Stargate SG-1 Gets A Seventh Season

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."

Comments

It's a shame...

[Romothecus]

The best science fiction shows on television never seem to make it... I suppose I just have an odder taste than most.

Re:It's a shame...

[Romothecus]

Sorry, I should have clarified, I was talking about Farscape. And then there was Space: Above and Beyond.

Re:It's a shame...

[Sean Riordan]

I think Farscape is the best thing i have seen on TV ever. Except for possibly MASH and X-Files. It really is a shame that not only did they cancel it, but they refuse to sell it to another network to continue. Space Above and Beyond was also a really fun show. I enjoyed it a lot until just before the end when they went low budget. I think the only quality show that suited my tastes that has stayed around recently was the X-Files, and they basically ran it into the ground at the end.

Re:It's a shame...

[spiro_killglance]

You should not judge art or a story, by its politics
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:It's a shame...

[nomadic]

Ugh, farscape may be cool but Space: Above and Beyond was mind-numbingly dull. Almost as bad as Earth 2 or Earth: Final Conflict in the dullness department.

Re:It's a shame...

[ackthpt]

The best science fiction shows on television never seem to make it... I suppose I just have an odder taste than most.

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...

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Competition works to a point, but cooperativeness works much better.

Please cite examples from history to support this assertion. Any examples will do, but be prepared to have them criticized if they're not representative of what you're saying, or if you're misinterpreting them.

If you study a little, you'll find that competition, while imperfect, yields significantly and consistently better results than cooperation.

As for your relentless and pointless whining about being down-moderated... grow up.

Re:It's a shame...

[Ozymandias_KoK]

Space: Above and Beyond was a good show (really fun show as you said) but the plots and writing were just B-movie bad. If you were willing to overlook some of the sillier aspects it was a good watch. OTOH, some of the plot lines DID have potential as well, so don't misunderstand my point... :)

Re:It's a shame...

[jo42]

The problem with Farscape is the characters are all too angry. I stopped watching it when every story line became too predictable.

Re:It's a shame...

[Eltintalle]

How about the Total Recall series? (Total Recall 2070 I believe it was called)

It had a very 'Blade Runner'-esque feel to it and in my opinion had good potential.

I watched it avidly for one season and then eagerly awaited it's return for the second season. A second season was never made.

*sigh*

Too bad...

[Mr. Sketch]

Since the show sucks now that they killed off Daniel. Oh well, it was good until then. I'm guessing this will probably be it's last season.

Re:Too bad...

[photonrider]

I think the show is as good as ever. The new guy is fitting in pretty good and Daniel gets to pop back in now and then.

Re:Too bad...

[vranash]

Yeah, just in case people didn't recognize him (the new guy), it's the dude who used to play Parker Lewis way back when (can't remember his name).

Re:Too bad...

[Lord Apathy]

I have to agree. I miss Daniel but I kind of like the new guy. I came into this season hating him before I ever seen him but he grew on me. Like a rash I guess

Re:Too bad...

[Twirlip of the Mists]

His name is Corin Nemec. IMDB is a good thing.

Re:Too bad...

[colonelteddy]

They killed Daniel???

When did this happen? Or rather, when will this happen?
Obviously we still have a while to catch up in australia.

Re:Too bad...

[spindizzy]

In Australia it happened about a month ago. Was a nicely done episode for killing off a major character.

Enterprise politically correct?

[kir]

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?

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[TheWanderingHermit]

Just how bad is Andromeda?!?!

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!

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[l0key432]

Hmmm. Mind telling me when the reset button was used in Shockwave II? Please do fill me in, because it seems to me that you're just bitching to be bitching, as nothing was "reset." It all happened and they all remember it, the 3000+ colonists are still dead as well. Where's the reset button? Sure, some parts of the episode may have been poorly executed, but there was no reset button. The TCW has not been resolved and as another poster pointed out, the use of technobabble throughout the series has been quite low. Get your facts straight.

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[eno2001]

Off Topic but: Yeah. I like it too. It was one of the better scifi programs on TV after Voyager went off the air. I liked the whole idea of people working together and getting past their differences to make something decent (The struggle to rebuild the Commonwealth).

I haven't watched it this season because it's not on at a good time anymore in my area. But, I would be curious to know what happened to Trance as well. They kept referring to her having changed last season. They also kept talking about her meeting her future self. It almost sounds like they imply that the two traded places.

Oh well... if anyone knows, I'd be interested in finding out. Thanks.

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[l0key432]

Oops. I'd like to point out that my above comments were in response to Platinum Dragon's rant, not Scholasticus. :)

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[Platinum Dragon]

Mind telling me when the reset button was used in Shockwave II?

Archer's back on the ship, Enterprise is merrily on her way, and the entire 31st Century storyline seems to have been wiped out due to internal logic, although I fully expect some convoluted use of treknobabble and badly-conceived plot devices to restore it soon enough.

Now, if Archer had been stuck in the 31st Century and actually had to take a few episodes to figure out what was going on, and Enterprise had been forced to limp along without Archer, or someone was offed, or Enterprise was sent home, or something significant, I could have been impressed.

Instead, we were right back, plotwise, to where we started, minus 3000 colonists we will never hear from again unless TPTB have a real good surprise up their sleeves.

Perhaps I was simply spoiled by Babylon 5.

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[CreamsicleSeventeen]

I agree entirely. Enterprise is the only Star Trek spin-off since Deep Space Nine that's been bearable. Next Generation was dubbed a "talk-show in space" for good reason.

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[tero]

A bit off topic here, but it looks like Firefly isn't doing too great either. Fox will probably drop it unles the ratings go up.

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[TESFox]

i really haven't watched it too much, but the little bit i've seen of Enterprise dosen't seen too bad... Personally i think TNG and voyager were the two best. Besides that, another season of stargate? Sounds promising...

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[trosis]

I think Enterprise is taking more efforts to interconnect the stories than any Trek series sans since DS9. Look at how the effects of Minefield where tied into the eposide about the repair facility as a great example this season. Also, the end of Shockwave actually impressed me as well.. Normally Trek wraps up the episode in the last 10 minutes with a big fight and then a short talk in the last 30 seconds. This one, they actually took the time to address Enterprise's mission and have T'Pol stand up for the crew and then ahve that dialog in their cabin. It really added a suttle depth to the episode that you don't usually see in Trek 2 parters. Granted I agree it would have been cool to make Archer be trapped in the future, I don't know how effective a story that really would ahve been. What to see him for 3 weeks bumbling around with Daniels trying to dig up dirt to find some technology to get home? The only thing that bored the sh*t out of my about the episode was the Enterprise being captured and their little escape. I've seen that enough in Trek, but I guess they had to do it..

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[running w scissors]

maybe it's because of the terrible time slot they have her in. friday at 7 just plain sucks. it's like they want the show to fail.

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[Araxen]

I liked both DS9 and TNG. Voyager still makes me want to vomit just thinking about it. I haven't really watched Enterprise enough to make a comment on it.

Re:Enterprise politically correct?

[l0key432]

Archer's back on the ship, Enterprise is merrily on her way, and the entire 31st Century storyline seems to have been wiped out due to internal logic, although I fully expect some convoluted use of treknobabble and badly-conceived plot devices to restore it soon enough.

That seems a bit of a stretch for a reset button. I see your point, but to me, a reset button is simply when the events of an episode(s) are "reset" and have never occured due to some weird time-travel screw-up or something and nobody remembers what happened. Thankfully, that hasn't happened on Enterprise yet. :)

Now, if Archer had been stuck in the 31st Century and actually had to take a few episodes to figure out what was going on, and Enterprise had been forced to limp along without Archer, or someone was offed, or Enterprise was sent home, or something significant, I could have been impressed.

May or may not have been nice. I would like to see something similiar to that in an upcoming ep or something, as long as it's done well.

Instead, we were right back, plotwise, to where we started, minus 3000 colonists we will never hear from again unless TPTB have a real good surprise up their sleeves.

IMO, that's not really a reset button. The TCW story will be revisited in later episodes for sure. Things may be somewhat back to normal for now, but who knows what'll happen. These things may be revisited later this season.

farscape still cancelled

[banky]

Farscape is still cancelled, but some people are trying to save it, and the jury is still out. It's a dead man (show) walkin' but it's not over till the switch is thrown.

Re:farscape still cancelled

[EverDense]

I click on the watchfarscape.com link. The page loaded, including a picture of Aeryn Sun (Claudia Black).
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.
...and thats the real tragedy of the show being cancelled.

Re:farscape still cancelled

[Neon Spiral Injector]

I clicked the link to see what you were talking about, but just got Ben Browder (John Crichton). I was like, "huh?". Then I refreshed and got Claudia. Cool, the page has different people on it each time you load.

Re:farscape still cancelled

[Jordy]

I've noticed a lot of SciFi's TV shows have ended and they have very few original shows now.

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.

Re:farscape still cancelled

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhh, yeah, whatever. I've always been impressed with how how Claudia Black's character, due to her acting and the script writing, has developed. Look at her in the early Farscapes versus her in season three and you'll notice a tremendous difference.

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:farscape still cancelled

[Anonymous Coward]

SciFi underwent a (sale? management changeover?) in 2000. There are educated guesses that there is some exec pushing and shoving from this that is only now started to take effect. Given the ad market, they are probably looking to survive and improve their bottom line. The slight downturn in ratings (really corresponds well with the change in timeslot and utter lack of advertising push before season 4 hit) didn't help.

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:farscape still cancelled

[ADRA]

Wrong wrong wrong.

Scifi channel may have cancelled it, but the show does still exist and is still sindicated (in Canada anyways).

http://www.farscape.com/news/index.html gives the general rundown

Re:farscape still cancelled

[spectecjr]

Wrong wrong wrong.

Scifi channel may have cancelled it, but the show does still exist and is still sindicated (in Canada anyways).

They're still showing already filmed episodes in Canada.

That's very different from it still being alive. Sci-Fi was one of the main financial backers of the show, and without them puttin in their $750,000 per episode, it's dead.

Simon

Re:farscape still cancelled

[Planet Bob]

I dunno how out it is for me, but the jury's gone home for me. It was so depressing watching the internal arches of the passageways of Moia being dumped in the Homebush Waste Reclamation Centre. :/

Aah.. MacGyver..

[EvilCabbage]

I havent sat down and watched an episode of SG-1 yet. Seeing MacGyver without his mullet just un-nerves me.

Re:Aah.. MacGyver..

[Xenographic]

Worse, where's the DUCT TAPE? How's he supposed to fix/invent things without his roll??? :]

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..

[teslatug]

Don't bad mouth McGuyver unless you want to get a royal wedgie from the sisters from hell.

Re:Aah.. MacGyver..

[EvilCabbage]

Heck and they even make McGuyver-inspired flat-rolls of it you can stick in your pocket now--they're quite useful, too!

Wow, that'll come in handy next time I need to dispose of an intern that knows "too much".

Thanks 3M! :)

Re:Aah.. MacGyver..

[Enquest]

Star Gate is a stupid. But I think you Americans can buy all the stupid stuff off star gate! Star trek at least tryes to be correct!

Re:Aah.. MacGyver..

[Araxen]

Does Patty and Zelma now watch SG-1????

Noooo!!!

[molrak]

That means we'll probably have to wait yet another year for the MacGyver Reunion Special, or the Richard Dean Anderson E! True Hollywood Story. Oh well, I guess there's always of catching him on the old reruns of General Hospital on Soap Network.

Question about SG TV series

[CathedralRulz]

Hi,
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

[xQx]

yes there's a story arc.
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

[Cyno01]

its based on the movie and theres a lot of continuity between the episodes and its mostly based on hard science, for things they cant explain they make up simple solutions without a lot of technobabble, just about every episode the team visits a new planet, and every planet is pretty much like some period in the earths history, sorry if that sounds cynical, i really do like the show, anyways... it was originally on showtime, i dunno for how long but showtime dropped it and sci-fi picked it up, its syndicated, i dont know much about that, but watching it on saturday afternoons before we got cable got me hooked

Re:Question about SG TV series

[PythonOrRuby]

And vastly better dialogue.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[jpt.d]

I would say that it isn't as well planned as Babylon 5 (not that there really could be that much planning in another series [with exception of Jeremiah]) but the things get done. For example B5 didn't deal with so many things that were close to home, Shadow War, Earth War, Centari-Narn war, etc. SG-1 is faced with more direct threats to their survival. First season was being shut down (base being shutdown), then the attack of earth by Aphophis, then the Tok'ra taking over Carter (main character). All this in a three episode span. Eventually it is the replicators, system-lords, a planted asteroid, big bombs that can go through walls, the thing that can destory the stargate, etc. Need I say more? I wouldn't really compare it to star trek though.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[Marillion]

Showtime had the series for five seasons. They syndicated it - with a lag of about a year. A big complaint about SciFi picking it up is that they jumped into season six with a bunch of fans (including me) lost on the background of a cast change.
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

[Bongo]

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?

Compared to B5, Stargate doesn't have as rich a story arc. It's not as grand either. For example, in B5 you have all the Mimbari religious beliefs which they take very seriously, and much later (I forget which season) you discover that the founder was actually a human, genetically changed by the Vorlons and sent back in time 1000 years using the Great Machine aboard the B4 station (which mysteriously disappeared years ago) to help the Mimbari fight the first Shadow war.

Although, for my tastes, some of the "big answers" in B5 were a bit of a letdown. Like, the Shadows and Vorlons, advanced races that are a million years old, one as evil as the other is wise, with undefeatable technology, turn out to be just two divorced parents arguing over how to raise the children and using the children as pawns in their little spat.

Still, the death of Sheridan, and the episodes set in the far future were brilliant ideas and touching.

So you won't see any of that richness or complexity in Stargate. In the latter it's just good guys and bad guys. The system lords are just dumb arrogant war-lords who ride around the universe in stupid looking ships which despite being full of amazing technology, let themselves be captured and killed by a couple of humans with C4.

But then Stargate doesn't forget that it's a TV show, and meant to be fun. You won't see the "meaningful" tone of B5 on this show, which after watching avery episode of B5, is something of a relief.

But Stargate does give some depth to the characters feelings for each other, and it's here that the continuity is mostly seen. They are a group who have a good heart and help each other out a lot. They also save Earth a lot... but that's just because it's sci-fi.

OTOH, B5's characters changed a lot, especially those that through all their Machiavellian manipulations ended up transcended Good and Evil, becoming Greatness.

The other thing about Stargate as compared to ST, is that there's no counsellor Troy, no Neelix. I'd rather have dinner with a carrion eater than be in the cafeteria with Neelix looming over my plate.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[sql*kitten]

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?

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.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[CreamsicleSeventeen]

...its mostly based on hard science...

Dumb-ass Army guys (and one stick-wielding-near-mute-muscle-dude) who teleport to other planets by walking through a magic donut is scientific?

Re:Question about SG TV series

[vsprintf]

As I was reminded once when I made a similar comment, they're dumb-ass Air Force guys.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[hatchet]

With quotes from first episode of Stargate SG-1 like: "we needed 2 years to MacGyver device like that"
Sam really says that;)

Re:Question about SG TV series

[holmesIV]

It doesn't have a story arc ala Babylon 5. There are reoccuring characters and events over time, but not the cohesion Babylon 5 had.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[tkg]

Another big problem with the Star Trek/B5 plot model is that the ranking officers take part in all the away missions (something that would never happen in real life; when the Navy sends the Seals on a mission, the captain and first officer stay on the ship). If that model were carried over to SG1, General Hammond would lead every mission through the stargate. One more reason SG1 is a bit more believable.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[drxenos]

I hate to dispute what you say, as I am a great fan of the show. But, SG-1 is as earth-centric as the others. In SG-1, it is referred to as "The First Planet." The planet where all human life originated and was seeded by the Goa'uld across the universe.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[Noren]

I can recall only four times when both the captain and the first officer left B5 at the same time during the series. Two of them were during the final showdowns with the First Ones and with Earth; in each case one had already left/been called away when the other left in order to command a fleet- not exactly an away mission. In "A Voice in the Wilderness" both left to negotiate a first contact situation in which the alien knew who both of them were and requested their presence. Only one other sort of fits the away mission mold- "War Without End", at which point the officers were concealing their actions from the crew, requiring them to do it themselves. Far short of the "all the away missions" claim.

Lumping B5 in with ST is not justified here.

Re:Question about SG TV series

[jedidiah]

They're a bit more diverse than that.

1 Air Force Officer
1 Army Special Ops Officer
1 Archeaologist
1 Illegal Alien Samurai

Re:Fuck

[BigBir3d]

for those of us that did not watch it from the get-go, it did not make much sense.

that is the best way to guarantee your show will have a short run: confuse the new viewers.

Farscape degenerated into introspective whining

[pcx]

Farscape was super cool for a season or two when they really did romp around the universe and see what was out there.

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.

Re:Farscape degenerated into introspective whining

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Just because it was written in on purpose doesn't make it interesting. I love good character development as much as the next guy, but the last couple of episodes of season 3 and most of season 4 just got so inaccessible that I found myself wondering what else was on.

The purpose of entertainment is, first and foremost, to entertain. If they stop doing that, they've blown it. Since you brought up the Buffy comparison, I am a die-hard Buffy-season-6 defender. Yes, season 6 was by turns silly and dark, dark. But it never quite stopped being entertaining. Farscape's season 4 stopped being entertaining. That's the difference.

Re:Farscape degenerated into introspective whining

[dnahelix]

Well, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but what you think has nothing to do with why Farscape was cancelled. The wonderful sets and costumes and special effects were too expensive for Sci-Fi channel. Plot, character development, story arcs, entertainment value, etc... have nothing to do with why a show is on the air. The following statement will completely explain the whole nature of the television industry.

$¥£!

I loved Farscape, and the fact that Sci Fi channel couldn't support a (large, educated and wealthy) fanbase that stuck with them for 4 years for just 1 more year, makes me sick of the whole TV industry. I have programmed the sci-fi channel off my tuner so I won't get mad when I'm flipping through channels and I won't watch any of their new shows. I'm not even going to watch the final eps of Farscape, I'm buying the DVDs. Oh, and can you please name a specific scene in season 4 that exemplifies the degeneration of 'self-introspection and self-pity' or 'chichton's whining, indignant yelling.' It sounds like you are more in favor of static, undeveloped characters that act the same every week and never change, for better or worse, like real people. -DNA - DNA

SPOILER WARNING

[CySurflex]

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.

Re:SPOILER WARNING

[FrankDrebin]

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, and Kurt and Goldie are living here so their son can go to hockey school.

Re:SPOILER WARNING

[Cyno01]

XTC is also a kickass energy drink

Re:SPOILER WARNING

[BTWR]

Seriously, I may be wrong, but itsn't Russel's charachter ON THE SHOW??? Wouldn't that be two identical people then?

Good!

[shadowj]

I've been a fan of the show since I stumbled upon it two years ago. OK, the premise is a little hokey... but the writing is SO good. The dialog sparkles, they avoid techobabble and use real science more often than I'd expect ("Y'see, Carter" [waving at ringed gas giant looming on the horizon], "this planet that we're on..." "Excuse me, sir, this is actually a moon, not a planet.")

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!

[naasking]

I personally liked O'neils line, "Shoot first, send flowers later." ;-)

Re:Good!

[muzzmac]

The avoid techobabble by having jack O'Niell tell scientists to shut up.

It's sooo good.

Re:Good!

[hidden]

I'll agree that the show is good, the writing is good, etc. but... they actually arn't that good with continuity... Overall storywise they are, but...

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!

[Bobulusman]

The "iris" still bugs me...the bit where the splash from when a stargate is activated convieniently vaporizes everything in it's path, except the iris, is a little annoying.

Granted, I haven't watch a whole lot of this show, but I was under the impression this is how it works:
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!

[Hellasboy]

as for the "sending probes through the gate first and stuff"; In the beginning of some episodes they will talk about what the probes picked up on the planet and then they will be sent in.

I'm glad for that, would be tedious to have to see them send in the probe in the beginning of nearly every episode ;)

Re:Good!

[Our Man In Redmond]

My wife just reminded me of the "Groundhog Day"-esque episode where the scientists figured out what was going on when O'Neill started spouting technobabble about their predicament.

Re:Good!

[Kanon]

1. Yes
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!

[sirsnork]

I must say I liked the one early in season 5 when the gate is locked open and about to explode and the new guy asks "So... how did you get the gate in here?" Just as everyone is looking for some way to save the planet when the gate explodes... It just sounds like something Jack should have said, or at least alluded too.

Re:Good!

[sql*kitten]

The avoid techobabble by having jack O'Niell tell scientists to shut up.

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!

[naasking]

Yeah, I love how they throw in something completely wacky, but true, when the situation is most serious. :-)

Re:Good!

[hatchet]

About 3rd point
They don't hit the iris, only energy/matter stream hits it. Note that iris is positioned 4 microns above event horizon and prevents matter from reintegrating.

Re:Good!

[Lord Apathy]

O'neil: "For the record general I want to blow it to hell."

With Macgyver Onboard...

[cdrj]

Just wait long enough; eventually we will begin to see photon guns made out of chewing gum and rubber bands....

Re:With Macgyver Onboard...

[sommerfeld]

In one of the early season one Stargate SG-1 episodes, Captain (now Major) Carter used "MacGuyver" as a verb, in the presence of Col. O'Neill...
FWIW, if you need to catch up, see GateWorld.

Re:With Macgyver Onboard...

[Twirlip of the Mists]

The quote is, "It took us fifteen years and three supercomputers to MacGyver a way to power the gate." Great one. There are more good ones. I like O'Neill's "You know that "we come in peace" business? Bite me." But my favorite has to be: "I remembered something. There's a man. He is bald and wears a short sleeve shirt. And somehow, he is important to me... I think his name is... Homer."

Thank god...

[kakos]

Besides perhaps Firefly, SG-1 is the best sci-fi show on TV. ALthough I certainly hope they bring Daniel back somehow after they killed him.

Re:Thank god...

[shadowj]

I'm with you on Firefly. I expected to detest the SF/western hybrid flavor of it, but it works... and, once again, the dialog is GREAT.

Re:Thank god...

[silentbozo]

No flash and dash like Enterprise, but I watch firefly because I KNOW they're gonna do something that exceeds my expectations of what sci-fi on TV normally delivers.

For example, despite the horrible sounding teaser for last weeks episode, where they're stranded in space with failing life support (a textbook sci-fi cliche if there was ever one), I watched it, knowing they'd deliver some unexpected take on the idea. So far, I'm pretty pleased with the show - but it is a much slower paced delivery than the rest of the stuff on TV these days.

Regarding Daniel Jackson, I hope the rumors of his death are overstated, since I'm still one season behind (watching it on the local network, as a syndicated show.) It wouldn't be the same without him, and putting John deLancie in as that spook Colonel is just weird... AND, if they ever do a feature, there'd better be Daniel as part of the team, or else I ain't gonna spend money to see it, no matter if they toss Apothis, the replicators, and whatever the hell else at SG-1 and Earth!

Anyone know if there will be a tie-in (and if so, what kind) for that new animated show, SG-Infinity?

Re:Thank god...

[silentbozo]

BTW, has anyone managed to figure out how Enterprise has managed to stay in such nice shape, without resupply or docking facilities? I would have dirtied up the ship a bit more for the show, after all, it has been a year since it started it's mission...

Re:Thank god...

[shadowj]

...but it is a much slower paced delivery than the rest of the stuff on TV these days.

You may have hit on something there. Why should we consider it a problem if the show doesn't move like a scalded cat? I find the pacing a welcome relief from the frantic flash and jiggle that you see all too much of these days.

...and putting John deLancie in as that spook Colonel is just weird...

SEMI-SPOILER: Don't worry about that too much; you'll be rid of him soon enough.

Anyone know if there will be a tie-in (and if so, what kind) for that new animated show, SG-Infinity?

I seem to recall reading that the SG-1 team has disowned SG:Infinity. That's just as well... I've seen the animated series, and I'll be charitable and say that it isn't my cup of tea.

Re:Thank god...

[hatchet]

spoiler:
Daniel dies in episode 521, because of radiation accident.
He is back 3/4 times in 6th season.. once as ascended being and once as thor. (he made thor's voice since begining).. other appearances are not known yet.

Re:Thank god...

[jmccay]

Technically, in the show Daniel isn't dead because he appears in season six (after he suposed death). He's ascended to a higher level--the same level as the powerful alien that taught meditation and took the child. I don't remember enough of the two previous episodes that talk about the child and the ascended alien, but in the one centering around the child, Daniel gets power hungry with a new weapon which the child told him how to build.

I am currently watching the fifth series (in sindication(sp?) (during/after watching the sixth season), but I still look forward to the seventh series.

I am glad Sci-Fi has been rerunning the entire series from the beginning on Monday nights. I have recorded everyone so far, and I have seen a couple episodes I missed because of sports events. It's been great catching up on old story line details.

Help Save Firefly!!!

[cybrpnk2]

Firefly in my book is the sleeper hit of the season by the creator of Buffy, and it has only gotten better with each of its first five episodes. Unfortunately, ratings continue to dwindle. Nielsons for first 4 eps have been in order: 4.0, 3.6, 3.3 and 2.7 for the "Jaynestown" ep after a two-week gap. Folks, this is bad. USA Today ran an article on droopy shows on Wed Oct 23 which had a Firefly photo and wrote it up pretty good; also Robert Bianco who writes up the USA TV stuff has given Firefly two recommendations this week, one in an article about which shows to watch at what time during the week and also on last Fri's "Best Picks" box over the TV schedule. If this press didn't help "Out of Gas" when the ratings come out next Wed, then that title may be prophetic....(sniff). This show is TOO GOOD to let this happen!!! Watch it!!! Spread the word about it!!!

Re:Help Save Firefly!!!

[Dionysus]

And this is proof that Firefly will be cancelled. Most shows that are critically acclaimed seem to get cancelled (The Tick, Profit...)

Re:Help Save Firefly!!!

[nebenfun]

er....
if Firefly is the sleeper hit that you predict, there won't be any problems in ratings...

however if by "sleeper hit", you mean "cancelled after one season, generic sci-fi piece of crap" then you might be on to something...

nbfn

Re:Help Save Firefly!!!

[kaisyain]

Yep and the list goes on and on. West Wing, ER, 24.

Oh wait....

Re:Help Save Firefly!!!

[feydakin]

Thr problem is that the wrong people have Nielson boxes.. My grandfather had one.. Yet he rarely watched TV, and when he did it was local news..

How are people like us suposed to affect ratings?? The PTB certainly don't think much of Email campaigns..What's left other than highjaking some Nielson boxes??

Re:Help Save Firefly!!!

[Dionysus]

If you have a Tivo, turn on the statistics collection, and hope Tivo people publish the data.

Re:Help Save Firefly!!!

[TheRealFixer]

Firefly is also hindered by the fact that it's on Fox, which has a horrible record of giving up on sci-fi shows right as they start to get good and build a following.

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!!!

[vandelais]

Another strike against Firefly this week is that in the Minneapolis-St Paul area, the broadcast was delayed until late nite hours due to the local (and overdone) coverage of the Wellstone plane crash.

Re:Help Save Firefly!!!

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Firefly in my book is the sleeper hit of the season

In order for this to be true, Firefly would have to be... a sleeper hit. As of this moment, that's not the case. Which is too bad, because I think it's one of the better shows on TV right now, and one of my favorites. Fox needs to get it off of Friday night and move it to a Monday or something-- some night when there's basically nothing else like it on, and when it won't be preempted left, right, and center. Maybe then it'll get a chance.

Welcome to North America

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at it this way: do you think that a phenomenon like Doctor Who (which ran for about 30 YEARS) would ever happen in North America? Only the Beeb would think of doing that (and THEY had to stand up to Mary Whitehouse and her censorshit brigade).

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.

enterprise PC

[GoatPigSheep]

Enterprise is so politically correct I can barely bring myself to watch it

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

[bdesham]

That's nothing... Archer (the Captain) actually said the word "breast"! And that after having a (wet?) dream about his science officer. Y'know, after watching the episode where we see Hoshi topless (well, not really) again, it seems to me that maybe the creators are trying to break away from the PC image. Which is good; the number of potentially good shows goes up as the amount of "allowed content" increases.

Re:enterprise PC

[GuyMannDude]

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

Re:enterprise PC

[stefanlasiewski]

How does mentioning "going to the bathroom" make the show PC?

re: enterprise PC

[demo9orgon]

Well, bathroom references aside, I think the lack of a perfectly working automated deconatmination unit (aka "The Transporter") on Enterprise makes for some interesting moments. There's always that wonderful goo and the rubbing..mmmmm, rubbing. Maybe they're just trying to be a viable property for the Sci-Fi Channel, Showtime or HBO as a targeted adult sci-fi program: I'd actually subscribe to see that.

It shouldn't be a secret that most of us who discovered the really good sci-fi found it filled with sex, violence, and plenty of space-opera: hence the really good classificaiton.

As for SG-10...I've never seen an episode that really made me like the show. The show just feels wrong...how they ever made it to a seventh season is almost maddening. I still can't believe anyone is watching Andromeda, or Earth: Final Conflict for the same reasons...change-writers and kill the show.

I can't be the only person here who remembers a really great show called Space Above and Beyond, and how it was asphyxiated for funds and ridden out of town on a rail. The people who made that show had a vision of a future which was gritty, and mired in war. War is an unparalleled catalyst...and all the BS "Temporal Cold War", or "Here a Gate, there a gate" plot-line shenanigans are a pretty damn weak backdrop compared to the gritty nature of dealing with war without pulling some miracle devices out of nowhere, or completely disregarding the simplicity of making the characters grow.

I guess what we're looking at, with SG-10, is that a show doesn't have to be all that good to those who don't buy in, it just has to be good the advertisers...same probably goes for all shows on TV regardless of genre.

Re:enterprise PC

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Yeah, I've gotta admit that I dug the fact that one of his first lines in the pilot episode was spoken to one of the Vulcans, something along the lines of, "You're lucky I don't knock you on your ass."

If only they'd stuck with it. Enterprise disappoints me because everybody gets along so darned well. If you think of some of the great ensemble cast shows-- Buffy, for instance-- there's a lot of friction between and among the characters. Some of the best episodes of Buffy basically involved no supernatural element to speak of, but just some kind of conflict between the characters. The characters on Enterprise are all so... chummy. So darned easy to get along with. It's dull.

I mean, think about it. Put a hundred people-- regular people, not trained Navy submariners-- in close quarters for nine months. Tempers are going to flare, romances are going to form and dissolve and re-form, and some people just aren't going to get along very well. Have the bridge officers break into the occasional shouting match! Fistfights in the crew mess. Put some real human beings, with real personality flaws on the ship for a change.

Okay, end of rant.

Re:enterprise PC

[CreamsicleSeventeen]

It doesn't. The post was sarcastic. Timothy might be the only viewer in Nielson-land who would find Enterprise too "PC" after TNG and Voyager left their mark.

Cool, I just found out...

[RedWolves2]

You can get Season 1 and Season 2 on DVD.

Re:Cool, I just found out...

[Cyno01]

well then, i guess i can delete them off my harddrive then

Re:Cool, I just found out...

[garbs]

Season 1 and Season 2 minus the referrer bit the parent poster put down.

Re:Cool, I just found out...

[isorox]

In the UK, you can get Season 2,3,4,5 and season 1 will be out shortly.

I did have every episode from season 3 onwards on my HDD but as I replaced them with DVD's off they went. I only have a handful of episodes, all from season 6, on there now.

SG1 is one of those series where its worth going a week without food to watch the dvd.

Re:Cool, I just found out...

[daveirl]

I suppose I shouldn't be shocked that both those links make you money by going through you're refferal ID account

looks like sci-fi is not picking up farscape

[paulydavis]

according to this websight http://www.farscapeworld.com/helpfarscape.shtml

the sig says it all

[Stalyn]

blah

andromeda sucks goatse.cx

[Karma Sucks]

Andromeda is total shite. It has become Hercules in Space and any depth to the show was destroyed when they fired Wolfe.

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.

Good writing, horrible setting

[Synn]

I think the writing in Firefly is really good, but the setting is crap. They put too many western elements in it. I guess they were going for an origional setting, something to set it apart from the other sci-fi shows.

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

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Their starship looks like a giant wrinkled turd.

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

[Bobulusman]

I've only watched the first two episodes, but I didn't think it was very bad. The only annoyingly steriotyped character is that greedy, jerky guy (Can't think of his name for the life of me). Other than that, seems like a good series, with some real potential.

Besides, what other ship captain would kick someone into the turbine? :)

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[shadowj]

Their engine is only 3ft DIA, 10ft long. It rotates. And this will push them faster than light?

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

[Digitalia]

Let's think about this. As an engineer, one must identify likely problems and rate their potential magnitude so that he can decide which deserves his greatest attention. Which is the greater problem? Gravity failing or environmental systems failing? If the gravity systems were to fail, repair problems would be slightly exacerbated and the crew would be temporarily inconvenienced. If their life support crashed, they would die in a very short period of time. Obviously, it becomes more important to allocate energy to the life support than to generating gravity.

As to your assertion that the gravity might not require energy, we must consider the three ways in which we might currently generate artifical gravity. The first, involves using centripetal force to generate centrifugal force, and thus gravity. Also, we might employ some manner of electromagnetic system, similar to those used for levitation of organics, to generate a "downward" force. Likewise, magnetic boots could be used on a metallic deck to provide the illusion of gravity, but this gravity would be ineffective at combating any of the diseases associated with long-term dwelling in null gravity. Finally, one might place a source of super-dense material at a convenient place below all of the decks. There are problems with each of these systems though. There is no apparent rotation of the ship, and any such rotation along the long axis of the ship would fling people towards the walls, not the floor. An electromagnetic system would require energy, and a magnetic boot system would not be suitable for a long haul cargo vessel. The required material to generate earth-like gravity would need to be either extraordinarily dense, or there would need to be a lot of it. Since Fireflies are such small craft, the material would need to be very dense. Though such a system would operate without energy, it is very improbable. This leaves only as of yet undiscovered systems as potentials, and even those would likely require continuous power, as you are attempting to generate a force.

And so, in moments when emergency reserves of power are all that remain, it would be extremely foolish to deplete those reserves by generating gravity when that power could be used to keep them alive.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[Frank Grimes]

Their engine is only 3ft DIA, 10ft long. It rotates. And this will push them faster than light?

It is never mentioned that they ever go FTL. It is even implied that all of the settled planets they visit are in the same system.

I still haven't rationalized the spinning engines. Maybe it's a system to convert heat from a fusion power plant to electricity, like the alternator in your car. Then the fusion engines would be on the sides, and the exaust is thier main propulsion.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Their engine is only 3ft DIA, 10ft long. It rotates. And this will push them faster than light?

Seeing as how those engines are plain old turbofans for use in an atmosphere, I'd say no. Check out the whopping big glowy thing at the tail if you ever decide to watch the show again. That's the engine they use in space.

Also, where'd you get the idea that they're going faster than light? While they haven't made a big deal out of it yet, all signs seem to indicate that Firefly is set entirely in one large solar system with some inner planets-- which we haven't seen on any of the broadcast episodes of the show yet-- and hundreds of moons. Seeing as how our own solar system has over 100 moon-sized-or-larger bodies in it, that's hardly implausible.

Yet they don't start floating around because of lack of artificial gravity?

The gravity is magical. How it works is irrelevant to the plot of the show, and about as interesting as whether your pipes are made of copper or PVC. Don't worry about the gravity.

Of course, then you went on to criticize what is widely considered to be among the best storytelling on television in terms so vague as to be utterly meaningless. If you don't like the stories, don't watch. Probably ought to stay away from most other television, too. And movies, don't forget those. Also radio. And almost all books.

How boring it must be to be an entertainment snob.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[Cyno01]

i remember someone insightfully stating from the firefly poll that firefly is science-fantasy, not science fiction, in science fantasy the technology is there, its a given, with no explanation and no technobabble, the exact oposite fo star trek

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Assuming that they are human and earth-descended, this is clearly shown to be ridiculous. There are maybe 5-10 bodies in this solar system that are workable. They implied hundreds.

I figure, that at minimum, for their premise to hold, humans have to be able to manage to travel 10 light years or so, in a reasonable amount of time. I figure 2 years is about the max, to cross from one edge of explored space to the opposite expanse. Do the math.

I'll grant that a slight reworking of the story would make FTL unnecessary. But they'd still need large fractions of c even then.

The spinning engines aren't rationalizable. The RPM is too damn low for anything imaginable, except possibly a no-talent prop designer on a shoestring budget. Even that's a stretch.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

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?

Yeh, too true. Then again, there are at least a few things that a somewhat intelligent person can say about what it wouldn't look like. For instance, a safe bet is that a FTL drive wouldn't consist of a giant Quaker Oats can, with 3 sprigs of celery sticking out of it wrapped in last year's christmas lights. Which isn't too extreme an example, given how ridiculous the device in question looks.

The permanent magnet suggestion is almost tolerable. If they had suggested it, it would do them much credit. Instead, you did, so you get the credit, and they still get my sarcasm.

Besides, you do argue a little circularly, before you come up with the decent explanation. If things were fastened down, you'd just assume that gravity could fail, but didn't this time.

they're a CREW, they were CHOSEN that way

Hmm. From that perspective, it only seems practical to staff a ship with a comical stardrive with a prostitute. He should have picked one that would service them though.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

The problem with techno-babble wasn't that they had something technical that was a problem, it was that they made up inane words to sidestep a crisis every single week.

If it's fantasy they should give us a few wizards and dragons. At least that would fit. This is a boring retread of stories everyone else has already told, and done a better job of.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[Twirlip of the Mists]

There are 95 moons in our solar system, according to a show I saw on the Discovery Channel last week. Take that number as accurate +/- 10%. If you assume as a fundamental conceit of the show that there's a way to create reliable artificial gravity-- I like another poster's idea of having it work like permanent magnets; hard to manufacture, but singularly easy to use, and virtually indestructible under normal conditions-- then you can imagine increasing the surface gravity of a rock the size of Phobos to the point where it could hold a breathable atmosphere.

Now imagine a bigger solar system than ours. Say it's got a dozen inner planets of the Earth or Mars types, and twenty or thirty outer planets of Neptune's size, all the way out to a cometary halo. Big sun, puts out lots of heat, so the biosphere of the star is very large. It's easy to imagine a system like that with hundreds, maybe even thousands, of usable worlds.

Also, consider that the only place we've gotten the idea of hundreds of new worlds from is the opening narration, which is notably short of detailed information. Maybe "hundreds of new Earths" really means something like 120 worlds. That would still be an awful lot.

Finally, remember that the purpose of the setting is to provide an interesting place in which to tell stories. The Star Trek stories use the entire galaxy as their setting, but doing so requires some serious bending of science. The speed of light makes interstellar travel boring at best, so they had to stipulate the existence of a warp drive. But drama sometimes dictates that it be necessary for it to take hours or days to go from one place to another, so arbitrary limits had to be placed on how fast the warp drive goes. Then, to give the Star Trek stories an "outside" from which to introduce new races and such, they had to stipulate the existence of wormholes allowing instantaneous trans-galactic travel. It just gets more and more complex as you go on, and the rules get more and more convoluted.

If, on the other hand, you assume that the speed of light is absolute, and pick a setting with a solar system containing hundreds of terraformed Earth-sized planets, all those problems go away. Yes, you have to get the views to accept one improbable premise*, but that's easier than getting them to accept a couple dozen improbable premises that wrap around each other, that mutually contradict each other, and the finally end up being arbitrary.

* Or is it? We have no idea how big the average solar system really is, having only our own solar system for comparison. Maybe ours is a runt.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[Twirlip of the Mists]

There are maybe 5-10 bodies in this solar system that are workable.

Bzzt. There are, in fact, 95 moons in this solar system, ranging in size from asteroid-like Phobos all the way to planet-sized Ganymede. If you count Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars, that gives us a grand total of 99 worlds in our solar system alone that are suitable, in the broadest sense, for human habitation. How these worlds get terraformed is an issue left for the sci-fi writers, but the basic premise is actually dead-on.

Until further notice, we can all just assume that Firefly is set in a single solar system that includes hundreds-- exactly how many isn't specified-- of terraformed worlds.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[Twirlip of the Mists]

For instance, a safe bet is that a FTL drive wouldn't consist of a giant Quaker Oats can, with 3 sprigs of celery sticking out of it wrapped in last year's christmas lights.

Five years ago, I would have assumed that a radio transmitter wouldn't look like a Pringles can, either. I guess I was just insufficiently imaginative.

From that perspective, it only seems practical to staff a ship with a comical stardrive with a prostitute. He should have picked one that would service them though.

You should watch the last episode, entitled "Out of Gas." There's a prostitute aboard the Serenity because she pays rent. The crew of the ship needs the extra cash, and she needs transportation. It's a completely reasonable arrangement.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[fferreres]

Besides, you do argue a little circularly, before you come up with the decent explanation. If things were fastened down, you'd just assume that gravity could fail, but didn't this time.


Well, if they had things fastened down and gravity wouldn't fail in a critical power loss, then I'd be really _annoyed_.

So they did the wise thing and did NOT fasten stuff. Also, it's wise of them to not do very expensive "features" (like ingravity) that add no content and that could be "almost tolerable" if you can think of a magnet.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[beowulfcluster]

Unless you have a patent that you want to talk about?

Not yet, he'll wait until everyone is using FTL drives before unleashing his lawyers on anyone who's infringing.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[IHateEverybody]

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

[sql*kitten]

i remember someone insightfully stating from the firefly poll that firefly is science-fantasy, not science fiction, in science fantasy the technology is there, its a given, with no explanation and no technobabble, the exact oposite fo star trek

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

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Sorry. Don't have time to explain why most of those are unsuitable, so let's talk Mercury. It's unworkable by any standard oof Terraforming that anyone has ever imagined. Unless you propose towing it to a new orbit. I suppose you'd use the spinning engines (minus blown catalyzers) to do it. Maybe 10 is low, though. It might be more like 20, or 30. You still can't get anywhere near that magic number 100 unless you count articial stations. I'd hardly consider those as "worlds".

Moving to another solar system just begs the FTL question again, unless you want to play "parallel development of six shooters and birthday cake candles".

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Five years ago, I would have assumed that a radio transmitter wouldn't look like a Pringles can, either. I guess I was just insufficiently imaginative

What a cheat. If you mean that some people use pringles cans as waveguides, then you're trying to tell me it is shocking that radio waves bounce off and are blocked by everyday objects? I just had to trim a branch on a tree in the front yard, because our DirecTV signal was losing strength the past few months. By your logic, tree benches also make good radio transmitters.

How the hell that has anything to do with FTL, is anyone's guess. "I'll know it when I see it" is a principle with at least a little bit of truth behind it, and the "pringles can" can't save your argument from it. Guys, I'm a little fuzzy on debating rules, which fallacy is that, btw?

The crew of the ship needs the extra cash, and she needs transportation.

Exactly. There simply aren't enough horny men on any given planet, that's why there are generally no more than 12 hookers in any given solar system.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

So. A cheap, well-understand chemical reaction uses too much power, but gravity generation doesn't?

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[Fweeky]

i remember someone insightfully stating from the firefly poll that firefly is science-fantasy, not science fiction, in science fantasy the technology is there, its a given, with no explanation and no technobabble, the exact oposite fo star trek

To be perfectly honest, I'd say this counts for pretty much all screen based sci-fi these days.

Star Trek may link impressive sounding words together into mostly meaningless phrases to describe technology and things in it's universe, but that does not make it any more plausable or less of a fantasy. It's warp drives, power generation and matter to energy conversion stuff is still effectively magic, and it's universe is no more plausable than the world of LOTR.

There's not necessarily anything wrong with this, of course. I would really like to see some hard SF on screen though, and not one that's been mangled by a clueless production team to make it more like Star Trek :)

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[dnahelix]

Thank you so much for writing this post. There is nothing as cathartic as reading one's thoughts written by another. The only thing sadder than the truth you have presented, are the insipid attempts at arguing with it.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[peg0cjs]

Granted I've only seen a few episodes (talk about a bad time slot), but I was under the impression that we were in a different system that was colonized by humans. Sure it would have taken years/decades/centuries for the original colonists to get from here to there and build up the colonies, but am I mistaken in my belief that we're in the future here?

Isn't the whole storyline of the Reavers about settlers who went out too far and lost sight of humanity?

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[Fweeky]

There simply aren't enough horny men on any given planet, that's why there are generally no more than 12 hookers in any given solar system.

It's actually made quite clear that she isn't a simple "hooker", not least because she's clearly more educated and refined than just about anyone else we've seen in the series.

More importantly, she seems highly picky as to who she services, and given where she is, probably doesn't have much of a client base who can both afford her and meet her own standards, so moving about a lot would make sense.

Plus I'd imagine she's chosen to skulk about in the backwaters to expand her experience of the world, given it's also fairly clear that "companions" tend to stick to more core systems.

Re:Good writing, horrible setting

[IHateEverybody]

So. A cheap, well-understand chemical reaction uses too much power, but gravity generation doesn't?

No, it's just that the backup system for the cheap, well-understood chemical reaction got knocked out by a freak accident while the gravity generation system did not.

Just because they cancelled Farscape...

[UpLateDrinkingCoffee]

Just because they cancelled Farscape does not make Stargate SG-1 a bad show. I think they are both great, and Richard Dean Andersen is *much* better in this role than he was in MacGyver... I mean, when the bad guys are chasing you never, I repeat, never toss away a perfectly good gun.

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...

[Neon Spiral Injector]

Plus, Richard Dean Anderson likes to use guns now.

"Shoot first, send flowers later."

Re:Just because they cancelled Farscape...

[Twirlip of the Mists]

I wanted http://fel.lat.io, but the IO TLD sucks.

You can still get http://cunniling.us.

Re:Just because they cancelled Farscape...

[spectecjr]

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?


It's just rumor, but apparently SciFi had repeatedly complained that there was too much continuity for new viewers to handle. So Kemper & Co gave them what they asked for - namely, more standalone episodes to give a bit of a chance for people to get up to speed without having to watch every episode.

Unfortunately, it didn't quite work. But when they got back into the arc (or even glanced off it), it was working really well -- see: Unrealized Realities. I Shrink Therefore I Am also worked quite well as mostly-standalone with a chunk of continuity at the end.

They're also doing a lot of setup for other plot arcs.

Re:Just because they cancelled Farscape...

[glwtta]

The best series have some kind of continuity. Anyone have any idea what changed?

This is mostly a guess, but the Farscape people were told that the show was picked up for two more seasons after the third (well, this part's not a guess, that did happen); and since they were more or less done with a lot of their previous plot arcs, the first 1/4 of those two seasons (the last 1/2 of which it looks like we wont see) felt like a lot of setup for the things to come.

I guess normally shows don't plan ahead as much since they expect to be cancelled the next year.

As far as some other differences that made the 4th season not quite as good: the new character juggling - Suzuki Sashimi Shamu just wasn't very "Farscape"; and yeah, there were many completely stand-alone silly episodes that didn't really add anything to the show. That and "John Quixote" should've been one of the funniest episodes ever, and instead just plain sucked (the first Farscape episode I can say that about)

Re:Just because they cancelled Farscape...

[dnahelix]

You said about Farscape, "this season felt more like the writers were making things up as they went." Interesting, that's how reality works.

Re:Just because they cancelled Farscape...

[robertchin]

He was even better as Ernest Pratt and Nicodemus Legend in the UPN show, Legend.

Stargate Cartoon

[Cyno01]

Anyone else head about this? Apparantly theres some new saturday morning cartoon called Stargate Infinity, i just got the first ep off kazza, but i havn't been bored enough to watch it cuz the quality is shite. Speaking of shitty quality anyone else seen the pilot for firefly? Why didn't they air that!?!??

Re:Stargate Cartoon

[crow]

The cartoon is horrible.

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

[jpt.d]

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....

Re:Stargate Cartoon

[Cyno01]

The characters are extremely shallow and rather juvinile. The writing is poor. well, it is a saturday morning kids show, we cant expect too much

Re:Stargate Cartoon

[coyote-san]

The technical quality of the show is actually better than most Saturday morning cartoons now. But this show is done in a somewhat realistic style (well, excluding the obligatory 3% body fat on all characters) while most cartoons are now drawn in an extremely flat style.

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.")

Re:Stargate Cartoon

[silentbozo]

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?)

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

[silentbozo]

OMG. I just took a look at a still from the show. Damn - how the hell did they manage to twist the Stargate property into that?!?!? And what is up with those character designs?

http://www.gateworld.net/infinity/index.shtml

A quote from the page:

The writers and producers of SG-1 and future live-action Stargate projects are not involved in Infinity. According to SG-1 co-creator Brad Wright, the animated series should not be considered official Stargate canon.

I should hope not!!!

Just so people know, these 4 are supposed to be Air Force cadets...

Farscape rocks

[MacAndrew]

Farscape is/was uneven from episode to episode, but the good ones were amazing. Soooo many TV shows are just plain mediocre, with nary a flash of brilliance. Also, Farscape was the first strong break with the threadbare Star Trek straitjacket to make it on the air. I loved the substitution of largely organic technology for electrical, and was rather fond of Moia (in a platonic way). Aeryn's cool, too. Trek never really pulled it off I think with strong female characters, so rare in scifi.

I'm surprised to hear of the cancellation, but true it is -- see the horse's mouth. 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 ... I just keep expecting him to "leap," you know?

Yes, I watch too much TV, but mostly science fiction.

Re:Farscape rocks

[0xdeadbeef]

Whatever, you spaceshipfucker.

Do you think the other ships call her "Meatfucker" behind her back?

Say what you will, I wouldn't mind a go with the ship in Andromeda.

Re:Farscape rocks

[spectecjr]

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.

The only problem is that SciFi has the rights to the first 100 episodes locked up. If they'd gone past 100, it would have been opened up for syndication.

However, without SciFi releasing the rights, they can't work out a syndication deal.

Some (more cynical/conspiracy minded than myself) might think that SciFi planned it this way, so they could cut the show and still keep showing it without anyone else getting their hands on it. But frankly, I can't think of any kind of business reason why they'd do that.

Simon

Re:Farscape rocks

[MacAndrew]

Maybe Henson could produce the remaining episodes with the characters sitting around reading the paper, chatting, that sort of thing; hand them over; then get on with the series.

SciFi must realize they have a valuable asset on their hands (even if they did book that Edward creep) and is most likely working on a deal now. Or they're profoundly stupid, there's always that.

Geez, don't these people realize how IMPORTANT this is ?!? (Yes, I do have a life, it's my children I'm thinking of.) ;-) Thx for the info.

Re:Farscape rocks

[glwtta]

Farscape on UPN? I'd much rather it were cancelled alltogether. Well, that kinda happened...

Anyway, the only news here that offers any hope was the Jim Henson people (I believe Brian himself) saying they may/will be doing Farscape movies.

(btw, just so you know where I'm coming from - Farscape was the only tv show I watched, sci-fi or otherwise)

Re:Farscape rocks

[Araxen]

That's the one thing about Enterprise I hope the commander just doesn't leap into another dimenson never to return. OOOOH the shame in that if it was to happen!

Re:Fuck

[Anonvmous Coward]

"that is the best way to guarantee your show will have a short run: confuse the new viewers."

Makes you wonder why the broadcast industry's so anti-Tivo, doesn't it?

Scifi Shows

[moniker]

Andromeda
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
Great funny dialog... poor science... (Still using gunpowder, but somehow they have excellent gravity generators and inertial dampeners) ... 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.

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.

Re:Scifi Shows

[bdesham]

Enterprise
The captain strikes me as whiny... I prayed for the dog to die in one of the more recent episodes.

You're kidding, right? You want to kill the hands-down best character on the show?

Re:Scifi Shows

[Jerf]

(Still using gunpowder, but somehow they have excellent gravity generators and inertial dampeners)

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,

One of the nice things about old technology is that it is easy to maintain. Sure, in a firefight, you might prefer a laser-guided smart rail-gun, but it's a bitch to find parts for it when it breaks. A shotgun, on the other hand, still kills people dead, and it's a lot easier to come by both parts and ammunition....

There's a certain *elegence* in the inelegence of a good firearm. Lasers can be reflected, guidance systems can be scrambled, electronics of all kinds can be confused or outright destroyed, particle beams can be deflected, but a bullet can only be stopped, generally not without doing damage to the thing stopping it. (I'd recommend against using your own flesh to do the job.) Very few things, even in 2088 [time setting of this game], can stand up to a concentrated barrage of firepower.

Simple is beautiful.

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

[jismay]

The KISS school of thought is definitely one that is well worth paying attention. When it comes to weapons, history has shown time and again that simple is better. As Robert Heinlein put it in Starship Troopers (my best recollection, as I don't have it in front of me) "While you're busy trying to read a vernier, someone much simplier armed ,say with a rock, will sneak up and bash your brains out"

Even in Andromeda, they show the long-standing commonwealth forces using force lances which can not only fire energy projectiles, but also turn into handy-dandy 6-foot pikes in an instant.

Re:Scifi Shows

[WeaponOfChoice]

I also like how the captain has no objection to just outright killing defenseless bad guys.

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

[Silverhammer]

Blockquoth the poster:

The fact of the matter is that given the place where Firefly takes place, using guns makes perfect sense.

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

[zephc]

Have you noticed that on star trek, the Borg shields cannot deflect normal bullets? (see 'star trek: first contact') Then WHY, oh WHY, wouldn't the Federation start making projectile weapons for fighting the Borg? Dumbasses... =P

Re:Scifi Shows

[Jerf]

As long as the hull is reasonably solid, it's not necessarily as bad as you might think. It might not breach if it's a weapon specially designed to be fired inside of a standard hull, if it's a soft projectile. At worst, it puts an easily-patched small hole into the hull, which is probably not the only hole in the 'rickety old spacecraft', which probably long ago gave up "hull integrity" as a binary, on-off value.

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

[Cyno01]

for their credit, they did have a real gun on an episode of star trek ds9 (the best series), the episode "Field of Fire" was on in syndication here in milwaukee thursday night, in the episode theres this crazy vulcan sniper with a gun that could transport its bullets, kinda a funny coincidence that that episode would come up in order on the day they caught the sniper(s)

Re:Scifi Shows

[Cyno01]

they did, they made a rifle for use within a damening field, it was in DS9 - Field of Fire, also, scroll down a post

Re:Scifi Shows

[shadowj]

I am a bit mystified by the terraformers decision to make all the (hundreds of) planets[?] into semi-arid dustballs rather than fertile paradisi...

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?

Re:Scifi Shows

[zephc]

Yeah, though I believe they mentioned the technology was abandoned (I'm sure the transporter wouldnt make it thru their personal shields anyway)

Besides, that was a sniper rifle, I'm talking about heavy-duty weapons ala Aliens

Re:Scifi Shows

[DavidTC]

The only real mystery is why Serenity doesn't have at least one hull-mounted machine gun.

That one's obvious...they're illegal.

At least that's the assumption I've been operating under.

While I doubt the Alliance is as evil as the characters presented in the show want to make it out to be (Come on, this is Joss we're talking about.), I seriously doubt they'd let just anyone have hull mounted weapons.

And the Serenity isn't outlaw enough to just do whatever she wants.

Re:Scifi Shows

[Twirlip of the Mists]

By all means, I invite you to fire a projectile weapon inside a rickety old spacecraft. Just be sure you don't miss...

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:Scifi Shows

[Twirlip of the Mists]

I am a bit mystified by the terraformers decision to make all the (hundreds of) planets[?] into semi-arid dustballs rather than fertile paradises

One would presume that the really nice planets would also be the ones with all the people on 'em. Given the ensemble's expressed preference for avoiding big crowds, it seems reasonable that they'd stick to the dry-and-dusties.

Re:Scifi Shows

[wizz0bang]

Just don't fire any of SG-1's new P90 ammo inside the Serenity... the 5.7x28mm NATO round will penetrate 48 layers of kevlar, 20mm of titanium or a standard NATO flack helmit at 200 meters :) not to mention O'Niell's P90 hold 50 rounds in a single clip. See FN (the P90 manufacturer) web site: P90 Ok... had to mix Firefly and SG1 somehow in this thread.

Re:Scifi Shows

[spiro_killglance]

"in the episode theres this crazy vulcan sniper with a gun that could transport its bullets."

You've got a machine that can cause arbitary matter
and energy to appear at any point in space without
needing a receiver, and you need bullets?

Re:Scifi Shows

[wizz0bang]

The ballistics are much different. The 9mm round will simply bounce off body armor, the 5.7x28mm goes clean through. It's like throwing a brick at something versus a lawn dart (an exaggerated example). It actually carries 60% of the reciol of a standard 9mm pistol round, making the P90 in full auto mode very accurate and easy to control (MUCH better weapon than the HK MP5). Check out this link for info on the 5.7x28mm SS190 round Too bad these are illegal in the US, I would LOVE to target shoot with the Five-Seven pistol model that shoots the same rounds as the P90, 60% of the recoil of a 9mm and 20 rounds in one little clip??? WOW

Re:Scifi Shows

[mkldev]

Sure it will. In fact, the shuttle launches with a pair of solid fuel rockets that illustrate the basic principle nicely. You use a solid propellant mixed with an oxidizer.

When it comes to bullets in space, the issue of whether that propellant is black powder or some other similarly explosive substance really doesn't matter much in the end, as long as it goes boom. :-)

Re:Scifi Shows

[Our Man In Redmond]

Great funny dialog... poor science... (Still using gunpowder, but somehow they have excellent gravity generators and inertial dampeners)

Slugthrowers are cheap, not that it matters. Anyone who doesn't know "Firefly" is just a horse opera with the sci-fi stuff bolted on isn't watching the show.

Re:Scifi Shows

[IHateEverybody]

Even in Andromeda, they show the long-standing commonwealth forces using force lances which can not only fire energy projectiles, but also turn into handy-dandy 6-foot pikes in an instant.

They also fire both "smart" (radar controlled for better accuracy) and dumb bullets as well.

Maxim

[Sivar]

What does the Maxim link have to do with anything? Some cheesy pun on the word "barely"? :)

Re:Maxim

[Unknown Relic]

The girl featured on that specific page of the Maxim site plays T'Pol on Enterprise. I believe the poster was alluding to the idea that she is the only thing which makes the show worth watching.

Re:Maxim

[ProfessorPuke]

Evidently he thinks Enterprise's only redeeming quality is the opportunity to watch that actress strip down in the decontamination chamber every week.

Re:Maxim

[Sivar]

Ahh, thanks. I couldn't look at the page for more than half a second because... Certain other people are in the vicinity. ;-)

Dammit!

[isorox]

I've already spent £500 of SG1 dvd's - and with another season to buy?!? /me goes off to celebrate

Re:Dammit!

[SmoothOperator]

You mean stay celibate.

Wooo hooo!!!

[greenskyx]

Since I don't have cable, this is the best show on TV other than re-runs of the nanny! ;-) No really... I do like SG1 even though it is a little silly at times. I really think their super acurate P90's rule..........

Helpful Links

[Anonymous Coward]

Just getting into SG?

• Official website
  
• Awesome fan website
  
• SG quiz
  
• Fun trivia
  

Posted anonymously so I don't get marked as karma whore.

Re:Helpful Links

[javert]

Here is another really good one:

Gateworld

grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastards

[tqft]

The other commenters obviously live in a country with a half decent

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:Fuck

[Psx29]

that is the best way to guarantee your show will have a short run: confuse the new viewers.

Not just new viewers...I hate it when there is a series I like and then I miss one episode and it just seems as though I missed so much I can never get back into it.

Movie? Spinoff?

[Flamesplash]

This, they hope, will segue directly into filimg a 'feature'. Smith said this a couple of times, but he emphasised the feature is not yet 100% certain. After that, the spinoff.

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?

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Wait a minute. A Stargate movie? It just might work!!! Damn, I wonder if they'll actually cat on this great idea.

Now, if only someone would start to seriously consider making a Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie, my life would be perfect!!!

Re:Movie? Spinoff?

[DavidTC]

...and introducing Kurt Russell as Rupert Giles.

Re:Movie? Spinoff?

[Flamesplash]

hehe, yes yes I know SG was a movie to start with, I even own it! :O

Movie to TV seems to be a lot more sucessful than TV to Movie. For one thing Movies are usually stand alone, in that a movie is not usually written with any sequal in mind so it has the freedom to use it's cast of characters however it sees fit and even to completely close the plot line off. They don't always do this which leaves room for TV series spin offs.

However the opposite is harder as part of the reasion the series was sucessful is that is _was_ a serial, and porting that to a movie is simply bad. If they made the movie as a really big all out Series finale to SG-1 where they could kill everyone or part of the cast etc.. that would be good, however, if they try to do it like the X-Files it'll just be mediocre.

SG-1 is quite good

[lrdnkn]

I have been watching this show almost religiously since its very first season and own both the first and second season DVD boxsets. I was quite concerned when they killed off Daniel Jackson, but I must admit that the new character Jonas has done pretty well to fill the void that Daniel left. The series is incredibly good at following its own reality. There have been numerous episodes that were tie-ins to previous ones (I'm not sure but I think some of these have been across season boundaries). I watched over the summer when SG-1 switched from Showtime to Sci-Fi. By all means if you have the time, watch (or record) the new season of Stargate:SG-1. I venture to bet that most Sci-Fi fans wont be sorry. Now there are occasional filler episodes that you may or may not like (take, for example, the hilarious "The Other Guys" episode this summer). I look forward to seeing the new season (and to getting more DVD boxsets :-)

If you like Sci-Fi, check it out.

Re:grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastard

[Phosphor3k]

.Voyager is still in season 6!!

They get home.

The dog?

[GuyMannDude]

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:The dog?

[moniker]

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?!?

I dunno... maybe I figured if we got rid of the damn mutt, the rest of his problems would just sort themselves out.

Anyways... last thing you'd want would be a vulcan girlfriend... seven years? hell.. married people have sex more often than that.

Re:grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastard

[Anonymous Coward]

Space Above and Beyond was a fresh break from star trek when it came out. Yeah, it was pretty corney, but the plots themselfs were still intresting enough. A lot of the shows make humans the peacefull tree huggers of the galaxy. It was nice to see humans as a whole whopping some ass for a change.

Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[Vegan Pagan]

My problem with S.T. Enterprise is that, more than any Trek since TOS, its Captain expects things to go his way and it usually portrays foreign cultures as inferior. The societies that do have higher tech are shown as either evil or condescending; Archer calls genetic engineering one's own race a deal with the devil and he believes that humans are entitled to all Vulcan technology. And almost no time is spent showing the ways that their cultures are superior to human ways. The only really redeeming moments were when he did an elaborate apology dance to get some equipment, and when he refused to help either side on the Desert Planet.

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

[DarkHelmet]

Ultimately, Enterprise reminds me of USA today: ignorantly pushing itself on the world and expecting to get better treatment than anyone else.

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

[AlistairMcMillan]

Although I do agree in part with Vegan Pagan that the series does seem to reflect the small minded prejudices of the producers, I need to correct one thing.

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

[GKChesterton]

During WWII an American GI came upon a Pacific Islander who was reading the Bible.

(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

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[GuyMannDude]

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

[Stephen VanDahm]

"The Q and the Borg are races that humans should look up to!"

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:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[Twirlip of the Mists]

I agree with you that Star Trek has a "my way or the highway" approach to morality

I, for one, look forward to the day, not too long from now, when the idea of moral relativism will have gone the way of communism, free love, slavery, phlogiston, and trephination. There is absolute right and wrong, my friends. It's good to hold true that one might not always be right, but it's bad to deny the existence of absolute good and evil.

In other words, I'm very much in favor of "my way or the highway" approaches to morality in cases where there is a clear line dividing acceptable from unacceptable. The tricky part is being able to identify those cases.

As for the rest of your post, I agree completely. The best description I've heard of Enterprise yet is your phrase: heavy-handed. The sexiest hour of Star Trek ever had to be the Next Generation episode "The Perfect Mate," with Famke Janssen. The red-hot steamy sex scenes in that episode consisted of Picard and Crusher having breakfast, and Picard and Kamala talking through the night. And it was hot stuff. Calvin Klein models smearing jelly on each other in blue-lit rooms is pretty lame by comparison.

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[drunken monkey]

Well not all woes. But there is a humble and unfortunate list of, let's just say, bad outcomes and actions, that are completely at the fault of US foreign policy or the CIA. Toppling or trying to topple a democratically elected foreign government not only pisses off the locals, but goes against the grain of the philosophy that this country was built with.

This isn't your grandfather's imperialism.

narbey

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[maniac1860]

Ultimately, Enterprise reminds me of USA today: ignorantly pushing itself on the world and expecting to get better treatment than anyone else.

That's an interesting take. I think it should be trivally obvious how everything you said about the Enterprise crew could be applied to the way that many nations view the U.S.

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[GKChesterton]

"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!"

Well, it *was* the Vulcan's fault. There were violating a treaty. They were wrong. And its something *the Vulcan's* should learn from... even if it has to be learned from us nasty, un-pc humans.

Sheesh... even truth and honesty have to give way to the sacred liberal cows of PC, relativism, anti-Americanism, and anti-humanism? Sorry, but that's just silly.

Besides... people can learn from their mistakes without going around in sackcloth and ashes moping about it. So the fact that the Enterprise crew doesn't come out and say, "Woe is us, we made a mistake", doesn't mean a thing. When I make a mistake I just suck it up and move on and try not to make it again. Being that unsubtle to pontificate on it would be lousy scriptwriting.

And, the fact that T'Pol took the Vulcans to task about the listening post and not the humans invalidates your whole point about that particular incident. The humans didn't throw it in their faces, even though they ought to have done so. Another Vulcan did. And the fact that the incident caused tensions with the Andorians was the Vulcans' fault.

And before T'Pol brought that incident up, Archer has just finished up a long speech about how humans were going to make mistakes, but they would learn from them.

It just amazes me at how many people today seem willing to, if they had the power, press a button and make humanity disappear. Of course, they'd prefer to press another button to make Americans disappear first, and then the rest of humanity.

GKC
"Men do not differ much about what things they will call evils; they differ enormously about what evils they will call excusable."
-- G. K. Chesterton

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[Stephen VanDahm]

I actually agree that there is such a thing as right and wrong, and that most of what passes for ethical relativism is a bunch of crap. My complaint about Enterprise is that, when the show tackles some moral issue, its treatment of that issue tends to be simplistic and preachy. If something isn't interesting, challenging, or educational, it probably isn't very good entertainment.

The Next Generation did a much better job of handling moral questions. Picard knows when to repsect foreign customs, but there are a couple of times in TNG when he has to decide whether the ethical relativism of the Prime Directive is more important than his own personal sense of right and wrong. And Picard violates the Prime Directive at least twice in order to do the right thing. But there is always some discussion of the moral complexities involved. You don't really see that in Enterprise.

Steve

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[Rothron the Wise]

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.

That's because Enterprise is not only less PC than TNG, although it is more mainstream, and because of the fact that they deal with real people, not pillars of morality and wholesomeness. The people on TNG act like they have no sexuality at all. One may start to wonder if that replicated food REALLY contains ALL the required nutrients for proper hormone production.

Then again, the first Enterprise has no holodeck. The crew on TNG can probably use that to relieve themselves, not that they'd ever show it on screen. The closest they've come is showing Vulcan foreplay which really can't count for obvious reasons.

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[sql*kitten]

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.

Well, Archer hates the Vulcans because they withheld technology from his father. Not because they applied diplomatic pressure to prevent humans from going into space (altho' they did), not because they threatened Earth if they were disobeyed (which they didn't) but because they didn't hand everything to Earth on a silver platter. And in the series he blunders through the universe wondering why every alien he meets isn't overjoyed to meet him, and eager to give him everything he wants. He's whiny and spoilt, basically he's an American tourist overseas, completely unable to understand that the rest of the world isn't like his hometown, and that they couldn't care less about him either way. And he's the best they could find?

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[jedidiah]

Just who do you think they would be able to recruit. It is still a ship and needs to be run as such. This means that you will be pulling your candidates from the ranks of military officers. Compared to that lot, Archer is light, fruity and raspberry.

They even address this issue in the series directly (to some extent).

Humanity doesn't change on a dime, as much as you might believe it can.

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[sql*kitten]

Just who do you think they would be able to recruit. It is still a ship and needs to be run as such. This means that you will be pulling your candidates from the ranks of military officers. Compared to that lot, Archer is light, fruity and raspberry.

Well, compare Archer to a modern-day senior military officer, like Colin Powell. He's a skilled military commander who is equally at home with diplomacy, and understands the subtleties of dealing with other cultures both on the battlefield and in the conference room. Even a green Lieutentant would have more gravitas and competence than Archer.

Re:Enterprise: Americans Deserve All

[jedidiah]

Powell is one exceptional example. He is, or rather was, the commanding general for an entire nation's armed forces. He can only reasonably be compared to other joint-chiefs. He really can't even be compared to other generals.

Also, Powell is not a "senior officer", he is a FLAG officer. That makes a difference in the comparison.

Your ideas regarding junior military officers are interesting at best.

Avoid Firefly - stick to Cowboy Bebop

[carb]

No offense to you my good man, but if for some reason you're actually interested in FireFly, I suggest heading out and picking up some Cowboy Bebop episodes (not sure if it's still on Cartoon Network: Adult Swim? - I'm in Canada, what do I know). After watching this Japanese classic you'll realize that a) it's great, and b) FireFly is a horrible rip-off. As for SG1, I've yet to see it.

Re:Avoid Firefly - stick to Cowboy Bebop

[Twirlip of the Mists]

FireFly is a horrible rip-off [of Cowboy Bebop]

It's hard to see how this is possible, seeing as how the series creator is on record as saying he'd never even seen Cowboy Bebop until Firefly was well into production.

Re:Avoid Firefly - stick to Cowboy Bebop

[carb]

Well, seeing as writers are spinners of fable and story, could it be possible that they might also ... lie?

Re:Avoid Firefly - stick to Cowboy Bebop

[fenix down]

I doubt it. If you want to say they ripped off an anime, pick Outlaw Star instead. It's been on TV in the US a lot longer, and it's got a lot more similarities than CB. The spinning jump engine thing that makes lots of glowing plasma, the naked chick in the box... You could probably find more, like the big brother empire thing or whatever they call it, but I've only seen 3 episodes. Beyond the engine kid being kinda like Ed and the whore being kinda like Faye, there's not much Bebop there that I can see.

Profit!

[carb]

Wow, someone actually remembers that show other than me? Profit was great! I can't believe it was taken off the air after 1 season - curse you Fox Broadcasting.

Re:Good! (Spoiler?)

[UpLateDrinkingCoffee]

My favorite scene in the whole series was when Jack and Teilk (sp?) were driving golf balls from the platform into the operational star gate! Now that was something very unexpected from the writers... I couldn't stop laughing for like 5 minutes.

Re:grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastard

[SparkyMartin]

Feel lucky that you were never subjected to "The Starlost" down under like we were up here in Canada.

What, never heard of it? Most ppl that did tried to forget it. It was a 'Noah's Ark in space' because Earth became uninhabitable, the ship was launched hundreds of years earlier so everyone on the ship forgot it was really a spaceship, and the 'heros' were these Amish-like characters, all filmed on a budget that could not have been more than $10,000; I think the FX were filmed with some guys camcorder.

Hey Platinum Dragon!

[Scholasticus]

They didn't exactly hit the reset button. There hasn't been any resolution to the temporal cold war. We still don't know how things are uptime after Archer got back to the 22nd century, we don't know who the "mystery man" is that the Sulliban are working for, and we really don't know who Daniels is. As far as the "treknobabble" is concerned, I think that this show has been pretty light on technological fixes to storylines, and Daniels has resoltutely refused to explain anything about how his stuff works. I think the show is watchable now; you just seem sour.

Re:Hey Platinum Dragon!

[Twirlip of the Mists]

And despite all those loose ends and mysteries, I just can't bring myself to care.

It takes a very special kind of talent to take an otherwise intriguing premise and make it as boring as your average Enterprise episode. Of course, I keep watching it. The first 30 episodes of The Next Generation were pretty bad, too. Who knows? Maybe the horse will learn to sing.

Re:Hey Platinum Dragon!

[Platinum Dragon]

Well, I was terribly, terribly underwhelmed by Shockwave pt. II. It brought Archer back way too quickly and easily, sent Enterprise on her merry way with no consequences, and I got the implication that whatever Archer and Daniels threw together was the "last" bit of time-travel technology available in the timeline Archer went through. Of course, now that Archer's back on the ship, one could say that he's in yet another timeline where the secret leader and Daniels exist again, but even that comes across as a hokey plot device.

Unless the writers did some serious preplanning for this overall plot arc, or they're very careful reintroducing the 25th and 29th-century characters (I screwed that up in the other reply, I realize that) things will simply get less internally logical and less watchable over time. The episode after Minefield was watchable and interesting (and suffered from a common problem to all Treks, the really quick wrap-up), but I had no interest in watching something about Archer's sexual frustration. Shockwave II turned me off watching the next couple of episodes, so I missed the first meeting with the Romulans.

It's pretty hard to piss me off when it comes to sci-fi (hell, I still sometimes catch Voyager when I have little else to do, along with Forever Knight!), but Shockwave II led me to believe B+B really haven't learned how to write long-term plot effects. I laughed when I heard about how they thought about the conclusion of Shockwave - shock of shocks - before going on break for the summer. It's been a fairly consistent problem with Trek season-ending cliffhangers, though some have been much better than others (Best of Both Worlds comes to mind). Shockwave II was easily the worst.

And to think, I didn't have much problem with the first season, and thought Shockwave I was a great setup.

Re:Hey Platinum Dragon!

[Oculus Habent]

I'm going to spoil it - even though this is a guess.

The mystery man the Suliban work for is a ROMULAN. Think about it. We've met the major players from TOS except for the Romulans. The shadow looks like a Romulan in the chamber. Archer looks at "The Romulan Star Empire" book in the future.

Am I the only one detecting some weak foreshadowing?

Anyway, the temporal cold war is a weak premise. What happens when they end it? Enterprise never happened (which would suit the pre-Enterprise Trek timeline)? They can't just end that future without changing the timeline before the show - they didn't really touch on how the loss of Archer didn't totally frig the past, as the future leader would never have existed to help them...

Also, thre are some weak continuity issues... No Vulcan mindmelds, yet by Spock's time they are so common that it is Vulcan custom for a son to bond with his father.

Oh, and villifying the Vulcans. As my friend said, it's the only group out of which they hadn't already made bad guys.

I still watch it. Partly because I like Trek, partly because I want to see how the hell they clean up their loose ends.

Re:Fuck

[KilljoyAZ]

When you realize TV networks are in the business of selling ads, not the business of entertaining viewers, their decisions make more sense.

Re:Good! (Spoiler?)

[DavidTC]

The great thing about Stargate is even when they do the cliche sci-fi episodes, they make them funny.

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.

Re:grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastard

[shadowj]

Oh, I remember the Starlost, all right. I occasionally still have nightmares from the trauma.

Two minor points of Starlost trivia: Harlan Ellison came up with the concept, and Ben Bova was credited as an advisor. Harlan would have nothing to do with the series by the time it made it to production; the credits list "Cordwainer Bird" as having conceived the series. That's Harlan's personal codename for "GOD, THIS SUCKS, STAY AWAY". Bova later wrote a savagely satirical and very funny novel called The Starcrossed (plot summary).

Movie and spinoff spoilers

[coyote-san]

The rumors are that the movie will set up a spinoff series, akin to the way the Showtime movie set up the series. (Not the original movie, since in that movie there was only one Go'uld and he was killed.)

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

*** YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED ***

The expected premise of the movie is the final battle with the Go'uld, closing the original series, and the discovery of the "ancients" who were behind the Atlantis legend, setting up the spinoff series. According to Plato, Atlantis disappeared beneath the waters of the sea, but as countless primitive cultures have pointed out the event horizon of a stargate looks a lot like a watery surface. It's not hard to connect the dots and believe that the Ancients left earth through a stargate and later generations morphed the story into Atlantis disappearing under the ocean.

Since it would be a very short series if humans immediately hooked up with the Ancients, I expect the spinoff to follow a human team searching for evidence of where the Ancients went. We might even see the 8th lock used on the gate again, or dare we hope even the 9th?!

Stargate: SG1 - the game

[Nycto]

While I am not an avid watcher of the show, I have seen a few episodes and the movie. The writing, acting and directing are excellent.

I have started watching more of the show, though, due to the fact that I recently joined a team working on a Stargate: SG1 first person shooter. So far the its looking awesome! We are always looking for input, though.

If any other Stargate: SG1 fans out there are interested, you can find information about the game at our website.

It started out as a Mod for Tribes 2, but the Lead programmer purchased the Torque Game engine and the mod turned in to a stand-alone game. Oh, and it will be freeware ;)

Where?

[Mulletproof]

Which brings up an interesting point-- Where are all the freakin MacGyver reruns?!? That was the best show when I was growing up... Every other bad show and it's mother seem to have reruns, but Mac? NoooOOOOoooo...

-grumbles something about Night Rider and Air Wold-

Re:Where?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Where are all the freakin MacGyver reruns"

WGN, late morning. (don't remember the exact time, sorry.)

Re:Where?

[Hard_Code]

Quizzantum Lizzeap biatch.

Re:Fuck

[starman97]

For that there's broadband...

I've got every ep of Enterprise in SVCD format .mpg's
because the Austin TX UPN station has about 100W of transmit power and DirectTV wont carry them as a local channel.

Got all of Farscape and Firefly too.. Now if only I could upload them back into the Tivo..

Wolf. Air WOLF.

[Mulletproof]

Typo. Kill me now.

Re:Wolf. Air WOLF.

[Lars T.]

BTW, it's Knight Rider. Not that I care.

Re:Good! (Spoiler?)

[Twirlip of the Mists]

No, no. Best moment was in the "Carter gets her own pet alien" episode. O'Neill and Teal'c show up at Carter's door with pizza and and Star Wars on video. Teal'c says he's seen it nine times. O'Neill says that if Teal'c likes it, it has to be good. Carter starts to give some excuse about how it's not a very good time, then stops mid-sentence to say, "You mean you've never seen Star Wars?" O'Neill kinda shrugs and says, "Oh, you know me and 'sci-fi.'"

Cracked me up.

USA Today?

[orichter]

I don't know, Star Trek the Next Generation might have been like USA Today (generally interesting and harmless, but vapid and shallow.) But Enterprise is more like the National Enquirer (Man has sex with big titted vulcan: Says love child will be named Spock.) Now SG-1 is more like the Wall Street Journal, but still not as good as Babylon 5.

P.S. This is niether a Troll or a Flame, just a poor attempt at humor.

Re:USA Today?

[Ozymandias_KoK]

Ok, build it up and leave us hanging. What kind of newspaper is B5?

Re:USA Today?

[orichter]

I would have thought it was obvious that B5 is not a newspaper, it's a novel; and a damn good one too.

Re:USA Today?

[Ozymandias_KoK]

Hey now, you can't go around switching in the middle of a metaphor. That's just wrong.

Re:USA Today?

[gfreeman]

Perfectly cromulent.

There are several good reasons for no machine gun.

[orichter]

They actually had an episode where they tried to use a gun out in space. They had to bring along a space suit so the gunpowder could get oxygen, and they only got one shot. Now it still doesn't explain why they don't have a rail gun, or some similar weapon, but then again most merchant ships on earth's oceans don't have ship mounted weapons either.

great scifi

[nsda's_deviant]

i thought the movie sucked but the plot had interesting ideas. like sliders with indy. anyone else know of good scifi like this?

anyone know about witchblade?

Stargates Fine...But What Happen to ST DS9?

[Paterson 07514]

I'm glad SG is on the Sci-Fi Channel instead of Show time. Its G to PG rated plus the show last no longer than 45-50 minutes per episode. Thats fits nicely with the commercial driver cable/TV channels.

I think Enterprise should be cancel and bring back ST simular to DS9( which I believe has the most number of seasons). I've seen re-runs of ST, TNG, Voyager but never DS9.

BRING BACK CAPTAIN SISKO!!!!

Re:Stargates Fine...But What Happen to ST DS9?

[kldavis4]

I am with you man, Deep Space 9 was the pinnacle of star trek. TNN will be getting DS9 in 2004.

Re:There are several good reasons for no machine g

[Anonymous Coward]

Gun powder doesn't need oxygen. The oxidizer is built-in.

andromeda might stop sucking.

[flux4]

I just saw the John de Lancie episode "Cui Bono" and was surprised to find that it was, well, okay. Not great, but also not as utterly rotten as the rest of Season 3 has been. For those of you keeping score, that's a *big* trend upwards. Sorbo actually shut up for large parts of the show, and the rest of the crew got to do actual stuff.

Also, Rev Bem is coming back this season. No clue if it's a guest appearance or a recurring role.

So maybe there's a tunnel at the end of... er, that is, a light at the end of the tunnel. We can hope.

Enterprise leaves alot to be desired

[sheWhoWalksWithToesL]

My husband likes to watch Enterprise and I would start watching it with him and each time there was always something that made me mad.

Whiny capt Archer is part of it. Another thing that bothers me is that DePaul the Vulcan is such a point of contention and conflict. She plays a detractory role, rather than a supporting one, which always gives me a headache. It is possilble to illustrate people's differences without this kind of crud. Look at the relationship played out between Spock and Kirk. And even the little tantrums McCoy had at Spock from time to time still had an element of friendship behind them. It was fun to watch the interplay between them. On Enterprise, though, too many people have serious issues.

The plots on Enterprise don't interest me. It just rubs me the wrong way in so many of its aspects I doubt I could articulate them all.

-SheWhoWalksWithToesLikeCobras

Come on...

[SimplexO]

... I mean really. It is in the 6th season, going into the 7th season. Do we really need to define the races and what the stargate is every episode? There just isn't a practical way to do something like that. This show is not giligan's island where a 30 second song can give you the entire background information.

There's 2 schools of thought. Each singular show has a singular plot or the series has continuity. I think they walk the fine line between those schools, and are barely on the continuity side.

I really like the witty comentary of Jack O'Neal. My favorite line is when some random bad guy was talking about his badass master after he knocked Jack down on the ground:

Bad Guy: You don't even know what [badguy's name] is capable of!

Jack (lying down on the ground): You... BASTARD!... You ended... that sentance with a preposition!

It's just so clever. =)

Andromeda has promise

[dsoltesz]

It's not so bad considering it's a piece of the Rodenberry Empire - Star Trek etc. have always been a bit clean and a little too politically correct, even the original series. Andromeda has a not-so-subtle dichotomy "old sci fi meets new sci fi" theme - larger than life goody-two-shoes Dillan Hunt, just like all our heroes (Lucky Starr, Buck Rogers, Clark Kent) of the good old days, teamed up with a band of shady types focused on money and/or power. Yeah, he gets them to help him save the universe, but they're helping him rough up his shiny, Good Boy persona too.

I think with the addition of Roger Engels as the head writer the upcoming season(s) should prove more interesting.

I miss Babylon 5

[haruchai]

Not since the original Star Trek have I so enjoyed a sci-fi series. It really had everything - imaginative writing ( kudos to Harlan Ellison for his consultations), great acting, humor and character development. Sorry gang, but most of the other shows mentioned on this page simply don't rate.

Re:PATHETIC

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Actually, friend, you should have realized by now that we watch (and talk about) shows like Stargate to escape those sorts of aspects of reality.

I hereby christen thee the "Go Outside" troll. Let's see if you can keep it up, and not burn yourself out like the "Get a real computer" troll did a few weeks ago.

Re:There are several good reasons for no machine g

[Edgy Loner]

I never understood that. I can only guess they threw in the requirement for having oxygen around the gun as an additional complication to be solved. Which leaves the question of how did Jayne work the trigger through the suit?

Re:There are several good reasons for no machine g

[mkldev]

Sounds like the writers didn't do their research. Most bullets contain an oxidizer. They have to, as the firing caps are basically airtight packages, IIRC. Granted there probably isn't enough oxidizer (if any) mixed with the powder that's packed into the rest of the shell casing to effectively fire a bullet, but that is an economic, not technical issue.

Re:There are several good reasons for no machine g

[orichter]

The more I think about it, the more farsical the Firefly universe seems. As other authors have pointed out, my earlier post on gunpowder not working in a vacuum is not correct (even if it is how they explain it in the show.) But as I said, there are many reasons why a gun wouldn't be useful on a space craft. For one, a differential velocity of several hundred miles per hour would be trivial compared to the speeds at which space craft normally travel. Surely in order to travel through space, one would have to build a craft which could deal gracefully with small debris traveling at large velocities.

Those Tau'Ra and their guns!

[runlvl0]

WHY, wouldn't the Federation start making projectile weapons for fighting the Borg? Dumbasses...

Coming back to topic (*cough*), this is just what happened in Stargate SG-1 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 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!

All that being said, Stargate sucks without Daniel Jackson. 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:Those Tau'Ra and their guns!

[zephc]

"Now we're just sober, and what fun is that?"

s/Danieljackson/Jonasquinn/g

=]

Sure, Parker Louis isn't D.J., but he's cool in his own right

Where's the DUCT TAPE?!?!

[d_force]

Damnit, I wanna see an episode where Anderson breaks out his trusty roll of duct tape!! ... Aww, c'mon.. at least the Swiss Army Knife!

Re:grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastard

[watsondk]

OMG Its really sad but I remember that, it was playing on sat tv, at some horrible hour of the morning.

I do think that the $10K budget was being a little optimistic, I am thinking more like $10 for the whole series.

There was another terrible SciFi that I came across, the name escapes me. It was a sort of mash in space thing, that must have had a $20 budget.

Looking for new episodes

[joeler]

I miss the dolby digital sound of SG-1 on commercial free Showtime, but will settle for new episodes. It has become one of my favorite shows, and although I enjoy the earlier season shows, I am looking forward to new episodes. The toughest acting job must be Tealk ( not sure how they spell it) - that guy walks around the entire show with a disgusting look on his face. However, the witty humor of the O'neil really adds to the show.

Kick ass

[ChrisJones]

Very happy to see this :)

SG-1 is definitely the best Sci-Fi on TV at the moment, so more of it is definitely a good thing!

Re:Easy

[Twirlip of the Mists]

That's not what you said. You said that cooperation is better than competition. Shall I quote you? You said, "Competition works to a point, but cooperativeness works much better." Then you said, "Fucking grow up you worthless slimebags!" which really made me excited about talking to you.

Now, as for governments and corporations, let's see what we have here. When governments compete, we send men to the moon. The "space race" was essentially a competition between the US and the USSR, and because of it both parties accomplished things that they had not been able to accomplish without that incentive. When governments cooperate-- to choose a comparable example-- you end up with bloated, bureaucratic ballyhoos like the European Space Agency and the International Space Station. Not exactly putting a man on the moon, is it?

And as for corporations... cooperation among corporations is usually called collusion, and it's almost always criminal. Competition between corporations yields better products and services made available on the open market at lower prices to the consumer, whether the consumer be individuals like you and me or other corporations.

Competition is better than cooperation.

Re:grumble grumble grumble - shut up lucky bastard

[isorox]

In the worst episode ever

Drop new age mysticism.

[Martin S.]

This used to be excellent, with proper stories for each episode, each series and the whole arch, decent plot development, proper character development and decent plot turns. However it all started going down hill when they introduced all the new age mysticism junk, when Daniel Jackson 'transcended'.

Re:Drop new age mysticism.

[penguintv]

The drop in quality, at least for some of us, began in season 4, when characters such as Anise/Freya were introduced, Sam had a ratty hairdo, and Sam and Jack declared feelings for each other. It was also the season of death - they began bumping off recurring characers like Martouf (which made Sam available for Jack) and Rothman. Then, the show was going to conclude at the end of season five, but the fans rallied and asked for it back, but Michael Shanks decided not to re-up, and then we got stuck with Jonas, the character with, well, no character. Bugs Bunny has more personality and he's a cartoon! Plus season six began retreading plots from movies (such as "A beautiful mind" to name just one). It's become preditable, and at times, downright boring. When Jack is bored to tears, imagine how the audience feels? Unless they get new writers, season seven will be more of the same, and it will probably tank.

SWEEEEEEEEEET!!!!!!

[Minter92]

Best Sci Fi show on television in a long long time. MacGyver with Guns nothing can beat that. /me does a dance a joy.

Re:So, is there a current season? Where?

[penguintv]

SciFi has yanked repeats of season six for the time being so fans will concentrate on the repeats of seasons 1-4 on Monday nights. It probably helps any new fans who will wonder why is Daniel in one episode,and Jonas in another. Season five is running in syndication on Fox. Seasons 1-4 will syndicate on SciFi. I hate to say this but smart fans will buy seasons 1-2 on DVD because SciFi DOES edit the episodes. Shame.

They are Behind

[Herkum01]

The should start producing version 8 instead of 7, they would not want to be behind MSN!

As if anything could be worse than Andromeda!

[The_THOMAS]

I didn't think it possible but yes, Firefly is worse than Andromeda. It seems when you here a show being hawked as, "...from the creators of..." something good, the show will suck.

Politically Correct -- can we retire this term?

[ianscot]

Enterprise is so politically correct I can barely bring myself to watch it,

People use "politically correct" to mean just about anything they want to now, so can we come up with some variations that actually mean something again?

Every time I've seen "Enterprise" it's done a stupid "Perhaps one day we'll have a... a 'directive' to use in interacting with new civilizations..." thing that makes me just cringe, it's so predictable. It makes the history of the Federation look pat and boring. It's not that great a show, okay.

But "politically correct"? What does that mean? Does that mean the vulcan woman isn't wearing her form-fitting uniform any more? I have no idea. Basically the only meaning it has any more has to do with the person who says it, not the noun it's modifying...

It's all been down-hill since B5...

[fzammett]

Just kidding.

Stargate has a lot going for it (excellent chatacter development, self-consistent stories and technologies, some actual creativity on the writing staff!)

As does Firefly (some of the best dialogue on TV this side of The West Wing, a captain with some balls, BABES!).

Enterprise manages a good show every now and again (T'Pol's grandmother episode, Shuttlepod I, the season one cliffhanger, the one where they had to wake Phlox up to work on Mayweather).

Farscape was just odd beyond words most of the time, which I loved (but it had some real dudes mixed in, let's be honest).

But Babylon 5 was just magnificent storytelling.

All you people that think the conclusion of the Shadow War was a let-down, YOU DIDN'T GET IT. I felt the exact same way when I first saw it, then after a few days of thinking about it I realized just how brilliant it actually was. And how daring it was: No technobabble-of-the-week way to defeat the Shadows and the Vorlons, no temporal reset to make it all go away, no religious hero coming down from Heaven to save everyone's ass. It might not have been as glorious as some would have wanted, but it couldn't really have ended any other way, and that in and of itself makes it perfect.

I'll say this about Babylon 5: no other show or movie has ever made me care about certain characters the way it did. I mean, I was quite literally fighting back the tears when you see what happend to Londo in The Fall Of Centauri Prime. To have seen the evolution of that character (my God, the character development!) and how he finally wound up, you can't help but feel a profound sense of sadness at what he allowed to happen (not that he had a choice except death I suppose, but still...)

Stargate can't do it. Firefly won't. Farscape doesn't have the chance to any more, Enterprise... don't make me laugh!

The happiest day of my life will be three years from now when I have the entire B5 series on DVD sitting on my shelf. And the week I make my kids watch it with me, non-stop from start to finish, nothing will match it.

You have seen greatness, and you have not recognized it. Go watch Survivor: Iraq or The Batchelor 163... you don't deserve to watch Babylon 5!

Re:Easy

[Twirlip of the Mists]

I'm not too worried. People like you tend not to get mod points.

Re:Easy

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Knock yourself out, friend. It'd be nice to get un-stuck from the karma cap once in a while.

OT: Americans Deserve All

[godscent]

(I won't say Americans, since the US is not the only country on this continent)

America is not a continent. North America is a continent. South America is a seperate continent. Generally, "America" is used as a shorter way of saying "the United States of America." Just as "China" is a shorter way of saying, "the People's Republic of China."

So while it's ok to say "people from the People's Republic of China," or "people from the United States of America," most people will probably continue to say "Chinese" and "Americans." And they're right, too.

Sorry for the off topicness.

Trekkie Spawn

[meehawl]

The happiest day of my life will be three years from now when I have the entire B5 series on DVD sitting on my shelf. And the week I make my kids watch it with me, non-stop from start to finish, nothing will match it.

You know, karma and kids being what they are, your kids are going to grow up to be hardcore Trekkies, and probably Renaissance Faire wibbly eared elf lovers as well.

Re:Trekkie Spawn

[fzammett]

I love it! Your probably 100% dead-on!

Fortunately, I'm a big ST fan as well... I had my wife make TNG uniforms for my son and I when he was two for Halloween. I had to settle for ST uniforms because she was able to come up with the pattern off the web from images she found, but the B5 Army Of Light uniforms, my first choice, were just too involved for her to make in time.

Geez, I never realized exactly how sad that actually is until I typed it! 'scue me while I go stick my finger in a socket for an extended period...

Other Andromeda horror stories...

[WCLPeter]

You also forgot the recent episode where Dylan and crew end up on the Beleraphon (sp?) fighting the Ogami. The scene where Dylan is helping the Captain repell the invasion, talk about long.

The bloody scene lasted almost the entire length between the commercial breaks. Endless shots of Dylan jumping through the air shooting at Ogami, ducking under Ogami fire and taking them out from around corners. The small amount of dialouge that *was* there basically consisted of "Watch Out!", "Thanks for saving my ass!", "Whoah!!! Who's the babe!!!" and other such tripe.

Okay, okay, I'm paraphrasing quite a bit here, but I was starting to fall asleep; pretty explosions can only hold your attention for a short time. ;-)

I guess this is what they meant by this season being more 'action' oriented. It's a shame. The show was never "Excellent" but it didn't totally suck either. It had some interesting ideas and the concept had promise if excecuted right.

Yet so far this season, every episode has had some kind of excessive action sequence where Dylan is fighting against a number of bad guys, by himself no less, or with someone who is essentially innefectual; that in the end really served no purpose other than fill time and/or Kevin Sorbo's ego.

As I watch this show I have to wonder just what the hell Sorbo was thinking when he thought that *this* is what people want to see. I agree with the guy above, this show is quickly turing into "Hercules: The Space Journeys".

What's next? Lucy Lawless showing up as "Xendromeda" the evil High Guard warship who, in retaliation for The Fall, Nova Bomed a number of Nietzschean solar systems. Then after a rousing guilt tripping speach from Dylan she suddenly feels oh so guilty about it and devotes her life to making amends for her sins.

Or how about this for a really interesting plot twist. That big old "Scary God of the Magogg" is really good old Ares in disguise. ;-) /* LOL */

I used to watch it on Showtime

[pair-a-noyd]

but when they moved to the Sci-Fi channel I quit watching it.

I hate the Sci-Fi channel. They USED to be good but they have too much LOW RENT CRAP on there now and so damn many commercials that you forget what you where watching!

they should have a "To be Continued" tag just before every commercial break. Damn, they run 45 minutes of commercials for a one hour program and you get 15 minutes of program. Just what hits the cutting room floor we may never know, but *I* know that I have been turned off to the Sci-Fi channel by Billy Mays yelling at me and trashy sluts trying to coax me into calling a 1-900-get-alife number for a special hot date with the girl of my dreams, please have your credit card ready!

Season 7 up in air

[penguintv]

Apparently the producer who spoke at a recent UK convention spoke out of turn. No xmas bonus for him! :( http://tv.zap2it.com/news/tvnewsdaily.html?28661

Last Post!

[alpg]

The instruments of science do not in themselves discover truth. And there are
searchings that are not concluded by the coincidence of a pointer and a mark.
-- Fred Saberhagen, "The Berserker Wars"

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...