• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Orville first review

Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai

Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai

Commander
Red Shirt
Well, the first review has come out for The Orville and it's...not good.

https://www.google.ca/amp/tvline.co...w-fox-seth-macfarlane-sci-fi-outer-space/amp/

My question is, did anyone really expect this to be the "real" Trek series this fall, and if so, why? Because its bridge set looked close to TNG's? I kept wondering why no one seemed to understand that it was a parody and purposefully using that set as an homage. It's not real Trek and was never meant to be.
 
I guess I have to preface this by saying I'll withhold judgement on the series until I see an episode or two, but...

The reviewer is saying it's not funny. It is possible to make a parody work without wall-to-wall jokes (e.g. the Derek Flint movies) but that doesn't seem to be the case here, in Dave Nemetz's opinion.

However, he does seem to be basing a lot of his review on expectations of Seth MacFarlane, rather than expectations of a lighthearted space comedy/drama. Not the best way to start. Using that approach, one could argue that MacFarlane doesn't succeed at singing, because a comedy writer/actor shouldn't have a nice voice.
 
It's all subjective. I never listen to reviews of movies or shows because they often disagree with my own personal opinions. In many cases I have loved movies that have received terrible reviews, or did not like a movie that recieved great reviews. So I never personally give much weight to reviews. Especially with something like comedy it's VERY subjective.
 
Whether The Orville ends up being great or sucking, I don't understand why so many alleged Trek fans were soncertain it would be the more "real" Trek series. It was never meant to be. It would be like saying Barney Miller was the new Dragnet.

And what did they base this on? A similar bridge aesthetic to TNG and colorful uniforms?
 
Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai said:
Well, the first review has come out for The Orville and it's...not good.

https://www.google.ca/amp/tvline.co...w-fox-seth-macfarlane-sci-fi-outer-space/amp/

My question is, did anyone really expect this to be the "real" Trek series this fall, and if so, why? Because its bridge set looked close to TNG's? I kept wondering why no one seemed to understand that it was a parody and purposefully using that set as an homage. It's not real Trek and was never meant to be.
Click to expand...
What the hell did i just read? Macfarlane himself said that Orville was meant to be drama first, with a little bit of comedic relief; not a "Family Guy In Space."
 
D
Jedman67 said:
What the hell did i just read? Macfarlane himself said that Orville was meant to be drama first, with a little bit of comedic relief; not a "Family Guy In Space."
Click to expand...
Did I say I thought it was supposed to be Family Guy in Space? I just wonder why Trek fans would leap on this like it's "real" and DSC is not.
 
Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai said:
Did I say I thought it was supposed to be Family Guy in Space? I just wonder why Trek fans would leap on this like it's "real" and DSC is not.
Click to expand...

It's not hard to understand at all. Seth's press blitz is talking about how modern entertainment is too grimdark and Orville is supposed to be the antidote. That resonates to a lot of people. And tone is all well and good, but you also need proper execution, which seems to be what the reviewers are complaining about, not the mission-statement.
 
Jedman67 said:
I was referencing the linked article, not *you*.
Click to expand...
Okay, I can understand that.

Bottom line is this; only Trek is Trek. All else might be good, even great sci-fi. I'm a huge fan of Firefly and Battlestar Galactica (the reboot). In many ways, both of those series are better executed than a lot of Trek has been. But neither have replaced Trek. And The Orville won't, either.

Discovery does look different, and yes, it looks like they're going for the whole "visual reboot" thing. This bothers the purist in me, but not the part of me that enjoys dramatic television. Trek had gotten too same-old, so humdrum. It needs to be shaken up again, and I'm glad that DSC is going to do that. What matters to me is: will they truly respect the history (and by that I mean story and character history, I do not mean "have they obsessively gone over everything with a fine-toothed comb to make sure not the smallest, most inconsequential detail is covered") and will it be well-written? If those aren't true, I'll be disappointed, but I'll probably keep watching to have an informed stance on the series as a whole, rather than watch three episodes and feel like I know everything about it. Some of the stuff that has the continuity pornographers' panties in a knot is just dumb stuff, like one guy I encountered swore this couldn't be canon because the shuttle bays have force fields. Kirk's didn't (or at least one episode behaved as if it didn't), so therefore it was a canon violation. I just...what? TOS violated its own canon in countless, much worse, ways, and he's worried that one episode supposedly establishes that Kirk's shuttle bay never had force fields, and that, moreover, this means absolutely no starships did at that time?
 
So Orville will not be "Star Trek" but Macfarlane is on record as wanting to bring back the feel of TNG to TV with Orville. Of course it will be different - for one, while TNG had humorous moments on occasion, Orville seems to be leaning a little towards "dramady" rather than a straight up serious show.
 
Jedman67 said:
So Orville will not be "Star Trek" but Macfarlane is on record as wanting to bring back the feel of TNG to TV with Orville. Of course it will be different - for one, while TNG had humorous moments on occasion, Orville seems to be leaning a little towards "dramady" rather than a straight up serious show.
Click to expand...
The problem comes in when fans suggest that Orville's deliberate TNG look makes it "more real Star Trek" than actual Star Trek. It's an aesthetics thing. If Trek's aesthetics had never changed whatsoever, barring minor changes, yeah, I'd be annoyed that DSC is deliberately trying to look different. But the films went for a different look, as did TNG, and just like both of those situations, this is the first new prime Trek in over a decade. So it does, and should, look strikingly different.
 
Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai said:
My question is, did anyone really expect this to be the "real" Trek series this fall...It's not real Trek and was never meant to be.
Click to expand...

Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai said:
I don't understand why so many alleged Trek fans were so certain it would be the more "real" Trek series.
Click to expand...

Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai said:
I just wonder why Trek fans would leap on this like it's "real" and DSC is not.
Click to expand...

Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai said:
The problem comes in when fans suggest that Orville's deliberate TNG look makes it "more real Star Trek" than actual Star Trek.
Click to expand...

Here's a question: Since you brought it up in every post you've made in this thread, could you please tell me where all these people are that you're saying think The Orville is "real" Trek?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Maurice
Carol Burnett & The First Star Trek TV Spoof?
Replies
11
Views
806
Maurice
Maurice
E
  • Locked
Why Star Trek Discovery Failed to Impress Hardcore Fans
Replies
6
Views
2K
T'Bonz
T'Bonz
Hawku
What does ChatGPT say about your fanfic?
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Sgt_G
Sgt_G
A
Transition and explanation of SNW into TOS technology
6 7 8
Replies
158
Views
8K
Henoch
Henoch
McCovey Cove
Star Trek: First Duty (PC #3) - "The Razor's Edge" (COMPLETED)
Replies
0
Views
389
McCovey Cove
McCovey Cove
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top