Star Trek: general discussion-Picard, Discovery, Lower Decks (and Orville)

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Compel**

I'm not sure if I've said it in this thread, but I've certainly said it before. - This is ultimately most of my problems with Voyager.

I can't dislike Janeways character, because she never had a character. All she ever was, was a plot device. - Which, naturally, culminated in the Endgame finale...

Ultimately the best thing, and the thing that kept me watching Voyager, were all the scenes between The Doctor and 7 of 9 in the second half of the show. - I would argue that there was plenty of material between them that did indeed match Data's best in 'The Next Generation.'

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Quite enjoyed episode 3.

Bit more Trek, and whilst she was present, wasn’t Burnham centric.

**beast_gts**

So...

Spoiler:

**BrianDavion**

Mr Morden wrote:
Pacific wrote:
Don Qui Hotep wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
True, but it makes him a more believable character.

Spesh when he kills Gowron, and gives Martok the mantle.

One of my favorite Star Trek moments of all time. <snip>

Ah me too, absolutely awesome.

Along with that this was probably one of my favourite scenes in Star Trek let alone Deep Space Nine, from the episode 'In the Pale Moonlight'. This still puts hairs up on my neck watching it.

Agreed - can you imagine such a scene with Super Burnham or more importantly anyone caring.

not really ebcause they'd never reach that, in fact I think it's worth contrasting DS9 vs discovery in how they handle War. DS9 slow burned the dominion war, It was what, season 5 before the war actually began? by time it began we knew who the players on each side where, we knew what the stakes where, and they enforced the stakes every chance they got, a number of episodes began with the latest casualtiy reports coming in, a major character remarking they knew someone aboard a ship that was lost, and said loss often being relevant to providing motivbations for the story, they explored loss, triumph, the human cost of war (consider the episodes dealing with Nog learning to deal with the loss of his leg) the characters also evolved during the war, using Nog as the perfect example, he went from Jake's friend who was trouble, to a fantastic officer. etc.

then you have discovery, they started the war in episode one season 1, showed us the discovery being super special, and ended the war by the end of the first season.. we where told it was an important war, the UFP was on the ropes, but.... did they do anything to sell that?

IMHO discovery is aiming to be the next DS9, but much like how the DCU is suffering trying to catch up too fast to the MCU, they're moving too fast, and not realizing that the Journy is whats important

**Kid_Kyoto**

An unexpected trip to the US let me catch up on the new Treks.

I really, really liked Picard... up to the last episode.

Sir Patrick was excellent as always.
I loved Captain Rios and his holograms
I loved that Raffi was a conspiracy nut, an alcoholic, a competent officer, a caring mother and was right all along!
I thought there were enough cameos with TNG characters to make it feel like a continuation and not a rehash. Riker's bit was surprisingly fulfilling.
I really liked it.

But...

The finale. OK.

Spoiler:

**Mr Morden**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
An unexpected trip to the US let me catch up on the new Treks.

I really, really liked Picard... up to the last episode.

Sir Patrick was excellent as always.
I loved Captain Rios and his holograms
I loved that Raffi was a conspiracy nut, an alcoholic, a competent officer, a caring mother and was right all along!
I thought there were enough cameos with TNG characters to make it feel like a continuation and not a rehash. Riker's bit was surprisingly fulfilling.
I really liked it.

But...

The finale. OK.

Spoiler:

So first off we have a violation of Chekov's Law, you have a Borg cube, you have a major plot about former Borg, you have a big bad of million year old AIs who are coming to destroy everything... and they have nothing to do with each other? Opps, all the Borg got shot into space and now they're dead. Opps the cube got drained by a giant flower and now it's crashed. Opps the Romulans killed all the ex-Borg. And the big bad are not the origin of the Borg, they're apparently not related. Just a different race of ancient AIs who are going to destroy everything.

Which brings me to the big bad. A major theme throughout is that the future is not written that there's no guarantee the androids are going to be a threat and they should be given a chance. But not the million year AI from beyond the galaxy, we're just going to assume prima facia they are evil and not even try and talk. So I guess we only give the benefit of the doubt to cute Asian robots?

No big fight with the Romulans. All those pretty, pretty ships and no big fight. Which, yes, is a very Star Trek solution but still

Picard's death. This was especially manipulative. Picard dies, they spend 5 minutes mourning him and... ha-ha faked you out he's fine. He's a robot now, but didn't get any robot powers and looks exactly the same and will age and die. Instead how about your mourn Data who will killed off 15 years ago and just replaced with another Soong descendant. Cry for me fan boy, cry!

Of these the AIs (who never got a name) was the real disappointment. We had no evidence (other than a million year old warning) they were hostile, and it felt un-Star Trek to just assume they were. You can't praise the possibility of coexistence with the Soong androids while just assuming the alien AIs are going to destroy everything.

Overall 4~5 stars and I'd watch it again. If I could watch it in Egypt

Def agree with everything there.... the series is good, sadly the last epsiode is a cluster feth from start to finish

Spoiler:

**Tannhauser42**

I feel like the last episode of Picard is the sort of episode that gets written when, after you've written your entire season on the assumption you'll get more than one season and have planned out the next several seasons with an overarching plotline, the suits suddenly walk in and tell you "there might not even be a second season, wrap everything up neatly in the last episode, but, just in case, leave a window open for another season." And then you chug a pot of coffee and write that last episode in one night on a caffeine-fueled fever dream.

**Overread**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
I feel like the last episode of Picard is the sort of episode that gets written when, after you've written your entire season on the assumption you'll get more than one season and have planned out the next several seasons with an overarching plotline, the suits suddenly walk in and tell you "there might not even be a second season, wrap everything up neatly in the last episode, but, just in case, leave a window open for another season." And then you chug a pot of coffee and write that last episode in one night on a caffeine-fueled fever dream.

Which sadly happens more than it should. I think its also because its very hard to sell a TV series to western producers without wrapping up most of the story lines within the last episode. It's something you notice as a stark difference to say, anime, where they are perfectly happy ending a series even without actually answering any of the big questions it raises. Or half way through the manga adaptation because you run out of cash or the manga hasn't gone any further etc...

Western studios want it all wrapped up nice and neat; which does hinder doing long term plot arcs.

**Kid_Kyoto**

Weird if thats the case, Picard is practically money in the bank for CBS. The only worry I'd have is Sir Patrick might not be able to do another season.

Spoiler:

**warboss**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Weird if thats the case, Picard is practically money in the bank for CBS. The only worry I'd have is Sir Patrick might not be able to do another season.

Spoiler:

Unlike Picard we can't just plop him into a new body.

I really thought the ending was a way to recast him if need be, though I think Patrick Stewart is even harder to replace than Shatner.

James McAvoy might beg to differ and he is only 5-6 years younger than Stewart was when he debuted in the role.

**trexmeyer**

McCavoy out here making a career of playing younger versions of Stewart's most famous roles.

**BrianDavion**

Mr Morden wrote:
Kid_Kyoto wrote:
An unexpected trip to the US let me catch up on the new Treks.

I really, really liked Picard... up to the last episode.

Sir Patrick was excellent as always.
I loved Captain Rios and his holograms
I loved that Raffi was a conspiracy nut, an alcoholic, a competent officer, a caring mother and was right all along!
I thought there were enough cameos with TNG characters to make it feel like a continuation and not a rehash. Riker's bit was surprisingly fulfilling.
I really liked it.

But...

The finale. OK.

Spoiler:

So first off we have a violation of Chekov's Law, you have a Borg cube, you have a major plot about former Borg, you have a big bad of million year old AIs who are coming to destroy everything... and they have nothing to do with each other? Opps, all the Borg got shot into space and now they're dead. Opps the cube got drained by a giant flower and now it's crashed. Opps the Romulans killed all the ex-Borg. And the big bad are not the origin of the Borg, they're apparently not related. Just a different race of ancient AIs who are going to destroy everything.

Which brings me to the big bad. A major theme throughout is that the future is not written that there's no guarantee the androids are going to be a threat and they should be given a chance. But not the million year AI from beyond the galaxy, we're just going to assume prima facia they are evil and not even try and talk. So I guess we only give the benefit of the doubt to cute Asian robots?

No big fight with the Romulans. All those pretty, pretty ships and no big fight. Which, yes, is a very Star Trek solution but still

Picard's death. This was especially manipulative. Picard dies, they spend 5 minutes mourning him and... ha-ha faked you out he's fine. He's a robot now, but didn't get any robot powers and looks exactly the same and will age and die. Instead how about your mourn Data who will killed off 15 years ago and just replaced with another Soong descendant. Cry for me fan boy, cry!

Of these the AIs (who never got a name) was the real disappointment. We had no evidence (other than a million year old warning) they were hostile, and it felt un-Star Trek to just assume they were. You can't praise the possibility of coexistence with the Soong androids while just assuming the alien AIs are going to destroy everything.

Overall 4~5 stars and I'd watch it again. If I could watch it in Egypt

Def agree with everything there.... the series is good, sadly the last epsiode is a cluster feth from start to finish

Spoiler:

the stupid "longevity is bad M'kay crap thats permiating everything these days" - not social inequality, not bad people doing bad things but oh no you might live a little longer

AAAAAND I think the reason WHY

Spoiler:

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Indeed.

And it’s not as if the human mind is exactly prepared for that.

Already we live well beyond our natural, in the wild life span. And we see many, many problems with longer life. As a personal example? Both my Grandfather’s developed dementia. Which is a horrible way to go.

Now, if we live forever, how much heartbreak would you go through just by outliving everyone else? How long until utter despair sets in, as you know your new friends are there for a mere blink of the eye?

Would the human mind adapt, or snap?

For me, having seen what happened to my Grandad’s, and knowing there’s therefore a high risk of dementia in my future? I’d be happy to check out around 80. Gives me time to enjoy retirement, without the feeling that I’m just hanging around because medical science makes it possible.

Sorry. Bit of a personal post.

**Mr Morden**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Indeed.

And it’s not as if the human mind is exactly prepared for that.

Already we live well beyond our natural, in the wild life span. And we see many, many problems with longer life. As a personal example? Both my Grandfather’s developed dementia. Which is a horrible way to go.

Now, if we live forever, how much heartbreak would you go through just by outliving everyone else? How long until utter despair sets in, as you know your new friends are there for a mere blink of the eye?

Would the human mind adapt, or snap?

For me, having seen what happened to my Grandad’s, and knowing there’s therefore a high risk of dementia in my future? I’d be happy to check out around 80. Gives me time to enjoy retirement, without the feeling that I’m just hanging around because medical science makes it possible.

Sorry. Bit of a personal post.

Seen in a nuymbher of shows Altered Carbon being the most prominant that twisted the central story from socila inequality to a much dumber - Logevity/immortality is bad m'kay.

Why are you assuming everyone else dies but you/ protangonist? Read the Culture novels for a utopian version - any person only dies if and when they choose to.

Death remains our greatest enemy often as you say accompanied by suffering which again is avoidable with better medicine / science.

It also depends if there is anything after death - if not life is very very short.

Lastly - and this is likely just me - there are few people in my life I could not live without - a few but not many.

**Kid_Kyoto**

I think the longevity=bad issue was problematic because...

Spoiler:

**Voss**

Yes, yes. Weep for the immortals because they're going to experience loss. Guess what? That's a hard sell.
Every time I see it, whether it's vampires, AIs, ponies, elves, whatever, I don't care.

Mortals experience loss too. It doesn't define our existence, even though you're (barring accidents or violence) almost certain to lose previous generations, and 50/50 of your own age group before you yourself go. And here's the point where selfishness kicks in- when people talk about this, they talk about the people they lose, never the people that will lose them. Younger siblings, children, protégés, etc. somehow that never comes up.

Immortality is a major benefit, no matter how you slice it. Yes, immortals will experience loss just like everyone else. But they'll never inflict loss on their loved ones. That's a huge benefit, one that people inclined to weep over immortality never consider in their selfishness.

The immortals will have more time to celebrate life with their loved ones, it's a simple mathematical fact- you're getting extra time with siblings, children, etc, new lovers and loved ones. More life, more love, more joy, more people to share it with.

Extreme pet peeve when it comes to fantasy/sci-fi.

**Mr Morden**

Voss wrote:
Yes, yes. Weep for the immortals because they're going to experience loss. Guess what? That's a hard sell.
Every time I see it, whether it's vampires, AIs, ponies, elves, whatever, I don't care.

Mortals experience loss too. It doesn't define our existence, even though you're (barring accidents or violence) almost certain to lose previous generations, and 50/50 of your own age group before you yourself go. And here's the point where selfishness kicks in- when people talk about this, they talk about the people they lose, never the people that will lose them. Younger siblings, children, protégés, etc. somehow that never comes up.

Immortality is a major benefit, no matter how you slice it. Yes, immortals will experience loss just like everyone else. But they'll never inflict loss on their loved ones. That's a huge benefit, one that people inclined to weep over immortality never consider in their selfishness.

Wish I had put it like that

**trexmeyer**

Voss wrote:
Yes, yes. Weep for the immortals because they're going to experience loss. Guess what? That's a hard sell.
Every time I see it, whether it's vampires, AIs, ponies, elves, whatever, I don't care.

Mortals experience loss too. It doesn't define our existence, even though you're (barring accidents or violence) almost certain to lose previous generations, and 50/50 of your own age group before you yourself go. And here's the point where selfishness kicks in- when people talk about this, they talk about the people they lose, never the people that will lose them. Younger siblings, children, protégés, etc. somehow that never comes up.

Immortality is a major benefit, no matter how you slice it. Yes, immortals will experience loss just like everyone else. But they'll never inflict loss on their loved ones. That's a huge benefit, one that people inclined to weep over immortality never consider in their selfishness.

The immortals will have more time to celebrate life with their loved ones, it's a simple mathematical fact- you're getting extra time with siblings, children, etc, new lovers and loved ones. More life, more love, more joy, more people to share it with.

Extreme pet peeve when it comes to fantasy/sci-fi.

I had a HS friend die when I was 20. Likely drowned. A younger brother of a HS basketball teammate died a couple of years later. Found out that a girl I had a thing for died a few years back, likely suicide. Two grandparents and one great-grandparent have died since I've been a teenager/adult. One parent is now dead. I think my count is likely lower than average.

I think the greatest loss one would actually experience with immortality is a cultural one. Imagine someone being born in 1700 still being alive. The world around them has changed many, many times. Hell, that's true for someone who born in 1900. My great-grandmother that lived to be 103 IIRC survived both World Wars, went from phones and cars being a rarity, to a world where nearly everyone stateside has a phone with more computing power than the first personal computers by an incomparable degree. Assuming my math is correct, there are likely still some elderly folks around whose grandparents had been slaves. Even though I'm still young the world I grew up in is markedly different from the one that kids live in now and it seems like change has been accelerating at least on a technological level since the 1950s.

On the other hand, getting to see all of that happen in real time would be incredible. I still can't help but wonder if immortality ultimately leads to a loss of humanity due to a growing disconnect from the rest of the world and the eventual realization that despite all the change human nature remains static.

**Don Qui Hotep**

I'm going to go ahead and say it; Star Trek: Enterprise has really cool ship design.

**warboss**

Don Qui Hotep wrote:
I'm going to go ahead and say it; Star Trek: Enterprise has really cool ship design.

There are some gems there. I'm a bit lukewarm on the NX itself but I really like the Vulcan ship designs. I do however like how they tried to make the era look more primitive in universe while still being more advanced in real life (i.e. no candy crush consoles on the bridge!).

**AegisGrimm**

And exposed pipes running along ceiling corners. I always loved the interior look of the NX.

**Momotaro**

Hey trexmeyer - there were people alive until the 1990s whose PARENTS survived the Irish Famine, and the last child of an American Civil War veteran died in... June of this year (2020).

The lady in question was still collecting her father's war pension!

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/07/irene-triplett-last-person-american-civil-war-pension-dies

My own great-great-grandfather remarried in his 70s, to my great-great-grandmother in her 20s. It was a very Victorian kind of security for women. My great grandmother, born in 1891, went from walking 5 miles each way to her job as a maid at a big country house to seeing a world where men flew to the moon.

**Pacific**

trexmeyer wrote:
Voss wrote:
Yes, yes. Weep for the immortals because they're going to experience loss. Guess what? That's a hard sell.
Every time I see it, whether it's vampires, AIs, ponies, elves, whatever, I don't care.

Mortals experience loss too. It doesn't define our existence, even though you're (barring accidents or violence) almost certain to lose previous generations, and 50/50 of your own age group before you yourself go. And here's the point where selfishness kicks in- when people talk about this, they talk about the people they lose, never the people that will lose them. Younger siblings, children, protégés, etc. somehow that never comes up.

Immortality is a major benefit, no matter how you slice it. Yes, immortals will experience loss just like everyone else. But they'll never inflict loss on their loved ones. That's a huge benefit, one that people inclined to weep over immortality never consider in their selfishness.

The immortals will have more time to celebrate life with their loved ones, it's a simple mathematical fact- you're getting extra time with siblings, children, etc, new lovers and loved ones. More life, more love, more joy, more people to share it with.

Extreme pet peeve when it comes to fantasy/sci-fi.

I had a HS friend die when I was 20. Likely drowned. A younger brother of a HS basketball teammate died a couple of years later. Found out that a girl I had a thing for died a few years back, likely suicide. Two grandparents and one great-grandparent have died since I've been a teenager/adult. One parent is now dead. I think my count is likely lower than average.

I think the greatest loss one would actually experience with immortality is a cultural one. Imagine someone being born in 1700 still being alive. The world around them has changed many, many times. Hell, that's true for someone who born in 1900. My great-grandmother that lived to be 103 IIRC survived both World Wars, went from phones and cars being a rarity, to a world where nearly everyone stateside has a phone with more computing power than the first personal computers by an incomparable degree. Assuming my math is correct, there are likely still some elderly folks around whose grandparents had been slaves. Even though I'm still young the world I grew up in is markedly different from the one that kids live in now and it seems like change has been accelerating at least on a technological level since the 1950s.

On the other hand, getting to see all of that happen in real time would be incredible. I still can't help but wonder if immortality ultimately leads to a loss of humanity due to a growing disconnect from the rest of the world and the eventual realization that despite all the change human nature remains static.

Very anecdotal, but my grandmother was born in 1907 and had known one of the guys that opened the pyramids during their 're-discovery', both World Wars, the moon landings and everything else that had happened that century. Really mad if you think about it. Although she was an intelligent woman and had a passion for life, by the time she was very elderly she felt the world had changed so greatly to be unrecognisable from her youth. I won't say that she was glad to die when she did pass in the 90s (who would be?), but there was certainly an acceptance that she had had her time on this earth.

I think, like you say, a connection with the world and culture around us is part of being human. If we lose that we would become something else, something which certainly makes interesting material for sci-fi writers and philosophers!

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

In terms of Picard, we’re discussing a single, solitary person.

Through that lens, that’s someone who will only ever know loss.

**BrianDavion**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
In terms of Picard, we’re discussing a single, solitary person.

Through that lens, that’s someone who will only ever know loss.

and in data's case we're talking about someone whom 1: Had spent the last 30 years living in a box (that's gonna....... warp your prespective) and 2: whose ultimate aspiration was always "to be as human as possiable" the latter is reason eneugh for him to embrace the idea of mortality

**ingtaer**

This flashed up when looking at something else;

Guess that means it might finally be happening, at some time, possibly, soonish...

**warboss**

yeah, nah.... (in Aussie accent)

He's currently suing (and being countersued by) his third and most recent fired director. I loved the original Prelude fan film more than anything I've watched from official trek in the past decade (3 JJ trek movies and 3 seasons of nuTrek.. didn't watch Lower Decks though) but many of the people who made the former (both on screen and off screen) are long gone. With this latest kerfuffle, he's claiming that he has to reshoot what was just shot pre-pandemic because it wasn't very good according to him now that the Director is publicly feuding with him and of course needs more money to do so since the money from the previous shoot was now wasted since unless he settles/wins the lawsuits.

As for the actors/characters, Richard Hatch/Kharn pass away while Tony Todd/Ramirez and Gary Graham/Soval left in a tizzy. Kate Vernon/Sonya is holding off on doing her part because according to the latest official axanar stream she wants to see the final script before commiting (the script that is now the source of the newest lawsuits). It's basically only Peters/Garth and JG Hertler/Sam left from the original cast.

To borrow from Star Wars, you were the chosen one, Axanar! You were supposed to bring balance to Trek! :(

**LordofHats**

Yeah. I can't help but feel Axanar is like Star Citizen. It's never coming out. The big talking head behind it is just going to keep teasing that it's almost here while holding out his hand for more money. It's like there's a new industry now where you can get paid to 'work' but never actually deliver any sort of end product.

**Overread**

LordofHats wrote:
Yeah. I can't help but feel Axanar is like Star Citizen. It's never coming out. The big talking head behind it is just going to keep teasing that it's almost here while holding out his hand for more money. It's like there's a new industry now where you can get paid to 'work' but never actually deliver any sort of end product.

Eh its nothing new. Duke Nukem spent well over a decade in that kind of pit.

It just becomes something when you notice it and its related to something you want; or when its generated vast sums of money and seems like a never-ending pit of money. Sometimes it is intentional and sometimes its just because whoever is in charge isn't good at their job. They get too fine-detailed or too demanding on requirements. Scrapping chunks of the project over and over and demanding improvement and so long as the money keeps rolling in (or at least so long as everyone can be afforded) they keep going.

Heck you can get this with school work; that essay that never ever seems to finish. Just like with school there's always a hard deadline. In school it when you can't ask for another extension - in business its when the money dries up. Though the sad thing is sometimes the money dries up and the project lead keeps going and going - even when there's no feasible way to raise funds or keep it alive they sink their money in over and over.

**BrianDavion**

Overread wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
Yeah. I can't help but feel Axanar is like Star Citizen. It's never coming out. The big talking head behind it is just going to keep teasing that it's almost here while holding out his hand for more money. It's like there's a new industry now where you can get paid to 'work' but never actually deliver any sort of end product.

Eh its nothing new. Duke Nukem spent well over a decade in that kind of pit.
.

and the end result was complete and utter garbage