Discovery and "The Orville" Comparisons
- Thread starter Jedi_Master
- Start date
Me as well. It has the TNG aesthetic with the TOS knack for humor and storytelling.
I'm not saying I didn't enjoy TOS, but character was not its strong point by any means. I'd actually argue that Spock was the only character who was fairly complex, and much of that had more to do with the subtleties of Leonard Nemoy's performance rather than how he was written. McCoy basically only had two personality traits - a prickly exterior, and a soft-hearted interior. I do have to say that the TOS formula for character interaction worked well, as they picked the smallest possible group (a triad) which could spark dynamic interactions. But while I don't require series to be full-on serialized, I expect more from characters than to be props to explore an anthology series.
I think Discovery thus far looks like a great show. I see it as a space action series set in the Star Trek universe (a bit like the new Star Trek movies). There's drama, flawed characters, heroism, redemption, etc like we often see in Hollywood movies. Thus far the writing, dialogue and characters are good.
I'm disappointed Discovery doesn't have the same 'scientifically progressive, more optimistic, exploration of new worlds and civilizations, moral/ethical dilemmas, exploration of humanity, impact of technology' edge that made Star Trek (TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyayer) almost unique in the world of entertainment.
Most movies and sci-fi tv shows (even in the 50s, 60s) usually have a more gritty, fearful and dystopian outlook on the future (technology turning against us, tyrannical government or corporation taking over, individuals right abolished, aliens attacking earth, etc) and Star Trek and a few other shows like Doctor Who, Stargate, provide us with a different outlook. In that sense, Discovery thus far is not different to most action and sci-fi Hollywood outings. On the other hand, TOS and TNG were written by people who had something to say about the current state of humanity, about our society, our future. It was evident in both storylines (episodes main stories) and character dialogues. BTW, the remastered TNG episodes are stunning. They look so great in HD.
Discovery does have flawed characters, drama, personal dilemmas, heroism, redemption, well written characters and dialogues but this is typical in good Hollywood outings. Even in great and popular series like Game of Thrones or others (CSI, The Americans, etc). In that sense, Discovery may develop into a great series on its own (I love action-adventure space sci-fi). It doesn't have the explorations of new worlds and civilizations, moral/ethical dilemmas, the exploration of humanity, a look at the impact of new technologies like previous Trek series. Star Trek TNG wasn't popular because it was similar but because it was different than most TV series and great. The Orville is closer to what Star Trek is for me. To what made Star Trek unique and great for me. Having Orville playing alongside Discovery soften the blow. I'm disappointed it's not as unique as the other Star Trek (why use the title Star Trek beside for money if it's not to make something similar -in spirit- to previous Star Trek series? Similar to what made them unique?) but at least I have The Orville which is closer to it. Each series can be their own thing and provide us with hours of entertainment.
Last edited:
Another good episode of Orville last night
Agree the characters are mixing really well.
Agree the characters are mixing really well.
I like ST: D - but honestly, across it's 51 year history Star Trek (including my favorite series TOS ) has never been 'High Brow Intellectual entertainment'. It was and has always been a science fiction adventure show, with some real science (along with a LOT of BS/Fantasy science) and some social commentary/moralizing here and there (and that last part took the forefront for a time with TNG.)
GR was the one who (after TOS cancellation) started trying to change the perception of Star Trek to emphasize the science/social commentary aspects and make it like they were more prevalent in TOS then they actually were when you look at the series as a whole. (And don't get m,e started on the "Gene's Vision"™ crap.)
It certainly wasn't a 'kid show' or 'high camp' science fiction like a lot of the stuff Irwin Allen did; but still I wouldn't call anything from Star Trek 'High Brow Intellectual'. YMMV.
Eh, I dunno. Name me a half-dozen more highbrow science fiction shows. Certainly nothing holds a candle to serious science fiction novels, but very few of those have been turned into movies, let alone full-length series.
What has set Trek apart from other sci-fi TV has been more often than not there was more of a point to the episode than just "adventure of the week." Even if handled ineptly, it usually involved some sort of broader theme, whether reflecting on a contemporary issue, the universal human condition, or the character dynamics.
That cast had charisma...
Fair comment...And one which can be equally applied in regards to The Orville...If one were so inclined...
Reminds me of Stargate and Farscape too.
Why does everything need to be "high brow?"
So we can pat ourselves on the back for watching "smart" things. We want everyone to know how intelligent we are.
You know what...I'd like to apologise! I seem to have become that guy at the end of the night picking arguments for the sake of it...If you love the Orville that's fine...It's just bugs me that some need to use it as a stick to bash STD - but whatever...I'm sense I am becoming a bit of a dick so I will, as there is not profit in bickering back and forth l leave this thread for now and bid you all - as we say in Manchester - Ta ra!
Want to be smarter? Maybe not watch TV designed to entertain.
I agree. It shouldn't be a means to bash DSC. It's really all a matter of opinion. To me, one right now is edging out the other because it fits the bill for what I want from a Sci-Fi adventure series. The other one is underwhelming, disappointing and I'm waiting to see where it goes. I'd never bash one or the other, but it is disheartening to see something that had such promise in the PR push and has yet to deliver.
Eh, TNG never sold me until season 5 or so.
They're different flavors of ice cream.
Orville is that OG adventure series with a little bit of character arcing across episodes and it's telling very classic Star Trek stories. (BTW, that music in the Stars episode... was I the only one thinking V'ger as they approached the city ship?)
Discovery, I think, has a steeper hill to climb. I think Orville got off on the right foot from go, for what it was intending to be, whereas Discovery should have junked the prologue story and jumped right into things with Episode 3, and over the course of the season given us the information about what happened to trigger these events for our lead. I think it would have helped prevent some of the bad first impressions people had with Burnham's character.
Orville is that OG adventure series with a little bit of character arcing across episodes and it's telling very classic Star Trek stories. (BTW, that music in the Stars episode... was I the only one thinking V'ger as they approached the city ship?)
Discovery, I think, has a steeper hill to climb. I think Orville got off on the right foot from go, for what it was intending to be, whereas Discovery should have junked the prologue story and jumped right into things with Episode 3, and over the course of the season given us the information about what happened to trigger these events for our lead. I think it would have helped prevent some of the bad first impressions people had with Burnham's character.
What kind of a fan are you? You're making lighthearted comments, not loving a Trek series until 5 seaons in?!?!?! What next?
I tend to agree. If Discovery can continue to make things interesting like they did in "Context is for Kings", then I can see hanging around the whole season. For me. the prologue was a huge mistake.
Similar threads
