Star Trek: Picard - Amazon Prime [ POSSIBLE SPOILERS ]

Rawr · 07-05-2020 09:28AM

BrookieD wrote: »

It's a shame really as back in the TNG era there was an open door policy for script submission and a few writers got a break from that approach.

My guess is that the current online world of emails etc. makes it now very easy for any Tom, Dick or Harry Kim to submit ideas and spam their collective inboxes. Back in the day you had to put the effort into a proper paper mail-in submission, which I'm guessing would deter all but the very committed story pitches.

There's also the ever-present microcosm of the LA / Burbank TV production world which I feel has just gotten more insular over time. I can't help but wonder if there is a protectionist sense of group-think within the entire industry which will defend the many hacks who make a living within it, while treating outside creativity with hostility, while only occasionally letting some of it in (and only then if it can further their own aims).

There are many commentators who decry that franchises like Star Trek are becoming too "woke" or focused on "virtue signalling", whereas I feel that a lot of that is very superficial. I feel that the biggest problem with these shows lies beneath the surface within production environments, where they often look exclusively within their own ranks for increasingly bland and uninspired direction. These shows won't die out for having a female lead, they'll die out for lacking any real sense of adventure or fun...they will die for being bland and boring.

I mentioned before that I do consider Picard to be a Trek show...just a disappointing Trek show. Expanding on that; although I was disappointed by how they wrote the story...I was also disappointed by it not being all that much fun. TNG was fun, and when the serious moments came it provided some contrast to the fun moments. "The Borg are here....this is serious now....." Even shows like DS9 had that balance. In later Trek I don't get that feeling. They have injected some brevity whereever they could, but I don't get a sense of people who know how to make a fun show about a space adventure. "This is all serious...with a joke here or there....but don't forget....it's serious..."

They should certainly be more open to new ideas and fresh perspectives, and if there was a way to do it I'd be delighted to share my bones of a Season 2 with them. But there's so much protectionism going on in these studios, they would be instantly hostile to the idea of a random Irish fan setting up the direction of their show

Evade · 07-05-2020 11:09AM

The more mundane reason is if you submit a script with a particular element or plot and later they make an episode with a similar element or plot you can sue for a story credit even if the coincidental elements came from a different submission.

De Bhál · 11-05-2020 03:40PM

I finished Picard Friday evening. Really enjoyed it overall. Last two episodes went downhill for me with the last one just too heavy on morality chatter. First time in the season I started complaining about some of the stuff on the screen. But overall twas enjoyable, moreso than Discovery anyway (for me).

Justin Credible Darts · 11-05-2020 04:08PM

De Bhál wrote: »

I finished Picard Friday evening. Really enjoyed it overall. Last two episodes went downhill for me with the last one just too heavy on morality chatter. First time in the season I started complaining about some of the stuff on the screen. But overall twas enjoyable, moreso than Discovery anyway (for me).

agree with most of that, especially on the preachy ending to picard, the hand holding between 2 women.

Thought that discovery finished better, after a miserable start, for me Pike was the standout star of the show

Inviere · 11-05-2020 05:49PM

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

Thought that discovery finished better, after a miserable start, for me Pike was the standout star of the show

Says it all really, the best thing about Discovery is a temporary character

Completely agree, he was quite well done in it.

Justin Credible Darts · 11-05-2020 09:50PM

Inviere wrote: »

Says it all really, the best thing about Discovery is a temporary character Completely agree, he was quite well done in it.

The star of season one was Lorca..another temporary character.
Pike for season two.

Truth is this whole concept of basing the whole show on one individual in Burnham has been awful.
The character is suppose to be part of the show...not the show about her, and this is why it has needed others to help carry it.

Inviere · 12-05-2020 10:57AM

I'm still not sure I could name five characters form the show (Lorca, Pike, & Burnham aside). As you say, the whole approach has been a disaster. Star Trek only ever truly shone, when the characters came to life. It's pretty much Burnham, whoever the Captain is that season, Saru, Tilly, & a bunch of extras.

pixelburp · 12-05-2020 11:06AM

Inviere wrote: »

I'm still not sure I could name five characters form the show (Lorca, Pike, & Burnham aside). As you say, the whole approach has been a disaster. Star Trek only ever truly shone, when the characters came to life. It's pretty much Burnham, whoever the Captain is that season, Saru, Tilly, & a bunch of extras.

I wonder would people's opinions be different if Discovery's lead character wasn't so polarising: that were Burnham a more charismatic character, more would be forgiven. Outside of Burnham, you could take Saru, Lorca, Stamets, Tilly at a stretch but appreciate she hasn't been everyone's flavour. So approximately 4 fairly well defined characters (let's include said polarising Burnham). Arguably, that's on a par with TNG, Enterprise & Voyager. Maybe even TOS.

Nostalgic goodwill is doing a lot of heavy-lifting: I'd argue old Trek had its fair share of non-entities whose names only embedded themselves through time, fandom & the fact many of the actors were themsevles engaging, decent folk by their own right. LeForge was (IMO obviously) a terrible non-entity - as bad as Discovery's own - yet LeVar Burton endeared himself in the intervening years in being a thoroughly Good Egg. Sulu had zero characterisation in TOS. He ... uh, liked fencing? yet George Takei has been such a larger than life, magnetic individual, Sulu basically being Takei (to the extent the actor's sexuality retrofitted into the character's own personal history).

Inviere · 12-05-2020 12:32PM

pixelburp wrote: »

I wonder would people's opinions be different if Discovery's lead character wasn't so polarising: that were Burnham a more charismatic character, more would be forgiven.

I actually like the character, and I think Green does a fine job with her too all things considered. The issue isn't so much Burnham, it's the absence of any effort in relation to character development outside of Burnham. Would that issue go away if Green were a better actor? Not for me anyway, as I said, I think she's not doing much wrong - the issue here is, as has always been with Discovery, the writers & producers.

Outside of Burnham, you could take Saru, Lorca, Stamets, Tilly at a stretch but appreciate she hasn't been everyone's flavour. So approximately 4 fairly well defined characters (let's include said polarising Burnham). Arguably, that's on a par with TNG, Enterprise & Voyager. Maybe even TOS.

None of those shows, were so solely centered on one character as Discovery is. They might not have been successful in their attempts, but they at least tried to develop non-main characters. Even if they were, the landscape of TV has changed since those shows were airing, so there's really no point comparing what Discovery is doing to shows from the 80's & 90's....the writers, producers, and network should know better by now.

Nostalgic goodwill is doing a lot of heavy-lifting: I'd argue old Trek had its fair share of non-entities whose names only embedded themselves through time, fandom & the fact many of the actors were themsevles engaging, decent folk by their own right. LeForge was (IMO obviously) a terrible non-entity - as bad as Discovery's own - yet LeVar Burton endeared himself in the intervening years in being a thoroughly Good Egg. Sulu had zero characterisation in TOS. He ... uh, liked fencing? yet George Takei has been such a larger than life, magnetic individual, Sulu basically being Takei (to the extent the actor's sexuality retrofitted into the character's own personal history).

Of course it had its fair share of non-entites....La Forge, Crusher, Troi, Kim, Chakotay, Sulu, Chekov, the list goes on. We know all that.

Where Trek shone, is where it got characters right. Not only that, but how those grand characters interacted with others and with the world around them...y'know, basic storytelling and such. It's as if those at the helm of Discovery have ignored ALL of the things Star Trek got right and wrong over it's ~60 year history, said "be grand", and expected it to work. I say that as someone who was initially hopeful of Discovery, and who by the end of the second season, felt the entire show from start to finish so far (a few standalone episodes aside), has been a total waste of potential from everyone.

You can't debate if Green is the issue, whether nostalgia is the problem, and argue that Trek has always had bad characters....the production has been riddled with well publicized problems in several areas....that's what's wrong with Discovery, not the actors, not Star Trek fans, but ultimately, the people writing for and producing the show.

Evade · 12-05-2020 03:40PM

pixelburp wrote: »

Nostalgic goodwill is doing a lot of heavy-lifting:

I'd be fascinated to see a group of people who have never seen Star Trek before watching season one of each series, except Picard, and see what they thought of them or which one they would most like to keep watching.

Stark · 12-05-2020 03:46PM

I think of the 20th century Star Trek series, TOS had the strongest first season by far. Pretty much hit the ground running and followed the reverse of every other series's pattern with a strong Season 1 and 2 and a weak Season 3. Whereas TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise didn't find their feet until Season 3. I would easily take Discovery's first season over TNG/DS9/Voyager's tbh. Not sure how I feel about Picard after reflecting on it. Was enjoying it but it built up a lot of promise, on which it failed to deliver by the time the season finished.

I've spoken to quite a few non-Trekkies and they all loved Discovery's first season. TOS is probably too dated now for a newbie to love.

Justin Credible Darts · 12-05-2020 04:02PM

pixelburp wrote: »

I wonder would people's opinions be different if Discovery's lead character wasn't so polarising: that were Burnham a more charismatic character,

got nothing against the actress, and she could play the greatest role, but it is still just one character.
My favorite show is was and will always be DS9, in part because of the depth of the characters.
Even TNG that had the awful cardboard cut outs of Geordi, and the Crushers, at least had Picard, Riker and Data, 3 characters at least, discovery having just one main, and its guest stars wont work, no matter how good the character is or talented the actress may be.

Pike will be a huge loss for season 3, as said he was the star of the show, even if he was not meant to be.

pixelburp · 12-05-2020 04:16PM

Evade wrote: »

I'd be fascinated to see a group of people who have never seen Star Trek before watching season one of each series, except Picard, and see what they thought of them or which one they would most like to keep watching.

Impossible to be sure given we're all bias here, but if we're spitballing about modern TV audiences, I'd be surprised if any of the series received much patience. Watching TNG, DS9 and Enterprise kinda depends on the viewer knowing "they get better", so if folks are coming at the show utterly cold - without those caveats - the garbage First Seasons would likely scare folk off. In fact, TNG might come off the worst given its infamously inert season. TOS would probably get a pass for being so completely out of time, while Voyager? Dunno, weirdly it might get the longest leash, having the most straightforward premise ("Lost in space"!)

Evade · 12-05-2020 04:30PM

pixelburp wrote: »

Impossible to be sure given we're all bias here, but if we're spitballing about modern TV audiences, I'd be surprised if any of the series received much patience. Watching TNG, DS9 and Enterprise kinda depends on the viewer knowing "they get better", so if folks are coming at the show utterly cold - without those caveats - the garbage First Seasons would likely scare folk off. In fact, TNG might come off the worst given its infamously inert season. TOS would probably get a pass for being so completely out of time, while Voyager? Dunno, weirdly it might get the longest leash, having the most straightforward premise ("Lost in space"!)

I'm not so sure. The only objectively superior things about PIC/STD are the quality of the special effects and the sets and costumes were made with HD/4k in mind.

pixelburp · 12-05-2020 04:38PM

Evade wrote: »

I'm not so sure. The only objectively superior things about PIC/STD are the quality of the special effects and the sets and costumes were made with HD/4k in mind.

You did say excepting Picard, and I intentionally ignored Discovery initially. Whatever else about the latter's flaws, it was more intentionally plot / arc focused than any other Trek so it might hold this theoretical Viewer than the older, more episodic shows - if only because it has a "what happens next??" quality.

We live in a different era of television, with different expectations, tastes & competing TV dramas. Once off, episodic TV is dead, for all intents and purposes. I don't believe a typical viewer would have the patience to stick with something so aggressively episodic, and as hamfisted and clumsy as TNG Season 1.

We can debate til the cows go home about a total hypothetical but old Trek requires a certain flexibility and appreciation of context.

Stark · 12-05-2020 04:42PM

I would never have stuck through DS9's first season had I not been emphatically promised that "it gets better".

pixelburp · 12-05-2020 06:42PM

Stark wrote: »

I would never have stuck through DS9's first season had I not been emphatically promised that "it gets better".

Same here with TNG. I had read enough that season 3 marked an upswing in quality but ye gods those first 2 seasons were rough to push through. If it wasn't Trek I'd have laughed it off as some awful drek from the bowels of network TV archives, moved on to something better. Don't believe a casual TV viewer in 2020, without those caveats, would stick with TNG. Not least because of the absence of a "plot".

Ballso · 12-05-2020 06:55PM

pixelburp wrote: »

You did say excepting Picard, and I intentionally ignored Discovery initially. Whatever else about the latter's flaws, it was more intentionally plot / arc focused than any other Trek so it might hold this theoretical Viewer than the older, more episodic shows - if only because it has a "what happens next??" quality.

We live in a different era of television, with different expectations, tastes & competing TV dramas. Once off, episodic TV is dead, for all intents and purposes. I don't believe a typical viewer would have the patience to stick with something so aggressively episodic, and as hamfisted and clumsy as TNG Season 1.

We can debate til the cows go home about a total hypothetical but old Trek requires a certain flexibility and appreciation of context.

The Mandalorian gave us some episodic style eps, alongside a series long story arc, similar enough to how DS9 did it. Mandalorian was MILES better than either of the recent Trek shows

Inviere · 13-05-2020 08:06AM

Ballso wrote: »

The Mandalorian gave us some episodic style eps, alongside a series long story arc, similar enough to how DS9 did it. Mandalorian was MILES better than either of the recent Trek shows

Couldn't agree more, it really was excellent imo. An example of how to expand within a franchise, in a fresh, all new direction. Discovery isn't even remotely of the same caliber of tv as The Mandalorian.

Inviere · 13-05-2020 08:12AM

pixelburp wrote: »

I wonder would people's opinions be different if Discovery's lead character wasn't so polarising: that were Burnham a more charismatic character, more would be forgiven...

Nostalgic goodwill is doing a lot of heavy-lifting: I'd argue old Trek had its fair share of non-entities

Just going back to this, why are you set on suggesting that a polarising character and people's own nostalgia is the cause of the issue, while ignoring the fact the the many many on set issues might be the cause of people's problems with the show?

pixelburp · 13-05-2020 09:37AM

Inviere wrote: »

Just going back to this, why are you set on suggesting that a polarising character and people's own nostalgia is the cause of the issue, while ignoring the fact the the many many on set issues might be the cause of people's problems with the show?

I'm not ignoring anything; we were talking about characters and so only suggested that were Burnham an all round more charismatic, less obnoxious lead character, people's goodwill for Discovery might have been a little longer. That a shítty supporting cast isn't a new flaw in Trek. We're all aware of the production issues, it's a wondering Season 1 came together at all.

Inviere · 13-05-2020 09:46AM

pixelburp wrote: »

I'm not ignoring anything; we were talking about characters and so only suggested that were Burnham an all round more charismatic, less obnoxious lead character, people's goodwill for Discovery might have been a little longer. That a shítty supporting cast isn't a new flaw in Trek. We're all aware of the production issues, it's a wondering Season 1 came together at all.

I see, cheers. Again though I don't know, hell I think if Patrick Stewart was playing Burnham the show would still be a mess. I don't feel there's many on-screen issues with Discovery (except perhaps the odd shaky-cam episode, and I'm not a fan of dark 'cinematic' lighting on tv shows...but that's just personal preference), for me the root of the issue is off-screen. Disjointed arcs, cramming to into too few episodes, lack of character development, amongst other issues, come well before we get into any on screen issues.

I'd love if the show found some stability in its direction, but we're about to have a third soft-reboot for its third season. I'm not sure how the show can ever be salvaged now and carve out its own niche spot in the Trek universe. Is it a prequel, is it a sequel, what is it?

pixelburp · 13-05-2020 11:54AM

Inviere wrote: »

I'd love if the show found some stability in its direction, but we're about to have a third soft-reboot for its third season. I'm not sure how the show can ever be salvaged now and carve out its own niche spot in the Trek universe. Is it a prequel, is it a sequel, what is it?

A sequel: hard to be 100% given we've had one trailer and that was it, but that promo made it explicit enough the third series will be a fresh start: Disco thrown into the far-far future and trying to rebuild the Federation (again, reading between the lines there). I'd honestly be very surprised if the writers actually let the ship return to its original time; especially if the rumours of a Pike series are true. The production issues appear to have been resolved and being in literal new canon territory for the franchise should give it the space it needed.

Inviere · 13-05-2020 04:13PM

pixelburp wrote: »

A sequel: hard to be 100% given we've had one trailer and that was it, but that promo made it explicit enough the third series will be a fresh start: Disco thrown into the far-far future and trying to rebuild the Federation (again, reading between the lines there). I'd honestly be very surprised if the writers actually let the ship return to its original time; especially if the rumours of a Pike series are true. The production issues appear to have been resolved and being in literal new canon territory for the franchise should give it the space it needed.

Yeah your assessment of the trailer & what we know so far seems fair. So if there's going to be a Season 4, it's a safe assumption then that it'll have to remain in the future (this also ties into the Short Trek that suggested the ship developed a highly advanced AI at some point, and ultimately sits abandoned). The production issues seem resolved thankfully, so all that's left are the writing issues....can they carve out a decent story that involves more than 2/3 main characters at this point, and allow the show to truly grow & mature?

AMKC · 13-05-2020 08:32PM

Inviere wrote: »

I see, cheers. Again though I don't know, hell I think if Patrick Stewart was playing Burnham the show would still be a mess. I don't feel there's many on-screen issues with Discovery (except perhaps the odd shaky-cam episode, and I'm not a fan of dark 'cinematic' lighting on tv shows...but that's just personal preference), for me the root of the issue is off-screen. Disjointed arcs, cramming to into too few episodes, lack of character development, amongst other issues, come well before we get into any on screen issues.

I'd love if the show found some stability in its direction, but we're about to have a third soft-reboot for its third season. I'm not sure how the show can ever be salvaged now and carve out its own niche spot in the Trek universe. Is it a prequel, is it a sequel, what is it?

Don't forget that it took TNG, DS9 and Enterprise 3 seasons before thy finally got good. Maybe this will be that turning point for Discovery.

pixelburp · 13-05-2020 08:40PM

Agree. Fundamentally Discovery was a show in search of a premise. The usual problem of prequels in that arsing about Discovered Countries could only go so far. Obviously same caveats again but if season 3 becomes the magic number again it'd be rather apt.

And weirdly, Burnham's previous central position in the narrative could yet work within the realms of a "rebuild the Federation" storyline - given she and the Discovery would presumably become the point of rallying. Trying not to get over excited but the potential is there.

Inviere · 14-05-2020 07:50AM

AMKC wrote: »

Don't forget that it took TNG, DS9 and Enterprise 3 seasons before thy finally got good. Maybe this will be that turning point for Discovery.

While that's certainly true, don't forget that while those early seasons were meandering a bit...we got some sustained character development, which meant those seasons weren't a complete waste of time. By the time said shows actually got good, we were very familiar with the characters, engaged with them, and that meant anything that happened to them subsequently actually mattered to us - the viewers.

Similarly, those shows didn't undergo several soft-reboots by the time they hit their stride. TNG was all about the 'classical' Trek experience, moral dilemmas, exploration, diplomacy, etc etc. DS9 went beyond that, and raised the bar for character development (still hasn't been rivaled 20 years on in the franchise), war, loss, and everything in between. Both shows stayed true to their roots, and that is what allowed them to actually grow into the staples that they still are today.

Discovery started out well. While it redesigned the Klingons and this caused some major issues (I personally enjoyed the new take on them), it gave us the backdrop of the Federation/Klingon war...why it started, the dangers it posed to the Federation, and so forth. Then it wasn't about that anymore, and we were suddenly watching the crews escapades with a pantomime villain version of Georgiou in the Mirror Universe. Then it wasn't about that anymore, and it was about Section 31 and the Red Angel, so saving the Federation from that. Now it looks like it won't be about that anymore, and it'll be about saving the future of the Federation....ALL of that crammed into less than 30 episodes!

^^ The show hasn't been given space to actually breathe (on the rare occasion we get a standalone episode, I feel the show fares MUCH better). To me, the show comes across as frantic and desperate, with each arc having to be bigger, better, faster, with less and less emphasis on enriching the quality.

Season 3 might be the one that sticks, but it would have stood a higher chance of sticking if the show was less panicked about what it's trying to be, and if we were more at home with the characters. Let's wait & see, though subjectively speaking, I'll have to fight my cynicism going in....we've seen Burnham save the Federation in the past, now we'll undoubtedly get to see her save the Federation in the future too. Fingers crossed for a more balanced approach this season.

Justin Credible Darts · 14-05-2020 04:06PM

AMKC wrote: »

Don't forget that it took TNG, DS9 and Enterprise 3 seasons before thy finally got good. Maybe this will be that turning point for Discovery.

Really, it took 3 seasons for DS9 to get good ?

Thats not fact but opinion, one you are obviously entitled to, however the first 2 season of ds9 saw episodes that are considered among the best episodes of ds9, and episodes like Duet, considered among the best in all of trek.
As mentioned by others, character development was widespread in ds9.

Meanwhile in Discovery the best characters were Pike , Lorca, and cirnwell....all now either dead or gone from the show.
Other than burnham, character development has been slow at best.

The argument made by many across forums that discovery was limited in what it could cover is nonsense in my opinion as there was plenty of material to work with.

As weak as enterprise, and voyager were, their first 2 season was superior to what discovery did, all that has helped Discovery was its HD, great cgi, and other effects.

Stark · 14-05-2020 04:16PM

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

Really, it took 3 seasons for DS9 to get good ?

Thats not fact but opinion, one you are obviously entitled to, however the first 2 season of ds9 saw episodes that are considered among the best episodes of ds9, and episodes like Duet, considered among the best in all of trek.
As mentioned by others, character development was widespread in ds9.

3 is an approximation but DS9 was crap up until the Maquis entered the picture in late season 2 IMO. One good episode does not make a good season.

TNG had a handful of excellent episodes in Seasons 1 and 2 but overall the quality was poor compared to later seasons.

Justin Credible Darts · 14-05-2020 04:52PM

they were still better than discovery.

Take away the effects, cgi, hi def, what did it have ?
A show almost entirely based on one character, that is not going to work.

Enterprise and voyager were widely slated, and had more than their share of dud episodes, but they had more decent ones in the first 2 season than discovery in my opinion.

Star Trek: Picard - Amazon Prime [** POSSIBLE SPOILERS **]

Comments

Star Trek: Picard - Amazon Prime [ POSSIBLE SPOILERS ]