At the very least they were new twists on somewhat original ideas. STD has yet to introduce anything except for the new way to fly, I guess.
I think that "new" is far more the discussion that it generates. I like the fact that it is a bit of an open ended question left at the end was an interesting twist.eh.... orville hasnt really introduced anything we havent seen before. bortus and his kid is real close but the "one world has one stance and ours is morally opposed" thing isnt exactly new either.
and?
they set up a very compelling serialized story. took three episodes. so what they didnt introduce anything "new"
its also a prequel show.
There have been no ideas introduced in STD. In The Orville every episode has explored something new.
I don't know what you mean by super balls.
And it's boring, hopefully this changes in the next episode.
Are you kidding. 4/5 episodes of The Orville were Star Trek script ripoffs.
I'd say that's a bad thing but TMP is literally a rewritten TOS episode.
I don't see the relevance there. I can cite many times when shows/artists lift from their own works. This is someone lifting from someone ELSE'S work.
Yes and no. Seth MacFarlane is lifting from Trek liberally but he's ALSO got a bunch of Star Trek alumni working on the show with him. Frakes directed the last episode.
Orville is basically the Jon Snow of Star Trek. It has no right to the title but it's not a pretender to Star Trek either as it shares the blood of the series.
Like Battlestar Galactica's reboot.
Yeah, getting Trek alumni on board is a cute way to keep the lawyers away.
And Galactica's reboot was said to be a reboot. Irrelevant.
It really wouldn't be and isn't.
Seth has openly stated the show is based on his love of Star Trek so it's a bit like saying Stephen King ripped off H.P. Lovecraft for Jerusalem's Lot.
So what you're saying is that The Orville is a Star Trek cover band.
I agree with your first point, but not your second. I cannot understand even bringing Babylon 5 into the argument, because even its staunchest fans agree it was almost entirely unwatchable until the back end of Season 1. G'Kar was a one-note smug snake still by the end of the third episode. Really Londo was the only one starting to take form, and that was because the third episode was entirely set aside as character development for him.
Well, while the first handful of episodes of B5 weren’t nearly as strong as the episodes of the 2nd or 3rd season, I still thought they were pretty good, and definitely left me looking forward to the rest of the show, which is more than you can say about the first three episodes of STD.
But let’s leave B5 out of it since we disagree, and try to compare the first three episodes of STD with the first three episodes of The Expanse. By episode 3, we’ve already been introduced to most of the major characters. We know Errinwright is probably a bad guy, can cheer for Avasarala and Miller, and we’re on the edge of the seat watching Holden and his crew go from bad, to worse to “holy shit!” These are characters you can love and hate, sympathize with and cheer for. We know where the story is going and got two mysteries to explore (Julie Mao and the Cant).
Compare that with the first three episodes of STD. Any interesting characters? Aside from Lorca there’s zilch. Do we really care about the Klingon war? Eh, not really. There’s the shroom drive if you can get past the initial silliness of the idea, but even that is just the means to an end, rather than an interesting plot arc.
No, just no.Yeah, getting Trek alumni on board is a cute way to keep the lawyers away.
This kind of post illustrates the redundancy of this thread now...
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.