What plots from sg1 do you want tobe carried on in Atlantis?

[Atlantis1]

Atlantis could not. It would need to have started back in SG1 to be a stand alone. Thats the ultimate difference. Atlantis has to get its origins and history from SG1. Voyager is a Spin Off. It did not need all the prior Star Treks to create a working Story. Angel is a spin off, it did not need Buffy to create a working story. Fraiser is a spin off, it did not need Cheers to create a working story.

I read books by an author named Jack McDevitt. He has written a series of books which have the same character but can be read as individual stories. Some will call each book a spin-off of the first book in the series but that is not so. Each book carries its own plot and does not rely on the other books in the series.

Just because a tv series is created and later other series are written based upon the idea of the first series does not make it a spin-off. It is just telling a story of other people and adventures in the same universe as a show of its own.

[ShadowMaat]

Would those be the books about that treasure hunter dude? I read the one about the search for Atlantis first and got hooked. Good stuff, but I'm not sure the analogy carries over. I'd see a series of books as being more like individual episodes of a show.

Now if you're talking about a spinoff book series... *thinks* I'm sure there are a lot of obvious examples, but I can't think of any I'm willing to admit reading.

I suppose the Star Wars books could be considered to have dozens of spinoffs, although I can't say how closely tied they are with other series'. I also don't know if the LOTR trilogy can be considered a spinoff of the Hobbit or if they just happen to be set in the same universe.

I know a lot of junior/young adult books that do spinoffs. Babysitters Club had Babysitters Little Sister series, I think. That was an impossibly long time ago, though, and I lost interest in those books as I grew up.

Can't say I know enough about the history of the Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew to draw any conclusions, either, although I know they occasionally visited one another. But I don't think they ever got rid of one of the Hardy Boys and replaced him with Nancy Drew for the rest of the series.

[SG13-NightOps]

You see, this is part of what I addressed in my post. I understand your grievance but what I don't see is some understanding what we 'purists' are trying to say. Rather I feel I am being told I have no right to feel as I do.

Hey now, you are the one insisting to me that Atlantis is its own show... Its a pot - kettle thing.

I have an opinion just as valid as yours as I can make a substantial enough case to support my opinion as you can make to support yours.

What it comes down to though - is we are two fans disagreeing on a website. The guys in the chairs are the ones calling the shots and making the final decisions.

The difference I guess is I am accepting that its their right to do so. I have disagreed with some of their decisions (I thought Origin was a terrible storyline). But you dont see me here ranting about it.

People have called me a "stepford" fan for that. Is that alright? I am simply expressing an opposing viewpoint that I hold. My other viewpoint is I want to hear their story - not impose my will onto them. Thats what TV is about. If you dont like what they are showing, you watch something else. If you dont like any of it, make your own.

"Purists" - Sorry, I did come up with that name but I thought you would mind it too much since in effect you ask for Pure Atlantis. It is not meant in disrespect, but to allow me to speak of a section of Atlantis fans without generalising and including those (like myself) that disagree with the "Pure Atlantis" opinion.

I read books by an author named Jack McDevitt. He has written a series of books which have the same character but can be read as individual stories. Some will call each book a spin-off of the first book in the series but that is not so. Each book carries its own plot and does not rely on the other books in the series.

Just because a tv series is created and later other series are written based upon the idea of the first series does not make it a spin-off. It is just telling a story of other people and adventures in the same universe as a show of its own.

Final Fantasy is much the same. They have the Aeons from installment to installment, but every game/episode is a completely new and different story.

Yet, when they make another one based on a former one, they do connect them.
FFX-2, FFVII Advent Children.
All others carry a different number.

I think we can establish now that everyone has their own idea on the connections between a parent show/game/move and its spin off.
Rather than try and squeeze SG1/SGA into someone elses model, how about we accept that via the actions of TPTB, they dont want to cut SG1 out of SGA completely.

[Atlantis1]

http://www.sfwa.org/members/mcdevitt/

[Mitchell82]

Thats where the misconception is.

SG1 was meant to end at Season 7 and The Lost City was going to be a movie that pre-empted Atlantis. However that changed and the series continued (As parodied in 200). Atlantis went ahead regardless.

Now as for the they wanted it different, DH contradicts that thought in an Interview on the MGM website (DH Part 2). He calls Atlantis a show meant to compliment SG1 - implying a connection between the two that was evident in the studio.

Continuation by definition is "An extension by which something is carried to a further point." This indeed applies to Atlantis from the Lost City of the Ancients Storyline started in SG1 - Season 6.

It is also, by some fans of both SG1 and SGA, impossible to separate the two and treat them like singular separate entities. Its much like Firefly and Serenity. Sure, you can watch Serenity without having watched Firefly first, however that doesn't mean they are mutually exclusive entities.

Having watched SG1, the hunt by SG1 for the Lost city of the Ancients, the formation of the IOA, the collection of the first ZPM that powered the gate to GET the expedition to Pegasus, etc - I can't say Atlantis has nothing to do with SG1. Its a continuation of that story which could not be told individually in SG1 - because SG1 still had to defeat the Goa'uld and Replicators.

If they never intended it to be a continuation - then they would never have place Weir in SG1 in the first place to make the connection.

Excellent points. At one point it was intended to be seperate and the only conection was the Atlantis plot. That's why it was introduced in Lost City. When Sg-1 was renewed Atlantis complimented SG-1. It is meant to be seperate but it is essentially a coninutation of the Stargate Universe and story but not a continuation of SG-1.

[Cautious Explorer]

I think we can establish now that everyone has their own idea on the connections between a parent show/game/move and its spin off.
Rather than try and squeeze SG1/SGA into someone elses model, how about we accept that via the actions of TPTB, they dont want to cut SG1 out of SGA completely.

I'll agree with you here. Most posters have said they don't mind an occasional reference to or guest appearance by characters from SG-1. Many are hopeful that Carter will fit in nicely without overshadowing the original crew. That is not cutting SG-1 out completely. I'm wondering if you aren't expecting more involvement from SG-1 than TPTB have indicated. We're debating what plots we do or don't want carried over from SG-1 because someone posted the topic, not because we have every expectation it will happen.

It is a Spin Off. Its a Spin off CONTINUING the Lost City of the Ancients storyline that was concieved and developed in SG1.
I guess the difference between SG1/SGA and Buffy/Angel was at least Angel didnt have to rely on Buffy as a basis of history to create a logical series. Angel could have started and finished without Buffy ever having existed.

Atlantis could not. It would need to have started back in SG1 to be a stand alone. Thats the ultimate difference. Atlantis has to get its origins and history from SG1. Voyager is a Spin Off. It did not need all the prior Star Treks to create a working Story. Angel is a spin off, it did not need Buffy to create a working story. Fraiser is a spin off, it did not need Cheers to create a working story.

Atlantis left the entire explaination of how it came to be to SG1 and did not recover that ground in SGA. It is a continuation.

Are you saying that SGA can't be understood without viewing SG-1? Everything I needed to know to enjoy the series was adequately explained in The Rising. I guess if I really felt lost I could go rent SG-1 DVD's but I've managed to muddle through so far without feeling the need.

Excellent points. At one point it was intended to be seperate and the only conection was the Atlantis plot. That's why it was introduced in Lost City. When Sg-1 was renewed Atlantis complimented SG-1. It is meant to be seperate but it is essentially a coninutation of the Stargate Universe and story but not a continuation of SG-1.

Yes. That about sums it up.

[SG13-NightOps]

I'll agree with you here. Most posters have said they don't mind an occasional reference to or guest appearance by characters from SG-1. Many are hopeful that Carter will fit in nicely without overshadowing the original crew. That is not cutting SG-1 out completely. I'm wondering if you aren't expecting more involvement from SG-1 than TPTB have indicated. We're debating what plots we do or don't want carried over from SG-1 because someone posted the topic, not because we have every expectation it will happen.

I was replying to the comments that infer SG1 should have no direct involvement, contact, occurance in SGA at all - ever - period.
Those comments came about because of the original question.

I simply said that continuing the Lost City would be a really good idea.... seeing how Atlantis *is* the lost city and all.

Are you saying that SGA can't be understood without viewing SG-1? Everything I needed to know to enjoy the series was adequately explained in The Rising. I guess if I really felt lost I could go rent SG-1 DVD's but I've managed to muddle through so far without feeling the need.

Not at all. I am saying that the History, how the Expedition got to be in atlantis is not explained adequately in SGA to qualify it as wholly separated from SG1.

For example, where in Atlantis do they explain Daniel finding the table on Abydos that let them know there was a lost city?
Or where it explains how O'Neill found the Antarctic base they started from by having the entire repository of knowledge of the Ancients downloaded into his brain - a second time.
Then of course, no explanation of where the Zed PM came from in the first place.

The connection between SG1/A and Firefly/Serenity are in these facts. If you had not watched Firefly, then you have no idea who Inara and Shep Book are when they get there.

So the history of Atlantis is left solely in SG1 and never explained again. You can watch SGA without witching SG1 - but you cant deny that they left it up to knowledge of SG1 to explain how they were eventually able to get there in the first place.

Yes. That about sums it up.

So now all we need is the common ground that SG1 is part of the Stargate Universe. A very very big part. Total separation is illogical.

Dont get me wrong, I am not saying sg1 should turn up on Atlantis left and right and take over. I am simply arguing that they have every right to exist in the same space time as Atlantis and can pop up if and when the writers see fit.

[Ltcolshepjumper]

It is a Spin Off. Its a Spin off CONTINUING the Lost City of the Ancients storyline that was concieved and developed in SG1.
I guess the difference between SG1/SGA and Buffy/Angel was at least Angel didnt have to rely on Buffy as a basis of history to create a logical series. Angel could have started and finished without Buffy ever having existed.

Atlantis could not. It would need to have started back in SG1 to be a stand alone. Thats the ultimate difference. Atlantis has to get its origins and history from SG1. Voyager is a Spin Off. It did not need all the prior Star Treks to create a working Story. Angel is a spin off, it did not need Buffy to create a working story. Fraiser is a spin off, it did not need Cheers to create a working story.

Atlantis left the entire explaination of how it came to be to SG1 and did not recover that ground in SGA. It is a continuation.

The only thing SGA has to draw from SG-1 is 1) the Stargates were built by a race of beings known as Ancients who learned how to become energy and 2) these Ancients built Atlantis and left b/c of a plague.

[Cautious Explorer]

I was replying to the comments that infer SG1 should have no direct involvement, contact, occurance in SGA at all - ever - period.
Those comments came about because of the original question.

I simply said that continuing the Lost City would be a really good idea.... seeing how Atlantis *is* the lost city and all.


Not at all. I am saying that the History, how the Expedition got to be in atlantis is not explained adequately in SGA to qualify it as wholly separated from SG1.

For example, where in Atlantis do they explain Daniel finding the table on Abydos that let them know there was a lost city?
Or where it explains how O'Neill found the Antarctic base they started from by having the entire repository of knowledge of the Ancients downloaded into his brain - a second time.
Then of course, no explanation of where the Zed PM came from in the first place.

The connection between SG1/A and Firefly/Serenity are in these facts. If you had not watched Firefly, then you have no idea who Inara and Shep Book are when they get there.

So the history of Atlantis is left solely in SG1 and never explained again. You can watch SGA without witching SG1 - but you cant deny that they left it up to knowledge of SG1 to explain how they were eventually able to get there in the first place.

I've got to say, I never really cared that much. As I said before, The Rising was enough for me. Sounds like you're a little more hung up on history. I'd rather see where we're going.

So now all we need is the common ground that SG1 is part of the Stargate Universe. A very very big part. Total separation is illogical.

Dont get me wrong, I am not saying sg1 should turn up on Atlantis left and right and take over. I am simply arguing that they have every right to exist in the same space time as Atlantis and can pop up if and when the writers see fit.

Which hopefully won't be all that often.

[SG13-NightOps]

I've got to say, I never really cared that much. As I said before, The Rising was enough for me. Sounds like you're a little more hung up on history. I'd rather see where we're going.

I have used the word "continuation" several times, non?

The fact that all this history is left to SG1 means that it is an absolutely logical conclusion that Atlantis can be deemed a Continuation for SG1 fans.

Which hopefully won't be all that often.

Problem is for most tho, is that if it does happen more often, then thats the writers choice. I wont object and tell them they are wrong - its their choice in the first place. They cant be wrong when its their decision. The end is not a foregone conclusion that happens the way we see it. They make the decision, good or bad. But never wrong. Good/Bad, Popular/Unpopular.

But its their choice, and if they choose not to sever the connection, then the perception of SGA as a stand alone spin off is incorrect. No?

[Cautious Explorer]

I have used the word "continuation" several times, non?

The fact that all this history is left to SG1 means that it is an absolutely logical conclusion that Atlantis can be deemed a Continuation for SG1 fans.

Sorry. We're just never going to agree on this. You want to call it a continuation because it shares a few elements. You go for it. I'm going to keep calling it a spin-off because it only shares a few elements with SG-1.

Problem is for most tho, is that if it does happen more often, then thats the writers choice. I wont object and tell them they are wrong - its their choice in the first place. They cant be wrong when its their decision. The end is not a foregone conclusion that happens the way we see it. They make the decision, good or bad. But never wrong. Good/Bad, Popular/Unpopular.

But its their choice, and if they choose not to sever the connection, then the perception of SGA as a stand alone spin off is incorrect. No?

Nope. I've watched and enjoyed SGA for 3 seasons without needing a referral to SG-1, so in my case it certainly is able to stand alone.

[SG13-NightOps]

Sorry. We're just never going to agree on this. You want to call it a continuation because it shares a few elements. You go for it. I'm going to keep calling it a spin-off because it only shares a few elements with SG-1.

I never said we had to Agree.
But just acknowledging my right to see it as a Continuation of a story started in SG1 would go a long way.

Nope. I've watched and enjoyed SGA for 3 seasons without needing a referral to SG-1, so in my case it certainly is able to stand alone.

I'm sorry, I think you missed my point completely. I was talking about from the Writers perspective.

But obviously it wont matter. I am show both my POV and that which appears to be the apparent POV of the writers, but apparently neither of them are allowed because it means members of SG1 are allowed to turn up on Atlantis or be put in command.

I guess the whole difference then will be - I am happy about it.

[Cautious Explorer]

I'm sorry, I think you missed my point completely. I was talking about from the Writers perspective.

But obviously it wont matter. I am show both my POV and that which appears to be the apparent POV of the writers, but apparently neither of them are allowed because it means members of SG1 are allowed to turn up on Atlantis or be put in command.

I guess the whole difference then will be - I am happy about it.

Sorry! I did misunderstand you. I thought you were talking about your own POV. I didn't realize you were speaking on the writers' behalf.

[SG13-NightOps]

Sorry! I did misunderstand you. I thought you were talking about your own POV. I didn't realize you were speaking on the writers' behalf.

Ok - well if we are just going to completely ignore what I am actually writing, I think this debate is pointless.

Unless English is not your first language? Then I can try and make words like "apparent" easier to understand.

[Mitchell82]

I was replying to the comments that infer SG1 should have no direct involvement, contact, occurance in SGA at all - ever - period.
Those comments came about because of the original question.

I simply said that continuing the Lost City would be a really good idea.... seeing how Atlantis *is* the lost city and all.


Not at all. I am saying that the History, how the Expedition got to be in atlantis is not explained adequately in SGA to qualify it as wholly separated from SG1.

For example, where in Atlantis do they explain Daniel finding the table on Abydos that let them know there was a lost city?
Or where it explains how O'Neill found the Antarctic base they started from by having the entire repository of knowledge of the Ancients downloaded into his brain - a second time.
Then of course, no explanation of where the Zed PM came from in the first place.

The connection between SG1/A and Firefly/Serenity are in these facts. If you had not watched Firefly, then you have no idea who Inara and Shep Book are when they get there.

So the history of Atlantis is left solely in SG1 and never explained again. You can watch SGA without witching SG1 - but you cant deny that they left it up to knowledge of SG1 to explain how they were eventually able to get there in the first place.




So now all we need is the common ground that SG1 is part of the Stargate Universe. A very very big part. Total separation is illogical.

Dont get me wrong, I am not saying sg1 should turn up on Atlantis left and right and take over. I am simply arguing that they have every right to exist in the same space time as Atlantis and can pop up if and when the writers see fit.

Excellent points. Sg-1 and SGA exisit in the same universe and SG-1 does not need to show up and take over but a story here or their and some reference makes sense to me.