Talk:All Good Things... (episode)

From Memory Alpha, the free Star Trek reference.

Contents 1 Episode talk page 1.1 Maintenance links 2 FA Status 2.1 FA nomination 2.2 Featured? 2.3 Votes for FA removal 3 Syndication 4 Mistakes 5 Line 6 Deleted Scene 7 Stephen Matthew Garvey's Ensign? 8 Contradiction over trial 9 Old Q 10 Goofs 11 Red Links 12 Warp 10 13 City of Death 14 "I cheat" qoute 15 Note to all who visit this page 16 Star Trek Journey's End... 17 Story and script

[edit] FA Status

[edit] FA nomination

"All Good Things..." is, I think, one of the best episode summaries I've seen on MA to date. Ottens wrote most of it. I made some modifications, and I think it is now ready (maybe needs a link/spelling/gramar check, but that's all) -- Redge 21:24, 29 Jul 2004 (CEST)

Support, with check. -- Michael Warren | Talk 19:44, Aug 11, 2004 (CEST)

You added lots of technobabble indeed. :P Well, supported, of course. Ottens 12:55, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)

That's the best part of the episode! (And it makes for soe interesting links to be filled) ;-) -- Redge | Talk 18:52, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Archived --Alan del Beccio 03:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Featured?

Can anyone find the voting process for this article to become featured? With the many red links and the (for a two-hour show) short summary compared to other FA-episodes I don't see how it became featured in this condition. Kennelly 15:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

It's been featured since August 16, 2004 (see here). Looking through histories, the discussion was made here, but it wasn't archived then.

Because of the 2.5+ years between now and then, a good argument can be made for removing FA status (although I personally don't think redlinks should be taken into consideration).--Tim Thomason 20:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Votes for FA removal

"All Good Things..."

This article was originally nominated and awarded FA status on August 16, 2004, for a rather beautiful summary. Since then, the summary has been changed dramatically. Some paragraphs have been merged and shortened, taking away the escense of the article.

Also, this article features a rather short summary for a featured (two hour long) episode. There are some non-fetured articles with longer summaries for episodes that are only one hour long. In addition, the orginization of the trivia is very loose, jumping from cast, to set, to character, and back again.--Nmajmani 20:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Then perhaps you ought to be going through the edit history and using it to fix these issues (while keeping any new information that has been added since the the time the article was featured, of course). - 66.241.73.223

Bump. This needs some attention one way or the other or the dispute tag needs to be pulled. --Alan 10:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Keep. The background order changes are minor and the quotes could be reduced but those are minor changes. The rest is ok by me. Logan 5 16:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm just going to pull this. I'll remove this 24 hours from when I post, and change the status back to FA. -Nmajmani 11:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Archiving. --Alan 07:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Syndication

This episode was the last in the series. In first-run, it was feature-length, later cut into two for syndication. Several scenes from the original version were cut for time.

• Does anyone know what scenes were cut?--67.180.249.101 23:57, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• There's been a discussion below about the scene when an aged Q confronts Picard on the Pasteur. This scene is cut the episode runs on Spike TV. While the image for the episode is from this scene, it also does not appear in the summary. If anyone has a copy of the feature length version, we could fill in these holes. --theinfinity42 15:40 9 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Mistakes

I've found three errors while reviewing the episodes:

1. Data says the three tachyon pulses all have the same configuration and are all generated by the Enterprise, but in fact one of them is generated by the Pasteur.
2. The anti-time reaction didn't form untill after the scans in the future, while they should really be getting smaller and smaller untill the pulse is activated, and it dissappeared. The Pasteur should have detected the anomaly, and the anomaly found by the Enterprise later on shouldn't be there.
3. Past-Data reports he is ready to initiate a static warp shell, but Picard hadn't mentioned the concept at all, but acts natural.

Only three errors over two episodes is not bad for Star Trek, but I doubt these are the only two mistakes, though they are (I think) the most apparent ones. -- Redge 21:07, 29 Jul 2004 (CEST)

Those errors should be included on the page, I guess. Ottens 12:19, 30 Jul 2004 (CEST)

Is the page still in use, BTW? Ottens 12:22, 30 Jul 2004 (CEST)

Not since I removed the msg. I'll add the mistakes. Anyone else finds any, post them here first in case your missing something and it isn't a mistake. I'm not entirely sure about the third one, so I'll double check later. -- Redge 14:01, 30 Jul 2004 (CEST)

Third is not a mistake. Picard mentions it in his big speech to the 2364-crew just prior to that. "...we have to take the ship into the very centre of the phenomenon and create a static warp shell. Now, this will put the ship at risk..." It's a diversion from the script - an addition more than anything - but it seems designed to correct that mistake (which was present in the final draft). -- Michael Warren 14:43, 30 Jul 2004 (CEST)

Another Mistake ?:

I don't know if this is a mistake, but Data apears to be a junior Lieutenant during the "past". To my knowledge he was second in command and Lieutenant Commander by then. But probably some things are just different in that timeframe... – Friedie 19:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I've already put it on, but in the past timeline, the chase lights under the viewscreen are moving the wrong way; outwards, not inwards. Prototype 01 13:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Line

That line was ment to represent the end of the first half and the begin of the second one. -- Redge | Talk 19:14, 12 Aug 2004 (CEST)

[edit] Deleted Scene

Didn't Martha Hackett play a character in a deleted scene? -- Tough Little Ship 21:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

IMDB says she was an uncredited alian captain in a deleted scene, but this is the first I've heard of it. Jaz ^talk 21:14, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

According to the Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion: A scene cut for time featured actress Martha Hacket (sic) as Androna, who would have been the first-ever depicted Terellian despite her having only two arms. --Jörg 21:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Are you correct about that spelling and the arm reference? Because that info is currently kept at Terrellian (Alpha Quadrant). Jaf 20:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Jaf

It is exactly like that in the Companion. Here's the complete quote dealing with all things Terellian:

A scene cut for time featured actress Martha Hacket (sic) as Androna, who would have been the first-ever depicted Terellian despite her having only two arms (see notes, "Liaisons"/254); as it was, Braga still inserted mention of the Terellian Death Syndrome, perhaps the same as the Terellian plague (sic) ("Genesis"/271).

And here's the missing scene from the script of the episode:

WORF

Captain... there are five Terrellian transport ships holding position in the Devron system.

TASHA

We're being hailed by the lead ship.

PICARD

On screen.

INCLUDE VIEWSCREEN (OPTICAL)

Which now shows a Terrellian pilot named ANDRONA.

ANDRONA

Enterprise, you are a welcome sight. We've been receiving threats from the Romulan Empire ever since we entered the Neutral Zone. I'm glad to see you're here to protect us.

PICARD

Why have you come here?

Androna's expression brightens a little.

ANDRONA

We heard about the Light... from a merchant ship who told us about the power it has to heal illness... to rejuvenate the elderly... and we had to come here.

The others on the Bridge look a little confused... they've never heard about any of this.

PICARD

We can't really be certain that the... Light... has this power. And there may be dangers, side effects we're not aware of...

ANDRONA

I have five ships full of sick and dying people, Captain. If there's even a chance it's true, I can't turn back now.

PICARD

It would be safer for all concerned if you left the Neutral Zone... and let us investigate the phenomenon more fully.

ANDRONA

No. I've come too far.

Picard is frustrated, but has no authority to order them away.

PICARD

I warn you that if the Romulans should decide to intervene, I may not be able to protect you.

ANDRONA

I understand. We'll take that risk. (beat, then smiles) Good luck, Captain.

The Transmission ENDS. Picard thinks for a moment, then heads for the Ready Room.

PICARD

(to Tasha) You have the Bridge, Lieutenant. I'll be in my Ready Room.

TASHA

Aye, sir.

Picard EXITS briskly to the Ready Room.

You see the text from the Companion has several mistakes:

• Martha Hackett's name is spelled wrong
• The script refers to Terrellians, not to Terellians
• Terellian Death Syndrome and Terrellian plague were mixed up. The Death syndrome was mentioned in "Genesis" and the "Terrellian plague appears for the first time in "All Good Things", it was furthermore spelt wrong (it's Terrelian plague in the script (not a cut scene) and not Terellian plague as in the Companion).

Wow, did that clear anything up? ;-) --Jörg 21:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Haha, not really, but thanks just the same. I asked because I was wondering if this made it more likely that they are actually one species and not two. Jaf 21:08, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Jaf

[edit] Stephen Matthew Garvey's Ensign?

Which era did this ensign make an appearance, and more to the point... which ship was he on? It would be nice to be able to add him to the relevant unnamed personnel listing along with a picture. -- Sulfur 17:11, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Long time ago, but here he is Stephen Matthew Garvin. – Tom 06:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Contradiction over trial

For Sulfur - regarding version 345122, if the trial never "truly ended" then a verdict couldn't have been arrived at, yet Q claimed so in "Q Who". Either Q was lying then or is lying in the finale. Either way, there's a contradiction. - 12.210.30.254 01:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

No contradiction whatsoever. Q regularily "expands" on the truth. Heck, for all we know, in Q's "timeline", "Q Who" could take place millenia after the end of "All Good Things" Point being, Q stretches the truth all the time. Since we see a trial in this episode, we can safely assume that the trial is still ongoing and that Q wasn't telling the truth or was intentionally misleading Picard previously. -- Sulfur 01:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Point being, Q stretches the truth all the time. - Just because the audience grants him the leeway, doesn't mean there's no contradiction; only that it's a routine occurence, hence ignored. Anyway, it's no biggie so I'll drop it. - 12.210.30.254 16:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, he said the Enterprise crew were exonerated for the crimes of humanity, not that humanity itself had been exonerated; secondly, he may have just said that in order to gain more trust to see if Picard would allow him to become a member of the Enterprise crew. --From Andoria with Love 02:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Old Q

What's with the "old" Q (with the white hair) in that picture? I never saw him in the finale. What was the scene about? Torlek 07:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

During a scene on which Picard was on the future Enterprise-D, Q appeared as an old man to mock Picard's old age. In reality, Q is actually ageless (at least, according to Q). --From Andoria with Love 07:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

That scene actually took place on the Pasteur. 88.108.247.17 17:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Is it possible that this scene is cut when All Good Things... is played in syndication (as on Spike)? It was just on this afternoon, and I can assure you that scene did not happen. I remember watching when the episode first aired in '94, and I do seem to recall that scene, though. --theinfinity42 00:06 9 December 2006 (UTC)

When feature length episodes are cut into two-part episodes, they also generally lose a scene or two to compensate for the extra time needed to recap the first part episode and to play the title theme. As for Spike TV with TNG (much like Sci-Fi Channel with TOS), they've taken the liberty to cut episodes down even further to fit in more commercial time. --Alan del Beccio 00:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I hapen to have the episode on DVD and this scene is included. However, I am wondering if anyone would approve changing this image due to its conditional appearance with a more common appearance in the episode (like the anti-time anomoly). However, I can assure any concerns, just watching this episode ten minutes ago, that this scene does indeed take place. Also, This scene is about two minutes long, and for tv purposes, I can understand its cutting. If one rents the DVD, thwy can see this mysterious scene.– Nmajmani 01:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Nmajmani

[edit] Goofs

I removed the following goofs (a.k.a. nitpicks) as per a discussion on Ten Forward. --From Andoria with Love 01:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

• One of the most significant plot oversights in the series occurs in this episode. The anomaly is determined to grow larger as it moves further into the past (in other words, growing smaller with normal time). However, after initially not finding the anomaly in the future, the crew decide that if they return, they might see the formation of the anomaly. Despite the fact that they return later than they originally were there, the anomaly has indeed formed.

• In the present, Data states that there are three beams seemingly all from the Enterprise merging at the center of the anomaly. However, the beam from the future originated from the Pasteur, not the future Enterprise.

• While none in the future initially believes that Picard is jumping through time, he never brings up the simple option of having someone run the same test on his memories that Dr. Crusher runs in the present to prove he is not just hallucinating.

• Incorrect Captain's chair is used in the past time line

• Data's rank pip incorrectly reflect the rank of Lieutenant Junior Grade when in fact he is a Lieutenant Commander

[edit] Red Links

Shouldn't we cut down on the proportion of red links to blue links? It looks kind of.. wierd, at first glance. 68.91.81.193 20:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure, make articles for them. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 00:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warp 10

One of the background info bullet points states that it is apparently possible in the anti-time future to go faster than Warp 10. This seems somewhat inaccurate; I think it would be more appropriate to say that "in the anti-time future, the warp scale has been recalibrated to include Warp speeds above ten, as the future Enterprise engages at Warp 13." After all, Warp 10 is "infinite speed" in the "normal" scale, so going "faster" than it doesn't make sense. Gregly 18:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Not really. When you are in a wormhole, by normal standards, you are faster than warp 10. Besides, It's been 25 years. We don't know the advancements made in that time. -Nmajmani 20:05, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Nmajmani

Actually, that's wrong, on the normal Warp speed chart, Warp 10 is infinite speed. Therefore, no matter how fast you go, through a wormhole or anything else, your speed would always be between 0 and 10. It might be 9.999...etc, but it would never be able to actually reach 10. --24.161.1.87 18:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, Tom Paris made Warp 10 in one episode. So it is possible in a minimum of 25 years that they can travel that fast. --Nmajmani 19:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Nmajmani

When Tom Paris made warp 10, he made it to infinite speed - i.e., he was everywhere at once, as was explained in the previous comments. Lazerlike42 00:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] City of Death

This episode borrows heavily from the Dr. Who episode City of Death, especialy the primordial-ooze scene. Should the article perhaps mention this? --Howdybob 05:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "I cheat" qoute

It's been a long time since I've seen this episode, but I think the first line of that conversation was spoken by Worf.

Your're right. I just watched the episode last night. I'll change the page to reflect this.--Nmajmani 11:17, 27 August 2007 (UTC)Nmajmani

[edit] Note to all who visit this page

OK. I just want to let everyone know of a mini-project I have embarked on. Over the next few days, starting tomorrow, I will be rewriting the entire episode summary from scratch. As this is a rather large edit, I ask that no-one make any large contributions to this articles episode summary, as I will simply be replacing the whole thing. The goal here is to get a summary online that complements this articles FA status, and to write portions for syndicated deleted scenes. (i.e. a summary for the full feature-length episode). So again, I ask that no-one please edit the summary of this article over the course of the next few days. Thanks for any cooperation, and if anyone has a copy of the syndicated episode, could you please let me know about the several cuts after the new summary is up. Again, thanks to all. --Nmajmani 03:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You could add the {{inuse}} tag to the top of the page then. – Cleanse 06:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I thought that tag only applied while the edit is in process. It's a several day edit, and I'll be working on my computer's text editor. but if it should be there, I'll add it now. --Nmajmani 12:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

OK. I just added the new summary. I am going to go through now and add links and pictures, but please don't take it down. Also, comments would be greatly appreciated. Remember, this summary is of the entire feature-length episode, and includes the controversial "Old Q" scene. --Nmajmani 01:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Star Trek Journey's End...

In the ads in the NYC area, the last episode was hyped as Star Trek the Next Generation Journey's End. Was that ever the original title? Chimeradave Aug 6, 2008

[edit] Story and script

This whole section (first part) is almost nothing but nitpicks.

• There is what appears to be a contradiction over the status of the trial as Q claimed in "Q Who" that Picard was exonerated. Later, Q said that the jury was still out on that trial in "True Q". However, this is cleared up when Q notes to Picard that Humanity will always be on trial and that it will never truly end.
• In the "present" time frame, Data reports that it is as if all three tachyon pulses originated from the Enterprise because they have an identical "amplitude modulation". In fact, one of the pulses comes from the Pasteur. This may be explained by the fact that the Pasteur's amplitude modulation may be identical to the Enterprise's amplitude modulation, or that this pulse was also configured by Data.
• Early on, Data establishes that events in one time frame have no effect on the other two. The formation of the temporal anomaly would seem to contradict this, or is excluded from this rule by Q. Later on, Data goes so far as to call the whole situation a paradox, though he may be using the term loosely.
• The idea that the temporal anomaly was created in the future and grew backwards in time is contradicted by its absence when the future Picard fails to find it, as well as its presence later on, supposedly - according to its own backwards logic - before its creation.
• The temporal energy generated by the anomaly causes La Forge's eyes to regenerate, allowing him to see. However, his blindness was due to a birth defect rather than an injury, so the tissue reverting to an earlier state shouldn't have healed him.
• Furthermore, if the anti-time energy caused the healing of La Forge's eyes, described by Dr. Crusher as "Organ regeneration," as well as the healing of "old scars," on other crew members, shouldn't Picard's artificial heart also be affected, surely this is also a prosthesis. One explanation could be that the captain's time-shifting has shielded him from the effects of different time-periods.

If no responses or objections I'm going to remove all the ones listed above. – Morder 21:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the proposed removal. There's pages and pages of good background info for this episode in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion, but I haven't had a chance to add it all yet.– Cleanse 01:01, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it was said somewhere that we should keep notes on apparent contradictions in continuity. So, the first note would be okay to keep, I think. Lose the rest, though, as those are nothing but complaints regarding the effects of the anomaly. --From Andoria with Love 03:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Removed all but the first – Morder 06:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)