Are you a fan of Farscape? That was basically Farscape.
THE ORVILLE - S1, E4: "IF THE STARS SHOULD APPEAR"...
- Thread starter Farscape One
- Start date
Are you a fan of Farscape? That was basically Farscape.
Oh Dude, You just KNOW they are planning to do something where no one knows WTF any of the aliens are saying. I imagine quite a comedic take on that
It seemed to have dual blaster weapons that only shot forward, but wasn't the final volley that took down the Krill in episode 4 a barrage of targeted torpedo type weapons that launched from the dorsal of the main body? They leapt out the topside of the ship, & then coursed behind them to land on the target while it was to the aft.
I'm very interested to see what The Orvilles obligatory "giant space monster" episode will be.....
I could have sworn I saw 4 foward facing tubes on the underside of the forward section in EP 2
With all the d1ck jokes, probably a huge phallic object.
I half expect it'll just be some generic space blob, but the blob crewman (forget his name) on the Orville will look out the window and exclaim "Dad?!" and then the whole plot will be some sort of arch episode for him.
The TV show M*A*S*H indeed operated at a high level, but I think it's fair to say that a big part of the reason was because it was the beneficiary of years of refinements that occurred before the first episode was filmed. The show was an adaptation of a film with an Oscar-winning screenplay, which itself was an adaptation of a novel inspired by the personal experiences of the author in the Korean War at a MASH unit. Plus, the cast and character changes over the run of the series necessitated shifts in tone, some of which arguably were for the better, such as the introduction of B.J. Hunnicutt. These multiple refinements really helped fine-tune the premise and rhythms to find what worked.
While rewatching the episode, I noticed something I missed. In one seen, Capt. Mercer was sending Isaac back to the ship, and we see him walking towards the door to the outside. In the next scene, he is talking to Mercer and the doctor while they are exploring the bioship. Did I miss something? Or is this a mistake?
Isaac returned and joined up with Mercer and the doctor?
Yeah, The Orville covers a lot of story during an episode by eliding this kind of unnecessary scene and trusting that the audience will fill in.
TV has always done this sort of thing, but Trek in recent decades has tended to be very literal and on-the-nose in this regard. For example, a Trek series would probably also have wasted a scene on the crew obtaining their disguises.
And at least one novel.
So funny how omission is a sin on Trek and a virtue on Orville.
Not necessarily to the same people, sorry.
Trek "omitted" an explanation of the Klingon foreheads for decades and no one with any sense complained.
The nitpicking about 'why didn't they explain this or that" is one of my long-time complaints about Trek fandom and the Franchise's increasing tendency to pander to that are just two more reasons I prefer The Orville.
Enjoy! The point stands.
No, given the way it was directed it was a complete misfire.
You have to learn to pick your targets better than that. Save that shit for Timo.
Last edited:
No, given the way it was directed it was a complete misfire.
You have to learn to pick your targets better than that.
NOPE.
TV and movies leave a lot out because viewers most often will fill in the blanks. That's S.O.P. for any TV show or movie. I'm currently writing a script, and in one scene I cut from someone waking up from a nightmare to that same person, fully dressed with their hair still damp, brushing their teeth in front of a bathroom mirror that's covered in condensation that they proceed to wipe off. I did this because the audience will fill in the blanks that the character decided not to go back to sleep and has already taken a shower and dressed. I don't need to spend fifteen minutes showing all of that when I can just cut to the end and let the viewer figure it out.
The question isn't whether or not there has been a cut that jumps forward in time. That kind of cut happens all the time and is fully intentional on the part of the screen writer. The real question is how intuitive it is for the user to fill in the blank time that was cut out with their own imaginations. So you could argue that they should have shown more of a lead-in, like Issac approaching his waiting crew mates before they continue on, but you can't reasonably argue that they should have shown the entire walk to and from the shuttle. Efficiency of storytelling is predicated on excluding the banal. (Unless you're deliberately using the banal to build tension or something...)
The question isn't whether or not there has been a cut that jumps forward in time. That kind of cut happens all the time and is fully intentional on the part of the screen writer. The real question is how intuitive it is for the user to fill in the blank time that was cut out with their own imaginations. So you could argue that they should have shown more of a lead-in, like Issac approaching his waiting crew mates before they continue on, but you can't reasonably argue that they should have shown the entire walk to and from the shuttle. Efficiency of storytelling is predicated on excluding the banal. (Unless you're deliberately using the banal to build tension or something...)
It's become more true over the decades in film and less true of TV. This is convergence - movie editors take advantage of the "TV vocabulary" that viewers have been learning for decades and TV has striven to become more "cinematic."
Trek over-explains in part, perhaps, to satisfy the feedback the writers get from a nitpicky fanbase.
Similar threads
