"Watched Picard for the first time, why the backlash?" Topic

So I put off watching Picard, only just subscribed to CBS AC last week so I could finally catch up with it.

I have to say I really don't understand all the negative backlash towards it.

I'm on Episode 9 and I think it's been absolutely fantastic. I mean the story is compelling, the characters are interesting, the acting is great, and it has excellent pacing.

Am I not seeing something? Or am I just being naive? Why am I not scoffing at this being yet another rehash like making "Alien 7" or something?

I don't consider myself a Star Trek fan boy, but I do genuinely enjoy the franchise and watch pretty much all the series and movies. There have been hits and misses with some of the movies and some of the spinoffs for sure.

And of course there is the whole old, old Holywood Capitalist mindset to milk something to death to extract every last bit of cash from it until the life is sucked out of it and the rehashing just becomes intolerable and insulting. And then there are franchises that are simply ruined because of it.

Star Wars, the Alien franchise, and others are examples where they just kept making them to the point where it began to eat and consume itself and become lifeless and worn out.

And of course Star Trek is the king of franchises, with more spinoffs than probably any other franchise in history.

But I just don't see Picard as being one of those things where they were bringing something back to life for the sake of rehashing the rehash. I found this story to be both compelling and plausible, as well as very moving. I think they way they handled Picard's character was wonderful, and the life struggles and internal conflicts I found to be relatable and feel very real.

I mean I guess I'm flat out asking everyone, Star Trek fans or otherwise. If you didn't like this, what are your reasons? Obviously it's ok to not like something! That's why we're free thinking adults.

But Picard seems to be a series that is getting a special dose of vitriol and disdain, and I'm not sure why.

I'm absolutely loving it so far.

I don't recall any volume of backlash to Picard, not compared at least to Discovery. I liked Picard; the only aspect I really did not like is how they handled Picard's illness.

Damon.

I'm basing the backlash from what I saw on IMDB forums and other star trek and movie forums. It has an IMDB rating of 7.6 but on the fan forums I saw a fair amount of negative reaction, for a wide variety of reasons. I'm sure a good deal of it is just the classic "right to complain" when anything new comes out that people hold dear, and the resistance to anything that upsets the existing franchise.

But a lot of it is the Picard character rehash complaint, that it was silly to bring back an old Picard and try to make him a captain or leader of a mission or anything.

I guess that rubbed some fans the wrong way, like Picard should have been allowed to retire in peace, but here we go again kind of thing.

I never did care much for the character, and haven't watched the series. But Patrick Stewart did interviews beforehand telling everyone how this series was somehow going to refute the Trump presidency. If you want a show to be judged on its artistic merits, you should probably avoid that kind of thing.

Nothing compares to classic trek. I watched tng, but it wasn't as good. I think DS9 was better than TNG, but still not as good as Classic. Then I couldn't get into Voyager at all, and I really tried to like Enterprise, but didn't. I kinda gave up on the franchise.

I still watch the Classic on Netflix though!

Haven't seen the new stuff.

Didn't like him in the old series. Not so much his fault, but more the directors' and writers' faults, e.g. needing to have a "minder" on the bridge to review and second-guess his every move.

Give me Kirk, even on his off days, any day over Picard.

Patrick Stewart is an excellent actor, from what I've seen of some of his other work.

I think the last two posts send the clearest message…

Trek after "Star Trek" (i.e. the original) just generally doesn't live up to the standards set by the original.

While the old show had some real stinkers in it (Spock's Brain, And the Children shall lead etc…), it was generally a very well written and entertaining show – and still is 50+ years later.

Sure – the special effects are very dated, along with some other aspects of the old show but, the characters, stories and overarching style still speaks to people.

Those of us old enough to have seen it first run – and those who grew up in the 70's watching it – have always wanted something to come out that could match "Star Trek" but, so far it's been very hit or miss.

I couldn't get more than about 20 minutes into the pilot for Discovery before I just changed the channel. I didn't get much further into the pilot for Picard (when it was online for free) before giving up.

The new stuff is MUCH too political and doesn't really seem to care for the upbeat "things will get better" attitude of the 60's series.

I didn't hate it. Actually I liked much of it far more than Discovery. The bad bits, however, really do grate, and the dark nihilist view Star Trek has taken seems to really be at odds with the prior, hopeful nature it had, even during Deep Space Nine, which explored some really tough topics without intentionally trying to tick off their audience.

If sit down and really think about the plot of Picard and the motivations of the various parties, it really is somewhat dumb.

This is a nice summary of the issues (though I didn't hate it as much as these guys do).

YouTube link

Stewart is a fine actor, really, in multiple types
of roles.

But the premise of the writing on this show seems
over the top 'Blue'.

I had niggles with it, but on the whole was happy to see more of this character and the Star Trek universe generally post Voyager and Nemesis.

I watched it.
I enjoyed it.

The new stuff is MUCH too political

Trek has always been political. People that are white/black on the wrong side of their face? Hard to get more political than that, especially in 1967.

It got a lot worse in 3rd Season, darth. Starcruiser is right, and I'll go further: 3rd season of classic Trek represents a shift from SF by SF writers which sometimes looked at political issues to the sort of SF which bends the universe to make some current political position the only possible one. There have been exceptions--some very good individual episodes of series I sometimes didn't care much for--but if you saw them in original broadcast order, 3rd season feels more like the later more didactic series than it feels like 1st and 2nd season Classic Trek.

The difference is that back then they put it out there in a thought provoking way that was from a neutral observer's position and relatable to the entire audience even if you were on the other side of the issue.

Great writing is relatable and takes you out of your comfort zone, making you consider and question your position. A lot of modern writing seems intent to say, ‘This section of our audience are not worth our time. Screw you.' Since they start there, it gives little room to really develop or evolve.

Deep Space Nine explored the point of views of terrorists, gay relationships, genocidal tyrants and cultural racism and yet remained thoughtful and relatable. Some didn't like it, but there was no backlash against it. I didn't feel Picard really was as bad about hitting people over the head that people feared (and that frankly the writers intended). When it was over I just pondered it and realized that a lot of the plot was just a bit nonsensical. A journey that ultimately led nowhere.

Again, I didn't hate Picard- my beefs are mainly with the logic issues and nihilist dark tone. I like several of the characters but found others to have been underdeveloped.

Again, I didn't hate Picard- my beefs are mainly with the logic issues and nihilist dark tone. I like several of the characters but found others to have been underdeveloped.

Agreed.

Best part for me were the two scenes with Data in the final episode. The Red Letter Media review of the series, and the recent Mr Plinkett review, nailed why the show wasn't anything great. They're on YouTube,

youtu.be/TwF1iri1GjQ

It seemed plodding and somewhat narcissistic. However, you can't beat the visuals, nor Orla Brady. By the end of the season, while not hooked, I was ready for more. However, if they pull the time travel rabbit out of their hat, I'm done.

"However, if they pull the time travel rabbit out of their hat, I'm done."

Absolutely. I love time travel stories when it's the basis of a whole series. A single time travel episode in a non- time travel series is ok. But to suddenly pull out an entire time travel story arc in the middle of a non-time travel show is lazy writing in my opinion. It means the writers have run out of ideas for the original basis of the show and are trying to "spice it up". Star Trek Enterprise is the case in point.