PDA

View Full Version : Stargate: The Original Movie



Major Tyler
September 25th, 2004, 07:12 PM
This thread is for discussion of the original "Stargate" movie.

Major Tyler
September 25th, 2004, 07:16 PM
Okay, when Daniel found Earth's gate address in the caves, he had all but the last symbol, and proclaimed that he could not get the gate to work without the last symbol. My question is, if the only symbol that they didn't know was the last one, why didn't they just try every remaining symbol until they got a lock? There would only be 25 or so symbols left, assuming symbols never repeat (which they don't). I'm surprised I haven't thought of it before.

WurdBendur
September 25th, 2004, 07:24 PM
I have no idea. I guess it's just another plot hole that makes it interesting. I never thought of it before, either.

Uncle Dick
September 25th, 2004, 08:24 PM
Okay, when Daniel found Earth's gate address in the caves, he had all but the last symbol, and proclaimed that he could not get the gate to work without the last symbol. My question is, if the only symbol that they didn't know was the last one, why didn't they just try every remaining symbol until they got a lock?
By that time, I think Ra had already landed and they couldn't have held the gate long enough to dial out anyway. When hiding from Ra in the caves, they found the seventh symbol and whole argument would have been rendered moot.

Additionally, the whole question of how exactly they managed to dial back to Earth (apparently) without the presense of a DHD remains murky. The novelization has Kawalsky manually dialling up the gate but from whence the power cometh, no one knows. It's unclear how the gate would react to a manual dial if the address inputed is incorrect. Reset might be impossible without a dialling computer or DHD.

Ananias
September 26th, 2004, 12:29 AM
Okay, when Daniel found Earth's gate address in the caves, he had all but the last symbol, and proclaimed that he could not get the gate to work without the last symbol. My question is, if the only symbol that they didn't know was the last one, why didn't they just try every remaining symbol until they got a lock? There would only be 25 or so symbols left, assuming symbols never repeat (which they don't). I'm surprised I haven't thought of it before.

Speaking of that, did the Air Force really need Daniel at all? The only thing he gave them was the last symbol. Katherine very clearly says they already had the first six. Is it really worth bringing a new guy in just so he could tell them which of the +/- 30 symbols to try? They could just try one a day and get inside of a month.

Ugly Pig
September 26th, 2004, 06:11 AM
Speaking of that, did the Air Force really need Daniel at all? The only thing he gave them was the last symbol. Katherine very clearly says they already had the first six. Is it really worth bringing a new guy in just so he could tell them which of the +/- 30 symbols to try? They could just try one a day and get inside of a month.
The problem was that they never realized they needed seven symbols. They recognized six, and assumed that's what they needed. And when they couldn't get it to work, they figured maybe the symbols had some other meaning that they'd need a brilliant mind to figure out, which is where Daniel came in. Of course, all he needed to find was that they had simply overlooked the PoO...

Crazedwraith
September 26th, 2004, 06:21 AM
The problem was that they never realized they needed seven symbols. They recognized six, and assumed that's what they needed. And when they couldn't get it to work, they figured maybe the symbols had some other meaning that they'd need a brilliant mind to figure out, which is where Daniel came in. Of course, all he needed to find was that they had simply overlooked the PoO...
Also they're are nine chevrons, they didn't know what the gate was for...

Basically they didn't know the gate needed seven

Axle
September 26th, 2004, 08:57 AM
But it's safe to assum that if they used seven symbols to get to Abydos they would need seven to get back. Plus the PoO would look diffrent then all the other symbols on the gate representing conslelations. So the whole trial and error thing would work...but if there was a DHD with the gate, isn't the PoO automatically put in when they pressed the red activation jewel. Providing of course they knew how to work the DHD.

Uncle Dick
September 26th, 2004, 09:24 AM
So the whole trial and error thing would work...but if there was a DHD with the gate, isn't the PoO automatically put in when they pressed the red activation jewel.
No. The seventh symbol has always been manually inputed on the DHD.

Erik Pasternak
September 26th, 2004, 09:49 AM
but if there was a DHD with the gate, isn't the PoO automatically put in when they pressed the red activation jewel. Providing of course they knew how to work the DHD.This has been argued to death. THe Big Red Button should be the PoO because the DHD has 38 symbols. But the PoO symbol is on the DHD, while the standard stargate symbol aquila is absent, so therefore the PoO must be manually imputed.

Crazedwraith
September 26th, 2004, 11:56 AM
But it's safe to assum that if they used seven symbols to get to Abydos they would need seven to get back. Plus the PoO would look diffrent then all the other symbols on the gate representing conslelations. So the whole trial and error thing would work...but if there was a DHD with the gate, isn't the PoO automatically put in when they pressed the red activation jewel. Providing of course they knew how to work the DHD.
Yes but we weren't talking about Dnaiel not doing on the way back we talking about why didn't catherines tema didn't do it in their two years before Daniel showed up.

Axle
September 27th, 2004, 08:35 AM
Ah, sorry. Didn't know the context. Ah, the joys of plot holes.

ibwolf
September 27th, 2004, 08:41 AM
Speaking of that, did the Air Force really need Daniel at all? The only thing he gave them was the last symbol. Katherine very clearly says they already had the first six. Is it really worth bringing a new guy in just so he could tell them which of the +/- 30 symbols to try? They could just try one a day and get inside of a month.
That's probably the biggest plot hole of the entire movie. Just step around it carefully and you wont get hurt :)

The problem here is of course that the original movie was a fast paced action movie that wasn't all that concerned about 'getting it right'. The same can be said for Devlin and Emmerich's next work, Indepence Day. These kind of movies are great 'popcorn flicks' but have the nasty tendancy to break down once you start examining them too closely.

Major Fischer
September 27th, 2004, 08:45 AM
These kind of movies are great 'popcorn flicks' but have the nasty tendancy to break down once you start examining them too closely.

I have a friend in the industry that calls these kinds of movies "boat payment movies" because they are made to make a great deal of money, but not for either art, critical thought, or even really for long term profit because they show best during that first summer release...

JediTrilobite
October 5th, 2004, 09:15 AM
And it really took off, with the show and Atlantis.

I don't know if this has been asked before, but how would a Special Edition work out? Something that maybe included a shot of a DHD or something to better fit continuity?

Ugly Pig
October 5th, 2004, 01:28 PM
I don't know if this has been asked before, but how would a Special Edition work out? Something that maybe included a shot of a DHD or something to better fit continuity?
I think the Director's Cut is the closest to 'Special' we'll get. And Devlin/Emmerich will never alter the movie to bring it more in line with the established series universe, you can be darn sure of that...

*RA
October 5th, 2004, 01:37 PM
Okay, when Daniel found Earth's gate address in the caves, he had all but the last symbol, and proclaimed that he could not get the gate to work without the last symbol. My question is, if the only symbol that they didn't know was the last one, why didn't they just try every remaining symbol until they got a lock? There would only be 25 or so symbols left, assuming symbols never repeat (which they don't). I'm surprised I haven't thought of it before.
At the time their knowlege of the gate wasn't that great, they were woried that if they entered the wroung symbol that they would end up in outterspace somewhere and not on earth, In the Directors cut they show some extra seens about trying to guess the gate address needed to get home.

Major Fischer
October 5th, 2004, 01:42 PM
At the time their knowlege of the gate wasn't that great, they were woried that if they entered the wroung symbol that they would end up in outterspace somewhere and not on earth, In the Directors cut they show some extra seens about trying to guess the gate address needed to get home.

And playing around with unknown technology at random wouldn't have seemed like a terribly good idea.... especially an unknown technology they had a faulty understanding of.

JediTrilobite
October 5th, 2004, 03:44 PM
Very true

*RA
October 7th, 2004, 12:36 AM
daniel may have figured out the address, but sam was the one the knew the most about the gate, and she wasn't on that mission.

omnian
October 7th, 2004, 01:03 AM
At the time of the film, Sam didn't exist though :p

*RA
October 7th, 2004, 01:07 AM
But she says in the show, that she had been working on it for before daniel came along, Shes the one who programmed the dialing computer I bileave. :cool:

omnian
October 7th, 2004, 01:11 AM
She is indeed the one who came up with the dialling computer.....for the show. Where it came from in the film, I haven't a clue. They never really said.

sshspooky
October 7th, 2004, 05:33 AM
i wouldn't be surprised if Sam was working at Area 51 when Daniel was brought in.

Major Fischer
October 7th, 2004, 06:27 AM
i wouldn't be surprised if Sam was working at Area 51 when Daniel was brought in.

Or that she'd been assigned to some other top secret defense project. Could easily see her getting sucked into national ballistic missile defense research.

WurdBendur
October 7th, 2004, 07:30 AM
And playing around with unknown technology at random wouldn't have seemed like a terribly good idea.... especially an unknown technology they had a faulty understanding of.
You have to remember that they were really only interested in the Stargate because they thought it was a weapon. I suppose after Ernest went through, they may have had some clue, but all the records from that expirement were sealed off. By the time the movie came around, we can assume they didn't know about it.

Elite Anubis Guard
October 9th, 2004, 03:56 AM
At the time their knowlege of the gate wasn't that great, they were woried that if they entered the wroung symbol that they would end up in outterspace somewhere and not on earth, In the Directors cut they show some extra seens about trying to guess the gate address needed to get home.


I have the DC, I've read the book (which is close to that) and I dont remember that.....

*RA
October 10th, 2004, 01:21 AM
I have the DC, I've read the book (which is close to that) and I dont remember that.....
You dont remeber when the guy from third rock, asked about it before ra showd up, Its an extra seen i think. One of the guys answers with something to that regard.

EDIT: Just went back and watched it, the guy from third rock says " we could turn the the thing the wroung order and materilze in the vacum of space."
It's right after the seen with D & S drawing in dirt, In the DC version.

*RA
October 10th, 2004, 01:24 AM
She is indeed the one who came up with the dialling computer.....for the show. Where it came from in the film, I haven't a clue. They never really said.
she says in the show, she was working on the stagate before the first abydos mission, but did not get to go on that mission. Proubally something about being a girl.

Egle01
January 22nd, 2008, 06:50 AM
Finally, a place to discuss original Stargate movie.

I don't know about you, but I saw all eps of series before seeing the movie.
It never troubled me. Not even watching the pilot. Wanted to see it for just to know how did it all actually begin.
Well, I was little disappointed. I thought the focus would be on the gate. And opening not so easy.
Some differences between series and movie are understandable, and it was amazing to see, how one movie's little details I enjoyed for 10 season of series.
For example staff weapons, gliders, hand device, rings. Ah, it was... cool.

Now talking about it, I'd like to watch it again.

Mister Oragahn
January 22nd, 2008, 11:36 AM
This thread is for discussion of the original "Stargate" movie.

S'ry, you're a bit late sir.

Arga
January 28th, 2008, 01:38 PM
About one scene in the Editor's cut version....


I don't really like the scene when the team is in the village on Abydos, and the storm is coming.. The locals are closing the big doors to protect the village. And the earth team gets scared, and start shooting people...
That's too bad for the poor Abydosians..

:(

Ebeneezer_Goode
January 28th, 2008, 03:15 PM
They don't shoot anyone.

Arga
January 29th, 2008, 09:48 AM
They don't shoot anyone.

oops, many apologies....
It was too quick for my eyes.
They shoot the ground only. Now I'm happy! Thank you for clearing that dark point...


http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_stormshoot1.jpg

http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_stormshoot2.jpg

http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_stormshoot3.jpg

qmwneb
February 1st, 2008, 11:23 AM
Could someone post some pics of the fossilised jaffa because i cant find them anywhere.

Thanks

Arga
February 1st, 2008, 11:36 AM
Could someone post some pics of the fossilised jaffa because i cant find them anywhere.

Thanks

There wasn't any fossilised jaffa in the original movie, as far as I know.
They mentioned it in the pilot of the series, if I remember well, but that was just invented to link the series with the movie.

qmwneb
February 1st, 2008, 11:50 AM
Apparently in the Stargate: Ultimate Edition Extended Cut DVD release there is a scene revealing the fossilized remains of a Jackal Guard and a Horus Guard found beneath the Stargate in Egypt. Colonel O'Neil contemplates the implications of the fossils shortly before he leaves on the mission to Abydos.

Arga
February 1st, 2008, 12:44 PM
Apparently in the Stargate: Ultimate Edition Extended Cut DVD release there is a scene revealing the fossilized remains of a Jackal Guard and a Horus Guard found beneath the Stargate in Egypt. Colonel O'Neil contemplates the implications of the fossils shortly before he leaves on the mission to Abydos.

ooohhh! now that you say it... it's true! on the Director's cut edition. (I've seen this one less than the original cut)...


For your enjoyment, I've captured these from my DVD:

Egypt, 1928:

http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil0.jpg
http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil1.jpg
http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil2.jpg


USA, 1994:

http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil3.jpg
http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil4.jpg
http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil5.jpg

qmwneb
February 1st, 2008, 12:50 PM
Thanks Arga, you're the best! :)

Arga
February 1st, 2008, 01:09 PM
Thanks Arga, you're the best! :)

You're welcome! Pleasure.

And welcome to Gateworld! Nice start, post in the thread of the origins of Stargate..

Ganthet Jr.
February 1st, 2008, 09:26 PM
ooohhh! now that you say it... it's true! on the Director's cut edition. (I've seen this one less than the original cut)...


For your enjoyment, I've captured these from my DVD:

Egypt, 1928:

http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil0.jpg
http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil1.jpg
http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil2.jpg


USA, 1994:

http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil3.jpg
http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil4.jpg
http://ednys.free.fr/stargate/SG94_fossil5.jpg



I feel like an absolute geek for nitpicking this, but it wasn't 1994, it was 1996. In the movie, they never say the year. After the transition from 1928 to the present, the subtitle says "Present Day". It came out in 1994, but then SG-1 came out in 1997, and took place one year after the movie. The movie has to take place in 1996, and this works because luckily, they chose to call the original movie "Present Day".

Arga
February 2nd, 2008, 01:19 AM
I feel like an absolute geek for nitpicking this, but it wasn't 1994, it was 1996. In the movie, they never say the year. After the transition from 1928 to the present, the subtitle says "Present Day". It came out in 1994, but then SG-1 came out in 1997, and took place one year after the movie. The movie has to take place in 1996, and this works because luckily, they chose to call the original movie "Present Day".

Yes you're right. When we consider SG1 as the continuation of the original movie, it must be in 1996. (and 1994 must be when they started to try to decipher the glyphs, because general West said something like "So you think you've solved in 14 days what they couldn't solve in 2 years?"). I was almost going to write 'Present day' on my post, but since we're in 2008 it would have been weird...

If Dean Devlin & Roland Emmerich were in this forum, I bet they'd say "no no no, it took place in 1994! SG-1 is wrong!"

jenks
February 2nd, 2008, 07:58 AM
I feel like an absolute geek for nitpicking this, but it wasn't 1994, it was 1996. In the movie, they never say the year. After the transition from 1928 to the present, the subtitle says "Present Day". It came out in 1994, but then SG-1 came out in 1997, and took place one year after the movie. The movie has to take place in 1996, and this works because luckily, they chose to call the original movie "Present Day".

The movie took place in 1994, the events of the movie in the SG-1 universe however, took place in 1996.

Ganthet Jr.
February 2nd, 2008, 10:28 AM
Yes you're right. When we consider SG1 as the continuation of the original movie, it must be in 1996. (and 1994 must be when they started to try to deciphey the glyphs, because general West said something like "So you think you've solved in 14 days what they couldn't solve in 2 years?"). I was almost going to write 'Present day' on my post, but since we're in 2008 it would have been weird...

If Dean Devlin & Roland Emmerich were in this forum, I bet they'd say "no no no, it took place in 1994! SG-1 is wrong!"


Heh, yeah. Sucks for those two though, because someone else got to continuing it first :-D! I'm not ashamed to say that I'm glad they did.

Mister Oragahn
February 2nd, 2008, 03:14 PM
Yes you're right. When we consider SG1 as the continuation of the original movie, it must be in 1996. (and 1994 must be when they started to try to decipher the glyphs, because general West said something like "So you think you've solved in 14 days what they couldn't solve in 2 years?"). I was almost going to write 'Present day' on my post, but since we're in 2008 it would have been weird...

If Dean Devlin & Roland Emmerich were in this forum, I bet they'd say "no no no, it took place in 1994! SG-1 is wrong!"

No, they wouldn't. They'd just say it's not the same continuity.

Drax
February 2nd, 2008, 11:26 PM
No, they wouldn't. They'd just say it's not the same continuity.

And they would be correct.

STC
February 6th, 2008, 12:42 PM
I watched it again recently and something I had never thought about suddenly struck me.

They had spent years trying to figure out what the symbols were, and what the Gate actually was. They get Daniel Jackson to identify the symbols etc and voila, they have a Stargate!

The scene immediately after Jackson's announcement, when Richard Kind's character says 'Monitor's up!" and suddenly they're tracking an object through an active wormhole?? That's the scene I'm talking about.

Having all that NASA type paraphernalia there suddenly seemed out of place and left me saying to myself, did I miss something??

For all they know, the Gate could have been a Henry Moore sculpture!

Egle01
February 12th, 2008, 05:50 AM
I watched it again recently and something I had never thought about suddenly struck me.

They had spent years trying to figure out what the symbols were, and what the Gate actually was. They get Daniel Jackson to identify the symbols etc and voila, they have a Stargate!

The scene immediately after Jackson's announcement, when Richard Kind's character says 'Monitor's up!" and suddenly they're tracking an object through an active wormhole?? That's the scene I'm talking about.

Having all that NASA type paraphernalia there suddenly seemed out of place and left me saying to myself, did I miss something??

For all they know, the Gate could have been a Henry Moore sculpture!

Yes, that's what struck me as well. There's no mentioning how did they manage to make the gate work (using computers).

jenks
February 12th, 2008, 07:35 AM
Carter did it.

Jeff O'Connor
February 12th, 2008, 07:44 AM
Zelenka did it.

Egle01
February 12th, 2008, 07:45 AM
Carter did it.

I know. But it was first mentioned in the series.

Dr. Michael Benjamin
February 23rd, 2008, 07:34 PM
I think its important to remember this dicussion is about the film not SG-1. Perhaps to try and explain away plot holes in the storyline of the movie some of you are projecting SG-1 technology onto the film. I don't think this can be done since the film obviously came first. There is no explanation in the film of exactly how the stargate coordinates are entered. The film demonstrates the coordinates apparently entered through electronic means (as illustrated further in SG-1) but provides no indication beyond that. Furthermore no information is provided about the method used to enter Earth coordinates at the end of the film (though many assume there is a DHD). To my knowledge no DHD was ever shown on screen or even mentioned in the film. This is something I have often wondered--how exactly did they "dial" the gate in the film? To me it seems the DHD was a concoction conjured up by writers to provide a basic primer on the stargate for the casual viewer of the TV series. I suppose it could be argued that the DHD was a logical asumption to answer the very simple question of how you actually use the stargate. However, I would be very apprehensive to delve deeper into this DHD business as it has its basis in the TV series not the movie.
Also, to address the original question posed, I do believe Daniel was neccessary to the story. Everyone who has posted thus far is only looking at the initial contribution Daniel made to the expedition. The film provided a very unique and logical problem with intergalactic exploration. How do you communicate with a people who have been living independent of any known modern ethnic group on earth? While Daniel initially believed the language to be somehow related to Berber he had to work at it. The inhabitants of the planet they traveled to (in the film the planet was not referred to as Abydos) spoke a literally unheard-of language. This language barrier would have to be overcome in order to have the story move forward. Daniel was absolutely neccessary to the story in order to explain to the people their true heritage and ultimately give them the sense of empowerment needed to rebel against Ra. Please note that while this argument does explain the neccessity of Daniel to the story line it does not explain his neccessity to the plot. If the original mission objective was to locate any threat to earth and blow up the stargate then there was no need to have an expedition at all--merely send the bomb through using a probe and end it all right there. However I don't think if it were done that way it would have made for much of a film! But to get back to my original point, SG-1 removed the very intruiging element of extraterrestrial linguistics and condensed nearly all of the galaxy down to English speaking Midieval peasants (strange how most of these peoples don't use contractions). Also, I always thought that the introduction of Carter in the series was an attempt to marginalize Daniel's character especially after it was said that she was working on the project two years before Daniel was successful. It came across to me as the writers saying in essence that Daniel got lucky and Carter was the more important of the two. Anyway, I love the film and SG-1 (not a fan of Atlantis) and I watch the movie often. Incidentally this is my first post here so I look forward to talking with all of you in the future. Thanks :)

Arga
February 27th, 2008, 04:18 AM
I think in the movie, to dial the return coordinates, they must have brought along a portable power source & computer with the same software they used to make the Earth Gate work, or manually dialed it. (like when SG1 escaped the prison planet).
They didn't mention how they did it, but I can't see any other explanation. (the DHD hadn't been discovered yet).

By the way, the novelisation book of the film, by Bill McCay (that came out before SG1 series), calls the planet "Abydos"!
I don't know if it was on the original notes of Roland Emmerich & Dean Devlin or if Bill McCay invented it himself...

J_schinderlin56
March 11th, 2008, 10:18 AM
The part I love about this movie is when Daniel was explaining his theories about the building of the pyramids and one of the professors there says "Then who built the pyramids? Men from Atlantis?" It always makes me Laugh. If they only knew. I bet it makes Daniel laugh too every time he sets foot on the lost city of the Ancients and thinks of that moment.

Those guys are really going to have egg on their faces if the Stargate Program goes public.

Rhydderch Hael
March 11th, 2008, 07:32 PM
If you want the Mother of All Nitpicks, consider this: Daniel Jackson's grand theory that the Stargate glyphs represented constellations (and that the destination could be located between six of them) doesn't hold water when your robot probe reports back that it's in another galaxy.

Let's see you try to fit an entire galaxy between two constellations seen from Earth's sky, much less six of them.

Arga
March 13th, 2008, 04:44 AM
If you want the Mother of All Nitpicks, consider this: Daniel Jackson's grand theory that the Stargate glyphs represented constellations (and that the destination could be located between six of them) doesn't hold water when your robot probe reports back that it's in another galaxy.

Let's see you try to fit an entire galaxy between two constellations seen from Earth's sky, much less six of them.

yes I don't like that part where the location indicator moves on this glass wall map, showing us that the probe arrived in another galaxy. All I can convince myself to believe is that this indicator wasn't calibrated properly.

And I have serious doubts about the scientific accuracy of such a technology that would tell instantly where something is located in the universe. (even if the signal was transmitted through the open wormhole, how can it know where it is in the universe?)

Mitchell82
March 13th, 2008, 06:16 PM
yes I don't like that part where the location indicator moves on this glass wall map, showing us that the probe arrived in another galaxy. All I can convince myself to believe is that this indicator wasn't calibrated properly.

And I have serious doubts about the scientific accuracy of such a technology that would tell instantly where something is located in the universe. (even if the signal was transmitted through the open wormhole, how can it know where it is in the universe?)
Yeah that scene really makes no sense. They even say that Abydos is in another galaxy at the edge of our universe. Alot of things changed from the movie to the show.

SylvreWolfe
March 23rd, 2008, 04:14 PM
The movie, the Stargate was for exploration. No known threat was there. O'Neil *not two L's* was ordered to go through, gather information and come back. If there was a threat then he was suppose to blow up the gate. That was not carried through into the series, the series said he was suppose to destroy the gate, period.
Danny was necessary to the expedition because of his linguistic skills. They did not know how to translate the symbols on the other gate, so they needed Danny to do it for them. Of course, if they ran into people on the planet, which they did, he could also act as the interpreter.
What Danny didn't tell them was that he was iffy with the language and would have to work at it to translate it. He kind of fudged how much he knew in order to go on the mission.


One of my major nitpicks with the movie, the one that stands out even though I haven't watched it in awhile, was Kawalski.
He was wearing LTC rank, but O'Neil kept referring to him as LT. And I am not sure how IMDB lists his rank.

I really hate how the series kind of forgot or ignored a lot of what was in the movie. There is a lot of inconsistency and lack of continuity in the characters and stories.

Akai
March 24th, 2008, 01:45 PM
The reason there was no DHD shown was because the concept was not even thought up until SG-1. It never showed them dialing the Abydos gate at all in the movie. Also, it was stated that Abydos (which wasn't even named in the movie) was in another galaxy on "the other side of the known universe". A LOT of details were changed for SG-1, quite a few things from the movie were retconned, to the point where I can safely say that SG-1 was only "loosely based" on the original movie. However, there was nothing in the movie that indicated there *wasn't* a DHD...the stargate room in the pyramid was never shown completely, and when it was shown there was usually something else climactic happening so noone bothered to focus on the environment.

In conclusion: the original movie was chock full of plot holes. SG-1 retconned a lot of things to make them make more sense. I do like the movie (surprisingly since I've absolutely hated every other Emmerich/Devlin movie), but it's an action movie, and if you try to analyze things in-depth like you can with SG-1 it utterly falls apart.

Mitchell82
March 29th, 2008, 12:33 PM
[B][COLOR="Magenta"]The movie, the Stargate was for exploration. No known threat was there. O'Neil *not two L's* was ordered to go through, gather information and come back. If there was a threat then he was suppose to blow up the gate. That was not carried through into the series, the series said he was suppose to destroy the gate, period.
Because he was. He was sent to blow the gate on the other end no matter what.

Danny was necessary to the expedition because of his linguistic skills. They did not know how to translate the symbols on the other gate, so they needed Danny to do it for them. Of course, if they ran into people on the planet, which they did, he could also act as the interpreter.
What Danny didn't tell them was that he was iffy with the language and would have to work at it to translate it. He kind of fudged how much he knew in order to go on the mission.
True.



One of my major nitpicks with the movie, the one that stands out even though I haven't watched it in awhile, was Kawalski.
He was wearing LTC rank, but O'Neil kept referring to him as LT. And I am not sure how IMDB lists his rank.
Actually it could be either Major or LTC. Since he is a major on SG-1 that is most likely his rank. You are right on Oneil calling him Lt which is a blatant screw up.


I really hate how the series kind of forgot or ignored a lot of what was in the movie. There is a lot of inconsistency and lack of continuity in the characters and stories.
They didn't screw up anything. They changed the origin of the Goa'uld and kinda changed a few things but they didn't screw anything up if anything they made it better.

SylvreWolfe
March 31st, 2008, 05:53 PM
In the movie Kawalski was wearing LTC rank. It couldn't be either/or

And they did ignore and screw up a lot from the movie when they made the series.

And I have no clue what you mean with your first comment.
In the series he was ordered to blow up the gate, regardless.
In the movie he was ordered to blow up the gate if there was an existing threat, as a contingency plan.

A lot of inconsistencies from the movie to the series and a lot of screw ups.

jenks
April 1st, 2008, 03:56 AM
And I have no clue what you mean with your first comment.
In the series he was ordered to blow up the gate, regardless.
In the movie he was ordered to blow up the gate if there was an existing threat, as a contingency plan.

A lot of inconsistencies from the movie to the series and a lot of screw ups.

Hammond: According to the mission brief, your orders were to go through the Stargate to detect any possible threat to Earth and if found, to detonate a nuclear device and destroy the Gate on the other side.

O'Neill: Yes.

Mitchell82
April 2nd, 2008, 11:53 AM
In the movie Kawalski was wearing LTC rank. It couldn't be either/or
LtCol rank and Major are both an oak leaf one gold the other silver. In the movie he is in green fatigues and it is a black rank like with BDUs so it cold be either and I never remember anyone calling him Col. Here is a pic if you don't believe me.http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t63/gatefan7882/vlcsnap-2214540.png


And they did ignore and screw up a lot from the movie when they made the series.

And I have no clue what you mean with your first comment.
In the series he was ordered to blow up the gate, regardless.
In the movie he was ordered to blow up the gate if there was an existing threat, as a contingency plan.

A lot of inconsistencies from the movie to the series and a lot of screw ups.[/COLOR][/B]
I disagree. They changed a few things but didn't screw anything up they made it better IMO.

Mitchell82
April 2nd, 2008, 11:54 AM
Hammond: According to the mission brief, your orders were to go through the Stargate to detect any possible threat to Earth and if found, to detonate a nuclear device and destroy the Gate on the other side.

O'Neill: Yes.
There you go so what's your problem again SylvreWolfe?

DavidTheGaul
April 3rd, 2008, 12:14 PM
There is no explanation in the film of exactly how the stargate coordinates are entered. The film demonstrates the coordinates apparently entered through electronic means (as illustrated further in SG-1) but provides no indication beyond that. Furthermore no information is provided about the method used to enter Earth coordinates at the end of the film (though many assume there is a DHD). To my knowledge no DHD was ever shown on screen or even mentioned in the film. This is something I have often wondered--how exactly did they "dial" the gate in the film? To me it seems the DHD was a concoction conjured up by writers to provide a basic primer on the stargate for the casual viewer of the TV series. I suppose it could be argued that the DHD was a logical asumption to answer the very simple question of how you actually use the stargate. . Thanks :)

I repost here:

About the way they dialed home in the movie, the novelization unveils the secret: kawalsky manualy engaged the stargate, following Daniel's instructions

In addition, there is no such computer/gate technology merging in the movie than in SG1, the computers of Creek mountain only control the mechanical parts added to the gate to make it rotates and engaged the chevrons, it's just a kind of improved manual way to dial it.
In comparison Computers of Cheyenne Mountain seem to be directly plugged to the stargate acting has a DHD, with access to gate status and stuff.

Dr. Michael Benjamin
April 3rd, 2008, 05:59 PM
Originally Posted by Dr. Michael Benjamin
There is no explanation in the film of exactly how the stargate coordinates are entered. The film demonstrates the coordinates apparently entered through electronic means (as illustrated further in SG-1) but provides no indication beyond that. Furthermore no information is provided about the method used to enter Earth coordinates at the end of the film (though many assume there is a DHD). To my knowledge no DHD was ever shown on screen or even mentioned in the film. This is something I have often wondered--how exactly did they "dial" the gate in the film? To me it seems the DHD was a concoction conjured up by writers to provide a basic primer on the stargate for the casual viewer of the TV series. I suppose it could be argued that the DHD was a logical asumption to answer the very simple question of how you actually use the stargate. . Thanks

I repost here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Me on another thread
About the way they dialed home in the movie, the novelization unveils the secret: kawalsky manualy engaged the stargate, following Daniel's instructions

In addition, there is no such computer/gate technology merging in the movie than in SG1, the computers of Creek mountain only control the mechanical parts added to the gate to make it rotates and engaged the chevrons, it's just a kind of improved manual way to dial it.
In comparison Computers of Cheyenne Mountain seem to be directly plugged to the stargate acting has a DHD, with access to gate status and stuff.


DavidThe Gaul,

Thank you in your interest in my post. I would like to clarify something however. It is my opinion that when discussing the film there should be no reference to the novelization. Since the novelization is not the film it is my belief that what the viewer sees on the screen is the only actual information that can be discussed and referenced. Novelizations tend to expand beyond what appears in the film. Furthermore, despite the notion that much of Mr. Devlin's production concepts and story components that did not make it to the final cut were presented in the novelization, I don't believe it can be used as it is outside material. I have seen other posters source the novelization when I mentioned the issue of the planet never referred to as Abydos in the film. I have read the novelizations from other films and found them to be much different from what appears on screen. Maybe I'm a purist but I cannot take this information and apply it to the film any more than I could apply what appears in a piece of fan fiction to the film (no insult to anyone who writes fan fiction). As far as the computers at Creek Mountain are concerned since there was no information presented IN THE FILM to the contrary I (and most likely many others) assumed the coordinates were entered via electronic methods. I'm also a bit unsure as to what mechanical parts were added to the stargate by the personnel at the facility. There appear to be some sort of capacitors or perhaps current regulators wired to the gate for some purpose so I will default and concede this point to you. Either way the film does not show any personnel standing in front of the gate entering coordinates (in fact the room was evacuated during the dialing sequence). Because of this, going purely by what is presented in the film alone, one is left to surmise that since the gate symbols appear on the computer monitors one at a time as the chevrons are entered that somehow the computer mainframe was linked to the components of the stargate responsible for entering the symbols. If you can provide me any evidence presented in the film (initial release or director's cut) that refutes my argument I will happily and gladly admit I was mistaken. Were the scenes that you speak of from the novelization cut from the final product? Perhaps. If so it's unfortunate since they would have given the viewer a better understanding of the mechanics of the stargate (I for one would have enjoyed seeing Kawalsky do all the work while O'Neil, Jackson, and company stand by and "supervise"). I may be in the minority on this issue but the novelization is not the film and the film is not the TV series. Though all three reference the same issues and characters I still hold to my opinion that the DHD was used in SG-1 as a way of easily explaining to a larger audience how the stargate is operated. Also I will admit I have never read the novelization of the film so I will ask-does the novelization refer to any sort of DHD device used to operate the gate? If so then I can understand its use in the series. If not then it still leaves me to ponder exactly how the gate was dialed. I'm sure operating it manually is fine for the backwards race from earth but it would be interesting to see if Ra did it the same way. Anyway thanks for the post. :)

DavidTheGaul
April 4th, 2008, 11:07 AM
does the novelization refer to any sort of DHD device used to operate the gate? If so then I can understand its use in the series. If not then it still leaves me to ponder exactly how the gate was dialed. I'm sure operating it manually is fine for the backwards race from earth but it would be interesting to see if Ra did it the same way. Anyway thanks for the post. :)


As I can remember it there's no reference to DHD or some sort in the book.
In addition to the way you see it, I can say that there somme little differences between it and the movie, like some names for example, but theres also other details, wich could explain where some SG1's concepts came from.
The book reveals that RĂ¢ is not the last one of his kind, and also strongly suggests that the stargate could lead to other planets...

I think i should read it again to check if there is no dhd hidden somewhere:cameron:

Coco Pops
April 5th, 2008, 03:54 AM
I think its important to remember this dicussion is about the film not SG-1. Perhaps to try and explain away plot holes in the storyline of the movie some of you are projecting SG-1 technology onto the film. I don't think this can be done since the film obviously came first. There is no explanation in the film of exactly how the stargate coordinates are entered. The film demonstrates the coordinates apparently entered through electronic means (as illustrated further in SG-1) but provides no indication beyond that. Furthermore no information is provided about the method used to enter Earth coordinates at the end of the film (though many assume there is a DHD). To my knowledge no DHD was ever shown on screen or even mentioned in the film. This is something I have often wondered--how exactly did they "dial" the gate in the film? To me it seems the DHD was a concoction conjured up by writers to provide a basic primer on the stargate for the casual viewer of the TV series. I suppose it could be argued that the DHD was a logical asumption to answer the very simple question of how you actually use the stargate. However, I would be very apprehensive to delve deeper into this DHD business as it has its basis in the TV series not the movie.
Also, to address the original question posed, I do believe Daniel was neccessary to the story. Everyone who has posted thus far is only looking at the initial contribution Daniel made to the expedition. The film provided a very unique and logical problem with intergalactic exploration. How do you communicate with a people who have been living independent of any known modern ethnic group on earth? While Daniel initially believed the language to be somehow related to Berber he had to work at it. The inhabitants of the planet they traveled to (in the film the planet was not referred to as Abydos) spoke a literally unheard-of language. This language barrier would have to be overcome in order to have the story move forward. Daniel was absolutely neccessary to the story in order to explain to the people their true heritage and ultimately give them the sense of empowerment needed to rebel against Ra. Please note that while this argument does explain the neccessity of Daniel to the story line it does not explain his neccessity to the plot. If the original mission objective was to locate any threat to earth and blow up the stargate then there was no need to have an expedition at all--merely send the bomb through using a probe and end it all right there. However I don't think if it were done that way it would have made for much of a film! But to get back to my original point, SG-1 removed the very intruiging element of extraterrestrial linguistics and condensed nearly all of the galaxy down to English speaking Midieval peasants (strange how most of these peoples don't use contractions). Also, I always thought that the introduction of Carter in the series was an attempt to marginalize Daniel's character especially after it was said that she was working on the project two years before Daniel was successful. It came across to me as the writers saying in essence that Daniel got lucky and Carter was the more important of the two. Anyway, I love the film and SG-1 (not a fan of Atlantis) and I watch the movie often. Incidentally this is my first post here so I look forward to talking with all of you in the future. Thanks :)


Plus Ra was a wuss in the movie as I have said elsewhere.

He runs away when all those people start charging up the sand hills.

Konrad9
April 5th, 2008, 08:37 AM
I really hope that this isn't what they were thinking about when they said a third movie was in the works.

leeman15251
April 6th, 2008, 03:13 PM
i never liked this movie. Just watched it after i started watching stargate sg1.

jenks
April 6th, 2008, 03:33 PM
I really hope that this isn't what they were thinking about when they said a third movie was in the works.

It's not.

Mitchell82
April 6th, 2008, 05:24 PM
i never liked this movie. Just watched it after i started watching stargate sg1.

For me it's the exact opposite. I loved the movie hence why I watched SG-1. Now I hate it compared to Sg-1.

matta
April 9th, 2008, 06:43 AM
Whats the old saying? if it aint broken, dont fix it? I dont see the point in trying to re-do this movie, its brilliant as it is. It was the starting point of a legendary tv show and it would be an insult if they changed it... they even had a rememberable closing line... "i'll see you around... Dr Jackson" how good is that lol.

matt

Coco Pops
April 9th, 2008, 06:48 AM
Whats the old saying? if it aint broken, dont fix it? I dont see the point in trying to re-do this movie, its brilliant as it is. It was the starting point of a legendary tv show and it would be an insult if they changed it... they even had a rememberable closing line... "i'll see you around... Dr Jackson" how good is that lol.

matt


I love the original movie too..... Especially the director's cut which makes a lot more sense then the theatrical version.

matta
April 9th, 2008, 07:00 AM
I love the original movie too..... Especially the director's cut which makes a lot more sense then the theatrical version.

Yeah i agree, i brought the special edition that had the original and the extended version and after watching them both you get a better understanding from the extended version.

matt

Mitchell82
April 9th, 2008, 09:47 AM
Whats the old saying? if it aint broken, dont fix it? I dont see the point in trying to re-do this movie, its brilliant as it is. It was the starting point of a legendary tv show and it would be an insult if they changed it... they even had a rememberable closing line... "i'll see you around... Dr Jackson" how good is that lol.

matt
They aren't redoing the movie it's pilot that they are remixing.

Sebastian
April 14th, 2008, 11:29 AM
Hi, there, my first post on GateWolrd Forums. I love the original movie. In my opinion it had a certain tone and atmosphere which was lost in the series. For example the conversation between Ra and Daniel is one of my favorite scenes in the movie; Ra's voice and intonation really give you and idea of how malevolent he was. Plus, the music was perfect in that scene. In the series I don't get that feeling from any of the Goa'uld (maybe Sokar or Anubis but they are late in the series). They just didn't give me any reason to fear them. And they butchered the Goa'uld theme. I hated that theme in the series.

Second I love the set designs. The interior of Ra's ship is the most awesome thing in the movie (so much detail). The costumes were amazing too, especially the Goa'uld guards (loved the claws on their hands). Ah, there's so much eye candy in that movie. The music is amazing too, especially the Stargate theme and Ra's theme. I can never get tired of listening to the opening scene of the movie.

To me, artistically, the the series was a downgrade from the movie. Even now after the series ended, I still think the movie > series in terms of art direction, set design and music.

Now, I love the series, don't get me wrong. It brought us the unforgettable stories and friendships. In that regard it is superior. The thing I don't like about the series is how they messed up the Goa'uld. (atmosphere, music). I was laughing at the serpent heads when I first saw them, and I always cringe at the sound of Jaffa marching in the hallways. Man, that was done to death, and it sucked too. Thank god for their demise, because I don't know how much longer I could have resisted.

Anyway, leave the movie alone, it's awesome.

Sebastian, dialing home.

andrewTellis
April 14th, 2008, 11:56 AM
I agree with you 100%. The first movie was amazing, unlike any other scifi movie before it. Too bad the series didn't have that same felling to it (not that I don't like the series, I love it)

Sebastian
April 14th, 2008, 12:49 PM
There's one thing that bothers me in the movie and the series: the staff blast force inconsistency. The first time we see it in the movie is when the Jaffa fires a last at a column. That is some major explosion. Directed at any human part and it would obliterate it.

From my DVD.

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/7035/clip15wr7.th.jpg (http://img508.imageshack.us/my.php?image=clip15wr7.jpg)

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/7998/clip16ho6.th.jpg (http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=clip16ho6.jpg)

But no, they have to change the force depending on what it hits. I mean sure it blows up stone columns to shreds (movie and series) but when it hits, let's say a leg (Jack in the Ne'tu prison, from "The Devil You Know", I think) all it does is burn some flesh.


Read inside the spoiler if you've seen the movie and the 3rd season of the series.

It's a small thing I know, mostly changed for story telling, but it bothers me anyway.

jenks
April 14th, 2008, 01:09 PM
There's only an inconsistency if you consider the series to be a continuation of the story from the movie, it's not. The movie is completely separate. There's no difference between the Goa'uld in the movie and the Goa'uld in the series because there were no Goa'uld in the movie.

Mitchell82
April 14th, 2008, 05:57 PM
There's one thing that bothers me in the movie and the series: the staff blast force inconsistency. The first time we see it in the movie is when the Jaffa fires a last at a column. That is some major explosion. Directed at any human part and it would obliterate it.

From my DVD.

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/7035/clip15wr7.th.jpg (http://img508.imageshack.us/my.php?image=clip15wr7.jpg)

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/7998/clip16ho6.th.jpg (http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=clip16ho6.jpg)

But no, they have to change the force depending on what it hits. I mean sure it blows up stone columns to shreds (movie and series) but when it hits, let's say a leg (Jack in the Ne'tu prison, from "The Devil You Know", I think) all it does is burn some flesh.


Read inside the spoiler if you've seen the movie and the 3rd season of the series.

It's a small thing I know, mostly changed for story telling, but it bothers me anyway.

We also saw a staff blast hit a soldier and yeah it killed him but he was hit square in the chest. Also a P90 or M16 can do the same to a pliller yet wound a person if aimed right.

Coco Pops
April 15th, 2008, 12:31 AM
Second I love the set designs. The interior of Ra's ship is the most awesome thing in the movie (so much detail). The costumes were amazing too, especially the Goa'uld guards (loved the claws on their hands). Ah, there's so much eye candy in that movie. The music is amazing too, especially the Stargate theme and Ra's theme. I can never get tired of listening to the opening scene of the movie.





What about the exterior. I loved the design of Ra's ship. Didn't much care for Ra but the ship was fantastic.

Just how much bigger then the pyrmaid was the ship?

I mean how deep into the ship was the very top of the pyramid once it settled on top? What they didn't show us, and I would have loved it had they had the time to do this was the exterior of where those long verticle windows were. When the panels all slid down from the side of the ship. It would have been kind of neat to see inside the ship via the windows from the outside. ..

I just loved the design.... The open cockpit gliders I didn't care much for. It's a pity no one could be shot that way.

But for me the size and story were the best parts, and the music set the atmosphere. It all fit together nicely and was truly enjoyable.

Pic
June 6th, 2008, 10:17 AM
Is there an "official" thread for the original movie (like the sub-folder for AoT and Cont.)? Or is it disallowed/discouraged because it's not part of this franchise or something? Just curious.

Anyway, I'm thinking of re-watching this over the weekend and thought I'd see if anyone else wanted to comment/discuss on the original. It's been years since I've seen a Jack that isn't RDA. :jack: I wonder if I'm going to have a hard time with this.

Here's a couple images to get the party started...

http://forum.gateworld.net/picture.php?albumid=478&pictureid=3741

http://forum.gateworld.net/picture.php?albumid=478&pictureid=3740

Admiral Mappalazarou
June 6th, 2008, 11:26 AM
...Y'know, I actually can't believe no one made this thread before. Green.

jelgate
June 6th, 2008, 12:06 PM
Is there an "official" thread for the original movie (like the sub-folder for AoT and Cont.)? Or is it disallowed/discouraged because it's not part of this franchise or something? Just curious.

Anyway, I'm thinking of re-watching this over the weekend and thought I'd see if anyone else wanted to comment/discuss on the original. It's been years since I've seen a Jack that isn't RDA. :jack: I wonder if I'm going to have a hard time with this.
Here's a couple images to get the party started...
http://forum.gateworld.net/picture.php?albumid=478&pictureid=3741

http://forum.gateworld.net/picture.php?albumid=478&pictureid=3740[/url]http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=4593

Mclean
June 6th, 2008, 05:44 PM
Quality thread and quality movie. :)

Mclean
June 6th, 2008, 05:45 PM
I wonder if we'll ever see the Abydonians again after they ascended! It would be nice to see Skaara again.

Ltcolshepjumper
June 6th, 2008, 07:53 PM
Hi, there, my first post on GateWolrd Forums. I love the original movie. In my opinion it had a certain tone and atmosphere which was lost in the series. For example the conversation between Ra and Daniel is one of my favorite scenes in the movie; Ra's voice and intonation really give you and idea of how malevolent he was. Plus, the music was perfect in that scene. In the series I don't get that feeling from any of the Goa'uld (maybe Sokar or Anubis but they are late in the series). They just didn't give me any reason to fear them. And they butchered the Goa'uld theme. I hated that theme in the series.

Second I love the set designs. The interior of Ra's ship is the most awesome thing in the movie (so much detail). The costumes were amazing too, especially the Goa'uld guards (loved the claws on their hands). Ah, there's so much eye candy in that movie. The music is amazing too, especially the Stargate theme and Ra's theme. I can never get tired of listening to the opening scene of the movie.

To me, artistically, the the series was a downgrade from the movie. Even now after the series ended, I still think the movie > series in terms of art direction, set design and music.

Now, I love the series, don't get me wrong. It brought us the unforgettable stories and friendships. In that regard it is superior. The thing I don't like about the series is how they messed up the Goa'uld. (atmosphere, music). I was laughing at the serpent heads when I first saw them, and I always cringe at the sound of Jaffa marching in the hallways. Man, that was done to death, and it sucked too. Thank god for their demise, because I don't know how much longer I could have resisted.

Anyway, leave the movie alone, it's awesome.

Sebastian, dialing home.

I agree. The gaould were much better n the movie. Even the jaffa. I never understood why the Jaffa had mail. Why did they wear so much clothing. And, speaking of goauld, what was Apophis exactly? A cheap knock-off of Ra? NO comparison to the movie Ra. The goauld of the series were lame.

Pic
June 7th, 2008, 04:35 AM
http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=4593

Thanks for the link! - maybe the mods will merge it and give it a sub-folder like the other movies so that it's easy to find... hint hint

Too nice of a day outside to stay inside, I'll watch tonight. I'm preparing myself for a 14-yr-old movie, so I know the sunglasses will be cheesy :cool:- but what else will I find?

jenks
June 7th, 2008, 07:09 AM
There were no Goa'uld in the movie.

Pic
June 8th, 2008, 01:17 PM
Merged thread -- thanks! ;)

I just re-watched the original movie and so totally loved it (again!) I was worried I'd find it too cheesy. Also, since I'd not watched it since SG-1 began to air, I thought I'd have a very hard time believing Daniel and Jack as played by Spade and Russell. So much air-time has cluttered my brain with Shanks and RDA. Taking this into account and attempting to suspend belief (more than usual, that is) and I thoroughly enjoyed re-watching this movie.

I had forgotten the Goa'uld storyline wasn't really in this movie - it was more of an *******ized version that ended up in the series as the Goa'uld. Here, there's an ancient alien who possessed one human and enslaved the rest. Similar enough to be recognizable and it lends itself to a stand-alone movie well. The Goa'uld make for a better series since you can have many of them.

This is also the first time I viewed the DVD special features ~ a little out there, huh?

pritnep
July 28th, 2008, 10:57 PM
I actually watched the movie a few weeks ago before I started Stargate SG-1 Re-watch I typed up my thoughts but couldn't find a discussion thread to post them into, until now.

Well I just finished watching Stargate (the movie), Extended Version - Director's Cut from the Ultimate Edition DVD. I have to admit that it has been awhile since I watched the orginal movie and probably to long for a Stargate fan so it was almost like it was brand new again, although of course I knew how it would end.

When Doctor Jackson is doing his seminar at the beginning one of the audience members asked "Well who do you think built the pyramids?", "Men from Atlantis" - while not exactly true in that connection it does ring true with the Stargate. Just something small I picked up on.

I know everybody says once you watch the movie and then Stargate SG-1 - Children of the Gods, to forgot everything from the movie but when they were explaining about Ra and how he was dying/couldn't regenerate/sustain long life I thought that could of been explained by the Unas because if I'm not mistake they used to be hosts to the Goa'uld. Although then at the end when it looks like Ra reveals his true form before dying...that just throws that idea right out the window. Also the fact that Daniel says that they are parasites. Or maybe I have just confused myself. After reading a few posts here I think I my thoughts were wrong/already explained another way.

I quite liked Ra's Jaffa, different from what we have in SG-1 but still cool looking.

Kurt's O'Neill is a very different one from RDAs who quiet offered used humour and only in the mid half of season 1 did we see that deep down he was really hurting from the loss of his son, while Kurt is all about the mission, duty and at times can seem to dark and serious. Just by watching the movie you can see how well Michael Shanks was cast as his Jackson is very similar if not exactly the same as Spader's at least initially till he grows up/changes.

Although more then a decade has past since it's original release the Stargate movie is still a must watch for gaters and Stargate fans alike. :)

Coco Pops
July 28th, 2008, 11:10 PM
I love the extended version of the movie still and every couple of months will watch it.

silly sally
July 28th, 2008, 11:34 PM
The best Stargate movie to date (and I think the most successful money-wise)

Domestic: $71,567,262 36.4%
+ Foreign: $125,000,000 63.6%
= Worldwide: $196,567,262

Dr. Michael Benjamin
August 1st, 2008, 07:30 PM
I love this movie. After ten seasons of SG-1 I am left with some very minor questions. The biggest question I have is how exactly does Anubis go from dead first prime in the film to half-ascended System Lord in SG-1? Also how is it that Horus was killed in the film yet somehow appears in SG-1 on several occasions? Maybe the series producers took a quick and dirty look at the film and tried to slip a few past the audience.

unluckynumber11
August 4th, 2008, 10:48 AM
yea another plothole is that the stargate was in Creek moutain complex in the movie and then in Cheyenne moutain in the next but they didn't move it because Jack said he's been there before. :confused:

Arga
August 6th, 2008, 07:04 AM
I love this movie. After ten seasons of SG-1 I am left with some very minor questions. The biggest question I have is how exactly does Anubis go from dead first prime in the film to half-ascended System Lord in SG-1? Also how is it that Horus was killed in the film yet somehow appears in SG-1 on several occasions? Maybe the series producers took a quick and dirty look at the film and tried to slip a few past the audience.

well.. I would say
because in the movie, it wasn't Anubis nor Horus. They just wore helmets like that... Did they mention their name?
(or were you ironic when you said that?)

SG1FanOregon
August 6th, 2008, 06:45 PM
Okay, when Daniel found Earth's gate address in the caves, he had all but the last symbol, and proclaimed that he could not get the gate to work without the last symbol. My question is, if the only symbol that they didn't know was the last one, why didn't they just try every remaining symbol until they got a lock? There would only be 25 or so symbols left, assuming symbols never repeat (which they don't). I'm surprised I haven't thought of it before.

If you look at the style of the symbols for the 1st six compared to the symbol for earth. The planet symbols are totally different from the constellations & there should be only the 1 for the planet they're on. That 7th symbol should stick out like a sore thumb without even trying all the remaining ones first anyway...IMO

SG1FanOregon
August 6th, 2008, 06:57 PM
Kurt's O'Neill is a very different one from RDAs who quiet offered used humour and only in the mid half of season 1 did we see that deep down he was really hurting from the loss of his son, while Kurt is all about the mission, duty and at times can seem to dark and serious. Just by watching the movie you can see how well Michael Shanks was cast as his Jackson is very similar if not exactly the same as Spader's at least initially till he grows up/changes.

Although more then a decade has past since it's original release the Stargate movie is still a must watch for gaters and Stargate fans alike. :)

Well, Kurt's O'Neill was there for the sole purpose of committing suicide for the mission. He never intended on going back, & it was because he was currently so depressed over his sons death. It was this mission however that gave him a new lease on life & RDA's humor is his way of never letting himself go back to that dark place. This had been brought up during the series at 1 point

ValaDee
August 6th, 2008, 08:56 PM
Well, Kurt's O'Neill was there for the sole purpose of committing suicide for the mission. He never intended on going back, & it was because he was currently so depressed over his sons death. It was this mission however that gave him a new lease on life & RDA's humor is his way of never letting himself go back to that dark place. This had been brought up during the series at 1 point

I totally agree...But it made me mad when I realize his mission was to destroy everything...That would have been a hugeeeeee mistake on their part...I am glad they didn't cause then we wouldn't have had SG1 series... :)))

SG1FanOregon
August 6th, 2008, 09:03 PM
I totally agree...But it made me mad when I realize his mission was to destroy everything...That would have been a hugeeeeee mistake on their part...I am glad they didn't cause then we wouldn't have had SG1 series... :)))

Just goes to show you how much killing a few badguys & starting a rebellion can cheer a man up LOL:daniel:

SG1FanOregon
August 6th, 2008, 09:09 PM
I happened to notice 1 HUGE boo-boo between the movie & the series. I just popped the DVD in to double check it.. When O'Neil was being reactivated & he was sitting in his sons room holding the gun, in the background is a little league award to Tyler O'Neil, not Charlie. Maybe TPTB didn't look close enough?? Who knows!

Dr. Michael Benjamin
August 7th, 2008, 11:13 PM
well.. I would say
because in the movie, it wasn't Anubis nor Horus. They just wore helmets like that... Did they mention their name?
(or were you ironic when you said that?)

No I wasn't being sarcastic ( I think thats what you meant :D). Read the credits at the end. Carlos Lauchu portrayed Anubis and Djimon Hounsou was Horus. Anubis was killed by O'Neil at the film's climax during the fight at the stargate. Horus was killed by O'Neil with a staff weapon just before the battel at the pyramid. Of course O'Neil and Jackson send Ra a nuclear present to top it all off.

Pic
August 8th, 2008, 05:37 AM
I happened to notice 1 HUGE boo-boo between the movie & the series. I just popped the DVD in to double check it.. When O'Neil was being reactivated & he was sitting in his sons room holding the gun, in the background is a little league award to Tyler O'Neil, not Charlie. Maybe TPTB didn't look close enough?? Who knows!

No, I never noticed that.
Maybe his name was Tyler Charles O'Neill and folks just called him Charlie. What? It could happen!

Sir Andrew
August 8th, 2008, 07:21 PM
There's one thing that bothers me in the movie and the series: the staff blast force inconsistency. The first time we see it in the movie is when the Jaffa fires a last at a column. That is some major explosion. Directed at any human part and it would obliterate it.


So Ra gave his Jaffa some modded staff weapons

Sir Andrew
August 8th, 2008, 07:23 PM
The soundtrack of the movie is superb. I had a copy somewhere that I used to listen to when I was doing homework, and I wish I could find it again...

Coco Pops
August 8th, 2008, 07:34 PM
The soundtrack of the movie is superb. I had a copy somewhere that I used to listen to when I was doing homework, and I wish I could find it again...



Yeah the soundtrack is awesome.... I love it

SG1FanOregon
August 10th, 2008, 08:11 AM
No, I never noticed that.
Maybe his name was Tyler Charles O'Neill and folks just called him Charlie. What? It could happen!

Ummmm you're right! That could very well be. Maybe I'll peek at that again :cameron:

rushy
August 28th, 2010, 03:53 AM
There's a 3% chance that in symbols could have repeated itself making millions of combinations.