept across multiple disparate series, it's not impossible to pull off, but odds are low enough I'd be on the look out for low flying sperm whales if anyone managed to execute it well.
JMS managed it with Babylon 5, but even he had to contend with massive shakeups and restructuring of his story as it went along.
I think B5 as a production is one of the greatest achivements in Television history. A almost shoe string budget. Next to no famous actors apart from Boxleitner. SFX made on fucking Amiga computers. Not even on a network or cable station for most of its run. 20 episode seasons with an overarching narrative close to half of which was written by one guy.
No other show has come close to it, before or since.
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
There really isn't a good way that it could pay off if done correctly. Effectively, from one of their perspective, they are getting to know their loved one progressively more as that person is forgetting them more and more. There are other problems with the idea that they are experiencing things in reverse "time" from each other, but everytime they are together, they experience it "forward" together.
Spoilered for being about Doctor Who and not Star Trek:
There were moments where the River storyline did pay off, or at least started to. The entire library episode, for starters. The episode later where she kisses the Doctor for his first time, and the realization and heartbreak that goes through River at the same time the Doctor is intrigued and twitterpated (played wonderfully by Alex and Matt Smith in that scene). There is a lot of drama to be explored there, or just have it a wacky weird anomaly about their relationship every time River pops up. Then Moffatt had to go and muck it all up for the sake of...I dunno, shock value maybe? Oh well.
B5 was a lightning-in-a-bottle accomplishment, but to be fair isn't quite the same beast: there's one time loop, it's stable, and barely impacts the ep-to-ep stories. It's super impressive for what JMS was able to pull off, though. Which is why I'm very wary of the remake, but we shall see...
BACK TO TOPIC, though lol. I think the idea of a Q running into Picard all out of order would've been interesting but ultimately distracting, and if Q is truly as omnipotent as he claims, he could've just as easily made sure to meet Picard linearly so as to not mess up his tiny fragile human brain.
There's so much more in general you could do with Q as a species, though, but therein lies the problem: if the Q are so much more advanced than "we" can conceive, then that immediately opens the possibility of us the viewers conceiving of things the Q could or should do that the writers didn't, which inevitably leads to disappointment.
Somewhat apropos: the "civil war" Voy episode. Q gave Janeway a context to perceive the collective in a way familiar to her (and at least a little bit Q still having fun, I would have to imagine). But there was no reason for the other Q to stick with the same perception construct when she brought the crew over. Instead, they could've rushed in as the calvary as whatever: Tom riding a T-Rex, Tuvok as a hovering monk passively nerve pinching everyone unconscious, Chakotay as Hawkeye, Torres in a giant Kahless mech, Kim dressed in a lieutenant's uniform...
"Let's take a look at the scores! The girls are at the square root of Pi, while the boys are still at a crudely drawn picture of a duck. Clearly, it's anybody's game!"
+1
Options
MonwynApathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime.A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered Userregular
Wasn't that always the plan? I thought they aid that each season of Picard was intended to be separate, to the point that they threw out obvious plot hooks just in case anyone in the future wanted to pick them up, but with zero intention of picking them up themselves. The JJ Abrams approach to writing, if you will (and if you won't, I will). There's a Mysterious Space Hole, and the New Borg are guarding it. What could it mean? Let us know when you come up with something.
And I think they had them all done and sorted before any of them aired, so there was no 'looking at fan reactions and adjusting course' element there.
I very much disagree. No way they had S3 planned out before S2 aired. They saw that the response to S2 was...not great and adjusted back to nostalgia. Stewart himself said he didn't want to make TNG s8 with the rest but something new with Picard. What they made was so bad even he accepted the pivot.
I mean they literally memory hole the whole season
Picard opening up to the possibility of love with his Romulan house keeper - removed
Good Borg who would have been jolly useful when the season Big Bad is Bad Borg - removed
Q's death - Undone.
Having multiple showrunners where each one just makes whatever they want with no consistency is terrible! We saw this with the Star Wars sequels.
But this does make me think - is Star Trek relevant anymore? Because the new shows like LD, Prodigy, SNW all continue classic Trek - but maybe that's not cool anymore. Maybe people want The Expanse with the serial numbers filed off and the word Star Trek bolted on. Maybe wholesome, positive exploration of the unknown while simultaneously exploring the human condition isn't what modern audiences want.
It's hard to get a read on what has been successful at Paramount because that place is a garbage fire. But maybe audiences have moved on as our world spirals into a nightmare.
I see people dismissive of old Trek and it makes me confused. That is Star Trek - that's the whole point!. That's what made it different to Buck Rogers or Star Wars.
I rewatched Skin of Evil and while it gets remembered for Tasha's death, it is in fact a really good episode about the nature of Evil. Picard gives a great speech at the end to Armus and it's a great Troi episode. Even the funeral at the end (cheesey as it is) inspires hope in the face of loss.
That people consign these episodes to the bin just boggles my mind.
The fact that Strange New Worlds is universally praised, even by boomer assholes who hate everything made after 2000, would seem to indicate that there's still an appetite for the "wholesome, positive exploration of the unknown" stuff.
Not universally at all and I envy your nicely sanitized algorithm profile or complete disengagement from social media not to have encountered it, because SNW has been massively rejected by the same creators and posters on many sites who hated Discovery and Picard.
But SNW is literally TOS with less evil computers!
I don't understand people not liking SNW, LD or Prodigy. They are good shows run in the classical spirit of Star Trek.
It's 'wokeness' isn't it? FFS. It's been said a million times but who watches Star Trek and is surprised by 'wokeness'. The show that has constantly attacked bigotry and persecution since the 60s.
If you look at anyone who says that they always have a show where it "started." Usually either TNG or Discovery but Voyager and Enterprise are big picks too. Everything before this point is just fun entertainment and everything after is woke inclusion quota virtue signaling.
The difference is that there's the Star Trek they watched as a politically unaware child who just liked the cool space show and doesn't really understand it, and the Star Trek they watched as a politically aware adult who could understand and feel attacked by the message.
You also have a lot of people, the majority of people, who don't actually think about things, they just go along with trends. Being progressive on X might have been popular in their circles, but being hateful troglodytes about Y later or Z even later is popular in their current circles.
Any contradiction is irrelevant, because reason is a tool for self-satisfaction or self-defense, something to twist to suit the internal narrative, rather than a tool for self-assessment used to correct flaws in the internal narrative.
On the whole, people don't like Change. They want more of what they already have, and changing it draws their ire.
Somebody posted a newspaper article when TNG was announced, along with the opinions that it was clearly going to be a disaster, and an insult to the memory of the original show.
And the pattern repeats with every show.
edit: And not just shows. Look at the vitriol that gets spewed towards any 'replacement' character. Dr Pulaski, Ezri? Not so much with Seven, both for the initial obvious reason that she was in a very skintight suit, and that she was actually filling a different character type, rather than immediately settling down to work as a nurse and hydroponics expert.
And it's far from limited to Trek, either. New Doctors, new 007, etc. I personally despised Jool when she was on Farscape, because as far as I was concerned she was replacing Zhaan, and she made a rubbish Zhaan.
But SNW is literally TOS with less evil computers!
I don't understand people not liking SNW, LD or Prodigy. They are good shows run in the classical spirit of Star Trek.
It's 'wokeness' isn't it? FFS. It's been said a million times but who watches Star Trek and is surprised by 'wokeness'. The show that has constantly attacked bigotry and persecution since the 60s.
I could try to explain why I dislike SNW, but I don't see much point. I don't spend my free time talking about things I dislike. Seems rather silly when I can do something I actually enjoy. I am not a big fan of TOS either though.
+1
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Thing that bothers me about Q is that TNG ended with Q basically promising something amazing out there for humanity and the future, even if he did stop himself before spilling the beans. Like some super amazeballs thing that the Q were living or higher levels of existence with blackjack and hookers, who knows. But then Voyager goes with the Q actually being bored as fuck and dying is the only adventure left for them. It just seems rather limiting in the scope of what the universe has to offer.
It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.
Except you'll eventually get bored and yearn for death...
The Good Place at least
had people shuffling off their immortal coil when they were still just regular people, and the trigger was them being fully fulfilled. Not that they'd just run out of things to do.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Thing that bothers me about Q is that TNG ended with Q basically promising something amazing out there for humanity and the future, even if he did stop himself before spilling the beans. Like some super amazeballs thing that the Q were living or higher levels of existence with blackjack and hookers, who knows. But then Voyager goes with the Q actually being bored as fuck and dying is the only adventure left for them. It just seems rather limiting in the scope of what the universe has to offer.
It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.
Except you'll eventually get bored and yearn for death...
The Good Place at least
had people shuffling off their immortal coil when they were still just regular people, and the trigger was them being fully fulfilled. Not that they'd just run out of things to do.
Voyager did some weird things with the Q and I think took them in a different direction than they were orginally intended. Basically the same way they 'ruined' the Borg, they kind of ruined the Q.
TNG interactions with the Q mark them as much more sinister - almost like they actively reap civilizations they deem on a dead end for example. Q keeps pushing Picard so that his Pet passes his species high-school exams and gets to go on with the education rather than be vaporised. Then there's the time they happily kill renegade Qs on Earth, and make ominous statements about Amanda (this is why Voyager's Q2 episode doesn't make sense - the Q will kill other Q). Q's whole 'the Trial never ends...' plotline is dropped (annoyingly).
Based on just TNG, the galaxy is supposed to be full of vastly different species and experiences than what's in the Alpha Quadrant - and then Voyager plows through the Delta Quadrant and it's all the same shit.
I guess if I were being charitable, I'd say Q is referring to the Universe not our Galaxy - and we know that strange other aliens like the Kelvins exist in other galaxies.
Disco's lack of sense of scale is back. I can't get past how comically large the Breen dreadnaught was, it looked bigger than the Wolf 359 cube and makes any concept of a protracted engagement with them silly. Though I suppose it could still fit in Discovery's turbolifts...
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
There was a Twilight Zone/Amazing Tales something or other story about a young pool hustler who wanted to be the best pool player in existence like the famous deceased pool great whose picture hung on the wall of the local pool hall. So one night the picture comes to life and the guy offers to play the youngster for his life. If the kid wins, he'll be one of the all time greats, and if he loses he dies. The ghost guy does a little shenanigans on the last shot to distract the kid and the kid loses. The tweeeeest is that he's not going to kill the kid, it's just that not being able to handle a little light gamesmanship means the kid will never be all that and eventually he'll die and be forgotten like everyone else.
I like to think that Q's tests and threats to do away with humanity are like that. He sets up a crisis for a species, and if they pass then they've expanded the boundaries of their existence or whatever, but if they fail then they're just not all that and will eventually stagnate and something something something fade away.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
There was a Twilight Zone/Amazing Tales something or other story about a young pool hustler who wanted to be the best pool player in existence like the famous deceased pool great whose picture hung on the wall of the local pool hall. So one night the picture comes to life and the guy offers to play the youngster for his life. If the kid wins, he'll be one of the all time greats, and if he loses he dies. The ghost guy does a little shenanigans on the last shot to distract the kid and the kid loses. The tweeeeest is that he's not going to kill the kid, it's just that not being able to handle a little light gamesmanship means the kid will never be all that and eventually he'll die and be forgotten like everyone else.
I like to think that Q's tests and threats to do away with humanity are like that. He sets up a crisis for a species, and if they pass then they've expanded the boundaries of their existence or whatever, but if they fail then they're just not all that and will eventually stagnate and something something something fade away.
The (original) TZ ep's twist was that the young challenger wins... and his "prize" is that, after he dies, he has to take up the duty and show up to every single match where he's the one called out, until someone else manages to beat him.
tl;dr no matter the outcome, a game won't make you happy.
random video popped up. I struggle with this scene. Sometimes i feel its very out of character for Picard, and sometimes it seems like its the most Picard ever. https://youtu.be/HVd-U1sAwvo
In some very important ways it's both at the same time.
The thing about First Contact: this is the first time since Best of Both Worlds that Picard has faced THE Borg. In I Borg and Descent he dealt with disconnected drones with at least some degree of personalities and individuality, the whole theme being that once a Borg is severed from the hive mind it quickly stops being Borg in the ways that really matter. Picard tried very hard to cling to his trauma and hate but when he finally faced Hugh he didn't see the face of his tormenter but a scared kid alone in the world.
First Contact was the actual face of his trauma returned, the Collective itself, and Starfleet wasn't entirely wrong in sending the Enterprise on a milk run when it showed up.
Picard insulting Worf is a weird note - but Picard quietly reciting Moby Dick 'And he piled upon the whales white hump, the sum of all the rage and hate felt by his whole race. If his chest had been a cannon, he would have shot his heart upon it.' is the perfect Picard epiphany moment I think. Showing his erudite, thoughtful nature overwhelming the rage and pain the Borg caused him - just perfect Stewart acting as you see Picard's whole demeanour and body language change - turning back into the Picard we know from the show.
Picard's PTSD with the Borg was pretty clear in the show. From Family where we see him break down for the first time - this normally very reserved, unemotional man just crying. Such a powerful coda to Best of Both Worlds. He later struggles with Hugh and even Lore's Borg.
There's also a certain irony that Moby Dick should be so relevant given Wrath of Khan is consumed by the novel - Khan even spouts it constantly to Kirk. Khan is Ahab (evil of course) - he will not let go of revenge and it does destroy him and everyone around him. Picard doesn't make the same choice.
RazielMortem on
+8
Options
MonwynApathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime.A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered Userregular
In some very important ways it's both at the same time.
The thing about First Contact: this is the first time since Best of Both Worlds that Picard has faced THE Borg. In I Borg and Descent he dealt with disconnected drones with at least some degree of personalities and individuality, the whole theme being that once a Borg is severed from the hive mind it quickly stops being Borg in the ways that really matter. Picard tried very hard to cling to his trauma and hate but when he finally faced Hugh he didn't see the face of his tormenter but a scared kid alone in the world.
First Contact was the actual face of his trauma returned, the Collective itself, and Starfleet wasn't entirely wrong in sending the Enterprise on a milk run when it showed up.
Yeah, this, exactly. It's the difference between someone with a fear of spiders finding a solitary spider in a corner of their apartment and moving into the house from Arachnophobia, and it's always weird to me that people don't get this.
First Contact was the actual face of his trauma returned, the Collective itself, and Starfleet wasn't entirely wrong in sending the Enterprise on a milk run when it showed up.
Starfleet was entirely wrong in not sending the Enterprise straight to the battle.
Starfleet would have entirely right to temporarily remove Picard from command on entirely justifiable grounds, and have Acting Captain Riker (the man who commanded the Enterprise the last time it saved Earth from the Borg, no less) bring their most advanced ship to Earth's defence.
Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
+5
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
But SNW is literally TOS with less evil computers!
I don't understand people not liking SNW, LD or Prodigy. They are good shows run in the classical spirit of Star Trek.
It's 'wokeness' isn't it? FFS. It's been said a million times but who watches Star Trek and is surprised by 'wokeness'. The show that has constantly attacked bigotry and persecution since the 60s.
I could try to explain why I dislike SNW, but I don't see much point. I don't spend my free time talking about things I dislike. Seems rather silly when I can do something I actually enjoy. I am not a big fan of TOS either though.
See while I love TOS and SNW, this is a perspective I totally get and respect. If you're not into TOS, you're almost certainly not going to be into SNW, either.
Lower Decks, though, that's a show that has something for everyone. Well, everyone except the sad boys on Twitter who are incoherently mad, at least.
Peace to fashion police, I wear my heart
On my sleeve, let the runway start
Just started into Discovery season 5, man that first episode felt too much like Star Wars, the music was williamsy and then they go to the market on tatooine and have a speeder chase through the desert.
0
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Lower Decks loves Trek in a way that it's happy to make fun of it.
A certain kind of fan sees that as an assault on their beloved property.
I wouldn't call that kinda person even a fan, just obsessive. Lower Decks is about as pure and concentrated Star Trek as it gets, there is absolutely no way to make that show without having a ton of love for Trek.
"devotee," 1889, American English, originally of baseball enthusiasts, probably a shortening of fanatic, but it may be influenced by the fancy, a collective term for followers of a certain hobby or sport (especially boxing); see fancy (n.). There is an isolated use from 1682, but the modern word likely is a late 19c. formation. Fan mail attested from 1920, in a Hollywood context; Fan club attested by 1930.
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
Mariner and Boimler are exactly the type of characters to drive the right-wing chuds who think Star Trek is for them absolutely crazy
Plenty of reasons for Lower Decks not to click with someone, Trekkie or not, but from what I've seen a lot of the people making youtube videos decrying the show are from the Jordan Peterson corner of the internet
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Fanatic or not, the phrase is over a hundred years old and meanings change. When I think "fan", I never think of frothing-at-the-mouth idiots who explode at a franchise for stepping a millimeter outside a rigid notion of what the franchise is "supposed" to be. If somebody tells me they're a fan of Taylor Swift, I expect somebody who likes a lot of her music and not necessarily all of it, not somebody who is wildly, emotionally invested in this album being a gift to humanity and that album being the work of Lucifer and vocalizes the latter extensively.
Something like Discovery is overdramatic junk to me, but I just... don't watch it. Thinking about it doesn't provoke a negative emotional response because I am a fan of Star Trek, not somebody obsessed with a narrow view of Star Trek.
+6
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
Fanatic or not, the phrase is over a hundred years old and meanings change. When I think "fan", I never think of frothing-at-the-mouth idiots who explode at a franchise for stepping a millimeter outside a rigid notion of what the franchise is "supposed" to be. If somebody tells me they're a fan of Taylor Swift, I expect somebody who likes a lot of her music and not necessarily all of it, not somebody who is wildly, emotionally invested in this album being a gift to humanity and that album being the work of Lucifer and vocalizes the latter extensively.
Something like Discovery is overdramatic junk to me, but I just... don't watch it. Thinking about it doesn't provoke a negative emotional response because I am a fan of Star Trek, not somebody obsessed with a narrow view of Star Trek.
Wild, someone in the Trek thread arguing about the definition of fan so they don't get tarred by association with those who argue about Star Trek shows.
Fanatic or not, the phrase is over a hundred years old and meanings change. When I think "fan", I never think of frothing-at-the-mouth idiots who explode at a franchise for stepping a millimeter outside a rigid notion of what the franchise is "supposed" to be. If somebody tells me they're a fan of Taylor Swift, I expect somebody who likes a lot of her music and not necessarily all of it, not somebody who is wildly, emotionally invested in this album being a gift to humanity and that album being the work of Lucifer and vocalizes the latter extensively.
Something like Discovery is overdramatic junk to me, but I just... don't watch it. Thinking about it doesn't provoke a negative emotional response because I am a fan of Star Trek, not somebody obsessed with a narrow view of Star Trek.
Wild, someone in the Trek thread arguing about the definition of fan so they don't get tarred by association with those who argue about Star Trek shows.
Fanatic or not, the phrase is over a hundred years old and meanings change. When I think "fan", I never think of frothing-at-the-mouth idiots who explode at a franchise for stepping a millimeter outside a rigid notion of what the franchise is "supposed" to be. If somebody tells me they're a fan of Taylor Swift, I expect somebody who likes a lot of her music and not necessarily all of it, not somebody who is wildly, emotionally invested in this album being a gift to humanity and that album being the work of Lucifer and vocalizes the latter extensively.
Something like Discovery is overdramatic junk to me, but I just... don't watch it. Thinking about it doesn't provoke a negative emotional response because I am a fan of Star Trek, not somebody obsessed with a narrow view of Star Trek.
Wild, someone in the Trek thread arguing about the definition of fan so they don't get tarred by association with those who argue about Star Trek shows.
Would you say you're a "Trekkie" or a "Trekker"?
Yes.
Anyway, hey @Cambiata , how do you figure being a SNW fan translates to TOS? I'm trying to figure this because I watched a lot of TOS when the boy was born a few years ago, in 3AM binges, and largely found it...fine. But it would be a lot less fine if I wasn't already a Trek fan (ha.). But I really enjoy SNW, as does my spouse, who can't tolerate TOS.
Is it a form/structure thing you're thinking, or....?
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
edited May 11
Aside from the obvious similarity in timeframe, there is a decided similarity between ToS and SNW in how they will both swing between the lighthearted and heavy, the comedic and the tragic. Whereas ToS would have an episode of getting used as playthings by a god alien, SNW gives us "we're trapped in a storybook by a god alien". SNW has a musical episode, ToS has defeating androids by the crew doing a bunch of ad hoc paradoxical bullshit. And while there are some longer arcs threaded in, episode to episode they tend to be tackling all-new stuff, much like ToS. There's certainly a shared trend of not being afraid to be sillier every now and again, but also coming back with big dramatic moments.
The thing is that SNW is made with modern tones and sensibilities so you're just not having to cringe at anything because of the horrible racism or sexism. That alone could put anybody off ToS at this point.
Posts
"Silence in the Library"/"Forest of the Dead" is still one of my all-time favorite episodes of Doctor Who. The premise of "someone the Doctor knows intimately well, yet they meet in backwards order, so that this, our first experience meeting the character through the Doctor's eyes, is the last time the character will meet the Doctor, and all the drama that that implies" was such an amazing premise, and Alex Kingston plays it so damned well (along with David Tennant putting out his typical best).
It's the example I immediately thought of with the whole Q/Picard/non-linear time point. Except that every subsequent attempt to bring back River in Doctor Who bungled it more and more (IMHO) until the concept was lost completely. The problem of writing a story (or multiple) regarding non-linear time is that we are all experiencing time linearly, and it's rare to find a writer capable of imagining all the consequences and nuances of non-linearity to be able to capture that properly in a story.
Trying to do it in a way that wouldn't put the audience off completely would require an even rarer writer.
Especially when both intertwined timelines are constantly being given new loops and tangles.
I think B5 as a production is one of the greatest achivements in Television history. A almost shoe string budget. Next to no famous actors apart from Boxleitner. SFX made on fucking Amiga computers. Not even on a network or cable station for most of its run. 20 episode seasons with an overarching narrative close to half of which was written by one guy.
No other show has come close to it, before or since.
B5 was a lightning-in-a-bottle accomplishment, but to be fair isn't quite the same beast: there's one time loop, it's stable, and barely impacts the ep-to-ep stories. It's super impressive for what JMS was able to pull off, though. Which is why I'm very wary of the remake, but we shall see...
BACK TO TOPIC, though lol. I think the idea of a Q running into Picard all out of order would've been interesting but ultimately distracting, and if Q is truly as omnipotent as he claims, he could've just as easily made sure to meet Picard linearly so as to not mess up his tiny fragile human brain.
There's so much more in general you could do with Q as a species, though, but therein lies the problem: if the Q are so much more advanced than "we" can conceive, then that immediately opens the possibility of us the viewers conceiving of things the Q could or should do that the writers didn't, which inevitably leads to disappointment.
Somewhat apropos: the "civil war" Voy episode. Q gave Janeway a context to perceive the collective in a way familiar to her (and at least a little bit Q still having fun, I would have to imagine). But there was no reason for the other Q to stick with the same perception construct when she brought the crew over. Instead, they could've rushed in as the calvary as whatever: Tom riding a T-Rex, Tuvok as a hovering monk passively nerve pinching everyone unconscious, Chakotay as Hawkeye, Torres in a giant Kahless mech, Kim dressed in a lieutenant's uniform...
The fact that Strange New Worlds is universally praised, even by boomer assholes who hate everything made after 2000, would seem to indicate that there's still an appetite for the "wholesome, positive exploration of the unknown" stuff.
I don't understand people not liking SNW, LD or Prodigy. They are good shows run in the classical spirit of Star Trek.
It's 'wokeness' isn't it? FFS. It's been said a million times but who watches Star Trek and is surprised by 'wokeness'. The show that has constantly attacked bigotry and persecution since the 60s.
The difference is that there's the Star Trek they watched as a politically unaware child who just liked the cool space show and doesn't really understand it, and the Star Trek they watched as a politically aware adult who could understand and feel attacked by the message.
Any contradiction is irrelevant, because reason is a tool for self-satisfaction or self-defense, something to twist to suit the internal narrative, rather than a tool for self-assessment used to correct flaws in the internal narrative.
Somebody posted a newspaper article when TNG was announced, along with the opinions that it was clearly going to be a disaster, and an insult to the memory of the original show.
And the pattern repeats with every show.
edit: And not just shows. Look at the vitriol that gets spewed towards any 'replacement' character. Dr Pulaski, Ezri? Not so much with Seven, both for the initial obvious reason that she was in a very skintight suit, and that she was actually filling a different character type, rather than immediately settling down to work as a nurse and hydroponics expert.
And it's far from limited to Trek, either. New Doctors, new 007, etc. I personally despised Jool when she was on Farscape, because as far as I was concerned she was replacing Zhaan, and she made a rubbish Zhaan.
I could try to explain why I dislike SNW, but I don't see much point. I don't spend my free time talking about things I dislike. Seems rather silly when I can do something I actually enjoy. I am not a big fan of TOS either though.
Except you'll eventually get bored and yearn for death...
The Good Place at least
Voyager did some weird things with the Q and I think took them in a different direction than they were orginally intended. Basically the same way they 'ruined' the Borg, they kind of ruined the Q.
TNG interactions with the Q mark them as much more sinister - almost like they actively reap civilizations they deem on a dead end for example. Q keeps pushing Picard so that his Pet passes his species high-school exams and gets to go on with the education rather than be vaporised. Then there's the time they happily kill renegade Qs on Earth, and make ominous statements about Amanda (this is why Voyager's Q2 episode doesn't make sense - the Q will kill other Q). Q's whole 'the Trial never ends...' plotline is dropped (annoyingly).
Based on just TNG, the galaxy is supposed to be full of vastly different species and experiences than what's in the Alpha Quadrant - and then Voyager plows through the Delta Quadrant and it's all the same shit.
I guess if I were being charitable, I'd say Q is referring to the Universe not our Galaxy - and we know that strange other aliens like the Kelvins exist in other galaxies.
I like to think that Q's tests and threats to do away with humanity are like that. He sets up a crisis for a species, and if they pass then they've expanded the boundaries of their existence or whatever, but if they fail then they're just not all that and will eventually stagnate and something something something fade away.
The (original) TZ ep's twist was that the young challenger wins... and his "prize" is that, after he dies, he has to take up the duty and show up to every single match where he's the one called out, until someone else manages to beat him.
tl;dr no matter the outcome, a game won't make you happy.
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
The thing about First Contact: this is the first time since Best of Both Worlds that Picard has faced THE Borg. In I Borg and Descent he dealt with disconnected drones with at least some degree of personalities and individuality, the whole theme being that once a Borg is severed from the hive mind it quickly stops being Borg in the ways that really matter. Picard tried very hard to cling to his trauma and hate but when he finally faced Hugh he didn't see the face of his tormenter but a scared kid alone in the world.
First Contact was the actual face of his trauma returned, the Collective itself, and Starfleet wasn't entirely wrong in sending the Enterprise on a milk run when it showed up.
Picard's PTSD with the Borg was pretty clear in the show. From Family where we see him break down for the first time - this normally very reserved, unemotional man just crying. Such a powerful coda to Best of Both Worlds. He later struggles with Hugh and even Lore's Borg.
There's also a certain irony that Moby Dick should be so relevant given Wrath of Khan is consumed by the novel - Khan even spouts it constantly to Kirk. Khan is Ahab (evil of course) - he will not let go of revenge and it does destroy him and everyone around him. Picard doesn't make the same choice.
Yeah, this, exactly. It's the difference between someone with a fear of spiders finding a solitary spider in a corner of their apartment and moving into the house from Arachnophobia, and it's always weird to me that people don't get this.
Starfleet would have entirely right to temporarily remove Picard from command on entirely justifiable grounds, and have Acting Captain Riker (the man who commanded the Enterprise the last time it saved Earth from the Borg, no less) bring their most advanced ship to Earth's defence.
See while I love TOS and SNW, this is a perspective I totally get and respect. If you're not into TOS, you're almost certainly not going to be into SNW, either.
Lower Decks, though, that's a show that has something for everyone. Well, everyone except the sad boys on Twitter who are incoherently mad, at least.
On my sleeve, let the runway start
A certain kind of fan sees that as an assault on their beloved property.
I wouldn't call that kinda person even a fan, just obsessive. Lower Decks is about as pure and concentrated Star Trek as it gets, there is absolutely no way to make that show without having a ton of love for Trek.
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
"devotee," 1889, American English, originally of baseball enthusiasts, probably a shortening of fanatic, but it may be influenced by the fancy, a collective term for followers of a certain hobby or sport (especially boxing); see fancy (n.). There is an isolated use from 1682, but the modern word likely is a late 19c. formation. Fan mail attested from 1920, in a Hollywood context; Fan club attested by 1930.
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
Plenty of reasons for Lower Decks not to click with someone, Trekkie or not, but from what I've seen a lot of the people making youtube videos decrying the show are from the Jordan Peterson corner of the internet
Something like Discovery is overdramatic junk to me, but I just... don't watch it. Thinking about it doesn't provoke a negative emotional response because I am a fan of Star Trek, not somebody obsessed with a narrow view of Star Trek.
Wild, someone in the Trek thread arguing about the definition of fan so they don't get tarred by association with those who argue about Star Trek shows.
Would you say you're a "Trekkie" or a "Trekker"?
Yes.
Anyway, hey @Cambiata , how do you figure being a SNW fan translates to TOS? I'm trying to figure this because I watched a lot of TOS when the boy was born a few years ago, in 3AM binges, and largely found it...fine. But it would be a lot less fine if I wasn't already a Trek fan (ha.). But I really enjoy SNW, as does my spouse, who can't tolerate TOS.
Is it a form/structure thing you're thinking, or....?
Goodreads
SF&F Reviews blog
The thing is that SNW is made with modern tones and sensibilities so you're just not having to cringe at anything because of the horrible racism or sexism. That alone could put anybody off ToS at this point.