Proud owner of CBS All Access Commercial Free account.
I am watching Star Trek: Discovery this season.
And if the stories come close to what that TV Guide threw together for the article...it will be.
Crossing my fingers and hoping to God/dess this will be MY STAR TREK. About f-ing time.
"Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
honestly I think it's more likely that they simply don't want to ruin opening night by having people posting plot synopses all over the internet before then.
Reviews aren't the same as synopses leaks. The Orville had negative reviews (clearly paid hatchet jobs) prior to its release. It seems to me, that Discovery are only prepared to play with a hand stacked in their favor
Heh, clearly you haven't read enough Sun Tzu. If you're expecting a "fair" fight, then you should expect to lose. Why? because you don't know everything, and what you don't know probably will hurt you. Thus if you're trying to win you should give yourselves as much of an advantage as you can.
Not for a long time Oh I don't ever expect a fair fight, nor expect CBS to hold themselves to such standards
As someone who was probably paraphrasing Sun Tzu once said: If you're not playing to win, you're waiting to lose.
honestly I think it's more likely that they simply don't want to ruin opening night by having people posting plot synopses all over the internet before then.
Reviews aren't the same as synopses leaks. The Orville had negative reviews (clearly paid hatchet jobs) prior to its release. It seems to me, that Discovery are only prepared to play with a hand stacked in their favor
Heh, clearly you haven't read enough Sun Tzu. If you're expecting a "fair" fight, then you should expect to lose. Why? because you don't know everything, and what you don't know probably will hurt you. Thus if you're trying to win you should give yourselves as much of an advantage as you can.
Not for a long time Oh I don't ever expect a fair fight, nor expect CBS to hold themselves to such standards
As someone who was probably paraphrasing Sun Tzu once said: If you're not playing to win, you're waiting to lose.
For sure There's a distinction though, between playing to win, and stacking the hand in your favor Ethics
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
honestly I think it's more likely that they simply don't want to ruin opening night by having people posting plot synopses all over the internet before then.
Reviews aren't the same as synopses leaks. The Orville had negative reviews (clearly paid hatchet jobs) prior to its release. It seems to me, that Discovery are only prepared to play with a hand stacked in their favor
Heh, clearly you haven't read enough Sun Tzu. If you're expecting a "fair" fight, then you should expect to lose. Why? because you don't know everything, and what you don't know probably will hurt you. Thus if you're trying to win you should give yourselves as much of an advantage as you can.
Not for a long time Oh I don't ever expect a fair fight, nor expect CBS to hold themselves to such standards
As someone who was probably paraphrasing Sun Tzu once said: If you're not playing to win, you're waiting to lose.
For sure There's a distinction though, between playing to win, and stacking the hand in your favor Ethics
If you're playing to win, you should take every advantage allowed to you.
honestly I think it's more likely that they simply don't want to ruin opening night by having people posting plot synopses all over the internet before then.
Reviews aren't the same as synopses leaks. The Orville had negative reviews (clearly paid hatchet jobs) prior to its release. It seems to me, that Discovery are only prepared to play with a hand stacked in their favor
Heh, clearly you haven't read enough Sun Tzu. If you're expecting a "fair" fight, then you should expect to lose. Why? because you don't know everything, and what you don't know probably will hurt you. Thus if you're trying to win you should give yourselves as much of an advantage as you can.
Not for a long time Oh I don't ever expect a fair fight, nor expect CBS to hold themselves to such standards
As someone who was probably paraphrasing Sun Tzu once said: If you're not playing to win, you're waiting to lose.
For sure There's a distinction though, between playing to win, and stacking the hand in your favor Ethics
If you're playing to win, you should take every advantage allowed to you.
Indeed As I said; the difference between playing to win (within the rules) and stacking the hand in one's favor (cheating)
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
honestly I think it's more likely that they simply don't want to ruin opening night by having people posting plot synopses all over the internet before then.
Reviews aren't the same as synopses leaks. The Orville had negative reviews (clearly paid hatchet jobs) prior to its release. It seems to me, that Discovery are only prepared to play with a hand stacked in their favor
Heh, clearly you haven't read enough Sun Tzu. If you're expecting a "fair" fight, then you should expect to lose. Why? because you don't know everything, and what you don't know probably will hurt you. Thus if you're trying to win you should give yourselves as much of an advantage as you can.
Not for a long time Oh I don't ever expect a fair fight, nor expect CBS to hold themselves to such standards
As someone who was probably paraphrasing Sun Tzu once said: If you're not playing to win, you're waiting to lose.
For sure There's a distinction though, between playing to win, and stacking the hand in your favor Ethics
If you're playing to win, you should take every advantage allowed to you.
Indeed As I said; the difference between playing to win (within the rules) and stacking the hand in one's favor (cheating)
The question then becomes "what are the rules?" And well... there is no rule that says any producer of any TV show or movie is required to allow "reviewers" to see it before the general public.
honestly I think it's more likely that they simply don't want to ruin opening night by having people posting plot synopses all over the internet before then.
Reviews aren't the same as synopses leaks. The Orville had negative reviews (clearly paid hatchet jobs) prior to its release. It seems to me, that Discovery are only prepared to play with a hand stacked in their favor
Heh, clearly you haven't read enough Sun Tzu. If you're expecting a "fair" fight, then you should expect to lose. Why? because you don't know everything, and what you don't know probably will hurt you. Thus if you're trying to win you should give yourselves as much of an advantage as you can.
Not for a long time Oh I don't ever expect a fair fight, nor expect CBS to hold themselves to such standards
As someone who was probably paraphrasing Sun Tzu once said: If you're not playing to win, you're waiting to lose.
For sure There's a distinction though, between playing to win, and stacking the hand in your favor Ethics
If you're playing to win, you should take every advantage allowed to you.
Indeed As I said; the difference between playing to win (within the rules) and stacking the hand in one's favor (cheating)
The question then becomes "what are the rules?" And well... there is no rule that says any producer of any TV show or movie is required to allow "reviewers" to see it before the general public.
When one show gave premier viewings, and didn't tell anyone not to write reviews, but another show specifically forbids reviews (but still allows tweets of endorsement) that says all that needs to be said about fair-play...
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Well, for starters you can tell the people actually did see the episode(s) and provided their personal opinion on it. Can't say I agreed with everything they all wrote though. Even so, I don't believe that qualifies the reviews as "paid hatchet jobs".
So.... they are "paid hatchet jobs" in your mind because they didn't like the show?
Why do you care what opinion I agree with?
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
The question then becomes "what are the rules?" And well... there is no rule that says any producer of any TV show or movie is required to allow "reviewers" to see it before the general public.
When one show gave premier viewings, and didn't tell anyone not to write reviews, but another show specifically forbids reviews (but still allows tweets of endorsement) that says all that needs to be said about fair-play...
In otherwords, both of them were playing by the rules but chose different strategies? Got it!
The question then becomes "what are the rules?" And well... there is no rule that says any producer of any TV show or movie is required to allow "reviewers" to see it before the general public.
When one show gave premier viewings, and didn't tell anyone not to write reviews, but another show specifically forbids reviews (but still allows tweets of endorsement) that says all that needs to be said about fair-play...
In otherwords, both of them were playing by the rules but chose different strategies? Got it!
Nope, one played the hand they were dealt, the other, tried stacking the deck in their favor
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
And despite the statement above, CBS did in fact have a preview of the first two episodes just last night. It seems to have been generally well-reviewed. I think some folks are just annoyed because CBS didn't give them their own private copies to review at leisure.
The question then becomes "what are the rules?" And well... there is no rule that says any producer of any TV show or movie is required to allow "reviewers" to see it before the general public.
When one show gave premier viewings, and didn't tell anyone not to write reviews, but another show specifically forbids reviews (but still allows tweets of endorsement) that says all that needs to be said about fair-play...
In otherwords, both of them were playing by the rules but chose different strategies? Got it!
Nope, one played the hand they were dealt, the other, tried stacking the deck in their favor
Interesting assertation.... How does one define "the hand they were dealt" though? It seems to me that both of them "stacked the deck" as you put it but in different ways.
Orville decided they needed reviewers to give them more media coverage. Discovery on the other hand seems to have decided that the best approach was to harness the awesome power of the speed of rumors. All they had to do was officially announce that the show existed and it got repeated more times than people drank beer during the last Superbowl. Seriously, all CBS had to do was whisper and the echoes became a deafening roar. Orville? Apparently they didn't think they could count on that, and they were probably right.
The question then becomes "what are the rules?" And well... there is no rule that says any producer of any TV show or movie is required to allow "reviewers" to see it before the general public.
When one show gave premier viewings, and didn't tell anyone not to write reviews, but another show specifically forbids reviews (but still allows tweets of endorsement) that says all that needs to be said about fair-play...
In otherwords, both of them were playing by the rules but chose different strategies? Got it!
Nope, one played the hand they were dealt, the other, tried stacking the deck in their favor
Interesting assertation.... How does one define "the hand they were dealt" though? It seems to me that both of them "stacked the deck" as you put it but in different ways.
Orville decided they needed reviewers to give them more media coverage. Discovery on the other hand seems to have decided that the best approach was to harness the awesome power of the speed of rumors. All they had to do was officially announce that the show existed and it got repeated more times than people drank beer during the last Superbowl. Seriously, all CBS had to do was whisper and the echoes became a deafening roar. Orville? Apparently they didn't think they could count on that, and they were probably right.
I'd draw the distinction as being The Orville clearly had some kind of 'preview' of some episodes, and the reviews which immediately came out, rather read like deliberate fault-finding, and the receptions I've read from 'civilian viewers', seem to be less critical than what one might expect to see if those initial reviews were fairly written. Discovery, on the other hand, invited a crowd likely to be receptive and positive, said no reviews, yet still allowed those guests to make positive tweets. As someone noted, the lack of other commentary from alumni names, is somewhat telling in its absence (IMO)
And absolutely, while The Orville is clearly aimed at the same fanbase, it doesn't have pre-attachment nostalgia to rely upon, in the way Discovery potentially does (because one is Star Trek, the other, is not)
I've not yet been able to view The Orville, as I lack the means, but the clips I have seen, appear well presented, and good production values. Definitely along the lines of the tone of Galaxy Quest
*Extrabecause...
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
That sounds like your assessment is based on the idea that the Discovery producers somehow influenced the tone of the reviews for Orville. Well, whose reviews are you thinking of and what is the tone of the other reviews they've done recently?
^ I would agree with you if not for the fact that not all of the reviews for the Orville were bad. [color]/
The majority tone of the reviews which were linked on this forum prior to The Orville's release, was overall critical, and IMO seemed to be trying to find complaints to make: Critics, rather than reviewers, if you will. The feedback from actual viewers, seems to be more positive than those pre-release reviews.
Bear in mind, we're also talking about people's opinions, rather than facts: What one person dislikes, another will enjoy, and neither disproves the other, because both view points are subjective.
But when pre-premier reviews are reachingly-critical, but viewer reception is then positive, I'm inclined to disregard those reviews as having been written with bias
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
That sounds like your assessment is based on the idea that the Discovery producers somehow influenced the tone of the reviews for Orville. Well, whose reviews are you thinking of and what is the tone of the other reviews they've done recently?
As per my reply to val; The reviews which have had links posted here on this forum, and the feedback which forum members have made of their own opinions from watching the episodes so far
And yes, I consider it very possible that the Discovery Producers may have offered some kind of incentive to those early reviewers. Or rather, I don't consider it outside the realm of possibility. I find it suspicious that CBS made a stipulation of 'no reviews', and yet haven't slapped gagging orders on those who have tweeted positively about what they saw, and equaly, impossible to ignore that those who were invited, would be incoined to give positive feedback. CBS are clearly trying to control the pre-release narrative, with only positive 'reviews', where The Orville took their negative reviews on the chin, and still launched to what appears to be, positive public reception
The reviews of The Orville which were critical, seemed to be focussing on similar issues (shows the tastes of the reviewer) and feedback from viewers such as on forum, or Trekyards, for example, seems rather accepting of the things which the reviewers mentioned negatively.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
In this day and age I think there is a healthy amount of skepticism about the integrity of professional critics and reviewers. By their very nature professional critics/reviewers have a symbiotic relationship with the entertainment industry. The entertainers want good reviews to promote their products and help them sell more. Likewise the reviewers rely on the cooperation of the entertainers to give them access to the product before it hits the shelves. As it stands the entertainers hold the stronger hand in the relationship as they control the flow of content. If a reviewer is to critical he can easily find himself blacklisted with the entertainers simply choosing to provide their content to more sympathetic reviewers. With the internet age there is now no shortage of people who will eagerly line up to review a product.
Sadly it is all to easy to fall into the "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" mentality.
The majority tone of the reviews which were linked on this forum prior to The Orville's release, was overall critical, and IMO seemed to be trying to find complaints to make: Critics, rather than reviewers, if you will. The feedback from actual viewers, seems to be more positive than those pre-release reviews.
Bear in mind, we're also talking about people's opinions, rather than facts: What one person dislikes, another will enjoy, and neither disproves the other, because both view points are subjective.
But when pre-premier reviews are reachingly-critical, but viewer reception is then positive, I'm inclined to disregard those reviews as having been written with bias
Ok fair enough. I would agree that the majority were negative reviews. Not all, but the majority were.
Exactly. And given that the majority of the feedback from forumites was positive, one has to then consider the possibility of bias, intentional or influenced, on the part of the reviewer
Personally, I often find it funny when you see poorly reviewed films and such that have a high user rating on sites like Rottentomatoes and such. Makes one wonder who is listening to these paid reviewers, if anyone at all.
Absolutely
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Film reviewers tend to be average guys. Science Fiction consumers tend to not be average guys.
@silverlobes: You are not average, and thus your opinions differ greatly from those of people specifically chosen because they are average! Average viewers want soap operas and crime dramas. Average viewers are totally uninterested in engaging their grey matter for entertainment; instead they want to turn it off and just be entertained passively. A show that makes you think makes the average viewer uncomfortable, and a show that challenges the accepted beliefs of an average viewer makes them angry.
But this is exactly what you seek in film, and therefore the standard Hollywood reviewers may miss details you enjoy finding. The average reviewer needs no financial support to cause him to write a bad review because on the one hand science fiction is inherently thought provoking, and Mr. Average doesn't want his thoughts provoked, and on the other hand, being an average guy, concepts that are embedded in sci-fi and easily understood by those of us who grew up reading Paul French are to him vague and esoteric concepts. So Mr. Average is hit with a double whammy of not really understanding what he just saw coupled with a bias against anything that challenges his preconceptions.
It is no accident that every positive The Orville review came out of gamer and sci-fi reviewers. Because The Orville is not a reality show, not a crime drama, not a soap opera, and requires the viewer to do a little thinking.
One should never attribute to malice that which can easily be explained through ignorance. And the most obvious proof of my thesis is the grasping at straws these reviewers did to explain why they didn't like The Orville. It is patently obvious that the reviewers themselves failed to understand why they didn't like it. They just knew they didn't, and so they went a-hunting. And they proved to me that they are unqualified to review science fiction.
Given this logic, Discovery would be foolish to place the fate of their show in the hands of people who have an unacknowledged bias against similar products. The Orville had to: reviewers let advertisers know ahead of time how popular a show is going to be, and thus how much an endorsement during that show could be worth. Discovery has no need to attract commercial product placements because their funding is not derived from commercial ads. If one gains nothing by taking a risk, why take the risk? Sun Tzu might have said that.
Film reviewers tend to be average guys. Science Fiction consumers tend to not be average guys.
@silverlobes: You are not average, and thus your opinions differ greatly from those of people specifically chosen because they are average! Average viewers want soap operas and crime dramas. Average viewers are totally uninterested in engaging their grey matter for entertainment; instead they want to turn it off and just be entertained passively. A show that makes you think makes the average viewer uncomfortable, and a show that challenges the accepted beliefs of an average viewer makes them angry.
But this is exactly what you seek in film, and therefore the standard Hollywood reviewers may miss details you enjoy finding. The average reviewer needs no financial support to cause him to write a bad review because on the one hand science fiction is inherently thought provoking, and Mr. Average doesn't want his thoughts provoked, and on the other hand, being an average guy, concepts that are embedded in sci-fi and easily understood by those of us who grew up reading Paul French are to him vague and esoteric concepts. So Mr. Average is hit with a double whammy of not really understanding what he just saw coupled with a bias against anything that challenges his preconceptions.
It is no accident that every positive The Orville review came out of gamer and sci-fi reviewers. Because The Orville is not a reality show, not a crime drama, not a soap opera, and requires the viewer to do a little thinking.
One should never attribute to malice that which can easily be explained through ignorance. And the most obvious proof of my thesis is the grasping at straws these reviewers did to explain why they didn't like The Orville. It is patently obvious that the reviewers themselves failed to understand why they didn't like it. They just knew they didn't, and so they went a-hunting. And they proved to me that they are unqualified to review science fiction.
Given this logic, Discovery would be foolish to place the fate of their show in the hands of people who have an unacknowledged bias against similar products. The Orville had to: reviewers let advertisers know ahead of time how popular a show is going to be, and thus how much an endorsement during that show could be worth. Discovery has no need to attract commercial product placements because their funding is not derived from commercial ads. If one gains nothing by taking a risk, why take the risk? Sun Tzu might have said that.
That's an interesting perspective, and I certainly wouldn't argue it. What does concern me, is the idea of people who are unqualified to review, posting reviews on professionally finished webpages, which others may then indeed consider to be qualified review, due to said professional presentation.
True, Discovery doesn't need to court advertisers, but it does need to court subscribers: If not for itself specifically, at least for the platform upon which it is appearing (CBS All Access) If it fails to draw subscribers, and to achieve reasonable streaming hits, its 'place in the list' will be given to something else which will. For all I know, Discovery might be awesome, but from what I've seen so far, my impression is that CBS are well and truly 'crossing everything' that this will be positively received. I find the positive 'responses' from Gates McFadden and Nicole deBoer, every bit as biased as those reviews which were critical of The Orville. Who, in their situation, is going to post a disparaging comment? It's not worth their while, and, as someone else mentioned, the silence from the other alumnus, is equally telling
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Just out of curiosity: We will have the Nielsen ratings for the pilot of DSC but how will we know how the show is doing after that? Will CBS release the numbers of new subs/viewers? Will Netflix also release data?
Just out of curiosity: We will have the Nielsen ratings for the pilot of DSC but how will we know how the show is doing after that? Will CBS release the numbers of new subs/viewers? Will Netflix also release data?
The number of subscribers for CBS All Access needn't be more than peripherally related to ST:D. For instance, there are a lot of people who are fans of, for instance, NCIS, and might subscribe when the ST:D push makes them aware that CBS All Access even exists (for my wife, it's nice to be able to watch whatever episodes she wants, and more importantly not watch the ones she doesn't watch - she's not a big fan of Kate). And some who sub for ST:D might stick around for, for instance, the entire run of Twilight Zone or I Love Lucy. Remember, after all, that the service gives you access to just about the entire CBS catalog, not just the one recent show...
Just out of curiosity: We will have the Nielsen ratings for the pilot of DSC but how will we know how the show is doing after that? Will CBS release the numbers of new subs/viewers? Will Netflix also release data?
The number of subscribers for CBS All Access needn't be more than peripherally related to ST:D. For instance, there are a lot of people who are fans of, for instance, NCIS, and might subscribe when the ST:D push makes them aware that CBS All Access even exists (for my wife, it's nice to be able to watch whatever episodes she wants, and more importantly not watch the ones she doesn't watch - she's not a big fan of Kate). And some who sub for ST:D might stick around for, for instance, the entire run of Twilight Zone or I Love Lucy. Remember, after all, that the service gives you access to just about the entire CBS catalog, not just the one recent show...
Yes, but if Discovery isn't popular, I would hazard a guess that it will be removed from the listing and replaced. In that regard, its continued existence as a series, will rely upon it receiving what the network execs consider to be a reasonable number of views. It still needs to 'perform' as a series
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Comments
I am watching Star Trek: Discovery this season.
And if the stories come close to what that TV Guide threw together for the article...it will be.
Crossing my fingers and hoping to God/dess this will be MY STAR TREK. About f-ing time.
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
I don't have CBS All Access and I am not really willing to subscribe to it for a show I am not really interested in watching.
My character Tsin'xing
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
If you're playing to win, you should take every advantage allowed to you.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
My character Tsin'xing
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
My character Tsin'xing
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
And despite the statement above, CBS did in fact have a preview of the first two episodes just last night. It seems to have been generally well-reviewed. I think some folks are just annoyed because CBS didn't give them their own private copies to review at leisure.
Orville decided they needed reviewers to give them more media coverage. Discovery on the other hand seems to have decided that the best approach was to harness the awesome power of the speed of rumors. All they had to do was officially announce that the show existed and it got repeated more times than people drank beer during the last Superbowl. Seriously, all CBS had to do was whisper and the echoes became a deafening roar.
My character Tsin'xing
And absolutely, while The Orville is clearly aimed at the same fanbase, it doesn't have pre-attachment nostalgia to rely upon, in the way Discovery potentially does (because one is Star Trek, the other, is not)
I've not yet been able to view The Orville, as I lack the means, but the clips I have seen, appear well presented, and good production values. Definitely along the lines of the tone of Galaxy Quest
*Extrabecause...
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
My character Tsin'xing
Bear in mind, we're also talking about people's opinions, rather than facts: What one person dislikes, another will enjoy, and neither disproves the other, because both view points are subjective.
But when pre-premier reviews are reachingly-critical, but viewer reception is then positive, I'm inclined to disregard those reviews as having been written with bias
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
And yes, I consider it very possible that the Discovery Producers may have offered some kind of incentive to those early reviewers. Or rather, I don't consider it outside the realm of possibility. I find it suspicious that CBS made a stipulation of 'no reviews', and yet haven't slapped gagging orders on those who have tweeted positively about what they saw, and equaly, impossible to ignore that those who were invited, would be incoined to give positive feedback. CBS are clearly trying to control the pre-release narrative, with only positive 'reviews', where The Orville took their negative reviews on the chin, and still launched to what appears to be, positive public reception
The reviews of The Orville which were critical, seemed to be focussing on similar issues (shows the tastes of the reviewer) and feedback from viewers such as on forum, or Trekyards, for example, seems rather accepting of the things which the reviewers mentioned negatively.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Sadly it is all to easy to fall into the "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" mentality.
Absolutely
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
@silverlobes: You are not average, and thus your opinions differ greatly from those of people specifically chosen because they are average! Average viewers want soap operas and crime dramas. Average viewers are totally uninterested in engaging their grey matter for entertainment; instead they want to turn it off and just be entertained passively. A show that makes you think makes the average viewer uncomfortable, and a show that challenges the accepted beliefs of an average viewer makes them angry.
But this is exactly what you seek in film, and therefore the standard Hollywood reviewers may miss details you enjoy finding. The average reviewer needs no financial support to cause him to write a bad review because on the one hand science fiction is inherently thought provoking, and Mr. Average doesn't want his thoughts provoked, and on the other hand, being an average guy, concepts that are embedded in sci-fi and easily understood by those of us who grew up reading Paul French are to him vague and esoteric concepts. So Mr. Average is hit with a double whammy of not really understanding what he just saw coupled with a bias against anything that challenges his preconceptions.
It is no accident that every positive The Orville review came out of gamer and sci-fi reviewers. Because The Orville is not a reality show, not a crime drama, not a soap opera, and requires the viewer to do a little thinking.
One should never attribute to malice that which can easily be explained through ignorance. And the most obvious proof of my thesis is the grasping at straws these reviewers did to explain why they didn't like The Orville. It is patently obvious that the reviewers themselves failed to understand why they didn't like it. They just knew they didn't, and so they went a-hunting. And they proved to me that they are unqualified to review science fiction.
Given this logic, Discovery would be foolish to place the fate of their show in the hands of people who have an unacknowledged bias against similar products. The Orville had to: reviewers let advertisers know ahead of time how popular a show is going to be, and thus how much an endorsement during that show could be worth. Discovery has no need to attract commercial product placements because their funding is not derived from commercial ads. If one gains nothing by taking a risk, why take the risk? Sun Tzu might have said that.
True, Discovery doesn't need to court advertisers, but it does need to court subscribers: If not for itself specifically, at least for the platform upon which it is appearing (CBS All Access) If it fails to draw subscribers, and to achieve reasonable streaming hits, its 'place in the list' will be given to something else which will. For all I know, Discovery might be awesome, but from what I've seen so far, my impression is that CBS are well and truly 'crossing everything' that this will be positively received. I find the positive 'responses' from Gates McFadden and Nicole deBoer, every bit as biased as those reviews which were critical of The Orville. Who, in their situation, is going to post a disparaging comment? It's not worth their while, and, as someone else mentioned, the silence from the other alumnus, is equally telling
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
My character Tsin'xing