• Ostrakon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    I think i agree with the general premise that flawed characters are more interesting, and i also feel (with no data to back up that feeling, so bear with me) that these ‘woke’ characters sometimes fall into a pitfall where they’re just so boringly written that it does feel like the writers are either afraid of being perceived as ‘punching down’ or (edit: finishing this thought) want to misguidedly write a perfect character for the sake of superficial representation of some group.

    That said, for this show in particular (i have watched TNG/DS9/Voyager but not Discovery), is it a valid criticism for this captain that couldn’t be applied to the older series? Picard’s flaws are heavily understated - sure, he was a violent little shit off screen when he was younger, and he can be a little more of a hardass than called for occasionally, but I always felt he was pretty consistently portrayed as the voice of reason, and his flaws were only relevant in a couple episodes. I think I would say that’s also true of Sisko and Janeway, though Sisko has a lot more nuance to his pragmatism that is really interesting as DS9 continues.

    • Hugin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Picard doesn’t have many flaws but the writing doesn’t usually make him the main character. TNG is more a problem solving show than a character drama. When they have character drama it’s usually the B story.

      When we do have a Picard centered episode they usually remove him from the rest of the crew. So you could say his main weakness is dependency on a crew. (Diehard in space doesn’t count)