‘The Orville’ Season 2 Production Starts, Star Trek Writer Joe Menosky Joins

As we reported a couple of weeks back, our adopted space show The Orville was gearing up to start production on its second season and today is officially the first day of filming. Cast and crew took to social media to announce the start of their first week back on set. We also have news on another Trek veteran joining the writing staff, a new member of the cast, behind-the-scenes photos, and more.

Season 2 Production Starts

Creator and executive producer Seth MacFarlane celebrated the first table read for the second season last week.

Scott Grimes (Gordon) sent out this image of the read as well.

Today actor Mark Jackson (Isaac) took to twitter to tease Grimes and producer/director Jon Cassar about first day of filming.

The Orville’s editor Tom Costantino also shared these shots from around the set today.

Also this morning, director/producer Jon Cassar posted this moody photo of Ed’s office on Instagram

And this afternoon actor Kai Wener (Ty Finn) sent out this behind the scenes picture of himself with his TV mom Penny Johnson Jerald (Dr. Finn), Peter Macon (Bortus), and executive producer David A. Goodman.

Joe Menosky jumps from ‘Discovery’ to ‘The Orville’

A familiar name caught our eye on a call sheet that costumer Ivy Thaide posted to Instagram this morning (now deleted, but you can see a screenshot below). Joe Menosky is now listed as a co-executive producer and writer for The Orville. Menosky is a well-known Trek writer with dozens of franchise credits to his name during the ’90s, but he is perhaps best known for penning the classic Star Trek: The Next Generation episode “Darmok.” The Trek vet also had a stint on Star Trek: Discovery in 2016/2017 when he was brought in by Bryan Fuller and co-wrote “Lethe” with Ted Sullivan. Apparently Menosky has now moved on, and so Discovery’s loss is The Orville’s gain.

Seth MacFarlane has stated that the second season of The Orville “will lean a little more heavier [sic] into the science fiction,” which is something that was already becoming apparent as the first season evolved. Menosky seems to be a good fit for this direction and it bodes well for the fans that someone with his talents is now on the team.

A second new cast member

In addition to Jessica Szohr who we reported about in our last update, Deadline reported last week that Chris Johnson (best known for ABC’s Betrayal and CW’s the The Vampire Diaries) is set for a recurring role in season 2.

Chris Johnson in ABC’s Betrayal (2013)

Eagle eyed fans on reddit noticed that in actor J. Lee’s (Lt. Cmdr. John LaMarr) video (which now seems to have been deleted from his Instagram) about how excited he was to get back to work on The Orville, he showed some of the cast doing a table read of the first episode.

We can see Chris Johnson’s name placard there, along with his character name, “Cassius.”

Behind the scenes on the ‘The Orville’ hair and make-up

The Orville’s head of makeup Howard Berger and head of hair Maxine Morris have penned a blog post for the Make-up Artists and Hairstylists Guild, where they goes into detail on creating the looks and creatures for the show. The post also includes many interesting images from the hair and make-up teams.

Howard Berger working on Chad Coleman

Maxine Morris fixing a wig

‘The Orville’ heads to PaleyFest LA in March

The well known museum for radio and television is hosting another of their PaleyFests, this time as part of their Los Angeles location with the cast and producers of The Orville. It will be held on Saturday, March 17 at 2:00 pm at the Dolby Theatre in Hollywood.

Scheduled to appear: Seth MacFarlane, Adrianne Palicki, Scott Grimes, Penny Johnson Jerald, Halston Sage, Peter Macon, J. Lee, Mark Jackson, Chad Coleman, David Goodman, Brannon Braga, Jason Clark

Season 1 rolling out internationally

The Orville has been spreading around the world. The first season has already premiered in a number of countries in Europe, including Fox TV in the UK, which started in December. The first season starts today in Sweden on Fox.

Over in Germany season 1 starts tomorrow on the Pro7 channel. Check out the dubbed German trailer below.


The Orville will return for Season 2 this Fall on Fox.

Keep up with all of our The Orville news at TrekMovie.com.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So Discovery manages to lose the guy who co-wrote what was arguably its best episode (the other candidate being “Context is for Kings”; nothing else even comes close IMHO) to the competition, such as it is. Great. I can hardly wait for Season 2.

You mistyped “Into The forest I Go” as best, sooo… yeah

Competition? Pfft. Not really. Orville is just a cheap TNG knock off.

What part of “such as it is” did you not get, Cap?

In any case, your riposte deliberately misses the point. The Orville may indeed be a cheap TNG knockoff, but great writing, if such were to happen, could well make it a success. DSC started with a premise loaded with potential that was almost entirely undone by a number of astoundingly poor creative choices. Anything is possible, but the odds that history won’t repeat itself in its sophomore season just markedly decreased.

Great writing… hmmmmm… again, not really. I watched the first season of orville and “great writing” doesn’t really come to mind to me.
I found the writing on Discovery a heck of a lot better. I was riveted to my seat with each new episode. With orville, I found myself channel flipping and occasionally tuning out.
Whether or not you tag what you said with “such as it is”, you’re still calling it competition. Which it isn’t.

Captain Ransom people like you confuses me. Now you’ll attack anyone who is slightly dismissive of Discovery even if its just an honest opinion but then you have no problem saying you think Orville sucks.

And I’m not getting on your case for that, its fine you don’t like the show, but this is what gets tiring of the internet, people simply have to accept what others hate like they have to accept what others like. I’m not saying you can’t disagree, but the constant ‘stop saying bad things about it’ argument doesn’t hold much water if you have no problem ragging on Orville.

For the record, I like them both but yes both have big flaws as well. Orville has actually surprised me on how much I like it but it does fall into a lot of nonsensical plotting. Great concepts, bad execution is what I’m saying a lot of the times. And some of the jokes are too broad but I actually laugh at them more than I thought I would. Discovery is decent but it tries too hard to be shocking for shock shake and relies too much on cheap twists like Voq/Ash instead of just telling an organic story. And hated the Klingon war arc. Sadly mostly a waste IMO. I’m still rooting for both shows in season two though.

I don’t care how others feel one way or the other though, its all subjective and I get that. I just get sick of the ‘my show is better than yours’ silliness I guess.

Point. Counterpoint. Stop ring a hypocrite Tiger.


*being* not ring.

How am I a hypocrite? Please explain.

Still waiting man. ;)

Still waiting lol. I guess when you name call maybe its best to have some actual facts before you do it so you know what you’re talking about Captain Ransom. ;)

When they avoid the dick-jokes, the Orville is by far the most TREKish show. Discovery has a lot going for it (and great promise), but Orville is much closer to TOS/TNG Trek.

That is a bit like saying, “when you avoid the gangrenous limbs, leprosy is by far the easiest disease to tolerate.” Part and parcel, and all that.

They’re both not amazing, in different ways.


Exactly. Orville is amusing but its nowhere near the quality of any trek. And those who put it on the same pedestal as star trek as people have done with Galaxy Quest should hand in their Trekkie card.

Where would you like me to send said card, assuming I ever actually find I had one for the last 44 years?

So much hatred, pretty sad for you man.

No hate. Just the facts.

You have no idea what you’re talking/writing about.

Yup. I don’t see the draw in him moving though. Unless MacFarlane removes all the dreadful unfunny humour, Menosky is better than The Orville.

I didn’t know that a writer who had a “stint” on the show can be spun into someone jumping ship or walking out on one team to go work with another. Love watching some of you try to make Orville out to be competition. You sound like DC fans trying to take jabs at the Marvel Cinematic Universe

Hi Michael Hall.

You said what I was going to. The guy who had a large hand in writing what turned out to be the best episode of STD (Lethe) bails for another show. STD feels like it is pretty disorganized based on the personnel changes and delays in pre-production and then seeing the final product. On the flip side, Orville did not have such issues and seemed to know exactly what they were from the start. As a result, they ended up with an overall superior show. I find myself looking more forward to Orville’s 2nd season than STD’s. And we will get it much sooner, too. And I really hope they do not drop the comedy aspect. Once again, that show worked much better when it was light and had more gags. Be them dick jokes or other kinds.

Thanks for the comment, but just to be clear: for all its issues (and with that tepid finale, the first season will never go down for me as anything other than a profound disappointment), I’d still rate Discovery as better television than The Orville. My point was that losing its best writer gives me little hope that season 2 will be an improvement.

Frankly, right now I’m more looking forward to the third season of The Expanse, and of course the final year of GoT, than I am to the return of either show.

You have another year yet for the final season of GoT….2019 bro

sorry but I disagree with your conclusion (you are entitle to it though). I found STD super heavy to watch. Every single frame is pure drama. There are tons of close ups to their faces, just to increase the drama or something else. There is no let down to the drama. One the episode is done I have no interest in watching it again. In contrast, I’ve watched ep 1 of The Orville more than 10 times, and other episodes multiple times, and I found most of the jokes funny every time. STD might be interesting because we are all Trekkie’s, but is very different in tone to the old Series.

Michael, I am in agreement regarding the loss of the better writer. And it’s fair that you found Orville less than appealing. It’s not for everyone it seems.

And seriously, Kirok, who DOES look forward to STD? ;-)

I do, but with a good degree of trepidation. As I said below, it seems like any attention is good attention and hate-watching is a part of the business model.

VS, I kinda am. But only with the hope that it will be better. Although I must admit it’s a little like hoping a sequel is better than the original. Which is rare but does happen.

It might seem like a loss that a revered Star Trek writer has left CBS Disco Time. But keep in mind Disco still has experienced writers on staff with credits such as Gilmore Girls, Beverly Hills 90210, Good Christian Bitches, Women’s Murder Club, Revenge, Reign on The CW, Super Girl on The CW, and Pepper Dennis on The WB.

You forgot BATMAN AND ROBIN and Trek 2009. Yeah, I’m stoked.

Oh wow. I’m going to assume everything you listed there is true. Explains a lot now…

Based on what they did on Discovery Season 1, which was awesome, what’s your point exactly?

Yeah most of the writers on Discovery didn’t really come from sci fi backgrounds with the exception of most of the Star Trek vets like Menosky. And yes, it probably does explain all the crazy ‘OMG’ cliffhangers we keep getting when you write shows like 90210, Revenge and Murder Club. They know what keeps people coming back the next week.

I will say for me, its been more positive than negative but yeah I am afraid what it will be like to lose another vet like Menosky who wrote a lot of Trek. With Fuller gone before production began and Meyer was basically sidelined completely Beyer is the only real dye-in-the-wool Trek writer left. But I think most of the episodes have been good, if not great so I have hope second season will be good even if he’s gone.

“Yeah most of the writers on Discovery didn’t really come from sci fi backgrounds with the exception of most of the Star Trek vets like Menosky. And yes, it probably does explain all the crazy ‘OMG’ cliffhangers we keep getting when you write shows like 90210, Revenge and Murder Club”

That’s because the hiring criteria of the STD leadership is identity politics and not intellectual achievements and scifi accolades (“PRIVILEGE!”). Nice “social experiment”, to quote Jason Isaacs’ mean little speech – it’s like watching a train wreck happening in slow motion!

Sorry to say but I watched every minute of The Orville S1 and skipped through whole swaths of Disco S1. The latter just tried way too hard to be daring/Watch Me I’m dangerous serial vs. thoughtful sci-fi. Venture to guess Gene might have felt the same…

“thoughtful sci-fi” ??? Orville is neither thoughtful nor sci-fi.

Captain Ransom,

You might want to check the meaning of the terminology that you are attempting to apply. According to Harlan Ellison, sci-fi or “skiffy” is what 60s network execs did to SF that made appeals to the intellect; turning its contemporary speculative fictional stories of Julius Schwartz’s Batman in DC comics and Ib MelchIor’s (ROBINSON CRUSOE ON MARS) LOST IN SPACE into popular camp pablum.

I really don’t need Harlan Ellison’s definition of what HE says is science fiction. It’s a comedy set in a space background.

Captain Ransom,

Please pay attention. Harlan absolutely was NOT defining science-fiction for which sci-fi is NOT an accepted abbreviation. “sci-fi” is slang, which the suits used to denigrate science-fiction as not legitimate literature or narrative art in the 60s, and why they justified doing what they damned well pleased to it. Your assertion that ORVILLE is a mindless comedy set in space devoid of thought is the very definition of “sci-fi” as the term was used in the boardrooms to describe what was done to such things as LOST IN SPACE, CBS’ ersatz STAR TREK. Your assertion that ORVILLE is NOT “sci-fi” is a non sequitur.

We’ll, you did write “according to Harlan Ellison…” And I really don’t care what his thought are on it. Orville is a sitcom set on a space ship like Friends was a sitcom set in apartment building/coffee shop.

Captain Ransom,

Re: don’t care what his thought are on it

I’m not sure why not? He was in the business at the time the term’s etymology evolved, writing thoughtful scripts, the kind that you proffer for admiration – one for STAR TREK, no less. And the only known author to prevail in the courts against the suits supposed “gentrification” excuses for turning such work into a “sitcom in space” as was done to seasons 2 & 3 of LIS.

But if it’s some sort of personal beef with him as a reference then:


Yes,he wrote some good stories. And I have no beef with him. But that doesn’t make his opinion the end all and be all.
Orville is a comedy in a space setting, pure and simple with cartoonish humor and fart jokes & dick jokes too.

Captain Ransom,

“Orville is a comedy in a space setting, pure and simple with cartoonish humor and fart jokes & dick jokes too.” — Captain Ransom

To which your assertion, “Orville is neither thoughtful nor sci-fi.” undermines your attempt at most effectively and clearly communicating that disdain.

How so? Everything I’ve said is true.

Captain Ransom,

Re: How so?

Saying it is NOT “sci-fi”, a derogatory term used to refer to junk science-fiction, suggests that you believe it to be other than junk. Best to spell it out if you wish to communicate your disdain most effectively.

Orville is great if you just want your TNG boner stroked, it’s a shallow imitation of that iconic show. Discovery is not the best Trek but it’s the far better show and even better than some other Trek shows (judging first seasons).

Not very wise venturing to guess what dead people would think if they were alive, especially when they would be almost a hundred years old if that was so. Just sayin’..

Seems like the regime change from Fuller resulted in a turnover. It happens. If you are in charge you want your people there.

Maybe. I’d be very interested in knowing just what happened to prompt Menosky’s departure since Ted Sullivan, who seems like a standup guy, spoke very highly of their collaboration. In any case, it’s not good news for Discovery, any way you slice it.

Ted Sullivan speaks extremely highly about everyone and everything. He’s such a cheerleader that you can’t trust anything he says.

I can trust that Menosky is a fine writer, and that together he and Sullivan wrote one of DSC’s better episodes–certainly, one of the very few that effectively moved the war story and Burnham’s emotional arc forward while delivering a clever spin on an important bit of Trek history. Now he’s gone, and that can’t be good. It’s not that complicated.

Does anybody know details of how the shows were credited and actually written? I mean, are they all rewritten by committee before they go before the cameras, or are there some shows where the one or two folks on the credits actually did most or all of the writing? (I’m wondering if maybe the ‘good’ shows owe more to just having one or two good scenes that could have been done by a rewriter or if they are just stem-to-stern good.)


For my money the aforementioned “Lethe” and “Context is for Kings” were mostly stem-to-stern good. (YMMV, of course, and no doubt will if you ever get around to bingeing the thing.). But in fairness I’ll admit there were moments in all the episodes I liked, even that cold turd of a finale. The writers knew their business in terms of character and dialogue, and the show was very rarely aggressively stupid in the mode of the Abrams films or some of the early Orville episodes. For me, where Discovery ended-up falling disastrously short was in the plotting–that is, the total inability of the showrunners to craft a satisfying tale over the course of a season that would address the very issues they themselves chose to raise in first place, while establishing their own universe that would be more than the sum of its parts in the mode of the prestige dramas they so desperately wanted to emulate. As to whether that failure stemmed from a lack of nerve, network interference, or the perils of art-by-committee I couldn’t say, but I tend to suspect that the rot spreads from the head.

Do we know for a fact that Menosky has left DSC? Surely it’s possible to write for more than one show.

“Seems like the regime change from Fuller resulted in a turnover. It happens. If you are in charge you want your people there.”

How enlightened and “progressive”! I suppose favoritism is only evil when you are in D.C. instead of Hollywood ;-)

Vulcan Soul,

Re: favoritism

I believe the word you are looking for is “cronyism”.

Loved the Orville and can’t wait for more. Having watched this and Discovery, The Orville is definitely presenting more interesting/ethical questions and ideas. Definitely a theme that made past Treks so great. In my opinion, The Orville has more Roddenberry DNA. Maybe Discovery can get there, but it was missing in season one.

I don’t watch The Orville and am not interested to watch it since I can’t stand McFarlane. But you are absolutely right that DIscovery needs more “Roddenberry DNA”. It is far too much generic action sci-fi at the moment with Star Trek gilding. I think Season 2 will be a real test for whether or not the showrunners have what it takes to do justice to that Roddenberry DNA and have the show sit comfortably alongside the best of past Trek.

Have to sort of agree. I did NOT think I would like Orville but I actually liked it more than I thought. It feels like a show with HEART, which I feel most Trek shows had, even if some more than others.

The problem for me about Discovery, while I DO think its the better show (especially its production values, thats no contest) it needs more heart. There is a coldness about it I can’t shake. With Orville I actually feel myself smiling after most episodes which I did a lot in Trek, especially for TNG and TOS. But Discovery, its more like “Woah, that just happened” but I don’t feel like I been uplifted like the others. There is no ‘fun’ like the others. Even dark DS9 with its cynical war, grey characters and stark morality play I can still smile at a lot of those episodes because the characters could still be fun, playful and dare I say it likable.

Thats the problem for Discovery, its all cynical and everyone is depressed. Tilly is OK but she’s no Quark either. Clearly no one wanted to be on that ship but hopefully that will change next season.


Interesting. I actually had fairly high expectations for Orville. It ended up not being quite as good as I would have hoped but still pretty good. There are inevitable comparisons between it and STD. I do it too. But I don’t think such comparisons are entirely fair as both shows have radically different tones as well as radically different approaches to their story telling. In the end, I liked Orviolle better because I thought they were more successful doing what they were trying to do and STD, while it had larger budget that shows up with their vastly superior production values, came up very short in doing what they were trying to do. I find it interesting that you mention you felt none of the crew wanted to be on Discovery. I didn’t think that but now that you mention it I can totally see it. To be fair I think part of that was the war time setting and the enigma that was the first half Captain Lorca. But it was a cold place. And I think that was intentional. IMHO where STD failed was in their piss poor story choices. Voq/Ash and evil Lorca taking the top spots on that front. Then there was the wasted opportunity to delve deeper into Klingon society… Their attempt to unite the Houses and such were completely ignored after the premier. And the war itself… Well, I could go on and on with the bad choices so I think you get the idea. In the end my overall assessment of Orville is if you think TNG could have been fun with more jokes, then Orville is for you. My overall assessment of STD is that unless you are a dyed in the wool Trek fan (as I am), don’t waste your money. There is better sci-fi out there.

I agree, Tiger2, that STD’s short on heart in some ways. I also think, relative to what a lot of people here are saying in defense of Orville . . . STD lacks LEVITY, which Orville has in spades (perhaps to a fault). What really started annoying me towards the end of the season was not only the cheap plot twists that underminded character development but also the lack of humor (I don’t mean *jokes* per se but just a tone not only defined by intensity).

Good point Holden. In fact I think thats why so many like Tilly, she is the only one that actually gets a laugh here and there (and sometimes it feels a bit forced but fine). Everyone else, although Stamets has his moments, its just so gloomy and serious ALL the time. Again I get because it dealt with a war, that might have been the side effect of it but watching a few episodes of other Trek of late, I noticed even the serious characters could crack a joke or just make a situation lighter. One of the things I loved about Data was he played everything straight but because he was an android who didn’t understand social cues all the time he manage to make a lot of funny situations just being himself. Even Worf managed to be a fun character a lot of times and that guy maybe smiled three times in ten seasons.

Discovery could use a bit more of that, just more fun moments like the Orville does. It doesn’t have to be silly humor but just people cracking a joke sometimes would be nice and feel like a crew that likes each other and not stuck with each other.

It’s not surprising that all characters turned out to be pawns when the writers regarded the season as a game of chess where they already knew which particular checkmate they wanted to arrive at in the end. And that’s what makes it missing “heart”. It’s by-the-numbers plotting.

I don’t know why some people are up in arms over people enjoying The Orville more than Discovery. Personally I enjoyed both shows, but my honest opinion is that as a pure science fiction with a message I enjoyed The Orville more, and if this “stroking my TNG boner” then I consider this to be a good thing. I will continue watching both shows and hope that the writing on Discovery can improve in its second year.

I agree completely, alphantrion. Discovery did better as the season wore on. They even went so far as to say that Starfleet is actually against genocide. How the mighty have fallen.
The Orville has much more Star Trek DNA, and has a lot of allegories and social commentary in every episode. It’s an unexpected pleasure.

Agree as well. Orville is actually about exploration, finding the unknown, questioning what makes us human. Yeah its a bit too comedic at times but thats WHY I fell in love with Star Trek.

Discovery has kind of avoided the first two, its all about cool tech and one big revenge drama, I just miss seeing a ship explore a planet or something cool in space and go from there. I’ll continue watching both for sure though.

I watched both. Will continue to watch both. But I think Orville was just better executed. When I watch their next seasons I will hope Orville leans a bit more on the jokes. And will hope Discovery gets better writers and comes up with a compelling story.

Rockin’ good news!

I’m happy to learn that reports of an extended wait for Season 2 were exaggerated.

Re: TNG boners, the Orville episodes advocating reason over superstition were more reminiscent of TOS than TNG. Actually, the season finale took a Voyager plot device to deliver a vintage Roddenberrian theme. It’s commendable to be delivering such lessons on network TV. But Discovery has messages of its own – like “genocide is bad and magic is real.” #GilmoreTrek

Dare I say I enjoyed the Orville finale vs Discovery’s. I really loved that story. And yes it does feel like Blink of an Eye now that you mention it.

Great news! Glad to hear another Trek vet has joined the Orville. The Orville is no doubt the true Trek, and I wish it success and many seasons. STD, on the other hand, is garbage. The Orville can satisfy both science fiction fans as well as Star Trek fans. Long live the Orville!

I hope we get Frakes directing again (and on Discovery as well as I think his episode was one of the best last season) but I also loved all the great cameos that show got. Not just Trek ones, but I mean like Liam Neeson and Charlize Theron. It just proves the pull McFarlane has in Hollywood when he can get all his movie star friends on the show.

Also would LOVE a Patrick Stewart appearance. As close as those two are (and Stewart did a show he produced) I’m kind of shocked it didn’t happen first season. Maybe this one. It would be great if he can get William Shatner on it too. I don’t think we can ever see these two on Discovery given the timeline (why I REALLY hate prequels sometimes) so this would be a great alternative. :)

I had read somewhere that Patrick filmed a cameo but I never saw it aired.

This is great news! I look forward to the new season: more sci-fi and less dick jokes. When they avoid the childish gags, Orville is far more “trekish” than anything else currently produced (broadcast or streaming).

Yes but the dick jokes are what separate it from Discovery and other Trek. It’s a comedy. Without the comedic element, Orville is just a TNG rehash.

100% agreed Arathorn. Without the comedy it’s just a TNG ripoff. The jokes set it apart as a TNG homage. And it just works better when its taken lightly. The show did not work as well when they were more serious.

so two klingon dicks peeing isn’t a dick joke?

I fail to be that enthusiastic about a TNG-Copy. They have some nice SF elements in there now and then and the creature design and the effects are great, for sure. Overall I find the endresult mediocre mainly because I am more exited for original content and find the overall concept to lean that much on another show from another franchise a bit weird. If this were a full fledged parody and as funny as say Scrubs, I would be more on board. I do understand why Star Trek traditionalists like that show, more of the same old. Good that there is something for everyone, I am definetly more hooked by The Expanse and Discovery.

I enjoy Orville just fine. First season is usually growing pains anyway and I thought they handled it quite well by not taking themselves too seriously (something a number of Trek fans should learn to do). In any case, it will be interesting to see what Menosky contributes. He’s certainly a talented guy and may be just what Orville needs to quiet down the critics.
I think Star Trek (in general) has been mostly a curse for any show set aboard a starship because everything gets compared to it. And while Galaxy Quest was deliberately spoofing Star Trek, I do not believe Orville is attempting to do that. I think Orville has its own identity and will find its legs, just as the beloved TNG did. But if people are always going to compare Orville to TNG, there is no way they will ever be satisfied. Such people may watch Orville, but they’re only looking for things to bash.

Orville does get bashed too much here. But it is clearly courting a TNG feel. I think MacFarlane specifically designed it that way. It’s meant to be a TNG spoof (at least on a aesthetic level). And to an extent that’s my issue with the show. I do like Orville, but it just feels a bit too generic. That being said – the show’s comedy approach differentiates it from Discovery. And I think they can both fill their own niche. If given time, I agree that Orville will find its legs and live up to its potential.

I try not to comment on Orville articles, but when people continue to call it real Trek or better than discovery… well…

The fact that anyone thinks Orville has any amount of quality anything is funnier than any joke the show has vomitted onto its audience.

Let’s stop with the comparison between discovery and Orville. It’s like compring apples and tampons, in that the only thing they have in common is that they both exist.

But The Orville IS better than Discovery, though. More Star Trek than the actual show with Star Trek in the title. And nope, will not stop comparing the two just because you say so. Sorry.

But Orville ISNT as good as Discovery. Not by many million light years. It’s typical weak Braga garbage fused with terrible McFarlane writing. It’s not close to anything Trek beyond some bad fan fiction. It’s fans playing dress up and hiring washed up Trek producers to recreate a visual style fans will recognize to trick them into thinking there’s something substantive on the screen.

The fact is, there’s absolutely nothing on Orville that hasn’t been done before and done better elsewhere. Every episode is a checklist of tropes and rehashed ideas, acted out by bland characters in bad cosplay. If Voyager was a weak TNG clone, Orville is a weak Voyager clone.

Its a copy of a copy of a reboot made by a mix of wanna be amateurs and has-been professionals with nothing new to say.

On the flip side, Discovery has its flaws but its actual entertainment.

It really just depends on your taste honestly. I see a lot of old school trek fans loving the Orville more because its more similar to what they grew up with, but lord that does not make it better than Discovery.

I just turned 22 and my love for trek has only recently be ignited because of Star Trek Discovery. I enjoy a handful of TOS episodes but they are cheesy to the max. I cannot get through TNG. And only watch a handful of Voyager.

It my mind they really just arn’t very good. Do they bring up some ethical stories, sure, but that doesn’t make it good. That goes for the Orville. A lot of shows have heart and ethics, that hardly makes it good.

The JJ films may not fit with your ideals of what trek should be but it made it cool again and relatable to a whole new generation. My friend love Discovery, but they refuse to watch anything prior because its quite dull most of the time.

So saying the Orville is closer to classic trek is hardly a praise. If trek is to endure it has to evolve which is what Discovery was.

Discovery had its heart at times, its ethics in a few episode, but overall it was a kickass drama.

So saying the Orville is more trek than Discovery…. I mean, maybe that’s true.

Star Trek for a lot of modern audience is pretty dated, kind of boring and is so cheesy that some of its “ethics and heart” aren’t worth revisiting.

At least Discovery has the the nerve to try and move forward and evolve while paying homage to its past.

If it tried to be like past Trek. Star Trek would be dead.

Dan… There is nothing wrong with Trek growing and changing. It’s inevitable. But it also still has to be at least somewhat engaging. The final 6 episodes had none of that. Either way the show just took a major dive. The plot was terrible. It undercut the things it was setting up. And it didn’t even touch on the themes the producers and cast said they were going to leading up to the show. It was just badly put together. It had promise then fell apart. Much of that could be explained by the changeover in show personnel. But not all.

I had no problem with a change in Trek. In fact I looked forward to one. But I’d rather trek be good than different.

I am enjoying The Orville totally. In fact more so then Discovery (its equal to Enterprise blah!). However, having Jonathan Frames is an important element, but to include LaVar Burton to the director’s list also, would be amazing. His story telling on any given episode, just heighten them. Also, his action direction on the Klingon storylines was some of the best on Deep Space 9. I can’t wait for The Orville’s season 2. Bravo! / Brava! to the full cast and crew for a job well done. Let’s keep this going ALL. Thank you.

Oops! Sorry Jonathan, (Mr Frakes) spell check is not up to par : ( today. For whatever reason, it keeps changing the k’s to m’s oh well, technology today. Peace.

It’s clear to me that Mcfarlane set out to remake Star Trek the next generation, he sold it as a crazy comedy but that was just to get it on the air. Second season he will go full on Star Trek and the broad comedy will be toned way down. Which is fine, I love the next generation, long live the Orville.

I hope not, Raul, about the broad comedy. Orville needs that. If they try to go serious I think the show will die quickly.

Maybe Farlone wants to deliberately echo TNGs evolution from slapstick hockeyness in Season 1 to more serious drama and a better execution; a well oiled engine in Seasons 3-7.

Thrilled to hear it. Orville was definitely one of the brighter spots on TV for me in 2017. Bring it on!

I’d like to believe that moody shot of the quarters heralds even more of a dark turn for the series. Been a sucker for downer endings ever since the conclusion of PRIVATE LITTLE WAR upgraded my view of the whole ep.

Just about the only redeeming feature of an episode rife with silliness and Kirk’s horribly misinformed take on Vietnam, agreed. (Though my fourteen year-old self reminds me that Nancy Kovacs in that furry orange vest didn’t hurt either.)

Well I like the vulcan healing stuff too, it’s a good example of how TOS could play the ‘charm’ card to leaven even the crummiest shows (except maybe AND THE CHILDREN SHALL LEAD and THE ALTERNATIVE FACTOR.) The guy playing M’Benga (cool name!) had a modest flare for dry comedy. I remember being irked when that good doctor got turned into a veritable serial killer in an early Bantam TREK novel. Talk about character assassination!

True enough about the charm, something the second season had in such supply as to almost make up for the fact that it wasn’t nearly as well-written as the first. The ultimate example of that may be “Bread and Circuses,” a show with a premise that was pretty threadbare and well-worn for Trek even by then, yet is so chock-full of crackling dialogue and witty performances and great direction that it manages to be a good episode almost in spite of itself.

I think Ralph Senensky (who shot B&C) had a great record as a TOS director, as even the lesser shows still are elevated with either camera work or great performances. I remember the audio tape I had of B&C from the 70s was ruined by my laughter during the “land someplace with a pitchfork” and “bring this network’s ratings down” lines.

Here is a thought, let Nicholas Meyer lead the show the second season!!! What happened to the project he is working on?!?!?!

No question that he’s another DSC writer who, for whatever reason, got sidelined in favor of those of far lesser talent. What a pity.

– Hired by Fuller
– “Old Trek” Alumni
– Not “diverse” enough

Three reasons for the Harberts clique to axe him (and Menosky)!

The next time you’re tempted to pull such stuff from yer orifice at least have the courtesy to stand downwind, pardner. Or spray some freshener, at least. Geez!

@Vulcan Soul “Not “diverse” enough”

You really should do some self-reflection….

Isn’t that the Khan on Ceti Alpha V show? Imagine that debut is a ways off, if it happens at all. My thought is that Gorgio blows up ceti alpha vi, and a distinct lack of hilarity ensues …

I don’t think Nic Meyer has very much to do with Discovery since the guy has been there all season and not a single credit has been given to him in 15 episodes. I thought we would get at least one ‘story by’ credit if not an actual screenplay but I don’t think Meyer has any real pull with the show. TM has put up every interview they could find discussing every recent episode and all the gushing over everyone who worked on it. I don’t think Nic Meyer’s name has even been referenced once the entire season, anywhere.

And I think that Khan show was nothing more than a rumor. No one has even hinted its true, much less its in development. I hope its dead personally, Trek needs to go forward with new stories, not regurgitate old ones for old fans who can’t let go of the 80s and 90s.


Re: not a single credit has been given to him in 15 episodes

“I don’t think Nic Meyer has very much to do with Discovery since the guy has been there all season and not a single credit has been given to him in 15 episodes.” — Tiger2

If by that, are you asserting his “consulting producer” credit hasn’t appeared in the opening credits of a single episode, you are simply wrong.


And he had the same credit prior for the CROSSING LINES television series, which, while obviously not a “major” credit, must be a more significant contribution than the “not very much” that you are supposing for it to be a position in two different unconnected productions? I doesn’t appear to be a made up honorific title as Paramount did to sideline Roddenberry in the movies.

I enjoyed The Orville evenly, whereas Discovery has been uneven. The Orville is a consistent, known commodity. With Discovery, I never knew from week to week if I would hate the next episode or love it. That yo-yo approach might be how TV works now, but I don’t like being toyed with in naked grabs for ratings. It feels like hate-watching is part of the business model.

I disagree on the Orville being consistent. The show needs to decide if it’s a comedy or a drama because it does both okay but neither great. I also don’t consider them competition, not even in the same categories.

I see them as occupying different, but possibly complementary niches. But this discussion board very much wants to make a comparison, and indeed, TrekMovie publishing Orville news here begs us make that comparison. To your second point, I think “dramedy” is now an established genre. Someone above mentioned Scrubs, which at the time I found jarring, because it would skip from back and forth from humor to drama in unfamiliar ways. Years on, however, I think that path has been worn somewhat smoother. There’s another aspect to The Orville, which is cringe comedy, like you see with The Office, with awkward situations and hanging pauses. It’s an interesting dynamic.

Cue the idiots whining about a Star Trek website covering a show satirizing Star Trek.

The Orville is not a satire of Star Trek, it’s an homage to Star Trek. It has some satirical elements but not exactly a satire.

I’m sure they can’t admit that in court, but I think this is a fair assessment. For the first time in forever, I’m actually rewatching some TNG eps (mainly because we embarked on a Garak-athon with DS9, and I sidetracked into an O’Brienathon due to Colm Meaney’s nerd writer in FAR BEYOND THE STARS, which led me back to THE WOUNDED and DATA’S DAY for the first time this century) and I was struck by how it wasn’t just the lighting and the cosmetics that seemed TNG-ish. More than ever, I wish ORVILLE would embrace the old TNG open submission policy, because I would be so there. While I didn’t really enjoy TNG, I did get how it worked, and most if not all of the stories I pitched there could easily be ORVILLE eps.

I’m not aware of any stipulation that Menosky writing for The Orville prevents him writing for Discovery again . . . The two aren’t mutually exclusive.

He’s a staff writer/producer on Orville. That will preclude him from working on other shows, at least for next season.

Yeah, but historically folks still ‘moonlight.’ Hell, Gene Coon was contracted to be running the writing on IT TAKES A THIEF during TOS season 3, but as ‘Lee Cronin’ he still delivered a few stories and scripts to TREK.

Having said that, I have a feeling Menosky would not be doing TREK work during this period.

Oh yeah Menosky could definitely moonlight, but agree it would seem unlikely.

And as far as Gene Coon goes – I believe a stipulation of him being released from his Trek contract was that he had to contribute X amount of scripts for S3.

That may well be, they’d’ve been damned fools to deprive themselves of any riches he could toss their way. Sorta off topic, but does anybody know why John Meredyth Lucas wasn’t invited back to produce season 3 TOS? He finished season 2 after Coon left, and he continued to work on the series third season, and his work was actually pretty decent (I think he was the only writer/director they had.) It seems like having a Lucas in the hand was worth more than a Freiberger in the … well, not gonna go there.

I’ve wondered that as well. Lucas was a talented guy who understood the show. Maybe Gene didn’t care for him.

I think the attitude behind the scenes was that Lucas’s work, while adequate, was no substitute for Coon, and thus not worthy of the producer’s chair. Which may well have been true, but in hindsight what other choice was there? Meanwhile, Gulf and Western was mainly interested in finding someone who could get a final year produced on the cheap, and that Freiberger was certainly qualified to do.

I just read a GR memo to JML about ELAAN OF TROYIUS (I’m on an email list from a couple genuine trek researchers who make a point of scanning and presenting actual archival documentation on TREK, instead of paraphrasing said correspondence and adding own spin to same, as certain published folk have a pronounced and appalling tendency to do), and he does seem to admit to being more critical of JML’s work than, say, Bob Justman (who on his own offers up a 13-point list of similarities to JOURNEY TO BABEL based on an early JML ELAAN draft.)

Then again, the fact GR did generate some memos on this during a time when, so far as I know, he wasn’t doing much memo writing at all suggests he did care about the final product more than I might have thought.

I’ve had the sense for awhile now that Roddenberry was actually more engaged with the production in its third year than most have previously suspected. That’s actually not good news, if you were of the mindset that it was only NBC’s intransigence over Trek’s timeslot and Gulf & Western’s budget-cutting that drove Roddenberry away, ruining what could have been the best season evah.

That makes more sense now. I can’t say I blame anyone for taking up such a position – I would imagine it is significantly more secure in terms of income than writing for shows ad hoc.

Menosky has left the safety of a staff job before, bailing on TNG to go live in Italy for a couple of years (otherwise, we’d’ve perhaps gotten additional Moore/Menosky stories like THE CHASE — let’s forget about IN THEORY, Stewart murdered that with bad execution — instead of the Moore/Braga ones that instead emerged.) So I don’t know that his financial status is tied to having a staff job, considering the residuals have kept flowing for him.

Caught one episode last year, there won’t be a second viewing. That said, there are a lot of viewing choices out there, enjoying Trek, this show, or any other sci-fi program doesn’t have to be mutually exclusive.

Joe Menosky, just like the handcuffed Nicholas Meyer, isn’t female, “colored” and gay enough to qualify for the illustrious Discovery writing team. The racists- and sexists-in-charge have made it known often enough that it is skin color and sexual orientation that count more than writing achievements in their ever more extremist quest for “diversity”. Keep going, Discovery! Other shows will take over to do the serious scifi instead of political projects. And good luck to The Orville, which seems to be the true safe haven for Trek alumni by now.

Yes, it’s a known fact that women, blacks and gays are generally incapable of cobbling together anything of value on their own. And historically, all creative failures are, by definition, political failures. Amirite?

Christ, what a twit.

VS, when you get on your alt right victim conspiracies I can feel everyone else doing a collective eye roll.

Dude you don’t even know A. That Menosky left (although yeah its most likely) or B. That he wasn’t the one who chose to leave and not the other way around. And I just find it funny you think its some kind of ‘diversity’ conspiracy when last time I checked the show runners are all white and its mostly males who write the show now (there are two women on the writing staff, the others all men), just like EVERY Star Trek production before it.

THATS what is funny man, think of EVERY show, every film and the show runners, producers and directors who were in charge from Gene Roddenberry to JJ Abrams, most of them were white males running it for 50 years now. Wasn’t Fuller a white guy? He handed it off to another white guy. So stop moaning, Jesus.

Fuller may be white and male, but he’s also gay, which according to this idiot’s theory-of-everything obviously means that he was a peecee affirmative-action hire and that Discovery was doomed from the start.

And that what is so sad about people like Vulcan Soul. Unless someone looks like HIM (my guess a straight white guy, what else could it be lol) then they are ONLY there because its an affirmative action/political issue. Its not because Fuller is actually a brilliant writer, its because he’s gay who was given the job over it over everything else. I don’t know if Vulcan Soul realizes how he sounds but he’s saying you clearly deserve to be there if you are white, male and obviously straight. ANYTHING else that delineates from that its questionable how you got the job. Its SO insulting.

How do people like this even BECOME Star Trek fans in the first place?

Not that I have any interest whatsoever in defending the creep, but I think that missstates his position somewhat. My guess is he’s perfectly willing to accept that a minority or a woman or gay could be perfectly able to work in media and do a great job, at least in theory. But if that person fails to perform, in his view the only possible explanation is that they’re an undeserving affirmative action hire, case closed. Never mind that people in all walks of life and of all hues and sexualities have been promoted beyond their talents since time immemorial for any number of reasons; never mind that it’s the cruel, mercurial nature of the arts that the efforts of genuinely talented people often fall short. It would never even begin to occur to him to question his beliefs in light of the simple fact that in the fifty-year history of the Trek franchise, all of the worst scripts–each and every one–was in fact written by a white male with a track record working in television. That’s why I can assure you, with no pleasure, that “Vulcan Soul” is a stone bigot, even as he would no doubt protest that he doesn’t have a prejudiced bone in his body.

D.C. Fontana was obviously brought on as a sop to the feminists.

…collective eye roll…..

Admins, why is this bigoted moron still allowed to flood this site with his hatefulness? Come on, how about a little administration around here!

You’re in the wrong fandom. This is a Star Trek site.

“Until humans learn to tolerate — no, that’s not enough; to positively value each other — until we can value the diversity here on Earth, then we don’t deserve to go into outer space and encounter the infinite diversity out there.” — Gene Roddenberry

Seriously — the mods haven’t banned this guy yet!? I’m all for other opinions, but this borders on hate speech.

Curious Cadet

You’re all for other opinions, but not Vulcan Soul’s opinion?

Tisk, tisk. Where have your IDIC ideals gone?

As it happens, there was a report on Morning Joe earlier this week that criticized the Democratic Party for the kind of mindset that Vulcan Soul is here attributing to the DSC executives——a mindset sometimes referred to as “reverse racism/sexism/etc…”, though IMO it is more appropriate to omit the “reverse,” as what is good for the goose should be likewise for the gander. Whether or not the DSC production actually has such a mindset, I couldn’t say. But, it’s certainly plausible, given everything that I’ve seen of the show and the way it’s been marketed. So, why don’t we try to be thoughtful, critical-thinking adults, and dispense with the labeling and trying to shut down opinions that we don’t share, mmk?

Ah, the olde “If you’re intolerant of intolerance you must be intolerant yourself!” argument shambles forth, ready to do battle on behalf of. . . what, exactly? The inalienable, constitutional right of “Vulcan Soul” to repeatedly assert, sans any evidence whatsoever, that Discovery ended up being a creative disappointment because some women and a gay person or two figured among its writing staff? Because unlike, say, Gene Roddenberry and Nicholas Meyer and David Simon and all other manner of writer-producers with their varying levels of talent, they came to the task with some liberal or progressive ideas about diversity that you and he take exception to? Really?

I used to think better of your rhetorical skills than that, Cygnus. Though that was quite some time ago, alas. But I do appreciate the tepid stab at decency in your admission of not really knowing the mindset of the DSC producers, which (though you lose points for that wishy-washy use of “plausible”) was more than “Vulcan Soul” could ever manage. As to his inalienable right to spout off hateful nonsense–well, fear not, I’ve got that covered. He’s free to do that, anytime. But if there’s anything I’ve come to understand about a certain breed of conservative it’s their apparent obsession over who is deserving–of food, shelter, health care, legal rights, etc. So in that spirit, rest assured that I give what passes for his arguments exactly the level of respect they deserve.

Michael Hall


No. Not really. That straw man that you just put up is entirely of your own creation, and does not represent me, my views, nor my comments.

I don’t know anything about Vulcan Soul other than this one comment that I responded to. I don’t know anything about any other comments that he may have made. And I’m not making any assumptions about him, his moral character, his values or his views based on this one comment. In other words, I’m not stereotyping him. And your regurgitation of social left talking points has not added anything worthwhile to this conversation. If you’d like to probe for substantiation of what Vulcan Soul suspects is going on——and doing so would be constructive——then why don’t you simply ask him? I’m actually curious, myself.

Michael Hall

P.S. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if you ask him and he doesn’t respond. You’re coming across as anything but fair-minded.

Cyg, Michael Hall,
You folks are by far my two favorite posters here, so in the best tradition of Kramer making wrongheaded observations about Jerry and Elaine on SEINFELD, let me ask you to stop fighting — “Now don’t you two see that you’re in love with each other?”


Thanks for that, man. Coming from a real working professional (as opposed to a dilettante like myself), your kind words mean a lot.

As to Cygnus, though, what can I say? I too came to greatly appreciate his postings on the subject of Trek’s thematic content (particularly with regards to the Abrams films), finding them cogent and frankly better thought-out and written than anything I could muster, even when I disagreed. Which is why I was distressed indeed to see him embracing the modern shibboleth of “political correctness,” a term which certainly had some legitimacy a generation ago but whose usage is now not only a hallmark of intellectual laziness but is ironically designed to do exactly what its proponents accuse the Left of doing: shutting down conversation through name-calling. Seriously, that someone like Donald Trump could accuse the opponents of state-sponsored torture of being “politically correct” and think he was making some kind of devastating point should be cause enough to make any decent person think twice about using the phrase, regardless of their political leanings.

While it’s probably a mug’s game to try to keep politics out of a Trek discussion forum—that the franchise tries, in its own frequently awkward and ham-fisted way, to be about something meaningful is one of the things we love about it, right?—I personally would welcome the notion that we at least put the partisanship aside. Because I detest the habit, on the Left as well as the Right, of viewing every damned thing strictly through a political lens (which often these days is just another expression of tribalism anyhow), and would honestly be very content to just discuss Trek’s successes and failures as art, or at least entertainment, so long as everyone stuck to that agreement. But that’s really the best I can do.

To show how weird everybody can get on the subject of trek, I started watching DSC last night on the free trial, and was only going to see as many eps as my wife could take (thought that would be about 1-1/2.) Instead we actually watched the first five in a row without falling asleep (her) or kicking the tv set in (me) …

I don’t like how the show fails to breathe (can’t imagine this show doing something like TNG’s ‘Troi worships chocolate scene’ and I seriously dislike the cinematography and HATE the ship exteriors (the silly gyro flip the ship does when jumping is a hot mess of bad execution on top of dubious shot design, and wonder why they go for cornball STAR WARS fireballs in space when blowing stuff up) … but found the shows pretty watchable overall, even though I don’t really see this as real trek anymore than I ever think George Lazenby is actually playing James Bond in OHMSS.

But even if the show worsens (which I’m pretty much sure it will), I’d be surprised if we don’t blow through the season in the next 3 or 4 days. I find it shows flashes of wit, but if there is any chemistry among the cast, that gets undercut by the unnecessary camera movement and editing, making it impossible to see any real character moments happening in a two-shot, which is what you need to build a feeling.

One other point: when it aired on normal CBS, the pilot show looked dark and mushy, but on the Amazon CBS, it revealed tons of detail. My wife noticed it too, saying it was like going from VHS to DVD (being a dick, I thought it was closer to going from VHS to laserdisc myself.)


Gratified (and frankly surprised, given your previous comments) to see you’re getting something out of the show. Even at its best it’s far from perfect, and we’re in total agreement about its inability to breathe, but I felt from the very beginning that with a serialized format, great cast, and darker tone it had loads of potential—which only made its ultimately not living up to it that much more disappointing.

I didn’t care at all for the “spinning rings/flip” effect myself; such visuals inevitably destroying any sense of scale and just coming off as expensively cheesy. (I did find myself reluctantly getting used to it, and there are some better executions of the idea later on.) We do part company on the production design and cinematography, though. I think it’s the best-looking Trek ever, Dutch angles notwithstanding, even with those silly costumes.

I’ll be interested in reading your take on the rest of the season.

Though Anthony Bourdain would doubtless counsel me to be more open-minded, I have to confess that the irony of being accused of unfairness towards someone who literally mind-reads his targets because he disagrees with them politically is a little rich for my taste.

*Sigh* His assertion–endlessly repeated on this forum as well as others elsewhere; maybe you should try keeping up before spouting off–is that the DSC producers, willfully or not, ended up sacrificing the show’s quality and integrity on the altar of their commitment to diversity. (As opposed to their liberalism, which as a charge would be equally baseless but at least morally defensible.) Now, in my eagerness to parrot leftist talking points it seems to me that this “diversity” can only refer to the people who make the show, the people who act in the show, or the show’s overall message of tolerance and inclusion (something not exactly new for Trek in any case). That’s just simple logic–no strawmen required–and since I find all of those possibilities equally hateful and stupid I see no need to inquire further. Here’s a suggestion, though: since you seem to be confused on this point, why don’t you ask him?

One would think the bare minimum for a Star Trek enterprise would be to grapple with a contemporary issue in a sci-fi setting. The Orville attempted this, with a not-terrible episode addressing social media and upvoting. This was more than Discovery could manage- their social relevancy being limited to Klingons not wishing to mix with Tellarites and Lorca saying “MAKE THE EMPIRE GLORIOUS AGAIN!” (CBS is even selling t-shirts with the slogan. Derp.)

When Discovery makes some new hires, perhaps they can get someone who knows how to pronounce “bowline” and how to spell “simulation.”

I like both shows and look forward to more,even though s.2 of STD is on the fence for me right now,but did enjoy the last episode this season. Also looking forward to Lost in Space in April,and Galaxy Quest will always be my favorite Trek movie,lol! I hope the tv series actually happens.

What about Australia FOX?! Not that it matters, thanks to the internet I’ve seen every episode and in HD! I still can’t believe Fox haven’t added ORVILLE to it’s Foxtel network in Australia. Companies bitch about stopping people pirating then they hold back a market release which fosters more pirating. At least Netflix is here and showing DISCO and I AM a subscriber. I don’t get it FOX??

Joe Menosky was the ONLY veteran Trek TV talent on Discovery. He’s part of the reason I even bothered watching Discovery in the first place. Well, novel writer Kirsten Beyer better step it up, she’s the only recognizable name in the writer’s room now. Maybe we’ll be able to get more Trek actor/driectors for DSC season 2 (I’m personally hoping for Robert Duncan McNeill or Michael Dorn, but I’d also like to see Roxann Dawson return to the Director’s chair.)

Gearing up for season 2…yay! I love it. It’s amusing and entertaining. More please. I can’t play the comparison game with STD. I haven’t seen the first episode of it yet, so I don’t really pay much attention to critiques of it. Can’t get around the “pay for play” thing. Oh well…someday. I just come here for Orville updates, and I’m a Star Trek fan since 1966.One thing that has taken a lot of air outta my tires, is that I take seriously what Dr. Steven Greer has to say about all things ET,UFO, and our own Deep State interfacing with same…long story short…there ain’t no bad guys out there (sorry DS9, no evil Empires to fight off, and it was my favorite ST show too), WE are the bad guys and under quarantine/lockdown until we clean up our act (which yes, it CAN be done, and they stand ready to help us with the Task)…I guess we really ARE the hillbillies of the Galaxy, as that Orville episode had it said.

First, I’ll clarify I love Family Guy, American Dad etc.

I watched these and they were ok. Just ok. The Orville is a comedy that manages a few laughs, but it’s a poor parody of a form of Star Trek stuck in the late 80’s. Seeing MacFarlane on-screen isn’t a bonus, someone else should have been cast. It feels like a personal vanity project made to elevate his ego and views – along with obligatory smug swipes at anyone who believes in things he doesn’t.

There were (are) people who contrast this with Discovery, saying The Orville is ‘proper’ Star Trek. Well, I’m glad he didn’t get his hands on Star Trek, if this is his vision. To me, The Orville is a reminder why Trek needed dragging into the 21st century and given a sane update.

@THX1138 — My thoughts exactly. Extremely well stated, and gets to the very heart of what’s wrong with THE ORVILLE for me. I made the comment earlier that there’s a GEICO commercial (Star Captain: The Lost Keys) that not only looks better than ORVILLE visually, but accomplishes in less than a minute what an entire season of episodes fails to do in the latter.

Thanks for the tip about the Geico commercial! Hilarious. Agree with you on the Orville…it plays it safe all the time, and ends up smug. It really feels like a throw-back show. Not even the procedurals on CBS feel that old-fashioned and bland.

I looked up that commercial (I’m not in the US), yeah, it’s better than The Orville, LOL.

I love The Orville. I hope it stays on @ least 10 years!!!

Orville writing is great if your mentality is 12 years old. Why does Hollywood always rehash the same shows? Can’t they come up with more original ideas in writers room?
Adianne to me is the best part of the show, but she’s not enough to continue watching it.