# Patrick Stewart in new Star Trek show



## Blue (Aug 5, 2018)

https://deadline.com/2018/08/patric...es-jean-luc-picard-cbs-all-access-1202440156/

Sir Patrick Stewart is going to star in a new Star Trek TV show.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Aug 5, 2018)

I wish him well!


----------



## Umbran (Aug 5, 2018)

Yeah.  I dunno if it is going to get enough viewers on CBS All Access to pay for someone of Stewart's stature.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Aug 5, 2018)

That IS the key.  But if the show has an “Angel”, CBS might be willing to run it at a loss for a season to see if the numbers trend in the right direction.

Of course, if they already have significant #s of people on their channel...


----------



## Tonguez (Aug 5, 2018)

78 years old  - I guess it wont be running for very long then ..


----------



## CapnZapp (Aug 5, 2018)

What CBS needs to realize of course is that nobody's interested on paying for more than three streaming services - tops.

They need to join up with one of the big three.


----------



## Kaodi (Aug 5, 2018)

I pray that in Canada it will just be available to watch regularly on Space. In our house we have exact one streaming service and we cannot even watch that due to crappy rural Internet.


----------



## Richards (Aug 5, 2018)

Yeah, I'd be interested in watching this on CBS, but not on CBS All Access.  I refuse to pay a network additional money to watch the shows they're "holding hostage," as it were.  Just my own personal line in the sand.

Johnathan


----------



## Morrus (Aug 5, 2018)

Awesome! I'll watch this on Netflix like I watch Discovery! Can't wait. Though I have to, as I expect it's a couple years away at the earliest.


----------



## fjw70 (Aug 6, 2018)

They had me at Picard. 

I tried All Access for Discovery but cancelled when the show didn’t pull me in. I am willing to try again for Jean-Luc.


----------



## Jester David (Aug 6, 2018)

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 (Aug 6, 2018)

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


----------



## Umbran (Aug 6, 2018)

Jester David said:


> 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 (Aug 6, 2018)

Umbran said:


> 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? 



Umbran said:


> 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?



Umbran said:


> 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 (Aug 6, 2018)

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 (Aug 6, 2018)

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 (Aug 6, 2018)

"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 (Aug 6, 2018)

Jester David said:


> 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 (Aug 6, 2018)

Mallus said:


> "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 (Aug 6, 2018)

Morrus said:


> 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.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 6, 2018)

Mallus said:


> 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.




It’s more “give us what we want, not what they want” - the former is “good service” and the latter is “pandering”. And vice versa.


----------



## Jester David (Aug 6, 2018)

Umbran said:


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



Which is the crux. They didn't for _Discovery_. They hired the writers room of a period fiction teen dramady that didn't even pretend to research the 1550s. 

Good writers are the difference between season 1 and 3 of both _The Original Series_ and _The Next Generation_. For opposite reasons. 
But they haven't hired a writer. They focused on the actor. They don't even have scripts. 



Umbran said:


> 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.



I don't trust the judgment of actors because they can create bombs. Because they're neither the sole nor the primary creative voice. They look at projects from micro perspective of portraying the character and have minimal impact on the final project. There's no shortage of terrible, terrible movies and TV shows with fantastic casts and actors giving amazing performances. 

I'm always going to need more than "they cast a great lead". Because every single time I have watched a show primarily because I liked the lead actor, I have been disappointed. 

And so far the only thing we know is that Stewart is cast and it's still being produced by the guy that wrote _Into Darkness_ and directed the latest _Mummy_ movie. He's doubling down on Star Trek now because Universal's "Dark Universe" of united monster films seems to have collapsed. 
I'm going to need more before I care.



Umbran said:


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



First... how is bring back Picard NOT "more of the same-old". It is literally solely relying on nostalgia and fondness for the actor/ character. 
_(edit: that it's Picard and not, say, Worf speaks to this. Fans asked for a Captain Worf show for years, and Worf was easily the fan favourite character with more room to grow, not already being a captain. Or even tapping Wil Wheaton for a Captain Crusher show. But they went with Picard. Not because he's the most popular. Not because he offers the best opportunity for stories or room to grow. But because the *actor* has the most name draw.)_

Second, it's more than a binary no-risk vs risk. Risk _always _has to be a comparisons of what is gained versus what is lost. Measuring potential gains against potential losses. 

What is being risked here? 
The big thing is the ending of _The Next Generation_. While we didn't expect everything to be perfect and rainbows after the show, you don't want beloved characters to suffer and fail. Which was the inherent problem with _Episode VII-IX_: for there to be more story the heroes of the first movie were required to have failed. I don't think people will be very happy if they present a 25th Century of Star Trek with a divided Federation and a Picard who has spent the last two decade withdrawing after the loss of the _Enterprise-E_ and many of his friends.
But it has to be _something_. Because a Picard that hasn't suffered hasn't grown. He needs to be in a place where he can grow and develop over the course of the show. If he's right where we left him then, and that's equally sad. And if he's already happy and content, that means he's either not going to grow over the series or he's going to end up less happy and worse off than he started. (Or he's going to have a lame Jerry Bruckheimer character arc where he gets all sad in the middle and has a huge crisis of faith before returning to right back where he was when he started.)

So it's a catch-22. They need to have the character in a different place and where they can tell a story, but anything they do means removing the happy ending already earned by the character. They need him different to reflect his growth and give Stewart something to sink his teeth into as a performer, but the character has to be familiar and recognisable or they've lost the benefit of using an established character. 
They either have to go Han Solo, where you have the sad loser that is largely in the same place and doing the same thing, or the Luke Skywalker, who has changed and grown for a way that provides the best story but means they've suffered for years. 



Umbran said:


> 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.



TNG also had the original creator involved.

Meanwhile, with _Discovery_ we have a team that seems allergic to trying to capture the feel of Starfleet and Star Trek, and whose first idea was to tell a war story. Who were quick to take the easy and lazy route of drama via interpersonal conflict.
I'm not sure I want that done to the decades following _Voyager_. It'd be a little too simple to just break things for quick drama.


----------



## Jester David (Aug 6, 2018)

MarkB said:


> 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.




Canonically, he should be tending the family vineyard in France and battling Irumodic Syndrome while potentially being divorced from Captain Beverly Crusher. 
While knowledge of the future might have changed the failed marriage and the vineyard, he should still have said degenerative neurological disorder.

Honestly... I'm not sure what I want him to be doing. People should be able to live well into their 100s in the 25th Century. So Picard should have two or three decades of life left. And the post-scarcity economy means everyone lives in a state of perpetual retirement anyway, so that's less of an issue. So he could be doing anything.

But, again, what makes the best story. Either for a one season series or a mini-series or a TV-movie. 
What _should_ Picard be doing?


----------



## trappedslider (Aug 6, 2018)

Depending on which way they go they have a number of routes to chose from Off the top of my head :

1. Follow in the foot steps of the Novels (borg war 2 or 3 or however many,typhoon pact etc) (( I also think this has Romulus going ka-boom but not sure))
2. Follow STO which ties into Romulus going ka-boom
3. Ignore the established timelines and do something new 
4. Show us what he was up in between the far end of All Good things and Nemesis 
5. Full on Indiana Jones but in Space! he does do Archaeology as a hobby


----------



## Umbran (Aug 7, 2018)

Jester David said:


> But they haven't hired a writer. They focused on the actor. They don't even have scripts.




And?  So?  Why does this matter at this point?



> I'm always going to need more than "they cast a great lead".




You seem to have missed an important part of this that I just mentioned.  When you say "I will need X," I must ask, "Need.. for what purpose?"

They are asking for _nothing_ from you.  There is no commitment to any action required at this time.  How much do you need... to do nothing?


----------



## Jester David (Aug 7, 2018)

Umbran said:


> You seem to have missed an important part of this that I just mentioned.  When you say "I will need X," I must ask, "Need.. for what purpose?"
> 
> They are asking for _nothing_ from you.  There is no commitment to any action required at this time.  How much do you need... to do nothing?



They are attempting to build hype. They are asking me to be excited. They need me to talk about the show positively and spread that excitement and thus spread their hype. 

It is having the opposite effect. I am not excited. An instead I am worried about the franchise as it seems unable to do anything but look backwards and milk nostalgia.


----------



## Imaculata (Aug 7, 2018)

trappedslider said:


> 4. Show us what he was up in between the far end of All Good things and Nemesis




I believe they have already confirmed that this will canonically take place after Nemesis.


----------



## Eltab (Aug 7, 2018)

Perhaps Starfleet finds a reason to pull Commodore Picard out of retirement to solve some problem, based on his reputation alone.  Sort of like the last appearance of Ambassador Sarek.

Picard must overcome the obstacle du jour and the "I ain't as good as I once was" factor.  His character could show growth if he contacts the former Mrs. Picard and the (much more matured) Wesley during that process.

Opening scene, he is in his vineyard looking at a box of medicine (I really see him sipping a glass of his own vintage to wash down a pill) for Irumodic Syndrome; he's volunteered to be part of the live-test.

I'm curious and cautiously optimistic, even though I can see that post-Roddenberry Star Trek has lost the fundamental concept _What if the better angels of men's natures were in the ascendant?_


----------



## Mallus (Aug 7, 2018)

One of writers being name-dropped in reference to the new Picard project is Michael Chabon, i.e. one of my favorite authors. He's won a Pulitzer Prize for fiction, among many other accolades. Heck, the film of Wonder Boys is terrific and I'll even go to bat for his script for John Carter. 

I'm really excited about this. While he's more known as a mainstream literary fiction writer, anyone familiar with his work knows he's a lifelong genre fan.

edit: now if they could only wrangle a script or two out of David Mitchell...


----------



## Jester David (Aug 7, 2018)

Imaculata said:


> I believe they have already confirmed that this will canonically take place after Nemesis.



The poster's question is what version of the post-Nemesis timeline will they be using. 

The Pocket Books EU or _Star Trek Online_ EU? The vision of the future seen in _All Good Things_? Or ignore all three and do their own thing.



Eltab said:


> Perhaps Starfleet finds a reason to pull Commodore Picard out of retirement to solve some problem, based on his reputation alone.  Sort of like the last appearance of Ambassador Sarek.
> 
> Picard must overcome the obstacle du jour and the "I ain't as good as I once was" factor.  His character could show growth if he contacts the former Mrs. Picard and the (much more matured) Wesley during that process.
> 
> ...



I can see thee obvious routes for stories. 


One is old man Picard, slowly losing his mind from Irumodic Syndrome, is telling the story of his life. So between interludes set in the "present" are flashbacks to Picard's early life, such as when he takes command of the _Stargazer_ after its captain is killed (while Picard is only a lt. commander) and then ends up commanding that ship for the next twenty-two years.
This works as you can have Stewart in every episode and narrating events, but you can have the action done by younger actors. 
Heck, certain bits could just be Stewart in his room, telling the events like a one-man play interspersed with actual scenes. Key speeches could alternate between the actors, so you get the best of both worlds. (heh) 
And you'd easy skirt around any an all problems with canon and continuity through the excuse of "unreliable narration".

The other is, as you say, the elderly Picard being pulled back for one more mission. Perhaps to serve as ambassador to Vulcan to do an important treaty negotiation. (Reunification with a segment of the Romulan Republic?) Or some other important diplomatic function that only he can do.
But, as you say, we saw that story already in _Sarek_. So it'd be retelling one of the great TNG stories and expanding. 

The third is archaeologist Picard who has spent the last few decades unearthing relics of a dead civilisation being drawn into a mystery and conflict. The antagonists were just expecting a bunch of pacifistic scientists, not realising one was a heavily decorated Starfleet captain. A much more Indiana Jones story. This combines elements of _Starship Mine_ with _The Chase _and the _Gambit _two-parter.
However, this really relies on Stewart being fit enough to sell the part. He looks great for his age... but he's still 78. Fit doesn't mean spry or full of endurance.

The first and third would be interesting for being set later in the the universe than we have readily seen, but likely not revealing too much of the state of the current galaxy. That allows the series to skirt around having to acknowledge "canon" just yet. The middle idea likely would have to touch more on the current status quo, unless the final mission involves some unseen part of the galaxy or no-name species. 
The first is the most open to continuation.  The latter two really work best for one-and-done stories. It's harder to have a second "last mission" or "unexpected adventure". But I kinda like the idea of Trek mini-series rather than mandated ongoing series. However, the reason _Discovery_ isn't an anthology show like planned was because sets and costumes are expensive, and they wanted to make repeated use of them. So miniseries work best if you can set other series in the same era and recycle sets, props, and costumes.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 7, 2018)

Mallus said:


> edit: now if they could only wrangle a script or two out of David Mitchell...




I’m gonna guess that you mean a different David Mitchell to the one I’m familiar with!


----------



## Mallus (Aug 7, 2018)

Morrus said:


> I’m gonna guess that you mean a different David Mitchell to the one I’m familiar with!



Ha! They're both British, though. 

I meant novelist David Mitchell, author of Could Atlas, The Thousand Autumns of Jacob De Zoet, Ghostwritten, etc. 

Not David Mitchel from Mitchell and Webb - but didn't they guest star in an episode of Doctor Who? I'd been down with both Mitchell's combining their talents for an episode of Star Trek.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 7, 2018)

Oh god help me I know what I want from this project.

Michael Chabon show-running a series about the wistful, bittersweet comedic adventures of John-Luc Picard retired from Starfleet and freshly divorced from Doctor Beverly Crusher, who teams back up with Vash after running into her on Risa for some quasi-legal archeological adventures. 

A show where Picard finally _cuts loose_ (a little). Where the Trek-y sci-fi problems of the week are really just an excuse for him to evaluate his life and its choices (and, ultimately mostly reaffirm all the stick-up-the-Jeffries Tube high-minded ethics that are inseparably part of his character). But he has a bit of fun in the process.

Make this so!

(not that anyone would)


----------



## trappedslider (Aug 7, 2018)

I think we are all ignoring a better question: Will he get pockets?


----------



## Mallus (Aug 8, 2018)

trappedslider said:


> I think we are all ignoring a better question: Will he get pockets?



Why would he need pockets? The Federation doesn’t use money and they sure as Hell don’t lock anything, so he don’t got keys.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Aug 9, 2018)

The final scene for Picard will be him lieing on bed after a nice evening meal spent with a bajoran family he and Data helped out a bit. Suddenly memories distorted by his Irumodic Syndrome are coming back, how he made the fatal decision that destroyed the Enterprise E and killed many of its crew, the first big flare of the syndrome. He believes he's seeing Data entering his room, and he says: "I think I was not happy like this in many years. But I didn't deserve this. Not after what I did. All those dead people. They trusted me... What have I done, Data?" Then Data pulls out a mek'leth, and stabs Picard in his artificial heart. It's not Data - it's Lore, avenging the many years he spend deactivated in Maddox' Lab...


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Aug 9, 2018)

Mallus said:


> Why would he need pockets?




Breath Mints?  “Kirk-strength” Federation issued condoms?  Tin of coco butter head wax?  A couple bags of Earl Grey Tea? AARP card?  FedEx (Federation Express) Card for use when traveling outside the Federation?  The odd bar of gold pressed latinum for places that don’t take FedEx?

Cheap Sunglasses?


----------



## Mallus (Aug 9, 2018)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> “Kirk-strength” Federation issued condoms?



Try new Trojan: Orions!



> Cheap Sunglasses?



Now I need to see Picard in a pair of cheep sunglasses. Like he's about to warp into a high-concept frat comedy from the 1980s.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Aug 9, 2018)

“Yo, Jean-Luc!  See that hot Bajoran shredding that dune on her dirt bike?  You should TOTALY take her to the 10 Forward Klingon Kegger this weekend!”

“Whooooaaaaa...I think I shall make it so!”


----------



## Mad_Jack (Aug 10, 2018)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> View attachment 100220




 "Make it so. Or else we're going to have a _problem_. And my associate Mr. Worf doesn't _like_ problems."


----------



## Legatus Legionis (Aug 11, 2018)

.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 11, 2018)

Legatus_Legionis said:


> What I find amazing is that everyone thinks he will star in a "live action" series.




That *is* amazing!


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Aug 11, 2018)

Hmmm...

Well if it IS a cartoon, I hope it’s _anime_ style...

_*WORF FROM ABOVE!!!*_


----------



## MarkB (Aug 11, 2018)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The final scene for Picard will be him lieing on bed after a nice evening meal spent with a bajoran family he and Data helped out a bit. Suddenly memories distorted by his Irumodic Syndrome are coming back, how he made the fatal decision that destroyed the Enterprise E and killed many of its crew, the first big flare of the syndrome. He believes he's seeing Data entering his room, and he says: "I think I was not happy like this in many years. But I didn't deserve this. Not after what I did. All those dead people. They trusted me... What have I done, Data?" Then Data pulls out a mek'leth, and stabs Picard in his artificial heart. It's not Data - it's Lore, avenging the many years he spend deactivated in Maddox' Lab...




Data's dead.


----------



## trappedslider (Aug 12, 2018)

MarkB said:


> Data's dead.




Depends on the timeline we go with.......and what gets ignored or not


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Aug 12, 2018)

MarkB said:


> Data's dead.




Data-Reborn-In-B4 of course.


----------



## MarkB (Aug 12, 2018)

trappedslider said:


> Depends on the timeline we go with.......and what gets ignored or not




I don't think they're likely to ignore actual movie canon.


----------



## trappedslider (Aug 12, 2018)

MarkB said:


> I don't think they're likely to ignore actual movie canon.




Who said anything about ignoring movies?

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Data#Return


----------



## Jester David (Aug 13, 2018)

MarkB said:


> I don't think they're likely to ignore actual movie canon.



Why not? They’ve ignored TV canon a bunch.


----------



## Mercurius (Aug 13, 2018)

Maybe James McAvoy will play young Picard in flashbacks.

Seriously though, this is intriguing. I was underwhelmed with Discovery--enough that I didn't watch the second half of the season--and I tend to feel that there is a law of diminishing returns with continually trying to squeeze out new ideas from old franchises. But Patrick Stewart is Patrick Stewart. If anyone can re-create a character, he can (see "Logan").

That said, I do hope we get some good old fashioned space opera and not just Picard tending grapes and facing mortality. Say, Picard is pulled back into active duty as an admiral-captain. 

I'm guessing the Borg will be involved in some form or fashion.


----------



## Eltab (Aug 13, 2018)

Mercurius said:


> Say, Picard is pulled back into active duty as an admiral-captain.
> 
> I'm guessing the Borg will be involved in some form or fashion.



Picard can be given the field rank of Commodore - somebody who can tell individual Captains what to do.

One season ended with Picard as a member of the Borg.  Obviously he got away and separated himself.  
Perhaps the Borg are looking for him, to further understand how he did that?

Philosophically, they could examine the relationships (theoretical, 'best', and actual) between the individual, a group, and the whole of society.


----------



## Jester David (Aug 13, 2018)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The final scene for Picard will be him lieing on bed after a nice evening meal spent with a bajoran family he and Data helped out a bit. Suddenly memories distorted by his Irumodic Syndrome are coming back, how he made the fatal decision that destroyed the Enterprise E and killed many of its crew, the first big flare of the syndrome. He believes he's seeing Data entering his room, and he says: "I think I was not happy like this in many years. But I didn't deserve this. Not after what I did. All those dead people. They trusted me... What have I done, Data?" Then Data pulls out a mek'leth, and stabs Picard in his artificial heart. It's not Data - it's Lore, avenging the many years he spend deactivated in Maddox' Lab...



It took me far too long to get what this was teasing...

Honestly, a Lore’s revenge story would be cool. But not going to ever happen as Bret Spiner has aged hard, and can’t pull off the ageless android anymore. Not without a heavy dose of still super expensive de-aging CGI. 



Mercurius said:


> I'm guessing the Borg will be involved in some form or fashion.



We’ve had (at least) four TV episodes and one movie dealing with Picard’s relationship with the Borg. That horse has been flogged. We don’t bee an entire series (or season) dealing with them.
Honestly, I’d be happy if the just say the Borg were dealt a crippling blow at the end of _Voyager_ and collapsed as a power. They’ve been done.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 14, 2018)

Jester David said:


> /snip
> 
> 
> TNG also had the original creator involved.




Yup, and it was some of the worst drivel ever to hit the small screen.  People remember the hay days of TNG, but, tend to forget that all the really memorable episodes happened AFTER Roddenberry no longer was involved.



> Meanwhile, with _Discovery_ we have a team that seems allergic to trying to capture the feel of Starfleet and Star Trek, and whose first idea was to tell a war story. Who were quick to take the easy and lazy route of drama via interpersonal conflict.
> I'm not sure I want that done to the decades following _Voyager_. It'd be a little too simple to just break things for quick drama.




Meh, I liked Discovery.  Excellent stories, cool characters, well laid out.  Sure, there were some duds there, I get that.  First season wobbles and all that.  But, I'll stack season 1 of Discovery against Season 1 of TNG any day of the week.  

The best thing they ever did with Star Trek was eject the Roddenberryism that there could never be any conflict between the main characters.


----------



## Jester David (Aug 14, 2018)

Hussar said:


> Yup, and it was some of the worst drivel ever to hit the small screen.  People remember the hay days of TNG, but, tend to forget that all the really memorable episodes happened AFTER Roddenberry no longer was involved.



Funny thing, Roddenberry was replaced as chief story editor halfway through season one. Remember how the show magically got better then? Oh wait, no, it continued to suck for another season and a half. 
Oh, and Roddenberry was also replaced for season 3 of the Original Series. Y'know, the _worst _season.
Weird... it's almost like he wasn't the sole reason TNG was bad...

Still, Roddenberry had a vision, which worked. He knew the setting and could write the series bible. Once good writers came on board they were able to build quality off his groundwork. 
So far the creative minds behind _Discovery _have not shown to me they have the best grasp of Star Trek lore, while also heavily relying on callbacks and references to TOS. 



Hussar said:


> Meh, I liked Discovery.  Excellent stories, cool characters, well laid out.  Sure, there were some duds there, I get that.  First season wobbles and all that.  But, I'll stack season 1 of Discovery against Season 1 of TNG any day of the week.



"First season wobbles" is a B.S. excuse. 

It's a free pass just handed to _Discovery_ to wave away and deflect any criticism, which I've never seen applied to any other TV show. It _only _comes up because TNG was bad at first and got better, and DS9 got better, and that's apparently enough to make a rock solid pattern. Despite _Voyager _never getting better, _The Animated Series_ never getting better, TOS getting worse, and _Enterprise _getting much worse before finally getting better in its fourth season. 
(Watching DS9 right now with my son. The pilot was excellent and the following two episodes were damned good. A very fine set-up for the series.)


_Discovery _was terrible. 

The wholly unlikable main character's character arc pretty much took her in a giant circle so she ended the season pretty much where she started. It took her thirteen episodes to learn something she should have learned in the pilot, just so the audience could be showing something about Starfleet and the Federation that has pretty much been a given for every other series. It was like spending an entire season to explore "the Prime Directive" or questioning the desire to explore. 

We spent the entire season being told Burnham had spent too much time with Vulcans and was too cold and logical, but she spent the entire season doing horribly irrational and emotional things which inevitably made things worse, and regularly imperilling other members of the crew. 
The second most important character was set-up as an interesting, flawed captain that was traumatised by war and potentially given a redemption arc that mirrored that of Starfleet. But all that was jettisoned because instead he turned out to be cartoonishly Evil. 
We get to see a Starfleet that happily torturing an innocent living creature to the bring of death to gain a temporary strategic benefit. And then partnering with a war criminal who is pretty much mega-Hitler in order to commit genocide. Crossing lines that wouldn't be acceptable in the current day, let alone in a utopian future. 

Meanwhile, the entire series spends its time telling us what's happening rather than showing us. There's a conflict between Starfleet's mission to explore and the need to win the war! But we never see them forced to pass up an opportunity for science. 
And Starfleet is losing the war! But we never really see that or get a sense of the losses. Then it's winning the war, but we only see a single victory. Then it's losing again the next episode. Oh, then they've lost for good... except suddenly the Klingons have agreed to stop fighting and somehow decide to just give back all their seized territory. For reasons. 

And the whole thing is wrapped up in the worst pseudoscience imaginable that felt like the show's scientific advisor was a crystal healing guru. 
_"It's a spore drive. It's powered by literal fairy dust that despite being macroscopic and visible to the naked eye is really the basis of energy and the source of all life in the entire multiverse. Thankfully we have the giant space targigrade to help navigate the magical mushroom network that crosses space/time."_ Which I only wish was hyperbole. 

Plus, the show was entirely reliant on shock and cheap plot twists to move it forward. No less than four sudden "shock" deaths. Two of which said shock deaths leading to the victim being eaten. And two heel turns as crew members reveal themselves to be evil all along. Paired with horror movie level gore in one episode, a couple s in another, and Klingon nip in a third. Because, apparently, Star Trek has less censorship than this site. 

All the while being shallow and empty, not even pretending to glance in the direction of allegory or examination of the modern world. There was no lessons on racism or the Vietnam war. No examination of the War on Terror or how paranoia can corrupt. Hell, even _Star Trek VI_ with its questioning of "what happens if the Berlin Wall falls... in space" and worries of peace had more depth.
There's plot thread introduced and forgotten regularly. Black badges! Then gone. What badges. And Vulcan terrorists. Then bye-bye. 
But none of that matter because the moment the season ended the show tripped over itself hitting the big red "reset" button that ensured that nothing that happened in the series mattered at all. And then it ran headlong towards cheap, blatant nostalgia by forcing the Enterprise into the series. 

And despite all that, the craziest thing in the show was Sarek suddenly having inexplicable ninja moves so he could kung-fu battle Burnham in his mind. 



Hussar said:


> The best thing they ever did with Star Trek was eject the Roddenberryism that there could never be any conflict between the main characters.



Yes, because the lack of conflict between main characters was terrible in Next Generation... 

It wasn't that there wasn't to be any conflict at all. It was that the characters would resolve their problems by talking to each other like adults. That they would not descend into childish bickering and cheap grudges for the sake of lazy drama. 
And _Discovery _showed exactly why that was a good idea with cheap conflict and forced tension as characters sniped at each other for no real reason. It was like watching character interactions written by student screenwriters in a remedial film school class. It felt like the standard secret based forced drama I expect from bad CW teen dramas.


Another fun rule Roddenberry had was avoiding too many references to TOS. There was Bones in the pilot and the plague in the second episode (_The Naked Now_) but after that he tried hard to not reference the original series and Enterprise. Because he wanted to move forward and not just look backward. He even pushed to avoid having too many familiar aliens show up, leading to Bolians being used in place of Andorians. 
Meanwhile _Discovery _had Harry Mudd, the Mirror Universe, a Klingon disguised as a human, a tribble on Lorca's desk, a Gorn skeleton in Lorca's weapon room, Sarek, references to Spock, the _Enterprise _, "the needs of the many...", etc. It was a freakin' "greatest hits" of _Star Trek_ elements. But, given that it was created by the guy who wrote _Into Darkness_ and basically retold _Wrath of Khan_, this wholesale lack of original thought shouldn't be a surprise...


----------



## trappedslider (Aug 14, 2018)

Tell us how you _really_ feel..don't hold back let it all out

EDIT: Found this floating around http://leethomson.myzen.co.uk/Star_...ion/Star_Trek_-_The_Next_Generation_Bible.pdf

Looks like a number of rules were broken......


----------



## Hussar (Aug 16, 2018)

Jester David said:


> Funny thing, Roddenberry was replaced as chief story editor halfway through season one. Remember how the show magically got better then? Oh wait, no, it continued to suck for another season and a half.
> Oh, and Roddenberry was also replaced for season 3 of the Original Series. Y'know, the _worst _season.
> Weird... it's almost like he wasn't the sole reason TNG was bad...
> 
> ...




I dunno.  DS9 got a LOT better later on and the first couple of seasons were pretty bad.  I recently rewatched everything, and I'd say that's pretty true of all Trek.  Voyager started bad, got quite a bit better, then died in the last two seasons.  Enterprise started very bad, but, ended in the last season quite well (ignoring the series finale episode).  

And, outside of Trek, you can look at Arrowverse TV which improved considerably.  Supernatural got much better after a shaky start which then tailspun into what we have now.  Sigh.

But, first season wobbles aren't really anything new to any series.



> /snip
> 
> Ok, fair enough. you don't like the show.  I get that.  But, I did like it, pretty much for every reason you don't.  Cool stories, lots of conflict, and a Trek show that actually shows WHY people hate Klingons.  Meh, different strokes.


----------



## Jester David (Aug 16, 2018)

Hussar said:


> I dunno.  DS9 got a LOT better later on and the first couple of seasons were pretty bad.  I recently rewatched everything, and I'd say that's pretty true of all Trek.  Voyager started bad, got quite a bit better, then died in the last two seasons.  Enterprise started very bad, but, ended in the last season quite well (ignoring the series finale episode).



_DS9_'s uptick was Ira Behr being promoted to showrunning and executive producer with season 3. 
_Enterprise_ getting better in season 4 can be attributed to Manny Coto coming aboard as head of the series along with Mike Sussman.
Heck, even the archetypal example, _The Next Generation_, is often attributed to Michael Piller coming aboard on season 3. 

Neither was just the result of the series moving out of its first season. More time didn't magically make the shows better. It was better writers coming aboard and a showrunner who was able to take charge and make changes. 

Meanwhile, the executive producer of _Discovery _has not changed. It's still co-creator, Alex Kurtzman. And now he's also the main showrunner and doesn't have another executive producer there, as Aaron Harberts and Gretchen J. Berg left. 
While Kurtzman is free to do his own thing rather than having to run with another writer's work... the second half of Discovery's first season wasn't much less problematic. 
And as a creative figure, Kurtzman is mixed. He's producted _Scorpion _and _Hawaii Five-O_ for TV, plus _Amazing Spider-man 2_. He wrote _Transformers_ and _Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen_. Plus _Star Trek Into Darkness_. Most recently he wrote and directed the recent _Mummy _film.

His hit:miss ratio is not good. I don't have a lot of faith he'll improve just because the season is a higher number. That has as much bearing on the actual quality of the show as odd/even numeration has on the movies.



Hussar said:


> And, outside of Trek, you can look at Arrowverse TV which improved considerably.



I think _Arrow _started strong and got better as it moved into more comic territory and beyond a vigilante with a hood. The second season was great. But the last couple years grew weak. 
Meanwhile, _Flash _started strong and then got problematic as it relied far, far too much on its formula. Season three wasn't good and season 4 was often painful. 
_Supergirl _definitely took a bit to find its groove and improved partway through season 1. 
_Legends of Tomorrow_ has definitely gotten better. This is a good example of a show needing to find its voice and work with the strength of its cast. 



Hussar said:


> Supernatural got much better after a shaky start which then tailspun into what we have now.  Sigh.



Supernatural got better yes, but that could be attributed as much to the metaplot building to a climax.  That can loosely related to getting beyond the first season, as they needed to lay the groundwork and didn't want to go "all in" just to be cancelled. 
It dropped in quality after the original creator left with season 5, when the series "ended". (Even then, season one wasn't "bad". The worst episodes of that stretch were probably in season 3.)
Then they brought someone else in, which led to up and down quality, as the showrunners changed three or four times. So, again, less about the "numeration" and more the stories and people working on the series. 



Hussar said:


> But, first season wobbles aren't really anything new to any series.



True...
Excluding all those shows whose first seasons are their best. 

_Six Feet Under
Glee
Friends
Lost
Sports Night
Veronica Mars
The O.C. 
Heroes
30 Rock_
Or even Kurtzman's own _Sleepy Hollow_

There's no shortage of shows that peak hard in their first season and then spend the rest of their run trying to recapture that magic. 

_Discovery _*could* end up like _Buffy_, _Alias _,or _Arrow_ and turn out a great second season. 
Or it could build and grow like _DS9_, _TNG_, _Babylon 5_, or _Supernatural _for a satisfying show that improves as it goes.

Or lacking the vision of Bryan Fuller, Kurtzman does what he does best and just retells stories that have already been done and pushes hard on the nostalgia button, failing to even capture the "WTF what is going to happen next???" wonder of the first season. Especially while being pulled in multiple directions and trying to get multiple shows going at once. 


"First season wobbles" are something you can evaluate after the fact. They're not a predictive element. And they're not an "cure all" excuse for criticism. Saying _Discovery_ will get better because other Trek shows did is as reasonable and sound as saying "the second season will be better, because even Trek stuff is always better than odd." You'll have as good of odds referencing what astrological sign the show is being filmed under.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 16, 2018)

But, [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION], you have to realize we're coming from very different directions.  I LIKED Discovery.  I thought the story telling was strong, the characters were very interesting and it was a fresh take on the Trek universe.  Sure, they dropped lots of Easter Eggs.  Well, that's a bit of a no brainer, first Trek in, what, 15 years after Enterprise was ... less than universally loved.  

And, let's not forget that they are looking for a larger, much larger audience than just North America.  They aren't gearing the show for people like you or me who've been Trek fans for far too many years.  They are trying to capture a broader, and much more mixed audience since they are shopping the show out on both the CBS stream and Netflix.  Which means that for the first time ever, not only is Trek trying to compete in North America, it's trying to compete world wide.  

Which is going to have some impact on the writing and how the show plays out.  

Did they do all sorts of bad things to canon?  Sure.  I get that.  For canon junkies, this show must seem like a real slap in the face.  For me, who couldn't care less about canon, it's very, very cool.  I'm really looking forward to season 2.  All the nitpicky stuff that bugs the crap out of you just washes away for me.  I just simply don't care.


----------



## Jester David (Aug 16, 2018)

Hussar said:


> Did they do all sorts of bad things to canon?  Sure.  I get that.  For canon junkies, this show must seem like a real slap in the face.  For me, who couldn't care less about canon, it's very, very cool.  I'm really looking forward to season 2.  All the nitpicky stuff that bugs the crap out of you just washes away for me.  I just simply don't care.



My last complaint thread mentions canon zero times. It also skips over complaints over the uniforms and Klingon makeup.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 16, 2018)

To be fair about "examining the issues", screen time plays a BIG role here.  I mean, every other Trek got at least 24 episodes in it's first season.  Disco got 15.  Losing 10 hours of screen time does make for a LOT of cutting.  Granted, that means we lost about 9 hours of people discussing in comfortable chairs around a long table,  but, hey, we can't have everything.  But, again, first season and they needed to make a splash.  I'm pretty willing to forgive a lot in a first season.


----------



## GreyLord (Aug 16, 2018)

I'm pretty psyched on this, enough to buy whatever service is streaming it when it comes out.  I DO hope that they show some of the Next Gen cast in the future, if only for cameos to show how they turned out (and hopefully with good futures...such as Riker as an Admiral and other such things).

But, I'd only really want them to focus on Cameos and do a majority on a New Cast with a New life that Picard is now leading.  The question is what type of thing will it be that they explore?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Aug 16, 2018)

Jester David said:


> It took me far too long to get what this was teasing...



I clearly was too subtle, or not many here watched Logan. 



> Honestly, a Lore’s revenge story would be cool. But not going to ever happen as Bret Spiner has aged hard, and can’t pull off the ageless android anymore. Not without a heavy dose of still super expensive de-aging CGI.



Just recast the role. Say Data/B4 picked a new face.




> We’ve had (at least) four TV episodes and one movie dealing with Picard’s relationship with the Borg. That horse has been flogged. We don’t bee an entire series (or season) dealing with them.
> Honestly, I’d be happy if the just say the Borg were dealt a crippling blow at the end of _Voyager_ and collapsed as a power. They’ve been done.



If they say he is in a different place now, I don't see how revisiting old wounds could be the focus of the story.


----------



## Mallus (Aug 16, 2018)

As of right now I'm torn between what I want out of the new show. While I'm at least semi-serious about wanting a retiree rom-com starring Jean-Luc and Vash, that's not going to happen. More realistically, do I want...

a) More of the same? Basically The Orville with 100% more Patrick Stewart and 100% less Seth McFarlane (but exactly the same amount of surprise celebrity cameos/guest stars). High quality Star Trek comfort food that tries to capture the essence of TNG. 

Or...

b) Something more ambitious? What a recent io9 article described as "Last Jedi-ing the Hell out of Captain Picard". I keep thinking of Stewart's acting chops, the penchant for Picard to blow off steam cosplaying Shakespeare on the holodeck, and this leads me to envision the new series using King Lear as a touchstone. A Lear-ed up Picard, played by a 78 year-old Stewart could be downright majestic. 

This is probably influenced by the bravura performance of King Lear starring Frank Langella I saw at BAM a few years back. Wrestling with mortality and regret gave two of the best Star Trek stories, ie The Wrath of Khan an Inner Light. Could be time for another go.


----------

