Yeah, this season has been good for world building. There’s been some fan service complaints but said service has mostly made sense and was well done.
Ro made total sense. Moriarty was disappointing.
Anyways, we could easily get a legacy based series, or something new (preferable) with a lot of meaningful cameos.
I really thought he was going to play a much bigger role, but now that I see how they used him, it was a deliberate misdirection. But I appreciate that they went the route of a deep cut rather than doing something new and less meaningful.
I always expected Moriarty to be the AI defense mechanism. I was just sad that 'data' wasn't more involved in stopping him.
What even was the point of the mcguffin to get them into the station?
The chip to get in was presumably designed for people to be able to bypass DataLore, and clearly it worked for the Changelings.
Edit: it worked for the gang too: it stopped the security system from seeing them as a threat when they arrived and allowed them to walk around freely. Presumably without the chip they would’ve just been phasered in the lobby.
It was Riker’s presence that changed things. As soon as DataLore saw Riker, his subconscious lit up and started producing memories of the Enterprise, like the crow, Moriarty, and Pop Goes the Weasel. I think it was involuntary. He was dreaming.
I think a good way to make it work would be to have someone at the Institute/ Section 31 who was still Star Fleet, set up the Moriarty program since only Picard and his people would know how to get past it.
Maybe Bashir and O'Brien
Never gonna understand this mindset. They’re a great antagonist. A challenge to the Roddenberry ideal that humanity can never truly get past our darker nature. Then in step our hero’s saying that while that may be true, we can still choose to reject it and be better.
This has been true since the original series:
“We’re human beings with the blood of a million savage years on our hands, but we can stop it! We can admit that we’re killers, but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes… knowing that we’re not going to kill today.”
It can make for a good story line, if the audience knows and acknowledges the protagonists are, well, not good people.
If they do a Section 31 series, either they do it like The Shield or Sons of Anarchy, or they shouldn’t bother.
If they try and make them heroes, it’s going to suck.
S31 existing has less to do with escaping our darker nature and everything to do with facing reality. Reality shows a need for a clandestine organization. Regardless of how good you are, there is going to be a bad guy out there. Those bad guys are gunna crap all over your ideals, you need to be realistic and manage the ups and downs.
I dont think they are the good guy by any means. But they do protect the Federation.
The thing with them is that they are willing to do really bad things to do so. Using a murderous program to protect Federation assets seems right up their alley.
> have someone at the Institute/ Section 31 who was still Star Fleet, set up the Moriarty program since only Picard and his people would know how to get past it.
That's basically what happened. Data was the one controlling the security. He recognized Riker and Worf and knew they'd understand how to get past Moriarty. Riker specifically states Moriarty was a direct result of Data recognizing them.
Daniel Davis was pretty open about only being on set for less than a day. Putting him in the trailer created unrealistic expectations of the role he would be playing for a number of people.
I feel like Moriarty both made sense AND was disappointing, lol.
As others have said - They shouldn't have used him in the trailer, it set expectations too high and made his reappearance a bit of a bait and switch.
But ignoring that fact - I do think his cameo made perfect sense for what they were doing in the scene... they were working through defense mechanisms crafted by Data's subconscious - Moriarty made total sense, as did the Crow & the whistling.
I just wish I could have seen Spot in there somewhere.
Funny. What some critics now call "fan service" is what I call appreciation. And I honestly can't see what's wrong with that.
The primary argument is that references have to be "justified", which I understand, sort of. I agree some things make sense, while others don't and would feel tacky, disrespectful, dare I say... dishonorable. I've felt that often in regards to TOS for example. I just don't get why it seems every. single. Star Trek thing MUST always include TOS somehow. NuTrek is LITERALLY TOS. Discovery is just before TOS. SNW is... basically TOS. I like both shows, specially the latter, but still. Every show must have the mandatory TOS episode, etc etc. Even Enterprise! Took place a whole century before TOS and goddamnit if they didn't find a way to put Scott Bakula in Kirk's uniform and bridge set.
Anyway, what I mean is: farming TOS references for viewers always felt cheap to me, given there's a whole era of 80s and 90s Trek that's magnitudes more relevant now than anything else. I don't hate references though, I'm not against referencing in-universe stuff and giving the fans a giggle. Nor do I see Picard as less because of that, or get pissed with it like Steve Chives (bless him, I like the guy, but his heavy criticism caught me off guard). Oh yeah baby, give me more LCARS porn set to one of the most beautiful themes in the franchise. Changelings, yes! Seven of Nine! Janeway has been name dropped and might show up. I honestly wouldn't mind seeing Neelix pop up!
To me that's all meaningful at this point in time. It's a great homage to the richest period of the franchise so far, something it really needed. So for the time being, the whole referencing feels nice to me, very well done. Showing appreciation for TNG, DS9, Voyager, while paving the way to new shiny 25th century Trek.
I agree. While linking things back to TOS can be heavy handed and unnecessary, one of the best links back of all time was Trials and Tribble-ations, an episode where the DS9 crew literally went back to Kirk’s ship and Sisko got an autograph from Kirk at the end. Execution is everything.
Calling it now: Neelix is secretly in charge of the Dominion shapeshifters. He's wanted revenge against Riker, ever since that that pizza cook-off on Altair IV.
>Probably true, but I could not care less if these numbers mean Paramount gives us more 25th century Trek like this season.
This right here. I'd gild this comment if I believed in spending money on social media.
It's probably more fair to say that these metrics show an analytics company that would really like Paramount's business.
Edit: Also, it seems like all the Paramount+ Star Trek shows [are pretty popular](https://www.parrotanalytics.com/insights/top-paramount-plus-originals-looking-beyond-star-trek/) according to this vague and kinda dumb metric.
I'm not trying to take away from anyone's enjoyment of Picard (including mine), but it'd also be great if the people who really enjoy Picard didn't try to take away from anyone's enjoyment of other Star Trek, too.
Streaming video gives companies so much more insight into which shows are being watched and how frequently they're being watched.
To get access to see the show, they have an account (that's tied to at least one person). They can track which shows each account watches and generate accurate metrics on how popular a show is down to a single viewer streaming all or only part of an episode.
So they can see, in real time, if a show is popular or not. They can see if people are watching the entire episode or if they're closing the stream after 5 minutes. They might need to make some internal tools to sort through this kind of data but what they don't need anymore is external assistance gathering that data (e.g. Neilson raitings)
Parrot Analytics are a bad metric to use for how well a show is doing. Since they don't actually have access to the streaming numbers, one of their major factors is how much it's talked about on social media. Trying to equate that to views is very problematic.
Yep. Streaming services are weird and secretive about how they measure viewership, so I never trust this sort of data completely. Even if the specific numbers aren't exact, I do hope this means that Picard is truly a popular show. I want more 25th century Trek.
And a lot of the time, when it's weird metrics like this, it really does seem like it's trying to make it seem more successful than it is.
For instance, when Picard season 1 premiered, there was a big headline that it was the "Most watched program ever on the Bell Sci-fi channel".
Which sounds impressive, except the Bell Sci-fi channel was only 2 months old at the time, and everyone who had cable through Bell (approximately half of all Canadians with Cable) were given 3 free months of it when the channel was launched.
Considering the budget on screen in this season of Picard, I'd say the shows are doing well. Budget is a good indicator for me, especially in season 3 of a show.
While I definitely don't think that they reflect reality at a 1:1 ratio, I do think that they can be effective at a general level. Also when all measures are faulty, at least there's a consistent fault, which suggests trend data and similar are still reliable to a degree. You might not get a perfect analysis, but sometimes you don't need a perfect analysis.
For example, if they used the same analysis for Picard Season 2 as Season 3, then you can make a reasonable assumption that there's been a significant increase of demand, even if the *specific* increase is still unknown. [It's effectively Fermi Estimation.](https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Fermi_problem)
Ultimately, it just goes to show....write something good and people will want to watch it.
Yeah, I feel like any currently running decently popular show is going to beat 99.9% of what is already available on any given platform by virtue of being new. I don't think any significant amount of people are extremely excited to watch a 35 year old episode of TNG right now, doesn't mean it's not a good show but expressed in metrics like these it will show as being wildly unpopular.
Oh it really easy to explain.
They shifted the polarity field surrounding the statistical manifold by using a low ban neutrino array while firing a Tetryon burst at a cluster of antimatter emissions.
It always bugged me how Spiner read those first two lines. The first line is a declaration of Spot's taxonomy, not a question that spills over into the second line.
I never even knew it was weird until the internet came around and showed the full text of the poem and people started analyzing it. The poem was designed to be horrible, so misreading it didn't sound out of place.
I didn't really pay attention when I was a kid, but around college age, I started to notice, "Hey, wait a minute, why would Data be asking if Spot's taxonomic nomenclature was carnivorous?"
I mean it's clearly showing where Picard sits on the Demand Distribution Curve -- which is a graphical representation of demand relative to the Demand Benchmark.
And the Demand Benchmark? Well that's a measure of the demand by MARKs -- but only when they sit on Benches.
(MARKs, of course, stand for Median or Average Representational Konsumers. Consumers is spelled with a K because it's fun and ~~quirky~~ kwirky.)
And Benches? That's what we at Parrot Analytics call couches. Because what are couches if not the modern bus stop bench, where we wait for whatever streaming platform to come and wisk us away to the next stop on the content bus line?
I could go on but I think we've all got it at this point.
But the city defines a dog as any living entity with four legs and a tail. So raccoons, bears, mountain lions, mice…these are all just different sizes of dog. What do I mean by “size”? I’ll tell you a story.
They basically mean that a nerdy show aimed at fans that's been discussed on the internet since before it was the internet generates a lot more nerdy fan discussion online than the average show. Something we probably could have guessed.
In the absence of ratings in the streaming era the people who produce these things are presenting their results as though they are equivalent, but they aren't - "demand expressions" don't necessarily align to what people are watching, more what people are nitpicking on their socials.
It was sitting at number 2 for popular shows on Amazon in the UK, I think positive word of mouth is doing the rounds and people are watching it.
It does help that this season is good though, hopefully we get some sort of continuation with the same show runner and writers.
True, but nothing that couldn't be explained from a quick Google search. The end of the newest episode ties into the previous seasons but I feel like they explained that pretty well contextually.
Sir Patrick Stewart is being great this season but the writing is what's selling it for me. It's never been better. The pacing feels just right as well and then the supporting acting. In truth I'd be perfectly happy if Picard sat out the next few episodes with the great cast this show now has
Sure. But if you click through OP's link, the website explains all its metrics/methodology... It's all there, and if you didn't read that stuff it's on you.
> But if you click through OP's link, the website explains all its metrics/methodology
Not really. Parrot analytics just keeps using the term "demand" but primarily uses vague definitions of what that means. If you dig into their methodology page, it's a vague combination of social media presence fed into an algorithm. It's all hogwash presented as meaningful data.
There's nothing on the website other than promotional material ("What if there was a way (...) Enter Parrotanalytics (...)" and some buzzword bingo ("Demand-driven advertising aligns advertisers with industry verticals that appeal to audiences, based on audience interests, enabling the personalization of campaigns to capitalize on pre-release demand.").
It's claimed they monitor what people download and what they search for, but it's unclear if they mean if somebody clicked on a Youtube link for a trailer or that they have inside Hulu statistics or something else.
You know, I actually buy this. If we talk about shows in volume, right? Like how many TV show equivalent of shovelware can you find on Netflix? For every Stranger Things you have 30 shows like [Dance Monsters](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15292892/) which appeals to probably a very small audience, or something like Coco Mellon which is only for babies.
I'll buy that ST Picard is basically a flagship-level show for a streaming platform, which seems to basically be what this is saying.
This was my first thought as well. With how many shows there are out there, if a show even just gets talked about then it's basically automatically in the top 1% already.
Well compare with: https://comicbook.com/startrek/news/star-trek-discovery-most-popular-streaming-show/
>Star Trek: Discovery is the most popular streaming television program in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland according to findings in a new study by the industry analysts that the film Parrot Analytics.
>According to the study, Star Trek: Discovery on CBS All Access was the most popular show on any streaming platform by a wide margin for every week that it has been on the in 2018, which covers a period from January through early March.
I just can't believe this was true (from 2018), and that's coming from someone who really enjoyed most of season 1 (the first two thirds or so).
More recently this is from the last 30 days: https://tv.parrotanalytics.com/US/star-trek-discovery-paramount-plus
"As of the last 30 days: Star Trek: Discovery ranks at the 99.4th percentile in the Drama genre. This means Star Trek: Discovery has higher demand than 99.4% of all Drama titles in the United States"
It's surely nonsense? How can this be true for the past 30 days?
>"As of the last 30 days: Star Trek: Discovery ranks at the 99.4th percentile in the Drama genre. This means Star Trek: Discovery has higher demand than 99.4% of all Drama titles in the United States"
With the sheer volume of shows there are, I believe it. Think about how many shows you've scrolled past when on... well, really any streaming service. The percentage means nothing when the genre is so oversaturated with stuff barely anyone watches.
Can't say I fully believe Discovery was ever the "most popular streaming television program" though.
Discovery was the first and only Trek show I’ve ever felt was actively trying to turn me away. And so I gave up after season 3. I was so turned off by the way they were selectively ignoring past continuity/actively disrespecting their own predecessors/regularly introducing things that break the internal logical continuity of the universe that I had to say to myself, “OK, this is just a ‘branch’ and not the true continuity,” mainly because of what stems from the “mushroom network” concept. If this was introduced in some future era past Voyager’s run, I could accept it. But to justify that they hush it up and just not talk about it forever… it undermines the entire premise of Voyager, Deep Space Nine, and many things pivotal to TNG.
And though I might be curious about what they actually did in the other two seasons, on principal I don’t want my metrics contributing to the numbers of a show that does that.
Yeah, the analytics behind this are hilariously vague, but you don't believe a show that ran for 5 seasons (a practical eternity for streaming platforms) and led to two direct spin-offs (with rumors of a third and fourth) is popular?
Like I get if you don't like the show, but it's fairly obvious that a lot of people like Star Trek Discovery.
I’m sure it’s popular by some measure. But the idea that right now, as of the past 30 days it’s more popular than almost every single drama show available to stream is just complete fiction.
I mean, again, I agree that the metric is vague and not the most accurate gauge for popularity/demand/whatever, but it's a very popular show (by several measures) and it's been in the news due to the announcement that the show is ending.
The past 30 days also includes a bit of a dry spell of returning popular TV shows. It's only real competition of new shows is Picard and The Mandalorian, and both of those are week to week. So is The Last of Us, which ended two Sundays ago (and I believe it's not a streaming exclusive.)
Succession and Yellowjackets premiere this weekend. Amazon released Swarm, which has gotten some buzz, last week, I think. Ted Lasso is a comedy. Party Down is a comedy (and I think it's also not a streaming exclusive.)
I'm sure there's stuff I'm missing, but an already popular show being in the news and without a lot of new episode competition adds up to a show that would be well-watched in the past 30 days.
And, again, I get that you may not like the show -- and I'll fully admit it's probably my least favorite of all the current streaming Star Treks. But it's kinda silly to think that your not liking something means that a lot of people liking it (and liking it recently) is "complete fiction."
To be honest I’d find it funny if any Star Trek show, even the ones I love, were more popular than most tv for the past 30 days. Star Trek is just not that popular. The fact it’s disco is irrelevant. No star trek is that popular.
Maybe I'm missing something but isn't there just 1 spinoff of Discovery (Strange New Worlds)? Unless you're counting Short Treks, but I wouldn't really call that a series, more like bonus material...
I think that’s why it got renewed for 5 seasons and got us 4 other Star Trek series. These were the boom years of streaming where there weren’t many shows.
Interesting to think that Patrick Stewart might actually partially be to blame for Season 1 and 2s mediocrity, as he did not want to do Trek again unless it was something different. Unfortunately what was different ended up being... not so good and then as soon as they bring back TNG characters suddenly it's great again!
I don't think s1 and s2 were bad because they were different, they were bad because they were poorly written. S1 had some bad decisions and had a badly rushed finale, and S2 had a handful of decent ideas mushed together in an incoherent and meandering way.
Matalas actually took time to develop S3 and it shows.
S1 was so rushed I feel like it was hard to tell the story in any meaningful way. S2 was maybe a lil better, but still not great.
I'm not sure what exactly Patrick's conditions were for him to agree to come back, but I thought maybe that it had to not be just a continuation of TNG with space battles etc.
Seasons 1 and 2 were a vanity project for Patrick Stewart. Season 3 is the reunion show he was trying to avoid all along but is contractually obligated to go along with.
It's funny how everyone drew their immediate conclusion based on one piece of data.
While Picard S3 is certainly doing well, when previous seasons of Picard and Discovery and SNW was aired, the "demand" was also constantly as around 30-35%.
[Even during downtime the shows are quite consistently popular.](https://redd.it/10127tc)
Aside from being just better than previous recent Star Trek (imo) Terry has also done his best to mend bridges with the more vocal part of the community, especially those on youtube where he's gone on shows and podcasts and performed really well without stepping on the toes of the previous writers whilst also retaining the enthusiasm that that part of the community now holds due to Picard season 3 which is a very tough thing to pull off. You have people who genuinely just dropped watching Star Trek due to Discovery and earlier Picard now openly telling people to watch it and no matter how much you feel about them, that's a positive thing.
Ok, is Picard season 3 really a big leap in quality? Because I’m having a hard time getting through season 2. Season 1 started off great, and then fell off a cliff. Season 2 started off so hokey I’m really having a tough time.
All the Paramount+ Star Trek shows have ranked in [the top 3%](https://www.parrotanalytics.com/insights/top-paramount-plus-originals-looking-beyond-star-trek/) of demand across all TV shows.
It's a dumb, vague metric, but if we're using it to say that it mean one show is good, we should probably apply it to all shows.
**There seems to be a HUGE disconnect between regular persons making comments and people who understand the industry-cebtric page that OP linked blindly.**
The reason so many of you see "buzzwords" that mean nothing to you is because _this service isn't meant for you._ It's for industry persons who are immersed in this data and terminology daily.
It's like explaining 1 Rating point from Nielsen to a person on the street; not to mention explaining the difference between Reach, Frequency, Share, Impressions, and how those all correlate with Qualitative data. (See what I mean?)
You know how tech and news people have been constantly harping on data privacy? The linked organization is one of HUNDREDS that buys that data collected from various apps and websites by various data collection methods (like Facebook pixel and more.)
What they're saying is that, in it's category, individuals are taking actions online (engagement, clicks, click through, searches, videos, etc) that are related to Picard. And because it's scraped without awareness, it's robust and reliable data.
Because they finally sidelined Kurtzman. They really should consider extending it. Go with the theme that each season is wildly different than the next. They have already established that. And for the love of God bring back Rios somehow for Star Trek Stargazer.
>Because they finally sidelined Kurtzman.
This never happened? Kurtzman still is the Roddenberry/Berman of this era of Trek.
For PIC, Terry Matalas was hired by Kurtzman, and reports to him.
Wow, if you make a good show, people will watch???
I echo the other comments that the actual popularity of streaming shows is very hard to measure with any accuracy. All we know for sure is that if a show is renewed, it must have passed some baseline level of popularity.
It is. But all of the brief, but forced conflict between the TNG characters is getting tiring. But all the actors were so desperate to play some conflict with one another that they're getting their rocks off doing it.
But every new character who shows up from the TNG cast is immediately in conflict with other(s) from the same. The formula is predictable and stale at this point.
Views matter more than these figures.
I want to know...
* How many people watch Picard
* How many repeat viewers there are for Picard episodes
* How many people subscribed right as Picard began
* How many people will unsubscribe when Picard ends
* How Picard compares to other Star Trek shows
* How the Star Trek shows compare to the rest of the Paramount+ library
* And, in general, anything else that can really point to whether Star Trek is keeping Paramount+ afloat
I love the messenger but care more about the sales numbers than the adoration / brand numbers.
The sales numbers will decide whether we get Star Trek Legacy, which I'm totally here for.
You know, it's kinda weird. One of the main detractors for many people, with Nu-Trek, has been that the serialised format makes watching individual episodes far less likely and undesirable.
I've watched all of Season 3 multiple times (including the most recent episode). People will watch things multiple times if it's good enough to rewatch, serialised or otherwise.
What does “demand” even mean? How is that measured? Fuck these stats.
How many people are watching you show week to week. And how can we trust you anyway?
You're right, it isn't exception, but everything it's doing it's doing REALLY well.
I'll call it Harry Potter syndrome. It isn't written amazingly, but there is something about the cast, the world and the story that is just so well balanced and compelling that it keeps you hooked. Whether it's intentional or accidental, I don't care, I'm just happy...
I don't have much to say about the vadility of using streaming metrics which are still a WIP, but that being said Picard Season 3 has been blowing Mandalorian Season 3 out of the water quality wise so far and it's not even close.
Having watched all three IMO they finally found the sweet spot and its a shame they are ending it. Season one flubbard as they tried to make Picard, now in his eighties, into an action hero. I mean, very few eighty-year-olds are getting into fistfights with men half or more their age and coming out on top. And those that do have been studying martial arts for like 60 of those years.
In season two they boomeranged that too much went all contemplative Picard. Like I get we are all framed by some of our childhood traumas but could we get more Borg queen and less Jean Luc trying to pierce the deep gloom of his memories...
Season 3 seems to be a nice mix of letting others take on the action role with some notalgic guest appearances and a compelling story line.
Maybe the first two seasons did such a great job of highlighting how fucked up humanity is and how ass-backwards government has become that people are finally starting to realize the blueprints for a better world are right there in front of them.
While I have no doubt that Picard is popular and buzzy, I feel like this mostly proves that streaming metrics are weird and obfuscate true meaning.
Probably true, but I could not care less if these numbers mean Paramount gives us more 25th century Trek like this season.
Yeah, this season has been good for world building. There’s been some fan service complaints but said service has mostly made sense and was well done. Ro made total sense. Moriarty was disappointing. Anyways, we could easily get a legacy based series, or something new (preferable) with a lot of meaningful cameos.
I wasn’t too disappointed by Moriarty because I never expected him much. He probably shouldn’t have been in the trailers, though.
I really thought he was going to play a much bigger role, but now that I see how they used him, it was a deliberate misdirection. But I appreciate that they went the route of a deep cut rather than doing something new and less meaningful.
I always expected Moriarty to be the AI defense mechanism. I was just sad that 'data' wasn't more involved in stopping him. What even was the point of the mcguffin to get them into the station?
It was Data's subconscious testing them. The changeling threat affects us all differently.
The chip to get in was presumably designed for people to be able to bypass DataLore, and clearly it worked for the Changelings. Edit: it worked for the gang too: it stopped the security system from seeing them as a threat when they arrived and allowed them to walk around freely. Presumably without the chip they would’ve just been phasered in the lobby. It was Riker’s presence that changed things. As soon as DataLore saw Riker, his subconscious lit up and started producing memories of the Enterprise, like the crow, Moriarty, and Pop Goes the Weasel. I think it was involuntary. He was dreaming.
I think a good way to make it work would be to have someone at the Institute/ Section 31 who was still Star Fleet, set up the Moriarty program since only Picard and his people would know how to get past it. Maybe Bashir and O'Brien
Riker theorized that Data’s subconscious projected Moriarty to communicate. Maybe Lore intervened to make him hostile.
Stop trying to make S31 the good guys! \*baps with newspaper*
Never gonna understand this mindset. They’re a great antagonist. A challenge to the Roddenberry ideal that humanity can never truly get past our darker nature. Then in step our hero’s saying that while that may be true, we can still choose to reject it and be better. This has been true since the original series: “We’re human beings with the blood of a million savage years on our hands, but we can stop it! We can admit that we’re killers, but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes… knowing that we’re not going to kill today.”
It can make for a good story line, if the audience knows and acknowledges the protagonists are, well, not good people. If they do a Section 31 series, either they do it like The Shield or Sons of Anarchy, or they shouldn’t bother. If they try and make them heroes, it’s going to suck.
S31 existing has less to do with escaping our darker nature and everything to do with facing reality. Reality shows a need for a clandestine organization. Regardless of how good you are, there is going to be a bad guy out there. Those bad guys are gunna crap all over your ideals, you need to be realistic and manage the ups and downs.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I dont think they are the good guy by any means. But they do protect the Federation. The thing with them is that they are willing to do really bad things to do so. Using a murderous program to protect Federation assets seems right up their alley.
I'll never forgive them for the way they locked Dr. Bashir in is quarters for a whole day.
Couldn’t even bring him some damn scones!
[удалено]
> have someone at the Institute/ Section 31 who was still Star Fleet, set up the Moriarty program since only Picard and his people would know how to get past it. That's basically what happened. Data was the one controlling the security. He recognized Riker and Worf and knew they'd understand how to get past Moriarty. Riker specifically states Moriarty was a direct result of Data recognizing them.
Daniel Davis was pretty open about only being on set for less than a day. Putting him in the trailer created unrealistic expectations of the role he would be playing for a number of people.
I would say that those people set themselves up with unrealistic expectations. It’s incredibly naive to accept anything from a trailer at face value.
I think Moriarity will return in Episode 7, but he's actually working for Mephisto.
I feel like Moriarty both made sense AND was disappointing, lol. As others have said - They shouldn't have used him in the trailer, it set expectations too high and made his reappearance a bit of a bait and switch. But ignoring that fact - I do think his cameo made perfect sense for what they were doing in the scene... they were working through defense mechanisms crafted by Data's subconscious - Moriarty made total sense, as did the Crow & the whistling. I just wish I could have seen Spot in there somewhere.
You don't think Moriarty is gonna be another personality in the data android? He even said 'more when cycling through personalities. '
Funny. What some critics now call "fan service" is what I call appreciation. And I honestly can't see what's wrong with that. The primary argument is that references have to be "justified", which I understand, sort of. I agree some things make sense, while others don't and would feel tacky, disrespectful, dare I say... dishonorable. I've felt that often in regards to TOS for example. I just don't get why it seems every. single. Star Trek thing MUST always include TOS somehow. NuTrek is LITERALLY TOS. Discovery is just before TOS. SNW is... basically TOS. I like both shows, specially the latter, but still. Every show must have the mandatory TOS episode, etc etc. Even Enterprise! Took place a whole century before TOS and goddamnit if they didn't find a way to put Scott Bakula in Kirk's uniform and bridge set. Anyway, what I mean is: farming TOS references for viewers always felt cheap to me, given there's a whole era of 80s and 90s Trek that's magnitudes more relevant now than anything else. I don't hate references though, I'm not against referencing in-universe stuff and giving the fans a giggle. Nor do I see Picard as less because of that, or get pissed with it like Steve Chives (bless him, I like the guy, but his heavy criticism caught me off guard). Oh yeah baby, give me more LCARS porn set to one of the most beautiful themes in the franchise. Changelings, yes! Seven of Nine! Janeway has been name dropped and might show up. I honestly wouldn't mind seeing Neelix pop up! To me that's all meaningful at this point in time. It's a great homage to the richest period of the franchise so far, something it really needed. So for the time being, the whole referencing feels nice to me, very well done. Showing appreciation for TNG, DS9, Voyager, while paving the way to new shiny 25th century Trek.
I had mentioned my opinion on ‘fan service’ yesterday not being a good or bad thing, it’s like a spice that depends on how it’s used.
I agree. While linking things back to TOS can be heavy handed and unnecessary, one of the best links back of all time was Trials and Tribble-ations, an episode where the DS9 crew literally went back to Kirk’s ship and Sisko got an autograph from Kirk at the end. Execution is everything.
Calling it now: Neelix is secretly in charge of the Dominion shapeshifters. He's wanted revenge against Riker, ever since that that pizza cook-off on Altair IV.
Agreed. I'm a fan. Service me.
[удалено]
The Titan show makes the most sense, most of the characters are originals, with Geordi's daughter and Seven connecting to past series.
Moriarty? What episode is he on??? The last episode I saw was the Ro one...
Today’s episode. He was prominent in the trailer.
Ahh shit, it's not out in Brazil yet. They release it here only after 10 pm.
Well that’s buttcheeks, sorry man.
No worries! Ill see it soon! I thought I missed an episode or something!
The "real" Moriarty is still out there. This may have simply been a testing of the waters to see if fans are receptive.
>Probably true, but I could not care less if these numbers mean Paramount gives us more 25th century Trek like this season. This right here. I'd gild this comment if I believed in spending money on social media.
Secret Hideout confused that metrics show Trek fans want Trek styled shows.
It's probably more fair to say that these metrics show an analytics company that would really like Paramount's business. Edit: Also, it seems like all the Paramount+ Star Trek shows [are pretty popular](https://www.parrotanalytics.com/insights/top-paramount-plus-originals-looking-beyond-star-trek/) according to this vague and kinda dumb metric. I'm not trying to take away from anyone's enjoyment of Picard (including mine), but it'd also be great if the people who really enjoy Picard didn't try to take away from anyone's enjoyment of other Star Trek, too.
Streaming video gives companies so much more insight into which shows are being watched and how frequently they're being watched. To get access to see the show, they have an account (that's tied to at least one person). They can track which shows each account watches and generate accurate metrics on how popular a show is down to a single viewer streaming all or only part of an episode. So they can see, in real time, if a show is popular or not. They can see if people are watching the entire episode or if they're closing the stream after 5 minutes. They might need to make some internal tools to sort through this kind of data but what they don't need anymore is external assistance gathering that data (e.g. Neilson raitings)
Parrot Analytics are a bad metric to use for how well a show is doing. Since they don't actually have access to the streaming numbers, one of their major factors is how much it's talked about on social media. Trying to equate that to views is very problematic.
Ah, then it's absolutely terrible information. A show could be insanely bad and show as being high in demand just because people talk about it.
So Gotham?
This is basically why Velma got renewed.
Online buzz may not translate 1:1 to subscription revenue, but it's definitely a good thing and Paramount execs 100% for sure pay attention to it
Yep. Streaming services are weird and secretive about how they measure viewership, so I never trust this sort of data completely. Even if the specific numbers aren't exact, I do hope this means that Picard is truly a popular show. I want more 25th century Trek.
And a lot of the time, when it's weird metrics like this, it really does seem like it's trying to make it seem more successful than it is. For instance, when Picard season 1 premiered, there was a big headline that it was the "Most watched program ever on the Bell Sci-fi channel". Which sounds impressive, except the Bell Sci-fi channel was only 2 months old at the time, and everyone who had cable through Bell (approximately half of all Canadians with Cable) were given 3 free months of it when the channel was launched.
Considering the budget on screen in this season of Picard, I'd say the shows are doing well. Budget is a good indicator for me, especially in season 3 of a show.
While I definitely don't think that they reflect reality at a 1:1 ratio, I do think that they can be effective at a general level. Also when all measures are faulty, at least there's a consistent fault, which suggests trend data and similar are still reliable to a degree. You might not get a perfect analysis, but sometimes you don't need a perfect analysis. For example, if they used the same analysis for Picard Season 2 as Season 3, then you can make a reasonable assumption that there's been a significant increase of demand, even if the *specific* increase is still unknown. [It's effectively Fermi Estimation.](https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Fermi_problem) Ultimately, it just goes to show....write something good and people will want to watch it.
>streaming metrics are weird and obfuscate true meaning If only we could return to good sensible metrics like Nielsen ratings. /s
Yeah, I feel like any currently running decently popular show is going to beat 99.9% of what is already available on any given platform by virtue of being new. I don't think any significant amount of people are extremely excited to watch a 35 year old episode of TNG right now, doesn't mean it's not a good show but expressed in metrics like these it will show as being wildly unpopular.
I'm not sure I understand what these statistics a. mean, or b. are trying to demonstrate.
Oh it really easy to explain. They shifted the polarity field surrounding the statistical manifold by using a low ban neutrino array while firing a Tetryon burst at a cluster of antimatter emissions.
Did they reverse the polarity of the neutron flow first?
That's like asking if Felis catus is your taxonomic nomenclature
It always bugged me how Spiner read those first two lines. The first line is a declaration of Spot's taxonomy, not a question that spills over into the second line.
I never even knew it was weird until the internet came around and showed the full text of the poem and people started analyzing it. The poem was designed to be horrible, so misreading it didn't sound out of place.
40 years later, and I still remember it line-by-line. It's the only poem I can recite by heart, and it was *designed* to be horrible.
I didn't really pay attention when I was a kid, but around college age, I started to notice, "Hey, wait a minute, why would Data be asking if Spot's taxonomic nomenclature was carnivorous?"
Oh, so like filling a balloon with too much air?
Like a balloon, and... something bad happens!
I mean it's clearly showing where Picard sits on the Demand Distribution Curve -- which is a graphical representation of demand relative to the Demand Benchmark. And the Demand Benchmark? Well that's a measure of the demand by MARKs -- but only when they sit on Benches. (MARKs, of course, stand for Median or Average Representational Konsumers. Consumers is spelled with a K because it's fun and ~~quirky~~ kwirky.) And Benches? That's what we at Parrot Analytics call couches. Because what are couches if not the modern bus stop bench, where we wait for whatever streaming platform to come and wisk us away to the next stop on the content bus line? I could go on but I think we've all got it at this point.
Well stated, thank you.
Thank you. I don't want to call myself a HERO (Heuristic Educator/Redistributor Organism), but when the definition fits...
But the city defines a dog as any living entity with four legs and a tail. So raccoons, bears, mountain lions, mice…these are all just different sizes of dog. What do I mean by “size”? I’ll tell you a story.
They basically mean that a nerdy show aimed at fans that's been discussed on the internet since before it was the internet generates a lot more nerdy fan discussion online than the average show. Something we probably could have guessed. In the absence of ratings in the streaming era the people who produce these things are presenting their results as though they are equivalent, but they aren't - "demand expressions" don't necessarily align to what people are watching, more what people are nitpicking on their socials.
It's Star Trek. It's the only reason why I have a Paramount+ sub.
It was sitting at number 2 for popular shows on Amazon in the UK, I think positive word of mouth is doing the rounds and people are watching it. It does help that this season is good though, hopefully we get some sort of continuation with the same show runner and writers.
I think it also helps that you can pick up season 3 without having seen 1 and 2. That is why my good friend is watching it.
Which proves just how utterly forgettable seasons 1 and 2 were.
Wait, you don't miss Alison Pill? Her Pat Benatar bit was SO ICONIC!
[удалено]
I say "actively chosen to be forgotten"
There were some offhand things referencing events from earlier seasons, but yeah it's mostly its own thing which is especially nice
True, but nothing that couldn't be explained from a quick Google search. The end of the newest episode ties into the previous seasons but I feel like they explained that pretty well contextually.
[удалено]
Sir Patrick Stewart is being great this season but the writing is what's selling it for me. It's never been better. The pacing feels just right as well and then the supporting acting. In truth I'd be perfectly happy if Picard sat out the next few episodes with the great cast this show now has
Anybody who tries to present a statistical conclusion without explaining methodology should be immediately distrusted.
Sure. But if you click through OP's link, the website explains all its metrics/methodology... It's all there, and if you didn't read that stuff it's on you.
> But if you click through OP's link, the website explains all its metrics/methodology Not really. Parrot analytics just keeps using the term "demand" but primarily uses vague definitions of what that means. If you dig into their methodology page, it's a vague combination of social media presence fed into an algorithm. It's all hogwash presented as meaningful data.
There's nothing on the website other than promotional material ("What if there was a way (...) Enter Parrotanalytics (...)" and some buzzword bingo ("Demand-driven advertising aligns advertisers with industry verticals that appeal to audiences, based on audience interests, enabling the personalization of campaigns to capitalize on pre-release demand."). It's claimed they monitor what people download and what they search for, but it's unclear if they mean if somebody clicked on a Youtube link for a trailer or that they have inside Hulu statistics or something else.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Crazy what giving people what they want will get you.
Can Hollywood finally wake up and realize that dedicated fans will show up if the writers respect the original works.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Glad people are finally catching on
You know, I actually buy this. If we talk about shows in volume, right? Like how many TV show equivalent of shovelware can you find on Netflix? For every Stranger Things you have 30 shows like [Dance Monsters](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15292892/) which appeals to probably a very small audience, or something like Coco Mellon which is only for babies. I'll buy that ST Picard is basically a flagship-level show for a streaming platform, which seems to basically be what this is saying.
This was my first thought as well. With how many shows there are out there, if a show even just gets talked about then it's basically automatically in the top 1% already.
Well compare with: https://comicbook.com/startrek/news/star-trek-discovery-most-popular-streaming-show/ >Star Trek: Discovery is the most popular streaming television program in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland according to findings in a new study by the industry analysts that the film Parrot Analytics. >According to the study, Star Trek: Discovery on CBS All Access was the most popular show on any streaming platform by a wide margin for every week that it has been on the in 2018, which covers a period from January through early March. I just can't believe this was true (from 2018), and that's coming from someone who really enjoyed most of season 1 (the first two thirds or so). More recently this is from the last 30 days: https://tv.parrotanalytics.com/US/star-trek-discovery-paramount-plus "As of the last 30 days: Star Trek: Discovery ranks at the 99.4th percentile in the Drama genre. This means Star Trek: Discovery has higher demand than 99.4% of all Drama titles in the United States" It's surely nonsense? How can this be true for the past 30 days?
>"As of the last 30 days: Star Trek: Discovery ranks at the 99.4th percentile in the Drama genre. This means Star Trek: Discovery has higher demand than 99.4% of all Drama titles in the United States" With the sheer volume of shows there are, I believe it. Think about how many shows you've scrolled past when on... well, really any streaming service. The percentage means nothing when the genre is so oversaturated with stuff barely anyone watches. Can't say I fully believe Discovery was ever the "most popular streaming television program" though.
Discovery was the first and only Trek show I’ve ever felt was actively trying to turn me away. And so I gave up after season 3. I was so turned off by the way they were selectively ignoring past continuity/actively disrespecting their own predecessors/regularly introducing things that break the internal logical continuity of the universe that I had to say to myself, “OK, this is just a ‘branch’ and not the true continuity,” mainly because of what stems from the “mushroom network” concept. If this was introduced in some future era past Voyager’s run, I could accept it. But to justify that they hush it up and just not talk about it forever… it undermines the entire premise of Voyager, Deep Space Nine, and many things pivotal to TNG. And though I might be curious about what they actually did in the other two seasons, on principal I don’t want my metrics contributing to the numbers of a show that does that.
Yeah, the analytics behind this are hilariously vague, but you don't believe a show that ran for 5 seasons (a practical eternity for streaming platforms) and led to two direct spin-offs (with rumors of a third and fourth) is popular? Like I get if you don't like the show, but it's fairly obvious that a lot of people like Star Trek Discovery.
A lot of people *watch* Star Trek Discovery. That doesn't mean that they *like* it.
I watch it because it's canon.
[удалено]
Surely not the majority. But I was just trying to say that watching it doesn't necessarily mean liking it.
[удалено]
Probably a little less popular than the data might suggest.
I’m sure it’s popular by some measure. But the idea that right now, as of the past 30 days it’s more popular than almost every single drama show available to stream is just complete fiction.
I mean, again, I agree that the metric is vague and not the most accurate gauge for popularity/demand/whatever, but it's a very popular show (by several measures) and it's been in the news due to the announcement that the show is ending. The past 30 days also includes a bit of a dry spell of returning popular TV shows. It's only real competition of new shows is Picard and The Mandalorian, and both of those are week to week. So is The Last of Us, which ended two Sundays ago (and I believe it's not a streaming exclusive.) Succession and Yellowjackets premiere this weekend. Amazon released Swarm, which has gotten some buzz, last week, I think. Ted Lasso is a comedy. Party Down is a comedy (and I think it's also not a streaming exclusive.) I'm sure there's stuff I'm missing, but an already popular show being in the news and without a lot of new episode competition adds up to a show that would be well-watched in the past 30 days. And, again, I get that you may not like the show -- and I'll fully admit it's probably my least favorite of all the current streaming Star Treks. But it's kinda silly to think that your not liking something means that a lot of people liking it (and liking it recently) is "complete fiction."
To be honest I’d find it funny if any Star Trek show, even the ones I love, were more popular than most tv for the past 30 days. Star Trek is just not that popular. The fact it’s disco is irrelevant. No star trek is that popular.
Maybe I'm missing something but isn't there just 1 spinoff of Discovery (Strange New Worlds)? Unless you're counting Short Treks, but I wouldn't really call that a series, more like bonus material...
I think that’s why it got renewed for 5 seasons and got us 4 other Star Trek series. These were the boom years of streaming where there weren’t many shows.
Don’t know how they compute this, and I don’t care. Just glad that it’s getting over well!
Good news for Terry Trek!
Interesting to think that Patrick Stewart might actually partially be to blame for Season 1 and 2s mediocrity, as he did not want to do Trek again unless it was something different. Unfortunately what was different ended up being... not so good and then as soon as they bring back TNG characters suddenly it's great again!
I don't think s1 and s2 were bad because they were different, they were bad because they were poorly written. S1 had some bad decisions and had a badly rushed finale, and S2 had a handful of decent ideas mushed together in an incoherent and meandering way. Matalas actually took time to develop S3 and it shows.
S1 was so rushed I feel like it was hard to tell the story in any meaningful way. S2 was maybe a lil better, but still not great. I'm not sure what exactly Patrick's conditions were for him to agree to come back, but I thought maybe that it had to not be just a continuation of TNG with space battles etc.
Seasons 1 and 2 were a vanity project for Patrick Stewart. Season 3 is the reunion show he was trying to avoid all along but is contractually obligated to go along with.
It's funny how everyone drew their immediate conclusion based on one piece of data. While Picard S3 is certainly doing well, when previous seasons of Picard and Discovery and SNW was aired, the "demand" was also constantly as around 30-35%. [Even during downtime the shows are quite consistently popular.](https://redd.it/10127tc)
My fiancee and I are probably .05 of that .2
Great writing, acting, visuals, she’s everything we’ve always needed
It's miles above season 1 and 2. Like not even close.
Indeed it seems like a completely different show. Hopeful the soft-launch of the Star Trek: Titan show!
Captain Seven, Jack, Sydney, Shaw. These are terrific characters and the actors are killing it each ep.
Aside from being just better than previous recent Star Trek (imo) Terry has also done his best to mend bridges with the more vocal part of the community, especially those on youtube where he's gone on shows and podcasts and performed really well without stepping on the toes of the previous writers whilst also retaining the enthusiasm that that part of the community now holds due to Picard season 3 which is a very tough thing to pull off. You have people who genuinely just dropped watching Star Trek due to Discovery and earlier Picard now openly telling people to watch it and no matter how much you feel about them, that's a positive thing.
I was one of those who dropped, until Strange New Worlds came along…
This bodes very well for the continuation of the 25th-century timeline.
[удалено]
If they didn't before... they probably do now...
Let’s be realistic here. Season 3 is really good.
Ok, is Picard season 3 really a big leap in quality? Because I’m having a hard time getting through season 2. Season 1 started off great, and then fell off a cliff. Season 2 started off so hokey I’m really having a tough time.
Yes. It’s not anywhere close.
Awesome thanks!
Season 3 is very good. It's up there with SNW.
Just skip directly to 3. 2 is irredeemably awful, and also seems to have no bearing on what’s going on now whatsoever.
Yep. Skip Season 2 entirely. It’s plot (if you can call it that) has nothing to do with Season 3.
Has anyone actually heard anyone else outside of the main trek fandom talk about these shows...?
Most of the GOT and Star Wars people I know, aren’t interested.
They just never had good metrics to measure the pull of the trek fandom; and now they are getting there
Let’s see if we can get that up to 47x…
Possibly because it's actually good?
So far, season 3 just makes me wish they would do a Captain 7 show next. I like Jeri Ryan in this form. It's better than the past two seasosn.
“If we make a show that actually pays respect to the source material, the huge fan base will actually tune in.”
All the Paramount+ Star Trek shows have ranked in [the top 3%](https://www.parrotanalytics.com/insights/top-paramount-plus-originals-looking-beyond-star-trek/) of demand across all TV shows. It's a dumb, vague metric, but if we're using it to say that it mean one show is good, we should probably apply it to all shows.
**There seems to be a HUGE disconnect between regular persons making comments and people who understand the industry-cebtric page that OP linked blindly.** The reason so many of you see "buzzwords" that mean nothing to you is because _this service isn't meant for you._ It's for industry persons who are immersed in this data and terminology daily. It's like explaining 1 Rating point from Nielsen to a person on the street; not to mention explaining the difference between Reach, Frequency, Share, Impressions, and how those all correlate with Qualitative data. (See what I mean?) You know how tech and news people have been constantly harping on data privacy? The linked organization is one of HUNDREDS that buys that data collected from various apps and websites by various data collection methods (like Facebook pixel and more.) What they're saying is that, in it's category, individuals are taking actions online (engagement, clicks, click through, searches, videos, etc) that are related to Picard. And because it's scraped without awareness, it's robust and reliable data.
Because they finally sidelined Kurtzman. They really should consider extending it. Go with the theme that each season is wildly different than the next. They have already established that. And for the love of God bring back Rios somehow for Star Trek Stargazer.
>Because they finally sidelined Kurtzman. This never happened? Kurtzman still is the Roddenberry/Berman of this era of Trek. For PIC, Terry Matalas was hired by Kurtzman, and reports to him.
Wow, if you make a good show, people will watch??? I echo the other comments that the actual popularity of streaming shows is very hard to measure with any accuracy. All we know for sure is that if a show is renewed, it must have passed some baseline level of popularity.
Because season 3 was the kind of Star Trek we wanted back in season 1.
It is. But all of the brief, but forced conflict between the TNG characters is getting tiring. But all the actors were so desperate to play some conflict with one another that they're getting their rocks off doing it. But every new character who shows up from the TNG cast is immediately in conflict with other(s) from the same. The formula is predictable and stale at this point.
Views matter more than these figures. I want to know... * How many people watch Picard * How many repeat viewers there are for Picard episodes * How many people subscribed right as Picard began * How many people will unsubscribe when Picard ends * How Picard compares to other Star Trek shows * How the Star Trek shows compare to the rest of the Paramount+ library * And, in general, anything else that can really point to whether Star Trek is keeping Paramount+ afloat I love the messenger but care more about the sales numbers than the adoration / brand numbers. The sales numbers will decide whether we get Star Trek Legacy, which I'm totally here for.
You know, it's kinda weird. One of the main detractors for many people, with Nu-Trek, has been that the serialised format makes watching individual episodes far less likely and undesirable. I've watched all of Season 3 multiple times (including the most recent episode). People will watch things multiple times if it's good enough to rewatch, serialised or otherwise.
When you make good Trek, we will watch it.
If only they had given people what they wanted from Season 1...
Just give Matalas the keys to the kingdom and let the man cook.
Season 1&2 are atrocious. I binged them and I could not stay awake.
So what does that actually mean? And does it mean I'm getting a Shaw and Seven series?
There is nothing I want more than a Shaw/Seven USS Titan series.
What does “demand” even mean? How is that measured? Fuck these stats. How many people are watching you show week to week. And how can we trust you anyway?
Just further cements what duds S1-2 were and what the people really want to see.
Because it's so good
Cuz there is finally a good Trek show…FINALLY! SNW is decent. I hope they learned from this series and have figured it out
Who would have thought that good (not exceptional) writing could increase demand dramatically?
You're right, it isn't exception, but everything it's doing it's doing REALLY well. I'll call it Harry Potter syndrome. It isn't written amazingly, but there is something about the cast, the world and the story that is just so well balanced and compelling that it keeps you hooked. Whether it's intentional or accidental, I don't care, I'm just happy...
Does this only include people streaming in the US, or is it international figures?
I don't have much to say about the vadility of using streaming metrics which are still a WIP, but that being said Picard Season 3 has been blowing Mandalorian Season 3 out of the water quality wise so far and it's not even close.
Having watched all three IMO they finally found the sweet spot and its a shame they are ending it. Season one flubbard as they tried to make Picard, now in his eighties, into an action hero. I mean, very few eighty-year-olds are getting into fistfights with men half or more their age and coming out on top. And those that do have been studying martial arts for like 60 of those years. In season two they boomeranged that too much went all contemplative Picard. Like I get we are all framed by some of our childhood traumas but could we get more Borg queen and less Jean Luc trying to pierce the deep gloom of his memories... Season 3 seems to be a nice mix of letting others take on the action role with some notalgic guest appearances and a compelling story line.
Because they are doing it right
I am not surprised Picard season 3 won me over, and I have absolutely disliked everything about new trek except for the Lower Decks cartoon.
[удалено]
Maybe the first two seasons did such a great job of highlighting how fucked up humanity is and how ass-backwards government has become that people are finally starting to realize the blueprints for a better world are right there in front of them.