|
Arglebargle III posted:Well Braga is on the writing staff... On Discovery? No, he is not. Menonsky is, however.
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 15:44 |
|
|
Phylodox posted:It has terrible production values. It looks like a sitcom (which, I guess, it is). It consistently hits the bar for “middling to bad episode of Voyager”. Any interesting ideas and themes are immediately and ruthlessly undercut by its terrible, smarmy humour. Every character has the same voice, Seth McFarlane’s, and I find him viscerally repulsive. Well, it sounds to me like you have a negative preference for Seth and anything to do with him which is fine but you are letting it color your perception of the show. Every episode of the Orville so far would have been an above-average voyager episode. In it's first season it's probably already above average for Trek in general when you look at the whole franchise.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:The post-DS9 Trek timeline is painted into a corner of gently caress by late DS9 and Voyager. There's not a lot left to explore, and there are time travelling narcs everywhere. It's a dead end. As Discovery is showing, its pretty easy to ignore established things about a fictional setting in the interests of the narrative no matter what time period its set. I realize that this is just as much as justification for setting Discovery when it is as much as for any other time period.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
The Bloop posted:Well, it sounds to me like you have a negative preference for Seth and anything to do with him which is fine but you are letting it color your perception of the show. Well, the big difference between The Orville and Voyager is that The Orville is a comedy, and (for me, at least), it fails completely on that score. None of the jokes land, and they frequently detract from the actual, serious story being told (Krill was particularly guilty of this). And it looks super cheap, regardless of my feelings about McFarlane. Like, sub-Voyager lighting, sets, and staging. It does have better ship designs than Discovery, but that’s hardly difficult, and they’re clearly just aping the designs from the 90s Trek shows (like pretty much everything that actually works in The Orville- the music is particularly derivative of James Horner and Jerry Goldsmith’s stuff). Anyways, this isn’t the Orville thread, I’m just pointing out that there’s definitely nostalgia for that 90s Trek, Babylon 5, Space: Above and Beyond kind of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
The Bloop posted:Well, it sounds to me like you have a negative preference for Seth and anything to do with him which is fine but you are letting it color your perception of the show. The Bloop posted:Every episode of the Orville so far would have been an above-average voyager episode. Normally I would never say this, in fact I don't think I've ever said this in my life, but you are being unfair to Voyager. Nothing in Voyager is quite as awful as that first episode of Orville, which is just a mess of embarrassing scenes and sets bought from Ikea. As boring as the Voyager pilot was, at least it didn't feel like a high school film project. Kibayasu posted:As Discovery is showing, its pretty easy to ignore established things about a fictional setting in the interests of the narrative no matter what time period its set. I realize that this is just as much as justification for setting Discovery when it is as much as for any other time period. The real benefit of making it a ToS prequel is that short of holodeck fuckery, hopefully we're safe from phoned-in cameos by the fat, wizened husks of former crew members. Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:The real benefit of making it a ToS prequel is that short of holodeck fuckery, hopefully we're safe from phoned-in cameos by the fat, wizened husks of former crew members. They said this about Enterprise too 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
I only watched the first episode of the Orville, and for all that it has worse acting and vastly worse production values than Discovery, the writing made way more sense than any episode of Discovery so far. The characters didn't have any bizarre behavior requiring contrived explanations, and it didn't rely on the viewer stretching single lines of dialog into crepe-thin patches for gaping plot holes. I can't comment on any other episode because I haven't watched them. And yes, McFarlane is a bit repulsive, which may be why I haven't watched the rest yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:Calling it now, Mudd is a Q. TOS already had a Q character in Trelane.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Lovely Joe Stalin posted:Ignoring the stated criticisms in favour of declaring the critic racist against McFarlane is quite dishonest and defensive. Good thing I didn't do that, then. I was making an observation based on the totality of the post. I actually disagree about the Orville looking bad. Certainly Discovery has a more expensive production and looks "better" in a technical sense, but it's an XBox vs Nintendo argument where more polygons, bigger gigaflops, and two million shades of brown doesn't necessarily make something look better. A lot if Discovery is ugly as poo poo because the art direction is worse. Is also not trying to be the same thing. There's room for PRESTIGE TV and also just regular TV and not everything needs to be cinema quality to be good. As for the humor not hitting, that's a subjective preference as all comedy is and hopefully people can recognize that their preference isn't universal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I only watched the first episode of the Orville, and for all that it has worse acting and vastly worse production values than Discovery, the writing made way more sense than any episode of Discovery so far. The characters didn't have any bizarre behavior requiring contrived explanations, and it didn't rely on the viewer stretching single lines of dialog into crepe-thin patches for gaping plot holes. You should give the rest a shot, each episode has gotten better than the last, and the pilot is so far and away worse than every other single episode of it so far that I kind of wish it didn't exist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:You should give the rest a shot, each episode has gotten better than the last, and the pilot is so far and away worse than every other single episode of it so far that I kind of wish it didn't exist. Yea, episode 4 was really good, not just "Good even though it's Seth" but actually good. The upvote/downvote episode is the only one I've just not liked and that's only because he's got "stereotypical American black guy" as one of his characters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
The Bloop posted:I actually disagree about the Orville looking bad. Certainly Discovery has a more expensive production and looks "better" in a technical sense, but it's an XBox vs Nintendo argument where more polygons, bigger gigaflops, and two million shades of brown doesn't necessarily make something look better. A lot if Discovery is ugly as poo poo because the art direction is worse. This is largely untrue. Discovery’s exterior ship designs are pretty crap, but everything else is fine. The sets, costumes, lighting, etc. all look good, especially when compared to Orville’s cheap, cosplay-looking costumes, rubber-mask prosthetics, flat lighting, and the aforementioned Ikea set design. quote:Is also not trying to be the same thing. There's room for PRESTIGE TV and also just regular TV and not everything needs to be cinema quality to be good. TV as a medium has progressed since the 90s. Technology that would have been reserved for big budget films is now readily available for television production. Other genre shows like Agents of SHIELD, Arrow, and Riverdale are hardly what I would call “Prestige TV”, yet all manage to look light years better than The Orville. Of course, The Orville’s sheer visual ugliness can be seen as one of its selling points since, as I said, it harkens back to those shows from the 90s. That’s my point about nostalgia: a show looking like garbage can actually make people want to watch it. quote:As for the humor not hitting, that's a subjective preference as all comedy is and hopefully people can recognize that their preference isn't universal. I guess, but as I said, it frequently aggressively detracts from what the show seems to be trying to say, and renders most of the characters samey and one-dimensional. Most of the humour derives from the characters being irrationally stupid or inappropriately sarcastic, even when that behaviour is literally unthinkable for functional people. The idea of “What if Star Trek, but everyone is irreverant?” isn’t terrible, but they’re all the same kind of irreverant because Seth McFarlane doesn’t know how to write people any other way. Then again, Family Guy is a very popular show, so what do I know? EDIT: Taear posted:Yea, episode 4 was really good, not just "Good even though it's Seth" but actually good. The upvote/downvote episode is the only one I've just not liked and that's only because he's got "stereotypical American black guy" as one of his characters. That episode and Pria were seriously terrible, and made me come very close to giving up, but About a Girl and Should the Stars Appear were good enough to keep me going. Phylodox fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Not everyone thinks busy+dark=good. Busy and dark can be good, but busy and dark with lots of reflective surfaces is notoriously difficult to light. Discovery's uniforms are definitely the busiest designs in the series history. Including the 2009 film franchise. Saying that TV has progressed is both subjective and vague. Mad Men may have been shot with a painterly eye for detail. True Detective may have pushed the bounds of fancy TV shots. The Sopranos and Breaking Bad presented tightly written thriller/ character studies. Does any of that reflect well on Star Trek discovery? Does it reflect badly on the Orville? The Orville art design for external shots is definitely better than Discovery, I challenge anyone to even tell me what a Klingon ship looks like in general while the Krill have a clear industrial design.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Not everyone thinks busy+dark=good. Busy and dark can be good, but busy and dark with lots of reflective surfaces is notoriously difficult to light. I feel like I was pretty clear about what I felt worked/didn’t work in The Orville. It’s a remarkably cheap looking show with ship designs that are pretty much swiped wholesale from Star Trek: The Next Generation, and consequently look good because of that. The Krill ships are basically romulan warbirds with extra spiky bits. The actual shots themselves, the way the ships are framed and such, is for the most part better than Discovery, which can be muddled and confusing, but still pretty workmanlike and boring when compared to something like, say, Battlestar Galactica, with its dynamic camera movements, frenetic dogfights and such. Of course, all of this is, deliberately or not, forcibly reminiscent of shows like Next Generation and Voyager.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:This is largely untrue. Discovery’s exterior ship designs are pretty crap, but everything else is fine. The sets, costumes, lighting, etc. all look good, especially when compared to Orville’s cheap, cosplay-looking costumes, rubber-mask prosthetics, flat lighting, and the aforementioned Ikea set design. I guess people(you) in TV/IV just don't know how to watch television.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
It's okay when somebody doesn't like The Orville, for whatever reason. I think it is good though. I re-watched this Disco episode, and I didn't mind Mudd's light punishment as much this time, mostly for one reason: it seems on the final run, he didn't kill anyone, even though he could have easily killed e.g. Lorca. In my head canon, he always wanted to only murder people before hitting the reset button, never kill anyone dead permanently.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
MichiganCubbie posted:TOS already had a Q character in Trelane. I would love if they brought back Trelane, but nobody could ham it up as well as William Campbell did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
MichiganCubbie posted:TOS already had a Q character in Trelane. And the Organians, the Metrons, the Excalbians, whoever set up the energy barrier at the edge of the galaxy, and.. did I miss anybody? Fun fact: in the DC Star Trek comics, the Excalbians were able to temporarily hold the Organians in stasis so they could play out their good vs. evil experiments using the Klingon Empire and the Federation. Binary Badger fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Whatever else you might like about this show there's no real excuse for having characters this flat and uninteresting. Michael Burnham is an extremely dull person, the military speech guy is a straight up flat mary sue character.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Mary Sue has lost all meaning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
xerxus posted:Mary Sue has lost all meaning. For real dude. Been in three episodes already and dude hasn't had some kind of deep Tapestry-style character development moment? Shut this poo poo down. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Drone posted:For real dude. Been in three episodes already and dude hasn't had some kind of deep Tapestry-style character development moment? Shut this poo poo down. I get what all the DS9 characters are like and what their flaws are pretty much the moment they're introduced. Sisko is passionate and stern, Bashir is overcompensating, Quark is greedy, Odo is fussy, Garak is gay. Doesn't take 3 episodes at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Drone posted:I would love if they brought back Trelane, but nobody could ham it up as well as William Campbell did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:It's okay when somebody doesn't like The Orville, for whatever reason. I think it is good though. Tyler would've stayed dead until Micheal told Mudd about who she was and forced the last reset.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:Tyler would've stayed dead until Micheal told Mudd about who she was and forced the last reset.  The Soldier speech sucked. But Tilly's response was good. Tilly is good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Isn't killing someone only to bring them back to life technically still attempted murder, torture and assault? The fact that you messed with their minds so they would forget you did it doesn't matter. Also pretty sure keeping someone in a timeloop against their will is some kind of false imprisonment, also messing with top secret materials, attempted sales of military hardware to an enemy, outright treason on the prison ship... Why is Mudd still alive again?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:I get what all the DS9 characters are like and what their flaws are pretty much the moment they're introduced. Sisko is passionate and stern, Bashir is overcompensating, Quark is greedy, Odo is fussy, Garak is gay. Doesn't take 3 episodes at all. Counterpoint: Picard is a completely different character between Encounter at Farpoint and All New Things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
How would you bring Mudd up on charges? At worst you could charge him with conspiracy to take over a StarFleet vessel, there's no way to prove he killed anyone let alone Lorca 53 times, and I doubt they would take the word of a stoner mycologist as hard evidence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Drone posted:Counterpoint: Picard is a completely different character between Encounter at Farpoint and All New Things. Character growth is different from not bothering to define a character in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:How would you bring Mudd up on charges? At worst you could charge him with conspiracy to take over a StarFleet vessel That's a pretty fuckin serious charge. Don't forget unauthorized access to a computer, brandishing, assault with a deadly weapon, piracy, and molesting an endangered species.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
That's why the ending felt so TOS to me. It had an element of improvised frontier justice that makes sense if you're out in the middle of nowhere and it's impractical to bring a prisoner back to civilization for a proper trial. I feel like if you look at it from that angle it works, but I think it falls apart if we're to presume they can shuttle people back and forth to Starfleet command whenever they want.Arglebargle III posted:Don't forget unauthorized access to a computer, brandishing, assault with a deadly weapon, piracy, and molesting an endangered species. Also, wasn't he also wanted for a bank robbery?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Don't forget unauthorized access to a computer, brandishing, assault with a deadly weapon, piracy, and molesting an endangered species. That'd be enough to get one a nice lifetime retirement in New Zealand. The Federation only chooses the most picturesque penal colonies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:How would you bring Mudd up on charges? At worst you could charge him with conspiracy to take over a StarFleet vessel, there's no way to prove he killed anyone let alone Lorca 53 times, and I doubt they would take the word of a stoner mycologist as hard evidence. I've always found the "FUTURE POLICE" part of Mudd's TOS rap sheet hilarious: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:I get what all the DS9 characters are like and what their flaws are pretty much the moment they're introduced. Sisko is passionate and stern, Bashir is overcompensating, Quark is greedy, Odo is fussy, Garak is gay. Doesn't take 3 episodes at all. It is ok and in fact it is good not to make every aspect of a character obvious from the first second he's on screen. Tyler is not a Mary Sue, he hasn't had much time to develop and so far we've mostly seen him through Burnham's eyes anyway. I don't really have a problem with any of the characters so far. I wish some of the bridge crew had more development, because they're interestingly designed and/or hot, but I guess they wanted to make a show that is not focused on the bridge crew.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:The actual shots themselves, the way the ships are framed and such, is for the most part better than Discovery, which can be muddled and confusing, but still pretty workmanlike and boring when compared to something like, say, Battlestar Galactica, with its dynamic camera movements, frenetic dogfights and such. Of course, all of this is, deliberately or not, forcibly reminiscent of shows like Next Generation and Voyager. Orville might be lacking the 2000s-era obsession with "documentary-style" camera movements that BSG embraced, but the exteriors - especially the combat sequences - are way more dynamic than anything Next Gen (and probably at least the first half of DS9) ever offered. And large starships fighting it out are naturally going to be less frenetic than one-man snubfighters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Discovery’s exterior ship designs are pretty crap, but everything else is fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Orville might be lacking the 2000s-era obsession with "documentary-style" camera movements that BSG embraced, but the exteriors - especially the combat sequences - are way more dynamic than anything Next Gen (and probably at least the first half of DS9) ever offered. And large starships fighting it out are naturally going to be less frenetic than one-man snubfighters. Next Generation and early Deep Space Nine suffered from having to use physical models. Later DS9 and Voyager used CGI, and were just about as dynamic as The Orville is now. I’d say the Defiant was probably considerably more nimble, but that might just be rose tinted glasses (or I’m remembering it from First Contact, where their animation budget was probably considerably higher). The point is that the ship battles in The Orville aren’t all that visually striking or exciting. I’m not saying that Discovery’s are, but we’ve barely had any at this point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
evilmiera posted:Isn't killing someone only to bring them back to life technically still attempted murder, torture and assault? The fact that you messed with their minds so they would forget you did it doesn't matter. Drink-Mix Man posted:That's why the ending felt so TOS to me. It had an element of improvised frontier justice that makes sense if you're out in the middle of nowhere
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Next Generation and early Deep Space Nine suffered from having to use physical models. Later DS9 and Voyager used CGI, and were just about as dynamic as The Orville is now. I’d say the Defiant was probably considerably more nimble, but that might just be rose tinted glasses (or I’m remembering it from First Contact, where their animation budget was probably considerably higher). The point is that the ship battles in The Orville aren’t all that visually striking or exciting. I’m not saying that Discovery’s are, but we’ve barely had any at this point. Guess what:  Orville mainly uses models, but they use CGI if needed. Issaries fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 15:44 |
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:You're more likely to like it if you don't care about Star Trek as a franchise. If you're outside the US it's on netflix so it doesn't cost you anything to try. Apart from Netflix not being free...
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 22:45
|
|
