Patrick Stewart in new Star Trek show

[Jester David]

I worry as immediately after the announcement they mention he will be “changed” by “his experiences” and then don’t ellaborate.

I imagine they need to do something to give Stewart a meatier role that feels less like retreading the same ground he did two decades ago, but just casting the same actor doesn’t guarantee fans will like a radically different take a beloved character. See the reaction to Luke Skywalker in Last Jedi. Especially when the producers haven’t done universally positive changes or demonstrated a strong grasp of the lore or continuity.
(And Luke only had thee hours of on-screen character development compared to the fifty or sixty hours Picard had.)

I can’t even imagine what story they’ll be telling. It will have to be set twenty years after Nemisis and far beyond what we have seen in the series. That alone will require big world-building, being a very different period. But neither can it be overly action packed with a star pushing eighty.

Would Picard be a captain? An admiral? Retired and working in the vineyard? At 25 years after TNG, it would be really close to the age Picard was presented in All Good Things. Is it just a story of old man Picard living in rural France?
Maybe a dying or ill Picard is telling his life to a biographer (while he remembers) with half the action being flashbacks to his time on the Stargazer or earlier ships...

 

[Imaculata]

I can't help but feel they are hitting the panic button after Star Trek Discovery was welcomed with very mixed reactions.

 

[Umbran]

I imagine they need to do something to give Stewart a meatier role that feels less like retreading the same ground he did two decades ago

I don't know if it has to be "meatier". From what he said in the announcement, and on twitter afterwards, I think the word is probably more like "relevant". Sir Patrick has noted that the thing bringing him back is having made a difference to people. He wants to do that again.

but just casting the same actor doesn’t guarantee fans will like a radically different take a beloved character.

See the reaction to Luke Skywalker in Last Jedi. Especially when the producers haven’t done universally positive changes or demonstrated a strong grasp of the lore or continuity.
(And Luke only had thee hours of on-screen character development compared to the fifty or sixty hours Picard had.)

I think this situation is different. The question isn't about the producers. I think, with all that extra time in the actor's hands, Stewart has more ownership of his character, and Stewart will effectively have more veto power on where the character goes. The question is more whether you trust Sir Patrick Stewart.

 

[Jester David]

I don't know if it has to be "meatier". From what he said in the announcement, and on twitter afterwards, I think the word is probably more like "relevant". Sir Patrick has noted that the thing bringing him back is having made a difference to people. He wants to do that again.

That's nice. But what does that mean? Relevant how? Is it going to be tapping into current political and social issues? With the struggles of being "past your prime" and remaking your life? The horrors of day-to-day life in a functional utopia? What's the story they're telling that only works with Picard and not a new character?

How does one set out to purposely make a show that makes a difference to people?

I think this situation is different. The question isn't about the producers.

Are you saying Mark Hamill was not invested in Luke Skywalker? Hamill disagreed strongly with the direction they took Luke.

Yeah, he has ownership of the character as he played him for ten years or so. But... he's spent thirteen years being Deputy Director Bullock on American Dad.
The ownership of roles is a tricky thing. Will he veto all the producers if they decide to focus the show that may not be popular with The Next Generation fanbase if it gives him a substantive and challenging acting role? Should he?

I think, with all that extra time in the actor's hands, Stewart has more ownership of his character, and Stewart will effectively have more veto power on where the character goes. The question is more whether you trust Sir Patrick Stewart.

Ehhhhh....
I like Sir Patrick. He's an excellent advocate and seems like a decent chap. And I love some of the role's he's portrayed. The people he has pretended to be. But he's also someone who willingly chose to be a poop emoji for The Emoji Movie.

Plus, a major bit of storytelling advice is to tell about the most interesting period of a character's life. Right now, Stewart is fifteen years older than William Shatner was during Star Trek Generations. Is this the most interesting period of Picard's life? That's central to the concept. That needs to be answered. And I don't think they have that yet. The announcement is coming across like it's super early in the production cycle and they just wanted to lock down Stewart before moving too far into the series.
At this moment, it just feels like fanservice more than anything. Bringing back Picard for the sake of bringing back Picard.

It feels risky to me. Jean Luc Picard is a beloved character, and just bringing him back in any capacity will be hard, as will imagining the state of the galaxy a quarter of a century farther than we've seen. The risks of getting it wrong are high. Plus, so much of what made Picard into Picard was a combination of factors. Reacting to the excellent ensemble of the rest of the cast. The writers giving him good material to work with, who also knew Picard as well as Stewart. A regular group of directors that knew the actors and how to get an excellent performance out of them.

 

[MarkB]

I'm going to leave my expectations wide open for this one, because I strongly suspect that it will be a show set in the Star Trek universe, but not a Star Trek show as we would imagine it.

The one thing I absolutely don't expect Picard to be doing at that point in his career is zipping around the galaxy in command of a Starfleet capital ship.

 

[Morrus]

It doesn’t have to be set the same number of years after the show ended in the timeline. And the guy looks much younger than his age and that’s before any TV lighting and stuff. I wouldn’t object to them setting it shortly after the last movie. I can suspend my disbelief that much.

 

[Mallus]

"Accusations of pandering and cashing-in be damned, Number One. Set a course, maximum warp. Engage!"

If this turns out to be nothing better than nostalgic comfort food television, I'm good with that. Easily worth my $6.00/month.

 

[Umbran]

That's nice. But what does that mean? Relevant how? Is it going to be tapping into current political and social issues? With the struggles of being "past your prime" and remaking your life? The horrors of day-to-day life in a functional utopia? What's the story they're telling that only works with Picard and not a new character?

Those are excellent questions. I have no expectation to know the answers to them before we actually see the show.

How does one set out to purposely make a show that makes a difference to people?

By hiring good writers, really. That's the essence of good fiction, is it not?

Are you saying Mark Hamill was not invested in Luke Skywalker?

Personal investment and ownership are not the same thing. I could dump every ounce of resources I have into Microsoft stock - I could be fully invested in it. But I wouldn't come anywhere near having *ownership* of the company if I did that. The very *idea* of Luke Skywalker has been in other people's hands too much for too many years for Hamill to really own it.

I think - when people think of Luke, they don't first refer back to Hamill's original performance. They refer to an ideal in their head of Luke Skywalker. When people think of Picard, they first think of Stewart's performance. That's the difference - while Picard is legendary, Skywalker is the stuff of myths.

The ownership of roles is a tricky thing. Will he veto all the producers if they decide to focus the show that may not be popular with The Next Generation fanbase if it gives him a substantive and challenging acting role? Should he?

I don't think the question could be answered (or should be posed) in the general sense - it is too vague to be meaningful. The only question that needs answering right now is - do you trust the actor's judgement enough to remain interested and open-minded? That's all the commitment required of us at this stage.

Ehhhhh....
I like Sir Patrick. He's an excellent advocate and seems like a decent chap. And I love some of the role's he's portrayed. The people he has pretended to be. But he's also someone who willingly chose to be a poop emoji for The Emoji Movie.

Any actor who doesn't make a bomb on occasion probably isn't taking enough risks. It seems to me that doing such stuff is also an excellent way for an actor to make sure they don't take themselves too seriously. Because when they do that, they become distant from their audience, and lose the empathy that makes acting work.

Plus, a major bit of storytelling advice is to tell about the most interesting period of a character's life.

Of course, this begs the question - interesting to whom?

We are talking about a new audience (even the old Next Gen fans have personally changed so much that we are, in effect, a different audience than we used to be). We have seen DS9 and B5, and other shows that have far more story arc than Next Gen did. To the audience of the 80s-90s, maybe that was the most interesting time in Picard's life. To the possible viewers today, is the same necessarily true? I am not sure.

It feels risky to me.

You don't want your media to take risks, then? More of the same-old, same-old for you?

Jean Luc Picard is a beloved character, and just bringing him back in any capacity will be hard, as will imagining the state of the galaxy a quarter of a century farther than we've seen.

Yes, well, when they launched TNG, they were imaging the galaxy almost a century farther than we'd seen at the time. That was hard too. But they did it just fine.

 

[Morrus]

"Accusations of pandering and cashing-in be damned, Number One. Set a course, maximum warp. Engage!"

Creators are neither allowed to pander or to not pander. Such is modern internet entitlement culture.

 

[Mallus]

Creators are neither allowed to pander or to not pander. Such is modern internet entitlement culture.

Sometimes I wish fandom would make up its mind about fan service. All this "give us exactly what we claim to want, but don't pander to us" is wearying.

Me, I'm just happy to be getting more Picard.