The Star Trek: Picard panel at the 56-Year Mission convention in Las Vegas in late August included Jonathan Frakes who kept mum about season three, however, he did talk a bit about directing a particularly controversial episode in season one. Frakes’ co-stars Gates McFadden and Michelle Hurd talked a bit about season three, and Isa Briones and Evan Evagora talked about their season two exits. Jeri Ryan also revealed why Seven sounds so different on Picard.
Frakes defends controversial season one episode
Before his first appearance in the seventh episode of Star Trek: Picard, Jonathan Frakes directed two episodes, including “Stardust City Rag,” which began with a teaser featuring a gruesome scene of former Borg drone (and Star Trek: Voyager character) Icheb having his implants forcibly removed before Seven of Nine could save him. A fan asked Frakes about the graphic nature of this controversial scene and the director explained the shock of it was the point:
I think the objective was to disturb and to make it as painful and graphic and emotional as possible. It was challenging and yet exciting to do something that far out of our usual comfort zone. We tried to scare the shit out of you and I hope we did.
When it came to talking about the upcoming third season, Frakes remained mum citing an email he received from the powers that be. He demonstrated this by taking off his button-down shirt to reveal his “Don’t ask me, I signed an NDA!” tee shirt underneath (his t-shirt first appeared in Las Vegas back in 2019).
Jonathan Frakes at 56-Year Mission Star Trek convention (Photo: TrekMovie.com)
Hurd celebrates “amazing journey” with Frakes and TNG cast
Picard cast member Michelle Hurd had no problems talking about her admiration for Frakes who she worked with as a director and co-star on Picard, as well as being directed by him in the past. The actress said of Frakes:
I adore this man. I can’t even tell you how much life and love he brings to the set… It’s not a Star Trek-only thing. He walks onto any soundstage – I had the privilege to have him direct me in another series that I did, a procedural cop show, and he literally walks on that set and every single department comes to life and is so happy he is going to share his time with us.
As for Picard season three, Hurd did say a bit about what it was like to work with the Next Generation cast.
In the first season, the first person I had a scene with was Patrick Stewart and that was an unbelievable experience and has changed my life, seriously. And then to have the opportunity to have people like Jonathan, Gates [McFadden], Michael Dorn, LeVar Burton, Marina [Sirtis]. It just goes on and on. I can’t wait. I literally would just be pinching myself. it’s an amazing experience. This has been a phenomenal journey. And I have to say, my experience on set has been so profound, but my experience with you guys [points to the audience] has touched my core. I am so grateful. The love and generosity and kindness that you guys give us, it impacts me and changes the way I enter rooms. And I want to thank you all for that. It’s been an amazing journey.
Michelle Hurd at 56-Year Mission Star Trek convention (Photo: TrekMovie.com)
Gates loves Crusher’s season three story
Speaking of Gates McFadden, the actress returned the compliment and talked about how Michelle Hurd’s Raffi is going to see some action in season three:
I just have to brag about you [looks to Michelle Hurd]. Ms. Hurd, oh my god, I have to say – I’m a choreographer and have done stunt choreography – and she does something so rad and so brilliant. Just to watch her rehearse. She’s so great. She’s the real deal.
As for her experience in season three, McFadden was more open than Mr. Frakes, talking a bit about Dr. Crusher’s story:
Well, it was fabulous. At first, I would like to say one thing and this is an amazing cast of people. I am a huge fan of their work and think they are awesome. So, it was so great to come back. And I love the Crusher story. I think it’s the best writing for me and best story for me of all the Star Trek stuff I’ve ever done. And Jonathan directed two of the episodes… I had a blast. I love all my Next Gen people. I love all the permutations of Star Trek. I’m just very, very pleased to be a small part of it.
Gates McFadden at 56-Year Mission Star Trek convention (Photo: TrekMovie.com)
Evagora’s WTF moment over being killed off
Evan Evagora isn’t back for season three of Picard, even though his character was resurrected at the end of season two. On the panel the actor talked about how he learned about Elnor being killed off early in season two:
I got the script and I read that I got shot and I thought, “No. This can’t be!” I read a few pages and was like, “What the fuck, I’m dead?” No one told me. No phone call. And then Akiva [Goldsman] ended up ringing me and was like, “Don’t panic, everything is okay, you come back in the end.” And I was like, “How? I’m dead?” But it all worked out. But every week was me flipping through it to see if I was alive yet.
Evan Evagora at 56-Year Mission Star Trek convention (Photo: TrekMovie.com)
Briones ready for Traveler spin-off with Wil Wheaton
Another actor not coming back is Isa Briones who played Soji in the first season and Kore Soong in season two. She also talked about how she had some questions for the showrunner during the second season before finding out it would end with the return of Wil Wheaton’s Wesley Crusher:
I remember when we were filming season two with Akiva Goldsman, and I was asking, because they’re so secretive, I was like, “What is happening? Who is Kore? What is happening to her?” And they were like, “We can’t tell you because we haven’t confirmed it yet, but wink wink, you’re going to be very excited about your scene partner.” I was like, “Cool.”… But then they’re like “It’s a TNG cast member,” and I was like, “I just know it’s Wil, give me Wil!” We got one day to work together. It was actually my last day of filming and it was one of the most emotional days on set, because Wil and I have created a friendship through doing Ready Room and conventions, but we had never worked together on a scene. We had always been like ships passing in the night, but still felt a really great connection for each other. He’s one of those guys that is instantly your friend. He is such genuine, good person. So that was really emotional to be with him and one of the first things he said to me was, “I have been waiting so many years to come back here and I am so happy to do it with you.”
Briones also added that she wants to return to Trek with Wheaton at any time:
And hey, I’m ready to do a Traveler spin-off. I want to do buddy-cop, Wesley Crusher and Kore take on the universe. I am down.
Isa Briones at 56-Year Mission Star Trek convention (Photo: TrekMovie.com)
Jeri Ryan explains why Seven sounds different on Picard
Jeri Ryan (who is also coming back in season three) wasn’t on the main Picard panel but during a separate Voyager-focused panel the actress talked about what it was like to bring Seven of Nine back, and discussed how she approached the character differently for Picard:
It was incredibly challenging because when I first got the scripts, I couldn’t hear her voice. She was so different. And Seven, her voice was so specific for so long on Voyager primarily because she was written by basically the same people and Brannon Braga if not wrote, rewrote almost every line I ever uttered. So it was a very specific voice. And so much time had the past. It was 20 years later. So she’s been very different person by that point. And Jonathan del Arco – who plays Hugh and is a wonderful actor and also a fantastic director and a dear friend who had just had just had his first scene on Picard – right before I started shooting he came over read through my scenes with me and helped me work on it because he had just gone through the same thing with his character. And he actually gave me just one simple little clue which was the absolute key to finding and making it make sense for me. And he said, “Maybe she just had to make a conscious choice to act and sound as human as possible just to survive.” And that was all I needed. I just needed that simple little thing to make it make sense for me and then tie the whole story together.
Jeri Ryan at 56-Year Mission Star Trek convention (Photo: TrekMovie.com)
More from the 56-Year Mission
We are still going through the rest of our material from Vegas and have more to share from some of the other panels at the 56-Year Mission in Las Vegas. Check out the rest of our STLV coverage here.
Find more news about the Star Trek TV Universe here at TrekMovie.com
The icheb scene would have worked if the rest of the episode wasnt a camp farce.
Agreed… the tone was all wrong.
I despised that episode with a passion.
It was one of the best episodes.
Disagree. That episode was arguably the best episode of that season. The scene worked perfectly and accomplished it’s intention. Which was to serve as motivation for 7.
I’m in agreement with ML31 on this. I actually think the contrast worked exceptionally well.
I might have appreciated the Icheb scene more if they had bothered to give us a scene or two before that of Icheb being, you know, a character we could begin to care about, to give his death some impact. Maybe something with him and Seven reconnecting. Better yet, reminding us who the heck he was.
But he was just a glorified red shirt in a gratuitous gore scene from a cheap horror movie. I got only a vague… uh, remember that guy from Voyager? Well, now he’s in the fridge so Seven can get some sweet, sweet violent revenge. Uh, sure, okay.
I didn’t get a scare out of it. It was more of a shrug.
But for the original kid and young teen target audience for Icheb as a point of view character in Voyager, it was brutal and devastating seeing that scene.
One of our teens still will not watch any new live-action Trek until the each season has run. They flatly refused to watch any Picard again after that.
Basically if they wanted to turn away the younger end of the fanbase that Voyager has built, it was a master stroke in burning IP. I don’t think that our teen was alone in that reaction.
Sorry to hear that.
While I did struggle to remember Icheb at all, I do sympathize. And if they absolutely needed to kill off the character (I very much doubt they did), they definitely could’ve handled it better for those fans in the audience such as your teen. The brutality was jarring to say the least.
I felt the same way about Hugh, though. And weirdly enough, also Bruce Maddox. And B4, in a manner of speaking.
A lot of unnecessary deaths that season, and I sure didn’t get anything out of them. Other than disgust.
I suspect your teen’s reaction was not the norm. I have to tell you that especially among boys gore is an attraction. If I was 13 seeing that scene I would have ate it up. My kid was no different at that age.
None of our kids liked it, even the one who’s into gore.
The point is that our kids went through middle school with Voyager as their favourite show, and Icheb was established as the character to be a young audience point of view. So, they were attached to him.
I really wonder if Frakes and Chabon would have the same love of Trek if Chekhov had actually died horribly in. Wrath of Khan. Good thing Myers didn’t feel it was necessary to kill off their generation’s point of view character in order to make the movie more authentic or motivate Kirk.
Not sure I agree on gender stereotypes on this either BTW.
The problem is there is no comparable character on TOS. Killing Chekov wouldn’t have served a purpose and Spock, a MAJOR character was already going to bite it at the end. I would think the best comparison would be Wesley Crusher or Jake Sisko. But even those characters had more screen time and were more regular than Icheb. Sorry your kids got attached to such minor characters. I don’t find myself in agreement with Secret Hideout decisions very often but if they were going to provide proper motivation for 7 Icheb was really the only realistic option. They already hinted at a mentor like relationship between the two and he was minor enough that most weren’t going to miss him. I myself forgot he even existed until I did the rewatch a number of years ago. Every decision isn’t going to please everyone.
Sorry you disagree on the very real trend of gore appealing to one gender over the other. Not much I can say about that.
The show did have a little bit of that problem. When referencing specific episodes out of 170+ you better make sure they are memorable references. I nearly forgot Icheb even existed until I did my Voyage rewatch over 5 years ago. I agree that knowing the relationship 7 had with him is certainly needed to make the scene work. It’s a bit of a tough like to straddle. Too much and fans in the know are bothered going over stuff they know. Not enough and viewers who may not know or remember are not going to get the full impact 7 feels.
The scene worked for me because I still recalled the relationship but only because I had done a recent rewatch of the show.
The scene didn’t work for me because, head-scratching canonical references aside, it failed to build up to the horror. There was no suspense and nothing there to establish this person as… a person first. He was a slab of meat on a table, screaming his head off. Even the first victim in Jaws got more before becoming fish food.
It was just badly conceived on every level.
I have to admit I’m not filled with Voyager knowledge having only watched the series twice. Once when it aired and once as a rewatch many years ago. So what canon issues there were I would be less familiar with them as I would with TOS. Given Secret Hideout’s precedent for blowing off canon I would not be surprised if it was there.
I don’t think the scene worked as a horror scene. You need more than just a little gore for that. And this was really not much gore at all. Wasn’t the eye a Borg implant anyway? The scene worked for me because it achieved its goal. Provide motivation for 7 to go where she did with her life. As far as giving Icheb more screen time to get the audience to sympathise more… That is a problem for people who never watched or recalled the character from Voyager. But since I had been reminded of Icheb through a recent rewatch, none of that was necessary for me.
You’re over thinking this. Icheb was a nobody.
del Arco’s advice was a pretty sharp observation IMO … and I think it worked, because I haven’t had any problems buying into Ryan’s current read on 7. (not that I’m an expert, probably saw 15 of her VOYAGER eps tops.)
I think the main reason I keep watching BOSCH and its spinoff is I keep waiting for Ryan to get hers from when she was a big villain who got away with stuff back in s2 or so …
Sort of gave up listening to Frakes when he made that comment about people who didn’t like Discovery being ‘wrong’ or whatever it was just because everyone worked hard.
The Icheb bit didn’t work for me and was just unnecessary. It’s good that Frakes has his directing gigs within the franchise and is well liked but people are entitled to their opinions.
Frakes like others will defend his work to the death, even if it is that monstrosity called Discovery.
I had no problem with the scene at all, and I think it worked quite well. A Director, Writer, etc will always defend their work. And I would suppose you would too if you made a decision for something at your job. That was a creative choice that he made and of course he would back it. If you were directing a scene the way you wanted it, you would do the same thing.
As far as Discovery, as well as any iteration of Trek since Discovery, I find people are incredibly negative. They are expecting a similar formatted style in the way of TNG/VOY/DS9. I am old enough to remember the backlash in the days when they announced TNG. Fans were freaking out at how different it was to TOS and that it was unacceptable to have a bald Captain. It’s amazing how that all parallels today’s gripes and whining over Discovery, etc. I, for one, am enjoying seeing Star Trek through other people’s visions. I say, long live Trek in all its iterations!
By format do you mean serialized storytelling? Because DS9 was heavily serialized in its later seasons.
That doesn’t seem to be the main source of the criticisms with Discovery, at least not the ones I’ve seen.
I agree. It’s not the serialized storytelling. It was (dare I say) the storytelling, with Picard repeating many of the same mistakes Discovery did.
I don’t think the major criticism of CurrentTrek is about style or tone (not to say those don’t largely suck); it is about sheer and abundant lack of quality and veracity in storytelling. That leads from characters who don’t exhibit professionalism — cool or otherwise — that is supposed to go part and parcel with Starfleet vets, and so everything leading off from that flawed point just magnifies how wrong they are handling things.
To be fair, I can point out how early TNG also fell into some horrible habits (how many times does Riker say he’s never seen or heard of anything like what they’re looking at, when we’ve all seen a close variation of same on TOS multiple times?), and I’m the last person to defend TNG because I frankly never liked it all that much, but they still didn’t constantly violate the pseudo-reality of professionals on a somewhat military vessel. You can cite examples from when TOS and the Berman era shows broke from this, but — and I’m exempting VOYAGER and ENT from this because I gave up on those shows very early as I didn’t want to watch suckfests — it was nowhere near as constant as what I saw when I was still trying to watch DSC in its first 2 seasons, and everything I’ve read about s3&4 suggests it was just more of the same.
To your other point: plenty of filmmakers are honest enough to acknowledge when they made a mistake — if they think it was a mistake, that is. So the notion a filmmaker always will defend his work is kind of like thinking all artists are going to be as temperamental as Kevin Smith, which I really doubt is the case.
Gee, I wrote a spec action movie script over 30 years ago and at the insistence of a potential agent, I was persuaded to add what he thought was an essential obligatory gay bad guy in a supporting role. I still cringe about that, and often wonder if that script — which actually managed to work its way up to a v/p of development at Silver Pictures before it got kicked back to me — would have actually succeeded if I hadn’t acquiesced on that point (especially given that agent didn’t even wind up repping me; I submitted the script cold myself with a legal release and a helluva good cover letter, and only got an agent a few months after that, when I was on fire with my writing and waiting to pitch at TNG.)
I agree but will pile on and say that Star Trek has ample room to show what professionalism “could be” in the future. These new iterations don’t really try except in SNW.
Even in SNW the lack of formality is troubling. I always admired Shatner’s ‘wear command like a comfortable old jacket’ approach to Kirk, but he had the iron to back that up, as evidenced in BoT and CharX. Mount has natural charisma and charm that puts him light years ahead of the current batch of Starfleeters on the tube, but he has got to get consistent writing to build on that, or it might wear thin.
Let’s be honest the reason they killed off Icheb the way they did was because the original actor was being a d*ck for the last 20 years to various people and on social media, so they kill his character off to ensure he would never be brought back…
As for the gore itself, I understand there’s a school of filmmaking that embraces that method, but I usually prefer implied horror. See the shower scenes in Psycho and Scarface for example. You think you see more than you actually do, and that makes it all the more horrific. The filmmakers are bringing you in to help connect the dots, which makes it a more, for lack of a better word, ‘intimate’ experience.
Agreed, sometimes your imagination fills in the blanks and the scenes become much more scary because imagination can go to places no amount of visuals can.
I think that EXORCIST III — at least up until its reshot ending — really manages to work that old-school less-is-more horror in a way that makes the scares almost a metaphysical condition, like you’re afraid you’re going to lose your soul if you keep watching.
With all due respect to Mr. Frakes and acknowledging that I usually enjoy his work, this scene was paramount in my epiphany in realizing that this was not in keeping with what Star Trek was meant to be as originally conceived by its creator and the folks that carried on his vision with the various later incarnations following Roddenberry’s passing.
I kept trying to give STP a chance up until that point even though I wasn’t enjoying what I was seeing much but holding out hope it would improve. But after that scene, that was pretty much it for me. I did struggle/slog through the remainder of S1, mind you, but this scene pretty much fully poisoned the well for me.
Up until that episode, I was watching the show with my then 10 year old son, but after that, I had to deny him watching it anymore. Thankfully, I had pre-screened the episode so he didn’t actually have to see that horrific scene. Sadly, he no longer watches any Star Trek (his choice), and losing out on watching the show during such a formative time in his life no doubt contributed to his lack of interest now in the show. I hope that someday he’ll come back to it, but it won’t be by watching STP…maybe SNW though which I have actually mostly enjoyed :) . Except for the Gorn…but that’s another topic for another time ;) .
Anyway, I realize that it really wasn’t Mr. Frake’s fault overall since I don’t think he would have had much to do with the script he would have been handed by the STP writers and was hired only to direct, but again, this scene was just plain awful.
Anyone is more than welcome to defend the scene, but for me, this is simply not “Star Trek” which is supposed to be about exploring both the Universe and the human condition. Sure, there’s going to be difficulties along the way. The “bloody nose” speech from Q way back in the S2 episode that introduced the Borg after Picard is rightly upset at losing several crew members due to Q’s pushing the encounter with the Borg into happening too soon comes to mind as a way to convey this inevitability without actual gore. Even the scene with Scotty bringing his mortally-wounded nephew to sickbay in WoK was far, far better done as while it was mildly graphic, it was not played out in such an extended, over-the-top way as was the STP torture/death scene.
The ending of that particular STP episode epitomizes why the writers have no idea about Star Trek as Seven obliterates the killer and gives into pure revenge. Again, not “Star Trek” which is supposed to be about hope and a positive future.
Anyway, that’s my say on the subject. Of course, YMMV.
I completely understand your point of view. However, I always point to “Conspiracy” when people say that scene in STP wasn’t Star Trek. Remmick’s death was way worse than Icheb’s for gore, admittedly a bit hokey now only due to the visual effects limitations of the time – if they’d had the capabilities we have now with CGI it would have been a pretty spectacular body horror moment. And you could argue that S1 of TNG was really quite violent, “Datalore” has moments of pretty intense sadism.
The point I’m trying to make is that while I also didn’t like Icheb’s death, and the violence of STP S1 in general, I don’t agree that it’s out of keeping with Star Trek more widely.
Hmmm…I had forgotten about that…you make a good point. Thinking back to when I first watched “Conspiracy” (back when it was initially broadcast while I was a freshman at college), I remember thinking that it was certainly something that had not been done in ST previously and that it was shocking in that sense. But somehow, the Icheb scene seemed much, much worse as it went on and on along with the actor’s agonizing screams.
I really didn’t think about the overall implications for the ST “brand” at the time of the “Consipracy” first airing, but I guess with age comes different perspectives, particularly when one now has a young one in his care :) .
I do recall thinking how different it was for ST in that there was no attempt made to understand the creatures from the episode. Didn’t the Remmick character who was “hosting” the mother alien actually say that they wanted “peaceful co-existent” just before Picard and Riker phasered his head off? But I think the line was delivered in a deliberately non-convincing fashion. It would have likely been akin to trying to negotiate with the aliens from the “Alien” franchise who, while intelligent certainly, were more like predatory animals so any such attempts would likely not go well :). Too bad they never had a follow-up episode as was implied from the ending. I think that there was a novel that came out about them, but if so, I did not read it.
And it always bothered me that the same was true for the salt vampire in the first-broadcast TOS episode. It sure seemed as though they could have at least just given the creature the salt it needed (it’s not like it was hard to come by) as Crater lived with it for quite some time without a problem as long it was fed. FYI, that creature scared the you-know-what out of me as about a 7 year old when I first watched that episode in the early 70s.
Anyway, I had a LOT more problems with STP which, as I said, made me stop watching that I could go on about for quite a bit, but I’ll leave that alone for now…
Remmick is a huge outlier though. They got so much flak for it that the shows and movies never approached that level of gore again until First Contact, and even that was rated PG. The violence Disco and Picard had on offer helped get them TV-MA ratings.
There are few things as useless in Picard season 1 as fridging Icheb to set up a villain of the week. Because a “long movie” needs a villain of the week for some reason.
Though that’s on the writers, not Frakes.
The change in Seven’s voice still strikes me as unnecessary. The way she spoke and carried herself on Voyager was such a unique creation of hers and Braga’s, and a huge reason why the character clicked with audiences. To change that so radically just to oversell the idea that she’s changed and hardened? Quite silly, especially considering the mental gymnastics Jeri Ryan had to employ in order to make sense of it.
Plus, all the scenes in season 2 where Seven was basking in the glow of being fully human would have had more resonance if Ryan had been given that more mannered base to contrast it with.
I made the mistake of watching numerous snarky Youtube reviews of PICARD so I think I’ve seen Ichy’s eyeball being yanked out at least 30 times. Ah, Star Trek.
Icheb was one of Voyager’s blandest characters, played by a rather weak actor. So killing him in a campy episode, after giving him no lines, was a huge misstep.
I honestly stopped watching after the Icheb episode.
It was needless and gratuitous for a TV franchise that is typically seen as family entertainment. And an unceremonious end for a character who appeared in more episodes than Barclay in TNG.
I don’t agree with Frakes on Icheb’s death, but at least it can be argued it had some narrative value. Hugh’s was just cheap emotional manipulation. Like Dahj’s death. And Picard’s “death”, etc. (Not that I’m salty or anything. :P )
I’d absolutely be up for the Section 31 project being retooled into some kind of Time Cops/Quantum Leap series with Kore, Georgiou, and Wesley in the cast. Lots of room for cameos and history nuggets, and it would give Michelle Yeoh some flexibility in her schedule.
Nah, sorry Frakes, not buying the need to show that.
I was really surprised with all the pushback from the Icheb scene. I didn’t find it unnecessarily gorey and it served a purpose for the storyline in regards to Seven’s motivations. In reality, I’m sure space would be terrifying at times and I like that modern Trek doesn’t shy away from showing that. I had always thought of Icheb as a throwaway background character. It never even occurred to me that there were fans that loved and related to him. It’s all just a nice reminder to me that people watch shows for a variety of reasons, and what I like (or don’t) about a scene or a character can illicit the exact opposite response from another fan. I really find those kind of extreme differences of opinion in regards to Trek really fascinating. As they say IDIC.
Change. People just don’t like it. I thought the scene, although gory, set Seven up for the big finale. Everytime I read a comment from Star Trek ‘fans’ about death of a character, how bad the new series are because they dare kill someone off, I just brush it aside like Q. “Oh your species is alway suffering and dying!” and move on to the next death! :)
The writing. Some people just don’t like it, either.
Meh. It’s exceedingly rare the times when Trek has had graphic violence that was unsuitable for kids. Commander Remmick aside, it had all been PG-13 stuff where one’s mileage would vary. Picard and Discovery made it pretty dicey for kids to be able to watch their debut seasons. It’s a valid creative decision and it’s not on me to ensure the shows appeals to people 20 years from now, or even my place to police what parents show their kids.
That said, I just think it’s a dumb move when this has always been a family-friendly franchise, that’s part of why it has lasted so long. I know people who have gotten great joy in introducing their children to the experience they had watching TOS-ENT as kids with their families. I was watching TOS and TNG when I was 6, for example. That same act of sharing has helped Star Wars, Jurassic Park and Doctor Who endure as well. Trek has usually been more cerebral, but it’s never been so adult as to be unsuitable for pre-teens until the TV-MA content in Disco and Picard. But there’s still SNW and the cartoons, and of course now Disco does things like bloodless sword fights worthy of DS9, but it will be interesting to see how many people in future picked up those two shows when they were kids.
Complete agreement. I, too, didn’t find the scene all that gratuitous at all. I’ve seen far FAR worse elsewhere and even on standard over the air TV. And I also saw Icheb as a throwaway background character whose function was to serve the other main characters.
So… Well said.
The eyes did not have it!!!
I thought it was funny how he died.
Star Trek always had moments where brutality were happening and I’m ok with that. BUT the Icheb scene is WAY over of what I want to see and experience when I watch star trek! The “message” they wanted to show would have work absolutely fine without doing it with no brutality limits AT ALL anymore! Star Trek is a show I want to put on and watch with my son without having fear of sending him to a psychological doctor. There are scenes sometimes where I cover his eyes sometimes – but this scene is something different really and it has nothing to do with “we want to scare you as best as we can” – It’s absolutely over the top and even much disturbing for adults! It’s truly not necessary and inappropriate to do that in a star trek show!!!!
Sorry Jonathan, but it was a gratuitous gore scene for the sake of it. To try and be edgy and to keep up with the Game of Thrones ‘pushing the boundaries of TV violence’ era Jones’s. Star Trek used to be a show the entire family could watch – and often be inspired by – without expecting SAW levels of slow graphic torture. You could have shot this from behind at least, with the eye being dropped onto the plate if you insisted on a gory close up. Would have achieved the same effect, and gotten the point over. Sorry, this was a cheap shot to get a reaction. With better writing and especially direction (even Seven recounting it, with just the echoing sounds of the torture, and the haunted look in her eyes telling all we needed) it would not have been needed. My opinion of Picard the show and those making the decisions to show this scene plumetted after seeing it. Very disappointed indeed in your reaction to this. Having now read your opinion of it, it’s evident you wanted the cheap shock. Easy way out… Unfortunately you’ve forever raised the bar of violence in Star Trek. Not something I’d be proud of.