[THE ORViLLE] | Season Two |

garaks31 · September 2017

Directed by; Jon Favreau

Air Date; September 10, 2017

S01E01 - Old Wounds ,( the poll is for the first episode! )

Spoilers plz with the code !!!

TheOrville.png?itok=2uH_lNAV

Synopsis; http://www.geekexchange.com/reviews/the-orville-1-01-old-wounds/

The 25th century. Space pilot Ed Mercer (Seth MacFarlane) accepts a position as Captain of the U.S.S. Orville and finds to his dismay that his ex-wife Kelly (Adrianne Palicki) will serve as his First Officer. On its first mission, the Orville run into the hostile alien Krill. their intentions steal a device which can accelerate time.

Next Eps. Promo

https://youtu.be/NC-Toz6zw48

Episode Two Discussions,

https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/startrekonline#/discussion/1234431/the-orville-s01e02-command-performance-discussions/p1

garaks31 · September 2017

Something of a shaky maiden voyage, the crew's backstory and workstation's could get more screen time. second episode's trailer shows promise on that aspect. i like unique scenes like,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_9RnJdXw4M

and the tree solution was definitely unique. got a SG A feeling from this project.

jonsills · September 2017

I try to cut pilots some slack - everyone's still feeling their way into the characters, the writers are still working out the exact parameters of the world, that sort of thing.

The humor seemed a bit forced, especially the gags around the helmsman ("hugging the donkey"? Seriously? And I don't care how you feel about your superior officer, referring to her as a "TRIBBLE" during duty hours, especially while manning your post, is a serious no-no). Some of the gags landed, though - I still think the captain's "Arbor Day" line was superior to "got wood". And the bit with the marble was funnier than I had thought it would be, helping to establish Ed as a lovable-loser sort.

The device was also kind of familiar to me, similar to Raymond Sinclair's last invention in the Larry Niven short story "ARM" (although in the story, it was mostly used to set up a truly surreal murder scene, as well as make it extraordinarily hard to figure out whodunnit). At least this device had a use - a couple of them, in fact, which also helps explain why the A.R.M. in Niven's story are mostly concerned with regulation of new technologies.

One background detail I did rather like was the fact that the desk in the Captain's Office included a small model of the Wright Flyer.

smokebailey · September 2017

Nice station and ships.

garaks31 · September 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTHFM6LZF-A

Channel, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-AtVTn-F0RUtdXDXzhXzmQ/videos

hevach · September 2017

It wasn't good, but it wasn't the abject horror that the reviews led me to believe. It's not good enough for Fox to cancel it in season 1. Also, it's Seth Macfarlane, and Fox owes so much to him at this point that I'm sure they'll free ride him at least two. I'll decide in a couple more episodes if I *want* them to, though.

mustrumridcully0 · September 2017

It was okay, I'd say. I kinda feel like the comedic aspect seems a bit forced, on the other hand, the basic story of the first episode wasn't really all that special and needed something to set it apart, I suppose.

It really felt like TNG in many ways.
The music for example - it sometimes seemed as if it was going into the TNG theme, and then quickly changed.
But also the physical action - aside from them being able for their security officer (sorry, still learning the names) to jump extremely high - had a very TNG like feel, with people standing mostly in the open and shooting energy weapons and mostly missing (and when the enemy energy weapons hit, it's definitely not deadly.)

They got holodecks, but no transporters. I'd say that's preferable to the opposite, from a setting point of view.

Overall, I think it might work for a throwback to "old trek", and the comedy might actually help sell it in the end. If you were trying to create a new serious Sci-Fi setting, I think you would normally have to make a few things more "realistic" or "believable".

bberge1701 · September 2017

garaks31 wrote: »

Something of a shaky maiden voyage, the crew's backstory and workstation's could get more screen time.

jonsills wrote: »

I try to cut pilots some slack - everyone's still feeling their way into the characters, the writers are still working out the exact parameters of the world, that sort of thing.

I'm on the same page as @jonsills here. It always takes series some time for a series to establish itself. I don't expect fully-formed characters with all their backstory laid out on Day One. I think they did an adequate job of establishing the personalities we will get to know better over the course of time.

All in all, I enjoyed it. Since many of the jokes in the pilot were laid out in the first trailer, no big surprises there. I thought that the crew demonstrated some good problem-solving skills, and their solutions didn't come across to me as overly contrived (i.e. technobabble miracle at the last minute).

garaks31 · September 2017

smokebailey · September 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEuYPfVXStc

angrytarg · September 2017

I thought it was okay. It felt like TNG but with actually believable people that make jokes and treat work like work ("we won't get off at five?" was soo refreshingly relatable xD). It needs to be seen wether the light hearted approach and actual episodic stories mix well, so far I think it might work. The "abor day" solution was very Trek I might add.

I really like to kick those reviewers hoof to the teeth though. At first since we throw tantrums at DSC they all hype Orville and now they "burn their god" just so we can find DSC not so bad, or what is going on? "The Orville" doesn't try to be more than what you see, it's not the show's fault people make TRIBBLE up and are disappointed by their own unrealistic expectations.

mustrumridcully0 · September 2017

valoreah wrote: »

Review: Fox’s ‘The Orville’ is Star Trek, the Next Regurgitation

Not that I completely disagree or anything, but when we're talking about a Star Trek "inspired" science fiction show, wouldn't it be a good idea to not just point out Penny Johnson's role as Star Trek alumni? I suppose her role as president's wife in 24 is more recent and a bit bigger than the role of Sisko's love interest, but it just seems much more relevant.

smokebailey · September 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPswIqR9lUE

legendarylycan · September 2017

smokebailey wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPswIqR9lUE

so what's the jem'hadar lookalike race called?

hevach · September 2017

Krill.

lordrezeon · September 2017

Well a lot of complaints I've seen stem from two core issues.
-Issue One: That it is to much like the old stale Star Trek that Hollywood never understood in the first place, rather than the hip edgy new Star Trek that Hollywood celebrated.
-Issue Two: That it is a Seth MacFarlane product. These tend to fall along the lines that it is low brow and uncultured, as in a show for the common man rather than the self-important elites that make up show business.

Overall I think the show is off to a pretty good start. It does a lot to capture the old fun adventurous feel that Star Trek used to have, while avoiding being preachy. The light hearted atmosphere really helps it stand apart for the plethora of melodramas currently on the market, pessimism is neither enlightened nor entertaining.

The light hearted tone also helps temper audience expectations about the special effects. We simply understand that they aren't trying to go for ultra realism with the effects.

The pacing was a little quick, but they had a lot to get through in a single episode pilot. They had to introduce a world, an assemble cast of characters, while at the same time providing an entertaining story. It is only natural that they had to keep things at a brisk pace. Likewise we can probably count on more character growth from the cast as the season progresses.

As for if the show will have numerous seasons or not... does it matter? Who cares if it runs as long as a Trek show or not as long as we enjoy watching it. I'd rather have an enjoyable but short lived show than a long drawn out show that I dislike.

rattler2 · September 2017

coldnapalm wrote: »

Humm...it's not a comedy...on Fox....

Yeah it's doomed.

When it comes to FOX and Sci-Fi of any kind... yeeeaaaa... FOX doesn't like Sci-Fi. Almost Human was a pretty good show with a top tier actor (Karl Urban) and they still canned it after one season. And then there was Firefly, which they aired out of order and canned after one season, and that was written by Joss Whedon, the same guy who did the successful Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

commanderkassy · September 2017

patrickngo wrote: »

to me, it felt like maybe MacFarlane actually cares about the project.

He's one of us, he's a *huge* Trek fan.

Anyways, I absolutely loved this show. I didn't think all the humor hit home as well as it could have, but I was exhilarated all the way through, and later I figured out why: it felt like *real* Star Trek, even being a "knock off", it felt more genuine than Enterprise or the Kelvin movies ever did. It was light-hearted, and fun, and adventurous, and exciting, and it had a cool world with interesting, well realized characters. I love it.

smokebailey · September 2017

lordrezeon wrote: »

Well a lot of complaints I've seen stem from two core issues.
-Issue One: That it is to much like the old stale Star Trek that Hollywood never understood in the first place, rather than the hip edgy new Star Trek that Hollywood celebrated.
-Issue Two: That it is a Seth MacFarlane product. These tend to fall along the lines that it is low brow and uncultured, as in a show for the common man rather than the self-important elites that make up show business.

Overall I think the show is off to a pretty good start. It does a lot to capture the old fun adventurous feel that Star Trek used to have, while avoiding being preachy. The light hearted atmosphere really helps it stand apart for the plethora of melodramas currently on the market, pessimism is neither enlightened nor entertaining.

The light hearted tone also helps temper audience expectations about the special effects. We simply understand that they aren't trying to go for ultra realism with the effects.

The pacing was a little quick, but they had a lot to get through in a single episode pilot. They had to introduce a world, an assemble cast of characters, while at the same time providing an entertaining story. It is only natural that they had to keep things at a brisk pace. Likewise we can probably count on more character growth from the cast as the season progresses.

As for if the show will have numerous seasons or not... does it matter? Who cares if it runs as long as a Trek show or not as long as we enjoy watching it. I'd rather have an enjoyable but short lived show than a long drawn out show that I dislike.

Issue One: SOD Hollywood. Some of us don't give a smeg about 'hip, edgy new whatever'.
Issue Two: Well, they kept trying to cancel his stuff several times, and it always returned. And a lot of the humor and stuff does take some brains to grasp, and not so much the 'average slob' material, since the 'average slob' material is everywhere else.

And personally, I really don't care for 'realism', since in sci fi, and the future....what's 'realistic'?

If we wanted 'realistic', I'd have batman and ironman dropping dead from heart failure due to steroid/drug use, like all the pro wrestlers many of us saw as kids, dropping like flies before age 60. ~shrugs~ Or Having Batman fighting bankers and corporate interests rather than a few disfigured/mentally unhinged gangsters.

smokebailey · September 2017

commanderkassy wrote: »

patrickngo wrote: »

to me, it felt like maybe MacFarlane actually cares about the project.

He's one of us, he's a *huge* Trek fan.

Anyways, I absolutely loved this show. I didn't think all the humor hit home as well as it could have, but I was exhilarated all the way through, and later I figured out why: it felt like *real* Star Trek, even being a "knock off", it felt more genuine than Enterprise or the Kelvin movies ever did. It was light-hearted, and fun, and adventurous, and exciting, and it had a cool world with interesting, well realized characters. I love it.

Yep, and I remember seeing Patrick Stewart, talking about Red Dwarf, wishing that some of that sorta humor would have been in TNG.

One does not need some major, multi billion dollar corporate conglomerate to make something good on screen, yo.

nickcastleton · September 2017

I liked it sure pilots are never great i honestly cant think of any pilot episode id say i loved including any star trek series.
im looking forward to seeing more and at the end of the day reviews dont matter its the viewing figures.
Remember

https://youtu.be/_6KX7RUpLmU

mirrorchaos · September 2017

All i will say is that Robert D. McNeill and Johnathan Frakes are involved in the project as directors. For Seth's project at least, he is off to a solid start with the right mix of people along with Penny Johnson and guest stars like Robert Knepper and Charlize Theron. Even so the first episode got some pretty rotten reviews. First impressions are the most important, it's always the case.

For now i am watching it from the outside looking in not even knowing about this Orville thing until a few days ago until it showed up on Ten Forward. If things pick up for this project instead of sliding into obscurity, it may give an early glimpse into what is in store for Star Trek Discovery and from there it will be a battle between CBS and Fox for who can do a trek like version better.

Competition usually brings out the best in people.. as well as the worst, lets hope it's not the latter and doesn't turn into a NASCAR inspired helmet being thrown at a windshield or a fistfight in the pits. Healthy competition would inspire better acting and more support for both projects from CBS and Fox. It's entirely possible that both Discovery and Orville could use each other in competition to make both of them stronger to last the distance.

No point thinking too far ahead, it's better to wait and and see what happens by the end of the year.

toiva · September 2017

Assuming the pacing gets a little better, it'll be just fine.

jonsills · September 2017

They're two different shows, on two different networks, with two different premises. Nobody ever claims there's only room for one cop show on TV - hell, last I checked there were three different shows called "NCIS"! Why do The Orville and TRIBBLE have to be in "competition"?

fiberteksyfir · September 2017

> @rattler2 said:
> coldnapalm wrote: »
>
> Humm...it's not a comedy...on Fox....
>
> Yeah it's doomed.
>
>
>
>
> When it comes to FOX and Sci-Fi of any kind... yeeeaaaa... FOX doesn't like Sci-Fi. Almost Human was a pretty good show with a top tier actor (Karl Urban) and they still canned it after one season. And then there was Firefly, which they aired out of order and canned after one season, and that was written by Joss Whedon, the same guy who did the successful Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

And the Avengers. Just sayin. Fox cancelled Family Guy twice too. So yeah, they're not known for making sound decisions like that. Anyways to the Orville.. I liked it, wish there was more Norm in the first episode, humor was definitely there some of it awkwardly placed but it WAS a first episode, most shows take me at least three or four to get really interested. All in all it's decent and I'm very interested to see where it goes. Once there's more character and story development we'll know.

darakoss · September 2017

jonsills wrote: »

I try to cut pilots some slack - everyone's still feeling their way into the characters, the writers are still working out the exact parameters of the world, that sort of thing.

The humor seemed a bit forced, especially the gags around the helmsman ("hugging the donkey"? Seriously? And I don't care how you feel about your superior officer, referring to her as a "****" during duty hours, especially while manning your post, is a serious no-no). Some of the gags landed, though - I still think the captain's "Arbor Day" line was superior to "got wood". And the bit with the marble was funnier than I had thought it would be, helping to establish Ed as a lovable-loser sort.

The device was also kind of familiar to me, similar to Raymond Sinclair's last invention in the Larry Niven short story "ARM" (although in the story, it was mostly used to set up a truly surreal murder scene, as well as make it extraordinarily hard to figure out whodunnit). At least this device had a use - a couple of them, in fact, which also helps explain why the A.R.M. in Niven's story are mostly concerned with regulation of new technologies.

One background detail I did rather like was the fact that the desk in the Captain's Office included a small model of the Wright Flyer.

look on his lamp...theres a Kermit the Frog too.

[THE ORViLLE] | Season Two |

[THE ORViLLE] | Season Two | 38 votes

Comments