Continuum for S/J shippers SPOILERS

[VSS]

This is interesting to me! I wonder why he wouldn't say the line. Just wondering!

Is this the one Brad was referring to when he said RDA was hard to write for because he wouldn't say obviously funny lines, but would make up his own?

It does make one wonder, does it not?

[JackandSamAddict]

Is this the one Brad was referring to when he said RDA was hard to write for because he wouldn't say obviously funny lines, but would make up his own?

It does make one wonder, does it not?

I think that was the part at the beginning with Ba'al's extraction. When one of them said instead of singing RDA said crooning. I watched it again last night...and I just LOVE this movie!!!

[Gate gal]

The Real Ba'al went back in time. From the moment he went back in time, he ceased to exist in the present and future time line (we hope).

The Real Ba'al was killed in 1939 because he went back in time -- but he was killed in an alternate time line. This does not have any affect on the SG-1 time line BEFORE he left it.

The Ba'al that the Tok'ra had was a clone.

The Tokra Ba'al being a clone is probably the reason that the host lived through the process. Remember the Daniel/Vala conversation about the chances of success in removing Ba'al from the host and the host surviving? I guess the host survived since technically he was only a few years old. Does that make sense? And, theoretically, we could see Ba'al again from him if maybe the cloning process made part of the symbiote remain, but I doubt they would go there.

Just adding in on the Sam on the bus scene, wow, that was too powerful. Well acted!

[Nikki]

This made me laugh...TPTB really wanted to make sure it was Fruitloops she picked up.

Props guy: We can't find a Fruitloops box!
BW: Just turn a Rice Crispies box into a Fruitloops one. But it has to be FRUITLOOPS!
Props guy: No problem.

[Gate gal]

Just read this article that was linked in Samandhttp://stargate.mgm.com/news_detail.php?id=96a.

Brief Quote:
“I think what I liked about it was that there was a sadness about the whole thing, for each of us,” Tapping muses. “Such a mundane sadness – for Carter, she’s just going to the grocery store, and Ben’s character is trying to go back to finding his roots. There’s just such a futility for all of us, which I really liked. It’s so not like our characters. Each of us is usually so proactive, and here we’re put in a position where we’re essentially castrated. We’re useless and we’re not allowed to use our strengths. So all of a sudden, when you see the first Alkesh go by you think, ‘Oh! Here we go! This is us again!’ So I liked that. It was interesting to play, because I’m so used to playing a character that’s so strong."

[cybercylon12]

I was just happy to see them all together again, so I loved it . I thought the story was great, better that Ark of Truth , I have not made it through that one without falling asleep, I guess because I do not like the ORI storyline which I think was deliberately bad so the show could get canned. Whatever has Jack is as good as cake to me.

[RealmOfX]

*pokes nose into thread*

I've been enjoying all your discussions even though I'm not really a shipper, you have come up with some excellent insights.

But as a space geek I'd like to say that NASA is going back to the moon (estimated first landing is in 2020) and they are planing to eventually build a moonbase. They are actually quite active in investigating and building technology and equipment right now to enable them to build a moonbase. In January they tested out an inflatable habitat down in Antarctica.

Right. SG-1 is going to wonder about what the clone said regarding the original Ba'al being out there. Eventually they'll decide he was lying, just like Jack said he was.

BTW, I'll bet that clone was highly ticked off at Ba'al when he flopped out on the floor and died.



In my way of thinking, it doesn't matter what they said. Obviously, it was just a throwaway line. But since TPTB don't often have throwaway lines, and especially not in a movie, I have to ask myself "Why is it there?" And the only reason I can come up with is that it is a diversion.

Of course, the fact that it screams "We don't really mean moonbase because a moonbase is scientifically, militarily and economically worthless" makes it easier to come to that conclusion!

In RL we only went to the moon to say we could, and to beat the Russians. There's no reason to go back (which is why we haven't), except to use it as a jumping point to interstellar travel. In the Stargate universe, they don't even need that. It's just a rock.

If she'd said "I'd like to discuss the plans for the new spaceship," then it would not be shippy at all. Because that could be real. But a moonbase? No way, that's not real. And of course, there's that silly grin on her face and Jack acting like he doesn't know what the heck she's talking about. They just want to lose Cam, that's all.

Okay, have I over-analyzed that scene, or what?

[jenks]

^^ I wonder how long that will last though, I can't see the American tax payer wanting to fund that sort of thing that way the economy is going...

[silly sally]

^^ I wonder how long that will last though, I can't see the American tax payer wanting to fund that sort of thing that way the economy is going...

Maybe they want to find oil on the moon

[Alan]

Maybe they want to find oil on the moon

Oil? On the moon? It's going a bit far if they want to get kinky with each other when oil is quite available from a store on Earth...

I'll get my coat.

[RealmOfX]

Oy! Don't drag the thread off topic!

I only posted about the real NASA plans because it was being used as part of the logic for a shipper point of view and I wanted to point out that the moonbase is being planned for in reality.

Now back to the shippyness.

[JenniferJF]

Well besides the fact that she is...

Actually, doesn't a woman in a committed "real" relationship usually gets what she wants? I'm so not trying to sound snarky. Dh gets me pretty much whatever I want, and if there is something I want to do, we do it... 99.5% of the time.

ROFL. Yes, well. I've always taken Jack's trying to get Sam pretty much anything she wanted, or do anything for her, for years to be a sign that, from his POV, he's BEEN in a commited relationship.

But I digress. The real change there wasn't his getting her what she wanted, but what she wanted involved his personal time and money.... Which seemed to be perfectly normal and reasonable to the both of them.

In my way of thinking, it doesn't matter what they said. Obviously, it was just a throwaway line. But since TPTB don't often have throwaway lines, and especially not in a movie, I have to ask myself "Why is it there?" And the only reason I can come up with is that it is a diversion.

Of course, the fact that it screams "We don't really mean moonbase because a moonbase is scientifically, militarily and economically worthless" makes it easier to come to that conclusion!

I had the same thought, really. The fact that the line didn't matter and was just thrown in there seems to accentuate the fact there was no DEEP HIDDEN PLOT-BASED franchise (we're building a moon base for the next movie) meaning, but was meant to give Sam something to say to Jack to get time with him.

And RCC was, supposedly, the guy who threw in the 'deny yourself your own desires' in Gemini and 'not exactly' in EDM at the last minute, so the fact that he might have thrown it in there... Doesn't hurt the shippy hintiness of it

But as a space geek I'd like to say that NASA is going back to the moon (estimated first landing is in 2020) and they are planing to eventually build a moonbase. They are actually quite active in investigating and building technology and equipment right now to enable them to build a moonbase. In January they tested out an inflatable habitat down in Antarctica.

I just can't see, in the Stargate universe, them bothering with a moonbase. Or at least, SAM not. Not with their current level of tech and not when there are so many other easily accessible planets. I can understand why WE would want to, we desperately need off this planet so we can clean out the aquarium a bit, but I can't see why they would on Stargate. Especially given, it was a throw-away line.

Heehee...I think Moon Base = Babies...but then again...I am extra fluffy!

Oh yes...and since his original line with that was: "Sounds like work" Just sayin' I say Beebies!

One day, you'll have to explain to me exactly why babies = fluffy . Wet, messy, loud and squirmy little people who, beloved as they are, tend to do more to hinder romance than help it along, yes. But... not fluffy.

Maybe I'll never get it. Anyhoo... I just can't see that bit being about babies. Cause why bring that up right there? more likely generic request for time, IMHO. Any conversation about babies would likely be a lot more serious. I'd hope.

[VSS]

*pokes nose into thread*

I've been enjoying all your discussions even though I'm not really a shipper, you have come up with some excellent insights.

But as a space geek I'd like to say that NASA is going back to the moon (estimated first landing is in 2020) and they are planing to eventually build a moonbase. They are actually quite active in investigating and building technology and equipment right now to enable them to build a moonbase. In January they tested out an inflatable habitat down in Antarctica.

Right, but I did say the main point of having a moonbase in RL is for a jumping off point to the rest of the universe, since gravity sucks up so much rocket fuel- like most of the weight of the space shuttle for instance. There's also interest in landing the ISS on the moon because it's infinitely cheaper. Right now, there's not a lot that can be done on the moon that isn't being done on the ISS, or the shuttles.

In the Stargate universe, there's no point.

And jenks is right about the costs. That's why the setting the ISS down on the moon is a nice idea.

EDIT: I'm a bit of a science geek, myself.

[Seahen]

Right. SG-1 is going to wonder about what the clone said regarding the original Ba'al being out there. Eventually they'll decide he was lying, just like Jack said he was.

BTW, I'll bet that clone was highly ticked off at Ba'al when he flopped out on the floor and died.



In my way of thinking, it doesn't matter what they said. Obviously, it was just a throwaway line. But since TPTB don't often have throwaway lines, and especially not in a movie, I have to ask myself "Why is it there?" And the only reason I can come up with is that it is a diversion.

Of course, the fact that it screams "We don't really mean moonbase because a moonbase is scientifically, militarily and economically worthless" makes it easier to come to that conclusion!

In RL we only went to the moon to say we could, and to beat the Russians. There's no reason to go back (which is why we haven't), except to use it as a jumping point to interstellar travel. In the Stargate universe, they don't even need that. It's just a rock.

If she'd said "I'd like to discuss the plans for the new spaceship," then it would not be shippy at all. Because that could be real. But a moonbase? No way, that's not real. And of course, there's that silly grin on her face and Jack acting like he doesn't know what the heck she's talking about. They just want to lose Cam, that's all.

Okay, have I over-analyzed that scene, or what?

The only reason I could think they'd like a moon base would be to move the stargate there to keep the program (and it's inherent dangers) isolated from earth. They could beam back and forth to earth for downtown after an appropriate quarantine period. Just saying.

One other point, how do you know she meant our moon?

[madaline_7]

The only reason I could think they'd like a moon base would be to move the stargate there to keep the program (and it's inherent dangers) isolated from earth. They could beam back and forth to earth for downtown after an appropriate quarantine period. Just saying.

One other point, how do you know she meant our moon?

Sweet!

Nice point!