Sign in to follow this  
Jay

The Orville vs Discovery: 9 episodes in

The Orville's first 9 episodes vs Star Trek: Discovery's first 9 episodes  

13 members have voted

  1. 1. Which set of episodes do you prefer?

    • The Orville's first 9 episodes are better than Star Trek: Discovery's first 9 episodes
    • Star Trek: Discovery's first 9 episodes are better than The Orville''s first 9 episodes
    • I have not seen all 9 episodes of both shows yet.


Recommended Posts

As of today, each of these new sci-fi shows have aired their first 9 episodes.  Both have episodes remaining in their first seasons, and both have already been renewed for season 2.

 

Discovery has been called by some  "Star Trek In Name Only" while The Orville has been called by some "Star Trek in everything but name".

 

If you have seen all 9 episodes of both shows, which do you thing has had a stronger beginning?

 

Which has a better chance of an overall better first season?

Which has a better chance of an over all multi-seasonal satisfying show?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I need to say that I've never been a fan of STAR TREK in any incarnation.

 

But I like the new DISCOVERY -- both the fact that it has a more pronounced story arc, and the fact that it's a bit more serious than the previous cheeseball versions. It's still not my cup of "pointy ear" sci fi, but within that genre, it's about as close as it gets. It's unquestionably the best of STAR TREK I've seen over the years, and one closer to my preference.

 

I like THE ORVILLE too, but I had hoped it would spoof the genre more. As it is, it's really neither foul nor fish. But as a longtime Macfarlane fan, I'll keep on watching.

 

Ultimately, my favourite of these is DISCOVERY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Orville! I look forward to it every week, moreso than Discovery.  With Discovery, even if I enjoy it, I know there's at least one thing every episode that's going to annoy the hell out of me. Plus those Klingons.

 

Discovery is Trek in name only, and Orville is Trek in everything but name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nick1066 said:

Discovery is Trek in name only, and Orville is Trek in everything but name.

 

22 minutes ago, Jay said:

Discovery has been called by some  "Star Trek In Name Only" while The Orville has been called by some "Star Trek in everything but name".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2017 at 10:51 PM, Nick1066 said:

Speaking of which, frankly I'm stunned that CBS and Paramount have not already filed a lawsuit.  It's not a homage to Star Trek, or even a parody of Star Trek. It essentially is Star Trek in everything but name.

On 9/20/2017 at 7:26 PM, Jay said:

It was not even really a parody of Star Trek or an homage to Star Trek: It basically IS Star Trek

On 10/5/2017 at 10:00 PM, Jay said:

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Viacom has a team of lawyers ready to sue these guys; This show isn't really a parody or homage to Star Trek, it basically IS Star Trek

 
 
1

At least I only copy from myself! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you watched all 9 episodes?  I'd say the special effects are a little better now than earlier on.  The budget is still clearly considerably less than Discovery's, though, for sure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thor said:

But I like the new DISCOVERY -- both the fact that it has a more pronounced story arc, and the fact that it's a bit more serious than the previous cheeseball versions.

 

Incorrect on both accounts, but since you never watched star trek I don't blame you for thinking that.

 

 

22 minutes ago, Jay said:

Have you watched all 9 episodes?  I'd say the special effects are a little better now than earlier on.  The budget is still clearly considerably less than Discovery's, though, for sure

 

Have you watched the first Nine episodes of Discovery, Jason?

I read they spent between 6 to 10 million on an episode, but I'm frankly not seeing it on the screen. The first two and the mid-season finale look like there was some money put in, the others look quite a bit cheaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really. It doesn't look like they're spending Game Of Thrones level money on this.

 

It looks fine, with some CGI thats actually quite ropey at times. But all TV Star Trek has had that issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stefancos said:

Have you watched the first Nine episodes of Discovery, Jason?

 

I have not watched a second beyond the 40 minutes or so of the pilot I saw over the air on CBS the night it premiered

 

1 hour ago, Stefancos said:

I read they spent between 6 to 10 million on an episode, but I'm frankly not seeing it on the screen. The first two and the mid-season finale look like there was some money put in, the others look quite a bit cheaper.

 

The cinematography and special effects in the pilot of Discovery are better than anything seen in The Orville so far


The Orville doesn't look bad, it just doesn't look expensive, like the pilot of Discovery did.  But I haven't seen the rest of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Stefancos said:

 

Incorrect on both accounts, but since you never watched star trek I don't blame you for thinking that.

 

I've watched a LOT of STAR TREK. All the films, several episodes of ALL of the series. But it's just not my cup of tea. It's too cheesy. DISCOVERY tries to do something closer to my preference (much like STARGATE: UNIVERSE was the only one of those shows that I liked).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

I've watched a LOT of STAR TREK. All the films, several episodes of ALL of the series. But it's just not my cup of tea. It's too cheesy. DISCOVERY tries to do something closer to my preference (much like STARGATE: UNIVERSE was the only one of those shows that I liked).

 

No one who likes Stargate, in any of its incarnations, has any business calling Star Trek "cheesy."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Stefancos said:

Have you watched the first Nine episodes of Discovery, Jason?

I read they spent between 6 to 10 million on an episode, but I'm frankly not seeing it on the screen. The first two and the mid-season finale look like there was some money put in, the others look quite a bit cheaper.

Irrelevant. If you were a true trekker, you would understand that character and story are far more important than flash and budget.  With that said, I unfortunately do not have CBS all access so can't judge Discovery.  I will have to defer to others who truly understand what Star Trek is at its core and I question based on your post if you do.

 

I will say having watched all of Orville, it gets better and is very entertaining but feels like what a high school student thinks Star Trek is about so it is very retro and somewhat juvenile rather than forward thinking. It is like a 1990's (maybe 1980's) version of Star Trek with modern production.  Give me Spock, Bones, Jim any day over anything that exists now but it seems that what I consider the core of ST just doesn't exist anymore.  It belonged in its time and place and was great. 

 

Orville's score is more star trek than Discovery's premiere episode (sorry can't speak to further episodes) but that is also part of what gives it an 80's/90's vibe.  Nothing wrong with retro scoring if it is done exceptionally well and originally (e.g. Star Wars: A New Hope). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. Calls me out for being a true Trekkie, and then says he hasn't seen Discovery. 

I never said Star Trek needs to be expensive to be good.

 

4 hours ago, karelm said:

Orville's score is more star trek than Discovery's premiere episode (sorry can't speak to further episodes) but that is also part of what gives it an 80's/90's vibe.  Nothing wrong with retro scoring if it is done exceptionally well and originally (e.g. Star Wars: A New Hope). 

 

Since you haven't seen DSC and I haven't seen The Orville lets not argue over who is more ignorant, ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

 

No one who likes Stargate, in any of its incarnations, has any business calling Star Trek "cheesy."

 

 

Yep, that is even worse. :lol:

 

14 hours ago, Thor said:

First, I need to say that I've never been a fan of STAR TREK in any incarnation.

 

But I like the new DISCOVERY -- both the fact that it has a more pronounced story arc, and the fact that it's a bit more serious than the previous cheeseball versions. It's still not my cup of "pointy ear" sci fi, but within that genre, it's about as close as it gets. It's unquestionably the best of STAR TREK I've seen over the years, and one closer to my preference.

 

 

 

While they upgraded the look and the captain is somewhat more unorthodox, I still have too many moments where I think that nothing has changed. The main thing I don't like about Trek shows (the moral exposition) is still there. But, yeah, at least I can watch it, and that is something I can't say about every Star Trek incarnation. So even though I'm still not a fan, we kinda agree, Thor. How about them bananas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

 

No one who likes Stargate, in any of its incarnations, has any business calling Star Trek "cheesy."

 

 

STARGATE: UNIVERSE is not cheesy. It's dark and foreboding, with only a tiny glimpse of the "pointy ear sci fi" that the previous incarnations have. It's obviously modelled more on the BATTLESTAR: GALACTICA reboot, which is VERY much my cup of tea. Blows all of these shows out of the water.

 

Strangely, though, I'm a fan of BABYLON 5. I think it may be because of nostalgic reasons and because the mythological and political storylines are so deep, I'm less alienated (no pun intended) by the silliness of the entire set-up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thor said:

 

STARGATE: UNIVERSE is not cheesy. It's dark and foreboding, with only a tiny glimpse of the "pointy ear sci fi" that the previous incarnations have. It's obviously modelled more on the BATTLESTAR: GALACTICA reboot, which is VERY much my cup of tea. Blows all of these shows out of the water.

 

Strangely, though, I'm a fan of BABYLON 5. I think it may be because of nostalgic reasons and because the mythological and political storylines are so deep, I'm less alienated (no pun intended) by the silliness of the entire set-up.

 

The BSG "reboot" was fantastic. It was also very much inspired by Deep Space Nine (in fact it was created by the same individual), the last four seasons of which at least were both decidedly "uncheesy" (mostly) and could be quite "dark and foreboding".  And for that matter its "mythological and political storylines" are in fact much deeper than your Babylon Five.

 

Frankly, Thor, I'm not sure you've seen enough Star Trek do dismiss it as "cheesy" outright.  That's called an uninformed opinion.  You're entitled to it, of course, but probably better to just say "I haven't seen enough Star Trek to really have an informed opinion on it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

It was also very much inspired by Deep Space Nine (in fact it was created by the same individual)

 

Ronald D. Moore didnt create DS9, but he did serve as of it's main writers and producers for about 5 seasons of it. And yes, there's a lot of elements from Deep Space Nine that found their way into BSG. From the posh, English doctor (Bashir and Baltar look almost identical) to the clone nature of the Cylons to the general look and feel of some of the set design, to the whole concept of doing a dark(er) sci-fi show with long story-arcs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

19 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

 

Ronald D. Mooredidnt create DS9,

1

 

I know...I wasn't very clear.  I was referring to the BSG reboot.

 

19 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

And yes, there's a lot of elements from Deep Space Nine that found their way into BSG. From the posh, English doctor (Bashir and Baltar look almost identical) to the clone nature of the Cylons to the general look and feel of some of the set design, to the whole concept of doing a dark(er) sci-fi show with long story-arcs.

 

 

Not to mention the religious & spiritual overtones, introducing moral ambiguity among some of the characters, the idea of the "good terrorist", divided loyalties....and of course Kira/Kara!  There was actually one BSG episode, and right now I can't recall what it is, that seemed like a direct remake of one from DS9.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always found it interesting that Moore joined the Voyager writing room after DS9 ended and basically left angry after one of two episodes. and basically did a DS9/Voyager mash-up for his own show. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stefancos said:

I've always found it interesting that Moore joined the Voyager writing room after DS9 ended and basically left angry after one of two episodes. and basically did a DS9/Voyager mash-up for his own show. 

 

Yeah, I've always thought the same thing. Moore was famously frustrated on Voyager (with good reason) and apparently it cost him his friendship with Brannon Braga.  I think I heard he wrote a spec script called "The Trial of Katherine Janeway" in which the crew mutinied and put her on trial for all the stupid decisions she made since getting them stranded in the Delta Quadrant.  Probably not a place Voyager was ever going to go.

 

He had some valid complaints about Voyager, mainly with the reset button...why did the ship continue to look pristine every week...stuff like that. And the show never really tackled how a crew would respond stuck together for so long in deep space so far from home. As you point out, Moore dealt with all this on BSG, but honestly no Star Trek show at the time was ever going to have that tone.

 

 

57 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Roslin isnt unlike Janeway in her toughness.

 

Roslin never struck me as anywhere near as self-righteous as Janeway. And she mostly avoided Janeway's poor decision making. Though you're right that both are pretty tough broads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than self-righteous I've always seen Janeway are very pragmatic, and very aware she's the final word when it comes to Starfleet and the Federation for the next 70 years. 

I've always enjoyed it when she was written as grim but determined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She was pragmatic, but this IMO was often undermined by her self-righteousness and in particular poor decision making.  I agree that, tough/grim/determined Janeway was the best version of that character (e.g. see Equinox) vs. idiot/poor decision making Janeway (e.g. see Basics) vs. self-righteous Janeway (see Equinox, ibid). :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voyager should have been about a Captain who makes a decision that has her ship and crew trapped 70 years from home, and who would because of guilt and regret be prone to taking excessive risks to try and get home faster.

 

Chakotay could be the second officer taking a more objective view at the situation. Tuvok could be a calming influence using his impeccable logic.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Voyager should have been about a Captain who makes a decision that has her ship and crew trapped 70 years from home, and who would because of guilt and regret be prone to taking excessive risks to try and get home faster.

 

 

Yeah but that's more or less what the show's about, right?

 

Did you ever re-watch Equinox?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

Frankly, Thor, I'm not sure you've seen enough Star Trek do dismiss it as "cheesy" outright.  That's called an uninformed opinion.  You're entitled to it, of course, but probably better to just say "I haven't seen enough Star Trek to really have an informed opinion on it."

 

How, exactly, do you know how much STAR TREK I've seen?

 

As a sci fi fan, I've seen MORE than enough to form an opinion -- on ALL incarnations, including DEEP SPACE NINE. I don't like any of it. Untill DISCOVERY, that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

How, exactly, do you know how much STAR TREK I've seen?

 

 

Um, because you told us...

 

19 hours ago, Thor said:

 

All the films, several episodes of ALL of the series. But it's just not my cup of tea. It's too cheesy. DISCOVERY tries to do something closer to my preference (much like STARGATE: UNIVERSE was the only one of those shows that I liked).

 

 

So that's "several" episodes of a series that spans 740+ episodes and a combined 31 seasons (to date).  

 

And it's fine that you don't like any of it. It's fine that it's not your cup of tea. But if you had really watched as much as you claim, you wouldn't dismiss it as "cheesy"...or at least you shouldn't. Especially DS9, whose progeny you profess to love.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to vote for "I have not seen all 9 episodes of both shows yet" because I haven't started Star Trek yet,

but I definitely very much enjoy The Orville and look forward to the next episode every week.

Knowing how much I like upbeat adventure and dislike darkness (enough of that in real life!),

I'm not particularly looking forward to this new incarnation of Star Trek. Sounds like it won't really be my cup of tea.

 

Where is another Stargate SG-1 when you need it? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nick1066 said:

So that's "several" episodes of a series that spans 740+ episodes and a combined 31 seasons (to date).  

 

And it's fine that you don't like any of it. It's fine that it's not your cup of tea. But if you had really watched as much as you claim, you wouldn't dismiss it as "cheesy"...or at least you shouldn't. Especially DS9, whose progeny you profess to love.

 

That's extremely presumptious of you. Do I really have to list the exact number of each of the series and films I've seen for you to think my view on STAR TREK is valid? What is the amount one must watch in order to have an informed opinion, in your view? 

 

 If I say I've seen a lot of STAR TREK, I've seen a lot of STAR TREK. And if I say I think it's cheesy or any other negative evaluation, that's my right. I don't really have to justify my opinion to you beyond that.

 

I realize you're probably a big STAR TREK fan, but you have to realize that not everyone is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

That's extremely presumptious of you. Do I really have to list the exact number of each of the series and films I've seen for you to tolerate my view on STAR TREK? If I say I've seen a lot of STAR TREK, I've seen a lot of STAR TREK. And if I say I think it's cheesy or any other negative evaluation, that's my right. I don't really have to justify my opinion to you beyond that.

 

Yes, yes, Thor, it's your right.  You have a perfect right to all of your opinions. And they're GOOD opinions, you should be proud of them! Never let anyone tell you that your opinions don't count. There there.

 

(slowly backs away)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this