Standalone Or Serialized...

[Farscape One]

I was giving some thought on DISCOVERY earlier today, and wondered if the series would function better as mostly standalone episodes.

Don't get me wrong. I enjoy the series, and though I still have some misgivings, I think it will end up being a fine addition to the franchise, and I am really looking forward to season 2, especially since it appears to be more an exploration season than season 1.

Maybe I should clarify myself... in this climate of shows being so arc driven (which I still really enjoy), is it possible DISCOVERY can function as a mostly standalone series? Or is it going to stay more arc focused?

Could the concurrent airing of THE ORVILLE, which is pretty much standalone, actually be a factor in why STAR TREK: DISCOVERY might stay arc driven?

And if THE ORVILLE finishes before DISCOVERY, are they more likely to become standalone?

Thoughts, everyone?

 

[CorporalClegg]

Depends on the story people want to tell. In Disco's case, the writers wanted to tell a serialized story -- as is the current trend in TV (And is likely to remain for some time.)

Orville exists solely in people's nostalgia. Part of that illusion is the episodic format.

And I can say with some certainty that Orville factors very little in Disco's decision making, despite the narrative some try to spin.

 

[BillJ]

Orville exists solely in people's nostalgia. Part of that illusion is the episodic format.

Nostalgia plays a part, but people won't stick around forever for nostalgia. I think it takes the standard Star Trek formula and turns it on its ear a bit, also there's MacFarlane who has a following thanks to his animated shows.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Nostalgia plays a part, but people won't stick around forever for nostalgia.

Which is what I've been saying for a while now. Orville has a very limited shelf life.

 

[BillJ]

Orville has a very limited shelf life.

Personally, I'm not so sure. I didn't even expect it to get renewed for a second season, based on its cost.

 

[BillJ]

Standalone or serialized? Both can thrive, both can suck. Just depends on the quality of the writing.

 

[jaime]

Depends on the story people want to tell. In Disco's case, the writers wanted to tell a serialized story -- as is the current trend in TV (And is likely to remain for some time.)

Orville exists solely in people's nostalgia. Part of that illusion is the episodic format.

And I can say with some certainty that Orville factors very little in Disco's decision making, despite the narrative some try to spin.

Oh it definitely exists. As do other episodic TV programs doing quite well for themselves.
And if the Orville isn’t a factor at any point in DSC, then it’s a bad sign...Trek did well when it looked at what was going on around it, either to put its own spin on trends, or to deliberately set itself apart from them.
Given how much Berman era talent is on the Orville, I think it very likely a fair chunk of the stuff on both shows are watching the other. There isn’t really a contest. Which is probably for the best.

 

[mdtauk]

Ideally I would have it like Deep Space Nine. With a shorter run, and maybe one or two stand alone stories as long as they were amazing, like Inner Light, Measure of a Man, The Visitor, Year of Hell, etc

 

[jaime]

Which is what I've been saying for a while now. Orville has a very limited shelf life.

Apart from the fact it’s on Fox, and they are probably being bought out by Disney, there’s really nothing that would logically lead to that conclusion. I actually suspect it’s going to do very well, unless Trek itself reclaims ground. I think the Orville will be looking at four seasons minimum, and possibly a few emmys.

 

[KennyB]

possibly a few emmys.

Really? What do you base that off of? This years numerous nominations or a gut feeling?

 

[jaime]

Really? What do you base that off of? This years numerous nominations or a gut feeling?

Gut feeling. I don’t actually pay much attention to the emmys themselves, so have no idea about nominations. I tend to hear about them afterwards, and when I think about some of the shows that I hear of winning them in various areas, Orville feels like it has a few of those qualities in common.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Discovery characters have much more depth than Orville ones - and that's because of the format.

 

[BillJ]

Discovery characters have much more depth than Orville ones - and that's because of the format.

I really disagree on this point. I feel like I've gotten to know the characters of The Orville over the 12 episodes they aired. I'm rewatching Discovery, and I still don't feel like the crew have any real depth beyond their angst.

 

[jaime]

Discovery characters have much more depth than Orville ones - and that's because of the format.

Do you mean the HDR?
XD

 

[Mudd]

Serialized is fine if you have great writers. Lousy or even so-so writing reduces it to a gimmick most of the time.

In the case of STD, last year a couple of writers demonstrated the ability to pull off one or two standalones reasonably competently. Their attempt at an arc, however, was pure shit - possibly because the producers who replaced Fuller were constantly trying to course-correct for a massively reworked season-long storyline.

 

[Farscape One]

That's one of the dangers of changing lead writers in the middle of a season... too many changes in the big picture.

I think that was a part of the problem with VOYAGER. I really liked that show, but it did waste a lot of its potential, particularly in their serialization. The premise of VOYAGER lent it be even more serialized than DS9 because of it being the lobe Starfleet ship in the Delta Quadrant. Furst two seasons, Berman, Piller, and Jeri Taylor were the top dogs. Season 3-4, Berman, Taylor, and Braga. Seasons 5-6, Berman and Braga. Season 7 was primarily Kenneth Biller, as Berman and Braga were focusing on creating ENTERPRISE.

DS9, by comparison, had a more stable writing leadership. Berman and Piller for season 1, and Piller and Behr for seasons 2-3, with Behr pretty much the lead from season 4-7.

(Though Berman mostly was not in the writing side of the equation until ENTEEPRISE.)

By comparison, look at JMS for BABYLON 5. Granted, it was designed from the start to be a tv novel almost entirely done by one man (JMS wrote 92 or 93 of the 110 episodes, and tge teleplay for 1 more), so the comparison might not be fair.

My point being that a series always suffers when it goes through too many writer changes. Yes, here and there is healthy so more fresh ideas can be used, particularly with shows that go on long runs.

There is something to be said about a writers room that is not chaotic.

 

[PicardSpeedo]

I'm a huge fan of serialized instead of standalone. This is one of the things that DS9 and Discovery got right.

TNG and TOS felt like there was never any character development, because the writers were forbidden from weaving continuing threads into the storylines. Voyager was slightly less-rigorously held to the same standard. This is why the writing quality for DS9 and Discovery seems far superior in some ways.

 

[BillJ]

The premise of VOYAGER lent it be even more serialized than DS9 because of it being the lobe Starfleet ship in the Delta Quadrant.

UPN put a stop to any serious serialization attempts on Voyager. Including a "Year of Hell" that was supposed to run an entire season.

 

[Farscape One]

I know about that. I was just saying it was a mistake, in my opinion.

Believe me, I know networks/studios tend to be wrong in a lot of creative decisions.

 

[Mudd]

Serialization encourages lazy, sloppy writing - "we'll return to that later." And then, you get Lost.