CapnZapp
Legend
Cut and paste from an AV Club comment that I liked:
"I’ve gotta say, after this second episode I unabashedly love this show, just for how earnest and cheesy it is.
The thing that struck me about a lot of the reviews of the pilot, and even this second episode, were how confused the reviewers were about the tone of the show, whether it was trying to be a comedy or a sci-fi drama and not mixing well.
There are comparisons with the show to “Star Trek,” sure, but the reviews almost never seem to be from people who “got” “Star Trek.” And I don’t mean understand that it’s a metaphorical sci-fi show expressing an optimistic view of humanity. I mean they don’t love the show the way the fans do for not only its message, but for its characters, its settings, and despite its idiosyncrasies, its inconsistencies, and even its flaws (and, in most cases, love it because of those things). In other words, the reviewers aren’t “fans” of “Star Trek.” Not the way I am. Not the way Seth MacFarlane is.
After the teaser and opening credits of the second episode, I seriously suspect that the confused tone is the entire point of the show. This isn’t a sci-fi show with an optimistic view of the future. It’s ah homage to fans of such shows.
What is the first shot of the second episode? The Orville floating through space as the music swells up. Presented EXACTLY as it would be on Star Trek TNG or Voyager, just with the Orville instead of the Enterprise or Voyager. It’s even looking at the ship at the same camera angle. That’s a very specific thing to reference. It cracked me up.
Then, there are the newly presented opening credits. And, sure, it’s one thing to say that a minute-long opening credit sequence on a broadcast TV show in 2017 is a huge throwback. But this wasn’t just any opening sequence. This was practically a beat-by-beat re-creation of the Star Trek Voyager opening credits sequence, just with the Orville being depicted encountering all manner of weird space stuff instead of what Voyager encountered.
Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
"I’ve gotta say, after this second episode I unabashedly love this show, just for how earnest and cheesy it is.
The thing that struck me about a lot of the reviews of the pilot, and even this second episode, were how confused the reviewers were about the tone of the show, whether it was trying to be a comedy or a sci-fi drama and not mixing well.
There are comparisons with the show to “Star Trek,” sure, but the reviews almost never seem to be from people who “got” “Star Trek.” And I don’t mean understand that it’s a metaphorical sci-fi show expressing an optimistic view of humanity. I mean they don’t love the show the way the fans do for not only its message, but for its characters, its settings, and despite its idiosyncrasies, its inconsistencies, and even its flaws (and, in most cases, love it because of those things). In other words, the reviewers aren’t “fans” of “Star Trek.” Not the way I am. Not the way Seth MacFarlane is.
After the teaser and opening credits of the second episode, I seriously suspect that the confused tone is the entire point of the show. This isn’t a sci-fi show with an optimistic view of the future. It’s ah homage to fans of such shows.
What is the first shot of the second episode? The Orville floating through space as the music swells up. Presented EXACTLY as it would be on Star Trek TNG or Voyager, just with the Orville instead of the Enterprise or Voyager. It’s even looking at the ship at the same camera angle. That’s a very specific thing to reference. It cracked me up.
Then, there are the newly presented opening credits. And, sure, it’s one thing to say that a minute-long opening credit sequence on a broadcast TV show in 2017 is a huge throwback. But this wasn’t just any opening sequence. This was practically a beat-by-beat re-creation of the Star Trek Voyager opening credits sequence, just with the Orville being depicted encountering all manner of weird space stuff instead of what Voyager encountered.
Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app