The Ark is 3 episodes into its first season and I've been watching it. The show was created by Dean Devlin ("Stargate", "Independence Day", et. al.) and has been hyped by
some commentators as sort of a metaphorical next creative phase of
Stargate: Universe (in the sense that it is about a spaceship in the far reaches of space where the crew is left to their own resources).
The connection to the MGM/TV-based
Stargate franchise is imaginative and metaphorical at best, since Devlin wasn't involved with the TV shows. Jonathan Glassner did write 1 episode (so far). I had read somewhere that Brad Wright was involved with the series, but I don't see his name in the credits. It's possible whoever wrote that confused Brad with MGM executive Michael Wright.
So, beyond the concept of a spaceship traveling beyond help from Earth, there is no real connection to the
Stargate TV franchise. I'm not surprised, but I was a little disappointed to learn that someone was being hopeful in previewing/predicting the show.
Creatively it reminds me of the old Saturday morning live-action shows from the early- to mid-1970s (like
Ark II). You can read more about that show here:
Ark II (TV Series 1976–1979) - IMDb
I honestly don't think there is any intentional connection. The quality of the scripts and the acting remind me of that show, and the costumes and some of the concepts (young scientists setting out to save humanity's future). This is a theme that has been explored in more than 1 TV show and movie.
Christie Burke heads the cast as Lieutenant Sharon Garnet. Other leads include Reece Ritchie as Lieutenant Spencer Lane, Richard Fleeshman as Lieutenant James Brice, Stacey Read as Alicia Nevins, and Ryan Adams as Angus Medford. I haven't done the cast full justice as this is a true ensemble show. You can get the full cast listing at IMDB.
The Ark (TV Series 2023– ) - IMDb
The plot is straightforward. A colony ship (the first of many) has been sent out from Earth. The military crew and civilian passengers were put into cryogenic sleep and were supposed to stay there for about 5 years. But the ship hits something along the way. The "something" causes considerable damage and one of the crew quarters is lost along with most of the officers.
3 young lieutenants and a doctor are all that remain of the ship's assigned crew, along with nearly 150 young brilliant scientists, engineers, and specialists in various fields. Their mission is to start a colony on a nearby planet and await reinforcements (including their families). Being chosen for the trip was a very prestigious honor. And apparently it led many desperate people to fraudulently get berths on the ship.
Earth has a lot of problems. Humanity has screwed it up and there is no choice but to get as many people off the planet as quickly as possible. The Ark program is the first wave of evacuations, consisting of (supposedly) carefully selected (and trained) pioneers who shouldn't have much trouble building a new civilization on another world. Several destination planets were chosen, but this show only follows the adventures on Ark I.
Although the ship pays homage to some of the criticisms leveled at science fiction TV shows, it kind of goofs up the science right and left any way. For example, artificial gravity is induced by spinning the ship. But the camera angles imply that characters are violating the laws of physics.
There are some other ridiculous violations of science that I won't share because they would give away the plot points. If you're a stickler for science in "science fiction" TV shows, you may find it difficult to watch this one. But given how many shows have people traveling faster-than-light via magical technology, beaming around the universe, using "artificial gravity plating", and always finding human-like space aliens who speak perfect English - well, let's just say you won't have to suspend disbelief on
those points (yet).
Given that the surviving crew and passengers wake up years before they're supposed to on a damaged ship with limited life support and resources, there are plenty of weekly disasters requiring the attention of brilliant scientists and engineers.
That said, the sub-plots revealing character development are kind of stereotypical. But the show has a difficult time deciding whether it wants to target a youthful audience or a mature audience. Thus far all nudity has been minimal and tasteful (people in showers). Initimacy is more implied than anything else. And all the deaths have been either clean-and-quick or happened "off stage".
The character interactions are for mature audiences (and that is why the show runs at 10 PM Eastern). But the actors and the dialogue are not very polished, in my opinion. I think the actors are doing a fine job with the direction and the scripts. They're just being directed to act as if they are filming a kid show (that just happens to deal with mature themes).
It's weird watching people who are either teenagers or just out of their teens act so young while doing things you expect of older, more mature people. I think this is intentional. It's probably Devlin's way of being cutting edge. It hasn't been done quite this way before (in my experience as a viewer of TV shows and movies - but there could be other productions that have mixed the tropes like this).
Some of the characters are just plain corny. That's intentional because they're young people (played by young people) obviously dealing with young people's feelings and desires.
Some of the characters are cardboard cutouts, obviously inserted into the episodes just to keep the plot moving. Maybe there are so many secondary characters (literally a cast of over 100 characters) that the show will never be able to represent them all credibly as real people. The crowds react to situations in the same dumb ways we've seen crowds react in 100 disaster movies and TV shows.
On the 1 hand, you want the characters to be less shallow. On the other hand, these are all college-age people - and they're acting a bit like college students who aren't sure of what to do with themselves. I think this is intentional. It's not quite
Animal House Goes to the Stars but there are a few hints of unfettered "frat boy" (or "sorority girl") behavior. In that respect, the show is presenting some plausible characterizations. But maybe I've seen too many college comedy movies to care about that kind of story any more (even if it's raised to a dramatic level from cheap slapstick).
The writers have to deal with as many problems as possible in order to keep the show going in an episodic fashion. Although there is clearly a story arc (about the journey of Ark I), the shows thus far have been disaster-of-the-week mini-movies.
I don't know if that is a sustainable premise. I suspect what they did was sit in a room and say to themselves, "Okay, this story needs to be told in phases: Phase I is everyone wakes up to a broken ship. What can go wrong?" If that's the case, I would expect a transition from diaster-of-the-week to multiple episode arcs about crew politics. People will probably divvy up into factions. I think that's the logical progression for such a large ensemble cast.
Some of the technobabble is interesting. The sets are nice and "futuristic" in that 1970s way. If you have ever watched
Space: 1999 you'll feel like you're visiting old, familiar territory in terms of costuming and set design. I don't know if the similarities were intentional.
Overall I'd give the show a B+ rating. It's not as good as I hoped it would be but I've seen far worse and I'll keep watching (for now).
If you don't get SyFy you may be able to watch episodes on some streaming apps like Peacock. IMDB provides a list of services. I watched the first couple of episodes on Fubo.TV (which is an independent streaming service that competes with major cable providers like Comcast, AT&T, and RoadRunner). But we've suspended our Fubo subscription for 6 months so I'll have to watch episodes on Peacock the day after they air on SyFy.