logo Sign In

Post #1112777

Author
m_s0
Parent topic
All Things Star Trek
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/1112777/action/topic#1112777
Date created
30-Sep-2017, 1:10 PM

DominicCobb said:

I don’t know how you can call her uninteresting. I think her backstory is pretty fascinating at the least, and she’s been put into a position that could prove compelling.

On paper perhaps. It really should have been fascinating if you break everything down, and they might turn it around still, but for the time being, as a viewer, I’m in a position of having to force myself to watch any more of Discovery. They sacrificed storytelling for meaningless spectacle and it paid off going by the overall positive reviews/buzz, but I feel whatever good intentions or ideas might be buried in there - on paper - are wholly let down by their execution.

dahmage said:

I agree with a lot of what you’re saying but I do think you need to give Discovery a few more episodes to find its footing. It would be nice if that wasn’t the case but it seems like it is.

Yes, I’m far from judging the entire show on the basis of the first two episodes alone, especially given the story structure, but man, I am not excited to continue watching at this point. Here’s hoping Jason Isaacs (hello) will be more than a bit player in the background. I guess that’s the one thing I can latch on to.

dahmage said:

I don’t really laugh at much of the attempt at slapstick humor in the Orville , but I do find the overall pacing and theme of the episodes to be more of the track I like than Discovery has been.

One good thing I can say is that there are genuinely clever riffs on Trek tropes peppered throughout the episodes. Often they get dragged out in typical Family Guy fashion (Shakespeare in ep. 4) to the point where they lose their impact somewhat, but they are there. Ideally, The Orville could evolve, cut back on the cringe and gain restraint in the humor (‘humor’) department, but I don’t think it will.