Re: Star Trek: Picard

Everyone knows Patrick Stewart gained his fame by doing a small but significant role as Richard Lionheart in Robin Hood: Men In Tights.

Re: Star Trek: Picard

davejo90 wrote:
lighton wrote:

And it's important to remember that back in the days there were way less shows to compete with.

This is very true and being an out and out sci-fi nut I can't get enough of these shows. I realise that the time it takes to produce them is long but I can't help wishing that there were more episdes in a season. 8 episodes is way to short for me big_smile

Then you'll be happy to hear that Picard is supposed to have 10: "Stewart revealed in January 2019 that the series would consist of 10 episodes" smile

I'm not sure, but I guess rising costs are at least one reason for fewer episodes per season. And if a show doesn't meet expectations, it's also cheaper to put an end to it (less sunk costs).

z1rra_1 wrote:

Everyone knows Patrick Stewart gained his fame by doing a small but significant role as Richard Lionheart in Robin Hood: Men In Tights.

big_smile

Re: Star Trek: Picard

graybags wrote:

I have a friend who isn't into Star Wars at all, but watches The Mandalorian - I don't get that either smile

Well duh obviously because that little green mogwai is supercute!

Re: Star Trek: Picard

scorpius074 wrote:

I respect your decision to watch what's relevant to your enjoyment, but with that way of thinking you're going to miss out on a ton of quality classic shows and movies. I guess the question for me is, have you finally decided to one day watch TNG? Also, out of curiosity, have you ever seen DS9 or Voyager?

I've never seen DS9 or Voyager, but might pick up TNG I've been recommended TNG by many friends, but never had the drive to watch it. I really have no clue as to why it was never interesting enough for me to even concider. Might have something to do with Enterprise being kind of bland.

scorpius074 wrote:

IMHO, Star Trek: TNG never felt dated at all. Even by today's standards. There were episodes from season four and onward that had high production value for a television series of its time, plausible concepts that stimulated the mind, and quality storytelling enriched with grade-A performances. Stargate premiered only a couple of years after TNG ended, and Farscape a couple of more years after that. In some ways, Farscape and Firefly felt more dated to me in comparison to the later seasons of TNG at the time.

I think in hindsight the compelling factors of Firefly and Farscape was the cast and the fact the story could go quite dark at times. While i never thought ST could be as interesting.



scorpius074 wrote:

This was never the case for me because what's new isn’t always necessarily better. If you look closely at some of the new sci-fi shows, they are basically portraying the same age old concepts in different ways. Some more plausible than others, but they're (for the most part) entrenched in the same facts, theories, laws, and hypotheses that are rooted in the same science found in previous shows, movies, and works of literature. Star Trek: TNG has had some of the most thought-provoking episodes I've ever witnessed. I'm talking episodes that, to this day, still make the old flash bulb pop. And while I can appreciate eye candy as much as the next person, a lack thereof is never a deal-breaker for me if the quality factor is emphasized elsewhere.

As I grew older what you describe is true. I think I was lucky being young when some of the greatest sci fi shows aired. Nowadays we are served with utter shit more often than not, the creativity is mostly gone, and no CGI can make up for that.


scorpius074 wrote:

I understand there are different strokes for different folks, but in your case, you happen to be a fan of an actor who's associated with a franchise within the genre that you're also a fan of. But you were never interested in watching the one series associated with the actor, the franchise, and the genre, that arguably made him famous? Yes, there are some who will argue X-Men, and believe it or not, Family Guy and American Dad ((LOL)), but even most people who have never seen TNG know Patrick Stewart as "The Captain" because of the movies.

Again, I'm not knocking your decision to watch what's relevant to your enjoyment. To each his own. However, seeing how you're a fan of Patrick Stewart, I hope you can one day give Star Trek: TNG a shot.

I should rephrase, not necessarily a fan but I really like him as an actor. A fan would as you say probably have watched more of his stuff smile

scorpius074 wrote:

Other than that, I must say that "Remembrance" exceeded my expectations, and I'm very much looking forward to the rest of this series. I knew going in that most of the true Star Trek vets were operating behind the scenes, with their fingerprints all over this, and it shows. I also happen to be a fan of Patrick Stewart's on-stage performances, and after watching the premiere, I still found myself in awe. The man can act. That's no revelation. But the strongest moment in the series premiere of Star Trek: Picard for me was simply giving him a moment to emote, to condemn, to express his distress and regret over the state of things. It allowed him to do what he does best and embrace the thematic resonance and introspection that were the hallmarks of Star Trek: TNG.

Couldn't agree more!

http://next-episode.net/sig/sig.php?alias=default&kk=133ba59597f9a4f2f96f73177a621cd8

Re: Star Trek: Picard

Moze wrote:

I think in hindsight the compelling factors of Firefly and Farscape was the cast and the fact the story could go quite dark at times.

It's a real shame that Firefly didn't live longer, but those were also a few of the reasons why I enjoyed watching both shows. Farscape in particular was such a unique approach to the genre and television in general. Jim Henson puppetry and clever non-CGI use of special effects made it pretty much stand the test of time. The early parts of the first season was a real chore for me to watch at the time, but it truly soared after the introduction of you-know-who.

There’s so much quality TV available nowadays that it’s almost intimidating how much gets churned out. I was going to wait and binge Star Trek: Picard once it was done, but it seemed like a Herculean task when I already have such a huge backlog of other stuff to watch looming over the horizon. So I decided to go with the weekly serving instead.

This should interest some...
Star Trek: Picard - 21 Trek Easter Eggs And References From Episode 1

https://next-episode.net/img/ne-link.png
https://next-episode.net/sig/sig.php?alias=default&kk=9c3d70de238ebfb2f7ddda60d4ab6e5e
https://signavatar.com/40753_v.gif
https://signavatar.com/40753_s.gif

Re: Star Trek: Picard

‘Star Trek: Picard’ breaks streaming records on CBS All Access
https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/27/star- … ll-access/

Re: Star Trek: Picard

Great news. I think what also helped it was the fact that Picard was ordered for season 2 as well, before season 1 even aired.

Plus the quality of the actors and the theme alone will have the fans drooling.

I know I am

Re: Star Trek: Picard

z1rra_1 wrote:
graybags wrote:

Out of interest, if you've not watched TNG, why would you even watch this?  You won't "get" who Picard is, his relationship with Data, etc. etc.  Don't  get me wrong,  I don't have a problem with what you watch, that's not my business, it just seems a bit odd to me.

I have a friend who isn't into Star Wars at all, but watches The Mandalorian - I don't get that either smile

Not knowing the full backstory isn't necessarily a hindrance. I haven't seen any of the older Star Trek shows but Discovery was great and I just look up stuff i didn't understand from the internet.  Yeah, I won't get some references and I'm blind to fan service, but it's still great quality TV and I enjoy it.

And about not "getting" Picard is maybe even more fun as someone who doesn't know, because we get to find out now.

Also, I've seen the sexed generation, that's plenty big_smile

I totally see where you're coming from there, I never watched Originals or Vampire Diaries, but I watch Legacies... I mean it's like the X-Men Academy but with magic. I have no idea about any series lore until it's mentioned and I roll with it pretty easily.

I have a friend into the whole franchise who thinks I'm crazy.

https://next-episode.net/sig/sig.php?alias=default&kk=fe18e3ede310c4d0ddb3af64211e19ec

Re: Star Trek: Picard

lighton wrote:

And The Mandalorian? That's easy to explain, season 1 is better than some Star Wars movies. big_smile

At least most of them, but that Lone Wolf & Cub shtick will stay compelling for only so long... unless it takes a page or two from, what I feel is the best SW property, the 2008 Clone Wars series and begins to not only include the larger SW Universe but we really need our samurai to become more developed. My biggest criticism of Mandalorian thought is the amount of plot armor the main characters had...

+ show spoiler

really the only ones being lost were the old-timer and the android. Not too far off from the Nickelodeon Western flicks of our Grandfather's day where the old-timer and the 'other' (usually a native or a demonized woman who has a heart of gold) are sacrificed to save the others.

Not that I didn't enjoy the trip, I just don't want to end up with that type of fatigue which personifies series in which the lion share of the series momentum gets spent before for program ends.

No offence to folks who still enjoy watching their favorite characters persevere but continuing on past a natural end point or with a premises that never evolves, today, is folly. Something I hope Picard keeps in mind as it goes on... speaking of which time to see where Jean-Luc's search takes him next smile

https://next-episode.net/sig/sig.php?alias=default&kk=fe18e3ede310c4d0ddb3af64211e19ec

60 (edited by TheFizza 2020-02-14 04:28:05)

Re: Star Trek: Picard

Moze wrote:

I've never seen DS9 or Voyager, but might pick up TNG I've been recommended TNG by many friends, but never had the drive to watch it. I really have no clue as to why it was never interesting enough for me to even consider. Might have something to do with Enterprise being kind of bland.

That's one of my issues with Enterprise as well... but I have issues with Voyager because I don;t think it ever really fulfilled it's premise so I might be too much of an Telelitist ;P That being said IDK what you might be looking for in a series because if it's any sort of series-arc or serialized story that's not what TOS or TNG are.

Gawd love both of those series (I know I do) but they may not be as enjoyable to as Voyager and DS9 which both could translate more to the modern audience. Not to say I don't recommend every fan of any Trek to try something else in the franchisee, even the cartoon, I feel it should be pointed out that it can be as boring as it can be frustrating seeing very little consequences continue or linger from episode-to-episode. With, of course, some notable exceptions.

Moze wrote:

I think in hindsight the compelling factors of Firefly and Farscape was the cast and the fact the story could go quite dark at times. While i never thought ST could be as interesting.

I HEART Farscape A LOT but you're not necessarily correct about Trek not getting dark because DS9 got DARK!

scorpius074 wrote:

If you look closely at some of the new sci-fi shows, they are basically portraying the same age old concepts in different ways. Some more plausible than others, but they're (for the most part) entrenched in the same facts, theories, laws, and hypotheses that are rooted in the same science found in previous shows, movies, and works of literature.

Star Trek: TNG has had some of the most thought-provoking episodes I've ever witnessed. I'm talking episodes that, to this day, still make the old flash bulb pop. And while I can appreciate eye candy as much as the next person, a lack thereof is never a deal-breaker for me if the quality factor is emphasized elsewhere.

Moze wrote:

As I grew older what you describe is true. I think I was lucky being young when some of the greatest sci fi shows aired. Nowadays we are served with utter shit more often than not, the creativity is mostly gone, and no CGI can make up for that.

I can see the points both of you make but I disagree with the conclusion it seems you've come to, Moze. I think we live in THE MOST AMAZING TIME for SF on the small screen.  While I agree it is true that there seems to be a sort of unified homogenization of the future there still seems to be different interpretations and even ideals. Not the ideals of the 1960's when Trek was a reflective utopia, was needed, but of the 21st Century when a more realistic look can be just as idealistic.

From The Expanse to (the now defunked) Dark Matter we can see the same ideals of Trek as they battle through the malaise of indifference and cruelty, reflecting today, as they fight for a better tomorrow.

scorpius074 wrote:

Other than that, I must say that "Remembrance" exceeded my expectations, and I'm very much looking forward to the rest of this series... But the strongest moment in the series premiere of Star Trek: Picard for me was simply giving him a moment to emote, to condemn, to express his distress and regret over the state of things. It allowed him to do what he does best and embrace the thematic resonance and introspection that were the hallmarks of Star Trek: TNG.

Moze wrote:

Couldn't agree more!

I enjoyed reading your comments and scorpius074 I think you point to the heart of things here... That being said, while I am very excited for the series to keep up the quality I see here in the first ep but I have a Four Episode test for new series, so I'll reserve (most of my) judgment, until then smile

https://next-episode.net/sig/sig.php?alias=default&kk=fe18e3ede310c4d0ddb3af64211e19ec

Re: Star Trek: Picard

CBS Makes Star Trek: Picard Pilot Free On YouTube 'For a Limited Time' (but only in the US)
https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/01/3 … mited-time

Re: Star Trek: Picard

lighton wrote:

...but only in the US...

Lol, that that even stops anyone anymore.

DRM "manages access" in the same way that Prison "manages freedom".
http://xkcd.com/488/

Re: Star Trek: Picard

Wizard wrote:
lighton wrote:

...but only in the US...

Lol, that that even stops anyone anymore.

Ask around at the nearest mall - many have no clue. smile

Re: Star Trek: Picard

It's weird to hear people curse in Star Trek...

...where did I put that rat's ass I could give?

Daemons are benevolent or benign nature spirits, beings of the same nature as both mortals and gods, similar to ghosts, chthonic heroes, spirit guides, forces of nature or the gods themselves.

Re: Star Trek: Picard

lighton wrote:

CBS Makes Star Trek: Picard Pilot Free On YouTube 'For a Limited Time' (but only in the US)
https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/01/3 … mited-time

[...]This is an opportunity for viewers curious about the show to see if Picard is worth subscribing to the network's streaming service, CBS All Access, to watch the rest of the series.

[...]The description for the video says the episode will only be available "for a limited time" and that it's presented by Geico. It does not, however, clarify how long "a limited time" is or when the video might become unavailable.

Also, check out some of the comments from the slashdot.org link when you get a chance. wink

https://next-episode.net/img/ne-link.png
https://next-episode.net/sig/sig.php?alias=default&kk=9c3d70de238ebfb2f7ddda60d4ab6e5e
https://signavatar.com/40753_v.gif
https://signavatar.com/40753_s.gif

Re: Star Trek: Picard

TheFizza wrote:

I can see the points both of you make but I disagree with the conclusion it seems you've come to, Moze. I think we live in THE MOST AMAZING TIME for SF on the small screen.  While I agree it is true that there seems to be a sort of unified homogenization of the future there still seems to be different interpretations and even ideals. Not the ideals of the 1960's when Trek was a reflective utopia was needed but of the 21st Century when a more realistic look can be just as idealistic.

From The Expanse to (the now defunked) Dark Matter we can see the same ideals of Trek as they battle through the malaise of indifference and cruelty, reflecting today, as they fight for a better tomorrow.

Well, I've seen every new sci fi show the last decades and I stand firmly by my point! The only new sci fi shows I've really liked is The Expanse, The Orville, Travelers and maybe Dark Matter as well. I guess it makes sense Travelers and Dark Matter was ok since it's some of the writers/producers of Stargate who made the shows. Again the nominator in those shows are a good likable cast with creative storytelling. And little to no political biases. (which is very hard to come by these days)

http://next-episode.net/sig/sig.php?alias=default&kk=133ba59597f9a4f2f96f73177a621cd8

Re: Star Trek: Picard

Daemonius wrote:

It's weird to hear people curse in Star Trek...

big_smile
https://youtu.be/7WTvEbUkeLM

https://next-episode.net/img/ne-link.png
https://next-episode.net/sig/sig.php?alias=default&kk=9c3d70de238ebfb2f7ddda60d4ab6e5e
https://signavatar.com/40753_v.gif
https://signavatar.com/40753_s.gif

Re: Star Trek: Picard

It seems to be a slow burn show.  Not for Trekkies? And the show theme song must be hated ( by them)

Re: Star Trek: Picard

merc_1 wrote:

It seems to be a slow burn show.  Not for Trekkies? And the show theme song must be hated ( by them)

The theme tune has a hint of Star Trek in it, as for slow, I think it's going at a speed designed to introduce the cast and what they do and the history behind the plot.

At the moment I'm intrigued to see how it's all going to develope and who are the 'goodies and baddies'.

And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes....

Re: Star Trek: Picard

I might  be  wrong but since when did you take Earl Grey tea with milk? a travesty?

71 (edited by merc_1 2020-02-02 22:54:15)

Re: Star Trek: Picard

davejo90 wrote:
merc_1 wrote:

It seems to be a slow burn show.  Not for Trekkies? And the show theme song must be hated ( by them)

The theme tune has a hint of Star Trek in it, as for slow, I think it's going at a speed designed to introduce the cast and what they do and the history behind the plot.

At the moment I'm intrigued to see how it's all going to develope and who are the 'goodies and baddies'.

not complaining but since when did star trek bother about introducing the cast lol

+ show spoiler

what I dont understand what is Commodore O's relation to the 2 Romulons? Is she a Vulcan and what is her interest in the new synths?

Re: Star Trek: Picard

merc_1 wrote:

It seems to be a slow burn show.  Not for Trekkies?

Why not?

merc_1 wrote:

And the show theme song must be hated ( by them)

Why? I think it nicely fits the really good intro.

73 (edited by merc_1 2020-02-06 13:44:06)

Re: Star Trek: Picard

lighton wrote:
merc_1 wrote:

It seems to be a slow burn show.  Not for Trekkies?

Why not?

merc_1 wrote:

And the show theme song must be hated ( by them)

Why? I think it nicely fits the really good intro.

well no beam me up Scottie no Spock  raised eyebrow

well I seem to remember the theme song to Enterprise was  hated by Trekkie types as it wasn't an overture type thing? Picards is even less so.

Re: Star Trek: Picard

Well, you just can't please everyone. cool

Re: Star Trek: Picard

It's strange the things you notice following comments from others as this last episode had so much old 'Star Trek' music in it.

And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes....