‘Star Trek: Picard’ Titles And Photos Revealed Through Episode 5

CBS has just updated their promotional photos section, so while all the photos there had been previously released, most of them are now tagged with episode numbers and titles. Thanks to photo metadata, we now know the titles through episode 5—the midway point of the season.

Episodes 2 through 5

Episode 2 – “Maps and Legends”

Synopsis: Picard begins investigating the mystery of Dahj as well as what her very existence means to the Federation. Without Starfleet’s support, Picard is left leaning on others for help, including Dr. Agnes Jurati and an estranged former colleague, Raffi Musiker. Meanwhile, hidden enemies are also interested in where Picard’s search for the truth about Dahj will lead.

Episode 3 – “The End is the Beginning”

Synopsis: Completely unaware of her special nature, Soji continues her work and captures the attention of the Borg cube research project’s executive director. After rehashing past events with a reluctant Raffi, Picard seeks others willing to join his search for Bruce Maddox, including pilot and former Starfleet officer Cristóbal Rios (Santiago Cabrera).

Episode 4 – “Absolute Candor”

Episode 5 – “Stardust City Rag”


Thanks to updated information, we can now sort these by episode.

“Maps and Legends”
“The End is the Beginning”
“Absolute Candor”
“Stardust City Rag”

Pictured: Jeri Ryan as Seven of Nine of the the CBS All Access series STAR TREK: PICARD. Photo Cr: Trae Patton/CBS ©2019 CBS Interactive, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


What do you think about the episode titles? Sound off in the comments section.

New episodes of Star Trek: Picard are released on CBS All Access in the USA Thursdays at 12:01 AM PT/3:01 AM ET. In Canada it airs Thursdays on CTV Sci-Fi Channel at 6PM PT /9PM ET and then is made available to stream on Crave. For the rest of the world it streams Fridays on Amazon Prime Video. Episodes are released weekly.

Keep up with all the Star Trek: Picard news at TrekMovie.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

We’re not going to see a proper late 24th Century Starfleet ship, are we? That ugly and uninspiring La Sirena garbage scow is going to be a permanent fixture :-(

We are ONE episode into the series.

My thoughts exactly.

(paraphrasing Montgomery Scott):”Too many fans are like starship captains and toddling children; they want everything at once, and they want it *their* way.”

You have TNG VOYAGER DS9 for that.

Why can’t we have something different ?

I don’t expect Picard to set foot on a star fleet ship at any point. Maybe at the very end of Season 3.

Yeah, let’s wait and see; it’s more fun that way to be surprised…. everything they seem to be doing on these new shows leads us to pleaseant surprises more often than not (witness Pike’s influence on ST:DIS, etc.). As for me, I trust them to continue that new ‘Trek tradition. Besides; maybe they’ll do something crazy-fun like introduce the Enterprise-F by the end of this series….. take young Spock’s statement at the end of ST:DIS Season-2… “Let’s see what the future holds.”

When I want something different, I watch something different. When I watch Star Trek, I’m watching it because I wanted to see Star Trek. :P

Actually… I would be open to “something different” every once in a while, but not from this creative team. Coming from them, “something different” is just a misdirection, a distraction intended to hide the fact that they have no idea what Star Trek is and how does it work. “Now it would be nice to pause the plot and spend next fifteen minutes jumping up and down the roof while fighting acid-spitting Romulan bikers in real time,” said no Star Trek fan ever.

@Boze – Perfectly said!

There are seven seasons of TNG and Voyager that do that kind of Trek.

I remember the same complaints about DS9 not being real Star Trek during its original run. It doesn’t go anywhere. Roddenberry didn’t want war in Star Trek. Etc., etc.

And now everyone recognizes it as one of the best versions of Star Trek.

Not everyone. I still think it was a monumental set of missteps (with occasional great episodes). I’m watching along with Mission Log now, and have yet to change my mind.

I argue that DS9 is probably the best sci-fi show TV has had so far, but it’s not really Star Trek at its core. I think it’s a variation on Trek, like Rachmaninoff’s “Rhapsody on a Theme from Paganini” wasn’t Paganini but a variation using some of the same elements.

When a show is too different from the core/original concept, it ceases to be that concept. Imagine a Law & Order show that was about murderers & rapists as the good guys. Sure, those characters fit into the L&O world, but such a show literally is the opposite of what L&O is about.

Same for Star Trek. It’s a bit like the ship of Theseus: so many changes from the original that it’s hard to say it’s the same thing.

For some of us, that is what is happening now. We’re seeing things called “Star Trek” that do not match what Star Trek was. (And yes, Star Trek has a core concept it needs to follow or it ceases to be Star Trek and just becomes Whatever Sci-Fi Show.)

Exactly PaulB! For me, it is like the current people in charge are completely gutting Star Trek and taking the name and a few concepts and slapping them on borrowed concepts from other sci-fi shows. Every new live action Star Trek show is now dark and anti-federation and starfleet. One show like that would have been fine. But all of them need to be that way? Star trek was always unique with its bright vision for humanity. Now, IMO, it is like every other depressing dystopian sci-fi show.

@PaulB I personally think that this is an overly strict way to view Star Trek–or any particular setting.

If, as a writer myself, I wrote something in a setting I’d created and a reader told me it didn’t fit. That I should only write stories that follow the very same formula of a dozen I’d already written, I’d say… well, tough. Don’t read it, then.

@JonBuck – Why did you twist my comment into something it’s not? I didn’t suggest that anyone should only “follow the very same formula.” Perhaps read more carefully before replying next time.

Every TV show has a core concept. Are you saying that doesn’t matter? Because that’s insane. A show is defined by its core concept, and variations that are literally opposite that concept are NOT that show.

Let’s do a show about 5 Amish children who like to build play-rocket-ships from cardboard boxes and call it “Star Trek” since the concept doesn’t matter. Right? Doesn’t matter what Star Trek is, just slap the name on anything you want.

@PaulB How do you differentiate “formula” from “core concept”, then? What degree of variation will you accept? You’ve already said you don’t consider DS9 to be Star Trek, so I think I have a good idea.

I’m simply not as strict of what I think of as a “core concept” as you are.

@JonBuck Really? You can’t differentiate between formula and concept? Those are simple and very different concepts, so explaining this might be difficult.

Here’s an example: NCIS is a show where the core concept is about Navy-related crime investigations. The show is “good guys getting the bad guys no matter what” basically–core concept.

The formula has so far been “tough boss, plucky junior team members, quirky science/tech people, at least one older confidante with a past…”

Each NCIS show varies that formula, but they all follow the core concept.

Star Trek was always about a future where humans have outgrown our most petty, destructive behaviors and learned to get along well enough to explore space together peacefully. It was always about a time when we’ve gotten past racism and such. It said “Humans will outgrow this savage childhoods someday.”

The formula of TOS was “starship and crew exploring the unknown in episodic adventures.” TNG’s formula was “starship and crew patrolling the mostly known and some of the unknown.” DS9’s formula was “space station and crew deal with religion, prophecies, gods, etc. while adventures come to them…until they realized that wasn’t working well, so they gave them the Defiant so they could run around in a spaceship the way TOS and TNG did.

DSC meanwhile says “we’ll still be petty, stupid, savage people no matter what we try to do.” Same for what I’ve seen of Picard so far.

The original concept was “Humanity will grow up” but it’s been replaced with “Humanity is childish and stupid and always will be.”

If I were being “strict” I would say that Star Trek should ONLY be what TOS said it was, in specific words: The voyages of the Starship Enterprise. But that would be needlessly, stupidly limiting of the universe.

@JonBuck – My long reply explaining concept vs formula is in limbo or blocked. I replied to Edward Samuela more briefly, but the same thing.

If you don’t understand the difference between a concept and a formula, it’s hard to have any conversation about either. My comments already explained it clearly enough, so…?

@PaulB That assumes Star Trek is definitively about a strict concept (e.g., a Starfleet ship’s adventures), instead of it being about a universe of characters.

Roddenberry himself wanted to spin Star Trek off into a Gary 7 show back in the 1960s. So the idea that stories within the Star Trek universe have to strictly be about a specific formula is something even Roddenberry didn’t believe.

@Edward Exactly! A setting is a framing device that can hold many different “core concepts” PaulB is talking about. There’s a series of books about the Department of Temporal Investigations that I rather enjoyed. It’s not about Starfleet officers aboard a starship. It’s a civilian agency that often has to deal with the fallout from various incidents. And they don’t think very highly of Starfleet officers.

There are all sorts of different stories to tell within the same setting. As a writer and worldbuilder, this is how my thinking goes.

If you’re a writer, you should have a better grasp of the terms concept and formula than you seem to.

A setting is the location/time of a show.
A concept is what the show is about, what it says–what defines it apart from other shows.
A formula is how that concept is demonstrated.

Setting: United States
Concept: Dragnet – good cops stop bad criminals, and good always wins
Formula: two detectives above reproach or corruption put bad guys behind bars

Now, switch the setting, and it could still work. (Canada)
Switch the formula, and it could still work. (a team of cops investigate federal crimes)
But switch the concept, and it is NOT Dragnet. (good isn’t good but actually corrupt, and the bad guys always win)

These are three different, simple terms.

@Edward – Like JonBuck, you are confusing “concept” and “formula.” A Gary 7 show would have had a different formula (lone agent with assistant fixing things) but likely the same basic concept (humanity will grow out of our primitive childhood into a positive future).

These new shows reject that core concept of a better humanity in a bright future. DSC showed an ugly, hateful Starfleet. DSC season 3 is apparently going to see a fallen, disgraced Federation. Picard is about a broken, bigoted Federation/Starfleet. NONE of that is a better humanity in a bright future.

Rejecting Roddenberry’s core optimism and progressivism is what makes these new works “not Star Trek” to many of us. Just as a version of “Dragnet” that made criminals the good guys would not be Dragnet.

If y’all can’t tell the difference between a concept and a formula, I’m not going to try to teach you. Study screenwriting, perhaps. (Not being rude, just saying that these two terms aren’t hard to comprehend in this context.)

@PaulB Then my advice to you is what I’d say to my readers if they didn’t think what I wrote was my “core concept”. Don’t watch it.

@JonBuck “Then my advice to you is what I’d say to my readers if they didn’t think what I wrote was my “core concept”. Don’t watch it.”

Wow, that’s such novel and amazing advice. You must feel so proud to offer such pearls of wisdom.

You didn’t have anything of value to say, and you can’t comprehend two very basic terms about tv shows, so your advice and your opinion are just empty noise.

@PaulB I’m sorry, but IMO that gets very boring very fast if writers and a series can never question the underlying concept, or introduce conflicts to or setbacks of that vision of human progress. You’re telling me that the Federation has to be good because it’s good, and in the entire future of it going forward there’s never going to be a point where maybe things dip backwards, or there’s trouble?

In fact, that’s exactly why the first season of TNG didn’t work because edicts stating that there could never be conflict between the characters because they had an evolved future that precluded it.

@Edward Samuela – I’m curious. What exactly IS Star Trek to you? What is required to make a show “Star Trek”?

It seems like you and some others just want…whatever. Isn’t there any specific thing about Star Trek that makes it Star Trek?

I’ve stated my thoughts on the core concept, what is required for a show to be Star Trek. Your turn.

@PaulB Star Trek is about an exploration of the human condition using characters in a science fiction setting. Period. The ups and downs of the Federation and the characters within the Star Trek universe are significant parts of the story, but they’re in service to saying something about humanity, culture, and the world we live in.

I disagree totally with your assertion that DS9 is not Star Trek at its core. If anything, if one takes the series as a whole, the central theme at the heart of DS9 is an examination of how “good” the Federation actually is. Ideals and principles are great, but they only mean anything when they are tested and held to when made inconvenient.

The Dominion War pushes Starfleet and the Federation to the breaking point, and the stories are really about how well the characters, and the institutions Gene Roddenberry had set up as a quasi-Utopian paradise, either do or don’t hold to the established Trek morality.

The fact the series is willing to go there, and show us that sometimes the characters can’t live up to the ideal, gives it a realism and REAFFIRMS those values through struggle instead of just spoon feeding them to the audience in a pretty speech.

@Edward Samuela – Most of your comment is well thought out, and while we disagree, I’m not going to attack your opinion. However, this part–the core concept–is a point to discuss: “Star Trek is about an exploration of the human condition using characters in a science fiction setting. Period.”

That is literally ANY science fiction show. Lost in Space. Babylon 5. Battlestar Galactica. etc, etc.

Star Trek is supposed to be an optimistic look at humanity’s future. It’s baked into the show from literally the very beginning. For many of us, the dark/gloomy “deconstruction” of that optimism is as wrong-headed as a Law & Order show glorifying murderers.

If, to you, Star Trek is “an exploration of the human condition using characters in a science fiction setting. Period,” then you will literally accept ANYTHING as Star Trek.

We fundamentally disagree. LL&P!

You are being rude.

@Edward Samuela – While Star Trek was used to try and launch a Gary 7 show, I don’t think it was going to be a Star Trek show. And certainly wasn’t going to change what Star Trek was at the time. An optimistic show about humanity growing up and traveling the stars.

@Trellium G – I can’t fathom why this is so hard for folks here to grasp. I’ve chatted with 10-year-old fans who understand the difference, and who know Star Trek is supposed to hopeful and uplifting about humans.

Some people are so blinded by their love of something that they lose critical-thinking skills and attack those of us who aren’t sycophantic. Tiring, isn’t it?

Star Trek shows have always been products of their respective eras, giving what people in the era need to see. People in the turbulent sixties needed to see that the people fighting for civil rights would overcome, and there was a bright future where racial prejudice was a thing of the past. People in the eighties needed some of the same reassurance that the Cold War wasn’t going to be the end of the world.

Right now, we need reassurance that evil—particularly, evil in the form of a malfeasant government—can be defeated. And for there to be an evil to defeated, there has to be an evil.

I’m sorry that you can’t enjoy the show as much as the rest of us, but every Star Trek fan I personally know is absolutely raving about Picard. And I’m raving right along with them.

I prefer Section 31.

And yet TNG was vastly different from TOS…Lol

“That kind of Trek.” And there it is…how people justify changing something that’s been established and telling you that you’re the problem because they couldn’t leave it as it was. Like when you work for a company that can’t stop changing their policies so they send YOU to a corporate training session called “Adapting to change.”

I am going to open a restaurant that sells Chinese food and call it Pizza Palace. And when people complain, I will remind them that there are plenty of other pizza places that serve “that kind of pizza.”


@bassmaster22 – Good analogy. But from what I’m hearing around here, the common Trekkie attitude is “I don’t care what kind of restaurant it is, or what food they serve, or if it’s good food, just as long as I can gorge myself endlessly.” They would be happy to walk into Pizza Palace and find nothing but Chinese food because they don’t care about the details, they just want the calories (and as many as possible).

The arrogance! They have no idea what Star Trek is?! Well, maybe you should learn to write and get a job. Oh, right you’re just a fan and all you can do is complain.

For the last time, there aren’t some crazy type of new acid spitting Romulans. He obviously bit down on a capsule or something that was in his mouth because after he spits, it kills him as well. Also, when and I really mean WHEN will fans stop and realize that Star Trek does not = Starfleet? I remember back in the late 90s people threw around the idea of a Klingon show and some fans were saying that wouldn’t be Star Trek. If it helps, just look at Picard as a spinoff. It expands the Trek universe. I’m loving the look at civilian and non Starfleet life. There’s a whole sandbox of possibility to explore. It’s long past time that we go there!

Yes, and we have Logan for the Picard story line. Your point?

“Why can’t we have something different ?”

We can. There are other shows for “something different”. If “something different” is what we are after why even bother with familiar characters and the name “Star Trek” at all?

Like you, I’d love to see some interesting and progressive Starfleet ship designs in this series, but I have my doubts they’ll show up.

How many times do they have to tell? It’s not TNG redux! But you’ll get your fix of Starfleet 24th century starships with Lower Decks. :-)

Oh a brain dead comedy cartoon. Gee thanks.

The cartoon hasn’t come out, so it’s amazing that you already know it’s brain dead. Any other future knowledge you can share with us?

Because comedy cartoons are known for being so intellectually satisfying. /S

LOL, fair enough, good point.

Actually, since it is from one of the main writers of Rick and Morty and the creator of @TNGSeason8, i actually think it will be intellectually satisfying.

Jeez, you know NOTHING about that show. Shut up.

All some fans want is more of their favorite series. Anything else is too different.

Yeah. It looks like they are sticking Picard on the Serenity.

Ha, nice.

Just a guess … But if the Enterprise-E still exists, it’ll probably show up at some point.

I would really love to know the status of Deep Space Nine, or whether Bajor is part of the Federation now.

Irony of all ironies, it’ll be the Enterprise-E that vaporizes the renegade Picard, and his ship, with the loss of all hands.

Fade to black.

Deal with it, this is not a Starfleet centric story. Just throwing in Starfleet for fanboy service is a waste.

I still believe that either Worf or Geordi is the captain of the Enterprise, and that we’ll see them and their ship sometime down the line.

It would be a funny twist if we saw… Captain Harry Kim!

That would be pretty darn cool if you ask me.

The Collector perfectly exemplifies what is wrong with the current fandom: so may people go IMMEDIATELY to the negatives. It’s disheartening to see such an unhappy, disenfranchised, miserably, whiny fanbase replacing what was once an optimistic bunch of people. I miss the fans of yore.

Perhaps because it’s disheartening to see such unhappy, disenfranchised, miserably, whiny concepts replacing what was once an optimistic concept for humanity’s future. I miss the Star Trek of yore.

Good job there is SEVEN HUNDRED+ of that too watch, then.

I’m not getting how people say ANY of the current shows don’t show optimism about humanity’s future. They all show bad/difficult situations, yes. But they also show humanity OVERCOMING them and making them better.

My problems with Discovery have nothing to do with any sort of lack of optimism. My problems there have to do with some lazy writing here and there. But I find it to be a very optimistic show.

The ONE episode of Picard we’ve seen so far made me love so much how we saw that despite some very bad events and resulting isolationism, there are still those that are willing to stand up and say “No!” and work to make things better. THAT is optimism.

Thank you, OSpock
I agree. The members of Starfleet in DSC were ALL good people — until they started losing the Klingon war, when DISCO had been gone for 9 months. With their backs up against the wall, hundreds of thousands [millions even?] of Federation citizens killed, Starfleet leadership, along with Vulcan, considered the latter-day equivalent of the Atom Bombs the US dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. BUT BURNHAM and the crew of the Discovery stopped this plan.

And before people jump on me about “Burnham started the war,” Burnham believed she was preventing a war by using the “Vulcan Hello.”

Yes, there was some sub-par writing in S1, and the MU switcheroo of my favorite captain was a real bummer [and a plot twist a lot of people saw from miles away]. Yes, there were mistakes. And I believe they OVER-corrected in S2, but JMHO. DSC has been uneven, but its heart is good, and the actors are fantastic.

I still hope they #FindPrimeLorca

There are different kinds of optimism. Star Trek used to say that things will get better, humans will get better, and we’ll be able to move on to exciting things like exploring the universe and our own nature as living things.

Now it says things will always suck, humans mostly will still suck, and we’ll have to spend all our time fighting and bickering instead of being explorers.

An analogy: A cancer patient can feel a couple of kinds of optimism. “I’ll beat this cancer and live cancer-free for the rest of my life” or “I’m going to die of cancer but at least I have the love of my friends and family to ease my days.”

One says things can get better. The other says things will always suck but we can persevere.

I far prefer the “things will get better” version because almost ALL other sci-fi shows focus on the “things will suck but we can survive.”

I watch Star Trek for what I can’t get elsewhere. Well, I used to–now it’s the same stories, same attitudes, as any other generic sci-fi show.

Pick Hard, you might be less discouraged by reading the earlier threads on the premiere. They were overwhelmingly positive. (Like the critiques and the ratings.)

I have a hypothesis that several of the the super negative fans need to bolster their outrage with negativity from YouTube trashfests before weighing in here.

Patrick and Alex TRIED to tell you all that this is going to be something very different that TNG and other Trek but apparently some didn’t want to listen. That’s what I saw the most with (some) Trek fans who had issues with the show. It’s a different story format, it’s a different perspective. You will probably see very few Starfleet ships because this isn’t a show about a Starfleet crew. It was never going to be.

People want to hate on Kurtzman for the sake of it. Makes them to feel better trashing somebody else. It’s equal parts tragic and pathetic.

Or, he just is a very bad writer and unfortunately producer (one of about 20) too.

No need to reply to this post, btw.

I heard this the first time when it was about Rick Berman and Brannon Braga.

Wow Collector, it seems as though you felt that you needed to compensate for the positivity and excitement in the posts in the threads about the premiere by jumping in with negativity at the top of this thread.

I think that I’ll wait to see the whole ship before forming a view of La Sirena. And given this is Star Trek: Picard, I’ll be perfectly happy the ship is not a main character in this series.

Are you sure you WANT to see a John Eaves designed Starfleet ship? But yes, no surprise the series’ main ship is ugly, generic and uninspired. That’s his specialty. No pointless cutouts though from what I can see, so that’s something I suppose.

“We’re not going to see a proper late 24th Century Starfleet ship, are we?”

Of course we won’t. There was not even a glimpse of Starfleet in the trailers and “this season on Picard” which aired after the 1st episode. No ships, no uniforms, nada. If anyone had any doubts whether the name “Star Trek” and certain things cherry-picked from the ST lore are just means to sell largely unrelated shows using familiar entities (places, characters, names) then it’s probably high time to even question that, unless one is intereted in going into fullblown denial :)

…if this is your only complaint, then I think the show is doing alright.

Let’s hope The Search for Maddox does not plot/plod along like Discovery’s Search for Spock!

That is a matter of conjecture.

There is no conjecture in stating a hope. Perhaps you are thinking of a different word than conjecture.

Seven red androids

“Without Starfleet’s support, Picard is left leaning”

This made me laugh.

I am right there with you!


“Without Starfleet’s support, Picard is left leaning”

And here I thought he had become a French nativist holing up in his vineyard, proud family crest on the chest and all ;)

Motorhomes look pretty cool in the future, good to know.

There’s still trailer parks in the 24th century??!! What happened to the Roddenberry Utopia!! Or maybe it’s freedom to live anyway you’d like….or to live off grid outside of Federation society and rules makes you live in trailers live this Raffi character who we’ll soon find out why she’s living off the federation grid! These plot summaries are making the whole story arc one slow burn, which is good to me, yet may be too slow for a lot of people poisoned by Marvel and action flicks.

You do realize that in TNG Roddenberry created a character (Tasha Yar) who came from a failed Federation colony world with “rape gangs,” right?

So trailer parks are not out of the question if rape gangs are a thing.

Yar didn’t grow up on Earth. Earth was implied to be the utopia according to TNG and DS9. Other places weren’t as great.

Let’s spell that out for the people up top thar, they seem to think Trek is all about utopia.

Starfleet was above reproach — MOST of the time. You had Picard, you had Jellico, you had Maxwell and Exploding Head guy.

Exploding Head Guy (Remmick) was being controlled by aliens, though.

“The Human Adventure Fell Flat On Its Face”

Pure speculation … But I’m guessing the reason Starfleet doesn’t support Picard’s investigation is that they’re working with the Romulans to reverse engineer the Borg tech.

It would explain how the Romulans were able to operate on Earth without Starfleet detecting them, including a black ops team using energy weapons and setting off an explosion near a Starfleet archive.

Given Seven of Nine being in the series, and her reported distrust of Starfleet, it’d be interesting to know whether Janeway is still an admiral.

“Given Seven of Nine being in the series, and her reported distrust of Starfleet, it’d be interesting to know whether Janeway is still an admiral.”

Apropos of which, I’m interested to know if the two Janeways’ attack on the Borg in “End Game” just dealt them a setback or if it obliterated them. Probably the former. And did Seven of Nine (nickname, 8:53) end up with Chuckles?

8:53… snort!

“8:53” made me laugh far more than it probably should have. :)

In a CNET interview they imply that the Delta Quadrant Borg are crippled but not gone.


Del Arco teases that the Borg that disconnected from the collective, as seen in the TNG two-parter Descent, have become more human over time, but noted that the broader Borg collective still remains a threat.

Goodness but this is a very attractive cast of renegades (Trek alumni included!). I really need to stop reading these articles about future episodes, though… even mere titles and photos are now revealing too much!

“Picard seeks others willing to join his search for Bruce Maddox”


In Star Trek, scientists don’t go missing, they hide to continue their forbidden research, lol.

I am getting a yet stronger Noonien Soong redux vibe.

And his ancestor, Arik Soong, as well.

I can’t help but think this show could be like the Fugitive with a Sisko investigating Picard. After all Picard killed Mrs. Sisko (as Locutus) at Wolf 359 that there is a potential vendetta there. Might think it odd that during the events of first Contact Picard stopped the fleet by knowing EXACTLY where to target a Borg Cube raising questions like why didn’t Picard inform the fleet prior to losing a bunch of ships and/or is he still connected to the Borg hive, then loses Mars to another AI threat…. only to now potentially go all in on perfect AI as he ages. Seems like Sisko or other could think the Captain has always been a turncoat maybe motivated to go all in now given if he can’t be Captain, no organic should?. Might add some shades of grey to make things interesting.

I’ll have some of whatever you’re smoking, because you are WAY WAY WAY out there. Are you joking, perhaps?

You got to admit it would be a mind blowing twist!!! Who to cheer for – Sisko or Picard? Who is saving the Federation and who is destroying it? You could always have it at the end where they end up working together (like the Fugitive).

No, I don’t have to admit that. It’s just…utterly nonsensical. Enjoy your weird daydream, but…yeah, it’s just yours. :)

I’d argue it’s as sensical than Picard being all “hey AI, you used me to kill thousands, potentially billions” then killed thousands again on Mars while dooming billions of Romulans but hey… no qualms/ reservations at all because I miss Data and wish Starfleet was all AI (how dare they have concerns!) Then again this is the guy who cried over family then forgot to use the Nexus to save them (leaving his ship destroyed in the process by a 50 year old BOP). All I’m saying is why not use the nonsensical parts of TNG for some game-changing thought provoking action?

You can’t judge an entire class of lifeforms by the actions of a few. That would be like saying that you can’t trust biological lifeforms because the Jem’Hadar killed billions. The Borg are bad, and some Synths attacked Mars for some unknown reason, but Picard isn’t the type of person to attack an entire species based on the actions of a few. Neither is Sisko, for that matter. Even in the worst days of the Dominion War, when the Founders were responsible for billions of deaths, Sisko never stopped trusting Odo. Besides, Sisko and Picard put aside their differences at the end of Emissary, and Sisko is busy being a god now.

AI in this case is manufactured life programmed on purpose to be perfect… why the racism then by Picard et al that you can engineer a perfect AI but can’t manufacture a perfect human by eugenics? Almost like engineered AI doesn’t equal naturally developed life that went through the experiences mandated by the Prime Directive. But then again anything for the unimind?

I honestly don’t know what is so wrong about halting the study of AI and eugenics. Seems a perfectly reasonable position to take given the history of all of that seen in all the different Trek incarnations over the years. I’ve always said, even though it did come out OK it was still foolish to trust Data at all. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if it turns out that this Maxwell dude is behind the synth thing. He was totally presented to be a jerk in that episode he was in. Even though I didn’t see him that way. In fact, Pulaski shared his opinions regarding Data.

I doubt Maxwell was behind the attack. He wants Starfleet to let him make new Androids. The attack on Mars put an end to that.

Why was it foolish to trust Data? He never did anything at all that made him seem distrustful.

Its one thing to regulate research into AI. However, there is no justification for outright banning synthetic life forms. B4 did nothing wrong, but he has now been disassembled and put in a box.

If every single AI that has been dealt with tried to kill everyone and/or had a personal agenda that included no concern for organic life or even life in general…. And then you run into another AI… What do you think would be the logical thing to do? Trust it? History says that would be foolish.

Yeah, Sisko vs anyone isn’t exactly a fair fight anymore. Sisko will just appear 5 minutes ago and punch them in the nuts.

Also, pretty sure Sisko is past vendettas.

“There are FIVE episodes!” (pictured so far)

But not yet five queens.

The latest iteration on my hypothesis is that the five queens of hearts represent Data’s five daughters: Lal, Soji, and another pair of twins.

At this point, two of five are dead, which leaves three.

I’m also strongly thinking that the Data’s positronic memory may have been taken from Lal. Data may have entrusted Maddox to keep Lal’s positronic matrix for study, and Data had downloaded into Lal.

[Rubbing hands in anticipation]

Star Trek: The Search for Maddox :))) For a one-off episode guy he is sure getting a lot of attention in this show. Which is a good thing in my opinion, because I always wanted to see more of that character on TNG.

Now we’re all waiting for the cameo we didn’t know we wanted!

“Stardust City Rag” sounds fun. Can’t wait to see what that’s about.

What I am wondering now is whether they managed to get Brian Brophy (the original actor that played Maddox in the Measure of Man) for an appearance. Apparently on IMDB his last acting credit is from 2014 but on Facebook someone mentioned that he didn’t officially retire that he was just teaching and could come out to film some scenes.

His IMdb doesn’t show him working on any projects, but maybe Star Trek PTB are making him keep it a secret.

Watching Picard is so amazing. So much joy to continue the story after Nemesis. There are so many options and stories they can develop. Really hope they make more Star Trek time related stories.

Seven of Nine – If she still has her Borg Implants, she could connect the past and the future. Not sure which Voyager episode, but I remember Kim sending her a message to the past, some instructions to change or re-write history. She also has worked with Section 31. Will be amazing to have Seven making new time related stories for Picard, Discovery, etc.

Sisko – Really (REALLY!) wish we also have Sisko one more time. Sisko could return to save the day. Would be amazing to see Kurtzman working in collaboration with Ira Steven Behr and his original team to pull a new DS9 project. Sisko, like Jean Luc, deserves a better closure to his character.

Guinan – Awesome we will see her again in Picard! Time travel stories with Guinan were always my favorite.

If Picard is dealing with the Borg and Discovery began telling us the origins, Seven, Sisko and Guinan are key to connect old/new shows. All of them have struggled in a big way because of the Borg.

I wish we could see Avery Brooks as Sisko again, but I think he’s given up acting and gone in a new direction in life.

Sad but true. Even if Avery Brooks did return to acting, I think he’d want to do something different. The only way I ever see him returning to Star Trek is if they decided to do a Benny Russell mini-series.

Outside of Trek, I’ve always wanted to see him play Thelonious Monk onscreen…seems like that would be a good fit!