I was eleven when the original Star Trek debuted on NBC in 1966. And it was instantly the best show on television, bar none. I had already discovered science fiction, and I had worked my way through Jules Verne, Isaac Asimov, and Robert Heinlein. A year before, even the ten-year-old version of me instantly recognized that Lost In Space was a steaming pile of barely watchable limburger cheese.
But Star Trek was so different, and soooo much better. It showed us a future that was good. Something that we could aspire to achieve. The best of humanity, where disease, racism and poverty had all been conquered. Star Trek was cool. And it was sexy. And frequently it was funny, too.
This year television offers us two different versions descended from that Trek of old. The “official” next Star Trek series, Star Trek: Discovery is found only on the pay channel CBS All Access. And then there’s The Orville, on Fox broadcast, which can only be called the bastard child of Trek.
Yeah, I had the same thought too. The Orville? Seriously? This cannot be good. It’s “bastard” in the sense that they don’t own the franchise, so instead of a Federation, The Orville has a Union of planets. They also have different shaped chest badges, and don’t have transporters. Other than that, you can see the similarities very easily. The Orville was created by comedian Seth MacFarlane, and helmed by Brannon Braga (who had previously been executive producer of Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek Enterprise).
But after watching all the preliminary episodes of both shows to date, I just have to come out and say it: The Orville is good. It’s better than good. It’s better than Star Trek: Discovery. And — surprising as it seems — I believe that if Gene Roddenberry were alive today, he’d be watching The Orville too. Here’s why.
- The future. The original Trek showed us a glimpse of a great, utopian future, the kind of place you wanted to live in. You couldn’t wait to be 300 years old so you could live in the Trek universe. And that’s pretty much the future The Orville shows us too: slick, clean, well-lit, and bright colors. It’s the kind of place you’d want to go to. Discovery is the opposite: dark and ominous. Discovery shows us the Federation during wartime. It’s not the kind of future you’d want to live in, given the choice. If you were living in the Federation of Discovery, you’d probably be figuring out ways to get fake bone spurs to stay out of Star Fleet.
- The humor. The Orville never takes itself too seriously. Pretty much every character is a comic relief at some point. Navigator John and helmsman Gordon are goofy but cool dudes, the kind of guys you’d like to hang with for beers after work — and the kind that do stupid stuff just because they can. Captain Ed Mercer and his first officer Kelly are trying (but failing) to act as cool headed professionals instead of ex-spouses with unresolved issues. Meanwhile on Discovery there’s barely a smile to be found, with the sole exception of Michael’s perky roommate Tilly, of whom far too little is seen to lighten the mood. The original Trek had a few deliberately comic episodes, like “A Piece of the Action,” where Kirk and Spock found themselves impersonating Chicago gangsters of the 1920s. You can easily imagine something similar happening on The Orville. But on Discovery? Perish the thought. There’s a war to be won, after all.
- The sex. Gene Roddenberry always seemed to find a way to get Kirk into the arms of a sexy woman. And his costumer, William Theiss, got into the spirit of things with costumes that seemed to be stuck on with scotch tape and chewing gum. Perhaps it’s too early to tell for sure, but The Orville has already seen Ed (Seth MacFarlane) in bed with a guest star (Charlize Theron). Discovery has had a sex scene too — between Captain Lorca and his admiral — but it turned out to be an act of politics rather than an act of love. (And yes, she was rightfully pissed when she realized it.) Frankly I can’t see Lorca (or anyone in the Discovery cast, for that matter) as anything like Kirk in the sex department. But I wouldn’t be surprised to see anyone on The Orville to be found in a post-coital embrace at any time, with anyone. Even Isaac the android.
- The social content. Of course, the original Trek wasn’t all sex and comedy; many of its episodes were not-too-subtle allegories on social problems of the 1960s. That was particularly true of the third season, when for example we had a really fabulous commentary on racism (“Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”). Surprise surprise: the crew of The Orville isn’t afraid of going there either. In just these first few episodes we’ve seen a show centering on propaganda in social media, another on transgenderism and sex reassignment surgery, one on the ethics of war, and one the meaning of truth in a totalitarian society. In fairness, Discovery has also shown us a strong ethical core, which is only to be expected from any Trek franchise. But I doubt that Discovery would ever do anything that might be an allegory on, say, impeachment. On The Orville it wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
- The guest stars. Yes, it’s a very small point, but I’ll make it anyway. So far MacFarlane has managed to bag A-listers Liam Neeson (in a cameo) and Charlize Theron (in a major guest role). That’s one advantage of shooting in LA. On Discovery (shot in Toronto) the A-list is harder to come by. So far we’ve seen Riann Wilson (who may be in a recurring role as Harry Mudd) and Michelle Yeoh (who was great — but they killed her off.)
So you disagree? Hey, this is DKos. You can let me have it in the comments.