Stargate SG-1 Gets A Seventh Season 430
An anonymous reader writes "Farscape may or may not have been cancelled [does anyone know?], and Enterprise is so politically correct I can barely bring myself to watch it, but with MacGyver onboard, it looks like Stargate SG-1 will be back for a seventh season."
Re:It's a shame... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fuck (Score:4, Insightful)
that is the best way to guarantee your show will have a short run: confuse the new viewers.
Farscape degenerated into introspective whining (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately near the end it degenerated into self-introspection and self-pitty that was made two billion times more annoying for criton's (sp) whining, indignant yelling.
If they could fire the writers and get people who had imagination and drive to explore the incredibly vast universe then sure, bringing farscape back would be a great thing. But as it stands now, it's a mercy killing, putting it down before it becomes a parody of itself and another star trek universe where they're more interested in psycoanalyzing everything than exploring.
Welcome to North America (Score:2, Insightful)
No, here in the land of Hollywierded entertainment, if it isn't a smash success within it's first week it gets canned. If it is too 'cerebral' (meaning the viewer has to remember what happened the week before) it gets dumbed down. That doesn't quite explain how the X-Files survived, but in general it's a good rule of thumb.
The best TV sci-fi doesn't happen in north america. American execs don't have the balls to tell a good story.
Just because they cancelled Farscape... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think SG-1 has more of a "formula" than Farscape... and as another poster mentioned it is great how true to past episodes they are. They never break the "SG-1 Reality".
Farscape on the other hand is much more on the edge. The first couple seasons were pure genius but honestly this season felt more like the writers were making things up as they went. The best series have some kind of continuity. Anyone have any idea what changed?
Farscape rocks (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm surprised to hear of the cancellation, but true it is -- see the horse's mouth. [farscape.com] However, I doubt it's dead. Farscape has the backing of the brand-name Jim Henson Company, a great premise (IMHO), and a solid library of four years that breaks the magic 88-episode threshold needed for successful post-series syndication.
I bet they'll go to syndication, as all the modern Treks have done, and maybe even score a better channel than SciFi, which can have John Edward for all I care (gag). Keep an eye on UPN. The Farscape season was not set to start until February, being from Australia and all, so there's time.
Enterprise is in its childhood. TNG was VILE for its first three seasons and would have rightfully died if not for the intervention of the Borg and a stunning season-end cliffhanger ("Best of Both Worlds"). I think it will show some decent character development, and I appreciate that they've deprived themselves of 3/4 of the technology that yielded too many pat technobabble solutions on shows like Voyager. Scott Bakula annoys me, but I guess I can get used to him
Yes, I watch too much TV, but mostly science fiction.
Re:Fuck (Score:3, Insightful)
Makes you wonder why the broadcast industry's so anti-Tivo, doesn't it?
Maxim (Score:3, Insightful)
grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastards (Score:2, Insightful)
In Australia - not only is cable TV way overpriced (and broadband charges seriously suck even before you put in installation and new modem cost), we simply do not get decent sci-fi.
How many seasons of Farscape have been made? Most of the episodes were shown I think but some episodes were missed (dropped for sport) and never reappeared. And it was made less 100km from where I am sitting.
Voyager is still in season 6!!
Cable TV is seriously screwed. But the gov and regulators look about to stuff up the commercial fix being proposed.
What about Space-Above and Beyond (simple storyline but done semi-well even if a bit corny)?
Not only do the programmers (TV schedules - not the nice people who write code) - have seriously lousy taste, they do not seem to manage to get it - put the show on same time each week.
Thankfully we have 3 hr video tapes - show can start anywhere between 30min and an hour late, then run for 1hr10min with the ads. Also 11pm Tuesday or Thursday is not what I would call an audience friendly time.
Re:Good! (Score:2, Insightful)
For the first couple of seasons they did all the things you would expect, sending probes through the gate first and stuff... Now they just seem to go wandering through with no idea what's on the other side...
Or, for the first season (more or less) They pretty much got thrown and came rolling out the gate.. Now "everything exits at the velocity it enters" (And yes I know they babbled an excuse for that last season)
Re:Scifi Shows (Score:5, Insightful)
This is one of the many ways Star Trek has simply ruined people's understanding of science. The fact of the matter is that given the place where Firefly takes place, using guns makes perfect sense.
Guns are cheap, they have around 1500 years of experience making and caring for them, cheap, they are easy to use, easy to make very durable, and did I mention cheap?
As I have written for a probably never-to-be-published game's guide,
Firearms have an excellent bang-for-the-buck, pun fully intended, and are likely to continue to have it for a long time to come. The only real mystery is why Serenity doesn't have at least one hull-mounted machine gun.
Re:Enterprise politically correct? (Score:3, Insightful)
All I needed to hear was the credits for the new season ("The universe is a dangerous place."). That said it all. It's going to be BAD. Then there was the line from Dylan about Tyr not hurting their friendship -- as if that were Tyr's first concern, instead of survival. Then there was the nuthouse episode, which I could not believe -- I was so bored, I was about to shut it off. The only reason I watched the last episode was to see John DeLancie. Now it's no more Andromeda for me. It's just gotten too sappy -- all the things that made it different from all the other shows are gone -- Tyr is becoming a nice guy, and the edge is even being taken off Sid (John DeLancie's character) and, with 50 worlds, the Alliance now acts like Star Fleet on idiot pills.
That's how bad Andromeda is!
Enterprise: Americans Deserve All (Score:5, Insightful)
Ultimately, Enterprise reminds me of USA today: ignorantly pushing itself on the world and expecting to get better treatment than anyone else. I suppose that's what now gets high ratings in terrorized USA, but it sure doesn't live up to the best of sci-fi, or even the best of Trek. The Q and the Borg are races that humans should look up to!
Re:Scifi Shows (Score:3, Insightful)
The generally casual attitude to killing has been lacking from most of the great sci-fi shows for years. Mal seems to be a captain who isn't gonna let his conscience come back and stab him a couple of episodes later. Besides that you've gotta love the way Jayne calls his gun 'Vera'...
Don't agree on the poor science (errr... sorta). General uptake of tech is proportional to ease of use and ease of maintenance. gunpowder weapons come out top of that scale especially when you don't have access to the all the supplementary tech you need to maintain something more fancy.
Combines my love of westerns with my love of sci-fi, though I am a bit mystified by the terraformers decision to make all the (hundreds of) planets[?] into semi-arid dustballs rather than fertile paradisi...
Re:Scifi Shows (Score:3, Insightful)
Windows may not be such a good idea to shoot out, as shown in the third (I think?) episode, but most hulls as shown should handle it pretty well.
Don't compare Firefly-era spacecraft with modern spacecraft, or even modern consumer airplanes. The structure looks much more like a modern battleship in style, which can function with quite a lot of holes in it.
Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All (Score:2, Insightful)
When Archer referred to the Suliban making a "deal with the devil", he was referring to where they were getting their genetic engineering from, with "future guy" in the devil role. He was not referring to the actual genetic engineering itself.
Anyway apart from that I agree.
Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All (Score:2, Insightful)
(I'm not trying to be pro-Christian here, although I am one. This is just what happened. Although for the point being made here, you could just as well substitute the Talmud, the Koran, the Baghavad Gita [sp?], or anything else.)
After talking with him awhile, the American GI told him that people in our country have left the need for such things behind. The island native said he was glad that his people did not have that attitude because otherwise he would be trying to cook and eat the GI right now.
At least that islander understood the uncomfortable truth that all cultures are not equal. Some cultures are better, in general, than others... just as some individuals are better than others. Its just reality... a fact. There are people who are better engineers than I am, and there are people who are worse. There are people who are more virtuous than I am, and there are those who aren't.
There are some cultures that aren't worth a bucket of warm spit. And there are some that are wonderful in various ways. I won't hide from the truth just because its not a warm fuzzy, touchy-feely, liberal, politically-correct truth.
I find it interesting that the Q and the Borg are held up as races to be looked up to. I sincerely hope its a joke that I missed due to the lack of body language inherent in a written post. I do not look up to any real or imagined culture that forcibly represses the individual and seeks to make it absolutely and totally subservient to a "collective", nor one that enslaves others, such as the Borg does. Nor do I look up to a culture that walks away from the universe, except for the odd member that comes back to torture the lesser advanced cultures as the Q does.
Human beings are imperfect, and nothing that they ever create will be perfect. So none of our cultures will ever be perfect, and American culture is certainly not perfect. However, it has a been a fairly good culture that shows a lot of ability to improve itself quickly. Our culture abolished slavery in less than 100 years since the foundation of the nation. Nearly all large cultures have had slavery at some time in their past. None have eliminated it as quickly nor as forcefully as ours has.
True, our culture has been in a bit of decline for the past 40 years, but I have great hope that we can recover before it becomes permanent. And I greatly suspect that the poster of the original comment would disagree with me on the evidence and reasons for the decline in our culture.
GKC
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult and left untried." -- G. K. Chesterton
Alternate formats for 'canceled' shows? (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps you could offer high quality downloads of the episodes for a subscription of around $5 a month? I'd love being able to watch my favorite shows ad free, and wherever I'd like. I watch very few series shows so the cost wouldn't be that great. And that way they can avoid paying for the expensive broadcast mediums.
Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All (Score:4, Insightful)
No, the Q and the Borg are even more self-serving than the humans on Enterprise are. Captain Archer may be ethnocentric, but he doesn't conquer and enslave the planets he visits (like the Borg), and he doesn't torture and experiment with innocent people like Q does.
I agree with you that Star Trek has a "my way or the highway" approach to morality, and that it's especially heavy-handed in Enterprise. Even when Archer goes through that apology ritual, he only does it to get the equipment, not because he actually cares that he offended the inhabitants of that planet they were visiting.
On the other hand, though, I think the fact that the humans are immature, ethnocentric, and a bit xenophobic is important to the series. They've only recently developed the ability to explore space and Archer and his crew are the first humans to encounter all these different cultures. It makes sense, then, that the Enterprise crew lacks the sophistication to interact well with other species.
What bothers me about Enterprise is that the character development is so heavy-handed. Like the whole Archer-T'Pal sexual tension thing. On TNG, you had occasional sexual tension between Picard and Dr. Crusher, but that was generally very subtle. On Enterprise, though, we're treated to Archer's bizarre sexual fantasies in which he and T'Pal basically fuck in the Detox chamber. Also, the whole crew-comeraderie thing is really sloppy. Lt. Reed complains about the lack of structure and discipline on Enterprise, then calls Hoshi Sato "Hoshi" rather than "Ensign Sato," and calls T'Pal "T'Pal" instead of "Subcommander T'Pal." It just doesn't gel.
But the worst part about Enterprise is, of course, the lame-ass time-travel episodes. I change the station every time they do that shit in Voyager and TNG, but when Enterprise started out, the central conflict of the show was this stupid "Temporal Cold War." Fuck that. If you're going to have a time travel episode, it had better involve travelling back to the early 21st century to bitchslap Rick Berman for writing such corny scripts.
Steve
Re:farscape still cancelled (Score:1, Insightful)
If you're watching the show because Black's a hottie, then for you, it's good Farscape was cancelled. Maybe you'll learn to utilize your internet connection right.
Black's looks adds believability and dimension to the relationship between Sun and Crichton that is the foundation of the show. Don't get me wrong. Without a doubt, she is hot. But hot folks on tv....*yawn*; someone who is just plain hot is the norm on the tele. But the combination of her looks and sensuality into her character....she isn't just a face or a body--her character and her acting to that fictitous character has created nerve wrecking, blindly, blistering hot character, one easy to forget is wholly fictitious. When you watch the show, you forget it's just a compelling scifi world.
It's similar when you see someone interesting and maybe slightly attracted. Then you get to know their personality and it's like "wow." That's what Black's performance brings to the Aeryn character.
Yeah, it's simple to say Black's there to draw young male viewers to the show (which it probably certainly does well if you just watch the show for bods). But the reality is, it's near unfathomable to really see anyone else could play Aeryn.
Re:It's a shame... (Score:3, Insightful)
but by artistic criteria. The claim "Babylon 5 was made for people who don't strive for the perfection that could be achieved if we set aside our differences and work together (a la STTNG)", is in
case completely wrong. In Babylon 5 the races started at odds with each other, Earth vs Membar, Narns vs Centari, and through the story ark, evolved
into a cooperation, sending there old gods away in the process.
Re:Scifi Shows (Score:2, Insightful)
What's your opinion on armed air marshals?
You'd be surprised. From what I've been told-- I'm not well educated in the science of guns, so I can't swear that this is true-- it's pretty unlikely that a bullet will punch through the multiple layers of aluminum and plastic and insulation and stuff that makes up an airplane hull. It's much more likely just to ricochet, which while bad for any passenger in the way, is better than depressurizing the cabin and sending the plane into a panic dive. I imagine the same would be true of even the most primitive (for lack of a better word) spaceship.
Consider the alternative. Security officers on the Enterprise routinely wandered around with sidearms that were fully capable of cutting right through the deck, the deck below, and the outer hull. How much sense did that make?
Re:farscape still cancelled (Score:1, Insightful)
With ad sales down, that meant to cut the fat, even if it was THE signature show for SciFi. (My parents are probably the most ignorant people of SciFi stuff or anything else on TV, but if I mention the "blue grey pale girl" or "guy with bulbous 'hair'" they know what show I'm talking about.) Instead, the network has put more money into making money off the bereaved, shows like Crossing Over (and some other show in the mornings I think that I see is on, can't remember the name).
The end effect is don't expect new original series, at least not anything of worth, from SciFi. They're done with them. For one, they have shown they can't afford it. For two, they've cut every single one. For three, you'd have to be desperate to run a series show on SciFi, even a successful one--since you know you'll just be backstabbed by some escape clause in your contract and handcuffed such that you can rerun those shows on other networks within a reasonable timeframe. For four, it's easier and cheaper just to show reruns of syndicated stuff or buy the rights from an old big 4 networks. (I expect Dark Angel will show up on SciFi in the next year.)
What you will see is stuff reruns and reruns of other networks shows. Not that that's bad; I particularly enjoy Cartoon Network and TNT and TNN, all which do a lot of running of old material. But it's boring and most SciFi folks own the DVDs and tapes to their favorite stuff anyways.
Not that you care, but since Farscape got dropped, I boycotted the channel. I watched Farscape and anything else they pretty much advertised during that time slot. I even started watching Lexx--hated it, then it got interesting. Now, screw 'em. I hope UPN picks up the show.
Re:Stargate Cartoon (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes. Actually it does. If you look at the writer's bible for many animated shows, there's a studio-inserted bit about contributing a positive moral message, which is a direct result of FCC education requirements.
If you write an episode for SG-Infinity, you'd better make sure nobody dies, and the good guys do good things. Kind of limits what you can do, but hey, constraints are supposed to be good for the creative juices, right?
Lets say it together "Saturday Morning CARTOON" other than a lot of kids not getting the better writing so easily, most of them do. Writers just don't get it....
Actually, many writers do "get it", but what you write has to get approved by the story editor and the director. Ever seen an episode where the writer was an idiot and failed to provide a reason for some special item, or had them do something, but never followed through in the payoff? You can bet someone cut pages from the script, and of course, when they cut, they ALWAYS manage to cut the pivotal story points... And, again, for "children's shows", your writing is subject to the scrutiny of the network censors (aka, television standards and practices), which limits the kinds of things you can put the characters through, not to mention again, the requirement that your story have some sort of moral point.
Those Tau'Ra and their guns! (Score:3, Insightful)
Coming back to topic (*cough*), this is just what happened in Stargate SG-1 [sg1archive.com] with regards to the Asgard - a highly evolved extragalactic civilization - and the Replicators - just like it sounds, a bunch of erector-set robots that simply kept "eating" the Asgard's technology and reproducing themselves. (Where is Bill Joy [wired.com] when you need him?) The replicators were (for some twisted logic reason) "immune" to the Asgard's energy weapons and other defenses, but sure blowed apart pretty when hit with SG-1's MP-5s and P90s [monstersinmotion.com]!
All that being said, Stargate sucks without Daniel Jackson [savedanieljackson.com]. We used to play a drinking game where we'd watch Stargate and drink whenever we'd hear Teal'c refer to him as Danieljackson (as though it were one word). Now we're just sober, and what fun is that?
Looking for new episodes (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good writing, horrible setting (Score:3, Insightful)
Their engine is only 3ft DIA, 10ft long. It rotates. And this will push them faster than light? Should they fill the tank with regular or premium, and how fast can they do 0-60MPH ?
The part you are referring to was only a small part of the engine which takes up over one third of the ship.
Their life support dies when the engine is off. Yet they don't start floating around because of lack of artificial gravity?
They specifically say that the explosion took out their backup life support system. Presumably the backup gravity generator remained intact.
Re:Good writing, horrible setting (Score:3, Insightful)
But on Star Trek, there is no functional difference between "technobabble" and "magic spell". You could move the whole thing into a Dungeons & Dragons world, and it would work exactly the same. In real sci fi, there are laws of physics that don't change from episode to episode, and in good drama, there isn't a magical solution to every problem, and things can't be neatly wrapped up in time for the credits.
Re:Cool, I just found out... (Score:2, Insightful)