Poll Disco v Lost in Space v Orville FIGHT

[Owain Taggart]

The relative peace here isn't because DIS isn't controversial. It's because the fandom is almost dead, with a few exceptions that still flood money into a television franchise that peaked in the 90s, died in the 00s, and only lives on from a very select circle of people still obsessing about it to the point they are willing to cash out hard for the nostalgia factor of it.

And it's something that was always going to be a problem from the onset of making it a streaming show on yet another streaming service among many. It limits the watercooler talk around the show, and it limits the amount of people that could inherently stumble upon it and start watching it out of curiosity. I think it's important for a show to have watercooler talk, as it's an interesting way of gauging interest and for the word to get around about a show, and generating buzz. But Discovery doesn't have that, and for a franchise's return, I think it's important that it should.

I think it would be good if CBS would premiere the second season the same way they showed the first two episodes. It would create awareness and remind people that it exists.

 

[seigezunt]

And after they get lost again, somehow the Harlem Globetrotters make an appearance.

How come you guys don't have jobs producing TV?? THIS IS GOLD

 

[Lord Garth]

How come you guys don't have jobs producing TV?? THIS IS GOLD

I do work for TV. It's just public access.

 

[middleagednerdgirl]

The result is so even because a lot, if not most, like more than one show. It's also limited in scope because it's a "like or not like" choice.

I won't get to see LIS until enough Netflix stuff I want to see piles up to justify the subscription. I don't want to see it enough to get Netflix just for that.

I liked the first 8 episodes of Discovery, I LOVED episodes 9-12, was disappointed in how the plot was concluded. I like the Orville but don't love it. Some of the episodes are cringeworthy, and even at its best it is an imitation of TNG with less interesting characters. Bortas is hilarious, and the security chief (I forget her name) is at least 2.5 dimensional, if not quite three dimensional. Nobody else even has a character. Still, I enjoy watching it because it almost manages to be what it's imitating, and that is better for me than most of the alternatives.

If it's an up or down vote, I have to say I like both shows, though that does not capture my feelings.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

I love all three shows, and think that they are the best new things TV has to offer. I think that it was time Star Trek was a bit dark rather than be the same sunny optimistic franchise it's been for 50 years.

I have to admit, I hold Trek to a high bar. On the other hand, I do believe that for Trek to continue to limp along as mediocre sci-fi in the age of prestige television, even after tons of money have been thrown at it, is really damaging to the franchise. You can only make so many big splashes and fail to deliver. And now they're asking people to pay for it.

Beyond that, I desperately want Trek to be good again. It has been before, when resources were far more limited, and I don't see why we should have to accept less than that now.

So, what is it about Discovery that you hate? Be specific.

 

[Vger23]

Westworld is amazing, but people expecting that out of Trek (or 98% of TV) are probably setting expectations too high. All I want is to be entertained for 45 minutes. And with a couple of exceptions, DISCO has done that.

Agree...although I must admit that I think Westworld may have been better as a singular season. I was pretty disappointed in the premier episode of S2.

 

[Jadeb]

So, what is it about Discovery that you hate? Be specific.

I don't hate it. I just thought it wasn't very good. I don't want to re-litigate why in a thread where it's off-topic, but I've explained my reaction extensively in my previous posts.

 

[Lord Garth]

I'll try to watch the new Lost In Space tomorrow-ish or the day after.

 

[gblews]

I've seen the first four episodes of Lis and I like what I've seen so far. But I don't see how it is a fair comparison to DSC. LiS is telling a "small" story of a small family trapped on a planet. DSC, at least season 1, told a much larger story about a war between two civilizations.

To me, the better comparison to DSC is The Expanse, even though it is in it's third season. It, like DSC, is telling a larger, serious story about war.

The Orville is an okay show, but it isn't telling a serious story, so not sure why its included here.

 

[Refuge]

So, what is it about Discovery that you hate? Be specific.

Hate is a loaded word I don't hate TV or Discovery but if I could sum up why it appeals less than the option I chose in this poll it is the tone more than anything. I've also liked being invested in my Trek and the sense of seeing a group of people to vicariously share an adventure with. Discovery has been disjointed in both writing and spirit. Maybe in season two we can settle on a team and once the audience (I'll speak for myself), but once I care for these individuals then what they do may matter. PLUS how about a little planet of the week?

 

[Rahul]

I've seen the first four episodes of Lis and I like what I've seen so far. But I don't see how it is a fair comparison to DSC. LiS is telling a "small" story of a small family trapped on a planet. DSC, at least season 1, told a much larger story about a war between two civilizations.

To me, the better comparison to DSC is The Expanse, even though it is in it's third season. It, like DSC, is telling a larger, serious story about war.

The Orville is an okay show, but it isn't telling a serious story, so not sure why its included here.

Not to spoil anything - but the scope of LiS widens as well a little bit over the course of the series. It's first and foremost about the family - but the entire future history of humanity, the Earth, and the first alien contact is touched upon as well. It's just simply more in the background, with the family drama firmly in the foreground.

I honestly would have liked DIS much more if they told a more personal story as well. I really liked Burnham's arc, and are pretty content with all the characters. Where the show utterly falls flat is both the worldbuilding and the larger story arcs - I have rarely seen a (science) fiction show bungle a war arc as much as DIS' klingon interlude. IMO the show would have massively imrpvoed if it told the single story of Burnhams' redemption and her colleagues on a secret mission on a mysterious starship. Instead of trying to ape (and utterly fail at) the main large conflict of DS9 in their very first season.

 

[eschaton]

I honestly would have liked DIS much more if they told a more personal story as well. I really liked Burnham's arc, and are pretty content with all the characters. Where the show utterly falls flat is both the worldbuilding and the larger story arcs - I have rarely seen a (science) fiction show bungle a war arc as much as DIS' klingon interlude. IMO the show would have massively imrpvoed if it told the single story of Burnhams' redemption and her colleagues on a secret mission on a mysterious starship. Instead of trying to ape (and utterly fail at) the main large conflict of DS9 in their very first season.

Yeah, not only did DIS eff it totally up, but they were boldly going somewhere we went before with DS9, ENT, and to a lesser extent numerous Trek movies and episodes which showcase quadrant-spanning threats. In contrast Trek has never really had a primary focus of a season on one character's personal arc. DS9 had secondary threads of this running through, but it wasn't plot central (except for maybe Sisko, where it was nearly ruined by the "epic" elements at the end).

The worldbuilding on DIS was just stunningly bad though considering how important worldbuilding has been for Trek in the past. I mean three different unrelated alien entities all represented by blue sparkles? Spending 90% of the action onboard either the Discovery or four other ships? Relatively small main cast, with maybe a half dozen recurring characters who set essentially everything in motion? You can't do "epic" without painting on a broad canvas, while DIS was a very confined show which felt very "stagy" at times. Just dyad after dyad talking together in rooms.

 

[Jadeb]

I honestly would have liked DIS much more if they told a more personal story as well. I really liked Burnham's arc, and are pretty content with all the characters. Where the show utterly falls flat is both the worldbuilding and the larger story arcs - I have rarely seen a (science) fiction show bungle a war arc as much as DIS' klingon interlude. IMO the show would have massively imrpvoed if it told the single story of Burnhams' redemption and her colleagues on a secret mission on a mysterious starship. Instead of trying to ape (and utterly fail at) the main large conflict of DS9 in their very first season.

I thought that Discovery's much-hyped focus on lower decks characters would give us the sort of smaller-scale personal drama you're talking about, but what we got was neither fish nor fowl. There was a war (offscreen) that might as well not have happened, yet there was very little character work I found compelling. I still don't feel I have a grasp on Burnham's character; Lorca was a waste of tremendous potential; and Culber's death rivals Tasha Yar's for pointlessness.

Meanwhile, LiS managed to make me care about every member of an equally sizable cast and gave everyone something meaty to do. In fewer episodes.

 

[eschaton]

Meanwhile, LiS managed to make me care about every member of an equally sizable cast and gave everyone something meaty to do. In fewer episodes.

The dialogue was one of the biggest differences, IMHO. DIS dialogue was just so universally terrible. It was basically:

1. Someone (Burnham usually) giving a monologue, or
2. Two people alone in a room together having a one-on one conversation.

Occasionally a third person would be present (like when Michael, Ash, and Tilly would hang out) but the third wheel would just stay silent. No one seemed to understand how to script group conversations.

In terms of topics, the conversations were always about either plotting the plot to tech the tech, or Micheal Burnham. We got a few thin slivers of character development in the latter half of Act 1, but this ended once we hit the MU.

In contrast, the dialogue in LiS is very naturalistic, and for the most part exists not to further the plot, but to develop the characters. There were lots of elements which weren't plot-critical - like John and Maureen's marriage troubles (and reconciliation) and Penny's brief crush - but they were great additions. It made it feel like we were actually watching real people rather than stage marionettes doing the writer's bidding.

 

[Mudd]

It's kind of a strange fact of life that in 2018 Lost In Space is a fantastic show and Star Trek is a kind of incompetent hodge podge of "so what?"

 

[Takeru]

I haven't started Lost in Space yet but I'm definitely interested in it.

Discovery was a lot of fun, a bit rough at times but I really enjoyed it overall.

Orville is a TNG fan film with a budget, I enjoy it for what it is but it really is 90s Star Trek and that makes it feel dated despite being brand new.

 

[Rahul]

To be perfectly honest, the new Lost in Space has a lot of problems as well. But those were all script related: In the pacing, and the (lack of) mining of many situations for dramatic potential. There was a lot that could have been cut, extended upon, or should have been handled with more care or explored deeper.

But they are on the right track. The production, hell, the whole execution, was almost flawless, and it's very obvious what the creators are going for, and they are succeeding most of the times.

DIS on the other hand is a show in dire need of a massive retool/overhaul. I actually think the written dialogue was better in DIS than in LiS a lot of the times. And DIS certainly knows how to make dialogue more fast paced and deliver scenes and plot points in a more thrilling way. But the entire show surrounding it has massive problems, and an extreme lack of direction.

 

[Mudd]

By the time I was finished with LIS every minor concern I'd had with it in the early episodes had vanished. The writers know exactly what they're doing with the dramatic aspects of the show; it simply isn't to everyone's taste. And honestly, nothing really good ever will be.

I choked on some of the plausibility aspects of the story, where pacing and "schoolboy science" was concerned, but honestly I've been willing to swallow much worse from Star Trek ever since 1966. So...

 

[Jadeb]

Yeah, it earned so much goodwill from me I was willing to handwave a lot of the science stuff, on the grounds that "it's an alien planet where things behave differently than on Earth."

I think you're right that it won't be to everyone's taste, but, boy, it is to mine. And I hope to enough other folks' that we get a second season.

 

[Owain Taggart]

The one thing Lost in Space truly excels at is the cinematography. Seriously, it's quite a gorgeous show at times, and I love how they use overhead shooting when in the chariot, showing us more of the landscape. So, you end up learning more about the planet they're on, and not only the group of people stuck there. The plotting I feel is quite good, and everything they show feels very deliberate and useful, and you can see where things are heading for the most part. The actors are all quite good, and they all feel ironically 'down to earth'. The chariots are awesome, and they must not have been cheap, as they look quite unique and functional.