It seems I see a dash of Galaxy Quest too.
THE ORVILLE Season Two...
- Thread starter Mudd
- Start date
It seems I see a dash of Galaxy Quest too.
Mine too.
Not really. Galaxy Quest parodies the Trek material; for the most part, The Orville simply parallels it to the same ends as the original. Little of the humor in MacFarlane's show turns on the Trek inspiration that's utilized, but mostly on the relationships and behavior of its own characters as in any contemporary comedy.
Yes you can use calculators but like with most math equations it's best to go by what your gut feeling is over what a unfeeling machine, tells you.
Jason
Everything you like about The Orville is stuff you used to like about Star Trek. It is literally Unofficial Star Trek Series, derivative in every way, moreso even than TOS was of Forbidden Planet. Music, costumes, sets, story structure.... they just cut out transporters and added humour in case the lawyers came knocking.
Enjoy it for what it is, but don't pretend it's anything more.
Enjoy it for what it is, but don't pretend it's anything more.
Actually it is a lot more. It actually has heart, which is missing in a shit-ton of Star Trek. It has a feeling of people who truly want to be out there exploring the cosmos. I feel more engaged with this group of characters than any show since Futurama's original run. Where Trek is concerned? I haven't been this engaged in caring about the characters since TOS.
It is funny to watch Trek fans downplay it, when it clearly cares more about "Roddenberry's Vision" than Discovery does.
That is not accurate though. As much as I enjoy Discovery and their characters, Orville is also doing its own thing. Yes, the setting is highly derivative, and plays with common tropes. But, as with other material, it depends more on the twists of the characters and their response to the situation. Orville has interesting and unique characters. So does Discovery. But, let's not pretend that one is some how greater than the other. Each are doing different things with their characters and that should be celebrated.
IDIC and all that jazz.
Ok, but let's be fair. The reason Trek fans downplay it is because of the insistence that Orville is "better Trek than Trek" when Trek means different things to different people. "Gene's Vision?" Which one?
The thing that hurts me the most about being a long time Trek fan? Is simply not caring about Discovery. For all the wink-nod moments and TOS fan service, I see very little of what makes Star Trek "Star Trek". I see a show that is simply living off of name recognition.
It really hurts me to say that The Orville is "better Star Trek" than Discovery. I've spent the prior 42 years being an unabashed fan of the Trek franchise. It is like rooting for the Patriots, Jets or Bills after being a lifelong Dolphins fan.
The one that simply said "we made it", the one that showed we could get along, even when we're different.
I haven’t given a shit about Roddenberry’s vision since I was 12. I enjoy Trek for what it is: escapism. And every once in awhile a decent allegorical story.
Admittedly it’s been a little while since we had one of those.
Discovery, I’ve enjoyed and I probably give it more patience than I should. It’s nothing groundbreaking and that’s okay.
Orville is fine. I get why people enjoy it. I don’t find it to be the amazing piece of sci-fi entertainment that some do. Then again, the banana joke made me chuckle once and then I moved on with my life.
Admittedly it’s been a little while since we had one of those.
Discovery, I’ve enjoyed and I probably give it more patience than I should. It’s nothing groundbreaking and that’s okay.
Orville is fine. I get why people enjoy it. I don’t find it to be the amazing piece of sci-fi entertainment that some do. Then again, the banana joke made me chuckle once and then I moved on with my life.
Last edited:
Yes and no. I think you can go overboard with it, much like anything else. But, at the same time, Trek was his brainchild. So it is tough to totally dismiss what he brought to the table.
It is still at the heart of what Star Trek is, and if you cut it out, you end up with something that is produced as Trek, but comes across as empty. And, that is the thing about Discovery, it feels empty.
Well, yes and no.
Roddenberry didn’t start off with this grandiose version of the future where life was perfect in every way and Earth was a paradise. It was something that really came along in the 70s and 80s. So it’s hard for me to take all of that vision stuff seriously as it has not ALWAYS been there. If that’s what you choose to feel, cool. But it’s not how I see it.
You guys are agreeing with eachother really, Bill is saying that the important part of Roddenberry's vision is that humanity "made it", that's it. The rest isn't necessary ("go overboard"). But you cannot really take that part out and call it Star Trek.
FWIW I think that part is still in Discovery, and it's problems lie elsewhere.
FWIW I think that part is still in Discovery, and it's problems lie elsewhere.
I agree. There are other flaws with Discovery. Pacing was a huge problem with season one. Sticking with Fuller’s war plot was a second. Which leads to the dour tone. They seem to be working on that from what I’ve seen in season two.
As I have said and I think many who support the show agree: the show ain’t perfect. But that doesn’t mean people can’t enjoy it or are less of people for finding enjoyment in it. I get some of that from SOME Disco naysayers. (Not so much Bill. He’s pretty cool.)
A
Amaris
Guest
This. I like Star Trek Discovery, but it doesn't have the same spirit of the previous incarnations, and I say that as someone who loves some of the characters already (Tilly, Stamets). I'm looking forward to season 2, but in all honesty, I'm more excited about The Orville's second season. MacFarlane *clearly* used TNG as his greatest inspiration, but the show is traveling in its own direction, and it's doing it in a way that feels fresh and exciting. They're going brighter, more optimistic, where Discovery has chosen to get darker, more gritty, more pessimistic, and I say that because even with the "we're Starfleet" speech by Michael, it just didn't jibe with the rest of the season up to that point.
Now, DSC is angling to be funnier, a little more relaxed. That is not a coincidence. I think they saw The Orville's rapid success and realized that unclenching might lead to better episodes, and more viewers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Flip that (IE 75% TNG with about 25% TOS) and I'd agree with you.
I'm hoping that is the case. They have a great group of actors on Discovery.
"And those are the days worth living for," as some character or another said.
No, there's nothing of that especially evident in Star Trek these days - not STD, anyway. It's all pretty much rote, dumb action and fan service as Ricky noted.
Last edited:
Similar threads
