Jump to content
rllmuk
PC Master Race

Star Trek: Picard - 'Best Trek Ever' says everyone

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Thor said:

Come on now, lads, haven't you been paying attention? The internet gods at Red Letter Media have declared it shit, therefore we must all say it's shit, and never watch any further episodes. :rolleyes:

 

3 hours ago, womblingfree said:

The Red Letter Media discussion is very funny and everything they say is true.

 

I thought Episode 1 was excellent anyway.

 

The one thing they’re missing is that even in a future utopia where prejudice is thought not to exist, if you take your eye off the ball, it’s back.


The thing is, nothing they say is wrong. And I’m sympathetic to their position but it’s exactly that kind of single-minded pedantry that got Star Trek tied up in knots in the first place -   trying to satisfy fans with a purity of canon that is infallible by design. 
 

But then you look at it and think - when they wanted to do a time travel episode they’d invent some mumbo jumbo to achieve their ends because that’s what they wanted to write about that day, so it’s not like they were ever above getting a script done by the deadline.

 

If it’s fun to watch, that’s the main thing. This was fun, so I don’t have too many complaints. I don’t think it shits on Star Trek. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you can easily be a lot pickier about some of the things in the show but as the rlm guys do also say, it's definitely not as terrible as discovery which is the main thing. 

 

And as you've said, it was fun too. So far so good and I also realise that there's probably no viable business in making old school star trek in the manner I and some of us might want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, b00dles said:

And as you've said, it was fun too. So far so good and I also realise that there's probably no viable business in making old school star trek in the manner I and some of us might want.

 

Well there is, but it's called The Orville. ;)

 

I think I prefer it this way, with The Orville doing the classic TNG thing with a whole new universe while Picard does something new in the proper one. As long as its good of course.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mogster said:

 

Well there is, but it's called The Orville. ;)

 

I think I prefer it this way, with The Orville doing the classic TNG thing with a whole new universe while Picard does something new in the proper one. As long as its good of course.

This is true. Although I'd still rather it was star trek: the orville :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, b00dles said:

Yeah, you can easily be a lot pickier about some of the things in the show but as the rlm guys do also say, it's definitely not as terrible as discovery which is the main thing. 

 

And as you've said, it was fun too. So far so good and I also realise that there's probably no viable business in making old school star trek in the manner I and some of us might want.

That's the rub, they're still saying it's terrible, just not as terrible as this other Trek Show. The episode is not terrible. Of course, it's not perfect either, but it's definitely not terrible. To be honest, I make the same face as those guys in RLM do in their youtube pic whenever someone here posts anything from them, or Half-in-the-bag, or whatever youtube "celeb" is in vogue at the time.

  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Thor said:

That's the rub, they're still saying it's terrible, just not as terrible as this other Trek Show. The episode is not terrible. Of course, it's not perfect either, but it's definitely not terrible. To be honest, I make the same face as those guys in RLM do in their youtube pic whenever someone here posts anything from them, or Half-in-the-bag, or whatever youtube "celeb" is in vogue at the time.

Well rich says numerous times he didn't hate it and they don't say it's terrible, just that it isn't "traditional" star trek, which they also recognise is unlikely as mentioned in the reviews of star trek 2009. They also enjoyed beyond but no one saw that. 

 

Fair enough if you don't like them of course, I find them entertaining but I don't remotely agree with everything they say and have mentioned elsewhere that they clearly do have some unfortunate common middle America type views. 

 

They're being picky nerds but that is basically their shtick and the majority of their criticisms are technically correct. It is a bit fun police to an extent but it's also done tongue in cheek, they're not nearly as bad or presenting these criticisms as factually bad like cinema sins for instance. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't understand how people expect the same old TNG format of episodes and use it as a criticism for today's programmes.  For me, it's an outdated way to put on a show which really shows its age when watched in today's era. Don't get me wrong I can still enjoy them but this is more because I watched them the first time around.   I remember towards the end of DS9 and the overarching plot was a feature of every episode - it really created a fantastic atmosphere.  I think it's the main reason why I didn't stick it out with Voyager as it slipped back into the same format (for the majority of the time anyway).

 

I'm not trying to have a dig at anyone who holds the opposite opinion but there was never any inclination this was ever going to be a star trek story in the traditional sense.  I think it is all the better for it. 

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, iknowgungfu said:

Personally, I don't understand how people expect the same old TNG format of episodes and use it as a criticism for today's programmes.  For me, it's an outdated way to put on a show which really shows its age when watched in today's era. Don't get me wrong I can still enjoy them but this is more because I watched them the first time around.   I remember towards the end of DS9 and the overarching plot was a feature of every episode - it really created a fantastic atmosphere.  I think it's the main reason why I didn't stick it out with Voyager as it slipped back into the same format (for the majority of the time anyway).

 

I'm not trying to have a dig at anyone who holds the opposite opinion but there was never any inclination this was ever going to be a star trek story in the traditional sense.  I think it is all the better for it. 

I'd rather have an over arching plot but with the exploration/ new space and science things each week instead of episodic in the sense of it being like a film chopped into bits. Much like ds9 was (which I'm rewatching at the minute). 

 

Again though, I did enjoy that first episode and I'm looking forward to the rest of it but that doesn't exclude the fact that I do think it could be a little better. It could of course be a whole lot worse too, like discovery. 

 

I enjoy the discussion about it all though, I'm not intending to piss on anyone's opinion or enjoyment (or disapproval) of it either, it's just fun to chat about trek :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thor said:

To be honest, I make the same face as those guys in RLM do in their youtube pic whenever someone here posts anything from them, or Half-in-the-bag, or whatever youtube "celeb" is in vogue at the time.


I don’t really compare RLM to the typical YouTube celeb. They could probably have a far bigger audience but they’re less in your face than the average YouTuber, not needy for subscribes and hitting the like button. I like that they don’t chop their sentences up with hard cuts, and include all the pauses and brain farts. It doesn’t always work, some of their vids ramble a bit. But I like the more relaxed, less hyper image they project.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nicky said:

Sorry, i'm calling bullshit on this line.  If "today's era" defacto means "this is how tv or shows have be done" then the fullblown industry is dead. TNG dispite its handful of duff episodes out of the 178 run. was a wildly successful and hopeful show, a positive moral tale of what we hope the future will be like. each episode had a start, a middle and an end - a setup and resolution. With some really intelligent and heady storylines in the mix. IF this is what you mean by aged, then that backs up the obvious "industry is dead" line earlier. There will always be a place for proper intelligent storytelling.  The only thing that "shows its age" is the 3:4 aspect, especially on the HD remasters. The TNG format isnt dead (look at orville for some of its extremley clever and well done writing and social issues adddressed) it's all down to chasing the lowest comon denominator. to try appeal to as many idiots as possible. Hence why Discovery was such a fucking shit-tip. Nerds and sci-fi became mainstream. Therefore to appeal to as much of this as possible and to sell as many subscription service fees as possible sci-fi became stupid. stupid, flashy nonsense that appealed to the short attention span modern entertainment consumer.


If TNG was remade today with the budgets afforded Picard or Discovery, we'd be heralding it as a thoughtful light in the darkness in our right-wing misery world. As i'm currently on my 4th "entire star trek episode marathon" in 10 years, my views also may be biased, but they're also coming from a position of having put up with the entirety of voyager and discovery.

 

Additionally voyagers problem wasnt to do with the format, It was that the execution of the show, paled in comparision to the premise. The ship was as good as new every time, and many of the peisodes didnt explore this "lost in the wilderness, we're fucked" approach and instead were scraped off of the TNG cutting room floor and recast with neelix. Also the Marquis issues were solved very early on and should have been a much more central part of the entire run.

 

tldr: i vehemently disagree with your statement.  Actually i don't think i do. In a way you're sort of right but i disagree with the fault being TNG. The fault is a)shit writing b)trying to appeal to as many people as possible as your show is no longer a niche thing and scifi is now cool. c) not understanding what makes what you have special, and d)TV's changed landscape and the fact every network needs a "crown jewel" a bland but flashy option to get more subscriptions.

 

this is one of those rambles you usually delete and go have a wank instead but im pressing submit!

 

Calling bullshit is fine if you don't agree. I didn't say that the fault was TNG only that by today's standards/trends my view was that it is dated. I loved it at the time and when I watch them I still enjoy them. However, most episodes are very formulaic:

 

Start: somewhere in space doing something sciency/routine where an anomaly or something bad happens. 

 

Mid: noone knows how to fix/deal with given problem with resulting danger/peril

 

Finish: last minute solution found which "might just do it".  It will take 48 hours to complete.....you have 12 hours only etc.  WooHoo...it works. End until next week. 

 

I am being very tongue in cheek here and as I've already said I love it and grew up on it but I stand by my comment that it is a dated format for today's TV culture (whether original fans of the show agree with this or not). And you are probably right in some aspect of studios wanting to reach as many people as possible but if that means that we get more star trek stories to watch similar to what we've seen in this first episode then all the better.  

 

Anyways....I've ranted a bit myself now without meaning to. I only started replying to say I wasn't placing blame on TNG. 

 

Looking forward to the next episode to see where it all goes. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cassidy said:

More than one woman in the episode.  And she kicked mens asses. So must have been real problematic for them. 

 

 

Are they sexist then? I have no desire to watch their "reviews" but they seem very popular in certain circles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hrrm. I like RLM but that video was ridiculously picky. Of course Picard was professionally distant as the captain of the Enterprise but that didn't preclude him from getting closer to the crew over time. They ignore little tidbits like Picard finally joining the officer's poker game at the end of the series and treat the character as if he should be the same authoritarian figure twenty five years later.

 

RLM often conveniently overlook some of the sillier elements of TNG in favour of the good stuff. I do wonder what a Re:View of TNG would've been like when it was contemporary and you had the likes of the crew running around Sherwood Forest, Crusher falling in love with a ghost or some of the main cast being transformed into children! Having rewatched it last year, it definitely wasn't the sacred cow I remembered it as. I got the impression Rich liked Picard more than he let on but Mike was dictating a harsher tone throughout.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nicky said:

this is one of those rambles you usually delete and go have a wank instead but im pressing submit!


I commend your passion and for hitting that submit button. :lol:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They make some good points in that RLM video but most of the decent ones revolve around "we want TNG to not change and just be TNG".. the rest were bad writing predictions which might or might not be right - Other than that it was alot of picky picky shite -

 

 

 


completely (deliberately) misunderstanding Picard's relationship with Data for "comedic" effect - no allowance for Picard's relationship and understanding of data to evolve (oh he told told Data to destroy Lal so that's what he thinks always! no character development) despite fact his opinion changed in that very episode. The utter disregard of the Data/Picard relationship in this review makes my blood boil. Given the shite they talked about that subject -  Mike certainly hasn't a fucking clue about Picard/Data relationship.

why didnt they stun her (well we know data is hard ot stun and they are trying to stun something similar)

Oh the Federation have always been fantastic and now they are racist - They even had clips of Star Trek 6 to back up their point - which actually damages their point

Oh their sun went nova quickly and later admit romulans are insular

Oh Spock was the only one there with no support to inject red matter (well yes because Fed had withdrawn)
 

The  Picard age stuff was pretty despicable about stunt doubles - oh this isn't a knock - and then go on about him sitting up

 

 

There is too much "comic book guy shtcik" in the video (and the worst of RLM videos) the majority of TNG episodes would not have stood up to that level of scrutiny. They came to this looking to give it a kicking because that is their modus operandi "new version of Trek and Star wars are shit" and they have vitriol pre-prepared.

 

Also this is episode 1!

 

edit - and if you go into a tv series knowing you HATE the writer/showrunner to a comedically large level then you are likely to dislike it even if you preface the review by saying "it's not THAT bad" - see also the new BBC Dracula adaptation.

 

 

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't stand Star Trek. Watched maybe a season and a half worth of TNG.  Seen an episode of DS9.  Haven't watched any of the others, including the films.  Cannot be bothered with canon and lore and all that up its arsedness.

 

Watched this.  Enjoyed it.  Looking forward to the rest.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of Romulans being insular and in denial of their sun showing signs of instability is much more intriguing to me after watching Chernobyl last year. There'd probably have been some great material in Picard's diplomacy struggling to surmount their façade and a mutual lack of trust as he tries to help them.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DeciderVT said:

The idea of Romulans being insular and in denial of their sun showing signs of instability is much more intriguing to me after watching Chernobyl last year. There'd probably have been some great material in Picard's diplomacy struggling  to surmount their façade and a mutual lack of trust as he tries to help them.

also the writing around reboot trek (which I am not a real fan of) talked of the Romulans messing with their own Sun and causing the Nova or a neightouring sun which cause a chain reaction to their sun. It still isn't great writing but it isn't as open and shut as they depict it.

 

Actually what bothers me most is they pitch themselves as reviewers/critics and yet they come to stuff with a massive amount of baggage. You will obviously come to stuff with baggage but you should be doing your damndest to rid yourself of it - not wrap yourself up in it and use it to predict failure.

 

Any reviewer that comes into a piece of work with the attitude of "well the writer/director has done shit before so this will probably be shit" is a reviewer worth nothing and a reviewer not worth listening to*. Yes it's acceptable when posting on a forum - I hate films by xxxxx and low and behold this one was shit too. But not wheny ou are meant to be a "proper" reviewer/critic.

 

 

* go and hear Kermode reviews on Adam Sandler films and where he eulogises about Punch Drunk Love because he went into it and turned off the voice that said "sandler is shit"

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they proper reviewers or critics? They just do a show on YouTube which a lot of people like. The baggage you mention is what made them popular, their own opinions and not shilling for companies.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never heard of those guys before this thread, and even what was said here I still have no interest in them. I don't suppose we could maybe move past them and bring it back to our own views on the show?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just watched it, came to say how much I enjoyed it and see that some twats on the internet are declaring it as shite. Fuck the internet. Spoils everything. 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Treble said:

 

I'm not really fussed about where some creatives took the universe in DS9. I agree with Rich at the point below, "DS9 was a good show, but I didn't want [its grittiness] to become the new normal". In fact, I agree with everything they've said from about 17 mins in.

 

 

So yeah, it may follow on logically from DS9 in some ways, but it's straying very far from Roddenberry Trek. 

I rewatched DS9 last year, and it’s level of grittiness is exaggerated, really. The ‘darkness’ of the series is due to the increasingly serialised nature of the storyline, which required the longer term consequences of major events and character actions to play out on screen in the longer term, rather than being resolved after 45 minutes as in TNG. DS9 is a long way from being the ‘90s grimdark fest that some genre and Trek fans oddly dismiss it as – for every In The Pale Moonlight there’s a Ferengi comedy episode, and DS9’s use of darker, heavier themes are more the consequence of the series going beyond the limited template of TOS and TNG than darkness for the sake of darkness.

 

(No, I haven’t watched the RLM vid.)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/01/2020 at 16:43, Death's Head said:

So by the time of this series which Enterprise do you think we're on? -F? G? Who's the Captain, do you reckon? Barclay?

 

Captain Nog. If anyone is going to be able to make smart career choices when Starfleet is becoming a more insular and bureaucratic mess, it's someone who understands the Rules of Acquisition.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the first episode was great, I get the RLM criticisms but cramming in all the stuff everyone knows about Star Trek early on is a marketing necessity really. The TNG movies were sold on Picard and Data, they're the characters EVERYONE knows and likes. Don't forget that TNG was doing straight up rehashes of TOS episodes early on.

 

Picard's relationship with Data definitely changes over the course of TNG. It also annoyed me slightly that they didn't seem to get that the closing scene was Romulans salvaging/refitting a disabled Borg cube, even after showing and reading out the caption on screen.

 

It was hilarious how many things they correctly predicted from the first teaser/announcement though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BossSaru said:

 

Captain Nog. If anyone is going to be able to make smart career choices when Starfleet is becoming a more insular and bureaucratic mess, it's someone who understands the Rules of Acquisition.

 

Oh mate. That would be amazing. So sad that we also lost Aron Eisenberg.

  • Empathy 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, sandman said:

Are they sexist then? I have no desire to watch their "reviews" but they seem very popular in certain circles.

Yes and occasionally racist but somehow they get a pass. And going by the negs my post has. A fair few passes from members here. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just realised the novelist Michael Chabon is showrunner? How did he get that gig!?

 

I really like his books and am definitely on board for the rest of the season, as Episode 1 sold me based on Patrick Stewart's performance alone.

 

I also didn't see any issues with data/Brent Spiner. Is it just make-up or CGI also? Looked fine tome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hub2 said:

So I just realised the novelist Michael Chabon is showrunner? How did he get that gig!?

 

I really like his books and am definitely on board for the rest of the season, as Episode 1 sold me based on Patrick Stewart's performance alone.

 

I also didn't see any issues with data/Brent Spiner. Is it just make-up or CGI also? Looked fine tome.

Pulitzer prize winning novelist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In one episode, it's the best Star Trek we've had in 20 years.  The reveal at the end was awesome.  The 5 Queens was quite ominous.  Would love to see the character of Q done justice in a 'modern' TV series story telling approach.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.