Discovery and "The Orville" Comparisons

[Roald]

Disliking things without experiencing them because of how others think/behave only hurts you in the long run

Suppose you're right, but I consider neither Trek... and I really don't have the time to delve into another franchise, as I'm already a massive Trek and Disney fan... again: my hatred for Orville and Axanar has nothing to do with the quality of these products, which is- I realise- quite good. But so many stuff out there is good, just don't have to time to see everything...

 

[alex08060]

I consider Orville a poly by fox to kill Star Trek, luckily most Star Trek fans consider Orville bad looking at the ratings.

 

[Charles Phipps]

I consider Orville a poly by fox to kill Star Trek, luckily most Star Trek fans consider Orville bad looking at the ratings.

The Orville is one of Fox's better rated shows right now.

 

[alex08060]

From 8 million to around 3.5 million

 

[starmike]

The Orville is one of Fox's better rated shows right now.

Source? I read last week that it was doing very poorly.

http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/orville-ratings-fox-1202566264/

 

[imdbrefugee]

The Orville is the celebration of the golden age of sci-fi. It's not Seth McFarlane's attempt to compete with Trek, it's his love letter to Star Trek. Discovery is Star Trek responding to a new TV age. None of the Star Trek series hit the ground running so it's unfair to expect Discovery to and it's unfair to compare it to The Orville which gets to play with Star Treks clothes but doesn't have to carry it's baggage.

I don't think Seth Macfarlane is the type of guy who would be happy by the type of factionalism that segments of both fanbases are creating. By all means have preferences, but there is no need for either side to be antagonistic and rip the shows to shreds. It's pervading most of the threads in this forum and It's getting tiresome.

/thread

 

[BillJ]

I consider Orville a poly by fox to kill Star Trek...

Why would FOX care about Star Trek? They don't compete with it at all. This is a ploy by FOX to get people to watch their network, and to keep a key, long-time contributor happy. People thinking it is anything else are just looking for a conspiracy.

 

[fireproof78]

I consider Orville a poly by fox to kill Star Trek, luckily most Star Trek fans consider Orville bad looking at the ratings.

I highly doubt Fox cares that much. They just want to make money.

Also, ratings will not give an insight in to the mindset of Star Trek fans towards this show.

 

[Campe]

I consider Orville a poly by fox to kill Star Trek, luckily most Star Trek fans consider Orville bad looking at the ratings.

Yeah, you’re reaching here.

 

[Uhura's Song]

STD = Orville x 100.

Orville is not without charm. But it is juvenille parody with d!ck & fart jokes. That any trekkie above the age of 12 would prefer that to STD is just sad.

This from someone who thinks TNG was the best Trek & hates JJ Abrams.

Gene's vision of a more advanced, nearly perfect human society came fully developed. Other than the near magical effects of Vulcans showing up, he never showed us how we got there.

Berman era stuff maintained this vibe even in dire circumstances (VOY) or further back in the timeline (ENT). Somewhat inappropriately in my view. The result is more valuable if one sees the struggle needed to achieve it.

Some critics have said the show is too dark. That we need the optomism of Trek in dark times. However, I think the more valuable lesson will be seeing humanity's better angels survive an assault, in wartime, from those who would sacrifice anything for victory, ideals & principals included. And come out better on the other side because of that struggle. That parallels more closely (hopefully) the times we live in. That is the untold story of Trek.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

That any trekkie above the age of 12 would prefer that to STD is just sad.

You’re right. It is. But it demonstrates how bad DIS is. Oh, it tries hard to emulate better shows (Game of Thrones, Westworld, Battlestar Galactica, The Expanse) but so far if fails miserably.

 

[Tesophius]

STD = Orville x 100.

Orville is not without charm. But it is juvenille parody with d!ck & fart jokes. That any trekkie above the age of 12 would prefer that to STD is just sad.

This from someone who thinks TNG was the best Trek & hates JJ Abrams.

Gene's vision of a more advanced, nearly perfect human society came fully developed. Other than the near magical effects of Vulcans showing up, he never showed us how we got there.

Berman era stuff maintained this vibe even in dire circumstances (VOY) or further back in the timeline (ENT). Somewhat inappropriately in my view. The result is more valuable if one sees the struggle needed to achieve it.

Some critics have said the show is too dark. That we need the optomism of Trek in dark times. However, I think the more valuable lesson will be seeing humanity's better angels survive an assault, in wartime, from those who would sacrifice anything for victory, ideals & principals included. And come out better on the other side because of that struggle. That parallels more closely (hopefully) the times we live in. That is the untold story of Trek.

I find that this story has already been told in ENT, albeit it was incomplete, but far more entertaining.

ST:Orville isn't perfect, but it's close to a solid 4/5. I wish I could say the same about STD.

I find what the STD is trying to achieve is an unremarkable goal that is unimaginative and is worthy of maybe two episodes, not a full season. But the problem is that it's not even well done. It is a blatant imitation of several popular shows, like GOT, with Star Treks brand association.

Star Trek is supposed to boldly go where no man has gone before, instead STD is a group of sad emo characters sitting around complaining. At least The Orville is trying to be StarTrek, that's good enough for me at this point.

 

[fireproof78]

ST: Orville?

Why not let the two things be their own thing?

Orville is not without charm. But it is juvenille parody with d!ck & fart jokes. That any trekkie above the age of 12 would prefer that to STD is just sad.

Honestly, this doesn't sound like you've actually watched it, if the only takeaway it is a parody. If it is a parody, it's doing a poor job, since I can't tell what specific thing it is supposed to be parodying, besides Star Trek in superficial ways.

Secondly, why worry other other "Trekkie" are doing with their time? It require no commentary and enjoying Orville doesn't mean I can't enjoy DSC. I actually enjoy both.

Some critics have said the show is too dark. That we need the optomism of Trek in dark times. However, I think the more valuable lesson will be seeing humanity's better angels survive an assault, in wartime, from those who would sacrifice anything for victory, ideals & principals included. And come out better on the other side because of that struggle. That parallels more closely (hopefully) the times we live in. That is the untold story of Trek.

On this point, I do agree. Optimism needs to be challenged and I think DSC is setting that up nicely. However, I think that it also is taking a very slow method towards building that story and not everyone will enjoy it in the piecemeal form right now. It simply doesn't look like Star Trek that has come before, so why not allow individuals decide whether "too dark" is not what they prefer for Star Trek?

There's are reasons why I don't like TNG but I would never begrudge an individual's enjoyment of that show.

 

[BillJ]

Orville is not without charm. But it is juvenille parody with d!ck & fart jokes. That any trekkie above the age of 12 would prefer that to STD is just sad.

It isn't the fart and dick jokes that have me preferring The Orville, though I do love them. It is that the characters are likable.

 

[Tesophius]

The dick and fart jokes aren't even 5% of why I like ST:O

 

[Roald]

I've seen two people knocking down DSC by calling it a GOT wannabe... seriously do you even watch the show? DSC bares little resemblance, and it's so lame to keep insisting DSC is nothing but a 'GOT in space'... seriously, the only common thing is the story arc format and -perhaps- that deaths occur unexpected, but that aside, nothing seems similar... GOT is very graphic, in violence and sex, DSC is not.. GOT centres around multiple characters and settings, DSC centres around ONE character and ONE setting... it really is so incredibly lame to keep pissing on DSC for trying to be 'GOT in space'... And really, we have Burnham worry about abusing a water bear; you know what that it: it's pure Trek. You can underline time and time again that DSC 'fails miserably' but the only thing that fails are your arguments...

 

[SJA]

This thread has become the equivalent of two bald men fighting over a comb...

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

It’s about as lame as calling Orville a "dick & fart" show.

And the comb is mine damn it!

 

[Rahul]

Discovery so far aims really high, but misses the mark by a mile.

The Orville aims pretty low. But it hits on target.

Which of those is preferable is everyone's personal choice. So far, I think DIS is way superiour in character building and even basic storytelling. While the Orville is better at worldbuilding and, yes, tone. I'm not up to date on the Orville, but plan to catch up later, while I always watch the newest Trek episode. The Orville is inferiour to Trek in almost everything regarding quality. But one thing the Orville does way better, is achieving that special "Trek" tone. This wide-eyed curiosity, paired with optimism and a dose of idealism. The Orville is a universe I'd like to live in myself. DIS not so much.

 

[Roald]

It’s about as lame as calling Orville a "dick & fart" show.

And the comb is mine damn it!

Never called Orville that.. And hey, I AM bald......!