What's your opinion now about SGU ?

[Radroz]

Okay, I gave it a chance.

After watching 9 episodes, I've made a very, very difficult decision.

This. is. Not. Stargate.

Yes, I get it that the showrunners are going for a more "mature" version of the Stargate concept, and are focusing more on human relationships. Several people have made a comparison to BSG, and I'm sorry, but that doesn't fit either.

As I was discussing this with my partner, I attempted to describe what I think made Stargate so successful as a franchise.

1) It had really nifty baddies. Even BSG had interesting adversaries —*sure, they were human-like robots, but at least they were a powerful villain hellbent on wiping out the human race. The villains were larger than life - big, booming voices to the point of being ludicrous. Ridiculous, yes, but it was FUN (more on that later).

So far, Universe has... well... each other. More like "Dallas" in space. SG-1 had the Goa'uld and the Orii. Atlantis had the Wraith and the Genai... then the humanform replicators. SGU... well... nothing there.

2) A looming threat. This might be considered part of the "nifty baddies" story, but it's more the second side of the same coin. Each of those adversaries provided plenty of plot elements (sure, they were kind of lame at times, but more on that later). In the end, they had to deal with a threat to counter. So far, SGU has... well... an old ship.

3) An alien POV. Sure, some call it a copout. But having that unique point of view is what gave Teal'c and Teyla that ability to have humanity look at themselves.

Jack: "Leave your staff weapon here."
Teal'c: "I have seen your world. I will need it."

4) It's FUN. Look, if I wanted to watch a soap opera, there are plenty of options. If I wanted to watch people treat each other like crap, then there's plenty there, too. I always watched 'gate because it was a way to escape. It was crazy situations set against modern-day humanity - and it was FUN. Hell, even O'Neill isn't wisecracking anymore. SGU isn't fun, it isn't entertaining, and it certainly isn't escapism.

In the end, it could be a great show — but it's just not Stargate. I'm just not interested anymore. To me, it's got many of the same flaws that Star Trek: Enterprise had; specifically, it's just too far of a departure from the original concept and its own universe. I just don't think I can watch it anymore.

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

Okay, I gave it a chance.

After watching 9 episodes, I've made a very, very difficult decision.

This. is. Not. Stargate.

Yes, I get it that the showrunners are going for a more "mature" version of the Stargate concept, and are focusing more on human relationships. Several people have made a comparison to BSG, and I'm sorry, but that doesn't fit either.

As I was discussing this with my partner, I attempted to describe what I think made Stargate so successful as a franchise.

1) It had really nifty baddies. Even BSG had interesting adversaries —*sure, they were human-like robots, but at least they were a powerful villain hellbent on wiping out the human race. The villains were larger than life - big, booming voices to the point of being ludicrous. Ridiculous, yes, but it was FUN (more on that later).

So far, Universe has... well... each other. More like "Dallas" in space. SG-1 had the Goa'uld and the Orii. Atlantis had the Wraith and the Genai... then the humanform replicators. SGU... well... nothing there.

2) A looming threat. This might be considered part of the "nifty baddies" story, but it's more the second side of the same coin. Each of those adversaries provided plenty of plot elements (sure, they were kind of lame at times, but more on that later). In the end, they had to deal with a threat to counter. So far, SGU has... well... an old ship.

3) An alien POV. Sure, some call it a copout. But having that unique point of view is what gave Teal'c and Teyla that ability to have humanity look at themselves.

Jack: "Leave your staff weapon here."
Teal'c: "I have seen your world. I will need it."

4) It's FUN. Look, if I wanted to watch a soap opera, there are plenty of options. If I wanted to watch people treat each other like crap, then there's plenty there, too. I always watched 'gate because it was a way to escape. It was crazy situations set against modern-day humanity - and it was FUN. Hell, even O'Neill isn't wisecracking anymore. SGU isn't fun, it isn't entertaining, and it certainly isn't escapism.

In the end, it could be a great show — but it's just not Stargate. I'm just not interested anymore. To me, it's got many of the same flaws that Star Trek: Enterprise had; specifically, it's just too far of a departure from the original concept and its own universe. I just don't think I can watch it anymore.

Well yes you’re entitled to your opinion, but I think your hideously wrong. Scifi shows don’t need nifty baddies as you put it to have conflict, they will have in SGU, and indeed have had alien enemies but part of the drama is the conflict between the personnel. As for the so called alien pov that got lost with each of the alien characters pretty quickly, I mean by the end of sg1 Teal’c was referencing Die Hard with the rest of them.

It might not be your idea of fun but for many SGU is. On top of that I think you’re completely wrong about the change in concept, while maybe it was a change in concept, the three most successful Star Trek films, the Wrath of Khan, The Undiscovered Country and the recent Star Trek 11 fly in the face of Roddenberry’s vision. Its not wagon train to the stars or peaceful explorers, they are tales of war and revenge.

[Radroz]

Well yes you’re entitled to your opinion, but I think your hideously wrong. Scifi shows don’t need nifty baddies as you put it to have conflict, they will have in SGU, and indeed have had alien enemies but part of the drama is the conflict between the personnel. As for the so called alien pov that got lost with each of the alien characters pretty quickly, I mean by the end of sg1 Teal’c was referencing Die Hard with the rest of them.

It might not be your idea of fun but for many SGU is. On top of that I think you’re completely wrong about the change in concept, while maybe it was a change in concept, the three most successful Star Trek films, the Wrath of Khan, The Undiscovered Country and the recent Star Trek 11 fly in the face of Roddenberry’s vision. Its not wagon train to the stars or peaceful explorers, they are tales of war and revenge.

Well, I don't know about "hideously wrong," but it's plainly obvious by reading much of this thread that I'm not the only person who feels that this series is too far a departure from the universe that SG-1 established. Further, no one is "hideously wrong" for disliking a TV show... or liking it.

After 13 years of establishing a Stargate universe, it's just not what I like. I liked a lot of what Stargate had to offer - but this, well, it's just not there.

That's part of the problem I had with DS9, too. It was a soap opera in space. In latter seasons, it got a little better; by then, it had already lost much of its audience. The same applies here.

As far as those Star Trek movies "flying in the face of Roddenberry," well - again, I disagree. Star trek 2, 6, and 2009 were all new stories that add to the fun of the original series. In fact ST6 was about PEACE, a major element of Roddenberry's view. Even the new film maintains a bit of it — but completely recreates the franchise for a new audience. Not much "wagon-train" there, but it was a great ride.

My love for sci-fi has always been about escapism, and it always will be. So if that is "hideously wrong," then so be it. I wouldn't want to be right. I just know what I like, and SGU isn't it.

It seems to me, though, that this thread is about opinion, not whether or not anyone is "hideously wrong" or not. Quite frankly, I think it's perfectly fine to dislike a show without being right or wrong. It's a matter of taste, and this isn't mine, nor is it what I view Stargate to be. That's all it is - and it's certainly not an assault on anyone.

[aretood2]

Well yes you’re entitled to your opinion, but I think your hideously wrong. Scifi shows don’t need nifty baddies as you put it to have conflict, they will have in SGU, and indeed have had alien enemies but part of the drama is the conflict between the personnel. As for the so called alien pov that got lost with each of the alien characters pretty quickly, I mean by the end of sg1 Teal’c was referencing Die Hard with the rest of them.

Ahem...um...Sci fi shows may not need a nifty bad guy...but stargate shows do...

It might not be your idea of fun but for many SGU is. On top of that I think you’re completely wrong about the change in concept, while maybe it was a change in concept, the three most successful Star Trek films, the Wrath of Khan, The Undiscovered Country and the recent Star Trek 11 fly in the face of Roddenberry’s vision. Its not wagon train to the stars or peaceful explorers, they are tales of war and revenge.

on a side not... Roddenberry's Idea of wagon trains is flawed...there were definitely cases of war and revenge. So actually those three movies suited the wagon train idea perfectly. And I would admonish Mr. Roddenberry for even considering ruthless invaders(Wagon trains) to be peaceful explorers.

see. we can argue on stuff. But needless to say, unfortunatly, SGU still has to prove itself to be a stargate show in the same way that. It is however, as you said, sci fi and good. Radroz has a valid point...Does SGU fulfill the same goals as SG-1?

I think that when they said "new" they also meant a "new" set of goals than SG-1.

[Deevil]

To each their own really. If you feel the show is not for you, you are well within your rights to tune out.

Personally, I haven't been so into Stargate since SG-1 ended... So it's nice to come back to the franchise again.

That being said, it is a departure from what he first 2 series' are. And I understand why it wouldn't be to everyones taste. It is what it is, and if you don't like to show you definately shouldn't watch it. I would hate to be forced to watch Desperate Housewives...

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

Well, I don't know about "hideously wrong," but it's plainly obvious by reading much of this thread that I'm not the only person who feels that this series is too far a departure from the universe that SG-1 established. Further, no one is "hideously wrong" for disliking a TV show... or liking it.

After 13 years of establishing a Stargate universe, it's just not what I like. I liked a lot of what Stargate had to offer - but this, well, it's just not there.

That's part of the problem I had with DS9, too. It was a soap opera in space. In latter seasons, it got a little better; by then, it had already lost much of its audience. The same applies here.

As far as those Star Trek movies "flying in the face of Roddenberry," well - again, I disagree. Star trek 2, 6, and 2009 were all new stories that add to the fun of the original series. In fact ST6 was about PEACE, a major element of Roddenberry's view. Even the new film maintains a bit of it — but completely recreates the franchise for a new audience. Not much "wagon-train" there, but it was a great ride.

My love for sci-fi has always been about escapism, and it always will be. So if that is "hideously wrong," then so be it. I wouldn't want to be right. I just know what I like, and SGU isn't it.

It seems to me, though, that this thread is about opinion, not whether or not anyone is "hideously wrong" or not. Quite frankly, I think it's perfectly fine to dislike a show without being right or wrong. It's a matter of taste, and this isn't mine, nor is it what I view Stargate to be. That's all it is - and it's certainly not an assault on anyone.

Yes this thread is about opinion. Your entitled to yours, I’m entitled to mine. Mine happens to be that I think your wrong and SGU is very enjoyable, or must we all tow the line that you spin? Yes there are plenty of dissenting opinions and there are plenty of people who like SGU, I happen to want a more DS9 like show. You might not but there is clearly an audience for this.

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

Ahem...um...Sci fi shows may not need a nifty bad guy...but stargate shows do...


on a side not... Roddenberry's Idea of wagon trains is flawed...there were definitely cases of war and revenge. So actually those three movies suited the wagon train idea perfectly. And I would admonish Mr. Roddenberry for even considering ruthless invaders(Wagon trains) to be peaceful explorers.

see. we can argue on stuff. But needless to say, unfortunatly, SGU still has to prove itself to be a stargate show in the same way that. It is however, as you said, sci fi and good. Radroz has a valid point...Does SGU fulfill the same goals as SG-1?

I think that when they said "new" they also meant a "new" set of goals than SG-1.

Who says they have to and who says that there has to be a central villain for very Stargate show? There’s no law commanding that and I think its very damaging to fiction to decide this is what you can and can’t do within a story line in a fictional universe.

[aretood2]

Who says they have to and who says that there has to be a central villain for very Stargate show? There’s no law commanding that and I think its very damaging to fiction to decide this is what you can and can’t do within a story line in a fictional universe.

Who says that they don't have to? SG-1 and SGA would just not be the same with out the nifty bad guys. And if, lets say, SGU didn't want to be new they would have to have a nifty bad guy to be like SG-1 and SGA.

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

Who says that they don't have to? SG-1 and SGA would just not be the same with out the nifty bad guys. And if, lets say, SGU didn't want to be new they would have to have a nifty bad guy to be like SG-1 and SGA.

Who says who says who says? Ok my head hurts now. I think the point is that applying some set formula to fiction and saying you must include this and cant include things like that is very damaging. Creators should be left to weave the story they wish.

[Radroz]

Yes this thread is about opinion. Your entitled to yours, I’m entitled to mine. Mine happens to be that I think your wrong and SGU is very enjoyable, or must we all tow the line that you spin? Yes there are plenty of dissenting opinions and there are plenty of people who like SGU, I happen to want a more DS9 like show. You might not but there is clearly an audience for this.

Okay, I'll try this again - no one is "right" or "wrong" for watching or not watching a TV show. We can disagree on whether we like the content, and that's just is. This isn't the law, and dissent is irrelevant. It's a thread for whether we like the show or not. Good God. You like it. Great. Enjoy it. As for me, I'll find something else.

Is it possible that we're BOTH "right" because we know what we like? It's basic human interaction. Everyone can enjoy or dislike a show and be perfectly "right." Some people like Trek. Some don't. No one is more "right" than the other.

So relax, already. It's just a TV show. We just happen to feel passionate about it one way or another. The thread asked what we think about the show now, and we all give our opinion. No one is right or wrong... it's just opinions.

[Ukko]

Who says that they don't have to? SG-1 and SGA would just not be the same with out the nifty bad guys. And if, lets say, SGU didn't want to be new they would have to have a nifty bad guy to be like SG-1 and SGA.

We've known for a long time that SGU was not going to be the same as SG1 and SGA and have a nifty bad guy of the week. Complaining their isnt one is rather pointless.

I didnt understand the highlited part.

[Radroz]

Who says who says who says? Ok my head hurts now. I think the point is that applying some set formula to fiction and saying you must include this and cant include things like that is very damaging. Creators should be left to weave the story they wish.

I think you miss my point - I wasn't applying a set formula to fiction. I was simply applying what Stargate was in its previous 12 years of established universe, and that Universe was just too far of a departure, and that I didn't like it.

No one is challenging the creators' position to weave whatever story they wish. Just as no one is challenging whether or not people can really enjoy this new show. Nor is it "damaging."

It's just a new TV show that some of us happen to dislike. There's no right... and no wrong. It's just a matter of taste. Universe, in my opinion, is just like an anchovy that got thrown on to an otherwise great pizza —*that's really ruined the overall taste. If you like anchovies, great! I don't.

So, enjoy your anchovies!

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

Okay, I'll try this again - no one is "right" or "wrong" for watching or not watching a TV show. We can disagree on whether we like the content, and that's just is. This isn't the law, and dissent is irrelevant. It's a thread for whether we like the show or not. Good God. You like it. Great. Enjoy it. As for me, I'll find something else.

Is it possible that we're BOTH "right" because we know what we like? It's basic human interaction. Everyone can enjoy or dislike a show and be perfectly "right." Some people like Trek. Some don't. No one is more "right" than the other.

So relax, already. It's just a TV show. We just happen to feel passionate about it one way or another. The thread asked what we think about the show now, and we all give our opinion. No one is right or wrong... it's just opinions.

Yes I know that’s the point of several of my other posts, we disagree. Because I have an opposing opinion I think your wrong, but it’s your prerogative to decide what you watch and do.

I think you miss my point - I wasn't applying a set formula to fiction. I was simply applying what Stargate was in its previous 12 years of established universe, and that Universe was just too far of a departure, and that I didn't like it.

No one is challenging the creators' position to weave whatever story they wish. Just as no one is challenging whether or not people can really enjoy this new show. Nor is it "damaging."

It's just a new TV show that some of us happen to dislike. There's no right... and no wrong. It's just a matter of taste. Universe, in my opinion, is just like an anchovy that got thrown on to an otherwise great pizza —*that's really ruined the overall taste. If you like anchovies, great! I don't.

So, enjoy your anchovies!

I think you miss the fact that post wasn’t addressed to you so it wasn’t trying make any sought of point or counterpoint about your post. There’s a reason why I quoted someone else’s post, because I was debating their points, not yours in that post.

[aretood2]

Who says who says who says? Ok my head hurts now. I think the point is that applying some set formula to fiction and saying you must include this and cant include things like that is very damaging. Creators should be left to weave the story they wish.

Who's adding any limits? I am merely saying that if you want to make apple pie (SG-1 like show) you need apples (Nifty bad guys). Because Apple pies are just not apple pies with out apples (that is, that an SG-1 like show is not like SG-1 if it does not have nifty bad guys). Got it?

Oh, Ukko...I was saying that if TPTB in a alternate reality did not want to make SGU into something new like they did in our reality they would need a Nifty bad guy to accomplish the same goals that SG-1 did.

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

Who's adding any limits? I am merely saying that if you want to make apple pie (SG-1 like show) you need apples (Nifty bad guys). Because Apple pies are just not apple pies with out apples (that is, that an SG-1 like show is not like SG-1 if it does not have nifty bad guys). Got it?

Oh, Ukko...I was saying that if TPTB in a alternate reality did not want to make SGU into something new like they did in our reality they would need a Nifty bad guy to accomplish the same goals that SG-1 did.

But if we apply the pie analogy here then tptb have been quite clear that they have set out to create a different type of pie. Their tired of apple pie for the last 15 years, they want cherry now.