Comment Stream

Re: PIC S3: The Last Generation

@Token

"@TheWatcher I didn't read any of that"

That's ok. The post was designed in such a way as to potentially improve you if it did and took it seriously or to simply reveal you to everyone else here as a shallow troll if it was obvious you didn't.

Your explicit confession confirms the side you picked so my post worked just fine.

You also lost out on something important but I never give up hoping your kind might improve someday anyway.

Something I learned from Star Trek.

Re: PIC S3: The Last Generation

Apologies for some spelling and grammar errors above.

Re: PIC S3: The Last Generation

@Token

I'm going to preface this with a statement that I want you to read very carefully and keep in mind as you read my points.

========================================================
***Don't double down based on emotional momentum.***
========================================================

Now to your response..

"Connection" is a theme that has featured prominently in every season of modern trek. It was in Season 2 of Picard. It was in seasons 2, 3, and 4 of Discovery. It's the safest, most generic, marketing approved message you could put in a season of Trek. It's utterly meaningless."

I didn't realize there was rule that said common themes are by definition of meaningless. Is that what you're saying? Heroism, love, sacrifice, fear, death. These are all old themes. All are meaningless because they are generic?

I'm offering you the chance to amend or clarify your statement.
Remember, don't double down. I'm giving you an opportunity and a dignified out here.

"Of course we all want to connect with others. You might as well make your theme about how we all need air to breath and water to drink. "

As Roger Ebert once said, 'It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.' The theme about the need for connection was demonstrated by:

1) Many of the character's starting states such as Shaw, Riker and Seven who are all being blocked from a meaningful connection for a variety of reasons and who all manage to reconnect by series end. There's a self healing element here that was handled across multiple characters while all respecting the theme.

2) Meaningful and well-acted conversations between veteran actors with respect to the histories of their characters. Ro's conversation's with Picard, Jack testing Picard about family while incognito at the restaurant are two examples. Notice how these connections in many ways are driving the character's actions. That's good writing.

3) Actual environmental manifestation during the story which could be taken as metaphor as with the dilapidated borg cube being the obvious example.

The theme permeates the series. The presence of a theme, common or otherwise, is meaningless unless you do something with it. The series set it up, demonstrated it's effects across multiple storylines and wove it into the plot and for my part I think they did a pretty good job of it and probably a remarkable one given the production complexities involved.

From a theme standpoint, what else could you want exactly? Sure you could argue that this and that could've been more effective but I would argue that a sincere and substantial effort was present and that counts for a lot.

My standard for quality isn't perfection, it's sincere and thoughtful effort which is generally trying to say something of substance, respects the audience and is putting that on a screen with style and a certain degree of professional presentation (which is why I have a measure of respect for the star wars prequels and nothing but utter HATRED for the sequel trilogy). If I get anything beyond that I consider it a bonus. If there's a reason why even great filmmakers find it difficult to keep topping themselves, it's likely because even they are not completely aware of what caused their work to be so successful. A certain degree of serendipity is often involved.

Picard is a sincere and thoughtful effort for me, presented with style and respect for its characters and for the audience at large whose plot withstands enough casual observation to be serviceable and whose moments make it more than the sum of it's parts.

Now before you respond, understand that you are NOT going to convince me otherwise and this is not an argument. If you have different standards by which you enjoy your Star Trek, then you have different standards. I'm only responding to your points about common themes being meaningless and that their presence is of no value. They may be of no value to YOU but I suspect they are valued by many, and your implying that they should not be edges towards the line between opinion and condescending insult.

Now you can refuse all responsibility for how you are being interpreted but those who reserve the right to speak while simultaneously refusing all responsibility for how they are interpreted are of a certain character which I'm giving you the chance not to be.

Re: PIC S3: The Last Generation

On future sci-fi writing as a whole and why I'm largely fine with the plot in Star Trek Picard (and frankly, why you should be too...)

1). Plot vs. Theme? Which should be more important?

In a plot movie, the story is the key. Themes and character arcs are bonuses but aren't required. Procedurals are all about this. Episodes like Conundrum and Remember Me are about this. Things have to be carefully layed out and the rules have to be specifically established as you go along because running into the limitations those rules set defines the "thinkspace" our characters have to work within which creates tension and legitimate jeopardy situations.

In a theme movie, the purpose is what are we saying about certain ideas? The plot primarily exists to setup and have those discussions. Episodes like Tapestry and Parallels are like this. You find god-like things like Q, the Guardian of Forever and various spatial anomalies here because they are essentially plot shortcutting devices that can be written however you want to setup the themes you want to explore with a minimum of fuss. They're flexible framing devices which are not the main point of the story.

The best and most memorable episodes are a terrific fusion of the two working in harmony to reinforce each other. Wrath of Khan remains the high watermark for me because the plot and the themes (aging, the effect you have on the younger generation, etc.) work well together.

But I acknowledge that the last one is a rarity. It's VERY difficult to pull off and the longer something runs, the easier it is to trip over something (usually in the plot department).

I want both good theme and good plot but if we have to cut corner somewhere, I would rather they cut corners on plot and frankly its the smarter call. Why?

2). Once the technology level and scope gets high enough, plotting starts to become increasingly rickety.

Future-set sci-fi suffers from AND WILL INCREASINGLY CONTINUE TO SUFFER FROM rickety plotting.

Predictive society sci-fi, despite the myriad possibilities it offers, also suffers from a one severe complexity, it always has to look and operate in a more advanced world than today's and the further out you go the more this principle applies. Unfortunately, this means plots will increasingly make less and less sense the further out you go.

Let's face it, creative use of the transporter alone could solve probably 95% of all problems that occur in Trek. We've just come to accept that they won't be employed that way.

The exponential gains in technology over the last few decades make predicting just how society will look at some fixed point in the future all but impossible. Frankly, given the state of genetics, robotics and reality simulation today I find the idea of fighting with rifles in corridors 300 years from now highly suspect.

Trek also comes with DECADES of continuity to look over written by hundreds of writers with different priorities and editorial hands directing the process. I don't think it's humanly possible to retain 100% continuity over time and it only gets harder as time passes. At some point, the continuity becomes overly limiting.

Basically, plotting in a futuristic society is hard. It's going to get harder because of the fact it has to reference the real world which in some ways moves at a faster pace and the decades of continuity doesn't help.

I want fantastic plots, but I acknowledge the fact that this is an increasingly tougher ask year after year particularly when it comes to Trek. I won't excuse truly lazy plotting but I cut some slack here. We're a long, LONG way from the 1980's when the only references to observe were TOS, TNG and a few movies.

As a writer and if you're really stuck or pressed for time and you have any theme ambitions, I would rather you cut corners on plot because cutting from theme empties your message.

For those who demand that trek adhere to continuity and it's own verisimilitude to the nth degree and then some, I get it. You want this world in your mind's eye to always look legitimate and internally consistent when referring to itself so your immersion isn't broken, but take this as a sign of things to come. You're asking a lot and what you're asking for costs more year after year (and i'm not talking just dollars). Beyond a certain point, that simply may not be sustainable so consider yourself warned.

3) Star Trek's reputation was made on theme, not plot. The world it created was incidental and it should respect but not become a slave to it.

Picard (the series) is admirable for having high thematic ambition and forethought. If you want examples I'll give them to you piecemeal on request time-permitting but to take three quick examples
1) Picard was living out his days on his chateau unfulfilled but has re-found connection with beverley and established connection with a son and so doing has discovered a part of himself he never knew he needed
2) Shaw had his connections forcibly severed at wolf 359 and is still suffering from the trauma
3) The borg queen and lair represent a kind of death state sought by those who want or experience connection in and of itself but without any purpose or real relationship behind it other than to multiply that connection. The emphasis is brought home by the dead and decaying state of those there feels very representative of this idea. Thematically powerful stuff.

The plot and pacing stumbled a bit to bring these moments forward but I favour theme over plot. I love the world of Star Trek but I remember that at it's soul it was not meant to be a world, it was meant to be a lens.

Those who say this isn't good sci-fi, sorry I can't agree. This is great sci-fi. It may not be as internally consistent anymore and that's too bad but for those who spit on this series and are determined to smash it into the dirt....

...you missed something.

Re: PIC S3: The Last Generation

You know the more I think about it the more I realize that this seasons is much smarter than I initially gave it credit for. It is in fact very smart and they went out of their way to setup an important and recurring theme throughout the entire series which was reinforced throughout almost every episode from the individual character arcs to the overall plot.

The need for connection to others and what the lack of it can do to you.
It affects Picard, Riker, Jack, Seven, the Borg Queen, Ro, Raffi, Shaw and is manifested even in the fleet coordination plot line. They're all in need of it and/or suffering from the lack of it.

The series revolves it's people and it's plot around this idea.

Now that I think about it, rarely have I seen a series or film that calls back so often to it's central idea. And the nice thing about it is that it did it so subtly and in a way is only largely visible when you look back on the season as a whole and put the incidents side-by-side.

If Trek going forward uses this framework as a launching point to grow from then maybe I won't retire from Trek after all (as I was planning to do after this). Trek is at it's best when it speaks to the human condition and now that I review it, I'm actually extremely impressed.

The finale gets a round of applause from me. It was smarter than I was. They had a point to make and they made it with aplomb.

That's what the best of storytelling is supposed to do.

Re: PIC S3: The Last Generation

Saw it. Liked it. Will type more later but the old crew was treated with respect and proper sentiment which they deserve and all major plot points were closed to my satisfaction. Some of the newer characters were also given arcs with closure which is refreshing to see. It was heavy on sentiment but it's a goodbye film so I find that entirely appropriate. Haven't enjoyed any NuTrek in any significant fashion since the start of Disco but for the first time in many years I had fun with Star Trek.

As far as the negative reaction goes I'm beginning to notice a pattern here, I think lot of negative viewers here are looking for reasons to disqualify it from receiving any credit.

Basically for them, every negative scores -10 points and any positives are only worth 1 point and thus should be spat upon for not being higher and is effectively worth 0. It's kind of like the trial of To Kill a Mockingbird except it's Star Trek that's on trial. It's ugly, patronizing and makes a mockery of the analytical process. They're entitled to their opinions but this is the age of internet troll where everyone's a critic. Everyone demands to be heard while being stingy about actually listening.

I'll have more later.

As far as Seven goes and any nonsense about feminism, agenda, blah, blah blah.

She's earned that chair.

Re: PIC S3: Surrender

@Dan

For myself and others here I assume, we watch because unlike a show where one never had any attachment to the characters to start with, a lot of us were and are attached to these characters and have seen them do lots of great stuff previously so we want it to be good and KNOW it could be based on past experience with TNG. So we keep watching and hope it will do TNG justice, become unhappy when it doesn't't and get especially ticked off when the reasons why seem to be so obvious, recurring and fixable. Writers and directors have the entire next gen run and decades of trek material to draw on so obvious flaws are maddening and often inexcusable at this point.

You were never really invested in voyager or Enterprise so tuning out wasn't a big deal. If one wants to see the next gen crew this is the only option and it's a major piss off to be held hostage to that while having to sit through some of the dreck this series has been. It's like watching a friend being abused but we keep watching hoping it will stop and improve, which thankfully it has this season.

Re: PIC S3: Surrender

For the record, I'm largely enjoying season 3. It has it's faults but nothing that can't be rectified by series end. I think they're pacing is off but I'm not going to judge the overall plot until the last episode is out and I've had a chance to sit with it for a while.

One thing I've definitely learned over the years though is that when it comes to lasting reputation, a series is far better off screwing up it's start but sticking it's landing than the other way around. If you screw up the beginning but reward people for sticking around, viewers generally tend to forgive you and tell others that "x" is good but you'll have to stick with it a bit first.

Screw up your ending after a good beginning though and an audience will crucify you for getting them invested and then punching them in the face at the end and they will tell everyone that ultimately it was a waste of time despite the compelling opening.

I love TNG. I grew up with the TOS films and TNG and I wanted these crews to get a send off worthy of the respect and dignity they deserve especially since we will likely never see them again. With Kirk's crew I largely got that. I'm REALLY hoping to get the same for Picard and company because they've earned it. I want this season to succeed, dammit.

Picard (the series) has a track record that makes me nervous but right now they still have room to pull it off and I haven't seen any lethally bad signs. Some things could've been better but I have yet to see anything definitively fatal.

So fingers crossed.

Re: PIC S3: Surrender

Thanks. I was re-watching some of the older films recently and it's amazing how after forty years, they just can't seem to top many of them. Granted a series and film are different animals but it's refreshing how there's not a lot of wasted space or repetitive conversation in those movies. Even the motion picture's (too long) special FX shots feel like they're genuinely inviting the audience to enjoy the wonder of it all as opposed to a lot of modern series where the dialogue and character reactions are so forced that it seems like even the writer knows he's padding things out.

The motion picture feels sincere in it's failing. A lot of modern series work does not.

Re: PIC S3: Surrender

Knives out parts 1 and 2 are other examples of badly written mysteries.

SPOILERS FOLLOW

In part one, we only learn during the "great reveal" scene that the nurse never poisoned Chistopher Plummer's character at all. This is information the audience was never privy to during the actual investigation and had no cause to suspect at any point earlier. Bad writing. The audience never had a chance of figuring out the mystery beforehand.

In part two, we actually SEE footage showing Dave Bautista's character pick up Edward Norton's drink which in the end is actually a lie. He handed it to him. That's outright false evidence being given to the viewer as a physical truth rather than as testimony which would allow room for suspicion so Edward Norton comes off as innocent. It's a dramatic cheat from an inferior filmmaker.

SPOILERS END

Mysteries should never outright falsify evidence and even the misdirections should have their own logic otherwise it becomes obvious to viewer by the end that the writer/director is just a dime-store magician who can only string along with cheap tricks that feel like a huge, empty, waste of time hindsight and often lessen the big reveal at the end by being so obviously unrelated.

It's a writer trying to pass off ineptitude as cool questions that were only every just a stalling tactic that he hopes will be forgotten later.

Re: PIC S3: Surrender

It's not the crime that often gets people caught, it's errors in the cover up.

Badly written mysteries work along similar lines. It's not what the mystery is about that often causes them to be dramatically unsatisfying, it's when the path to them doesn't make sense along the way that reveals that something is fundamentally wrong or weak in the writing.

The best mysteries actually put all the evidence you need right in front of you but they do it in such a way that the most critical facts are downplayed while more misleading (but not false...that's key) ones are brought to the forefront which cause the audience to draw the wrong conclusions. But a good mystery never lies to you.

They carefully backtrack from the end and determine all the clues they need to leave to both justify the end and mislead the audience along the way then weave it all into a believable and natural path towards the conclusion from the beginning.

Badly written mysteries or mystery boxes mislead or misdirect through emotional or plot gimmicks with bad setup and often no payoff which are cheap and unskilled methods of dragging an audience back week after week.

Case-in-point. Rey finds Luke's lightsaber in the force awakens. Grabs audience attention. Makes them ask "how?" and invests the viewer in the explanation of the event and it's significance to the character.

Payoff: Zero. Completely forgotten. Used as a cheap emotional trick in the moment.

Re: PIC S3: Surrender

Actually, scratch that last point. The heroes don't know it was dropped so it won't come up though the tech will still play a role on Frontier day.

Locutus is likely still at Daystrom. Vadic's hand communications are simply because he probably gave her some piece of him to allow them to stay in contact.

It's also how Vadic got in so easily to get Riker.

Re: PIC S3: Surrender

How this will play out.

The face is an incomplete Locutus which is whom Troi recognized behind the door in Jack's mind.
He was created at Daystrom from Picard's body from the traces of Irumodic syndrome in his DNA which were actually emergent elements of Locutus trying to re-write Picard's DNA over the years.
Vadic was at Daystrom which is how they met and he engineered her escape.
Damage to Picard's body from age and death means he needs some of Jack's DNA to complete himself and needs to do it before Frontier day.
Jack's powers are a derivative of the hive-mind abilities the Borg possess and were inherited from Picard.
The Federation fleet is being gathered all in one place for Frontier day because Locutus intends to call in the borg once he's been completed somehow and ambush them using a much larger version of the portal weapon to bring them there instantly but he needs his hive mind abilities back before then.
This is why Vadic agreed to help him and also explains why she remarked on Seven's witnessesing Jack's capture as appropriate.
The changeling conspiracy is all about maneuvering the fleet into the trap.
Now that the changelings can be identified, they can all be killed or transported to a place of confinement simultaneously.
The smaller portal weapon Vadic dropped will be found and used to defeat the overall threat somehow.