I'm a fan, but agree it overdo the female cast thing at times. Especially with the boob logo...
Discovery and "The Orville" Comparisons
- Thread starter Jedi_Master
- Start date
Wow...I don't even know where to begin. I'll just say that representation should keep improving, and not cater to one point of view, even my own.
As for good storytelling, there's no way of even evaluating that yet. But, guess what, you want to draw in a bigger audience? Diversity.
As both The Orville and Discovery appear to have a typical Hollywood level of diversity (a few minority cast members, but majority white) why is this a matter of discussion?
There is nothing wrong with wanting more groups of people to see representatives of themselves on the big screen, and such diversity doesn't take anything away from the quality of the story.
There is nothing wrong with wanting more groups of people to see representatives of themselves on the big screen, and such diversity doesn't take anything away from the quality of the story.
The cast was not a prob I think...having the female GB be totally inept (more so than the original toilet paper busting crew) and then ...man. I just won't go there. I hope de for more, that's all.
Thats my point . I have nothing aganist diversity in general. But it should not be the selling point or primary focus, ONLY GOOD STORY TELLING.
You can have both. But one has to be carefull not to take diversity into stereotypes, tropes and pandering.
It's hard to sell "good story telling" in a thirty second or two minute commercial.
Exactly this.
But that kind of thing happens all the time, usually without that level of drama. American films are remade with local actors for foreign markets. Foreign films are remade with American actors for American markets. Older films with predominately white casts are remade with predominately black casts to capitalize on a different market. Likewise with films made up of mostly men being recast with women.
The brouhaha came about because there's a vocal subset of sexist man-children with antisocial personalities who like to constantly throw out terms like "snowflakes" and "SJWs" and "safe spaces" as pejoratives despite being such wusses that they're intimidated by the very existence of a movie they liked from 30 years ago being remade with women actors (or girl gamers for another example), as if that cancels out the existence of the original or somehow threatens men.
If they had just shut the hell up and stopped turning their misogyny into a crusade the film would have faded into obscurity for being one of a million mediocre remakes. If anything they helped generate more revenue for the film by making it an event.
Wasn't the ghost with boobs logo just a stupid in-movie marketing idea by the dumb secretary played by Thor? It was intended to be sexist and insulting and was rejected as such within the film, IIRC.
Oh, yeah, clearly you have no problem with diversity. That's why you had to repeat "I have no problem with diversity" like a mantra over and over again to convince other people and probably even yourself that it's true.
People like diversity because they like to see themselves reflected in the characters onscreen. They like to be inspired by the idea that someone like them can one day be a part of a positive future. That's not a detriment to storytelling, it's a benefit. Greater diversity in characters presents more opportunities for greater diversity in storytelling.
You apparently are incapable of handling a series not being predominately made up of straight white men, so who exactly is the snowflake in need of a safe space?
You probably didn't realize it, but you just made the case for proportional casting. That would mean 50% women in all shows and films. That would mean about 50% Latinos, 30% Whites, and 10% Asians for films and TV shows made in the Hollywood area. That would mean 66% Asians in films and TV shows made for a worldwide audience. Is that at all reflective of what you're seeing onscreen? Or does your minority rule no longer count when straight white men are the minority?
You're acting as if Discovery has been selling itself as the next installment in the Madea franchise because it has a black lead or that it will be airing on Bravo because it has a gay actor. What are you basing that on? Has any of the very limited marketing made any indication that "This is a show aimed only at black people or gay people"? No. So obviously your problem is the casting in and of itself, and believe that the presence of black women leads and gay supporting cast means it's going to be an agenda driven show rather than just being reflective of reality and modern times where gay people and women of color are an active part of society.
Provide examples where this has any relevance to ST: Discovery, or else drop it. I've had about enough of troublemakers constantly dropping by to baselessly whine about the show being less white and straight than an Osmonds concert.
Last edited:
Over here that sort of fed into the advertising of the film through articles in the papers. The brouhaha too..but mainly the big focus in the guardian and such like was 'hey girl ghostbusters'. Rather than 'hey look, new Ghostbusters.' It was being used as part of the advertising. I think the whole brouhaha was in a large part as you say...people were getting tarred with the same brush for expressing a negative opinion towards it mind you. I started off in the naysayer camp...more to do with not liking reboots and what I had heard suggesting this was going to be...well...what it eventually was. Then I was quite excited and really looking forward to it. Even after the film had come out and had its negative reviews, I was still excited for it to come to home video as that's where I would be watching it, and after all the angry press how bad could it be right? I bought the bluray...twice...one to give away as a gift and.....then I saw the film. Extended version. I think my wife liked it even less than me, but then I was a fan. So yeah, like I said, maybe if a film or show is being heavily pushed for its politics, and less for other things, it's worrying that it isn't being pushed for its quality. I still say there's nothing wrong with casting four women as Ghostbusters, but the script kind of walked that in a direction that wasn't good for anyone. A real shame. Like everyone else I like the kooky one...whose name (character and actress in fact) now elude me. Mind you, it's 2am and have been working. Time for sleep. (I don't think DIS is being pushed for its diversity.)
1) Dont presume to tell me how or what I am thinking. That is libral arrogance of the highest kind, looking for a argument thats not there.
2) proportional representation fair enough, if you have 10 main cast the what 5 white, 2black two latino 1 asian and one gay if its based of USA stat?
No problem with that as that would be appropriate diversity.
3) I took concen of the producers using diversity as a cheap selling point.
4) your a mod and obvious from your sig a die in the wall libral so arguing with you is pointless.
5) Again DONT tell me how I think or twist what I am saying.
I didn't agree with everything, but I loved the concept of proportional casting. This, I hardily support.
1) Anyone who has to repeat "I have no problem with diversity" multiple times in a post is trying to convince you of something, or convince themselves. Most people just know that there's nothing wrong with diversity as a default and don't have to constantly remind people of it because they're going to follow it up with a bunch of things that contradict that assertion. It's like starting a post with "I have no problem with Peruvians, but..." You know there's some Peruvian hate coming. They know what they did.
2) So, how is ST: Discovery not indicative of close(r) to proportional diversity, then? If you have no problem with that then what are you complaining about? It's a tempest in a teapot. There's been zero indication that the show is going to be exclusively focused on any particular ethnic group or gender or sexual orientation more than any other Trek series is.
3) Read the stories from astronaut Mae Jamison or Whoopie Goldberg about the importance of having a black woman character in the main cast of a scifi drama back in the 60s and how it influenced their career choices. You may think that it's not still important today to have characters young women, people of color, LGBTQ people, disabled people, etc. can look up to and be inspired by like them in film and TV, but it is. It just doesn't matter as much to you because your demographic is treated as the default so you don't have to put much thought into it.
4) Boo hoo. Your safe space awaits.
5) I don't have to twist what you're saying. Just as I said, you were completely incapable of providing any examples of how Discovery will focus entirely on stories about people of color or gays or pander to any particular group or do anything every other Trek TV series hasn't done before. Your complaint is baseless. So all that leaves is... not liking the diversity to begin with!
It was, but along with the whole "don't read the comments on youtube" thing which was obviously a nod to the trailer, in my opinion the film(makers) over emphasised the female leads and the backlash. I thought the film was great, and as a comedy it made me laugh, but even if the the references were saying "so what if we're women, we won't let the haters get us down", personally I just felt they went too far and as a result were too unsubtle, and detracted from the film. Same with with references/cameos to the originals.
Sure. It's not just that, though. The devil is in the details. All that aside, I just don't laugh at the dude's jokes a lot.
It's a 2008 episode called Wishful Thinking. I honestly believe that there's no way MacFarlane didn't see that and think it a neat idea. But my dislike for the man makes me unforgiving toward him, too; I'll freely admit that. For example, if a producer I liked pulled the same shit, I'd be more like, "eh, but he/she did something completely original and cool and profound with it, see?????"
So there's always personal prejudice playing a role, too. I'm not exactly objective about that. At the end of the day, I just don't like his humour, and when he then takes someone else's idea, I'll bitch about that ad nauseam.
I kinda wish that every thread about Star Trek didn't have to become an ideological conflict about values associated with diversity.
That said, to answer the original question...I want to watch Star Trek. It doesn't even compare with my interest in something like The Orville. Even if The Orville is a great, funny show, it's not a contest.
Like, it's not even close.
That said, to answer the original question...I want to watch Star Trek. It doesn't even compare with my interest in something like The Orville. Even if The Orville is a great, funny show, it's not a contest.
Like, it's not even close.
They will both sit equally in my "Things to watch" list.
Oh, make no mistake, I'm fascinated by both and will watch both.
But...there's Star Trek...and then there's everything else.
Now, it's then up to each show to hold interest with the quality of the production and writing...but right out of the gate...it's literally:
Star Trek
NFL Football
MLB Baseball
The Orville
All the other useless crap
But...there's Star Trek...and then there's everything else.
Now, it's then up to each show to hold interest with the quality of the production and writing...but right out of the gate...it's literally:
Star Trek
NFL Football
MLB Baseball
The Orville
All the other useless crap
Similar threads
