Slashdot Mirror
Stargate Atlantis Coming This Summer
boog3r writes "According to this and SCIFI there is a new Stargate series on its way to your local passive viewing device this summer. Quickie for all the click-deficient types: "In the new series, a secret base left by the originators of the Stargate is discovered in the most unlikely of places -- on Earth, buried among the ruins of the legendary city of Atlantis." Sounds fun to me! I found more info here and here. Take these tidbits with a grain of salt, much misinformation about the new series is circulating right now. I just hope this great franchise does not go the way of Star Trek, post Roddenberry."
And drown at the bottom of the ocean?
Count me out!
I have been pwned because my
It's much more watchable than most of the rubbish that seems to come out of Paramount's Star Trek franchise these days. I find Enterprise totally unwatchable and couldn't even be bothered to see the last film in the cinemas. I made the right decision too, cos the DVD was a major dissapointment.
That said, I think Stargate has become too sciency/technical. Did anyone else prefer it when all the technology like the Gates themselves were much more mystical and incomprehensible? Somehow, talking about Gates and DHDs in terms of lines of software code, mathematical equations and matter dematerialisation doesn't seem quite as mystical as the original movie and the earlier episodes, where much of it was still based in Egyption mythology and the technology seemed more magical (neither human nor Goa'uld understanding how it really worked) rather than increasingly Trek-like technobabble descriptions of how things work.
I will, of course, be watching Atlantis as Stargate and its spin-offs are still some of the most watchable sci-fi about at the moment. I just wouldn't have taken it in quite the same direction if it were left up to me.
No thanks, I've pretty much ignored anything from the network that killed Farscape so that it could pay for Tremors: The Series.
SG-1 is one of my favorite shows these days. That and the Simpsons are about the only shows I watch other than the News and Jay Leno. I've missed about 3 seasons while I was in college, but making it up when I catch a show in sydication now and then. One thing that made SG-1 cool was it was actually orginial. Sure, same old sci-fi themes, but the casting was a good mix and the writing has generally been fair as well. Richard Dean Anderson's character was a complete departure from the movie, but his character is pretty funny.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
Yeah, thanks for contributing to this discussion. Not.
SG-1 is amongst the better sci-fi productions being made right now. The show's not perfect by any means, but for the most part it's well-written, well-acted and great viewing. The storylines and the on-screen chemistry of the team are second to none at the moment: I'd rather watch SG-1 than the dirge that is Enterprise any day of the week.
If it's not to your taste then I don't really care. Plenty of people disagree with you.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
The thing I like about Stargate:SG1 is that it is relatively sensible about its science and proceedures - these people really act more like military people than certain other shows I could name.
However, this sounds suspiciously like we might be calling upon the services of Bruce the Shark fairly soon - will somebody help me set up the ramps?
www.eFax.com are spammers
Because the poster is worried that the series may have a significant drop in quality due to bad producer decisions, much like what happened to ST after G. Roddenberry was no longer in direct creative control (which started happening shortly before he passed). Many ST fans felt that the ST franchise tried to become over-techie ("Jordions") and derivative after that.
... if you want to continue a franchise, why don't you go buy FireFly and kill off Atlantis, and anything similar to Tremors. It would be nice to have that series get their real conclusion and you might almost repair the damage done with Farscape's cancellation. Now -that- is an unrelated post.
It has nothing to do with the death of a creator, and the poster seems to have -liked- Roddenberry's direction for ST and disliked what happened after. In this case his passing is a milestone for show quality, much like we -may- be saying in 3-4 years about "boy I hope it's like Stargate -before- Atlantis".
Personally, I don't see why "Atlantis" would need to be another show. That's one of the things I like about SG1, it has handled the various twists and turns that other shows like to use as spinoffs -internally-. However, it seems pretty clear that the writers may be about to run out of steam based on this season. I like this season (last night being an exception) overall, but it a) HAS become more star trek-like in focus and b) I don't see where the logical conclusion of SG1 would go after this season if it wraps up the way it seems to be. In which case, all "Atlantis" would seem to me to be is a way to keep the franchise going after the first series is properly finished.
Hey SciFi
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
...in Stargate, that is a rather natural development. We've got this lots of wierdo alien tech, where the Stargate is just one, that we don't really understand, wouldn't there be a buzz like hell to figure out wtf all this really is? Whereas in Star Trek the "tech" is just part of the setting.
:D.
Human science would leap tremendously, once you know it *is* possible and can observe it rather than speculate. Most great scientific break-throughs aren't really that hard to replicate, once they've been discovered.
Yes, I admit in some ways it is changing the show. On the other hand, if it had stayed "Well we go through this gate, and then we're 4 people exploring ruins/blowing up aliens of the day" I imagine that'd be pretty worn out by now, at the end of the 7th season.
No matter what direction, the most important thing is direction. There's nothing I hate more than a series where you can miss 10 eps, and still be just where you left off, same everything. And to make Stargate work, they need bigger and worse enemies. And to do that, the SG crew need more and better tech. You can't fight for the fate of the universe with rifles and hand grenades, or at least not just that
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
That said, I think Stargate has become too sciency/technical. Did anyone else prefer it when all the technology like the Gates themselves were much more mystical and incomprehensible?
"Magic, in any sufficiently advanced show, is indistinguishable from technology." (Appologies to ACC)
Actually, I think what happens is that writers have to have some idea of what and how things work, in order to work with it consistently. Eventually, it works its way into the scripts.
We, as viewers, don't need to know how or why things work the way they do. It actually keeps things more interesting for us to be trying to figure it out. Unfortunately, that gets forgotten.
It's roughly analagous to seeing the monster in a horror movie: Less is more.
One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
Ummm, that is just wild speculation. As far as I know, the new series is set in another galaxy, on an offworld human base. I think the name has something to do with the new planet being the origins of the atlantis legend, several people have already been cast.
This is relatively old news. For more info check out:
http://www.sg1database.net/atlantis.html
Again this is AFAIK, I could be wrong
C17H21NO4
Richard Dean Anderson's character was a complete departure from the movie, but his character is pretty funny.
...a complete depature from MacGyver. I must honestly say that I never thought I'd be able to accept him as anything else but that - few people were so intesively connected to not only a character - but a specific trait of that personality - as him.
Pretty much all through the first season (at least), every time they were in a jam I somehow expected him to pull out a piece of string, some duct tape, sulfuric acid and a pocket knife to save the day. I think the role he plays is pretty much the only role he could play to make it work.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The main reason the more recent episodes of SG-1 have been less good (but still very enjoyable in my opinion) then the previous seasons is mainly because of Richard Dean Anderson (jack) being unwilling to spend as much time on the show, every season he says he wants to quit to spend more time with his daughter and every season they negotiate a nice package for him which means less work. IIRC he works about 3 days a week now which is why there are so many episodes that he barely appears in or in some cases doesn't appear in at all. In the next season of SG1 (season 8) rumour has it that he'll be in a more Hammond like position in charge of the SGC. Atlantis is obviously a way to not only expand the series but to get away from relying on RDA signing on every year.
If anyone cares Gateworld is a fantastic site for information on all things stargate.
In Soviet Russia Slashdot cliches use you
I suspect the reason you like the shows you do, is because the ones you like are what I call 'episodic television'. Bab5, DS9 and Farscape require that you see many more episodes to fully understand what is going on. Enterprise, Voyager and SG-1, for the most part, can stand on their own as single episodes.
Not that one is better than the other, I like all of those shows. My favorites are DS-9,SG-1,Farscape and Bab-5, in that order.
--fatboy
I'm not sure where this blanket statement (in the form of a question) is leading? It's funny that two assumptions are made in that one question too. The first being that SG-1 fans collectively give opinions regarding Star Trek. The second being that the Star Trek you refer to is Enterprise and not some other Star Trek series.
Personally, I am a huge SG-1 fan. I watch the episodes as they appear on television, and I own all the DVD box sets currently out. I watch Star Trek:TNG almost everyday and feel that it is one of the best science fiction shows ever produced. I really enjoyed Star Trek:Voyager when it was on and am looking forward to getting the DVD box sets. I like some of the characters on Star Trek:DSN, but as a whole, I didn't like to watch the show that often. The original Star Trek series introduced interesting plot devices, but just as the stereotype was set for William Shatner (Captain James T. Kirk), he really didn't contribute much in the way of acting like a real captain. He had his moments, but largely he acted like William Shatner on screen. Star Trek:Enterprise also has good plot devices and even sometimes a good story. The characters are still somewhat new, so I expect it will take a couple more years (just like Voyager) to form into something palatable for more people.
This circle is now complete.
Some people saw some glaring similarities between the original Stargate and Disney's Atlantis: The Lost Empire.
- Brilliant linguist has goofy theory and is reviled by the scientific community.
- Senior citizen contacts scientist to reveal that his theory was right all along.
- Scientist brought along as expert advisor for military expedition based on aforementioned theory.
- Strange world reached via a twisting tunnel.
- Scientist teased and tormented by expedition members.
- Expedition utterly reliant on scientist for salvation.
- Military expedition has a secret adgenda.
- Scientist falls for beautiful native.
- Glowing eyes.
- A symbol like an upper-case lambda features prominantly in the promotional material for each movie.
There are probably more I'm forgetting and of course the differences are significant, but it is very suspicious.
Don't blame me, I voted for Durga.
In the show:
There are two stargates on earth. one was lost in the antartic and a second one was built. (By the ancients, millions of years ago or something). Only one can be used to receive at any time since they have the same coordinate, but both can send. (There was an episode where the second gate gets stolen/misplaced by the military)
An overload on the circuits makes the incoming wormhole jump to the second stargate. (Used in the episode where they discover the second gate, O'Neill almost freezes to death in the Antartic. They finally figured out what was going on and fly out to rescue him. Also used in the stolen gate episode)
The addressing grid size seems to be large. In one episode Daniel is on a Goa'uld ship that is about to blow, looks out the window and sees earth, and realizes he's close enought that he can use earth as an origin point, so he survives by leaving through the gate. So, yes, the gate address is the same to earth orbit at least.
Actually, I should say there were two gates on earth. In one episode the Goa'uld find a way to overload earth's stargate to make it blow up. The Humans send the gate to outer space on a ship with a experimental hyper-drive, and it blows up. The anti-gate weapon is destroyed, and the SGC gets the second gate from the russians.
Yes, I'm a geek.
You guys just killed Stargate. Every time a SciFi show is mentioned here a cancellation notice follows within three months. Damn.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
I've known David professionally for a couple of years now and he doesn't get this excited over every job, so that's got me looking forward to checking out series. It doesn't hurt that I'm a fan of SG1 also.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
Kurt Russell is a big-name movie actor, he's not going to appear in a regular TV series. It was inevitable that both him and James Spader, another big-name movie actor, wouldn't appear in the spin-off TV series, just as it was inevitable that James Caan wouldn't appear in the spin-off TV series of Alien Nation.
I find it incredible that people seriously believe that getting an actor who's made it in movies (a medium within which an actor is better paid, less worked and more able to cherry pick his roles) would tie himself down to a TV show for one or more years. Sorry, but the real world just doesn't work that way.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
I love SG-1, and for the most part its better than the movie IMHO, but they have tried spinoffs already, and that makes me nervous. Anybody remember Stargate: Infinity? It was a very short lived saturday morning cartoon. Just terrible.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."