Star Trek: Picard season 3 introduces his son — and it works?

For ages remakes and sequences have dominated Hollywood. However, television and film have been dominated for the past decade by long-running series with unbroken continuity. This has given rise to the “legacyquel” or “requel,” works that revive dormant properties using a mixture of new and familiar characters. New characters, usually played by much younger (and less expensive) actors, serve as an on-ramp for new viewers as well as a potential off-ramp for the “legacy” characters, who are present to attract nostalgic fans and reassure them that their version of the franchise hasn’t been discarded. It’s an opportunity for the leads or even creators of a popular intellectual property to pass the torch to a new generation and ensure its longevity. Or, less charitably, it’s the tip of the spear in studios’ efforts to minimize the importance of movie stars in the marketability of films in favor of making brands themselves — things they own — the real selling point.

However, we are also witnessing a new Hollywood trend with the proliferation of the legacyquel. LotsThere is a wide variety of TV programs and movies about children of celebrities.

This isn’t automatically a bad idea, and many of the better examples find ways to twist or subvert the basic formula of “the same story, but with the next generation.” CreedAn inverted version is still the most valuable legacyquel. RockyThe story of a child born SomebodyIt is possible to do it yourself. Nobody. Star Wars: The Force awakensThe villain is the son of two famous characters. Cobra Kai and 2022’s The ScreamHave protagonists descended from their source material’s villains. In the realm of superheroes, it’s more of a mixed bag. Alongside new faces like Shang-Chi, Ms. Marvel, and Moon Knight, Marvel’s Multiverse Saga has introduced us to a slew of familial heirs to vacant Avengers titles. (Ant-Man’s daughter has a shrinky-suit now, Hulk’s got a big green cousin and a big green son, Thor has an adopted daughter portrayed by Chris Hemsworth’s real-life daughter, etc.) In what might be the most uncomfortable example in a modern franchise, the eerie CGI ghost of deceased actor Harold Ramis was trod out to endorse his character’s grandchildren in Ghostbusters: AfterlifeThe film “The Son of Ivan Reitman”, was directed by Ivan Reitman’s son.

“So what?” you might be asking. The fact that TV and film characters have children is just one consequence of the open-ended stories they tell about their next phases. Are superheroes or spacemen allowed to have children? It’s not possible. I’m not Joe Quesada. In fact, it’s terrific that long-form live-action media forces storytellers and audiences alike to acknowledge the passage of time. I worry that fictional dynasties are being made by this new crop of offspring. During an era in which the growing chasm between haves and have-nots has further crowded our screens with actors, models, and musicians whose family connections have given them a huge advantage over other aspiring artists, the narratives currently offered by corporate media reinforce the idea that today’s most important people are the children of yesterday’s most important people.

Image: Marvel Studios

Photo: Eli Ade/MGM

Image: Marvel Studios

I don’t mean to suggest that this is some sort of massive conspiracy by rich media elites to manufacture our consent for the coming techno-feudalist hellscape. (Though it probably won’t hurt.) It’s a consequence of the same lazy, cautious approach upon which Hollywood has repeatedly doubled down over the past three decades. The best bet when deciding on which projects to spend tens of thousands or hundreds of million of dollars is a well-known quantity. And, since today’s most vocal audiences are the sorts who demand to be rewarded for the time they’ve invested in these fictional universes, simply repurposing the title or premise of a popular product from years past will no longer cut it. All must add up. Sometimes, even recasting a favorite role is sacrilege.

But, since Harrison Ford isn’t getting any younger, studios need to establish new characters who can sustain the value of these intellectual properties after the original star has moved on either professionally or mortally. Having your protagonists’ offspring inherit the franchise is the avenue that requires the least thought or explanation, and therefore has become the most common. It’s the narrative equivalent of hiring someone’s nephew because it’s easier than interviewing a bunch of new job candidates. It’s not an outright evil practice, but it is how wealth and power perpetuate themselves.

Star Trek is a long-standing franchise that has been able to thrive for over 50 years without resorting to any of these tricks. What is the best time to watch Star Trek? Star Trek: The Next GenerationThe show was launched in 1987 with a cast that included characters not directly related to McCoy and Spock. In fact, the show’s writers’ bible expressly forbade pitches featuring the descendants of established characters from Original Series, in order to ensure that the audience’s attention was on the new crew rather than in the rearview mirror. Even after another 30 years’ worth of spinoffs, each series has almost exclusively introduced new characters without family ties or familiar last names, with the only exceptions being Discovery’s Michael Burnham (Spock’s foster sister), Picard’s Soji Asha (Data’s daughter, sort of), and La’an Noonien-Singh of Strange New WorldsThe Khan family is a descendant. It’s not that family legacy isn’t a thing in the world of Star Trek, or that its post-capitalist utopia has completely negated the advantages of inherited status. (We’re looking at you, Jonathan Archer.) It reinforces the fact that Star Trek, at least from 1987, isn’t the story about a specific group of people, but the future they will live in. The heroes of Starfleet come from anywhere and everywhere, and in the eyes of the audience, they’re all starting from zero.

This is until the next episode Picard officially confirmed the implication of last week’s cliffhanger: New character Jack Crusher (Ed Speleers) is the estranged son of Admiral Jean-Luc Picard, and for the first time since the death of Kirk’s son David in Star Trek IIIThere is an patrilineal successor to Star Trek’s throne.

Photo: Trae Patrickton/Paramount Plus

This, in itself, is not a bad thing, and Speleers’ performance as the roguish son of Picard and Dr. Beverly Crusher calls to mind Chris Pine’s take on James T. Kirk more than Gates McFadden or Sir Patrick Stewart — save for that accent, because Paramount wouldn’t dream of casting a non-Brit as Picard Jr. even if it doesn’t make sense for the character’s backstory. The incongruity in the dialogue is expressed at best in a hand gesture. The storyline is actually quite engaging, following Picard’s struggle to connect with an adult son he never knew, one with a different set of values and a criminal record. The discovery of Picard’s long-lost son may seem a bit cliched in theory, especially considering that this dynamic was almost rehearsed to the point where it is barely recognizable. TNG episode “Bloodlines”), the execution is smooth enough to justify Jack’s presence on the show.

Jack passes the most important test of a character with inherited clout: “Would I be interested in him if he were not Beverly and Jean-Luc’s kid?” He is, mercifully, a puzzle for our main character to solve, rather than a mere sequel to two beloved heroes. Like his parents, Jack is an adventurer with a desire to help others and to do good, but unlike Jean-Luc, who is Mr. Civility, Jack couldn’t care less about the rule of law. If his goal is to get medicine to civilians in a warzone and the only way to deliver it is to bribe both sides of the conflict with weapons, then that’s what he’s going to do. It’s an ethos that, understandably, mirrors that of the mother who raised him, a doctor who’s unconcerned with the political ramifications of healing the sick. She’s a doctor, and doctors heal; let the politicians do the politics.

This conflict has played out between Starfleet captains and doctors since Kirk and McCoy, only Jack doesn’t actually answer to anyone. Add to that a chip on his shoulder from growing up without a father and operating outside the warmth and comfort of the Federation, and you’ve got the makings of an interesting protagonist, with or without a famous parentage.

I find it frustrating that Jack Crusher’s spinoffs seem to be inevitable. This, along with the suspicion of his creator, frustrates me. In the season premiere, Jean-Luc tells us that “[he is] not a man who needs a legacy,” a sentiment that is consistent with his development over the course of the past 35 years. Even though the next episode of Season 2 will question Picard’s assertion about his relationship to his son and its effect on their relationship, it is hard not to feel the need for Picard to leave a legacy. This would allow Star Trek an intellectual property that could last a lifetime. When I see Jack Crusher meet the USS Titan’s Ensign Sidney La Forge, daughter of TNG’s famous Geordi La Forge, I can only imagine a Paramount executive standing just off screen like a royal vizier arranging a politically expedient marriage. “This will keep us afloat for another 30 years,” he says to himself, hands tented. “Bring on the Next Next Generation.”

While I’m sure Jack and Sidney’s babies will be brilliant and beautiful, Star Trek has never required such contrivances to sustain itself. Star Trek has no dynasties. This adds a layer of hope to Star Trek’s universe, considering how our future appears to be owned by the same people that own it. In the 25th century, our immediate investment in a celebrity couple’s kid will not be assumed. It would be great if the 2023 situation was similar.