"Stargate Universe" Discussion/Speculation (Spoilers)

[Shan Bruce Lee]

Is this not the definition of controversy? That people will take sides, argue, debate and discuss the subject?

If people weren’t concerned about this, if they didn’t have an opinion then it would not be considered controversial in the first place.

So if you want TPTB to be brave, creative, and innovative and tackle these controversial issues in SGU stories, then you should expect this reaction and expect that people will want to debate it – and that some will love the idea and some will hate it.

It seems to me if no one disagrees with the story and everyone thinks it is great then it would not be controversial in the first place. I am not sure you can have one without the other.

Unfortunately we're not doing that... in order to have that conversation there has to be an actual episode for it to center around. This is the 16th episode and the first doesn't even air for 2 months.

Not only that, but the conversation isn't even really about the actual plot of the episode, it's about the show runners bringing it up in the first place. If it were anything less we wouldn't be having this discussion until - like I said - there was an episode out to talk about.

[EdenSG]

Unfortunately we're not doing that... in order to have that conversation there has to be an actual episode for it to center around. This is the 16th episode and the first doesn't even air for 2 months.

Not only that, but the conversation isn't even really about the actual plot of the episode, it's about the show runners bringing it up in the first place. If it were anything less we wouldn't be having this discussion until - like I said - there was an episode out to talk about.

Again, is this not the definition of controversial?

If people are going to say that they think it great that TPTB tackle a “controversial” subject and that it is great they have the balls to do a subject like this then there will be those that say they shouldn’t, that it is poor representation of the characters, for what ever reason is important to them.

Again, if you want a controversial story, whether it is a 2 minute scene or it envelopes the entire episode then you will have debate. If you want a controversial story/ scene/episode, you will get different opinions.

We all have seen the same sides and cast calls. So if you believe there is not enough information on this episode to know or say it is controversial then why are so many others applauding TPTB for a tackling a controversial subject?

Not trying to argue with you, just trying to understand the logic.

[Pandora's_Box]

So...

:: munches popcorn ::

What'd I miss?

[PG15]

The fandom's blowing up from incomplete and inaccurate spoilers.

Business as usual, basically.

[Pandora's_Box]

Boo.

I thought my long absence would mean I'd come back to something new and juicy. Rats.

Is this about the sex thing?

[Shan Bruce Lee]

Again, is this not the definition of controversial?

If people are going to say that they think it great that TPTB tackle a “controversial” subject and that it is great they have the balls to do a subject like this then there will be those that say they shouldn’t, that it is poor representation of the characters, for what ever reason is important to them.

Again, if you want a controversial story, whether it is a 2 minute scene or it envelopes the entire episode then you will have debate. If you want a controversial story/ scene/episode, you will get different opinions.

We all have seen the same sides and cast calls. So if you believe there is not enough information on this episode to know or say it is controversial then why are so many others applauding TPTB for a tackling a controversial subject?

Not trying to argue with you, just trying to understand the logic.

We're not even discussing the definition of controversy. We're talking about a few "fans" (if that's the right word) saying the whole episode should be scrapped based on a few completely out of context - and misinformed - plot elements.

[Shan Bruce Lee]

Boo.

I thought my long absence would mean I'd come back to something new and juicy. Rats.

Is this about the sex thing?

No it's about certain individuals thinking a tuna sandwich is as good/better than a PB & J... which it's not...

[jelgate]

So...

:: munches popcorn ::

What'd I miss?

Well a few days ago I saw someone who wasn't you steal Brian J. Smith*

[LtColCarter]

Well a few days ago I saw someone who wasn't you steal Brian J. Smith*

Hush...don't tell!

[jelgate]

Hush...don't tell!

No its fun watching Spaz get angry

*imagines ways that Lt. Scott could die*

I quite like hypoxia.

[Alan Wake]

I didn't know this was SGU-1?

No need to be rude. I was mainly suggesting if they bring all the other main Sg-1 characters over for a few appearance, they might as well bring them all for a few appearances.

It's like he's left in the dark.

I'm well aware this isn't a show about SG-1, but thanks though.

[Ltcolshepjumper]

Oh, I do hope they manage to put him in too though, it wouldn't feel the same... and it might feel a little awkward to be honest.

Ok. let's get this straight. SGU is supposed to be SEPARATE from not just Atlantis, but also SG-1. SG-1 had their double portion screen time in Atlantis. Can't we all just accept the fact that SG-1 is OVER? SGU is a new series, with a completely different cast. So far, the ONLY SG-1 recurring character is Oneill, and thats only because he's the guy at the top. Can we please remember that SGU is its OWN SHOW? ASt least given the fact that at least one character from SG-1 appeared in EVERY SEASON of SGA.

Tealc has absolutely NOTHING to do with SGU. Nothing. Nada. There would be NO justification for Tealc's appaerance. None.

[Alan Wake]

Ok. let's get this straight. SGU is supposed to be SEPARATE from not just Atlantis, but also SG-1. SG-1 had their double portion screen time in Atlantis. Can't we all just accept the fact that SG-1 is OVER? SGU is a new series, with a completely different cast. So far, the ONLY SG-1 recurring character is Oneill, and thats only because he's the guy at the top. Can we please remember that SGU is its OWN SHOW? ASt least given the fact that at least one character from SG-1 appeared in EVERY SEASON of SGA.

Tealc has absolutely NOTHING to do with SGU. Nothing. Nada. There would be NO justification for Tealc's appaerance. None.

Sadly, We are all able to weigh are opinion on this forum.

I hear some people talking about Daniel being in some episodes, and carter and Jack.

What's wrong with wanting Teal'c in too? I would say he has all the justification to be in there somewhere. He had nothing to do with Atlantis either, but wasn't he on there? I guess I forgot he was an ancient expert.

For the last time, I know this is a new show. I was only saying since other characters were making appearances, they should squeeze them all in. If only just walking around the base together, and having a few lines to say.

[Eternal Density]

It would be extremely difficult to fit Teal'c in without it looking like obvious stuntcasting, plus the new fans would have little or no idea of what a Jaffa is.

As for all this controversy over relationships and such, there's actually a thread for that which isn't being used much. Anyhow, my advice is to wait and see, as we're stumbling around in the dark and grasping at straws.

[Pandora's_Box]

No it's about certain individuals thinking a tuna sandwich is as good/better than a PB & J... which it's not...

Nothing is better than PB & J. Nothing.

Well a few days ago I saw someone who wasn't you steal Brian J. Smith*

You mean you saw them steal the clone I made. This is fine.

Anyhow, my advice is to wait and see, as we're stumbling around in the dark and grasping at straws.

So we're par for the course then.

So glad to see nothing changed while I was gone.