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."
Too bad... (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Too bad... (Score:2)
Enterprise politically correct? (Score:4, Informative)
Really? I've just started watching them and feel it's no where near as PC as TNG or Voyager. I guess if you compare it to something like Firefly... OK.
Just how bad is Andromeda?!?! Or is just me who thinks it's shite?
andromeda sucks goatse.cx (Score:3, Informative)
The reason Wolfe was fired was because Sorbo (Hercules) thought that he was too smart and that the Andromeda should be made more episodic and less about science-fiction and story arcs. Now it's about Dylan Hunt, Hercules of space.
The cool characters like Rev Bem, Tyr, Trance, etc have been discarded or destroyed in favour of Sorbo.
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!
farscape still cancelled (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:farscape still cancelled (Score:3, Funny)
For a split second (before I looked at her face, and realised who she was) I thought I'd been re-directed to a soft porn site.
Re:farscape still cancelled (Score:2)
Re:farscape still cancelled (Score:2)
This brings up the question, what are they going to do with their budget?
I remember they turned down taking up Babylon 5 because of all the original programming they were doing. It sure would be interesting if they focused their money on another jms project.
Aah.. MacGyver.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Aah.. MacGyver.. (Score:2, Informative)
Heck and they even make McGuyver-inspired flat-rolls of it you can stick in your pocket now--they're quite useful, too!
Re:Aah.. MacGyver.. (Score:4, Funny)
Noooo!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Question about SG TV series (Score:4, Interesting)
I have never watched this show but am curious how it compares to the Star Trek and Babylon 5 series in that does it have a story arc and continuity between each episode? I think the show started on the Showtime network, didn't it? How did it become syndicated?
Thanks.
Re:Question about SG TV series (Score:2, Informative)
in fact, it's almost as much of a story arc as babylon 5, except that they are making up as they go along.
It's alot like star trek, with a little more action, just as much moral debate, and probably just as much drama.
Re:Question about SG TV series (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Question about SG TV series (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Question about SG TV series (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Question about SG TV series (Score:5, Informative)
It doesn't really have a strong arc in that if you miss an episode you're lost for weeks. There's a few arch enemy races that are always lurking ready to pop up into some episode. There good aliens too who help out, sometimes.
They avoid "techno-bable" by just accepting that there are aliens out there who make cool stuff we humans just can't understand. "We don't know how that works," is a frequent line.
Another key success factor is the great cast. Anderson gets some great one-liners and brings a good dose of humour to the show. Tapping and Shanks are totally convincing as the shows eggheads. The supporting cast could easily lead in their own series.
I sure the show syndicated because there's money to be made.
Re:Question about SG TV series (Score:5, Interesting)
The show has great continuity and the technology is almost completely internally consistent. By that I mean, if a given piece of technology worked one way in one episode, then that's how it works. Unlike Star Trek where the technology is a crutch for weak script writers. You know the way in Star Trek the transporters or sensors will simply stop working for an arbitrary reason to prod the plot along? Doesn't happen on Stargate at all, and without that crutch, the writers are forced to be much more creative.
Another example: Enterprise is set years before Kirk, so deflector shields haven't been invented yet. But the writers are too lazy to do away with the "shields are failing" plot device, so they simply substitute in the technobabble "hull polarization" and write exactly as before. Star Fleet doesn't exist yet, but Earth's single, primitive starship can interfere with established, advanced spacegoing races with impunity, just like Kirk or Picard... how? Umm, because that's the only plot they know how to write.
Another thing that annoyed me about Star Trek and Babylon 5 was their Earth-centricness, Earth being the capital planet of the Federation and humans being the "chosen race" in Babylon 5. In Stargate, humans are in a complex universe in which often they are only bit players in the ongoing feuds of the Goa'uld amongst themselves, the Asgard have problems of their own in their home galaxy and often cannot be bothered with Earth's problems, etc. All the other races have been getting on with their histories without Earth even being relevant for large periods of time (i.e. Earth was ignored by the Goa'uld since the Egyptian period). This ongoing activity by NPCs means that the storylines continue between episodes.
Finally, the characters on Stargate are more believable. They are fairly ordinary people who find themselves in extraordinary circumstances, not like Star Trek (particularly TNG) in which each character is "special", the boy genius, the telepath, the noble warrior, etc. Star Trek characters in every series apart from the original are cliches.
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.
SPOILER WARNING (Score:2, Funny)
Re:SPOILER WARNING (Score:2)
Rumors have it that in the 1st episode of Stargate next season, MacGyver builds a new stargate out of three tablets of XTC and a paper clip, and Kurt Russel (from the original StarGate movie) comes back as Tango and gives MacGyver some Cash.
While this is obviously a joke, it *would* make some sense for Kurt Russell to do a cameo spot on SG-1, since the show is shot here in Vancouver [stargate-sg1.com], and Kurt and Goldie are living here so their son can go to hockey school [sportserver.com].
Good! (Score:5, Interesting)
Best of all, the show has a memory... every episode takes into account EVERYTHING that has happened in previous episodes, something that happens in real life but rarely happens on TV. Looks like the Enterprise people are starting to understand that... pity they haven't figured out how to write interesting stories, though.
I had my doubts about Michael Shanks leaving, but the show doesn't seem to have suffered. I'm very, very pleased that it's continuing... but I hope that the producers will have the good sense to pull the plug when they start to run out of steam.
Re:Good! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Good! (Score:5, Funny)
It's sooo good.
Re:Good! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Good! (Score:3, Interesting)
There is a great scene in the first episode in which O'Neill isn't taking Carter seriously, and she gives him an earful about how wearing her genitals on the inside didn't stop her flying 100 hrs of combat missions in the Gulf War, and he replies that he has no problem with female Air Force officers, there problem is that she's a scientist too, and he doesn't trust scientists.
One of the great things about the show is that you can see over time how he comes to respect Carter and Jackson, even though Jackson isn't even Air Force, he's a civilian. That sort of character development is far beyond Star Trek's writers.
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:Good! (Score:2)
1. The splash or whatever it is called can take out anything in its way.
2. If the gate is blocked (like when it's buried), no splash can begin to form, so it can't take out anything
3. The iris is positioned in such a way that it block the point that a wave needs to form.
Feel free to flame me with my mistakes. I've only watched it before/after Farscape anyway.
Re:Good! (Score:3, Informative)
2. Nope. The splash forms, takes out a load of rock/dirt/whatever but when you go through where are you going to go. You're underground and you can't go back. (They did an episode on this). If you fall back into the event horizon of an outgoing gate you die. Gates are one way (Except for the bizarre first episode but we'll forgive them for that.)
3. They activate the iris after the gate has formed but before people come through. When people do come through they hit the iris very, very fast. The SGC has had practice at identifying people based on the smears left over on the iris.
Re:Good! (Spoiler?) (Score:5, Informative)
That episode is a 'time loop' episode...not only do they play golf though the stargate, but at one point Jack starts tossing some balls...then cuts to the next day...Jack and Teal'k are both tossing balls up in the air...cut again, and they're juggling perfectly. It's absolutely hilarious.
That episode is one of the all time best...the plot is, basically, that they need to learn an alien language to figure out how to stop the time loop Jack and Teal'k (Actually, the entire planet, and a few other planets are caught in a screwed up time travel experiment, but only Jack, Teal'k, and one other guy know it.) are caught in...but Daniel can't deciper an entire language in the eight hours or so the time loop is over...so Jack and Teal'k have to learn it. Which learns to a great scene where Jack corrects Daniel on some obscure alien language point.
And the straight forward time travel cliche episode was funny, too. it's called '1969', and that should give you some clue as to why it's funny.
With Macgyver Onboard... (Score:2, Funny)
enterprise PC (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah if you want a good idea of how overly PC that show is, this season of enterprise had the first mention of actually GOING TO THE BATHROOM (on the minefield episode) ever on star trek.
Re:enterprise PC (Score:5, Funny)
And I'm not clear on how racy pictures of Jolene Blalock demonstrate that Enterprise is PC.
Perhaps he's referring to the fact that Braga and Berman had the guts to cast a member of the woefully underpresented and discriminated-against minority of really-good-looking-women-wearing-hot-outfits on their show?
GMD
Cool, I just found out... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Cool, I just found out... (Score:3, Funny)
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?
Re:Just because they cancelled Farscape... (Score:2)
"Shoot first, send flowers later."
Stargate Cartoon (Score:2)
Re:Stargate Cartoon (Score:2)
In the cartoon, all the SG people wear weird X-Men-ish outfits. The characters are extremely shallow and rather juvinile. The writing is poor. Every episode has some hit-you-over-the-head moral. (Does that make it count towards some FCC-mandated children's programming with morals quota?)
Re:Stargate Cartoon (Score:2)
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.
Re:Stargate Cartoon (Score:2)
As for the show itself, I've seen one episode. It was a bit weird - it's clearly targeted at young children. That reduces the bad guys to monsters, and strips the complexity from the characters and plot. When I learned of the premise (it's 2040, an SG team leader has been impersonated by aliens attacking the base and he must clear his name) I expected the show to be targeted at tweeners with a slightly more ambiguous message. (Basically variations on "don't judge people on their first impression.")
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.
Scifi Shows (Score:5, Funny)
First season was cool and funny... but as soon as they changed the title theme from cool riffs done by the guy from Rush to the "Hercules in Space" orchestral wailings... everything else seemed to begin to suck as well. My understanding was that some of the good creative talent was kicked out. Can't watch it anymore.
Enterprise
The captain strikes me as whiny... I prayed for the dog to die in one of the more recent episodes. But a lot of the episodes have a cool spooky atmosphere.
Odyssey 5
The science sucks... but the dialog is great. "Praise Jesus... and fuck you."
Firefly ... except... I do like how every explosion in space is not accompanied by these nifty sound effects that noone should hear. I also like how the captain has no objection to just outright killing defenseless bad guys.
Great funny dialog... poor science... (Still using gunpowder, but somehow they have excellent gravity generators and inertial dampeners)
Farscape
I loved the show... but it seemed to go down hill in the fourth. The end of the second season was fantastic. I liked how they never tried to explain the science... and especially how the aliens looked more like the guys in the mos eisley cantina that stupid trek aliens with head and nose ridges.
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
The dog? (Score:5, Funny)
The captain strikes me as whiny... I prayed for the dog to die in one of the more recent episodes. But a lot of the episodes have a cool spooky atmosphere.
Let me get this straight: that episode featured a main plot of the dog getting sick and a subplot of Capt. Archer fantasizing about his super sexy vulcan science officer and you wasted your prayers on the fuckin' dog?!?
Man, I was on my hands and knees praying that T'Pol was going to help our dashing captain get "Long And Prosper"!
GMD
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:Scifi Shows (Score:2)
Blockquoth the poster:
By all means, I invite you to fire a projectile weapon inside a rickety old spacecraft. Just be sure you don't miss...
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:Scifi Shows (Score:2)
Re:Scifi Shows (Score:2)
Re:Scifi Shows (Score:2)
Besides, that was a sniper rifle, I'm talking about heavy-duty weapons ala Aliens
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?
Re:Scifi Shows (Score:2)
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:2)
Maybe most of the terraformed worlds are lush gardens... but remember the premise. Serenity wouldn't be hanging around the really nice places, would it?
Maxim (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Maxim (Score:2)
Re:Maxim (Score:2)
Dammit! (Score:2)
Re:Dammit! (Score:2, Funny)
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:grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastard (Score:4, Funny)
They get home.
Movie? Spinoff? (Score:2, Interesting)
I really think loosing Shanks was a horrible blow to the show and the story, but you have to admit they have been doing well with the direction things are going.
I wonder though how well they can do a movie. Very very few TV->Movie moves have gone well if not simply OK, I would hate to see them fall into this pit. I'm starting to wonder if it's possible to do the TV->Movie transition.
As for the spinoff I don't think it will go anywhere. I watch SG-1 but I don't think I would watch it if not for the current cast. Guess I'll see...
Re:Movie? Spinoff? (Score:3, Funny)
Now, if only someone would start to seriously consider making a Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie, my life would be perfect!!!
SG-1 is quite good (Score:2, Interesting)
If you like Sci-Fi, check it out.
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:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All (Score:2)
You're entirely missing the point. Enterprise was based BEFORE any of the other series, BEFORE humans/people in general grew any sense of humility. BEFORE any such thing as the prime directive, and the federation and the like.
The whole point of the show is to bridge the gap between today, western-centric, human-centric, and the future, where we try and put that all behind us.
Enterprise IS like the US today, I agree with you there. But Archer did have a good point on the beginning show of the second season. Starfleet was only beginning relations with other races. Archer is no diplomat as Picard is, and then, why should he be? They're only starting to probe out into space.
Same with people from the US (I won't say Americans, since the US is not the only country on this continent). The more we get people of other races and countries into this one, the more we'll eventually understand that there ARE other countries, other religions, and other philosophies out there. After all, western culture isn't going to obliterate everything else out there.
The Q and the Borg are races that humans should look up to!
Respect, yes... Humans in the show respect the power of both races. But look up to, no. You were complaining that the humans in Enterprise seem to condescend other cultures inferior to them. Q does exactly the same! The borg, on the other hand, destroys culture in order to further its own. You chose the worst two examples of races to prove your point, either that, or you were being sarcastic :)
[Archer] believes that humans are entitled to all Vulcan technology
One final thing they learn in the 24th century. Don't supply a race technology. Or in 20th century speak, don't sell other countries weapons.
I imagine overall that Archer will change as the show progresses. Relations with the Vulcans will improve. They'll get less afraid of using the transporter, etc.
Just don't count the show out. The show uses philosophy by counter-example. Take it as such.
----
(Sorry for the Star Trek tangent)
Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All (Score:4, Interesting)
Just don't count the show out. The show uses philosophy by counter-example. Take it as such.
I applaud your attempt at defending Enterprise but I'm going to have to give the nod to Vegan Pagan. The show is borderline offensive because of the brashness of the Enterprise crew. We haven't seen an episode where the crew realizes they have definitely done something wrong. The closest we've gotten was the episode where the crew decides to withold the cure for a disease on another world. I'd be more inclined to agree with your point of view if we had an episode where the meddling of Enterprise clearly caused a serious problem. Off the top of my head I can think of a terrible missed opportunity: the episode where Enterprise exposes the Vulcan spy base to the Andorians. In later episodes, it is commented that that decision greatly increased tensions between the Vulcans and the Andorians, understandably. But the whole thing is played off (in fact I think T'Pol takes the Vulcan command to task on this) as it being the Vulcan's fault! The Enterprise crew feels fully justified in creating a volitle situation. It would have been nice to hear Archer weighing the issues and whether he did the right thing. Even better would be a concrete example of an unfortunate incident between the Vulcans and the Andorians that directly follows from Archer's decision.
I'm starting to ramble here and I'm not even sure I've made my point. What I'm trying to say is that if Enterprise is trying to make a show about how humans are learning from their first few mistakes in space, they aren't doing a very good job. We only see things from their perspective and it's always viewed in the light that Archer is doing the right thing.
GMD
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: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
USA Today? (Score:3, Funny)
P.S. This is niether a Troll or a Flame, just a poor attempt at humor.
Shanks isn't TOTALLY gone... (Score:2)
For the record, I think Corin Nemec's doing a decent job as Jonas Quinn. He's not Daniel, of course, but still... in any event, like I said, it's not like we've seen the last of him.
Just my $.02...
Enterprice politically correct? Give me a break... (Score:5, Interesting)
God, there's alot of things I've thought about Enterprise, but politically correct is not one of them. If you were talking about Voyager, I'd agree with you.
Enterprise is about 3 strong white men, one white women who's main purpose on the show is to look pretty.
There's are also two tertiary non-whites: An waify Asian communications officer who serves no useful purpose and a Black pilot. The alien doctor is the only character who has any originality whatsoever (but he's too goofy).
Sexual stereotypes abound. Strong white men: Weak-but-good-looking-women. These stereotypes have been used over and over in dozens of sci-fi shows and movies, are completely overused in the genre.
There are two common plots: Time travel, or T'pol being the object of (captain | the security officer | people from other ships) sexual fantasies. Give me a break...
It's like the stories were written by 15-year-old sex starved boys. There's really not much else to the show. It's getting boring, and I've stopped watching...
Maybe if you compare it to Buck Rogers it's politically correct, but what's your angle?
glad they are keeping it.... (Score:2)
I've heard a few folks bashing andromeda...You should really give it a different look. I think the real sleeper on the show has been the last season with Tyr. He's really getting to put in some quality time, and is doing well. His character is easily my favorite, although ass-kicking Trance is another I'd like to see more of.
sg-1 and technology (Score:2)
Richard Dean Anderson (Score:5, Funny)
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:It's a shame... (Score:3, Interesting)
Or refined, or mature, or analytica, expecting something of quality or even something which isn't just more shallow pseudo sci-fi-drama junk.
I could sit through show after show of Alfred Hitchcock Presents and Rod Serling's Twilight Zone, which are masterpieces compared to today's stuff, and most of those shows originally aired well before my time, I just catch them on cable and am completely fascinated with how well they told a story in 30 minutes (less commercial breaks) I've seem enough of today's "writing" to leave my TV off and go outside to play. It's going to be tough when I get my knee worked on and am stuck inside for a while. I guess there's always coding up those projects I've never had time to get around to. :-)
Re:It's a shame... (Score:2, Insightful)
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:Fuck (Score:4, Insightful)
that is the best way to guarantee your show will have a short run: confuse the new viewers.
Re:Fuck (Score:3, Insightful)
Makes you wonder why the broadcast industry's so anti-Tivo, doesn't it?
Re:Fuck (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Good writing, horrible setting (Score:2)
But I grimace every time I see someone pull out an ancient six shooter. Funny thing though is that they do some things really right. I love how in space there is no sound.
Re:Good writing, horrible setting (Score:4, Funny)
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 ?
Their life support dies when the engine is off. Yet they don't start floating around because of lack of artificial gravity?
Enough with the technical nitpicks though. Let's talk about story development and plots that are so vapid, with none of the epic overtones that make other scifi shows interesting. Let's talk about characters that are assembled together according to occupation in some Canterbury-Talesque clone that is lacking any nuance, subtley or homage to that classic. Characters that never have any real decision to make, because things are so cut and dried, that even a retard could make them and never choose poorly. Except when the ship is "dead in the water" and the captain has to send everyone away even though they'll die, just so he is in danger with no help, when we get to the "suspenseful" part. And then said shipmates mysteriously return, for the hell of it, so that his lifeblood doesn't leak out much like my soul does when I commit the insanely stupid crime of attempting to watch it.
Now look what you've made me doing, I'm crying like a child in horrid memory of a show best left unwatched. They should seal up that studio with concrete and lead, like they do with nuclear reactors in meltdown. With the actors and director still inside.
Yes, they really do some things right.
Re:Good writing, horrible setting (Score:2)
Besides, what other ship captain would kick someone into the turbine?
Re:Good writing, horrible setting (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course, since every child knows that FTL drives don't look anything like that... oh, wait, we haven't invented them yet, have we? Unless you have a patent that you want to talk about?
Their life support dies when the engine is off. Yet they don't start floating around because of lack of artificial gravity?
Why are you expecting the gravity to fail? The layout of the ship makes it clear that they expect the artificial gravity and inertial compensation to be absolutely reliable... nothing is fastened down, items are left unsecured on flat surfaces, they even use a conventional stove and teapot. Perhaps the gravity doesn't require power; perhaps it's something analagous to a permanent magnet.
Enough with the technical nitpicks though.
Agreed. All I can say about your analysis of the characters and plot is that I disagree. You found the characters "Canterbury-Talesque" (that's a truly ugly neologism, by the way)? Well, of COURSE they're going to have neatly defined functions... they're a CREW, they were CHOSEN that way! Never mind their "mysterious" return... it's stated quite clearly that Zoe ordered them to return when she regained consciousness. If you're going to take potshots, at least pay attention to what you're shooting at.
It's unfortunate that you don't like the show. Change the channel, then, and allow those of us who do enjoy it to watch it.
Re:Good writing, horrible setting (Score:3, Interesting)
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: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:Help Save Firefly!!! (Score:2)
A querky show like Firefly isn't going to catch on right away. It takes some time for the word to pass on, and people to start reccomending it to their friends. Unfortunatly, Fox will never afford it this time. It'll be gone by December.
Re:Help Save Firefly!!! (Score:2)
Re:Help Save Firefly!!! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Thank god... (Score:2)
Re:Barely.... Stoned (Score:5, Funny)
"The melting walls are illogical. The talking dog is illogical. The colorful sound is illogical. The wavy floor is.."
You get the idea; it a'int pretty.