Star Trek: Picard

[Overmind One]

Care to explain why supreme commander?

I think it's because he is not a hardcore fan and does not understand why Star Trek fans are saying The Orville is Star Trek despite not having the name, any of the characters or a shared canon. That is understandable, since it IS a rather unusual situation we have here. A show not officially associated with Star Trek, has a different name and is on a different network is Star Trek? Yeah, it is. But casual fans will never understand why that is true.

 

[Overmind One]

Exactly what @Quetesh said. The fact is that it's an entirely separate show. Just because some people (or one person) doesn't like the new Star Trek shows doesn't mean they get to bend reality and turn The Orville into Star Trek. It is not Star Trek, and saying that it is seems to me as a delusion only a child would have.

Saying that reveals you to be a casual fan who is not as into Star Trek as hardcore fans are. But you did say it seems that way to you personally so no argument there. Seth McFarland certainly did not set The Orville out to be "an entirely separate show", he was writing it to be an actual Star Trek show. He took it to CBS and presented it as Star Trek.

I also detest the generalization that "real Star Trek fans" (which is an insulting phrasing by itself) count The Orville as "real Star Trek". Call The Orville what it is. It's an entertaining show which conceptually has many similarities to what Star Trek the Next Generation was, but is yet an entirely new and different show in it's own right.

I still don't know where you are getting this "entirely new and different" thing about this show. That would certainly be news to Seth McFarlane, who was writing a show that was as close to TNG as possible in tone and feel to continue the Star Trek series on TV. It is new, and now since it can't be Star Trek in name, it is The Orville.

It is an honor to The Orville to hold it in as high regard as Star Trek the Next Generation. It is an insult to The Orville to not recognize its achievement on its own merits. The Orville is NOT Star Trek. The Orville is The Orville!

Who isn't recognizing it's achievement on it's own merits? It's merits are that it does Star Trek better than CBS's "Star Trek" does it. It is popular because it is doing what Star Trek fans wanted their new Star Trek TV show to do, but couldn't. The "entirely new and different" show is Discovery, and it sucks.

 

[Quetesh]

Discovery and the reboot movies are not part of ST canon either. The new showrunners may want it to be but it isn't. Star Trek is a thing like an apple is a thing. It has an intrinsic identity that is Star Trek even though it isn't. Discovery is clearly not Star Trek, even though it is called Star Trek. You can take an apple and call it an orange, but it will still be an apple to anyone who knows what an apple is. The Orville is Star Trek because it is structured like Star Trek, is written exactly like Star Trek, looks and feels like Star Trek, and is created by a person who knows and loves Star Trek better than ANYONE who has tried to do Star Trek since Enterprise was canceled.

The fans of Star Trek know it when they see it.

No, that is not true, you may not want it to be true, but the owners of the show are the owners and what they create becomes canon. Fans don't get to dictate that.

It is insulting to be called a casual fan just for you to win your point!! I have watched the shows and movies my whole life, as has the hubby, many many many times. I am just realistic in the way canon works.

Crappy canon is still canon.

 

[YJ02]

The problem is that they padded his face and then added CGI on top - why do that?

versus

 

[YJ02]

No, that is not true, you may not want it to be true, but the owners of the show are the owners and what they create becomes canon. Fans don't get to dictate that.

It is insulting to be called a casual fan just for you to win your point!! I have watched the shows and movies my whole life, as has the hubby, many many many times. I am just realistic in the way canon works.

Crappy canon is still canon.

 

[YJ02]

"renewed old Trek"? Nothing of the sort has been created.

PICARD

i would say, but wait...it didn't air yet,so....

 

[YJ02]

. Think back to Stargate Universe. Was it Stargate or not? To a real fan of Stargate, it was not Stargate. It had a stargate,

you are laying on a high level of subjectivity based on your personal expectations

other things to say..no..quetesh already said it

 

[YJ02]

How do you miss the point so easily? No, what I know is that somebody in the Legal Department at ViacomCBS told Kurtzman's people "No, you can't use the original Seven of Nine ocular implant unless you pay us for the right to use it". Just like they did for the uniforms, the original communicators and anything else from the original license. Uniforms would cost much less to license, as would those communicators, since they are commercially available to fans. All they would have to pay is the right to use them in the production.

you have no way of knowing this,, all speculation. maybe with age, the nature and surface of the actress' face has changed and they needed to make the adjustments needed to keep it on her face?

do you keep a checklist of everything? why would tptb's keep some things exactly alike (barring the aging of actors) and then make minute changes to other things?

or, since i am in the middle of watching TNG right now, when DS9 came out and the cardassians had a different look in it from tng, did you freak out then as well? i think ensign Ro's bajoran nose ridges looked a bit different too from DS9 bajoran nose ridges--freak out then?

or in tng they called them the "bajora", in ds9 they called them 'bajorans"..again, meltdown?

the truth is as projects develop, ppl get ideas fro changes and tweaking..new writes and producers come along, things do change

 

[Overmind One]

No, that is not true, you may not want it to be true, but the owners of the show are the owners and what they create becomes canon. Fans don't get to dictate that.

It is insulting to be called a casual fan just for you to win your point!! I have watched the shows and movies my whole life, as has the hubby, many many many times. I am just realistic in the way canon works.

Crappy canon is still canon.

Funny, until 2009 the fans did EXACTLY that (red bolded). The fans were and still are the keepers of the canon for not only Star Trek but also Star Wars. The owners are not what gave value to the Star Trek IP. That is true of Star Wars though. Fans gave Kirk, Uhura, Scotty and Sulu their full names. Fans are responsible for so many integral things in Star Trek it could not exist without their support and input. Fandoms create value, not owners. At least in Star Trek. In Star Wars, that is also true ultimately. Without fans or customers, you got nothing.

The second bolded. I have also been watching Star Trek movies and shows my whole life. I was watching Star Trek for IT'S whole life too, right from the premiere episode from Desilu in 1966. I watched it get canceled because of low interest, and I was part of the fandom which grew after it's cancellation. I went to one of the first conventions. I was part of the fan group that resulted in Star Trek TMP being made, and then watched in amazement as the now millions-strong fanbase inspired Paramount to create TNG. None of that is owners dictating anything. FANS did that. Without fans, there would be no Star Trek. Fans made Star Trek valuable, and they can take the value away easily by ignoring it. Watch Star Wars burn and die. It is burning because fans no longer care about it. The "owners" can make whatever they want, but if the fans reject it then it become valueless. I am sure some "fan" is buying rejected Star Wars sequel trilogy toys marked $25.00 to $1.99 at the dollar store, but what is that? I see that there are some purple haired gender fluid SJWs who love Star Trek Discovery, but they cannot float the show or CBS All Access.

Picard might be good. But if Picard is bad, then fans will reject it and it will die. If the fans love it, it will become a success and will continue. Where in those scenarios is the owner of the IP calling the shots?

 

[Overmind One]

you are laying on a high level of subjectivity based on your personal expectations

other things to say..no..quetesh already said it

Forget about what I say. Watch what happens if the fans reject it because it wasn't done well. You have already seen what happened with Discovery so far. You see even more clearly what is happening to Star Wars as a result of fans falling out of love with it. You saw what happened to Doctor Who after the "owners" (I chuckle at that) changed it. Owners are never the reason something has value. Fans/Customers are. Piss them off or change the thing they are fans about, and they will leave and remove all the value from whatever it is you think you "own" in terms of it's form and appeal.

People who passively accept whatever they are told and have no personal passion for what they are watching are just consumers. Fan is short for fanatic. Fans are not just consumers, they are participants in the things they love, beyond the simple transaction of a purchase or watching of episodes.

 

[Overmind One]

I'm reminded of the letter writing campaign done in 1968 Overmind One. Over fifty years ago fans were shaping Star Treks destiny so I agree with you on one level, yet it also has to be taken into consideration that I have ownership over no media in my Blu Ray collection...I just own a copy.

TPTB have ownership of Star Trek and its canon but the fans dictate its destiny.

I think both sides of the argument are right in your own ways.

You wrote this as I was writing my responses! I remember that too. The small fandom that started that letter writing campaign are also responsible for the massive fan following that happened after the show was canceled in Season 3. The fandom grew and grew and THAT is the reason there is Star Trek today. Not the owners. Owners merely buy and sell. They do not add value. They can't even add value by dumping money into their purchased product. Unless fans like it, it is a waste of money and time for any prospective owner.

 

[Overmind One]

Check this out. Its Irish people who never watched Star Trek before comparing TOS to STD.

Its interesting to get a non fans perspective.

LOVE THAT! I love the part when they switched to Discovery, and within a minute the girl says "I hate it!". Their comments are very telling. One looks at the Discovery crew and asks "These are the good guys?" HAHAHAHA!

 

[YJ02]

No with the make up he still looks weird. They seem to have added more padding.

well yeah, look how smooth his face was in the 80's, then how he looks now, they need to fill in those sagging areas and depressions/furrows

they probably did it a little much

but in the first trailer-when they were playing cards, it didn't seem to be as heavy an effect

maybe this trailer being a dream sequence might have something to do with it

-----------------
they should have just did like the Leia character was done for rogue one and for tarkin's character. just re create from file and over lay the face on a similar looking actor. whatever the process was

but then, ppl would have bitched about that too

 

[YJ02]

Funny, until 2009 the fans did EXACTLY that (red bolded). The fans were and still are the keepers of the canon for not only Star Trek but also Star Wars. The owners are not what gave value to the Star Trek IP. That is true of Star Wars though. Fans gave Kirk, Uhura, Scotty and Sulu their full names. Fans are responsible for so many integral things in Star Trek it could not exist without their support and input. Fandoms create value, not owners. At least in Star Trek. In Star Wars, that is also true ultimately. Without fans or customers, you got nothing.

The second bolded. I have also been watching Star Trek movies and shows my whole life. I was watching Star Trek for IT'S whole life too, right from the premiere episode from Desilu in 1966. I watched it get canceled because of low interest, and I was part of the fandom which grew after it's cancellation. I went to one of the first conventions. I was part of the fan group that resulted in Star Trek TMP being made, and then watched in amazement as the now millions-strong fanbase inspired Paramount to create TNG. None of that is owners dictating anything. FANS did that. Without fans, there would be no Star Trek. Fans made Star Trek valuable, and they can take the value away easily by ignoring it. Watch Star Wars burn and die. It is burning because fans no longer care about it. The "owners" can make whatever they want, but if the fans reject it then it become valueless. I am sure some "fan" is buying rejected Star Wars sequel trilogy toys marked $25.00 to $1.99 at the dollar store, but what is that? I see that there are some purple haired gender fluid SJWs who love Star Trek Discovery, but they cannot float the show or CBS All Access.

Picard might be good. But if Picard is bad, then fans will reject it and it will die. If the fans love it, it will become a success and will continue. Where in those scenarios is the owner of the IP calling the shots?

so you dont even care about story? just about all the behind the scenes power plays and licensing---the sausage making?

-----------------------------------------


"fanbase inspired Paramount to create TNG. None of that is owners dictating anything."

i am sorry, but from everything i have read or watched this is incorrect

the fans actually protested against TNG demanding a return of Kirk and Spock

the studio wanted to make TNG and at first, Roddenberry was n't even consulted

it was in the newer documentary that Shatner made that i posted in the trek forums

Roddenberry used lawyers to get himself included into TNG

 

[YJ02]

Forget about what I say. Watch what happens if the fans reject it because it wasn't done well.

but that is the cornerstone of what we are trying to get across to you

it didn't air yet. all of your (and YT ppl) predictions of suckness are based on how well/inclusive/leading the trailers have been

and they dont have that much info in them

 

[Overmind One]

well yeah, look how smooth his face was in the 80's, then how he looks now, they need to fill in those sagging areas and depressions/furrows

they probably did it a little much

but in the first trailer-when they were playing cards, it didn't seem to be as heavy an effect

maybe this trailer being a dream sequence might have something to do with it

-----------------
they should have just did like the Leia character was done for rogue one and for tarkin's character. just re create from file and over lay the face on a similar looking actor. whatever the process was

but then, ppl would have bitched about that too

I think they did a decent job for Spiner considering his age and current appearance. And Spiner pulled actual Data out of his head and put him into the character I saw in that trailer. I am encouraged by it. Picard seems....subdued. But he has also aged. Frakes is pure Riker in the trailer and he arguably looks more different than any of the TNG characters appearing in the trailer. Seven looks basically ageless in the trailer, but her character does not seem to be the Seven I remember. Double blazing phasers? Not the Seven I remember. Poor Janeway was overlooked in Picard....but buzz is starting that she may get her own Star Trek show is Picard does well. Hope!

 

[YJ02]

Care to explain why supreme commander?

is this a serious question?

different title? check!

different studio? check!

different cast? check!

different plot and 'universe' of ships, tech and uniforms,etc,etc? check!

how is it Trek?

it is "trek-esque", but it is not Trek

 

[Overmind One]

so you dont even care about story? just about all the behind the scenes power plays and licensing---the sausage making?

-----------------------------------------


"fanbase inspired Paramount to create TNG. None of that is owners dictating anything."

i am sorry, but from everything i have read or watched this is incorrect

the fans actually protested against TNG demanding a return of Kirk and Spock

the studio wanted to make TNG and at first, Roddenberry was n't even consulted

it was in the newer documentary that Shatner made that i posted in the trek forums

Roddenberry used lawyers to get himself included into TNG

The fans are the reason there was a TNG. The fans are the reason there was movies. The FANS are responsible for there being a Star Trek today. For you, everyone who watches the show is a fan. Those few fans who wanted Kirk and Spock in TNG were a minority within the fanbase. It is true that there were legal issues with Roddenberry having creative power in TNG, but that was because he had become "woke" between the 1960s and the 1980s. His lawyer, David Gerrold is the one who forced his way into TNG. Roddenberry was in no matter what.

It is still 100% true that the FANS dictated and continue to dictate the fate of Star Trek, not it's owners. Same with Star Wars. No way around that fact.

 

[YJ02]

Seven looks basically ageless in the trailer, but her character does not seem to be the Seven I remember.

yes, you must be back to the cat suit

seriously though, you dont remember all of the action scenes she was in?

fighting "the rock" (ratings pandering to wwf fans of time?)

 

[Overmind One]

is this a serious question?

different title? check!

different studio? check!

different cast? check!

different plot and 'universe' of ships, tech and uniforms,etc,etc? check!

how is it Trek?

it is "trek-esque", but it is not Trek

Spoken like a true drone. Of course it isn't ACTUAL Star Trek. But it is Star Trek, and the fandom that has gathered around Star Trek is now gathering around The Orville because it is Star Trek. I know, it seems complicated. Try this: go to the store and buy a banana. You now own the banana. If you put it on a plate and call it a pomegranate then is it now a pomegranate because you say so? You OWN it. You paid for it, didn't you? You can name it what you want, right?

Banana lovers are going to love your "pomegranate". Pomegranate lovers, not so much. What does it say for the tiny little group of pomegranate lovers who just accept that the banana is now a pomegranate because you said it was? To me, it makes them idiots. Now, try it the other way around. you have a large group (fandom) of bananas, and you go and buy a pomegranate and name it a banana. You bought it, you OWN it. You call the shots, right? But the banana lovers see your "banana" and reject it because it isn't what they love. It isn't even really a banana. THIS IS THE SITUATION. Discovery is not Star Trek, even though it has the name Star Trek. The Orville is not Star Trek in name, but it is Star Trek.

Does this make any sense to you?