Morally questionable actions of the Stargate Atlantis Expedition

[Laxian of Earth]

IMO that is part of the problem. TOO many shows think killing or even permanently injuring "ONE OF THE MAIN cast" is verboten.. To ME it strains belief that they never seen to suffer..

I still like this better than the Game of Thrones route:

Kill as many main characters as possible! (as much as it's realistic it happens to piss people off who like certain characters, not to mention that you have to constantly introduce replacements - or start with an "impossibly" large cast (for a TV-Show) and thin that out over the running time of the show!)

greetings LAX
ps: It's also unrealistic in a show were the dead can be brought back via technology and by other means (sarcophagus, nox-healing, cloning and genetic memory, ascending and descending (retaking human form) etc. etc.)

[DarkenLycht]

Well, if facing the consequences for their own actions I would not mind if one or the other main char gets killed or harmed...they can always make up a reason to bring them back. It is just that moist of the time they get warned of bad consequences and still do it without really being affected themselves, often at least

I liked it that they also got affected when the Wraith watcher was killed then the Atlantis team could not just ignore that and move on, but I guess that was necessary to give them an enemy they could fight against

[BlowitUpistus]

I still like this better than the Game of Thrones route:

Kill as many main characters as possible! (as much as it's realistic it happens to piss people off who like certain characters, not to mention that you have to constantly introduce replacements - or start with an "impossibly" large cast (for a TV-Show) and thin that out over the running time of the show!)

There has to be some happy medium between "NEVER kill someone without a sure fire means of resurrecting them" and Lets see how many main characters we can kill THIS season!

[Laxian of Earth]

Hm...we had "harmed"

Daniel was forced to use a sarcophagus more than once because he was dumb enough to get himself shot (in the movie, while on board of the two ships Apophis took to invade Earth) and he was dying before he ascended (it's unclear how much the hand-healing-device could heal him, but everybody knew that it wouldn't fully restore him!)

The Team was killed when they attacked Apophis on the Nox-Homeworld (except for Teal'c)

Jack needed a damned symbiote because of that ancient plague that nearly killed him

Carson was killed because of Rodney touching **** he shouldn't have

Sheppard nearly died when he was attached to that stupid bug

Sam nearly died because of the Ashrak

etc. etc. (those were just the examples I remember without looking anything up!)

Sure longer lasting consequences would have been nice sometimes and some more character development etc. (but sadly they didn't really do longer arcs at first, which more or less demanded that everything was reset after an episode (with few exceptions)...that's also why they never kept any new technology (at first, later on some stuff was retained of course!) or developped much on their own (the naquadah reactor and limited space-ship technology which did badly in any encounter (the Prometheus wasn't just a prototype, it was ill conceived, too small (just like the later 304s - otherwise they wouldn't be so much better with a ZPM because simply pumping more power into a system doesn't make it better, unless said system was running on too little power before!), the weapons were of no use in a fight...every Ha'tak ignored the missiles after all!))...in reality one of the first things they'd really would have wanted to learn would be how staff-weapons work and then they'd make their own energy-weapons and the next thing would probably be personal shielding (so ground engagements against Jaffa start being pretty onesided! Which would also explain the low losses of the SGC against superior jaffa-numbers, more than "plot-armor" at least!))

greetings LAX

[coolcatkim22]

IMO that is part of the problem. TOO many shows think killing or even permanently injuring "ONE OF THE MAIN cast" is verboten.. To ME it strains belief that they never seen to suffer..

It's not verboten, it's just bad story writing. Killing off characters for the sake of "drama" or "realism" can make the audience feel emotionally manipulated. Audiences get invested in their characters and if you start killing them off for little to no reason, then they're less likely to get invested with the rest of the cast or any new characters you introduce.

Shows like "The Walking Dead" or "Game of Thrones" can get away with it because they're whole premise is set around the idea that "everyone's life is forfeit". A show like SG-1 or Atlantis are about the human condition and morality, not specifically about life and death.

Ultimately, what we watch fiction for is to see if a character succeeds or fails at their quest. Whatever the outcome we must feel as though their failure or success was earned. Similarly if a character dies we must feel that it was EARNED.
If a character is going to die their story arch should build up to that death. The less build up there is the less likely audiences will respond positively to it.


P.S.
Happy 4 year anniversary of this thread everybody!!!

[StargateMillennium]

Well, I did once post a thread asking whether people preferred shows with mortal characters that die regularly or ones with a consistent crew that somehow survive and people said they preferred the latter because they're watching for entertainment and escapism and they lose that if their favorites constantly get offed.

Personally, they don't have to necessarily get offed to suffer a consequence. Aside from a few comments here or there, people tend to all agree with the same action. Aside from Ronon, who will always disagree with anything that isn't killing wraith, Teyla was the only one who voiced genuine criticism of wraith to human conversion. They could've had a 50/50 split of people who agree and people who disagree each presenting solid arguments.

Or they could have actual consequences. I mean, maybe the ep after SG-1 breaks protocol, they are grounded for a period of time or are under evaluation or something.

[StargateMillennium]

Oh yeah. And that wraith-to-human virus gives me some Mass Effect Androme Kett vibes.

[Laxian of Earth]

Other way round! Stargate went there first, I believe

greetings LAX
ps: Mass Effect...damned, you sadly can't unsee Mass Effect: Andromeda and Mass Effect 3

I want to send myself a message through a stargate (dialed to intersect with a solar-flare!): "Don't play Mass Effect 3 and Andromeda - signed: Lax"

[kevin knox]

It has to be the same with every other TV series or movies, you can't kill off the key characters or the whole franchise will fall apart. The story arc has to revolve around a handful of characters (that survive incredible odds) and have time for character development and allow the audience to understand them and grow emotionally invested in them... of course.

If you compare with say X-files or even Game of Thrones, some characters too have to be around to draw a common thread through the whole storyline or it wouldn't make sense.

Overall, I love the Stargate Atlantis series much more than the SG-1 and Universe.
I can say it was very entertaining for me to watch and laugh at their honest depiction of some very human character flaws. Their constant conversational jousting and banter was also interesting with some very funny puns added. All very natural and with a good dose of honoring some of the "better angels of our nature", in the words of Abraham. The action scenes are kind of trite and predictable though, but still tolerable when compared to say Star Trek TV series, which borders on the ridiculous. lol.

The other thing I have to add, is that I really liked the way they sprinkled some philosophical angle into the Atlantis series, which makes you think about the consequences of human and non-human actions and reactions. There was a whole lot of moral dilemmas as well which I thought the producers were quite clever to leave largely unresolved. This provokes the viewers who notices these moral dilemmas to THiNK and answer it for themselves rather than have it spoon fed to the audience. Very intellectual without being too condescending about the moral implications of it all ...

*Spoiler alert...don't read anymore if you want to find out for yourself.


Some of the moral dilemmas are:
- the fact that humans appearing in Pegasus was what triggers the early awakening of the Wraith. In the process, it endangers Pegasus inhabitants as well as exposing Earth's location too. So perhaps, the principle of non-interference (a concept from Star Trek) has its merits, but then if you're not curious about the Universe and want to explore it, whats the whole point of being human?
Further, perhaps getting Earthlings to encounter Wraith species earlier, would have been a good thing in the overall scheme of things since it gives Earth an early warning and an opportunity to rally Pegasus inhabitants to fight them off?

- When humans have the power of the Ancients (which are humans too), who is the creator and who are the God(s)? Who owns who? Recall, the episode where the Ancients came back to reclaim Atlantis and took over all the controls without even asking Elizabeth for permission. So, Earthlings would seem to be the trespassers in Pegasus but Earthlings are also one branch descendants of the Ancients, so do they have a right to inherit Atlantis from the Ancients?

- The Wraith was said to be a race developed or evolved from the iratus bug which acquired human DNA from Ancients (presumably from biting and attaching themselves to early Ancient explorers). Thus, in a sense too, the Wraith has a lineage from the Ancients and have equal rights to everything Ancient.

- The Replicators are also created by the Ancients to fight off the Wraith, but in the process they too became an enemy of the Ancients (and humans from Earth too). So again, it seems to say that some solutions may actually make the situation worse than just leaving it alone. But then, without the Replicators as a counter-balance to the numerical superiority of the Wraith, humans in Pegasus and Earth would probably have been completely culled and wiped out. So, the ends may justify the means?

- Another end that may justify the means, is Earthlings in Atlantis experimenting with Michael, in order to transform him into a human. Similarly, throughout the millenia, some Wraith obviously have also been doing vice versa, with mixed results. Teyla was said to have some Wraith DNA and even manage to mentally control a powerful Wraith Queen once, and her child obviously has Wraith genes passed on. Her tribe has others like her too. So, the point is you can't really completely destroy Wraith since their DNA has infiltrated human populations as well.

- Which comes to the biggest moral dilemma. Is Wraith as a race "evil"? Their nature is to feed. How different is that from humans? We need to eat too and humans breed and genetically engineer our poultry and cattle too....for food too. In the greater ecosystem of the cosmos, perhaps Wraith is an inevitable evolutionary development to have predators to balance the prey populations?
On planet Earth, predator species naturally developed over time to prey on other species and keep the natural balance. You can't say Mother Earth is "evil" for evolving wasps that feed on spiders, or tigers that feed on lambs, or eagles than feed on snakes and rabbits. If eagles did not feed on rabbits or snakes, the whole ecosystem will be overrun by rabbits and snakes over breeding and damaging the entire ecosystem.

So, who is to say if Wraith did not evolve for the same purposes to be a natural predator species in a galactic ecosystem?

I recall there was one episode where a Wraith scientist asked a rhetorical question of what he would become if he no longer needed to "feed" on humans. It is like a Tiger asking itself what it would its nature be left with, if it became a vegan. That episode was really though-provoking for me.

- There are other oral dilemmas such as playing God with some Pegasus colonies etc... too many to list here, but the above are some of the more salient ones that line the whole story and well-worth watching.
Thanks for reading and hope you enjoy Stargate as much as i did.

[WraithTech]

So, who is to say if Wraith did not evolve for the same purposes to be a natural predator species in a galactic ecosystem?

Oceanic dead zones, deforestation and rainforest burning, manure lagoons, mass extinctions, plastic litter patches in the ocean, multiple nations bombing one another... all visible from way up in the sky... it is a small wonder someone hasn't evolved to take notice. From War of the Worlds to Mass Effect, extraterrestrials taking notice and coming for humans is a scifi theme.

I recall there was one episode where a Wraith scientist asked a rhetorical question of what he would become if he no longer needed to "feed" on humans.

It's more than just meeting individual energy needs: Keller's plan would have left them without their physical feeding hands, without the ability to share lifeforce, to heal their children and their brothers and to reverse death. Especially for a telepathic race who would both share and feel the pain of their wounded and dying friends and family, not being able to heal them any more would be devastating.

[kevin knox]

... it is a small wonder someone hasn't evolved to take notice. From War of the Worlds to Mass Effect, extraterrestrials taking notice and coming for humans is a scifi theme.

Yes, the depressing news is that humans are probably the "evil" ones to begin with...just that our anthropomorphic sense of entitlement makes us think we are God's special children in a Universe full of other species.

If Stargate is really a "soft" disclosure by the US government; then I'm guessing the real Aliens out there are very tolerant of us humans and have put us under some sort of quarantine for our own good. lol.


It begs the question, then if Wraith (or similar species) exists, then are they to be exterminated or protected as in a "protected" species by space-faring civilizations encountering them?

Today on Earth, tigers are already an endangered species, and for some strange reason, we don't find it abhorrent that tigers hunt and eat their helpless prey alive too. In fact, we admire the strength and beauty and power of tigers. No one in their right mind would want to genetically engineer a tiger into a herbivore and hence render it harmless to us. So, I agree with your points that a similar attempt on Wraith would be devastating to them and perhaps even "immoral" (by human standards).

That is why I say the Atlantis series makes one think about various actions and consequences in ways most sci-fi films do not.

Perhaps, there is no resolution to the moral dilemma of humans versus wraith encounters, except to either avoid each other completely (maybe by banishing one species to another galaxy far far away...since there are hundred of Billions of galactic unexplored real estate) or to revert to survivalist instincts and engage in all-out war till the last man or wraith is left standing. I doubt human governments and their military brass can accept any other outcome which allows the threat to remain in our literal backyards.

Another possibility is that the Wraith somehow limits their own spread and growth based upon the growth and availability of their food source (i.e. humans). Just as in a planetary ecosystem, the predators cannot grow in large numbers if the prey population cannot support it. This was seen in the manner in which the Replicators switched strategy to wipe out the Wraith food source (i.e. humans) in order to starve the Wraith populations. Note also in one of the episodes whereby the Wraith even fought amongst themselves for the dwindling food sources at one point.

I'm suggesting that is also why the Wraith needs to hibernate for hundreds/thousands of years to allow its food source to recover between each culling season. This could be an evolutionary system to keep the galactic "balance" between predator and prey. This happens in the real-world natural ecosystems as well. When predator numbers rise too much too fast, they run out of food after all the prey gets eaten, and the predators turn on each other (fyi, Wraith are cannibalistic too as shown when their leaders sometimes feeds on their own kind out of necessity for survival).

Eventually, the apex predator that survives the dry spell has her numbers reduced relative to the available food source and the whole cycle repeats. In the Atlantis series, it was the appearance of Earthling humans that actually disrupted this cycle that has been going on for thousands of years in the Pegasus galaxy.

We just had to mess up other ecosystems, after we're done messing up our own. :-)

[WraithTech]

It begs the question, then if Wraith (or similar species) exists, then are they to be exterminated or protected as in a "protected" species by space-faring civilizations encountering them?

You mean if a 3rd alien party would intervene in Wraith and human wars and decide our fates? I think we both know things would not be looking very well for humans.

In fact, we admire the strength and beauty and power of tigers.

Admired, by some, but degraded by too many. In some countries, they still are violently forced to do silly tricks for human “amusement” and are killed for so-called “trophies.” Also, I am not sure of your native language, but English phrases villainize such obligate hunters. Loan “shark.” Violent “predator.” Sneaky “snake.” “Preying” on the elderly, etc.

That is why I say the Atlantis series makes one think about various actions and consequences in ways most sci-fi films do not.

Some viewers see this when looking at the Wraith, especially, and even try to be better people because of it in real life. But, not enough viewers see this. They only see the human main star cast and write off everyone else, human or Wraith. Stargate as a whole has less interaction with other races than other scifi shows, with the tendency to make the others 2D villains.

We just had to mess up other ecosystems, after we're done messing up our own. :-)

Yes. Even littering nonbiodegradable PowerBar wrappers and golf balls in the Pegasus galaxy shows an attitude of disrespect.

[kevin knox]

Well, you can't fault humans for being primate-like and Wraith for wraith-like when each of their "way of life" is threatened.

You only have to look at (human) teenage boys' monkey antics and short-term focus to know how most humankind actually think and act. Whether your teenagers are from asia, the States or down under makes little difference. Human brains are wired (or should I say short-circuited) with all sorts of bias and prejudice.

I'd assume the same would apply for Wraith or other species we might encounter or have already encountered out there. Short of a "hive" mind, any advance technological civilization will likely have complex organization of individuals, and a complex organization implies hierarchy and chain of command and control, which in turn implies a social class structure with bias and prejudice built into it.

Notice that in Stargate Atlantis, even the hive Queen felt disgusted by the sight and stench of Michael, who was "turned" from wraith into a human and back again. So, the Wraith is hardly a model of high civilization, besides the obvious fact that they are cannibals.

The best way we can label the Wraith species is one similar to tigers or lions, if you prefer... apex predators born from evolutionary adaptation, plus with FTL spaceships and associated technology.

I can't say watching sci-fi makes people better. I think it makes people think ahead a little more about the possibilities. Which is why I think contemporary sci-fi is a front for the "soft" disclosure process (i.e. gradual acclimatization of the general population to the reality of our origins, the extra-terrestrial presence, technologies and discoveries...and "revelations" too shocking for a formal public announcement)

PS: ff you want to go down the rabbit hole of global conspiracy, you might like to know that Stargate likely had a role to play in the "soft" disclosure process of the US govt:

https://www.exopolitics.org/stargate...whistleblower/

[WraithTech]

besides the obvious fact that they are cannibals.

When humans are put into starvation and stranded conditions, the same desperation happens, the world over.

I can't say watching sci-fi makes people better.

It has made me a better person and I have seen others say the same. So, hope is out there.

PS: ff you want to go down the rabbit hole of global conspiracy, you might like to know that Stargate likely had a role to play in the "soft" disclosure process of the US govt:

I’ve seen this idea and have had run-ins with people who harass Stargate fans and seen other Stargate fans harassed off of sites because they think we are in on some conspiracy and supporting some evil NWO or something. LOL!

[kevin knox]

When humans are put into starvation and stranded conditions, the same desperation happens, the world over.

...
I’ve seen this idea and have had run-ins with people who harass Stargate fans and seen other Stargate fans harassed off of sites because they think we are in on some conspiracy and supporting some evil NWO or something. LOL!

Yes good point. As mentioned earlier, you can't really fault human or wraith for their respective behaviors given the way each progressed in their own evolutionary path.

As for the NWO idea, nope, I've never harassed anyone for it and I don't encourage anyone to do it. I doubt the Stargate actors and producers are even aware of the disclosure backstory nor who introduced those very plausible sci-fi ideas. They are all just trying to pay rent :-)

On a more sober tone, my point is Stargate is merely just ONE of many dots in the connect-the-dots disclosure scheme. The producers of Star Trek / Star Wars and also others have been known to have actually consulted "contacts" within the military-industrial complex or drawn from some, deliberately or otherwise, "leaked" content.

Sci-fi works are the best way for plausible deniability by the military-industrial complex and the powers that be, since they can claim its all only "fiction" and everyone can easily laugh it off.

However, if one has just spent some time to read some of the actual govt. documentation released via the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) by the CIA/FBI/NSA/NASA and other alphabet soup organizations, you would know that UFOs is a REAL phenomenon and considered to be REAL by very many real-world people within the military-industrial complex.

That simple fact that there is ACKNOWLEDGEMENT with documentary proof, in and by itself, already tells us the actual reality could be stranger than sci-fi. There are now just too many credible people who have already come forward identifying their names and risking their careers, reputation and even their family and their own lives, to share new information/documents/pictures of various phenomenon.

If you just do a cursory count, there are now probably thousands of pilots, engineers, scientists, policemen, military witnesses from privates to high-ranking officials, doctors (who have found physical evidence of unknown implants), astronauts, soviet cosmonauts, employees with US military contractors, abductees and in a few cases, senators and even presidents etc. who have directly experienced unexplainable, non-human phenomenon in space and on earth.

New evidence from the archaeological record is also increasingly shown to be strangely congruent with the hypothesis of extra-terrestrial visitation, even interference with human affairs, in the distant past.

Thus, there is two logical conclusions. Either all these people are all insane with synchronous mass delusions or we are confronting a real phenomenon that is so deeply disturbing that we refuse the accept it for what it is. That we laugh about it is probably because we feel helpless and uncertain how to respond to all these (plural) strange phenomenon except to laugh it off.

The funny thing is mainstream scientist all tend to AVOID even studying the phenomenon. If Science is claiming to be the dispassionate and objective study of nature and natural phenomenon and trying to understand the science behind it, then ask yourself why practically all scientists today avoid such topics?
Too controversial for the scientific method? or perhaps our primate-brain really fears the possibilities?

In any case, I think human civilization is reaching a cross-roads. We either face up to the possibilities and move forward rationally considering and adapting these new possibilities, especially with energy and transportation technologies which can literally bring human civilization to a new level, or we are going to go down the path of extinction like the Neantherdals did. Personally, its not that much of a choice to me.