'Star Trek: Picard' warps onto TV with an okay premiere episode

[Admin]

While "Star Trek" fans worldwide are rejoicing at the return of Capt. Jean-Luc Picard, the actor who plays him says his younger self would have been surprised to reprise the role.

'Star Trek: Picard' warps onto TV with an okay premiere episode : Read more

 

[GlennMadden]

I loved the Picard episode 1 because I am hungry for anything new Star Trek. Interesting article you wrote, a little long on words but very informative.

Couple of thing wrong with the series though.

1. How long can the older Patrick Stewart hold up?
2. Brent Spiner "Data" face was bigger, he is older. WRONG ... He is an android who does not age or change appearance.

It will be interesting to see if the series pans out.

 

[Mike A]

I loved the Picard episode 1 because I am hungry for anything new Star Trek. Interesting article you wrote, a little long on words but very informative.

Couple of thing wrong with the series though.

1. How long can the older Patrick Stewart hold up?
2. Brent Spiner "Data" face was bigger, he is older. WRONG ... He is an android who does not age or change appearance.

It will be interesting to see if the series pans out.

In the the Star Trek TNG finale, All Good Things, future Data has a considerable amount of gray hair. He is probably altering his appearance to give the illusion of aging, hence making him seem more human.

 

[Woodstock]

This is one of the most in-depth reviews I've read on 'Picard' – I don't necessarily agree with everything the writer has said, but certainly a lot of it. However, he goes to great lengths to explain why he has these opinions and that's something a lot of reviews don't do particularly well. Long live longform journalism...especially when it's about sci-fi.

 

[Admiral Bear]

The review just about sums up my opinions of the first episode, although it's a bit more charitable than I would be. I found the whole thing slow, ponderous, badly written, and cliched, with even Stewart appearing to struggle with much of his dialogue. I'm firmly in the camp of it being solidly "meh". It's far better than Discovery, but given how low that set the bar, improvement was not only necessary, it was almost inevitable. It's better than I expected it to be, although not by much, amd worse than I'd hoped.

 

[sward]

I havent seen it yet so I'm avoiding spoilers!

 

[rmurray]

The first episode was slightly better than marginal. Stewart definitely can still pull it off so I am hopefully that things will develop. If things stay on track we should be in for a good series. Anything is better than Discovery at this point. I cancelled my CBS all access because of season 2 of Discovery. That series flew off the rails quick!

 

[Vaz]

The only thing I liked about it was that it is set AFTER the events of Nemesis, and not in some alternate timeline or (ANOTHER!) Prequel series (Enterprise and Discovery).
Other than that one thing alone, I'm not bothering with it, simply because Jeri Ryan is to star in it and (I'm going to irk a lot of people by ssaying this...) I HATE Ryan! She ruined Voyager. I want Kes.

 

[Chase Williams]

Hmmmm.

Well I must mirror the sentiment of one of the commenters. It is rather nice to enjoy a full and detailed review.

I really enjoyed the first episode and I'm keen to see the second. I felt on a second and third watch today it grew on me.

Originally I felt it was not as good as I hoped it would be but I think Disco has poisoned my mind to Trek that is outside of what fans of the show historically want.

That said, letting the episode breath a little and embracing the new setting... I found that it was more cerebral (and perhaps a tad cerebro!) and the pacing and general direction and quality of acting was far superior to Discovery.

I think personally it can only get better from here.

As openers go... I think we've been given something enjoyable that appears to want to shine a light on the distaste many of us have the state the world is in but offer us a bit of hope that getting off our backsides might mean we can affect change.

Kudos to the writer for exploring it in such detail. I shall keep my eyes peeled for the review of the next installment.

LLAP

 

[timlister82]

I loved the Picard episode 1 because I am hungry for anything new Star Trek.

I think CBS was banking on that because other than Sir Patrick and a few "member berries" sprinkled in there wasn't much else that was good. The plot was a bit silly and they've completely undermined Starfleet in order to give Picard a reason to "lose his faith".

 

[vfxtodd]

This is one of the most in-depth reviews I've read on 'Picard' – I don't necessarily agree with everything the writer has said, but certainly a lot of it. However, he goes to great lengths to explain why he has these opinions and that's something a lot of reviews don't do particularly well. Long live longform journalism...especially when it's about sci-fi.

Actually, I think it's one of the worst reviews ever written about any film or show. A respectable critic doesn't give away the entire show, scene by scene, as this guy does. Such reviews ruin the experience for anyone who hasn't seen the show, yet.

This is one person's opinion. There's nothing factual about it. I think he's wrong on most counts. Film critics are actually quite useless. Because they always bring their own baggage to their review. I once read a critic's review about a horror film after I read another one of his articles where he expressly states that he hates horror films. So, why should I read the review of a horror film by a critic who openly hates horror films? That would make me stupid. Yet, here he is, critiquing a horror film.

I find that the only time to read a critic's "full length" review is AFTER I've seen the show or movie. That way I can compare my personal experience to theirs. Some people say that critics help them save money for movies by reading their reviews. That assumes that your experience will be identical to the critic's before you've even seen the film or TV show. Personally, I can never take this critic's opinion seriously. The fact that he reveals almost every scene in his review of "Picard" shows that he not only has no respect for the medium, he also doesn't respect the views of his own audience. Good critics don't give away every beat of a story. This twit does.

 

[vfxtodd]

This guy represents the worst side of film and television critics. He literally breaks down almost every scene in "Picard". Picking over it like a corpse, looking for a cause of death. Personally, I liked the first episode of "Picard". I think it was very promising.

There will always be critics who want to stand out. The best way to do that is to rip apart, in detail as this guy does, every aspect of a show or film. Thankfully, I already saw the episode, and settled on my own experience. The sad thing is, many people read reviews like this before they see a show or movie.

When I see a long review, I know immediately that the review will mostly be too revealing for me if I haven't seen the show or movie. This guy had issues with virtually every scene. When I got to the part where he is near the end of the episode, and noticed there were still several paragraphs to go, I knew I was in for an ego stroking treatise. That's when I stopped reading.

 

[Woodstock]

 

[Una N]

Wow, this is the longest hatchet job I have ever read. Not a Star Trek fan, I take it. Well, I saw the 1st episode and I loved it. So glad I didn't read this excessively long, crap review before I saw it. Needless to say, I wouldn't be "tuning in to" your reviews in future.

 

[vfxtodd]

Wow, this is the longest hatchet job I have ever read. Not a Star Trek fan, I take it. Well, I saw the 1st episode and I loved it. So glad I didn't read this excessively long, crap review before I saw it. Needless to say, I wouldn't be "tuning in to" your reviews in future.

I agree. I enjoyed it as well.

 

[Hawkstein]

It's barely watchable if you're a true TNG/Picard fan... they definitely didn't catch the essence or character of Picard right. That aside it's entertaining enough. Discovery on the other hand is actually unwatchable unless you like to torture yourself. On the flip side, Mandalorian was so well done and I'm not even a Star Wars fan.

 

[Space Force]

Since Star Trek TNG, there has not been even one so-called "Star Trek" movie or episode that was worth watching. Not one. I say "so-called" because this is just the latest example of untalented hacks trying to feed off the success of actually great shows. Literally only about 1 in 100 remakes ever matches the quality of the original, let alone surpasses it. IMO, no one should be allowed to use the name of any great movie or series. If they want to hack away, they can invent their own name for it.

 

[Hawkstein]

Since Star Trek TNG, there has not been even one so-called "Star Trek" movie or episode that was worth watching. Not one. I say "so-called" because this is just the latest example of untalented hacks trying to feed off the success of actually great shows. Literally only about 1 in 100 remakes ever matches the quality of the original, let alone surpasses it. IMO, no one should be allowed to use the name of any great movie or series. If they want to hack away, they can invent their own name for it.

Spoken like a true old man scared of change. In all seriousness, you're mostly right.... I loathe how JJ ruined Star Trek (AND Star wars) for the masses.... absolutely f-ing ruined the message and meaning and replaced it with recycled/hollywoodized/lense flare/feed-the-masses-BS.