The Orville was a much more old trek-style show, and people universally loved it more than the new trek, despite being progressive.
I’m an old school Trekkie and pretty leftist myself and I absolutely hated the Orville. I didn’t see it as doing anything worthy of such praise. It had a lot of tired humor and (badly) recycled story lines from Star Trek. And I have thoroughly enjoyed just about every bit of new Trek that’s come out.
I also don’t agree with your point about them just presenting things instead of subtly insinuating. The only things they present without integrating it into the story are LGBTQ characters and their personal situations. And that’s only because those things should be absolutely normal and unremarkable at this point. The fact that conservatives still have issues with this is entirely because conservatives are socially backwards. And they’ve been made that way by a constant stream of backward propaganda via Fox News and local media outlets that have been taken over by multibillion dollar corporations who have injected their conservative views onto local news outlets en masse.
In other words them not getting it or enjoying it isn’t a problem for Star Trek it’s a problem for conservatives.
Edit: I also find it hilarious that you think that old Trek was in any way subtle about their social commentary. Having the first interracial kiss on national TV on top of several story lines dealing directly with racism was far far from subtle.
You are not alone in feeling like that about The Orville. I hated that Seth MacFarlane just filed the serial numbers off of TNG and forced in enough lazy jokes about dicks and beer to make it lawyer-proof, and the masses called him some kind of TV scifi pioneer for it.
It doesn’t have to be subtle to show why something is good or bad.
My favorite recent example was the TV adaptation of the Last of Us. The third episode makes it very clear that it’s a statement that a gay couple can have a beautiful life together. I was watching through the show with my parents, who were incredibly homophobic. They got very upset when they realized that it was going to be about a gay couple, but by the end they had tears in their eyes.
There was zero subtlety, because the story was so beautiful it didn’t need it.
You misunderstood my comment. I NEVER said that the old Trek was subtle. Your whole reply is hinging on that point, which is not true. I said that they made the focus of an episode to EXPLORE ethical issues, while on new trek, they take them for granted and then they go on to have a formal adventure.
I’m an old school Trekkie and pretty leftist myself and I absolutely hated the Orville. I didn’t see it as doing anything worthy of such praise. It had a lot of tired humor and (badly) recycled story lines from Star Trek. And I have thoroughly enjoyed just about every bit of new Trek that’s come out.
I also don’t agree with your point about them just presenting things instead of subtly insinuating. The only things they present without integrating it into the story are LGBTQ characters and their personal situations. And that’s only because those things should be absolutely normal and unremarkable at this point. The fact that conservatives still have issues with this is entirely because conservatives are socially backwards. And they’ve been made that way by a constant stream of backward propaganda via Fox News and local media outlets that have been taken over by multibillion dollar corporations who have injected their conservative views onto local news outlets en masse.
In other words them not getting it or enjoying it isn’t a problem for Star Trek it’s a problem for conservatives.
Edit: I also find it hilarious that you think that old Trek was in any way subtle about their social commentary. Having the first interracial kiss on national TV on top of several story lines dealing directly with racism was far far from subtle.
You are not alone in feeling like that about The Orville. I hated that Seth MacFarlane just filed the serial numbers off of TNG and forced in enough lazy jokes about dicks and beer to make it lawyer-proof, and the masses called him some kind of TV scifi pioneer for it.
It doesn’t have to be subtle to show why something is good or bad.
My favorite recent example was the TV adaptation of the Last of Us. The third episode makes it very clear that it’s a statement that a gay couple can have a beautiful life together. I was watching through the show with my parents, who were incredibly homophobic. They got very upset when they realized that it was going to be about a gay couple, but by the end they had tears in their eyes.
There was zero subtlety, because the story was so beautiful it didn’t need it.
You misunderstood my comment. I NEVER said that the old Trek was subtle. Your whole reply is hinging on that point, which is not true. I said that they made the focus of an episode to EXPLORE ethical issues, while on new trek, they take them for granted and then they go on to have a formal adventure.