I’m glad the CBC is revisiting the story now that they have the other side.

Heh, I don’t think I agree with either of these takes.

It seems to me like season 1 was very much Michael Chabon’s vision - indeed, they’ve said in interviews that it didn’t bear much resemblance to the original pitch that sold Stewart on the series.

I’ve always felt that Chabon had a lot of great ideas (and to be frank, I still think that first season is the best “Picard” season), but was perhaps too inexperienced to get those ideas implemented in a timely and affordable fashion.

Del Arco not being informed of Hugh’s death is a bit of a non-issue, I think - the guy was a guest star, so it wouldn’t be right to expect them to treat him like a principal cast member.

Flag restrictions are typically a way to ban Pride flags without actually saying it out loud.

Covering the era from The Original Series, to Star Trek: Enterprise, and the films, the franchise is known for celebrating the beauty of exploration and analyzing ethical dilemmas largely based on societal issues.

Interesting - I guess the newer stuff is covered by a separate license.

The Mastodon version of this Lemmy post should contain the link (and does, when I look at it).

Why must the lowest-hanging fruit taste so sweet?

I think we have to assume it is - there’s kind of an unspoken contract with the writers that any universe containing the trappings of the Mirror Universe must be the Mirror Universe.

And there’s certainly precedent for the shows and movies nicking elements from novels and comics. It doesn’t have to mean that the works have been “canonized,” but it’s nice to see them using bits from those stories when it suits them.

This article does not say threats were made - it says, “according to Chinese Canadian interview subjects, this invoked a widespread fear amongst electors, described as a fear of retributive measures from Chinese authorities should a CPC government be elected.”

That’s bad, to be sure, but if there was no direct threat, you’re going to have a pretty hard time prosecuting the issue.

So…if I were to say online that Donald Trump is an absolute disgrace, and people in the US should vote for his opponent, should I be facing charges in the US? Or maybe my comment should just be nuked?

By no means am I arguing that foreign influence is a good thing, but it’s awfully hard to regulate effectively.

That assumes they’re operating within the country.

The “pressure” in question is social media content - how do you propose legislating that?

Producer David Richardson said: “This was an absolute treat to work on. The Fugitive Doctor is such a brilliant, head-turning twist in this amazing long-running show we all love, and script editor Robert Valentine and I had such fun making plans.

“Thirteenth Doctor showrunner, Chris Chibnall, very generously gave up his time and met with us on Zoom while we threw around ideas and he gave us some clarifications about this most enigmatic era of Doctor Who. We came out of that meeting elated, full of purpose and sure of our direction.

“Chris told us that Jo was fantastic and a gorgeous person to work with, and he was absolutely right of course – she came into the studio full of joy for the part, always smiling, always brilliant and charismatic. The Fugitive Doctor now has her own audio series – and as the saying goes, it’s about time…”

Okay, I actually think it’s pretty cool that Chibnall is taking an active interest in the audio stuff.

A law against what, exactly?

CBC has this to add:

Bell Canada Enterprises (BCE Inc.), which owns 37.5 per cent of MLSE, said in a Wednesday press release that the deal is expected to close in mid-2025.

The company said that it is selling its ownership stake to reduce its debt and “support its ongoing transformation” from a telecommunications firm to a tech company.

What the hell are they doing over there?

This is probably well beyond the scope of what these nights are about, but I do wonder what they did with the “Picard” season three bridge set.

I actually don’t have a satisfactory answer to my own question.

Star Trek was a prominent part of the popular culture when I was a kid, so it was easy to have a basic knowledge of TOS without actually seeing it.

I think I probably saw Star Trek IV first, and the first episode I can clearly remember watching is “Unification II”, though I’m pretty certain I saw something before then.

I was mostly concerned about the docking pylons being too realistic, but I can’t guarantee that wouldn’t happen, either.

It looks cool, but potentially dangerous?

I think the episode implies ethical issues, but stops well short of spelling them out. The fact that Kingsley concealed the childrens’ true natures for as long as she did suggests that their research was not on the up-and-up.

My best guess is that the station’s research, on paper, fell within Federation regulations, but their actual work did not. But that’s stretching pretty far, given that no one explicitly raises the issue.

This is the first I’ve ever heard of a login required at star trek dot com.

It’s mainly a charity thingie - TrekCore has a summary.

Maybe more importantly, it doesn’t look like they’re doing any panels on Star Trek Day this year.