PDA

View Full Version : Always a successful mission - Good or bad?



Feli
April 27th, 2004, 10:11 AM
In the audio commentary to Revisions Martin Wood talks about the fact that SG-1 never really screw up and that he would have liked to not have a happy ending for Red Sky.

What's your opinion? Should SG-1 fail every now and then? Does there always have to be a happy ending? Can't a show that's been successful for seven seasons now be allowed to show its heroes lose a major battle? Or are the minor screw ups that often happen enough?

For illustration; a minor screw up is the ending of Learning Curve - Jack can't save Merrin from her fate but at least the children are treated decently in the end. A major screw up would have been if the planet from Red Sky had been destroyed.

Shipperahoy
April 27th, 2004, 10:15 AM
I'm a happily ever after type person so I don't really want to see them screw up a mission big time. I think there have been enough small issues that have arisen as consequences of their previous missions to show that it's not all sunshine and roses. Like the Gou'ald attacking the protected planet after they destroyed Thor's Hammer and their lack of follow up caused problems in Double Jeopardy etc.

David
April 27th, 2004, 10:55 AM
I think there are episodes that showed how the team failed. Perhaps not at the very end, but they certainly met irredeemable consequences.

Heroes II
The Sentinel

to name a couple off the top of my head.

Madeleine
April 29th, 2004, 12:55 PM
Scorched Earth was nearly a screw-up ep, but got changed. I'd have liked to see an alternative ending on the DVD; good as that ep ended up I did find the bittersweet original idea very interesting.

Beast of Burden was one where Daniel in particular messed up, and knew it right after every bad decision he made. At the end he couldn't make it right, only less wrong. It was a really good ep, and served Daniel's story-arc well at the time.

Other times there are huge missed opportunities. Memento, for instance:

Teal'c & Jonas - "Your God is a fraud, and you have dedicated your life to a falsehood."

Loyal Worshipper - "Oh. Well. Nice weather for it"

Hmmm. That could have been a fascinating starting-point for allsorts.

I like to be surprised by happy endings as well as by sad endings. If the default option is Success, then it's a good thing to not use default too often, to keep things unexpected. Over seven years, on balance Stargate succeeds.

GateGipsy
April 30th, 2004, 08:47 AM
With the original ending of Scorched Earth - where the Enkarrens are saved at the cost of the Gadmeer - wouldn't have been a screw up. I think that if there had been no other choice whatsoever then, and only then, we should have chosen in favour of the Enkarrens. True, the absolute right thing to do if looked at utterly objectively would have been to save the Gadmeer race. But it wasn't an objective, rational desicion to make. In the end, we would have had to come down in favour of the Enkarrens, because we knew them, had made friends with them, and could emotionally relate to them.

What about the ending to The Other Side? Could that be seen as a 'screw up', knowingly allowing someone to die, no matter how bad we knew they were?

Skydiver
April 30th, 2004, 09:06 AM
red sky would have been so much better, in my opinion, had it not been a happy ending.

I always imagined it as earth trying to evac them, finally falling back on 'hey, freyr said to follow us' but they ignore jack & co, because they just got done telling the g'tau that freyr is a fraud.

sg-1 goes home, opens the gate weeks/months later to find everyone dead....and they died not just because of what sam did, but because sg-1 destroyed their faith by debunking their gods. earth playing god killed a planet.

imho, it would have been much more dramatic than the 'gee, happily ever after'

No, i'm not saying that every eps should end on a down note, but in this case, it would have been far more dramatic rather than cliche

bcmilco
April 30th, 2004, 10:34 PM
I love to see an episode every once in a while were the good guys loose. It's a nice reminder that we're all fallible and that sometimes no matter how hard we try we can't always fix everything.

Feli
May 1st, 2004, 02:37 AM
I love to see an episode every once in a while were the good guys loose. It's a nice reminder that we're all fallible and that sometimes no matter how hard we try we can't always fix everything.
My thoughts exactly! I'd especially like to see how our characters deal with such an occurence afterwards.

Apophis
May 1st, 2004, 08:09 AM
Failure does happen on occasion, think about Full Circle. Anubis gets the eye of Ra and destroys Abydos. Futhermore as a consequence of Daniel attempting to stop him he is desended (is that the right word?). :rolleyes:

Nurgle
May 1st, 2004, 08:57 AM
There have been a few screwups over the years... the one where they sabatage the meeting between Apophis and Her-ur (however the hell you spell it) didn't go exactly to plan, and in fact made things worse.

Putting Ba'al incharge of the force against Anubis didn't go too well either...

And then of course theres the time O'Neill spent as a Tok'ra. Probably could have turned out better...

bcmilco
May 1st, 2004, 09:58 AM
My thoughts exactly! I'd especially like to see how our characters deal with such an occurence afterwards.

Yes that would be great! :)

David
May 1st, 2004, 10:01 AM
Unfortunately SG-1 is known for killing the show right after the climax. If I ever have a word with Peter DeLuise and the rest of the gang I will bring that up.

Skydiver
May 1st, 2004, 10:03 AM
Failure does happen on occasion, think about Full Circle. Anubis gets the eye of Ra and destroys Abydos. Futhermore as a consequence of Daniel attempting to stop him he is desended (is that the right word?). :rolleyes:


true. but that is about the only consequence we see to Anubis getting his death star. Daniel's decision was great for the short term, but really wasn't that good in the long run. And there really were no consequences beyond fallen and homecoming, not even a mention that anubis had been using his super weapon to attack other planets or the such.

There were no real consequences to the people of Abydos, they were all ascended and are living happily ever after in glowville.

It's not totally the writer's fault, Full Circle was originally supposed to lead into Lost City, however both stories were weakened a bit by the need to stick 20 more episodes between them.

keshou
May 1st, 2004, 10:13 AM
I think it provides for powerful drama when the good guys don't always win and even more when they screw up. This series is set in present day and let's face it, we screw up all the time in dealing with other cultures, even here on Earth. I still want SG-1 to be the good guys, just not perfect. :)

I would have loved to have seen them not be able to "fix" things in Red Sky, been forced to made a choice in Scorched Earth. Full Circle would have been a much better episode if all the inhabitants of Abydos hadn't been ascended. Sure it would have been sad but it would have been interesting to see SG-1 (and the descended Daniel) dealing with that tragedy. When they do make mistakes, there doesn't seem to be much fallout from them. [Edited to add: oops, posting at same time as Skydiver, she made the same point about Full Circle, much better than I did!]

I think Brad Wright is good at writing ambivalent endings (Unnatural Selection and Lifeboat) that don't always have all the loose ends tied up with a pretty bow at the end. That's one of the reasons I always look forward to a Brad Wright episode.

Ace
May 1st, 2004, 12:08 PM
I would like to see them screw up everyone once and awhile...they are only human. Well 3/4ths of them are! :) I'm sure Jaffa screw up too. It would probably cause some major controversy though, just as in Unnatural Selection when there was a huge debate on whether or not Jack did the right thing.

I personally believed he did, but I know others did not. That kind of screw up I thought was great, though I guess technically it wasn't a screw up. However I would have enjoyed the alternate ending in Red Sky, where the planet couldn't have been saved.

Ace

bcmilco
May 1st, 2004, 01:07 PM
Unnatural Selection was the episode that made me sit up and take notice of SG-1! I really liked it alot I liked the fact that the good guys didn't have a clear cut victory and they had moral issues to look at.

Those little things make the show and the characters so much more real to me.

aAnubiSs
May 1st, 2004, 01:26 PM
I'd like an episode where the SGC finds a lonely Ha'tak. Several SG-teams and their allies are dispatched to recover it, only to find out a System Lord also found the Ha'tak and wants it. a Huge firefight takes place and they end up playing hide and seek on the Ha'tak, only after both sides taking heavy losses. This goes on and ends up with all but one SGC-member dead to report back that the System Lord was able to take the Ha'tak.

Then we would see that Ha'tak attack a nearby planet.

Fade out

The End.

// aAnubiS & IfYouWantTo.

spg_1983
May 1st, 2004, 03:54 PM
I don't think that they do have succesful missions all the time. Look at the number of times that they barely get out with their lives and dont get the tech that they were after. Those are failed missions. "Red Sky" wasnt a failed mission but a serious screw up. The mission was to go to the planet, which they accomplished but it had bad side effects. I think the writers do a good job of balancing the number of times they succeed on their missions and the number of times they fail. As far as on going story arcs i think it would be noce to see them lose every now and again byt as far as individual episodes go i think they do a great job of making sure they don't succeed or fail to often.

Sparki101
May 2nd, 2004, 04:48 AM
I like the characters to have their pedestall yoinked from under them with great zeal and bringing them down a notch or two. I love bittersweet endings, where unanswered questions are debated for hours afterwards. So yeah, I think it is a good thing to have an episode with the hero's not winning or where the victory is hollow. It makes the episode stand out from the rest and it gives the characters more depth.

omnian
May 2nd, 2004, 05:03 AM
I'd love to see more episodes that have unhappy endings. I mean, everything nowadays has a happy ending and it just annoys me! There are only a few episodes with relatively sad endings like Divide and Conquer where Martouf dies and there's Heroes Part 2 obviously.......

There should be more cliffhangers too....I like those.

angsty_otaku
May 2nd, 2004, 07:16 AM
i really want to see them screw up...they look like the golden team where everything goes right because they're so perfect yadda yadda...it makes the show less believable (because the show is quite believable in the first place...right >.<...hey you never know ^_^;;) but all creatures make errors and it's time that TPTB create a situation where something does go wrong and everything is not all perfect...and yeah... >.< i ramble eh?

spg_1983
May 2nd, 2004, 09:01 AM
i really want to see them screw up...they look like the golden team where everything goes right because they're so perfect yadda yadda...it makes the show less believable (because the show is quite believable in the first place...right >.<...hey you never know ^_^;;) but all creatures make errors and it's time that TPTB create a situation where something does go wrong and everything is not all perfect...and yeah... >.< i ramble eh?
well like was said earlier isnt that what "Red Sky" was? In the end the asgard bailed us out but i would definately have called that a screw up and a failure. SG-1 didnt reacha solution and the whole planet was gonna die. the problem i think with having them do something too seriously bad is the questions it raises. example. say that the asgard hadnt bailed us out and there wasnt a happy ending to "Red Sky" if all those people died then i think the SGC and the viewers would start to question whether we should be going off world. If we are destroying planets in our own quest to save ourselves then are we really any better than the goa'uld? are we willing to become like the goa'uld to save ourselves? thats why i like episodes like "Red Sky" and "One False Step" because they actually show how reckless our gallavanting across the galaxy is and it makes us the viewers think about it and the the team think about it but it still has a happy ending and innocents arent hurt. If tptb are going to write episodes that genuinley(sp?) fail (and not like i said in my earlier post where they just fail to get the tech they were after) then they have to do it in a way where the consequences effect us but not innocents, otherwise, like i said we are no better than the goa'uld.

Crazedwraith
May 2nd, 2004, 09:03 AM
Thye do screw up. Alot. Well maybe it's just that i've been watching my brand spanking new season 1 box set.

The Nox- they go to recover invisble creatures, they don't.They try to capture Apophsis, THEY DIE. End result: they din't get the tech and can't ever go back to the planet.

Bloodlines- They go to get a symbiote to study and stop ry'ac beig implanted they fail at both objectives.

Lets not forget the many many misisons were entire SG teams die and SG-1 and/or Earth are put in perill for absoutly no gain. Zilch. nadda. none. nowt.

spg_1983
May 2nd, 2004, 09:10 AM
Thye do screw up. Alot. Well maybe it's just that i've been watching my brand spanking new season 1 box set.

The Nox- they go to recover invisble creatures, they don't.They try to capture Apophsis, THEY DIE. End result: they din't get the tech and can't ever go back to the planet.

Bloodlines- They go to get a symbiote to study and stop ry'ac beig implanted they fail at both objectives.

Lets not forget the many many misisons were entire SG teams die and SG-1 and/or Earth are put in perill for absoutly no gain. Zilch. nadda. none. nowt.
exactly! every time they go through the gate and get into trouble and then get out with just their lives is a failed mission. if every mission was a succses than the SGC and Area 51 would be overwhelmed with alien tech and not have enough places to put it. since that is not the case i think its safe to asume that the majority of SG teams missions are failures. since one of their primary missions is to find new tech to defend themselves, even every time a team goes off world and nothing happens and they dont find anything useful than that is technically a mission failure and would officially be reported as such.

DarkQuee1
May 2nd, 2004, 02:31 PM
We seem to be talking about two different things: the team's screw-ups, and the writers'. SE was screwed up by the writers. It was fine until the last ten minutes, when--in order to give us a happy ending--we get the proverbial "rabbit out of the hat" ("Oooh, look, we have only ten seconds before the Enkarrans are destroyed and I've just happened to find the perfect planet among 400 billion stars.") and changed the rules they'd set up at the beginning (we had a time problem: the Enkarrans could not be gathered in time. A problem that goes away if they stop the darn process long enough to fly the entire population to another planet).
the only character screw-up--Daniel's helping Lotan to destroy the bomb and thus, if the new planet wasn't found, leaving them without a defense--gets nullified by the happy ending paste-on.

The problem is not that we haven't seen screw-ups; the problem is that we haven't had sufficient consequences for the screw-ups. Red Sky is an example, as is BOB (Daniel really does help start a war at the end, one that's going to get very nasty)--the events of BOB get brushed away as of no consequence in EM (which had a screw-up of its own that will probably never be addressed, as it probably made it clear that the audience isn't looking for Unas stories).

Two episodes that do show consequences for a screw-up are "Thor's Hammer" and "Thor's Chariot."

SPOILERS AHEAD FOR SEASON 7 & 8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
And we apparently will see some consequences from Unnatural Selection in New Order.

J.

bcmilco
May 2nd, 2004, 03:01 PM
The problem is not that we haven't seen screw-ups; the problem is that we haven't had sufficient consequences for the screw-ups.

Yes, that's exactly how I feel! :)

ShadowMaat
May 2nd, 2004, 03:11 PM
I like happy endings as much as the next person, but I value good storytelling more. I also think that having SG-1 fail once in a while makes them a little more human, and I am definitely all for that. If the Good Guy always wins, every time, it gets a little boring. Throwing in a few failures keeps up the mystery- you'll never know HOW things are going to end and you can't smugly sit back and assume everyone will live Happily Ever After. Real life isn't like that and TV should reflect that. Not constantly all the time, but just once in a while... as a reminder. I think it enhances the storytelling process and opens up new threads of possibility.

spg_1983
May 2nd, 2004, 03:29 PM
I like happy endings as much as the next person, but I value good storytelling more. I also think that having SG-1 fail once in a while makes them a little more human, and I am definitely all for that. If the Good Guy always wins, every time, it gets a little boring. Throwing in a few failures keeps up the mystery- you'll never know HOW things are going to end and you can't smugly sit back and assume everyone will live Happily Ever After. Real life isn't like that and TV should reflect that. Not constantly all the time, but just once in a while... as a reminder. I think it enhances the storytelling process and opens up new threads of possibility.
but the thing is they do fail all the time, just not on the really big on going story arcs.
"The Nox" : they were supposed to go and capture one of the flying critters: failed and alienated the nox

"Thor's Hammer" : they were supposed to go through and make contact with the asgard : failed and destroyed the hammer leaving cimmeria open to invasion, so they are directly responsible for the death of kendra and all the others that were killed, including gairwyns husband and brothers

"Spirits" : they were supposed to go through and find SG-11 and get the trinium : not only did the fail to get the trinium they brought back aliens impersonating SG-11 who then got all through the base

"One False Step" : the SGC nearly wipes out an entire race of a planet : not technically a failure since their mission was to go through and retrieve the downed UAV which they did

"New Ground" " the team goes to make contact with the advanced humans : failed and got themselves captured

"The Serpents Venom" : the team is to prevent the alliance of Apophis and Heru'ur : failed stopped the alliance sort of but aided apophis to becoming more powerful than ever

this is just a partial list ill come up with more later

ShadowMaat
May 2nd, 2004, 04:41 PM
Yeah, but I WANT them to fail on some of the big cases. ;) Not catastrophically, but just enough to bring them- and us- down a few pegs.

spg_1983
May 2nd, 2004, 05:58 PM
Yeah, but I WANT them to fail on some of the big cases. ;) Not catastrophically, but just enough to bring them- and us- down a few pegs.
the problem is that if they failed on the really big big cases the repurcussions, while interesting would end the show. any time earth was in direct danger of being destroyed or invaded, if they had failed it would have ended the show and that would suck

ShadowMaat
May 2nd, 2004, 06:22 PM
The big stories don't always involve Earth being in direct mortal peril. I just think that it'd be interesting to see what happened. Maybe you're right and it wouldn't work, but I'm still curious. :p

LtLisa
May 2nd, 2004, 08:25 PM
not to mention the mortality rate of the average SG team. and aliens...just look at how many people die in each episode. I agree that the ascension thing in Full Circle weakened the power of that episode; I would've been more affected by all of them dying. The only one I could see ascending (as something believable) was Ska'ra.

Hubble
May 2nd, 2004, 08:53 PM
The problem is not that we haven't seen screw-ups; the problem is that we haven't had sufficient consequences for the screw-ups.


Exactly. I'd like to see them have to deal with the consequences of some of the decisions they've made, either collectively or individually.

Jordan

ShadowMaat
May 3rd, 2004, 03:37 AM
The problem is not that we haven't seen screw-ups; the problem is that we haven't had sufficient consequences for the screw-ups.

Must've missed this before. Yes. Maybe that's the problem. SG-1 does get away with screwing up, but they never have to pay the price for their mistakes. "Oops, we destroyed your atmosphere. Good luck! Quick, Daniel, dial us home!"

I'm not a very nice person, so maybe I just want to see the team suffer. http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/scorchio/sevil.gif

Mr Prophet
May 3rd, 2004, 05:29 AM
I agree that they do fail from time to time, but as well as the consequences of their failures, I'd like to see more episodes in which they get honestly beaten.

Successful enemies have to walk a fine line between two questions: "How are you still alive?" and "Why haven't you killed them yet?" The sheer size of space and the multitude of concerns facing all parties allows plenty of room for some of the major System Lords to score definitive victories every once in a while without wondering why they haven't finished the job, so I'd like to see that every now and then.

jenniferhailey
May 3rd, 2004, 08:53 AM
I guess Stargate is and always has been more of a "how are they going to get out of this mess" show rather than a "are they going to get out of this mess" show.

But I'd like to see them screw up a little more, and not be able to fix it for once. It creates more angst. Angst be good. :D :D Especially the Sam variety, cause she rocks.

Mr Prophet
May 3rd, 2004, 10:23 AM
But I'd like to see them screw up a little more, and not be able to fix it for once. It creates more angst. Angst be good. :D :D Especially the Sam variety, cause she rocks.

Ah yes, pain. Always time for a little pain.

Of course, having said all this, I'm not sure many of my fanfics end in untriumphant (is that a word) circumstances, but they do quite frequently have a lot of pain.

Anubis
May 3rd, 2004, 10:26 AM
I think that in season eight they should really screw up at least once. If SG-1 is to be a 3-person team then perhaps without O'Neill they aren't as a strong team. It can be disappointing that it always ends up with Earth winning yet another battle so maybe the Wraith in Atlantis should kick some butt

ShadowMaat
May 3rd, 2004, 10:56 AM
I think that in season eight they should really screw up at least once. If SG-1 is to be a 3-person team then perhaps without O'Neill they aren't as a strong team.

OK, that I patently disagree with. If they're going to fail, they're going to fail as a team, not because the Almighty Jack isn't there to Save the Day. Setting it up that way just leaves it wide open for vindicating all the Sam-bashers who think Sam is incompetent and "She's going to get them all killed!" and "She isn't capable of command!" and many much less polite things...

crono2004
May 3rd, 2004, 12:12 PM
There are plenty of unhappy endings, i.e Janet's death, Martouf dying, those were all pretty unhappy if you ask me, but i think the occasionay bad ending is needed and not happy all the time, and the show has done a great job of keeping this balance so far

angsty_otaku
May 3rd, 2004, 12:34 PM
well yes there are eps. where it shows some bad effects of what going around in the stargate has done around the galaxy. but the thing is, sg-1 almost always fixes it and things turns out for the best. there are a few exceptions like in season 7...and D&C in season 4 (?) and the other side (season 4)but for the most part it's find someplace where everything basically sucks (like under goa'uld rule or some other hideous tyrant, or some disease has struck etc...) and then save the people from whatever is ailing them... >.<

thorshammer
May 15th, 2005, 01:50 PM
I like the unsuccesful missions because you never expect it. So if they always win its not as entertiaing.

Ote_4_T
May 15th, 2005, 07:02 PM
We need to have like half of the read being downhill and then need to gid out of the whole by our selves rather than geting help from our allys. Ok i'm done.

SimilarCadence
May 15th, 2005, 07:29 PM
I think that in season eight they should really screw up at least once. If SG-1 is to be a 3-person team then perhaps without O'Neill they aren't as a strong team. It can be disappointing that it always ends up with Earth winning yet another battle so maybe the Wraith in Atlantis should kick some butt

You got your wish as far as Season 8 goes----
Spoiler for season 8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
"Gemini" delivered big time in the unsuccessful "missions" department, with major repercussions.......

ApophisOfTheStargateRealm
May 15th, 2005, 09:02 PM
the only thing is earth is at stake...i cant wait for them to expose the whole sg-1 project to the public...

MarshAngel
May 16th, 2005, 06:55 AM
I agree with the statement that it's the lack of consequences thats the real problem but part of the problem is that when SG1 escapes their screwups by the skin of their teeth they don't often go back to check up on what happened after... at least on screen.

Since most of the situations seem to be life or death it seems the ultimate consequence would be for a team member to die, and that happens sometimes. Except for Janet however, they usually come back.

To explore all the stories that they want and create a story arc for the season some episodes exploring the consequences of their actions would undoubtedly have to be eliminated. I think the writers also operate under that the assumption that when a millitary team goes through the gate losses are expected and therefore, not always noteworthy.

Another possibility is that at this point we've come to expect a certain level of competence from SG1 that major screwups on their part seem out of character. Prime Example is Gemini. Sam screwed up big time and it was completely out of character. If they hadn't managed to save the day... end of series as it too often is.

Believer
May 16th, 2005, 09:17 AM
If every mission went as planned, and everyone came home, safe and sound, how long do you think the series would have run? A year? Two?

Macharius0
May 19th, 2005, 10:45 AM
I think it can now be said that SG-1 isn't always successful in their missions. Thankfully they have built themselves such a legacy that they will always be able to bank on their overwhelming coolness, to lessen the fallout from some of their greater failures.

Nurgle
May 19th, 2005, 11:30 AM
What about "Icon"... they were responsible for millions (if not billions) of deaths... that can't be undone, even if it did have a vaguely happy ending.

Ancient 1
May 19th, 2005, 12:49 PM
I think all the minor screw-ups are enough for now. Remember that of all the alternate realities, we are one of the few that the Goa'uld havent taken over. A major screw up or failure could mean the end of the world as we know it. :D
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v321/7of9/violent041.gif

SG-1ssm
May 19th, 2005, 07:37 PM
I vote for minor scvrew ups halfthe time and at lest 1 major 1 once a season

Pharaoh Atem
July 16th, 2006, 06:22 PM
for 8 years SG-1 for the most part has already come out of a mission with no problems.

but i think for those who saw season 9 and flesh and blood that things have changed SG-1 is getting there donkeys kicked by the ori and
season 9 and flesh and blood spoiler
the body count jump to a all time record in Beachhead Ethon and Camelot alone and as we find out in flesh and blood culak is under the control of the ori

so i think it's safe to say that for the time being successful mission are not something the fans should take for granted anymore.

the fifth man
July 16th, 2006, 06:29 PM
for 8 years SG-1 for the most part has already come out of a mission with no problems.

but i think for those who saw season 9 and flesh and blood that things have changed SG-1 is getting there donkeys kicked by the ori and
season 9 and flesh and blood spoiler
the body count jump to a all time record in Beachhead Ethon and Camelot alone and as we find out in flesh and blood culak is under the control of the ori

so i think it's safe to say that for the time being successful mission are not something the fans should take for granted anymore.

And personally, I like that. It's refreshing to see things not going so well for our heroes right now. Even though, in the end, we know they'll end up prevailing against the Ori somehow, I feel there will be many more losses along the way. Serious losses.

Pharaoh Atem
July 16th, 2006, 06:30 PM
And personally, I like that. It's refreshing to see things not going so well for our heroes right now. Even though, in the end, we know they'll end up prevailing against the Ori somehow, I feel there will be many more losses along the way. Serious losses. like cameron said there need a new plan..... a damn good one

the fifth man
July 16th, 2006, 06:38 PM
like cameron said there need a new plan..... a damn good one

No doubt there.:) I just think it will take them awhile to come up with a plan that really works against the Ori and their forces. In the meantime though, it should make for some interesting viewing.

Annubis' hitman
July 18th, 2006, 11:45 AM
This is part of the reason i like the new ori story arc. We dont always win. I think us losing adds a whole new dimension to the show and i believe that we should have a couple of bad missions along the way.