Good TV
-
@thenomain Of if you're into the utopia aspect of Star Trek then this show is definitely going to piss you off. It's way grittier than anything Trek has ever seen before.
Exactly this without the Star Trek name I would be a big supporter of STD since it is a decent sci fi show. With the Star Trek name I cancelled my account with a few days left on the promo month I had because it was not worth watching because it was completely not what I wanted from something using the Star Trek name.
-
@thatguythere It is early in the Federation, they are still nailing stuff down, it's the middle of a major war.
I like it because it's not the same shit rehashed over and over again. It's different shit that's been rehashed over and over again.
Also: Chris Isaac. Mmmm. Not quite maybe go straight for as he used to be, but I still enjoy watching him.
-
@thatguythere It is early in the Federation, they are still nailing stuff down, it's the middle of a major war.
That makes great sense from an in story perspective but answers zero of my consumer perspective of is this a product I want. And when I want star trek I want bright and optimistic sci fi.
Bad Analogy time, McDonald's could start making an amazing Pizza but I would never bother with it because If I am at a McD's I am there for the Big Mac so the best pizza in the world is meh at best.
-
@thatguythere Two things:
a) You wouldn't eat great pizza (assuming you like pizza, which come on, who doesn't) because a different company makes it than you usually associate with pizza? That's... interesting.
b) One way to look at it is that social evolution came from somewhere. There was an episode in, I think, Voyager where someone points out after they considered bending their rules that it was specifically for times like these these rules were made; it's easy to be moral in safe, peace times.
As for Captain Lorca, even for his own time, he's clearly suffering from some sort of massive PTSD and his moral code is seriously skewed, and he's been surrounding himself with others as broken as he is. This is made clear by the horrified reaction his own Admiral had over his actions, successful as they may have been.
I find this kind of debate of ethics and civility against one's own self preservation is an engaging one, and Star Trek is all about such debates. I think there will be more.
Also it bears remembering the show is still brand new, and they spent the first 3-4 episodes introducing the new state of things in ways past shows didn't have to; we started in one ship, now we're in another, we were exposed to the reality of Klingon politics, etc so some time was spent setting the pieces.
TL;DR: Give it another chance, IMHO. It might be different but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
-
@thatguythere Two things:
a) You wouldn't eat great pizza (assuming you like pizza, which come on, who doesn't) because a different company makes it than you usually associate with pizza? That's... interesting.
No what I am saying is if I want great pizza I know where i can get it already so why would I go to a place where I go when I want non-pizza. Much like if i want darker sci fi I have places to find that already, for darker sci fi I have always preferred novels.
As far as giving it a chance I watched 3 eps it didn't make me want to watch more, that is all the chance any show ever gets with me.
-
I'm in the same boat as some others with Discovery just not capturing my interest. When I heard there was a new Star Trek I was excited for Star Trek and to me that means mostly TNG followed by TOS and Voyager. What we got was closer to DS9. Which isn't bad but it's not my cup of tea. At least not right now. I wanted TNG-style Star Trek. Thankfully The Orville fills that need quite nicely. Unfortunately I only have so much time for TV so Discovery has been tossed by the wayside.
That said, back in the day Firefly wasn't my cup of tea either. A few years later I watched it and loved it. I'm assuming the same will be true of Discovery. One day in the future, perhaps once the series has wrapped and I can binge watch the whole thing, I may like it.
Then again I may not. I hate what they did to the Klingons. I hate it. It's not like when Gene Roddenberry updated them for TNG, then he was just doing what he would have liked to have done in TOS. This is Bryan Fuller (and I love Bryan Fuller for the most part) taking a Michael Bay sized dump on my favorite Star Trek species. It just doesn't sit well with me.
-
@zombiegenesis said in Good TV:
That said, back in the day Firefly wasn't my cup of tea either.
IIRC Firefly got a poor reception because they aired out of order and didn't make sense. And they jumped around time slots, which will kill a show pretty quickly.
For Discovery, I feel like CBS is paying critics to be very supportive, I keep reading blogs who are like 'wtf is with fans, amirite?' and I wonder what's going on with these critics? TV is flooded with gritty, pessimistic and dark shows right now, is it any wonder many fans are preferring the light hearted optimistic view in Orville, even if it isn't the most stellar writing?
-
even if it isn't the most stellar writing?
Or acting.
Or plotlines that aren't painfully predictable.
Or...I don't hate Orville, but I don't get why it's so popular.
Saying the quiet parts out loud since 1996.
-
@auspice I think it's the tone. People need a scifi show that isn't depressing AF.
-
-
@auspice I wouldn't say the plotines is painfully predictable. They've thrown some curve balls in there. That said I think the show just feels good and, for me, makes me feel like I'm 13 again watching TNG. I get to sit down for an hour and just lose myself in some scifi goodness that doesn't take itself too seriously. I think the cast has good chemistry and I think they're developing some good story lines that could actually have impact on things down the road.
-
@zombiegenesis
See, I rewatch Star Trek eps quite often on Netflix. TNG had very good writing much of the time (I do really miss the 'random sci-fi spec script' quality of that series). And generally solid to great acting (Patrick freakin' Stewart). I can get that whenever I want. This is maybe the thing I appreciate most about streaming. I don't have to wish for the latest inferior copy of a thing. I can just have the thing itself.The Orville just doesn't do it for me (and I dislike Seth MacFarlane as a writer in general, a barrier for entry which is just not going away).
-
Hey, not everything is for everybody right? That's why I hesitate to call Discovery bad really, it's just not for me. I don't mind Seth McFarlane myself but I can certainly see how others might have an issue with his writing. I'm just glad both shows seem to be flourishing. The last time we had something like this (dark and gritty BSG up against Enterprise) Enterprise got destroyed and cancelled.
-
@zombiegenesis
Though Enterprise always had consistently higher ratings and budget than BSG since it was on network (such as you can call UPN a network). That's kind of an apples to oranges comparison. BSG was never a "hit" for Sci-Fi, but it was doing OK by cable standards and was supported in part by a cost-sharing distribution deal with the British broadcaster Sky One (this is why episodes actually aired in the UK prior to them airing in the US, it was part of the deal). Enterprise had to meet pseudo-broadcast ratings expectations, which were higher at the time than they are now. I always saw its problem as that it wasn't pulling in what Voyager had pulled in (and Voyager hadn't been the flagship to a launch a new channel UPN had hoped for to begin with).This has been my tangent about TV shows from 10 years ago.
I guess I probably find Discovery and The Orville incomparable for the same reasons. Very different funding models and expectations, very different creative goals. More TV sci-fi that's not totally ghettoized on Syffy is definitely good for everyone.
ETA: It was Sky One that co-financed BSG's first season, not the BBC. Because I need to correct my tangent about TV shows from 10 years ago.
-
I always blamed BSG for the death of Enterprise because I'd ask someone "Did you see this weeks Enterprise ep?" and then they'd just go on about Battlestar. It was quite frustrating. Especially since I always felt the shows were a bit opposite in how they ended up. Enterprise started weak but ended strong, IMO, and BSG was just the opposite; started strong and ended weak.
-
Lets not forget the biggest draw for Orville.
They can have a short action scene without ten thousand cuts. (Not this is not a shot at Discovery but they way pretty much every action scene gets shot these days even ones in things I otherwise love) -
@thatguythere They can't afford a thousand cuts.
Which is the reason TNG didn't do that either. In fact it's why there are so few action scenes - budget limitations.In a way that's what drives plot - if you don't have space laser battles with weird CGI enemies you have talking scenes and dialogue through prosthetics, which is way cheaper.
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
@thatguythere They can't afford a thousand cuts.
Which is the reason TNG didn't do that either. In fact it's why there are so few action scenes - budget limitations.Afford or not I am glad they do not have them, I would much rather see one well planned and worked short fight sequence then the standard holly wood five minute fights with literally 100+cuts that for the most part look like ass. (For refernce the the Underworld movies)
Hell it almost makes me want to turn on Walker Texas Ranger for the the horrible that was that show at least they could shoot a proper fight.
-
Sometimes you even do it on purpose. I would love to see what Aaron Sorkin would do with sci-fi, tho after "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip", maybe he should just keep within his comfort zone.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos -
@thenomain Walk-and-talks in zero gee?
"If you stand for nothing Burr, what will you fall for?"
-- Hamilton: An American Musical
