Skeptics Guide to the Universe Forums

Media => TV & Movies => Topic started by: Eternally Learning on May 16, 2017, 03:53:53 PM

Title: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on May 16, 2017, 03:53:53 PM
Not a huge McFarlane fan, but he is talented and loves Star Trek so I have hope. Also, this seems like a sequel to the show in Galaxy Quest, especially the look of the show. Hopefully this turns out to be something special.

https://youtu.be/dnkXUKvmlG0
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on September 10, 2017, 10:00:35 PM
That was boring and coated with McFarlame's oily sheen.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 10, 2017, 10:19:57 PM
For lighthearted sci-fi, I'd give it a 7/10.  I'll keep watching.

It's like Star Trek: TNG meets Galaxy Quest.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on September 11, 2017, 04:28:03 AM
The look was pretty good and I'm happy they didn't mock the underlying setting of the show. The jokes and gags almost all fell flat for me though. I mean if you're going to go for an everyman of the future that's fine, but how far is an officer going to get who acts like the captain of this show? IDK, I can see how this show could mature and be better once it finds it's stride, and the first episode was enjoyable enough that I'm hoping that happens.  Probably the thing I found most off-putting when comparing this to Trek though, was that for a premiere episode the plot was way too centered on the relationship of Captain and XO and just treated the mission as a backdrop. I imagine that maybe next episode will explore the macguffin a bit more, but I would have preferred this episode to focus on that and maybe assign the ex wife at the end as a teaser for next week. Would have done a better job establishing the main character BEFORE introducing the conflict.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on September 11, 2017, 04:28:26 AM
For lighthearted sci-fi, I'd give it a 7/10.  I'll keep watching.

It's like Star Trek: TNG meets Galaxy Quest.

It wishes it were like that.  It is but a cheap knock off of them, at best.  Where women are still casually referred to as bitches for the lulz.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: seamas on September 11, 2017, 10:39:45 AM
I didn't even know about this, was  busy watching the Giants offensive line crumble. We did a brief switch of stations and saw the last 2 seconds or so.
My kids both love Star Trek (TOS) and Galaxy Quest. We might give this a shot next week.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Mormegil on September 15, 2017, 02:36:44 PM
I didn't even know about this, was  busy watching the Giants offensive line crumble. We did a brief switch of stations and saw the last 2 seconds or so.
My kids both love Star Trek (TOS) and Galaxy Quest. We might give this a shot next week.

First episode is available for free on Google Play, iTunes, Hulu, and oddly, Yahoo.

https://view.yahoo.com/show/the-orville
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 16, 2017, 05:03:21 AM
women are still casually referred to as bitches for the lulz.

some people prefer to be happy than grumpy.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 16, 2017, 07:00:15 AM
finished watching that episode, and in the final scene I realized I'd completely missed whereever they'd referred to women as bitches for the lulz.

which scene was it? or is there an ep 2 out that I couldn't find?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on September 16, 2017, 09:27:17 AM
I missed the first 1/3 of the episode.  What I saw was ok but I'm still not sure . I'll watch it but I can see how McFarlane can get to you after a bit. It has potential.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on September 17, 2017, 09:47:30 PM
Dammit, this plotline and high concept needs better writers, better characters, better actors, better show bible / internal world logic, and consistent theming.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 17, 2017, 10:43:02 PM
Better than the pilot!

Edit: And you know what?  Zoos are kind of evil. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on September 18, 2017, 12:42:17 AM
Dammit, this plotline and high concept needs better writers, better characters, better actors, better show bible / internal world logic, and consistent theming.

I think the second episode was a lot better than the first so at least it's a step in the right direction.  Hell, it even made me chuckle a few times, especially the doctor's reaction to being placed in command.  I'm not sure I'm on board with making the captain the butt of a million jokes though.  I mean, it's fine for an all-out comedy, but for a show that's trying to balance comedy with drama it actively undermines the character.  I can't say I find any of the actors to be amazing, but they haven't had much opportunity to be in the show and I only know McFarlane and Padalecki.  I'm curious what complaints you have about the show bible or internal logic though; I can't say I've noticed anything at this point that bothered me and honestly, it doesn't feel like we really know much about what the show bible might say.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 18, 2017, 11:27:47 AM
a zoo episode, eh.
(https://i.imgur.com/YdnLGqd.png)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Mormegil on September 18, 2017, 03:03:16 PM
a zoo episode, eh.

It's been done at least as far back as "The Twilight Zone." (http://"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_Are_Alike_All_Over").  I did enjoy the way they resolved it.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 19, 2017, 01:35:06 AM
a zoo episode, eh.

It's been done at least as far back as "The Twilight Zone." (http://"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_Are_Alike_All_Over").  I did enjoy the way they resolved it.

yeh. it was just funny to see two in the same week
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Tofu on September 19, 2017, 05:23:26 AM
I'm gonna watch the first two episodes tonight. McFarlane has never been a favourite of mine either, but 1000 Ways to Die in the West (or something like that) had some really hilarious moments and swayed me towards giving him some leeway.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 19, 2017, 09:26:46 AM
It really helps that this is an ensemble cast.  MacFarlane still hasn't figured out use of his body and facial expressions. 

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Tofu on September 20, 2017, 02:26:40 AM
It really helps that this is an ensemble cast.  MacFarlane still hasn't figured out use of his body and facial expressions.

I think you're right. I must say, i really enjoyed how much of a throwback it was to the original Star Trek series and as much as I'd like to give MacFarlane credit for his creation here, the show would be better without him acting in it. All of the scenes in episode 2 with his participation were dull or contrived. Then again, without him this would mostly just be a remake. I hope he recognises the weaknesses and plugs them to make the series a success.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 20, 2017, 03:23:14 AM
personally I don't think the show justifies a full length lazy long Star Trek style intro music sequence.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: 2397 on September 20, 2017, 04:25:38 AM
Did he create this series because he wanted to act in it?

I haven't watched it yet, but seeing him in the promotional material makes it feel like something's off.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 20, 2017, 07:48:01 AM
he wanted to act in it

and didn't want to have to spend hours in the make-up chair.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on September 20, 2017, 08:38:43 AM
At this point I feel like MacFarlane's acting and his character are the weakest parts of the show thus far.  His relationship with his Ex/XO also clashes a lot with the premise of the show IMO as well. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on September 20, 2017, 09:04:59 AM
At this point I feel like MacFarlane's acting and his character are the weakest parts of the show thus far.  His relationship with his Ex/XO also clashes a lot with the premise of the show IMO as well.

Yes.  That and the tech is so inconstant.  Even in the first two eps, I can already see where they have written themselves into a corner with stuff that will tech their way out of too many problems.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on September 20, 2017, 09:22:13 AM
At this point I feel like MacFarlane's acting and his character are the weakest parts of the show thus far.  His relationship with his Ex/XO also clashes a lot with the premise of the show IMO as well.

Yes.  That and the tech is so inconstant.  Even in the first two eps, I can already see where they have written themselves into a corner with stuff that will tech their way out of too many problems.

At least that is a huge sci-fi trope. This show having a comedic bent also means that simply nodding and winking about such things wouldn't be too offensive if it comes up, though it does undermine the drama they seem to be aiming for.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: John Albert on September 20, 2017, 10:15:24 AM
I tried with The Orville. It just made me want to go back and watch some classic Trek, so I did!

That's something, I guess.

Rick and Morty though, great googly moogly that show fucking kills! 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 21, 2017, 08:35:16 PM
Uh oh::
Quote
About a Girl

The Orville crew is divided between cultures when Bortus and Klyden debate if their newly born offspring should receive a controversial surgery.

This is going to be a high wire act.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 22, 2017, 12:11:03 AM
I liked this episode of Star Trek and will continue watching. 

That said, the writing could've been better.  They spent a lot of time on cross-species comparisons which were irrelevant to either what Bortus/Klyden found persuasive or to thei quasi-genocidal compatriots' concerns.  It felt confused, which is probably appropriate for a cultural relativism episode.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: jt512 on September 22, 2017, 02:11:59 AM
Episode 3 takes an unexpected serious turn. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on September 22, 2017, 04:02:45 AM
This episode is by far the best they've done so far.  The acting was well done, the jokes mostly mostly made me laugh ("well, depending on how you use it" :D), and the plot totally makes good on striving to honor Star Trek.  I only have two real complaints.  One is that in service of a joke (admittedly a funny one) they undercut the core conflict of the show.  Making Bortus change his apparently stubborn mind solely by watching Rudolph was fucking hilarious, but it made his position way less plausible.  Why would he be so strongly opposed after having changed a core, lifelong belief only a few hours prior?  The other is, like Fortran said, the fact that all the counter arguments made at the arbitration, except the last one, relied on females of other species and were mostly irrelevant because of it.  For instance, what if females of their species evolved to have at 75% mortality rate after reaching a young age? 

Other than that though, if the show continues to produce episodes of this caliber or gets even better then I'll be a very happy camper.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 22, 2017, 09:42:33 AM
Making Bortus change his apparently stubborn mind solely by watching Rudolph was fucking hilarious, but it made his position way less plausible.

That was hilarious.  It also set up a touching moment with the doll.

As far as Bortus' credulity goes, I hope it was meant as characterization.  Maybe he's more anxiety-prone or sentimental than we thought?  Maybe his cultural identity is changing thanks to serving on a Union ship? (Tune in next week to find out!)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 22, 2017, 02:23:15 PM
I like how they bother to put in the little detail that in the future/their world it only takes 12 seconds to fix a cleft palate :)

some painfully high school health class video dialogue in there, though.

ugh, I just got up to the home planet stuff
(click to show/hide)

aaaand now I'm up to the circumcision apologetics. apparently that still exists in the future.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 22, 2017, 03:07:09 PM
The Maclans are basically, "What if the Nazis won (centuries ago)?," but against non-males.  I'd give the stereotyping a pass.  If they weren't nasty fellas then there wouldn't have been a genocide!

Edit:  I said, "quasi-genocidal," earlier.  The concept of genocide would fully apply here, wouldn't it?

Edit 2: Adjusted phrasing.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 22, 2017, 04:08:05 PM
I wonder what their 'procedure' is supposed to be -- presumably something capable of making the female as physically strong and intellectually competent as the males, since they can then be suffered to live, and even go through life without anyone realizing they would have become female-like because they are/were female (to whatever extent the procedure can't alter the genes that are relevant to their differences).

makes me think of the whole 'severe male brain' idea of autism - can we 'correct' the millennial sickness of pathological empathy by giving a healthy dose of male-ing the brains of safe-spacers who're either female or male but underdeveloped/too-female to happily adhere to the ideal standard that is the virtuous 'man', of noble and brave character?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 22, 2017, 04:38:44 PM
Nah, just bring back day drinking and beating your kids and we'll back to the Good Old Days in no time! 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 22, 2017, 11:16:41 PM
Nah, just bring back day drinking

ah. back. yes. back...
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Morvis13 on September 28, 2017, 09:18:43 AM
I thought the first episode was good enough to warrant watching more. The second was painful to watch and I almost gave up. The zoo was dumb. The sex change episode was ok i guess the trial dragged a bit. Maybe I'll watch a couple more but I can see this getting old really fast if they keep the sexist, body function, drinking jokes up.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: 2397 on September 28, 2017, 11:29:10 AM
So is it all gender politics so far?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Morvis13 on September 28, 2017, 12:43:35 PM
Just that one episode takes on gender. The others are more about the relationship of the captain and his ex-wife XO.
The first episode is worth watching.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on September 28, 2017, 05:50:50 PM
I'm still not sure about it. I'll keep watching but I'm not sure yet.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 28, 2017, 10:08:34 PM
Just that one episode takes on gender. The others are more about the relationship of the captain and his ex-wife XO.

I thought it was only sex it took on.

maybe in the future they'll do an ep where a species with only two or even just one sex has 15 different genders
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 28, 2017, 11:28:03 PM
Just watched episode 4 and holy shit that casting

Overall, this is way better than I expected it to be

Edit:  I took the themes as relating to climate denialism and theocracy.  Also, I dug the flat earth / turtle imagery
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on September 29, 2017, 03:28:29 AM
Yes, this was another solid episode that was ultimately very Trek-like.  I still find a lot of the humor misplaced and off-putting and I still dislike the disharmony between Capt Mercer being both a bumbling moron and a capable officer, but other than that I have very few complaints about this episode.  Not ground-breaking or anything, but it's like comfort food for the Trekkie in me.

On another note, seeing that cameo at the end made me realize that with Seth's passion for this show and his connections in show biz that it's highly probably we're gonna get a decent amount of Star Trek cameos at some point or another.  Patrick Stewart at least seems a certainty given how much he's shown up in Seth's other work.

ETA: Also, forgot to mention that I'm quickly getting tired of the excessive focus on Mercer and Grayson's divorce.  Every once in a while is fine when you have something new to add but they are just rehashing the same jokes and points every episode.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on September 29, 2017, 05:03:28 AM
1300 hours?
oh, 1pm.

typical smart wife dumb husband sitcom misandry. disgraceful.


2,000 year old ship and a family of English-speaking people with American accents... such anglocentricism! do not look forward to future episodes
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: MTBox on September 29, 2017, 12:54:43 PM
I find it entertaining, which is fine. It reminds me a bit of The Librarians series, which is not bad if you sit through it with pre-teens and listen to their comments.

I keep thinking it will drop into Cheesy, since it is riding that edge, but it hasn't yet. I think waiting for that to happen took some of the fun out of it, and now I just "go along for the ride." It is a bit slow paced at times and could be better edited. I don't know why every commercial break returns with the Ship In Space view, though. If we left an interior scene, why come back to Space view?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on September 30, 2017, 06:10:01 PM
This is basically TNG but with lame jokes punctuating each scene.
The cast are mostly bad and I have no idea why McFarlane insists on acting.

Not the worst show on tv by any means, might use it as background noise while I clean.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on September 30, 2017, 06:20:22 PM
This is basically TNG but with lame jokes punctuating each scene.
The cast are mostly bad and I have no idea why McFarlane insists on acting.

Not the worst show on tv by any means, might use it as background noise while I clean.

The doctor is the only person who can act, and she is like a lifeguard in a pool of drowning puppies whenever she is on screen.  It's stressful to watch her try and save the scene / the other puppies from drowning.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on September 30, 2017, 06:26:24 PM
This is basically TNG but with lame jokes punctuating each scene.
The cast are mostly bad and I have no idea why McFarlane insists on acting.

Not the worst show on tv by any means, might use it as background noise while I clean.

The doctor is the only person who can act, and she is like a lifeguard in a pool of drowning puppies whenever she is on screen.  It's stressful to watch her try and save the scene / the other puppies from drowning.
The young cadet is ok too I guess.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on September 30, 2017, 07:28:49 PM
I feel like you two are watching a different show than me. Sure, no one is winning any Emmys but for what they are aiming to do, no one I've seen is stand out bad except MacFarlane. I mean the two guys at Conn and Ops (I think?) are pretty over the top stupid, but that's less their fault and more the fault of the writing.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on October 01, 2017, 12:08:17 AM
This is basically TNG but with lame jokes punctuating each scene.
The cast are mostly bad and I have no idea why McFarlane insists on acting.

Not the worst show on tv by any means, might use it as background noise while I clean.

The doctor is the only person who can act, and she is like a lifeguard in a pool of drowning puppies whenever she is on screen.  It's stressful to watch her try and save the scene / the other puppies from drowning.
The young cadet is ok too I guess.

I was coming back to post that after watching episode 4.

I think I also figured out what is pissing me off about this show.  Next Gen and TOS sure could lay on the cheese, but I could forgive it, because it was always done in earnest.  The shitty comedy on The Orville just seems to undercut and hang a lampshade on the earnestness.  It makes the whole endeavor seem insincere.  So I don't trust the shows sensabilities.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: MTBox on October 01, 2017, 04:14:00 PM
The appearance of Liam Neeson was great and unexpected. I also got confused seeing Norm Macdonald get credited 3 episodes, but I figured out where/what/who he is.

I went to imdb and looked at the writers and the directors for which episodes and upcoming guest starts. Now I am definitely going to keep recording it (I time-shift everything I watch from cable).
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 01, 2017, 10:52:10 PM
I think Patrick Stewart let slip somewhere that he may be guesting.  Seth also hinted that he might have a few other Trek alum lined up.  Honestly though, I think John DeLancie would be a perfect fit for this show given the comedy angle.  Bring him in as basically Q, but call him R or something and have him wink and nod to existing in multiple universes.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 02, 2017, 02:34:21 AM
I also got confused seeing Norm Macdonald get credited 3 episodes, but I figured out where/what/who he is.

how do you not spot that voice instantly!
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: MTBox on October 02, 2017, 01:19:18 PM
"how do you not spot that voice instantly!"

I kept looking for his Height to give him away. Just like, at first, I was sure Brent Spiner was Isaac.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on October 04, 2017, 10:17:16 AM
1300 hours?
oh, 1pm.

typical smart wife dumb husband sitcom misandry. disgraceful.


2,000 year old ship and a family of English-speaking people with American accents... such anglocentricism! do not look forward to future episodes
  That was the point.

It was a society and culture ignoring science not curious about the world around them, adhering two a misunderstood 2000 year old religion and as a result their world would soon be destroyed. 

That’s the kind of cultural analogy that made Star Trek and much of science fiction great


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on October 04, 2017, 10:20:25 AM
I also got confused seeing Norm Macdonald get credited 3 episodes, but I figured out where/what/who he is.



The voice of the talking blob


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Morvis13 on October 04, 2017, 10:29:10 AM
The talking blob reminds me of myself. How scary is that?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 04, 2017, 11:51:34 AM
  That was the point.

::facepalm::
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 04, 2017, 11:53:05 AM
The talking blob reminds me of myself. How scary is that?

because his shape is amorvis?

(amorphous)

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 07, 2017, 06:19:11 PM
Man, another decent episode.  I'm starting to let myself feel good about this show now.  Also, stellar guest star in Charlize Theron.  Seth's connections may really allow this show to have a quality far above what it has any right too.  Still though, I'm getting reeeeeeally tired of hearing about the divorce and the blue alien.  It's fine in and of itself, I just wish it wasn't the most prevalent theme throughout the whole show thus far.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on October 07, 2017, 07:36:25 PM
The "ha-ha, but seriously that's mysogynist" jokes really wreck the fuck out of this show.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Tassie Dave on October 07, 2017, 07:46:04 PM
The show is starting to grow on me. They are getting some great guest stars.

Though that leg stuff up was a bit of a clanger. Aren't the prop department and CGI crew comparing notes.  ???
Gordon's leg was clearly amputated just above the knee, yet the leg that fell from the ceiling was a full leg from the hip. Sloppy.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 07, 2017, 08:51:59 PM
The "ha-ha, but seriously that's mysogynist" jokes really wreck the fuck out of this show.

Yeah, the disparity between the childish humor and high-minded social commentary definitely rubs me the wrong way, but it's not ruining it for me yet.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 07, 2017, 11:37:15 PM
Seth MacFarlane says he's confident The Orville will get a second season. (https://www.digitaltrends.com/movies/the-orville-nycc2017-news/)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 08, 2017, 03:03:10 AM
if he says "jar of pickles" one more time, I'm going LV terrorist on him.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Tassie Dave on October 08, 2017, 03:38:06 AM
if he says "jar of pickles" one more time, I'm going LV terrorist on him.

You know Seth is setting up some lame gag. He is literally going to hand Alara a jar of pickles to open at some stage.


Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 08, 2017, 03:51:46 AM
Jesus... I just looked at the wikipedia page and realized the directors are pretty interesting too.  Jonathan Frakes (Cmdr Riker) directed episode 5, Robert Duncan McNeill (Lt Paris) directed episode 2, Brannon Braga (TNG/Voy/Ent producer) directed episode 3, and friggin Jon Favreau Directed the pilot.  Looks like at least one other repeat Trek director came on board as well.  It's starting to make more sense why these episodes feel so much like Trek.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 08, 2017, 03:59:40 AM
if he says "jar of pickles" one more time, I'm going LV terrorist on him.

You know Seth is setting up some lame gag. He is literally going to hand Alara a jar of pickles to open at some stage.
or some one-episode problem will happen where she loses all her strength, and has to ask him to open that jar for her.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 08, 2017, 04:18:33 AM
ep 5
at the very end
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Tassie Dave on October 08, 2017, 04:31:42 AM
ep 5
at the very end
(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 08, 2017, 09:54:04 AM
In keeping with the finest traditions of schlocky television sci-fi, it didn't really make sense. 

And when the leg fell through the ceiling and Mercer was just like that, "nevermind that right now," that was a good scene. 

But I agree about the prop.  Both Malloy and the prop had full thighs! 

Edit:

And I really appreciate that the anomaly was scientifically correct.  They took a cue from --
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on October 08, 2017, 10:24:39 PM
The leg bits were the most amusing to me.  Character based humer you dumbasses.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Morvis13 on October 08, 2017, 10:29:08 PM
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 09, 2017, 02:09:27 AM
ep 5
at the very end
(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

then
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 09, 2017, 02:10:49 AM
(click to show/hide)

yeh,
(click to show/hide)
also,
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Tofu on October 09, 2017, 04:55:51 AM
The show is starting to grow on me. They are getting some great guest stars.

Though that leg stuff up was a bit of a clanger. Aren't the prop department and CGI crew comparing notes.  ???
Gordon's leg was clearly amputated just above the knee, yet the leg that fell from the ceiling was a full leg from the hip. Sloppy.

That was the first thing i noticed.
Funnily enough, as soon as Gordon said "now it's your time to get me", i guessed that the joke was gonna be leg-amputation. One of those lucky guesses when you know exactly how the joke is gonna go.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 13, 2017, 01:06:24 AM
Man... Another good one and the comedy mostly fit in with the episode instead of clashed with it.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: John Albert on October 13, 2017, 01:55:27 AM
(click to show/hide)

I seem to recall they used that same trick multiple times in Deep Space 9?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 13, 2017, 02:15:09 AM
(click to show/hide)

I seem to recall they uses that same trick multiple times in Deep Space 9?

At any rate I'm sure they destroyed it by "destabilizing the ambient quantum field" or some such nonsense, not to blow it apart.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: John Albert on October 13, 2017, 02:24:40 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03E68F6599Q
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 13, 2017, 03:29:31 AM
Quote
Cmdr Grayson: Ed, there are families down there!

Captain Mercer: I know ::sigh::

Lt. Malloy: ...there's probably a lot of single people, too.

good cunt.


LMFAO, they know they need to learn more about their religious enemy, and what they find is
(click to show/hide)

more ?libtard? silliness with their plot...
(click to show/hide)
gotta say I prefer game of thrones
(click to show/hide)

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 13, 2017, 09:23:07 AM
I loved the, "single people," line. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 13, 2017, 11:42:09 AM
I loved the, "single people," line. 

now in shareable meme form
(https://i.imgur.com/Lic6P0c.jpg)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 13, 2017, 07:41:09 PM
Fun Fact: Another popular car rental service is Enterprise
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 28, 2017, 09:21:59 AM
wtf @ this new ep being a Black Mirror rip-off.

'lawyer? what's a lawyer?' but eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeverything else that they say just happens to be perfectly mutually intelligible.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 28, 2017, 05:14:20 PM
I took it as commentary on The Court of Public Opinion's capriciousness. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 28, 2017, 06:55:39 PM
The concept was the same as the Black Mirror episode, but they executed it quite differently, maybe even a bit better TBH.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on October 29, 2017, 11:23:29 AM
The concept was the same as the Black Mirror episode, but they executed it quite differently, maybe even a bit better TBH.

FWIW, Star Trek would often do the same thing, pick up a theme from science fiction and use it for an episode.

In the case of Black Mirror, the ideas that reached thousands of people on a streaming series reached millions on network television.

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Belgarath on October 29, 2017, 11:33:35 AM
The concept was the same as the Black Mirror episode, but they executed it quite differently, maybe even a bit better TBH.

Yes, agreed on this.  The ending was a bit more hopeful and really REALLY more relevant to today.  Turn that shit OFF!  :)

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 29, 2017, 01:05:37 PM
The concept was the same as the Black Mirror episode, but they executed it quite differently, maybe even a bit better TBH.

FWIW, Star Trek would often do the same thing, pick up a theme from science fiction and use it for an episode.

In the case of Black Mirror, the ideas that reached thousands of people on a streaming series reached millions on network television

the unoriginality is only part of it, what's worse is how contrived things had to be to make it fit into the universe of the show they wedged it into. A show like Sliders, by contrast, had the perfect premise for this kind of sci-fi short story episode.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 29, 2017, 01:09:46 PM
The concept was the same as the Black Mirror episode, but they executed it quite differently, maybe even a bit better TBH.

Yes, agreed on this.  The ending was a bit more hopeful and really REALLY more relevant to today.  Turn that shit OFF!  :)

hopeful? I found that a bit more interesting than anything -- she's shown this amazing world-changing picture of things, and her only response is to be a bit more apathetic about local politics and social mores. goddamn is that tragic. I mean, I was hoping she'd be sparked into some kind of modern day de Tocqueville in the ending. far from something so optimistic is what we got.

but when you said 'the ending' and 'relevant' I thought you meant the earlier resolution where an alien source used tech (misinformation) to influence a political outcome that suited them (perhaps inspired by the purported Russian social media propaganda's influence in the last US election).
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 29, 2017, 06:17:03 PM
The concept was the same as the Black Mirror episode, but they executed it quite differently, maybe even a bit better TBH.

FWIW, Star Trek would often do the same thing, pick up a theme from science fiction and use it for an episode.

In the case of Black Mirror, the ideas that reached thousands of people on a streaming series reached millions on network television

the unoriginality is only part of it, what's worse is how contrived things had to be to make it fit into the universe of the show they wedged it into. A show like Sliders, by contrast, had the perfect premise for this kind of sci-fi short story episode.

The fact that the Orville has, from the start, shown a strong streak of not taking itself seriously, helps with that even if it does undercut some of the serious things it wants to do. That said, I don't think this is any more wildly unbelievable than a society that speaks in metaphors only, but while still using words that aren't used otherwise.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 29, 2017, 10:35:31 PM
That said, I don't think this is any more wildly unbelievable than a society that speaks in metaphors only, but while still using words that aren't used otherwise.

...was that a thing?
my disdain is not in short supply, what is this thing? I shall add it to the things I look down upon.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 29, 2017, 10:37:34 PM
That said, I don't think this is any more wildly unbelievable than a society that speaks in metaphors only, but while still using words that aren't used otherwise.

...was that a thing?
my disdain is not in short supply, what is this thing? I shall add it to the things I look down upon.

It was one of the most well known and well regarded episodes of TNG, Darmok. My point was not that Trek has fucked up too and thus it's OK. My point was that the sci-fi being contrived doesn't mean an episode has to be bad considering that Darmok was absurdly contrived and yet among the best episodes of sci-fi ever.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on October 29, 2017, 11:24:15 PM
There was an old short story in a Dragon mag that ran with this premise as well.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 29, 2017, 11:49:13 PM
Darmok was absurdly contrived and yet among the best episodes of sci-fi ever.

does it hold up?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on October 30, 2017, 12:02:02 AM
Darmok was absurdly contrived and yet among the best episodes of sci-fi ever.

does it hold up?

In my opinion, yes. Very much so.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on November 11, 2017, 03:42:56 PM
Enjoying this more than Star Trek at the moment.

This weeks ep was a bit messed up though. My main complaint is that the plot of every episode relies on the crew not knowing some pretty amazing things about the alien races they interact with when its not the first time they have met.
Rob Lowe was funny in the episode but it seems like they wrote themselves a massive problem with huge and serious implications and then just kind of shrug it off at the end like its all cool.
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: MTBox on November 11, 2017, 03:49:05 PM
I don't know if you watched "Eureka." The writing for that show was always of a similar arc. Don't get me wrong; these shows can be fun to watch and entertaining. It's a nerdy eye candy, like watching the Barrett-Jackson auto auctions.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on November 11, 2017, 04:44:04 PM
I don't know if you watched "Eureka." The writing for that show was always of a similar arc. Don't get me wrong; these shows can be fun to watch and entertaining. It's a nerdy eye candy, like watching the Barrett-Jackson auto auctions.

(click to show/hide)
Never seen Eureka.
In general I do like the format that the show follows.
Its just
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on November 11, 2017, 04:59:59 PM
I'd be OK with the premise if the characters on the show didn't treat it like a joke. Also, the premise serving to "save the day" as it were was equally disturbing. I mean, I guess in context that might have been the best solution, but maybe the next conversation should have been to tell the aliens what they did and to explain that it was only because what happened to them put them in that position in the first place.

All that said, moral qualms aside, I did enjoy the episode.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on November 11, 2017, 09:27:12 PM
I don't know if you watched "Eureka." The writing for that show was always of a similar arc. Don't get me wrong; these shows can be fun to watch and entertaining. It's a nerdy eye candy, like watching the Barrett-Jackson auto auctions.

(click to show/hide)
Never seen Eureka.
In general I do like the format that the show follows.
Its just
(click to show/hide)

Ya I would think the Orville would know about this. This couldn't  have been the first time it has happened.I wasn't that thrilled with this episode.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 11, 2017, 10:30:05 PM
I was, however, pleased by the elevator sub plot.

But yeah, Evil Rob Lowe was rapey as fuck
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on November 12, 2017, 10:19:06 AM
I was, however, pleased by the elevator sub plot.

That was a good touch
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on November 12, 2017, 10:32:10 AM

But yeah, Evil Rob Lowe was rapey as fuck

That is true. For humans it would be considered rape. Not in Lothario culture.  They are like banobo's. Sex is not that big of deal and they seem to do it at the drop of a hat.
Maybe that is why I didn't care for this episode as much. A little to rapey for me as well.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 12, 2017, 11:15:33 AM
Made me think of Hollywood sex scandals.

Everyone's tense and uncomfortable about it but they kinda just try to work around it. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on November 12, 2017, 12:53:44 PM
Its part of what grinds my gears about McFarlane and the South Park guys.
They bask in the praise when they deal with a social issue well and wjen free speech is threatened you see comedians pop up all over the place talking about the deeper value of comedy as a tool for dealing with complex issues.
But when they fuck it up they all retreat to "Don't take it so seriously! Its just a goof!"
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on November 12, 2017, 02:37:48 PM
Ya Jon Stewart was accused of that too when he was running the Daily show.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 15, 2017, 03:53:20 AM
love is the greatest date rape drug.

people, like vulcans, should only have sex when there is no passionate brain chemistry and hormones corrupting their thinking
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: bimble on November 15, 2017, 05:25:10 AM
love is the greatest date rape drug.

people, like vulcans, should only have sex when there is no passionate brain chemistry and hormones corrupting their thinking

I though Vulcans only made love when their brain chemistry and hormones corrupted their thinking... hence the whole Pon Farr phenomenon...
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 15, 2017, 06:57:27 AM
love is the greatest date rape drug.

people, like vulcans, should only have sex when there is no passionate brain chemistry and hormones corrupting their thinking

I though Vulcans only made love when their brain chemistry and hormones corrupted their thinking... hence the whole Pon Farr phenomenon...

really? that's disappointing writing. do they also 'only punch people when they're angry'? like...who the fuck can't manage to do that? unimpressed. I thought they were supposed to be some sort of monkish model of intellect and self-mastery.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 15, 2017, 08:47:53 AM
people, like vulcans, should only have sex when there is no passionate brain chemistry and hormones corrupting their thinking

I don't think this analogizes, though.  It's an outside factor whose effect is such that it appears to strip agency.  The, "strip agency," being the key part. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 15, 2017, 09:13:30 AM
people, like vulcans, should only have sex when there is no passionate brain chemistry and hormones corrupting their thinking

I don't think this analogizes, though.  It's an outside factor whose effect is such that it appears to strip agency.  The, "strip agency," being the key part. 

as opposed to an 'inside' factor doing the same. no agency, either way.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 15, 2017, 10:07:16 AM
If you don't believe free will exists and this is all just some cosmic dance to which we're passive witnesses, you'd still have to distinguish between --Did you move your arm because you reached for a coke or because I electrocuted your arm?  Are those literally indistinguishable?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on November 15, 2017, 10:34:35 AM
people, like vulcans, should only have sex when there is no passionate brain chemistry and hormones corrupting their thinking

I don't think this analogizes, though.  It's an outside factor whose effect is such that it appears to strip agency.  The, "strip agency," being the key part. 

as opposed to an 'inside' factor doing the same. no agency, either way.

Um... What is love (well baby don't hurt me :P) or attraction or human connection of any kind if not seeing inside process which alters how we would otherwise normally act? The difference between Pon Farr and this dude's think in Orville is that one is a period of increased sexuality that comes regularly, the other is a period of emitting rufie Vibes which makes others fall in love with you for a period before it wears off. The former affects a change in yourself, the latter affects a change in others.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on November 15, 2017, 10:48:20 AM
Why do I feel like we are sliding into a MGTOW hole?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 16, 2017, 03:11:44 AM
the other is a period of emitting rufie Vibes which makes others fall in love with you for a period before it wears off.

that sounds like most relationships, from one-night stands, to former marriages -- you're suddenly taken with some external stimuli, altering your behavior, and eventually it wears off and you go back to giving no fucks about that external object anymore.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on November 16, 2017, 06:56:52 AM
the other is a period of emitting rufie Vibes which makes others fall in love with you for a period before it wears off.

that sounds like most relationships, from one-night stands, to former marriages -- you're suddenly taken with some external stimuli, altering your behavior, and eventually it wears off and you go back to giving no fucks about that external object anymore.

I'm sorry... Do you seriously think that there's no difference between two people hooking up for a one night stand and one person drugging the other so that they can have their way with them? The only difference between the later and the show's premise is that Lowe's character unintentionally rufied other people, realized he did it, but decided to sleep with them against their will anyway. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on November 16, 2017, 08:32:56 AM
the other is a period of emitting rufie Vibes which makes others fall in love with you for a period before it wears off.

that sounds like most relationships, from one-night stands, to former marriages -- you're suddenly taken with some external stimuli, altering your behavior, and eventually it wears off and you go back to giving no fucks about that external object anymore.

I'm sorry... Do you seriously think that there's no difference between two people hooking up for a one night stand and one person drugging the other so that they can have their way with them? The only difference between the later and the show's premise is that Lowe's character unintentionally rufied other people, realized he did it, but decided to sleep with them against their will anyway.
But also- How did he not know?
When the answer is- 'Because the plot requires it' maybe rethink the plot.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on November 16, 2017, 08:47:30 AM
the other is a period of emitting rufie Vibes which makes others fall in love with you for a period before it wears off.

that sounds like most relationships, from one-night stands, to former marriages -- you're suddenly taken with some external stimuli, altering your behavior, and eventually it wears off and you go back to giving no fucks about that external object anymore.

I'm sorry... Do you seriously think that there's no difference between two people hooking up for a one night stand and one person drugging the other so that they can have their way with them? The only difference between the later and the show's premise is that Lowe's character unintentionally rufied other people, realized he did it, but decided to sleep with them against their will anyway.
But also- How did he not know?
When the answer is- 'Because the plot requires it' maybe rethink the plot.

Well, I don't think it was too crazy to say that he didn't think about the handshakes until they started coming onto him. I don't think he slept with her before realizing what had happened at any rate.  He just seemed very hippy dippy about virtually everything and seemed to live as if life didn't have consequences.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 16, 2017, 10:33:29 AM
the other is a period of emitting rufie Vibes which makes others fall in love with you for a period before it wears off.

that sounds like most relationships, from one-night stands, to former marriages -- you're suddenly taken with some external stimuli, altering your behavior, and eventually it wears off and you go back to giving no fucks about that external object anymore.

I'm sorry... Do you seriously think that there's no difference between two people hooking up for a one night stand and one person drugging the other so that they can have their way with them? The only difference between the later and the show's premise is that Lowe's character unintentionally rufied other people, realized he did it, but decided to sleep with them against their will anyway. 

except he didn't drug them any more than Beiber drugged his fans ... he just _had to be near them_ and they swooned for him. that's just the biology of it. human biology or alien biology, they didn't try to trick someone any more than the chef is trying to rob me when I smell pizza at the pizza place--if I want to buy pizza after that, that's on me.

you seem to be suggesting that if you get me drunk, and I drive home drunk, somehow it's not me but you who is guilty of drunk driving.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on November 16, 2017, 10:47:39 AM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on November 16, 2017, 01:00:53 PM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

Are you getting someone drunk against their will or knowledge?

I've never been clear on this idea of someone getting someone else drunk. If you encourage someone to drink, and they drink enough that they can't control themself, who "got them drunk?"

(Of course, just because someone got themselves drunk does not mean you can have your way with them)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on November 16, 2017, 01:09:45 PM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

Are you getting someone drunk against their will or knowledge?

I've never been clear on this idea of someone getting someone else drunk. If you encourage someone to drink, and they drink enough that they can't control themself, who "got them drunk?"

(Of course, just because someone got themselves drunk does not mean you can have your way with them)
Can we move from discussion of rape apologetics back to discussing the show we like?
Or start a different thread to debate whether or not rape victims are really victims?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on November 16, 2017, 04:55:03 PM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

Are you getting someone drunk against their will or knowledge?

I've never been clear on this idea of someone getting someone else drunk. If you encourage someone to drink, and they drink enough that they can't control themself, who "got them drunk?"

(Of course, just because someone got themselves drunk does not mean you can have your way with them)

It's not about who puts the glass to their lips; it's about one person drinking while the other doesn't; intentionally, thus intentionally creating a power imbalance to be exploited.

If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

Are you getting someone drunk against their will or knowledge?

I've never been clear on this idea of someone getting someone else drunk. If you encourage someone to drink, and they drink enough that they can't control themself, who "got them drunk?"

(Of course, just because someone got themselves drunk does not mean you can have your way with them)
Can we move from discussion of rape apologetics back to discussing the show we like?
Or start a different thread to debate whether or not rape victims are really victims?

I felt that point needed to not just hang there, but yeah. I'm with you. It's not the way I was expecting this discussion to go...
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 16, 2017, 04:56:16 PM
you seem to be suggesting that if you get me drunk, and I drive home drunk, somehow it's not me but you who is guilty of drunk driving.

The analogy would be --

Evil Rob Lowe's Pheromones : Having sex with the emitter :: Drinking a lot of alcohol : being drunk

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on November 16, 2017, 05:57:14 PM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

Are you getting someone drunk against their will or knowledge?

I've never been clear on this idea of someone getting someone else drunk. If you encourage someone to drink, and they drink enough that they can't control themself, who "got them drunk?"

(Of course, just because someone got themselves drunk does not mean you can have your way with them)
Can we move from discussion of rape apologetics
WTF?
Quote
back to discussing the show we like?

One of the reasons I like the show is because it covers topics like this, where it raises deeper questions than you see at first glance.

Is the Robb Lowe aphrodisiac effect the equivalent of drugging someone? Is it the same as using alcohol to seduce? Is it unethical, or does the idea that he and his species see sex differently make a difference?

It's better to talk about that than elevator music and flashing lights and cool effects, but, to each his or her own.

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 16, 2017, 08:10:33 PM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

you get me so drunk, like, with an IV? or I get me drunk?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on November 16, 2017, 08:28:24 PM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

you get me so drunk, like, with an IV? or I get me drunk?

I'm done... You are either trying to not understand me or you have some seriously disgusting views about what is appropriate behavior. Either way, I'm done with this discussion, at least with you.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 16, 2017, 10:15:50 PM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

you get me so drunk, like, with an IV? or I get me drunk?

I'm done... You are either trying to not understand me or you have some seriously disgusting views about what is appropriate behavior. Either way, I'm done with this discussion, at least with you.

your denial of my autonomy seems pretty disgusting to me.

if I stab you while I'm drunk, no one is going to say 'you made him drink, he's not responsible for his choice to stab you'. except you. apparently you say that, where it suits your virtue signalling needs.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 16, 2017, 10:17:13 PM
you seem to be suggesting that if you get me drunk, and I drive home drunk, somehow it's not me but you who is guilty of drunk driving.

The analogy would be --

Evil Rob Lowe's Pheromones : Having sex with the emitter :: Drinking a lot of alcohol : being drunk



those words lack any causal relationship.

you may as well have said 'apples, and oranges, pears and grapefruits is the analogy'
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 16, 2017, 10:20:17 PM
It's better to talk about that than elevator music and flashing lights and cool effects, but, to each his or her own.

discussion is always bad when you can't defend your prejudices and love them more than the truth.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on November 16, 2017, 10:50:48 PM
It's better to talk about that than elevator music and flashing lights and cool effects, but, to each his or her own.

discussion is always bad when you can't defend your prejudices and love them more than the truth.
Are you even paying attention ?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on November 16, 2017, 11:22:03 PM
If you make it clear to me that having sex with me is not something that you are interested in, then I get you so drunk you can't control yourself and then I have sex with you, is that not rape?

you get me so drunk, like, with an IV? or I get me drunk?

I'm done... You are either trying to not understand me or you have some seriously disgusting views about what is appropriate behavior. Either way, I'm done with this discussion, at least with you.

your denial of my autonomy seems pretty disgusting to me.

if I stab you while I'm drunk, no one is going to say 'you made him drink, he's not responsible for his choice to stab you'. except you. apparently you say that, where it suits your virtue signalling needs.

I'm not virtue signalling.  I've engaged with you quite a bit, but you don't seem to be willing to actually read what I'm writing.  So either you have a misunderstanding and nothing I know how to say can resolve that, or you believe something that I find pretty disgusting.  In either case, I see no point in engaging with you anymore.  If you think that me saying date rape is disgusting is going out on a limb to show everyone how good I am, well I think you've already demonstrated that I'm not capable of changing your mind, so please carry on thinking that.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 16, 2017, 11:33:48 PM
those words lack any causal relationship.

you may as well have said 'apples, and oranges, pears and grapefruits is the analogy'

All I see are pixels on a monitor.  There's... nothing! 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 17, 2017, 02:01:26 AM
"Regardless, it is crushed."
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 17, 2017, 11:35:13 AM
you believe something that I find pretty disgusting.
likewise.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 17, 2017, 11:35:58 AM
those words lack any causal relationship.

you may as well have said 'apples, and oranges, pears and grapefruits is the analogy'

All I see are pixels on a monitor.  There's... nothing! 

that reply seems to suggest even you can't actually elucidate any imagined meaning
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on November 17, 2017, 02:25:15 PM
Well the humor still ganks me out of the episode (which'd be ok if it made me laugh ), but it seems to be very solidly safe-Trek.  Not a bad thing.  Contrast that with Discovery which seems to still be Trek, but with a modern TV sensability.  It is as different from NG as NG was from TOS, while Orville is happy to be a NG revival.

Its nice to have both, but dammit Orville get better humor writers ffs.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on November 17, 2017, 02:54:02 PM
Well the humor still ganks me out of the episode (which'd be ok if it made me laugh ), but it seems to be very solidly safe-Trek.  Not a bad thing.  Contrast that with Discovery which seems to still be Trek, but with a modern TV sensability.  It is as different from NG as NG was from TOS, while Orville is happy to be a NG revival.

Its nice to have both, but dammit Orville get better humor writers ffs.
Great point! The show actually doesnt make me laugh, but is enjoyable in its own right as sci-fi fluff.
Really weird.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 17, 2017, 05:15:25 PM
those words lack any causal relationship.

you may as well have said 'apples, and oranges, pears and grapefruits is the analogy'

All I see are pixels on a monitor.  There's... nothing! 

that reply seems to suggest even you can't actually elucidate any imagined meaning

Were you responding to me or your own quote??? ayooo

Do you actually believe what you're saying or is this a Devil's Advocate routine that didn't really work out?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on November 17, 2017, 05:42:07 PM
those words lack any causal relationship.

you may as well have said 'apples, and oranges, pears and grapefruits is the analogy'

All I see are pixels on a monitor.  There's... nothing! 

that reply seems to suggest even you can't actually elucidate any imagined meaning

Were you responding to me or your own quote??? ayooo

Do you actually believe what you're saying or is this a Devil's Advocate routine that didn't really work out?

your post, failing to explain the meaning you didn't provide initially suggests you admit you don't have one at all. (See how, you asked a thing, and I explained? instead of saying 'ayoo pixel binksy boo!')
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on November 17, 2017, 05:53:00 PM
Well the humor still ganks me out of the episode (which'd be ok if it made me laugh ), but it seems to be very solidly safe-Trek.  Not a bad thing.  Contrast that with Discovery which seems to still be Trek, but with a modern TV sensability.  It is as different from NG as NG was from TOS, while Orville is happy to be a NG revival.

Its nice to have both, but dammit Orville get better humor writers ffs.
Great point! The show actually doesnt make me laugh, but is enjoyable in its own right as sci-fi fluff.
Really weird.

I am getting use to the humor. At times it gets a little tiring but I get it its what the show is about. I think they said it would be a funny/serious show. I'm ok with it.

On another note I like the no transporter in the show. The transporter was an easy out for the writers IMO. When ever they get up against a wall writing wise they can't fall back on a transporter bailing them out.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on November 17, 2017, 07:15:46 PM
Well the humor still ganks me out of the episode (which'd be ok if it made me laugh ), but it seems to be very solidly safe-Trek.  Not a bad thing.  Contrast that with Discovery which seems to still be Trek, but with a modern TV sensability.  It is as different from NG as NG was from TOS, while Orville is happy to be a NG revival.

Its nice to have both, but dammit Orville get better humor writers ffs.
Great point! The show actually doesnt make me laugh, but is enjoyable in its own right as sci-fi fluff.
Really weird.

I am getting use to the humor. At times it gets a little tiring but I get it its what the show is about. I think they said it would be a funny/serious show. I'm ok with it.

On another note I like the no transporter in the show. The transporter was an easy out for the writers IMO. When ever they get up against a wall writing wise they can't fall back on a transporter bailing them out.

Except they have replicators which is basically transporters......
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on November 17, 2017, 07:38:32 PM
Well the humor still ganks me out of the episode (which'd be ok if it made me laugh ), but it seems to be very solidly safe-Trek.  Not a bad thing.  Contrast that with Discovery which seems to still be Trek, but with a modern TV sensability.  It is as different from NG as NG was from TOS, while Orville is happy to be a NG revival.

Its nice to have both, but dammit Orville get better humor writers ffs.
Great point! The show actually doesnt make me laugh, but is enjoyable in its own right as sci-fi fluff.
Really weird.

I am getting use to the humor. At times it gets a little tiring but I get it its what the show is about. I think they said it would be a funny/serious show. I'm ok with it.

On another note I like the no transporter in the show. The transporter was an easy out for the writers IMO. When ever they get up against a wall writing wise they can't fall back on a transporter bailing them out.

Except they have replicators which is basically transporters......

I see your point but I like the no transporters.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on November 17, 2017, 07:39:44 PM
Well the humor still ganks me out of the episode (which'd be ok if it made me laugh ), but it seems to be very solidly safe-Trek.  Not a bad thing.  Contrast that with Discovery which seems to still be Trek, but with a modern TV sensability.  It is as different from NG as NG was from TOS, while Orville is happy to be a NG revival.

Its nice to have both, but dammit Orville get better humor writers ffs.
Great point! The show actually doesnt make me laugh, but is enjoyable in its own right as sci-fi fluff.
Really weird.

I am getting use to the humor. At times it gets a little tiring but I get it its what the show is about. I think they said it would be a funny/serious show. I'm ok with it.

On another note I like the no transporter in the show. The transporter was an easy out for the writers IMO. When ever they get up against a wall writing wise they can't fall back on a transporter bailing them out.

Except they have replicators which is basically transporters......
Depending on how accurately they can replicate a human brain in a given state.

When they were testing transporters, they must have done a few safety runs where they copied a person and made them appear somewhere but didnt kill the original. Thats the only way to know for sure its safe for human use right?

So there were multiple clones of some student volunteer?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on November 17, 2017, 07:56:35 PM
Well the humor still ganks me out of the episode (which'd be ok if it made me laugh ), but it seems to be very solidly safe-Trek.  Not a bad thing.  Contrast that with Discovery which seems to still be Trek, but with a modern TV sensability.  It is as different from NG as NG was from TOS, while Orville is happy to be a NG revival.

Its nice to have both, but dammit Orville get better humor writers ffs.
Great point! The show actually doesnt make me laugh, but is enjoyable in its own right as sci-fi fluff.
Really weird.

I am getting use to the humor. At times it gets a little tiring but I get it its what the show is about. I think they said it would be a funny/serious show. I'm ok with it.

On another note I like the no transporter in the show. The transporter was an easy out for the writers IMO. When ever they get up against a wall writing wise they can't fall back on a transporter bailing them out.

Except they have replicators which is basically transporters......

They are three-d printers at the molecular scale, and they're really fast.

They don't take apart a donut and reassemble it using its molecules, they have raw materials and build a new donut from those every time.


Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 17, 2017, 09:17:32 PM
What throws me about transporters is that they were never nailed down.  They've been everything from [People Mover (but ~fancy~)] to [Fax Machine-Paper Shredder]. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: xenu on November 17, 2017, 09:55:47 PM
I use to think transporters were cool but like I said they just make for lazy writing. I like how they didn't add that to the show.

Replicators like the ones on the Enterprise are a lot like transporters(I Think). The 3-D printing idea would make sense in this show.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 02, 2017, 12:13:10 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/8U4UzLg.gif)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Morvis13 on December 11, 2017, 08:13:47 AM
Just saw episode 12. They are going to get some angry letters.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on December 11, 2017, 08:59:40 AM
I think I sort of get this show better now.  It's not so much a parody of star trek as much as a particular ship in star trek that's crewed by the B team.  Now that I think of the show in those terms, some of the issues I have had bother me less than before.  They do stupid things and make mistakes that The Enterprise crew would never do because this is just not a very good crew. 

And if the show really runs with this, it could do something interesting.  We are so used to these types of shows with people who really know what they are doing.  There are many story lines that open up once a crew doesn't really have its shit together, both comedic and dramatic. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 11, 2017, 11:07:47 AM
I enjoyed this product and/or service.  A+++!

In particular, I liked the nakedly anti-religion and pro-reason themes to episode 12.  It was the best kind of ham handed
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on December 11, 2017, 05:02:13 PM
It wasn't entirely Anti religion. In fact it was assuredly Pro religion as a method for civilization achieving a certain level.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 11, 2017, 08:59:20 PM
It wasn't entirely Anti religion. In fact it was assuredly Pro religion as a method for civilization achieving a certain level.

An atheist would see it that way perhaps, but someone religious would almost certainly see it as anti-religious because the message is not "the beliefs of religion are real," the message is "religion is based on BS beliefs and does a lot of harm, but is useful/necessary as a stepping stone towards a more advanced society."  I wouldn't entirely disagree with that message either.  I think that religion absolutely was a useful lie for a long time, but now it is at least getting to the point where it is no longer needed to function.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on December 11, 2017, 09:29:15 PM
It wasn't entirely Anti religion. In fact it was assuredly Pro religion as a method for civilization achieving a certain level.

An atheist would see it that way perhaps, but someone religious would almost certainly see it as anti-religious because the message is not "the beliefs of religion are real," the message is "religion is based on BS beliefs and does a lot of harm, but is useful/necessary as a stepping stone towards a more advanced society."  I wouldn't entirely disagree with that message either.  I think that religion absolutely was a useful lie for a long time, but now it is at least getting to the point where it is no longer needed to function.

Whether it was pro or anti Religious institutions is one thing, and good arguments could be made either way.

But it's clear that the basis of the religious beliefs of the people on this planet had nothing to do with any kind of spirituality. I would argue it was anti-deism.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on December 13, 2017, 02:27:04 PM
The show's okay. McFarlane's created a decent pseudo-Trek universe. I think if he would open up the show to other writers besides himself, it might really take off. Maybe the humor wouldn't sound so forced and wooden. 

What I can't get over is how damn BIG the crew quarters are (at least for the senior staff). Commander Kelly's quarters were a spilt-level. A split-level!! She walked up a spiral staircase to her bed!! I realize this is the far future and advance tech leads to increasing miniaturization, but that's an absurd waste of space on any kind of ship outside of a luxury cruiser. What's the crew count of the Orville? Does everyone have such spacious digs?     Yeah, I know it's a comedy, but it's border-line serious enough for this to bug me. And yes, STAR TREK had roomy ship quarters too, but not on this scale. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on December 13, 2017, 02:52:08 PM
The show's okay. McFarlane's created a decent pseudo-Trek universe. I think if he would open up the show to other writers besides himself, it might really take off. Maybe the humor wouldn't sound so forced and wooden. 

What I can't get over is how damn BIG the crew quarters are (at least for the senior staff). Commander Kelly's quarters were a spilt-level. A split-level!! She walked up a spiral staircase to her bed!! I realize this is the far future and advance tech leads to increasing miniaturization, but that's an absurd waste of space on any kind of ship outside of a luxury cruiser. What's the crew count of the Orville? Does everyone have such spacious digs?     Yeah, I know it's a comedy, but it's border-line serious enough for this to bug me. And yes, STAR TREK had roomy ship quarters too, but not on this scale.

That's the joke, the show is very much a parody.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 13, 2017, 02:59:08 PM
I don't think the room size is supposed to be a joke.  They're supposed to be a post-scarcity fleet where the bottle-necking is on personnel shortages.  Why wouldn't they have large quarters?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Morvis13 on December 13, 2017, 03:14:22 PM
I don't think the room size is supposed to be a joke.  They're supposed to be a post-scarcity fleet where the bottle-necking is on personnel shortages.  Why wouldn't they have large quarters?

The ship is not infinite in size. Actually judging by the shuttle being the size of a large van the ship is kinda small.
There is a lot of wasted space in the ship but I think that is really for the benefit of aesthetic tv viewing.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on December 13, 2017, 03:30:48 PM
I don't think the room size is supposed to be a joke.  They're supposed to be a post-scarcity fleet where the bottle-necking is on personnel shortages.  Why wouldn't they have large quarters?

If it's not supposed to be a joke, I found it funny anyway.

I saw it as a subtle dig against Star Trek. Not just the rooms, but the corridors. They are even wider than the corridors on Star Trek.

The only purpose for having corridors that wide is to be able to use a full camera dolly rig, but with steady-cams those aren't needed anymore.

I also thought it funny when in one episode they're in a corridor near the crew quarters, and they open a locker mounted on the wall and pull out a cache of weapons. Do they have those every ten feet in every hallway?

There's a lot of subtle little jokes like that in the show that I'm enjoying.



Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 13, 2017, 03:44:38 PM
If it's not supposed to be a joke, I found it funny anyway.

To be honest, I actually did, too.  Gives me a 'luxury cruise ship' vibe.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 13, 2017, 04:00:02 PM
The show's okay. McFarlane's created a decent pseudo-Trek universe. I think if he would open up the show to other writers besides himself, it might really take off. Maybe the humor wouldn't sound so forced and wooden. 

That is a definite weakness of the show so far in my opinion as well. TOS, TNG, and DS9 thrived on having a diverse and talented writers' room.  I can only hope that Seth's name figured so heavily into the writing credits of the first season because that was how he had to pitch it to Fox, and now that it's successful, he'll be able to bring in more outside talent.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on December 13, 2017, 04:04:40 PM
A big problem with McFarlane properties is that he stretches his writing talent across too many shows at once and the end result can feel very diluted across the board.
Also, he is a smarmy asshole, so that doesnt help.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on December 14, 2017, 09:40:18 AM
Just saw episode 12. They are going to get some angry letters.

for shrugging off the rape/free-will thing?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on December 14, 2017, 10:03:35 AM
The show's okay. McFarlane's created a decent pseudo-Trek universe. I think if he would open up the show to other writers besides himself, it might really take off. Maybe the humor wouldn't sound so forced and wooden. 

That is a definite weakness of the show so far in my opinion as well. TOS, TNG, and DS9 thrived on having a diverse and talented writers' room.  I can only hope that Seth's name figured so heavily into the writing credits of the first season because that was how he had to pitch it to Fox, and now that it's successful, he'll be able to bring in more outside talent.

thats what happened with american dad, which got much better around season 3.

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: moonwrangler on December 29, 2017, 01:52:36 AM

I don't like any of McFarland's other shows, but this is my favorite show of the year.

Anyone want to play a round of latchkum?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on December 31, 2018, 07:47:51 PM
Not too sure how I feel about the "pon far morphs to a  toilet break" story line.  Although this may prove that Bortus is Trump.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 01, 2019, 09:44:46 AM
Not too sure how I feel about the "pon far morphs to a  toilet break" story line.  Although this may prove that Bortus is Trump.

Considering it stemmed from a throwaway line in the pilot episode, I was totally on board with it.  I thought it was pretty funny too.  I wasn't laughing my ass or anything, but it felt like the right kind of humor for the show and didn't distract me.  I also am 100% happy with the decision to move away from the divorce story line if that's what they are indeed doing.  All in all, this wasn't even remotely close to their best episode, but it was solid.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 01, 2019, 12:02:41 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/bqSDEaI.gif)

I'm a big fan of Isaac's condescending, "Nathan and Jody."
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 01, 2019, 12:36:20 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/bqSDEaI.gif)

That's awesome.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on January 02, 2019, 10:52:52 AM
I liked the episode but it felt a little weird for a season premiere.  It didn't really set up any season long story arcs.  I recently read an article about the show discussing how Roddenberry forbade interpersonal conflict to be a driver of the plot on ST and TNG and this felt like a direct challenge to that edict.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 02, 2019, 01:24:09 PM
I liked the episode but it felt a little weird for a season premiere.

According to AV club, Fox is doing its thing again:
Quote
Tonight’s episode was originally intended to be this season’s second episode –while next week’s, which was originally going to be the final episode of last season— was going to be the premiere.
Source: AV Club (https://tv.avclub.com/the-orville-begins-its-second-season-with-a-strong-low-1831394790)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 02, 2019, 03:18:14 PM
Haven't they learned from Firefly yet???
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on January 02, 2019, 05:05:56 PM
I found the episode a bit tedious and smug/preachy.
Maybe too much McFarlane? I found season 1 watchable (more so than the new Trek weirdly) but might drop this show.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 02, 2019, 06:51:37 PM
Season 1 didn't exactly have the strongest start either.  I'd give it time.  Also, yeah... I really prefer this show to Disco
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 04, 2019, 01:41:43 PM
That was a very direct handling of holodeck addiction.

Loved the porn alien, btw.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on January 08, 2019, 07:12:43 PM
Bortus is DTF.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: swan on January 11, 2019, 01:36:19 PM
I just saw "Home (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orville#Season_2_(2018%E2%80%9319))" and got a good chuckle out of their choice for villain of the week:
(click to show/hide)
It was also fun to see two Starfleet doctors in conflict. Not thrilled that the show seems to be following TNG's "staffing progression" too closely, but oh well.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 11, 2019, 01:47:25 PM
Agreed.  I did not see that coming.

(click to show/hide)

Loved that. Their little sequence was genuinely unsettling, too.

Best line of the week:
Mercer: "Why? Is he thinking of splitting in half?"
Grayson: "We can't legally ask him that."
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: werecow on January 19, 2019, 10:19:09 AM
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on January 19, 2019, 11:04:50 AM
Not thrilled that the show seems to be following TNG's "staffing progression" too closely, but oh well.

The scuttlebutt is that she was dating Seth McFarland. When they broke up it precipitated her leaving the show. Which is a real shame cuz she was a great actor and did some really stand-out work, especially in the first season. One more reason to dislike Seth MacFarlane, I guess.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on January 19, 2019, 04:21:13 PM

The scuttlebutt isn't she was dating Seth McFarland. When they broke up it precipitated her leaving the show. Which is a real shame cuz she was a great actor and I done some really stand-out work especially in the first season.just one more reason to just like Seth MacFarlane though I guess.

I do not understand what you are saying here.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on January 19, 2019, 04:33:33 PM
Edit- Ah, that sounds more like Pants!
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on January 19, 2019, 05:19:09 PM

The scuttlebutt isn't she was dating Seth McFarland. When they broke up it precipitated her leaving the show. Which is a real shame cuz she was a great actor and I done some really stand-out work especially in the first season.just one more reason to just like Seth MacFarlane though I guess.

I do not understand what you are saying here.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I edited it for clarity. And I promised to no longer use voice to text to write my posts. This post not included.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: werecow on January 19, 2019, 05:31:14 PM
A good, so it wasn't just me then. I was questioning my English skills there for a second. }|:op
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on January 19, 2019, 08:20:00 PM
Not thrilled that the show seems to be following TNG's "staffing progression" too closely, but oh well.

The scuttlebutt is that she was dating Seth McFarland. When they broke up it precipitated her leaving the show. Which is a real shame cuz she was a great actor and did some really stand-out work, especially in the first season. One more reason to dislike Seth MacFarlane, I guess.

Thank you for the edit, clarity appreciated.  She was actually my favorite character. I still like MacFarlane, though.

Met him once when my wife and I crashed his Family Guy premiere party. He was going to kick us out, but didn't.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 01, 2019, 04:52:42 AM
Oh my god... the breakup scene...  I laughed so hard I was crying.  This season is god damn amazing.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on February 01, 2019, 09:19:34 AM
I wouldn't say any of the episodes have been standouts (thoug i have not watched this weeks)  but it's steady dependable sci-fi that isn't trying to reinvent the wheel.  That sort of thing has  its place.  I was really missing this type of show.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 01, 2019, 12:28:20 PM
Gonna miss Bortus' little guy
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 01, 2019, 03:22:40 PM
The whole high gravity planet was painful to watch. I had to actively turn off the physics engine that lives in my head to enjoy the otherwise we'll told tale.

Overall we are enjoying the show.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on February 01, 2019, 03:42:35 PM
I'm probably thinking too much about a show that is really little more than re-makes of lesser Star Trek: Next Generation/Voyager episodes with juvenile sex jokes added, but I'm hoping that McFarland has a plan in mind for Isaac.

An entire planet of sapient robots? That couldn't have happened naturally. Who built them and why? What happened to the builders? Did the robots overthrow them when they became self-aware (cliché!)? Are there other robots like Isaac among races like the Krill also gathering data? What happens when they all conclude their missions and report in? Are the robots planning on eventually replacing the inefficient biological organisms in the universe with machines (another cliché!)? 

What is the "lifespan" of Robots like Isaac, indefinite with proper constant maintenance?  How will the doctor feel as she grows older and Isaac stays the same...or will he modify himself to simulate aging for her?

Isaac's world isn't part of the Union. How does a member of a world not joined serve as an officer on a fleet ship? I could see him being onboard as an observer or ambassador, but he's a bridge officer! Did he immigrate and apply for citizenship? 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 01, 2019, 03:49:36 PM
I had similar thoughts this episode.  This was the first time I can recall where they really spelled out why he was there among a people he considers so beneath him; raised a lot of questions about their ultimate motivations.  I'm sensing that they are planning some big galactic takeover or something and that Isaac will eventually work to stop them after he's changed from being on the Orville.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on February 01, 2019, 03:51:42 PM
I had similar thoughts this episode.  This was the first time I can recall where they really spelled out why he was there among a people he considers so beneath him; raised a lot of questions about their ultimate motivations.  I'm sensing that they are planning some big galactic takeover or something and that Isaac will eventually work to stop them after he's changed from being on the Orville.

Could make for a good series-long arc! Could be what brings the Union and the Krill together to fight against in the final season/episodes!
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 01, 2019, 04:05:54 PM
I haven't seen this ep yet. Probably on Sat.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 01, 2019, 04:59:50 PM
So on another note I inadvertently got into a brief discussion (https://www.facebook.com/doug.drexler.7/posts/10155739863491104?comment_id=10155739928441104&reply_comment_id=10155742115246104&notif_id=1549037415704978&notif_t=feed_comment) with Doug Drexler (worked behind the scenes on TNG, Voyager, Enterprise, BSG, etc (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0237774/)) and he related that he has a gripe with The Orville because of how they shamelessly ripped off all the work done on Star Trek and didn't even attempt to hire anyone from the TNG era art department they ripped off of.

Quote from: Doug Drexler
Orville has picked our corpse clean, appropriated the texture and look that we spent decades creating. There are some of our writers there, director of photography Marvin Rush is there. They strive to imitate us visually... but is there a single art department person on staff who sweated blood to create the look that they are aping? Not a one. I think it's shameful. Shame on you McFarland.

Never thought of The Orville from a Hollywood professional stance before.  I'm still loving the show and intend to keep watching, but it's definitely a different perspective I was not expecting to see.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 01, 2019, 09:10:34 PM
So on another note I inadvertently got into a brief discussion (https://www.facebook.com/doug.drexler.7/posts/10155739863491104?comment_id=10155739928441104&reply_comment_id=10155742115246104&notif_id=1549037415704978&notif_t=feed_comment) with Doug Drexler (worked behind the scenes on TNG, Voyager, Enterprise, BSG, etc (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0237774/)) and he related that he has a gripe with The Orville because of how they shamelessly ripped off all the work done on Star Trek and didn't even attempt to hire anyone from the TNG era art department they ripped off of.

Quote from: Doug Drexler
Orville has picked our corpse clean, appropriated the texture and look that we spent decades creating. There are some of our writers there, director of photography Marvin Rush is there. They strive to imitate us visually... but is there a single art department person on staff who sweated blood to create the look that they are aping? Not a one. I think it's shameful. Shame on you McFarland.

Never thought of The Orville from a Hollywood professional stance before.  I'm still loving the show and intend to keep watching, but it's definitely a different perspective I was not expecting to see.

That sounds a bit like sour grapes to me. The TNG and Voyager aesthetic does run strong in the show, but that is not unique to Orville by any means. I'd be surprised if McFarlane actively avoided hiring people from TNG or Voyager - though I can see him fearing exposure to IP lawsuits if he did.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 01, 2019, 09:17:15 PM
So on another note I inadvertently got into a brief discussion (https://www.facebook.com/doug.drexler.7/posts/10155739863491104?comment_id=10155739928441104&reply_comment_id=10155742115246104&notif_id=1549037415704978&notif_t=feed_comment) with Doug Drexler (worked behind the scenes on TNG, Voyager, Enterprise, BSG, etc (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0237774/)) and he related that he has a gripe with The Orville because of how they shamelessly ripped off all the work done on Star Trek and didn't even attempt to hire anyone from the TNG era art department they ripped off of.

Quote from: Doug Drexler
Orville has picked our corpse clean, appropriated the texture and look that we spent decades creating. There are some of our writers there, director of photography Marvin Rush is there. They strive to imitate us visually... but is there a single art department person on staff who sweated blood to create the look that they are aping? Not a one. I think it's shameful. Shame on you McFarland.

Never thought of The Orville from a Hollywood professional stance before.  I'm still loving the show and intend to keep watching, but it's definitely a different perspective I was not expecting to see.

That sounds a bit like sour grapes to me. The TNG and Voyager aesthetic does run strong in the show, but that is not unique to Orville by any means. I'd be surprised if McFarlane actively avoided hiring people from TNG or Voyager - though I can see him fearing exposure to IP lawsuits if he did.

Oh it's definitely sour grapes and Drexler is no stranger to IP problems considering he was forced to shut down his absolutely amazing blog, Drexfiles, down over complaints of lack of attribution (complete BS).  Still, I can't say I don't understand, especially when they've brought on so many Trek actors, directors, and writers to help them be more Trek-like.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: The Latinist on February 02, 2019, 04:16:02 PM
I have not watched this show; I've been rather avoiding it. But given how much some of you seem to like it and the fact that it's been at least moderately successful, perhaps I've been unfairly dismissing it.

Can someone give me a sense of what (if anything) about it is transformational? That is to say...what makes it not just a Star Trek knock off, but an original work of art in its own right?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 02, 2019, 04:29:10 PM
It's good, stands on its own merit.

It fills the niche of 'optimistic, generally upbeat sci-fi.' 

And this last episode (S02E06) was hilarious and nicely done.  It was like an Isaac Asimov dramedy.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: swan on February 02, 2019, 08:24:44 PM
An entire planet of sapient robots? That couldn't have happened naturally. Who built them and why? What happened to the builders?

Basically, if a race realized that they could never reach the stars themselves then perhaps they'd create "well-behaved Von Neumann machines" that would use only non-living worlds to bootstrap & replicate on, with their primary goal being to save and share the memory of their creators. Even with thousands of expeditions/swarms sent out, if even just one or two made it to the self-replicating stage then evolution would hopefully take over.

It's a bit sad to think that over millennia they may forgot a lot of what they know about their creators, but with any luck they'd still exemplify the best properties of them and maybe remember to avoid some of their pitfalls. If they eventually stumble upon other intelligent life, then they could share the creators' history (one way or another) …and maybe even start carrying on the memories of these new friends too.

Then again, maybe the machines on Kaylon evolved from a different self-replicating technology designed to proclaim “Squids Are Stupid!” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ68cQj2KqQ )


I really like the arc idea too, though hopfully it won't be too trite. Sometimes it really does feel like I'm simply watching "TNG without the annoying smugness."
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 02, 2019, 08:29:21 PM
I was impressed with the nuanced writing. Neural networks are messy. Also, I KNEW I knew the blob's voice!
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: jt512 on February 02, 2019, 08:30:04 PM
I have not watched this show; I've been rather avoiding it. But given how much some of you seem to like it and the fact that it's been at least moderately successful, perhaps I've been unfairly dismissing it.

Can someone give me a sense of what (if anything) about it is transformational? That is to say...what makes it not just a Star Trek knock off, but an original work of art in its own right?

Just watch a couple episodes and judge for yourself.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Tassie Dave on February 02, 2019, 09:01:08 PM
I have not watched this show; I've been rather avoiding it. But given how much some of you seem to like it and the fact that it's been at least moderately successful, perhaps I've been unfairly dismissing it.

Can someone give me a sense of what (if anything) about it is transformational? That is to say...what makes it not just a Star Trek knock off, but an original work of art in its own right?

Just watch a couple episodes and judge for yourself.

I have dropped off after a few episodes into S2. It's not bad. It's just very Meh and some of the acting is fairly mediocre.

Though to be fair, I've never got into Star Trek either. Apart from loving the original series as a kid.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on February 02, 2019, 11:09:39 PM
It's basically star trek TNG fan fiction that explores more of the interpersonal relationships between crew members than TNG did.
And the people act more informally. 

But no it doesn't exactly break new ground.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 02, 2019, 11:29:01 PM
New ground?  Not really, but it's gone a bit further with its moral statements than TNG ever did.  They also seem more prepared to tackle currently difficult issues and make more definite statements than TNG too. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 03, 2019, 12:52:16 AM
OK, in terms of humor, this is a great example of them getting it right and drawing humor from the story and characters instead of tacking it on:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 03, 2019, 02:15:03 AM
I like how they handled Isaac last episode.

(click to show/hide)

Also, I love this B-Plot:
(click to show/hide)


(click to show/hide)

Arg, zapped for copyright.

Here's a clip of a one-off gag:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1zQXumoh_g
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 03, 2019, 02:49:19 AM
Arg, zapped for copyright.

Bah!  Oh well.  I tried.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 03, 2019, 02:52:22 AM
Let's try this again on Vimeo:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 03, 2019, 09:39:46 AM
New ground?  Not really, but it's gone a bit further with its moral statements than TNG ever did.  They also seem more prepared to tackle currently difficult issues and make more definite statements than TNG too.

For example, one of the bridge crew is from a 100% male race (they lay eggs). He and his husband routinely talk about sex and love and such. Their relationship is a significant part of the overall show, including real drama when their child had a terrible - but correctable - birth defect. The Captain and the First Officer were married before he was assigned to the Orville - another relationship that gets explored. The recent stuff with the doctor and the robot - it's continuing to explore the theme of what makes a relationship meaningful and fulfilling.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on February 03, 2019, 09:44:39 AM
I have not watched this show; I've been rather avoiding it. But given how much some of you seem to like it and the fact that it's been at least moderately successful, perhaps I've been unfairly dismissing it.

Can someone give me a sense of what (if anything) about it is transformational? That is to say...what makes it not just a Star Trek knock off, but an original work of art in its own right?
My minority opinion would be- Nothing.

Its Seth Mcfarlane using the TNG aesthetic and premise to give smug and stale takes on relationships, gender roles (theres a lot of "with women you have to x").
I guess its a good metaphor for him trying to understand the modern world as it probably seems alien to him as it seems to most aging comedians.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 03, 2019, 09:55:39 AM
I have not watched this show; I've been rather avoiding it. But given how much some of you seem to like it and the fact that it's been at least moderately successful, perhaps I've been unfairly dismissing it.

Can someone give me a sense of what (if anything) about it is transformational? That is to say...what makes it not just a Star Trek knock off, but an original work of art in its own right?
My minority opinion would be- Nothing.

Its Seth Mcfarlane using the TNG aesthetic and premise to give smug and stale takes on relationships, gender roles (theres a lot of "with women you have to x").
I guess its a good metaphor for him trying to understand the modern world as it probably seems alien to him as it seems to most aging comedians.

It's definitely the case that there is 'with women you have to x' - but also 'with men you have to x' and more generally 'with a partner you have to x'. There is complete acceptance of non-binary genders. Same sex relationships among human(oids) are handled pretty well too, I thought.

I've interpreted the 'stale takes on gender roles' not as smug, but as intentional starting points for people who don't have a useful frame of reference for the gender and relationship concepts that the show explores. I don't recall a case where the stale take was shown to be a good take in any way. As with s02e06, those generally lead to conflict and unhappiness, which is resolved by a more mature approach. All wrapped in humour, of course.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on February 03, 2019, 10:05:07 AM
I give them credit for actually planting the seeds of this romance plot in earlier episodes. It felt like it made sense instead of being something crazy.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on February 03, 2019, 12:23:05 PM
I have not watched this show; I've been rather avoiding it. But given how much some of you seem to like it and the fact that it's been at least moderately successful, perhaps I've been unfairly dismissing it.

Can someone give me a sense of what (if anything) about it is transformational? That is to say...what makes it not just a Star Trek knock off, but an original work of art in its own right?
My minority opinion would be- Nothing.

Its Seth Mcfarlane using the TNG aesthetic and premise to give smug and stale takes on relationships, gender roles (theres a lot of "with women you have to x").
I guess its a good metaphor for him trying to understand the modern world as it probably seems alien to him as it seems to most aging comedians.

It's definitely the case that there is 'with women you have to x' - but also 'with men you have to x' and more generally 'with a partner you have to x'. There is complete acceptance of non-binary genders. Same sex relationships among human(oids) are handled pretty well too, I thought.

I've interpreted the 'stale takes on gender roles' not as smug, but as intentional starting points for people who don't have a useful frame of reference for the gender and relationship concepts that the show explores. I don't recall a case where the stale take was shown to be a good take in any way. As with s02e06, those generally lead to conflict and unhappiness, which is resolved by a more mature approach. All wrapped in humour, of course.
It could be taken as intentional starting points but with the meta knowledge we have from his other work, Im not as inclined to be as generous about the intent of the jokes.
I dont think there is much value in breaking down those jokes when it is still just a silly comedy, but if it had just made me laugh, I probably would have been fine with it. Red Dwarf is still one of my all time favourite comedies for example and its not nearly as woke as this (how could it be?) but it makes me laugh and generally has more interesting things to say about sci fi.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 03, 2019, 01:05:26 PM
smug and stale takes on relationships, gender roles (theres a lot of "with women you have to x")

I took that as a joke.  In that episode, all the men/boys were idiots in the tradition of sitcom buffoonery. And Mercer's supposed to be bad at relationships
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on February 03, 2019, 01:49:03 PM
smug and stale takes on relationships, gender roles (theres a lot of "with women you have to x")

I took that as a joke.  In that episode, all the men/boys were idiots in the tradition of sitcom buffoonery. And Mercer's supposed to be bad at relationships
And I think that would be a fair assumption if we did not know so much about McFarlane himself.

Edit- I really dont want to seem like Im shitting on peoples enjoyment or interpretation of the show. My only intention was to give an alternate take to the question of why one should watch it.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 03, 2019, 02:57:49 PM
I don't know anything about the guy but the writing seemed structured for 'sitcom buffoonery'

In that episode:I have a hard time believing you're not supposed to laugh at this stuff.  Like Dann's poem?  Oh my god
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: werecow on February 03, 2019, 03:29:45 PM
I don't know anything about Seth Mcfarlane personally, but family guy pokes fun at traditional gender roles all the time, as does this show, so I'm not sure how to square that with Harry's view on the creator of both shows.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on February 03, 2019, 06:38:14 PM
I don't know anything about Seth Mcfarlane personally, but family guy pokes fun at traditional gender roles all the time, as does this show, so I'm not sure how to square that with Harry's view on the creator of both shows.
Maybe best to just assume Im wrong?

I disagree on Family Guy though. So maybe Im biased?
Aside from old Family Guy (when I was a different person completely) the only thing he has done that I liked was some American Dad and A Million Ways to Die in The West.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on February 05, 2019, 02:59:13 PM
Orville is essentially Seth MacFarlane cosplaying Star Trek. It's not ground breaking SF, but it's the only space set show worth watching until The Expanse returns on Amazon with season four (not a fan of Star Trek Discovery at all)

Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on February 05, 2019, 07:27:26 PM
One thing this show really reminded me is how much I missed non-serialized TV.  It's seen as less prestigious or artful, but it does let you do a type of storytelling that modern serialized shows can't really do. Take The Magicians for example. I really enjoy that show but ever since the back half of season 2...it's been really hard for the show writers to squeeze in "one off hey let's show something fun that could only exist in a world of magic" type episodes.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Harry Black on February 06, 2019, 05:57:29 AM
One thing this show really reminded me is how much I missed non-serialized TV.  It's seen as less prestigious or artful, but it does let you do a type of storytelling that modern serialized shows can't really do. Take The Magicians for example. I really enjoy that show but ever since the back half of season 2...it's been really hard for the show writers to squeeze in "one off hey let's show something fun that could only exist in a world of magic" type episodes.
Thats definitely a great point!
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on February 08, 2019, 05:58:13 AM
One thing this show really reminded me is how much I missed non-serialized TV.  It's seen as less prestigious or artful, but it does let you do a type of storytelling that modern serialized shows can't really do. Take The Magicians for example. I really enjoy that show but ever since the back half of season 2...it's been really hard for the show writers to squeeze in "one off hey let's show something fun that could only exist in a world of magic" type episodes.
Thats definitely a great point!

But the Orville is serialized to a degree. There are a number of running sub-plots such as Isaac's mission and the romance with the doctor as well as the threat of the Krill and the captain's effect of his dalliance with the spy. It's not like classic Trek or 60s/70s TV where NOTHING carried over from episode to episode.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: werecow on February 08, 2019, 07:51:23 AM
One thing this show really reminded me is how much I missed non-serialized TV.  It's seen as less prestigious or artful, but it does let you do a type of storytelling that modern serialized shows can't really do. Take The Magicians for example. I really enjoy that show but ever since the back half of season 2...it's been really hard for the show writers to squeeze in "one off hey let's show something fun that could only exist in a world of magic" type episodes.
Thats definitely a great point!

But the Orville is serialized to a degree. There are a number of running sub-plots such as Isaac's mission and the romance with the doctor as well as the threat of the Krill and the captain's effect of his dalliance with the spy. It's not like classic Trek or 60s/70s TV where NOTHING carried over from episode to episode.

Which imo is a good thing. I like the combination of having one-offs and running story lines.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 08, 2019, 08:30:08 AM
The difference between episodic television and serialized TV shows is not that Episodic shows are 100% self contained stories within each episode.  If that were the case, TOS wouldn't qualify either because later episodes relied at least partly on the audience's awareness of who these characters were and what the setting was, and that knowledge grew as the show went on.  What defines serialized television is that the new episode is a direct continuation of the plot from the previous episode and directly leads into the plot of the next.  Obviously, reality is messy and there are elements of serialized TV in episodic shows and vice versa, but it generally just boils down to whether the season tells one big story or several individual ones.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: werecow on February 08, 2019, 09:43:29 AM
The difference between episodic television and serialized TV shows is not that Episodic shows are 100% self contained stories within each episode.  If that were the case, TOS wouldn't qualify either because later episodes relied at least partly on the audience's awareness of who these characters were and what the setting was, and that knowledge grew as the show went on.  What defines serialized television is that the new episode is a direct continuation of the plot from the previous episode and directly leads into the plot of the next.  Obviously, reality is messy and there are elements of serialized TV in episodic shows and vice versa, but it generally just boils down to whether the season tells one big story or several individual ones.

Sure, but so far, this looks to be more of a hybrid between the two than TOS or even TNG. The episodic format works well for the comedic and SF aspect of it, but for the drama and action I tend to prefer the serialized format because there tends to be more character development, the stakes can be raised without it feeling too rushed, and the plots can be fleshed out over several episodes.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 08, 2019, 10:18:58 AM
I dunno, the only story that even comes close to being serialized is Ed and Kelly's divorce and subsequent moving on and they seem to be (thankfully) moving on from that being a major part of the show in this season. Every other inter-episode arc is dispersed widely over a season so far and is basically like TNG did call-backs and character evolution but a little bit more.  I mean you have the Krill, which are an arc in about the same way the Borg were, you have Bortas and Klyden's relationship, which has appeared in only a handful of episodes, and Penny and Isaac's relationship which was more or less background noise until last week.  The main difference in those arcs is that the happened a bit quicker than they would have in TNG, but in form they are pretty similar.

That all said, this to me is a great way to update TNG's style of storytelling a bit while avoiding going full-on serial with season-long main plots that drive each episode like Discovery has. I didn't realize how much I'd missed lighter-hearted, episodic TV until the Orville.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: werecow on February 08, 2019, 01:45:16 PM
I dunno, the only story that even comes close to being serialized is Ed and Kelly's divorce and subsequent moving on and they seem to be (thankfully) moving on from that being a major part of the show in this season. Every other inter-episode arc is dispersed widely over a season so far and is basically like TNG did call-backs and character evolution but a little bit more.  I mean you have the Krill, which are an arc in about the same way the Borg were, you have Bortas and Klyden's relationship, which has appeared in only a handful of episodes, and Penny and Isaac's relationship which was more or less background noise until last week.  The main difference in those arcs is that the happened a bit quicker than they would have in TNG, but in form they are pretty similar.

Hm, yeah, maybe the "bit quicker" is what I'm referring to. Maybe my memory is just hazy, but iirc in TNG you had similar arcs, but it often took a very long time to get back to any of them (even if you had as many multi-episode arcs or callbacks per season, seasons were also nearly twice as long) and most of the time the events of one week's episode had next to zero effect on what happened the next week. In this show I get a somewhat greater sense of continuity, not just because of the Krill arc and the multiple interpersonal relationships1 but because even in "episodic episodes" it feels like there is a bit more lasting character development, or the dynamics between the characters changes more based on what happened the last time we saw them together, or there are simply some more comments or jokes about what happened in a recent episode. There was definitely character development in TNG, but most of the time it felt to me like it took a back seat compared to the SF parts of the story. Could just be my memory failing me but it does fit the way a lot of TV shows were done back in the 90s.

1The one thing I never liked about the Trek multiverse is that even the humans often seemed alien to me in that they were too idealized and - given the progressive nature of the show, and the fact that I was in puberty when that show ran - oddly sexless - I still can't imagine most of the characters as anything other than smooth Ken & Barbie dolls. }|:op
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 08, 2019, 05:21:00 PM
Episodic: Use a random number generator to select viewing order. Works fine.
Serial: Watch in chronological order or be lost AF.

ST:TNG had MOTW (Monster Of The Week) episodes that would fit anywhere in that season, if not the series. They also had serialized episodes that only make sense in order. I'm not sure if Orville has any eps that are truely standalone within a season since they talk about relationships so much.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on February 10, 2019, 10:25:06 AM
I really doubt anyone would be truly lost though...worst case scenario 2 minutes of wikipedia would bring you up to speed.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 10, 2019, 01:26:15 PM
I really doubt anyone would be truly lost though...worst case scenario 2 minutes of wikipedia would bring you up to speed.

Wikipedia didn't exist when TNG was first run in 1987. Having serial TV meant you had to watch every episode or be lost. I bet the internet has been part of the shift.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 10, 2019, 01:43:30 PM
I don't see how any episodes of the Orville have been worse in that regard than say I Borg, Brothers, any of the Q episodes after Farpoint, Journey's End, and on and on.  You act like recurring characters, references to previous episodes, and continuity of setting and story are strictly inventions of the last 15-20 years. 

I think a better test for episodic vs serialized is whether or not the show could be syndicated out of order without confusing the hell out of people.  Breaking Bad, no way.  BSG, maybe some episodes.  TNG, absolutely yes (that's how I started watching it).  The Orville, I say yes as well.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on February 12, 2019, 08:26:45 AM
I'm perplexed as to why there was a re-run last week. Not a pre-emption for a sporting event or awards show, but a repeat of an episode barely over a month old. And this during February, a sweeps month the ratings from which networks use to set ad rates for the rest of the year (other sweeps months being May, July, and November). You don't air a re-run during sweeps! That's when you air your biggest episodes, finales, or two-parters (Orville does have a two-parter coming up after next week).
 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on February 12, 2019, 11:31:21 AM
I'm perplexed as to why there was a re-run last week. Not a pre-emption for a sporting event or awards show, but a repeat of an episode barely over a month old. And this during February, a sweeps month the ratings from which networks use to set ad rates for the rest of the year (other sweeps months being May, July, and November). You don't air a re-run during sweeps! That's when you air your biggest episodes, finales, or two-parters (Orville does have a two-parter coming up after next week).
 

Fox kills good shows?
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on February 12, 2019, 12:57:04 PM
I'm perplexed as to why there was a re-run last week. Not a pre-emption for a sporting event or awards show, but a repeat of an episode barely over a month old. And this during February, a sweeps month the ratings from which networks use to set ad rates for the rest of the year (other sweeps months being May, July, and November). You don't air a re-run during sweeps! That's when you air your biggest episodes, finales, or two-parters (Orville does have a two-parter coming up after next week).
 

Sweeps measure local ratings, not national ratings. National ratings are sampled daily and weekly.

But airing a re-run doesn't probably doesn't help you local affiliates boost their evening news ratings.

They have a lot of weeks left in the season and limited number of episodes left, they may prefer to have a run of new episodes leading up to the season finale rather than drop a repeat in March or April.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on February 22, 2019, 03:33:16 PM
"Identity" Pt. 1

Well. We totally called that plot twist, didn't we guys? Can't believe there are actually people who were surprised. Must not read or watch a lot of Science Fiction!

Some non-spoilers (or at least minor spoilers) thoughts:

*Wait! The Orville can land?!? Well, it is  smller than the Enterprise and a little more aerodynamic...but why? That's what shuttlecraft are for!  And it doesn't really land, but docks with one of those towering techno-spires.

*How is there a breathable atmosphere for the Orville crew breath without environment suits on Kraylon? It appears that the planet is entire covered in machinery, which makes sense for a planet of AIs. No plant life anywhere.  Where's the oxygen coming from? Why would there be any, the AIs don't need it so why would they care?
 
*I have more thoughts, but they fall into major spoiler territory so I'll wait a  bit. I just hope they don't hit the total re-set button with a major character next week. There should be long term and dire consequences for him as a result of all this.


Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: PANTS! on February 22, 2019, 03:36:59 PM
I mean everybody knows that when you  nuke a Hi-Tech City the Nanorobots take over the planet.

And yeah, you could be a little bit more lax on the sliders but they still can overheat the planet and destroy their civilization through global warming.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 22, 2019, 03:56:33 PM
Maybe they'll find some backdoor vulnerability and turn the entire race into Isaacs.  Homogeneity means everyone has the same vulnerabilities.  Diversity saves the day?

*How is there a breathable atmosphere for the Orville crew breath without environment suits on Kraylon? It appears that the planet is entire covered in machinery, which makes sense for a planet of AIs. No plant life anywhere.  Where's the oxygen coming from? Why would there be any, the AIs don't need it so why would they care?

Oceans out-of-view?  And an easy atmosphere keeps maintenance requirements down.  Iirc, Venus implodes and melts our landers very quickly.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on February 22, 2019, 04:37:38 PM
"Identity" Pt. 1

Well. We totally called that plot twist, didn't we guys? Can't believe there are actually people who were surprised. Must not read or watch a lot of Science Fiction!

Some non-spoilers (or at least minor spoilers) thoughts:

*Wait! The Orville can land?!? Well, it is  smller than the Enterprise and a little more aerodynamic...but why? That's what shuttlecraft are for!  And it doesn't really land, but docks with one of those towering techno-spires.

*How is there a breathable atmosphere for the Orville crew breath without environment suits on Kraylon? It appears that the planet is entire covered in machinery, which makes sense for a planet of AIs. No plant life anywhere.  Where's the oxygen coming from? Why would there be any, the AIs don't need it so why would they care?

I agree on pretty much all fronts.  I'm sure they landed the ship specifically so later events could happen.  Kinda weird either they've never done it before or that they chose to do it now.

*I have more thoughts, but they fall into major spoiler territory so I'll wait a  bit. I just hope they don't hit the total re-set button with a major character next week. There should be long term and dire consequences for him as a result of all this.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 22, 2019, 04:44:32 PM
Oh man, that would own.  Maybe they'll go all Dr. Strangelove about the organic's propensity to sap and impurify our precious algorithms
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on February 22, 2019, 05:05:32 PM
I also thought the Union was being far too hasty in extending membership invite to Kraylon. These are machines they're dealing with! Wouldn't the Union want to know their backstory first? Who built them, why, and what happened to the builders? You know, the very same questions we were asking earlier in this thread.  Heck wouldn't the Union want to verify that they were truly autonomous machines and not under control of some other race for possible nefarious or at least conflicting ambitions?    But then again they let the Maclans in, so...…..
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: swan on February 23, 2019, 04:00:52 PM
(click to show/hide)

Anyway, whatever happens next I know will be interesting and probably unexpected; definitely enjoyable.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on February 23, 2019, 05:15:03 PM
I’m speculating that the boys will be the ones to figure out the Kaylon strategy because they’ve played a lot of that 3D chess-like game and that will give them an insight.

I’m almost certain Issac will do something traitorous (to the Kaylons) and save the ship somehow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Paul Blevins Jr. on March 01, 2019, 02:56:19 PM
"Identity" Pt. 2

Well. That was totally predictable. Enjoyable but predictable. I imagine the next few eps are going to be bottle shows as it looks they blew most of the season budget on this! Some thoughts, I'll try to keep spoilers minor:

*Why didn't Yaphet keep passing guns to more of the crew so they might have staged a full-scale attempt to re-take the ship?

*Disappointed to learn that Isaac wasn't named after Asimov. Maybe McFarland felt Newton would be know to a wider audience.

*Also disappointed to learn that the Kraylon were mistreated by their builders. I liked the idea that the AI's decided to exterminate all biological life out of a cold, emotionless logical reasoning that such life was inefficient, inferior, and irrelevant. Nothing personal guys! Giving the Kraylon a somewhat legitimate reason for their jihad robbed them of a bit of menace. 

*Don't like the idea that of all the Kraylon only one, Isaac, was constructed after the revolution and of course he turns out to have "feelings". I liked my idea of the Kraylon sending out dozens of Ambassadors to all the races in this universe, including the Krill. It would have   made for an interesting episode meeting the Krill version of Isaac.

*Not buying that Isaac would be forgiven so easily, even if he was instrumental in defeating the invasion. How will a Orville crewman who lost a husband or wife in the attack feel rounding a corridor and seeing Isaac serving aboard the ship? What will his rank/job be aboard the ship? I can't see anyone taking orders from him after this!
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on March 01, 2019, 03:27:09 PM
"Identity" Pt. 2

*Don't like the idea that of all the Kraylon only one, Isaac, was constructed after the revolution and of course he turns out to have "feelings". I liked my idea of the Kraylon sending out dozens of Ambassadors to all the races in this universe, including the Krill. It would have   made for an interesting episode meeting the Krill version of Isaac.


I don't think they said he was the only one. Just that he was born after the overthrow. Maybe that's all the blue-eyed bots.  Hmm....
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: Eternally Learning on March 01, 2019, 06:09:17 PM
I completely agree that this episode was waaaay too predictable, but ultimately enjoyable.  My biggest disappointment is in seeing the complete lack of visual creativity of the show on full display here.  All Union ships are virtually identical, just different sizes.  Same with all Krill.  Talk about boring, and what a way to make me not interested at all in whatever world-building is going on in this show. 
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: superdave on March 04, 2019, 08:36:37 AM
I'm still enjoying the show, but creatively it never quite seems to fully commit to anything.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: The Latinist on March 05, 2019, 01:53:06 PM
It's basically star trek TNG fan fiction that explores more of the interpersonal relationships between crew members than TNG did.
And the people act more informally. 

But no it doesn't exactly break new ground.

Yeah, that was my impression, and that's not something I am remotely interested in consuming.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: CarbShark on June 29, 2019, 12:15:44 AM
McFarlane announced that they’re doing season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 14, 2019, 05:43:10 PM
been marathoning this season.
it's almost insufferably blatant progressive propaganda for children, but they've had a couple interesting episode concepts (I think it was eps 6 and 7)
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 14, 2019, 05:45:41 PM

It's basically star trek TNG fan fiction that explores more of the interpersonal relationships between crew members than TNG did.
And the people act more informally. 

But no it doesn't exactly break new ground.

it's just the same old naive utopian american idealism updated for this century's 'next generation', the future world where we will try to coexist with issues of sexism and gender issues and sex robots and the like.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 14, 2019, 05:49:36 PM
McFarlane announced that they’re doing season.

what was it that they said when they introduced Seth MacFarlane on the Comedy Central roast of Charlie Sheen.... when he does something, by god he does it  to  death!

he'll do a Moclan spin-off Will & Grace and an Isaac and Dr Claire Mork & Mindy reboot if he can.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on October 16, 2019, 12:30:18 AM
been marathoning this season.
it's almost insufferably blatant progressive propaganda for children, but they've had a couple interesting episode concepts (I think it was eps 6 and 7)

That is just as accurate as a description of ST:TOS when it first aired.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 16, 2019, 04:10:54 AM
been marathoning this season.
it's almost insufferably blatant progressive propaganda for children, but they've had a couple interesting episode concepts (I think it was eps 6 and 7)

That is just as accurate as a description of ST:TOS when it first aired.

never saw it
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on October 25, 2019, 09:49:19 AM
been marathoning this season.
it's almost insufferably blatant progressive propaganda for children, but they've had a couple interesting episode concepts (I think it was eps 6 and 7)

That is just as accurate as a description of ST:TOS when it first aired.

never saw it

Probably not something you'd enjoy, based on your thoughts about this one.
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: GodSlayer on October 25, 2019, 11:02:14 AM
been marathoning this season.
it's almost insufferably blatant progressive propaganda for children, but they've had a couple interesting episode concepts (I think it was eps 6 and 7)

That is just as accurate as a description of ST:TOS when it first aired.

never saw it

Probably not something you'd enjoy, based on your thoughts about this one.

enjoyment isn't the only value in a TV show, though
Title: Re: The Orville
Post by: brilligtove on October 25, 2019, 01:14:22 PM
been marathoning this season.
it's almost insufferably blatant progressive propaganda for children, but they've had a couple interesting episode concepts (I think it was eps 6 and 7)

That is just as accurate as a description of ST:TOS when it first aired.

never saw it

Probably not something you'd enjoy, based on your thoughts about this one.

enjoyment isn't the only value in a TV show, though

I'm certainly not going to tell you how to spend your time! :)