Spoilers Halo: Season One - Discussion Thread

[Rahul]

I actually don't know anything about "Halo" - other than seeing some gameplay. But I never played it myself, and I'm completely oblivious to the larger lore and story of it all.

I'm just interested in it because it looks like a high-prestige SF show, like Star Trek, The Mandalorian or Stargate back in the day.

Is this thing watchable for someone with no previous connection to "Halo"? Or does it fall in the "videogame adaption traps"?

Can anyone give me a quick rundown of things I should know before starting to watch this show?

 

[Romulan_spy]

Is this thing watchable for someone with no previous connection to "Halo"? Or does it fall in the "videogame adaption traps"?

Yes, it is very watchable for non-HALO fans. The first episode will tell you everything you need to know.

Can anyone give me a quick rundown of things I should know before starting to watch this show?

Basically it is set in 2552. Humans have colonized the galaxy. There are outer colonies that are trying to secede. Humans are also at war with a brutal religious alien race called the Covenant. The Covevant is seeking some piece of advanced mysterious technology that they call a relic. UNSC (United Nations Space Command) is the military, exploratory, training, and scientific agency of the Unified Earth Government. It is like Trek's Starfleet but much more militaristic. UNSC marines are your basic soldiers. There is also a group of elite super soldiers called Spartans. The most famous Spartan Is Master Chief who is the main character of the show. That's the basic background story. You will get all of that from episode 1. I won't say anything more so as not to potentially spoil anything for you.

 

[DigificWriter]

I don't like the Halo game series, myself, due to its format, and I followed along with the premiere of the TV series just fine.

As far as pertinent information goes, most of what you need to be aware of is presented within the first episode itself, so if you're on the fence about things, I'd say go ahead and watch the first episodeand then decide if it is something you want to continue with.

 

[Romulan_spy]

I am definitely not a HALO nerd. I played a little of HALO 2 or 3 (can't remember which one) back in the day but I am not a big fan of First Person Shooters (I prefer 4X strategy games). I remember playing multiplayer and hating the experience because I was a total noob and other players would just kill me over and over again within seconds of spawning. I do play HALO WARS and like it. I've never read the books. I know the basic plot of HALO. LOL. Knowing all that, I really enjoyed ep 1.

 

[Noname Given]

I thought the first part with the battle on Madrigaul was amazing. The scene of the Pelican dropping Master Chief from the air who lands and starts wrecking the Covenant was awesome.

I do think having Master Chief go AWOL in the first episode might be a mistake. I think it would have been better story telling to build a season long arc where Master Chief slowly question orders and then goes AWOL later in the season.

I also heard that episode 2 is a filler episode which is disappointing. Why do a filler episode in only the second episode of the season?

I'm curious as to why the first season only has 9 episodes when Paramount usually Greenlights 10 episodes per season for the series it produces of late.

 

[Romulan_spy]

I'm curious as to why the first season only has 9 episodes when Paramount usually Greenlights 10 episodes per season for the series it produces of late.

Might be a budget issue. The CGI of the Spartans and the Covenant is probably expensive. Maybe the finale has a big CGI battle. So they could only do 9 episodes on the budget given, not 10.

 

[Noname Given]

Might be a budget issue. The CGI of the Spartans and the Covenant is probably expensive. Maybe the finale has a big CGI battle. So they could only do 9 episodes on the budget given, not 10.

Interesting given that they gave Star Trek Discovery season 2 an extra episode because of the producers writing a large finale script.

There's also the fact that they already renewed it for a second season before an episode of the first season even aired.
^^^
Although they also did that for the majority of the Star Trek series they're producing, and it could also be a result of the covid-19 situation in that it caused such a lull in production across the board that they want to jump start everything to a degree and in effect get back ahead of the curve, but still I can't see them agreeing to an entire second season and all the costs involved oh, if they didn't see some merit in the episodes that were being produced for this new IP (in the streaming/TV sense, as I realize that the Halo IP has been around for 21 years in the PC/Console gaming world.)

 

[fireproof78]

Might be a budget issue. The CGI of the Spartans and the Covenant is probably expensive. Maybe the finale has a big CGI battle. So they could only do 9 episodes on the budget given, not 10.

My first thoughts are to budget, because the equipment would be expensive, especially up front. Besides, streaming services play around a lot with episode count.

 

[David cgc]

I've heard quick season two orders can also happen with very expensive shows to help amortize the costs further; since it takes a lot of money to get things rolling, it can make sense to add more episodes, bringing down the average cost per episode and helping the show turn a profit even if it's not a massive hit.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

The first episode passed an hour. I'm not versed enough in Halo lore to know if there's anything to be upset by, but there were easter Eggs I did spot through having played the games (I think the last one I played was Halo 3 on the 360?).

I'll be back for episode 2. I didn't hate it, I didn't love it either, but am curious to see more which I suppose is a good start.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I also heard that episode 2 is a filler episode which is disappointing. Why do a filler episode in only the second episode of the season?

Nearly every single time I hear something described as a filler episode it's almost always one that focuses on character development and backstory instead of action scenes. Both of which are pretty important to the story.

As opposed to what filler episodes used to be which was mostly clip shows, which if they did as a second episode would be a beautiful tribute to the Clerks animated show which did a clip show in their second episode and only featured clips from the first episode.

 

[Romulan_spy]

Nearly every single time I hear something described as a filler episode it's almost always one that focuses on character development and backstory instead of action scenes. Both of which are pretty important to the story.

Well, I hope ep 2 is good. I personally don't mind an episode that focuses more character development and backstory with little action. I just hope it is not stuff that is boring. So we will see if it is good "filler" or bad "filler".

 

[Tuskin38]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[marillion]

Ok. So I watched it and enjoyed it for the most part. But the fact that the people of Madrigal were driving around in 19th and 20th century era vehicles and using AK-47s really kind of took me out of the element. I find it hard to believe anything like that would still be around in 2552.

 

[fireproof78]

Ok. So I watched it and enjoyed it for the most part. But the fact that the people of Madrigal were driving around in 19th and 20th century era vehicles and using AK-47s really kind of took me out of the element. I find it hard to believe anything like that would still be around in 2552.

The outer colonies are often underfunded, poorly supplied. So, if something is reliable and works then they will keep using it.

Also, 19th century vehicles? You realize people still use horses?

 

[JD]

I don't remember seeing any nineteenth century vehicles.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't remember seeing any nineteenth century vehicles.

I don't either but well, such vehicles are possible with animals.

 

[Tuskin38]

maybe they confused 1900s and 2000 with 19th and 20th centuries. I've seen it happen.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I don't remember seeing any nineteenth century vehicles.

I guess I missed the stream engines and buckboards too,

 

[thribs]

maybe they confused 1900s and 2000 with 19th and 20th centuries. I've seen it happen.

Picard for instance.