I'm rather fond on the take I read on Reddit regarding these kind of stories: "Actor Open To Receiving A Paycheck"
News Mount And Peck Are Open To Reprising Pike And Spock
- Thread starter AutoAdmin
- Start date
Can't blame him.
I'm gonna bake my own pizzas. But first I'm going to print up some Domino's boxes and crowdsource a commercial with T-shirt sales. My fans swear it is better Domino's than Dominos. I start baking in 30 days, but because of the haters I can only sell it a slice at a time. Please buy another T-shirt.
You need to offer a bit of pepperoni and blob of cheese on YouPie to get people to send you money.
I've liked what I've seen of Orville, but, yes, I have to work hard not to hold its more combative fans against it.
In other words, I wish certain folks would stop using it as a club to beat DISCO with. And the whole "real Trek" thing makes me roll my eyes as it implies that there can only be one true successor to classic Trek, as though this is a matter of apostolic succession or whatever.
The reality: both shows are inspired by classic Trek in different ways. There is no "right" or "true" approach.
It feels a little like Cain and Abel sometimes. But we should be celebrating the influence of the franchise as it expands from within and from without.
in this context i mean real trek as the one produced by the company that has the IP to make such a show.
I knew kids in the 80's that called their Gobots transformers. it's fine.
Fair enough. I was referencing the folks who keep insisting that Orville is the true spiritual successor to Trek.
Precisely so. Like it, or don't like it, but the comparison game, the competition is frustratingly reductive in its argumentation.
If "spiritual successor," they might have a point. Issues-oriented, go-adventurey, sounds more like the vibe/ethos of previous Trek iterations (other than DS 9), more than Dsc did, to me. Y'all have me convinced to try it again. ORV, I mean.
What you are describing is doctrine and dogma, which Orville does follow. Spirit is something quite different, IMO. And Orville is rather guilty of choosing the expedient, unethical, immoral and juvenile path, that places it rather, AFAIC, the requirements of what spiritual successor implies.
It seems to lie somewhere between being a parody of and a homage to 1990s Trek from what I can tell. Who could have predicted some Star Trek fans would prefer a parody starring the guy who does the Family Guy voices over an actual Trek series currently on air?
It comes down to what kind of fans of Star Trek that actually are. To be fair, Me and my palls back in the 90s preferred dubbing our own far funnier and much much dirtier dialogue over episodes of Voyager than watching the real thing, while changing the names of characters to Captain Hepburn, Spaft (Half-Spock, Half-Shaft, all Vulcan), Raoul, Kleenex etc. because that was what it took to make it entertaining. I think I'd have enjoyed The Orville if it wasn't such weaksauce milktoast in that department instead of a snuggie for people who miss TNG and for Seth to complain about why hot chicks don't fall for nice guys like himself who want to cosplay being a Starfleet Captain.
Indeed. 'actor open to receiving employment'
Forwarning: This is not a DSC vs. Orville post. I am well aware that some of the criqitues I am stating have been leveled against DSC. This is just my personal opinion as to why DSC is not working for me. Mileage will vary.
I think if it forged ahead in a way to make its own path, rather than fall back on more familiar bits and odd interpersonal of comedy. That's not to say that the comedy wasn't unwelcomed, but that it felt uneven in its handling of the subject. As such, it lost track of the characters and my enjoyment waned.
I really want to enjoy the characters on Orville but Bortus and Klandon are the closest I have to full engagement with characters and their arc and that's mixed, at best.
Indeed. I think what's going on is more Star Trek's formula, not its spirit.
But let's get back to Spike.
Although I agree with what you've said, I would like to see a Pike series not purely due to nostalgia, but because Mount was convincing as Pike, he made the character interesting, as opposed to Hunter in the old days, who was conflicted and a bit of a stuffed shirt bore to be honest.
I also enjoyed most of what Discovery showed us, sure it had flaws, but most of it was great Trek, and my desire for a Pike show is not something to be used to beat Discovery with.
G
Gonzo
Guest
The real question now is would Netflix pay for it, they passed on Picard and it was picked up by Amazon.
Same goes for the new S31 show and any potential Pike series.
Must admit I am not really bothered about Picard being on Amazon, the show doesnt really interest me.
Same goes for the new S31 show and any potential Pike series.
Must admit I am not really bothered about Picard being on Amazon, the show doesnt really interest me.
CBS isn't all that concerned with Netflix because they ARE working on getting the backend in place to go international with CBSAA as well. Their whole strategy has been to eventually be a full competitor to Netflix and other streaming services worldwide.
Similar threads
