SHP Forums

... all right, then? :|I'm not sure what I've just seen, except that if Star Trek's lawyers find this, they may issue a C&D for a breach of copyright.

I'm not a lawyer, though. Just thinking aloud ...

Content like this is practically what the internet is made of. Have you visited the internet lately? It's in no danger.

I am not sure who the face is?

JJ Abrams. His next projects are DC-related with Warner Bros.

Oh.

He may have tanked Star Trek, but I don't think he tanked Star Wars. Granted, nothing will live up to the original trilogy blah blah blah.

But what he did, for me, was far better than ANY of the prequels. Any of them.

Patrick Stewart's facial expression is perfect.

But, but, but ... *pedantic moment* I don't know who wrote the caption, but that's not how to spell "LASER". I'm sorry, but that's a pet peeve of mine - people who can't be bothered to check the proper spelling when they write something. Yes, I know it's only a silly graphic, but good spelling would cost nothing, take practically a second, and make the joke even better.

I know, I know - you can't expect internet users to have perfect spelling ... but why not?

Let's start a campaign! *waves a flag* Good spelling forever ftw! Who's with me?!

Star Trek Picard sucked.

Actually there were a couple nice references and moments but that all had to do with cameos. The actual plot is awful. Screw this show.

Agreed.

All right ... hmm. I haven't seen the show, so I can't tell. Who wrote it? Who directed or produced it? I'm just trying to think of a reason why the plots should suck so much.

*looks it up on wikipedia*

Directed by: Hanelle M. Culpepper

Written by: Michael Chabon & Akiva Goldsman

Produced by: Oh dear ... maybe this is the problem? There are 8 executive producers: Eugene Roddenberry, Trevor Roth, James Duff, Patrick Stewart, Heather Kadin, Akiva Goldsman, Michael Chabon and Alex Kurtzman. Wow.

If there are so many executive producers, each of them would have their own vision of the show, and might (even would?) want to take the show down their vision. That'd lead to arguments - maybe even tantrums? - about what direction the show should or would take, what it should be, etc. etc., especially if and when egos are involved. Does that sound likely? I'm just guessing.

I read that a similar sort of thing happened when the Pythons were shooting "Holy Grail". Each of the Pythons contributed some things to the script, and some people (naming no names, 'cos I can't remember them) were reluctant to "kill their darlings" (i.e. remove their pet lines that they thought were hilarious or wonderful, even if those lines contributed nothing to the movie and just slowed it down). It still turned out to be a good movie, even if it meandered a little.

However, the Pythons learned their lesson, and by the time they filmed "The Life of Brian", there was just one director. That made it a much "tighter" (and better) movie.

It's preachy. Star Trek is not supposed to be preachy. Patrick Stewart definitely had a message he wanted to send and he did it at the expense of how Star Trek tells stories of morality and ethics. And I don't know much of Michael Chabon but many who were fans of him stated that they were highly disappointed with his work here as showrunner. Akiva Goldsman is responsible for numerous Hollywood flops and incredibly bad writing decisions over the years, and Alex Kurtzman is responsible for Star Trek Discovery, Mikie Spock, and Klingon Orcs. Star Trek is as dead to me as Star Wars is.

However, it was absolutely a beautiful moment when Data asked Picard to let him die. That entire scene was awesome closure for Data and felt like Star Trek again. Truly wonderful. And the scenes with Riker and Troi were fantastic too.

MusicallyInspired wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 7:53 pm It's preachy. Star Trek is not supposed to be preachy.

Really? Because I always felt like that was the big difference between Star Trek and Star Wars.
Star Trek always had a "message."

Star Trek had a message, yes. But it wasn't preachy. It didn't try to convince you of one side or the other. It took a social/ethical/moral issue, presented you with both sides of the argument, and let you make up your own mind. It treated you like an intelligent human being. The Orville now has taken the lead on this style of storytelling and does so phenomenally well.