Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

S10: Critique & Contemplation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Manche
    replied
    Originally posted by ses110 View Post
    It's interesting how Daniel spoke up when Makepeace took over SG-1 when everyone though Jack was bad in shades of Grey. When Sam came back in Season 9 Daniel never said Sam should be in charge of SG-1. Another example of how the show missed RDA and Gekko leadership.
    Sorry that I react to such an old comment but despite the fact how much I like Daniel defending Sam, there is one thing which is quite annoying for me in the connection. I never found any comment about it on this page, so I will write it there. I do not like the suggestion of Daniel that the fourth member probably will be "someone like Ferretti." It looked as quite unfair to him. He was already a leader with his own team, we know him as a capable soldier, so why Daniel thinks that he should be demoted in the favour of Sam?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mandysg1
    replied
    I also perfer an enemy they actually fight and have a chance at winning. The Ori were...what on another dimension and all powerful

    Leave a comment:


  • jckfan55
    replied
    ^good point.
    It would have been interesting to see the power structures out there readjusting in the wake of the decline of the goa'uld.

    Leave a comment:


  • siles
    replied
    LA would have been a much better foe, plus Vala would have had a natural connection with that plot without having to manufacture a "superbaby" storyline with Adria

    Leave a comment:


  • Skydiver
    replied
    IMHO, the LA had a ton of potential that got ignored for a 'newer bigger bad'.

    It's just like the star wars universe....once the 'evil empire' is toppled, it can take years or decades or lifetimes to clean things up. There were books that dealt with it but the movies always gloss over it.

    But I think the chaos of 'good LA vs bad LA' could have a ton of interest. Developed bad guys, some worse than others and that moral ambiguity could have made things intriguing. Instead we got OTT cliches with the Ori, augmented by ham fisted commentaries on the real world and episodes that I felt were better suited to be SNL skits than a real episode.

    Leave a comment:


  • thekillman
    replied
    I think the LA in SGU was what they had originally intended for SG1. Imagine if it HAD been that way in SG1, would've made a much better enemy than the Ori

    Leave a comment:


  • themaster
    replied
    Originally posted by Skydiver View Post
    IMHO, it was just all clumsily handled. I honestly think a 'better' and more real threat could have been the lucian alliance and the rise of various minor goa'ulds. But the writers made the lucian alliance too cheesy and comical so l ost that potential enemy.
    Yah, I have to say the "lucian alliance" as handled in "universe" was a bit more developed...

    That doesn't mean I don't think the getting caught scene in "Off the Grid" was hilarious

    Leave a comment:


  • Brother Freyr
    replied
    Originally posted by Skydiver View Post
    With the ori we never had more than Oma's word that the Ori were bad and were 'vampiring' off their followers. We went to war based on nothing more than the ancient's say so.
    "Convert or die." The motto is all the evidence we needed to know the Ori were an enemy. Sucking or not sucking their followers' power, good or bad according to the Ancients, none of that was a deciding factor: the Ori and/or their followers were fundamentalist warriors bent on galactic domination. We didn't go to war because an Ancient said the Ori are bad. "Getting involved" wasn't a choice we were given. The die was cast as soon as the Ori learned of our existence. They immediately resolved to convert or destroy us.

    Originally posted by Skydiver View Post
    I think my biggest issue with the Ori is my feelings that it was a hamfisted attempt to 'comment' on real world events and religious 'wars'.
    The paraellel to real-world religious intolerance doesn't trouble me. It's a defining issue of our times. I often enjoy film that's relevant to current issues. True, it was blunt, but the story was good enough for me to overlook the absence of subtlety. I just wish they hadn't repeated "Hallowed are the Ori" so often during the first half of season nine.

    Leave a comment:


  • Skydiver
    replied
    I think my biggest issue with the Ori is my feelings that it was a hamfisted attempt to 'comment' on real world events and religious 'wars'.

    with the goa'uld, we had 'proof' that they were bad. Enslaving humans and experimenting on them, killing them ,etc. With the ori we never had more than Oma's word that the Ori were bad and were 'vampiring' off their followers. We went to war based on nothing more than the ancient's say so. Yeah, we eventually got some degrees of manipulation from the priors, but that was down the line, and after we got involved in the whole mess.

    IMHO, it was just all clumsily handled. I honestly think a 'better' and more real threat could have been the lucian alliance and the rise of various minor goa'ulds. But the writers made the lucian alliance too cheesy and comical so l ost that potential enemy.

    Leave a comment:


  • suse
    replied
    "forced" covers it nicely. I didn'tt sense the same timing as before S9. I'm not so sure that it wasn't more Rick than Michael but as I at the whole Ori storyline I wasn't a fan of it anyway. Good riddance to the Ori though. Nothing like killing off your super powerful antagonists (such as they were ) offscreen. So that left of with the minions and Vala's get.

    Leave a comment:


  • jckfan55
    replied
    For me the problem was in the whole direction of the show, more than any individual's performance. I do think Jack and Daniel in the Shroud felt a bit--forced. Not sure how much of that was the writing and how much the performances. I haven't watched it lately, though.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brother Freyr
    replied
    Side note: let's remember that criticism, in this context, doesn't imply dislike. It's a method for better understanding a show that we love:
    the act or art of analyzing and evaluating or judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mandysg1
    replied
    Originally posted by jasminaGo View Post
    People can criticize what ever they wanna criticize, you can't tell them what to do, and since this is a Season 10 thread and RDA/Jack weren't a big part of the last few seasons it doesn't give much to discuss/criticize/whatever. But if you want to bring out some specific issues that you have please go right ahead.

    I do agree that the Goa'uld were getting a bit old, but the problem lies in the fact that the holes in the Ori storyline and the way it was handled in general didn't really allow me to accept them as the new big bad guys. They were sorta... kinda there... but we never saw them, and then we got some really cool ancient tech that was conveniently lying around waiting to be used, they went poof (maybe... cause we never really saw that either) and that was that.
    I found problems in s8 also; if they had shown more of SG1 with Sam leading and adding characters then, we probably wouldn't have the problems we had with s9 and 10 in having someone with no gate experience leading SG1.

    Leave a comment:


  • hedwig
    replied
    Originally posted by themaster View Post
    Yah know if you want to criticize.. you should spend more time focusing on richard dean anderson and the jack o'neill character which wasn't always that great.. either!

    I have to say I personally thought they did a good job in the last few years and brought back some energy to the show.. the gaul'd really were getting to be a "old" storyline.. so thank goodness they ended/changed it..
    Richard Dean Anderson was only in a few episodes of Season 10. Are you talking about his performance in "The Shroud", or "200"? He was only in a "Avalon" (I think) for maybe 5 minutes in scenes with Daniel, Landry, and Mitchell.

    Leave a comment:


  • jasminaGo
    replied
    Originally posted by themaster View Post
    Yah know if you want to criticize.. you should spend more time focusing on richard dean anderson and the jack o'neill character which wasn't always that great.. either!

    I have to say I personally thought they did a good job in the last few years and brought back some energy to the show.. the gaul'd really were getting to be a "old" storyline.. so thank goodness they ended/changed it..
    People can criticize what ever they wanna criticize, you can't tell them what to do, and since this is a Season 10 thread and RDA/Jack weren't a big part of the last few seasons it doesn't give much to discuss/criticize/whatever. But if you want to bring out some specific issues that you have please go right ahead.

    I do agree that the Goa'uld were getting a bit old, but the problem lies in the fact that the holes in the Ori storyline and the way it was handled in general didn't really allow me to accept them as the new big bad guys. They were sorta... kinda there... but we never saw them, and then we got some really cool ancient tech that was conveniently lying around waiting to be used, they went poof (maybe... cause we never really saw that either) and that was that.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X