Star Trek Picard SPOILERS thread

[MarkB]

I think MarkB's point was only that most of us here are unlikely to even know that Truth Seeker is an infrequent poster or just popped up. We're very unlikely to have it influence how we respond to him/her here.

I doubt it was meant as much of a criticism.

I wasn't intending to be critical, just confused.

And yeah, I don't keep track of most posters on ENWorld, so I'm not going to particularly notice if anyone's a new face here, or treat them differently because of it.

 

[Truth Seeker]

Bent out of shape? Nah. Not understanding your point? Yeah. This is just a casual conversation about a nerdy TV show, but it's easy to get a bit passionate about it, positively or negatively, as I'm sure most in this thread LOVE Star Trek, just as we LOVE D&D and hang out on ENWorld.

If I've gotten too excited while expressing my disagreement and confusion over your points, sorry. From my POV, I'm so in love with this new show, ST: Picard, that the negative views expressed by some confuse me . . . are we watching the same show?!?! But anyway, to each his own, YMMV, yada yada . . . .

To that I am treating as such...nothing more nothing less.

To what I seeing via the internet, everyone or almost everyone are doing comparisons and in some quarters it not matching their expectations.

 

[Truth Seeker]

Stewart is talking about character growth. In both the real world and the Star Trek universe, decades have passed. Jean-Luc Picard is not the same person he was 20 years ago, just as Patrick Stewart isn't the same person he was 20 years ago. Neither am I, for that matter. I'm not the same kid tuning in every week jealous that Wil Wheaton gets to be on the Enterprise and I don't . . . .

Stewart was not interested in ST: The Next Generation "Season 8", or in yet another entry in the movie series after ST: Nemesis, where (in episodic storytelling fashion) Picard is in pretty much the same place he was in most episodes of the show. Stewart has expressed similar sentiments in reprising the role of Professor X in the X-Men franchise. Both the Professor X of "Logan" and the Picard of "Star Trek: Picard" are men who have grown and are in very different places in their lives from what we remember "back in the day".

AND I LOVE THIS! I'd watch a "Season 8" of Next Gen, don't get me wrong, but this is storytelling that has me excited and intrigued. Way more interesting to see how the decades have treated Picard than watching a re-tread of Next Gen. ST: Picard builds on top of the lore of Next Gen and the rest of Star Trek, but it is most certainly a show with a different storytelling tone for an audience that has also changed over the years, long-time Trek fans and just sci-fi fans in general.

Are there some long-time fans grumpy that ST: Disco and ST: Picard are "not true Star Trek" shows, just like we had grognards here on ENWorld grumping that the latest D&D edition is "not my D&D"?!?! Of course we do. That is a constant of life. But is there a LOT of fans unhappy with the direction of the new Star Trek shows? Possibly, I suppose, but I haven't seen evidence of it, and both shows seem to be doing just fine.

EDIT: Add in last paragraph.

On the upper part of your last paragraph...I remembered the days of thread closings and bans (shakes head in sorrow on those old days)

For ST, the brand is more recognized than D&D, and yes the feverish love for it, has a greater pronounce effect than the former. But given the latest 'assault'' on DW and SW, long time fans and those who were raised on these fictional, creative fantastical stories, followed by least 3 or 2 generations. There is a heavy investment, D&D in the same vein. But the others have greater representation, that is a undisputed fact.

As a friend of min once said to me maybe a decade or two ago, that yes, rebooting or refreshing a franchise for a newer audience, is a given, if the companies to keep that said IP and wants to be make a continuing profit from it. At the time, I didn't think of far reaching consequences of such a decision. In today's climate, I do now...there is much more diverse media to distract or attract that needed audience to give the coin to keep that specific franchise alive.

This show face these challenges to be relevant and to be current in the people eyes...how that is done, is the journey that will be questioned.

It is same way, we gamers have questioned the use of new Editions of D&D, is it worth getting, it is worth playing, it is worth spending that coin. I will put in the record, I am SCIFI nerd before D&D, was expose to the former from the late 60's, 70's and early 80's, 1983 or '84 I started into the RPG life.

I do love both genres, but Sci-Fi gets the upper hand with me.

There is a divide with Trek, as there with Star Wars, and Doctor Who, on the last two, are they salvageable? Trek dealt in possibilities and hope for a greater future. Star Wars dealt with dealing with the Darker nature and holding it at bay.

And being honest here...what did Doctor Who represent? Watch enough of it, but I didn't get or see the message.

The other 2 mentioned, I did...hence the different points of views.

Thanks for the discussion, the EnWorld crowd has never disappoints.

 

[bloodtide]

As a Star Trek lore person, I'd say the show has been good at following the established lore. Someone is doing the fact checking.

I still think the twins will be daughters of Data AND Lore.

This show is filling in a lore gap too: Why does the galaxy have no androids, robots or artificial intelligences? Not just Starfleet or the Federation.....but Everyone. We have seen, in the Original Trek, ancient alien robots....but nothing in the present. So...why not?

Well, what if there is a group of people that are keeping such things in check. People that want to stop the AI robot apocalypse that might (aka will) happen. Maybe some helpful aliens like the Preservers? Maybe it is species 00001...the race that made the Borg?

Or maybe.....considering Picard's Asomov robot book....ist's a Super Artificial Intelligent Android, kinda like R.Daniel......

 

[Truth Seeker]

As a Star Trek lore person, I'd say the show has been good at following the established lore. Someone is doing the fact checking.

I still think the twins will be daughters of Data AND Lore.

This show is filling in a lore gap too: Why does the galaxy have no androids, robots or artificial intelligences? Not just Starfleet or the Federation.....but Everyone. We have seen, in the Original Trek, ancient alien robots....but nothing in the present. So...why not?

Well, what if there is a group of people that are keeping such things in check. People that want to stop the AI robot apocalypse that might (aka will) happen. Maybe some helpful aliens like the Preservers? Maybe it is species 00001...the race that made the Borg?

Or maybe.....considering Picard's Asomov robot book....ist's a Super Artificial Intelligent Android, kinda like R.Daniel......

Don't forget Lal...

Added---I have to consider that the twin are the sole creation of Bruce Maddox, since he brought them to life, using ahem a template of Cmdr. DATA from a single 'neuron'. Bruce was the dad here. As for LORE, that remains to be seen, if he is too a contributor last seen deactivated, boxed and stored in a unknown location

Interesting throw there...well we got 8 more eps to go, hopefully it will be explained, but they might have jump the shark on why things are the way they are?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Well, if you go with my "they're ALL twins" retcon idea... maybe there's always a Data and a Lore? So you have Dahj (Data) and Soji (Lore) and maybe we'll later get Brent Spiner playing "B3" (Or whatever)... B4's "Lore". He did suggest in a convention interview that Data wasn't the only character he could play. Everyone assumed B4, but B4 is in a drawer. That's not exactly Spiner playing him, is it.

I know I'm not getting much support for my twins-idea, but Lore's whole creation came from an "evil twin" trope. The writer's room could absolutely have said "What if EVERY android has a twin!?"

 

[Truth Seeker]

Well, if you go with my "they're ALL twins" retcon idea... maybe there's always a Data and a Lore? So you have Dahj (Data) and Soji (Lore) and maybe we'll later get Brent Spiner playing "B3" (Or whatever)... B4's "Lore". He did suggest in a convention interview that Data wasn't the only character he could play. Everyone assumed B4, but B4 is in a drawer. That's not exactly Spiner playing him, is it.

I know I'm not getting much support for my twins-idea, but Lore's whole creation came from an "evil twin" trope. The writer's room could absolutely have said "What if EVERY android has a twin!?"

In Order of Creation...
B4
Lore
Data
Soong's dead wife Juliana superior model
Lal by Data---total cascade failure.

Added---if the daughters were born just shy of three years ago in Star Trek time, then the only means for their speedy development will not come from Lore or Data...it will be Soong's replica Wife.

She is fully developed in all human nuances, with the condition she ever discovered she is not human, she will shut down for good. If Bruce ever knew about her, she is the true source of android development, to be human. Soong's last and greatest achievement. And in three years, to get to the point to how the girls are, would have taken time. If this theory holds, Bruce couldn't have reach this stage, he did a shortcut.

I know you want the Twin moment, but if they do go there, it will be massive curve to say the least.

 

[MarkB]

To what I seeing via the internet, everyone or almost everyone are doing comparisons and in some quarters it not matching their expectations.

This statement can also apply to just about every single high-profile product of any kind that's been released in the past 20+ years.

In particular, I'm pretty sure it's sociologically impossible for any sequel or follow-up to an old and well regarded TV series to match everybody's expectations.

 

[Mallus]

Does anyone know where this '25% Star Trek' thing comes from? I'm seeing it a lot online lately and, frankly, it sounds like pure Internet BS. How would you go about determining what percentage 'Star Trek' a show is? Can you use a tricorder?

"Captain, sensors indicate the new series masses .25 militreks on the Daystrom-Desilu scale, just within legal tolerance limits".

Contacts, licensing agreements, they would cover specific IP ("You can use the Klingons, but not the Romulans", "You can reference material from the first 6 films, but not the TNG-era films"), wouldn't they? Not some random percentage that sounds impossible to quantify, let alone enforce.

In two episodes of Picard, we've got direct references to events in Nemesis, Star Trek (2009), and multiple TNG episodes. On Discovery we have Pike and Spock as characters in the 2nd season, as well as an episode that serves as (and is framed as) part 2 of the unaired pilot. This covers a pretty broad swath of the ST universe.

So...25% of what?? Who is convincing people of this?

edit: also, Data's daughter from "The Offspring" is Lal. It means 'beloved'.

 

[Nagol]

Does anyone know where this '25% Star Trek' thing comes from? I'm seeing it a lot online lately and, frankly, it sounds like pure Internet BS. How would you go about determining what percentage 'Star Trek' a show is? Can you use a tricorder?

"Captain, sensors indicate the new series masses .25 militreks on the Daystrom-Desilu scale, just within legal tolerance limits".

Contacts, licensing agreements, they would cover specific IP ("You can use the Klingons, but not the Romulans", "You can refenence material from he first 6 films, but the TNG-era films"), wouldn't they? Not some random percentage that sounds impossible to quantify, let alone enforce.

In two episodes of Picard, we've got direct references to events in Nemesis, Star Trek (2009), and multiple TNG episodes. On Discovery we have Pike and Spock as characters in the 2nd season, as well as an episode that serves as (and is framed as) part 2 of the unaired pilot. This covers a pretty broad swath of the ST universe.

So...25% of what?? Who is convincing people of this?

edit: also, Data's daughter from "The Offspring" is Lal. It means 'beloved'.

It's an original misinterpretation by a reporter talking to an artist who was asked to change about a quarter of designs on Discovery. That interpretation was misinterpreted by those who saw his musings

There was an interview with the designers of the Enterprise as seen at the end of Discovery and one of them said they were asked to change it by about 25%. When asked if that was an aesthetic or legal demand, he said “legal”.

The reporter put a statement regarding his personal speculation on a private Facebook group and it got out.

This “rule” has been disavowed by the artist, CBS, the production team, basically anyone in the know.