Wow really? I put it under the best along with later season DS9 and Discovery Season 2
2 Likes
people hate Picard forā¦ pretty much the same reason people hated DS9 twenty years ago
Which is? I ask out of curiosity. But if you think itās gonna derail the thread, feel free to pass on answering.
The very brief version: A largely non-Starfleet group that isnāt on a mission to explore the unknown. Beyond that, the details vary.
For me, Picard tried too hard to be gritty and dark in all the wrong ways, and I say that as someone that liked it when DS9 did their version of it. I also thought it went too far to making special effects over substance (a complaint often held against DISCO & the Kelvan films too). Really, there was very little in Picard that I liked (except the 2399 Starfleet uniforms that looked very much like updated 2371 uniforms).
1 Like
Thatās one of the things I like about it. I think the Star Fleet exploration shows have already been done once or twice. Or three or four or five times. Thereās room for something thatās actually original.
2 Likes
Some people want more of the same. When people turn on a Law & Order show, they want the cop & lawyer drama. When they pull up a CSI (or similar) show, they know what to expect. When they watch most sitcoms based on a married couple and their kids, they want to see variations on the well-worn path. It;s not hard to imagine that some (many?) Star Trek fans are similar.
1 Like
Can it be called āStarā āTrekā if they arenāt trekking through the stars? That would be like āCrime Scene Investigationā without investigating crime scenes.
2 Likes
I thought Picard was great for the first 9 episodes, but while I didnāt hate the last one, it was just very strange and riddled with plot holes. Iām happy with the show though. I just canāt get into discovery though. Iāve seen the first couple episodes of season 2, and Iāll admit itās already a hundred times better than season 1, but I just donāt like Burnamās character. Itās nothing against the actress, I just donāt find her character remotely interesting or relatable so far. Iām hoping sheāll improve though.
Funny the Burnam character is basically the only thing I like about Discovery.
DS9 would eistablish that yes they can. 
Besides Picard is still trekking through the stars, itās justā¦ a family walk instead of a boy scout troup
1 Like
Just because DS9 is good doesnāt mean we canāt consider the philosophical question as to whether it could be called Star Trek or not. Do we want to consider āStar Trekā a journey through space? Or are we content to just call āStar Trekā a setting whether or not there is a āwagon train in the starsā going on? If āStar Trekā needs to have a journey through the unknown space, what else could we call the setting? These are all things at least worth talking about. Sure āStar Trekā has the most recognition, and it seems to be what people are using as the āsetting nameā, but maybe there needs to be more thought about it.
In fairness, there hasnāt been a wagon train to the stars going on since the start of TNG,
.
If TOS is Wagon Train, then TNG is Gunsmoke and DS9 is Fort Apacheā¦
1 Like
Not all Star Wars films and shows revolve around war. The main films do focus on war of some kind (Galactic Civil War, Clone Wars, Separatist battles, fights with the First Order) but you have a number of stories that are tangential to that, despite the franchiseās name.
Treks through the stars are always happening in Star Trek series. But like Star Wars, sometimes thatās just the setting rather than the plot.
3 Likes
First time poster, long-time Star Trek fan.
The question was asked: Any fairly trivial breaks from canon that make big differences to you?
Yes, and itās right on page 59 of the core rulebook. How the book ever got published with the rank pips chart being that screwed up Iāll never know, but I fixed it up in my PDF copies of the rulebook. I then printed off a replacement chart for my hard copy that also includes canon enlisted ranks, though it only covers from 2373 to 2384. Iāll have to do a full chart for all eras next, but thankfully Modiphius didnāt include a Fleet Captain rank, since based upon the evidence on film in TOS and Discovery, Fleet Captain was an honorific rather than a rank.
I do however have one break from canon that is anything but trivial. Events in the films Star Trek, Star Trek Into Darkness, and Star Trek Beyond are not canon, regardless of whether events in those films occurred in the prime timeline or not. This means no red matter, no Spock being sucked into the alternate reality, no USS Franklin. This also used to refer to the destruction of Romulus but Star Trek: Picard firmly established that the Romulan star system was destroyed, but retconned the source to be the Romulan star going supernova rather than a star outside the system.
I do have an explanation of how Discovery tech could appear more advanced than TOS, but that explanation is beyond the scope of the question. I try to avoid breaking canon whenever possible and instead try to explain away discrepancies between sources with as minimal a disruption to established canon as possible.
the red matter and spock dissappering are ALSO canon to ST:Picard, not specificly mentioned no, but they are
Normally, you would be correct. The powers that be consider the JJVerse films to be canon. However, as I donāt consider those three films part of canon - as previously mentioned - those events donāt exist. The fact that Star Trek: Picard doesnāt mention them makes ignoring them much easier.
3 Likes
What about Enterprise?
As far as I remember the movie neveer said which star went supernova anly that this supernova destroyed Romulus and Remus. STO established the Hobus star as source of the supernova.
For me both Nero and Spock did not only travelled back in time but also across timelines. The past of the Kelvin timeline is not identical with the prime timeline.
This āproblemā is quite easily to solve. If you accept that design changes are just production decisions (because the futuristic designs of the 1960s are completely out of date today and technology marched on) and not in-universe changes and that TAS is canon then Discovery has less canon problems than most other Star Trek shows.
Who is Nero? That Roman emperor who fiddled while Rome burned. That is the only Nero in Star Trek.
I donāt expect anyone to like or accept my point of view regarding the JJVerse films. Truth be told I donāt care if anyone does. But one thing is clear to me: itās a good thing I never watched āLostā. Abrams is a terrible writer and director, having not only damaged the Star Trek franchise with his work, but Star Wars as well.
Star Trekās canon is whatever we see in the multiple TV series and films. Therefore the Enterprise in the 2250s must have appeared both in its original design as well as its Discovery design. Naturally thatās impossible so what is the in-universe explanation for the discrepancy?
Itās easy to just say, ābecause of advances in real world technology just imagine that TOS used the Discovery designā, but the real fun is in creating in-universe explanations for things like that.
3 Likes
Wrong! Nero is the antagonist from the first Kelvin timeline movie, a movie which you choose to ignore.
Wrong! I never watched Lost but his take on Star Wars was good. The problem was Ryan Johnson and his solitary take on Star Wars which led to a very disappointing movie and a series finale which tried to correct all the mistakes Ryan Johnson made.
Back to topic: You have to accept that the Kelvin timeline is part of Star Trek canon. Even if you do not like it. It is a completely different timeline, a parallel timeline with similiar developments (until Nero attacked the USS Kelvin).
But thatās the reason they did not use the designs from the first Star Trek pilot.
There is really no need for an in-universe explanantion, because in-universe none of the design changes happened (even if they joked about in in Trials and Tribble-ations). Roddenberry himself saw no need to explain why for example the Klingons looked different in the movies. For him there was no change in uniform, design etc. For him it was a vision of the future. This means that this vision has to be updated over the years in order to remain a vision of the future.
BTW many of the technologies we saw in Discovery and thought to be new in TNG did already appear in TAS which BTW is canon (or even in TOS but has not been recognized).