'Air, Part 2' (102) General Discussion

[VSS]

The second part wasn't as good as the first, it was kinda slow and dragged a bit in places *shrugs*

But I have a bone to pick there isn't any thunkable guys on SGU

Uh oh, watch out. There's a thread for this that some else started and I was accused of being insensitive for saying the same thing.

But, the women are hot. Always.

[ciannwn]

It is a little unfair to judge Wray in this one. When Air was written she was written as recurring. It was only when Ming impressed Brad and Robert that she was upgraded to regular

Even if she'd been a regular from the start I still don't see how someone from the IOA could have done anything meaningful in these first two episodes. She's not a medic, as far as we know she isn't a computer genius or a technician and she didn't have a dying father who sacrificed himself.

From your earlier post -

That is the risk you run with essemble casts. Some episodes can not heavily feature everyone.

That's the good thing about ensemble casts as far as I'm concerned. If I don't like a particular character I'm not going to be stuck with seeing him/her being heavily featured every single week.

[jelgate]

Even if she'd been a regular from the start I still don't see how someone from the IOA could have done anything meaningful in these first two episodes. She's not a medic, as far as we know she isn't a computer genius or a technician and she didn't have a dying father who sacrificed himself.

I think really the only thing you could do with Wray is maybe have question Rush as a leader more. But given what I know about her character description I highly doubt she will stay in the background

That's the good thing about ensemble casts as far as I'm concerned. If I don't like a particular character I'm not going to be stuck with seeing him/her being heavily featured every single week.

So Universe is kind of like an anti-Atlantis?

[ciannwn]

So Universe is kind of like an anti-Atlantis?

There were times when SGA should have been renamed Stargate Sheppard and McKay. Hopefully the SGU writers won't fall into the trap of finding two characters they prefer writing for and forget about everyone else.

[Vapor]

"Likeable characters." I keep seeing terms like these get used, and it strikes me that some of the people watching the show might be looking at it in a totally different way from how I do.

It seems some people judge characters on the show by how much they would want to hang out with them, or grab a beer together, or (oh boy) go on a date with, or something. Instead of judging them by what they do for the story and the themes of the show.

For me, some of my favorite television characters are actually ones that I probably wouldn't like very much if they were real. Because those typically are the ones that shake things up, create interesting, dramatic story, and sometimes explore parts about myself and the people around me that we might not always want to face otherwise.

Characters like this have a purpose, and I would venture that it's not a mistake that so many of the Destiny's crew have such obvious flaws. That would seem to be part of the point. They're human beings with issues, desires, shortcomings, insecurities, fears. They didn't all just spring from their mother's womb with swords and shields, ready to become amazing heroes.

In fact, it's when such characters work through some of these issues that make them look that much more heroic in the end. If you're already perfect, then there's less room for growth.

To be honest, as much fun as SG1/SGA provided, they were pretty light when it came to really deep development across the seasons. SGU immediately introduced some sort of character dilemma with almost all of the Destiny's main crew. How long did it take for this many characters to get some specific thing to do (that wasn't motivated by plot) in Atlantis? As I recall, it was quite a while.

For the record, I loved SGA. But I also enjoyed the SGU premiere quite a bit, and was not put off by the different style, or the fact that the characters had a lot of growing to do. In fact, I welcomed it.

[BIG_GATE_HEAD]

I rewatched part of the pilot last night and just like the first time I was enjoying it until they slowed it down for Chloe and Scott to have a moment. Now I have all ten seasons of SG1 and both movies(and will continue to buy the movies as long as they make them) as well as all five seasons of Atlantis. Now if SGU is has alot of the slow down points I will not buy the dvds just watch the episodes as they air and maybe watch the better ones on HULU.

[Eternal Density]

I don't think there's ever been a recurring (or regular) stargate character who I particularly 'disliked' in the sense that I didn't want to see them on the show.

Oh, wait, there's Pete.
[edit] I don't mind 'slow down points', unless they are awkward "the story stream just hit an eddy and doesn't know what direction to day" spots, that's a little painful to watch. Rewatching CotG was a bit like that in spots. But I have no problem with 'character moments' like that one with Lt Scott and Chloe.

[PG15]

Sir, I can't assume that.
The story telling was poor, we are story-guessing at this point about the character. Yet this isn't a mystery. The characters are being overt to the viewer. The guy taking rations with out permission. Sex in broom closets and etc.

Sir, they are not formulating a mystery, yet they give little indication if what Rush does is poor judgement or just poor conveyance of his intentions compared to others in the story.

Sir, again that's story-guessing.
Good mysteries give you clues to guess.
Bad works force you to guess.

I don't really care if you want to believe it or not. I believe them. Take it or leave it.

Or, we can agree to disagree.

In this case faced with immediate death they instead of attempt to dial Earth as they did at the....end of Part II chose to let someone die.

They only found the address then.

Yes, sir, the pilot was boring.

Don't ever twist my words like that, Lieutenant.

The door problem was anti-climatic with a simple fix they couldn't figure out. That's why I contend that they need to do something else with the enemy instead of immediately setting these...contentious people at each others throat from the word go.

I disagree. I thought the pilot's different take on Stargate was a lot more fresh and exciting then the same old "fight the enemy" storyline.

Sir, and instant change in direction in direction for a franchise can be as detrimental as high G combat manuvers. People will black out, sir. It's so more important to make a believable story than single-minded objective chasing.

It was believable to me. In fact, it was more believable then a lot of past SG fare.

Sir that means it was readily evident, overt. If there is any doubt then it wasn't. I have doubt, sir.

That's your problem then. TPTB has no need to appeal to the lowest common denominator by explaining every minute detail.

Sir that was a sacrifice that by two options, they didn't have to make.
Safe sir, I don't think so sir. The hull is not intact, the vessel is in disrepair. The occupants do not know how to fix it (apparently) Food and water are highly limited. I can determine nothing safe in the assessment, sir.

THis would be equivalent to choosing to stay on a ocean going vessel made in the 14 century who's lower decks are flooded. Little to No food or water. with a continent of land right off shore.

Yes, there maybe violent natives, diease, and wild animals but the ship is threatening to sink. You need the ship...yes...to get home but you can come back. Compared to an ocean voyage, a space ship is risk personified.

Well let's see. At the moment, the ship is "fine". There's a day of air left and as far as the crew knows they are in no immediate danger. Sure, the hull could suddenly breach and various other nasty stuff could happen, but that's all in the "maybe" pile. The same applies to the planet. So far all they know is that it's "barely habitable" based on preliminary data. The atmosphere could contain air-borne diseases, and other nasty stuff could happen.

The planet is not a continent of land (which we are all familiar with), but rather a dark shape in the distance that may or may not be safer than our ship.

You know what, at this point I'm tired of this debate. How about we just agree to disagree? Most of our points all come down to personal opinion anyway.

[Mitchell82]

Entspeak,

I'm perfectly aware that the danger was to Earth, specifically.
But you are wrong.
The fact that the wormhole shutdown could have been foreseen because we KNOW with a certainty that a sufficient enough spike in energy will cause the wormhole to jump instantly.

It is a Plot Hole.
And definitely an inconsistency of truth.

No it's not. You seem to not get that the storyline of the show is progressive and takes more than one ep to tell. The plot is focused on the air supply issue and was clearly laid out in the ep. Rush's motives are unknown at this point other than he really wanted to dial the 9nth chevron. Methinks you need to pay closer attention Lieutenant.

[Linzi]

"Likeable characters." I keep seeing terms like these get used, and it strikes me that some of the people watching the show might be looking at it in a totally different way from how I do.

It seems some people judge characters on the show by how much they would want to hang out with them, or grab a beer together, or (oh boy) go on a date with, or something. Instead of judging them by what they do for the story and the themes of the show.

For me, some of my favorite television characters are actually ones that I probably wouldn't like very much if they were real. Because those typically are the ones that shake things up, create interesting, dramatic story, and sometimes explore parts about myself and the people around me that we might not always want to face otherwise.

Characters like this have a purpose, and I would venture that it's not a mistake that so many of the Destiny's crew have such obvious flaws. That would seem to be part of the point. They're human beings with issues, desires, shortcomings, insecurities, fears. They didn't all just spring from their mother's womb with swords and shields, ready to become amazing heroes.

In fact, it's when such characters work through some of these issues that make them look that much more heroic in the end. If you're already perfect, then there's less room for growth.

To be honest, as much fun as SG1/SGA provided, they were pretty light when it came to really deep development across the seasons. SGU immediately introduced some sort of character dilemma with almost all of the Destiny's main crew. How long did it take for this many characters to get some specific thing to do (that wasn't motivated by plot) in Atlantis? As I recall, it was quite a while.

For the record, I loved SGA. But I also enjoyed the SGU premiere quite a bit, and was not put off by the different style, or the fact that the characters had a lot of growing to do. In fact, I welcomed it.

I mentioned likeable characters, so I'll respond to this, explaining what I meant.

Would I want to hang out with McKay, who is one of my favourites on SGA? Hell no! I'd kill someone in real life like that after about 20 minutes. Would I want to hang out with someone like Ronon? Uh, nope! Sheppard, Teyla, Woolsey, Weir? Nope. To be honest, I'd not want to at all, and being in Atlantis with them with the wraith? Hell no again!!!!!

What I mean by likeable, is that I feel a connection to the characters, find them enjoyable and entertaining - put simply, there's a spark to them and I care about them and what happens to them. I enjoy seeing them interact with other characters. Put simply, they're engaging. I didn't find the SGU characters to be any of those things, on the whole, though, as I said earlier, I did find Eli quirky and enthusiastic, (but I found David Blue's performace way too over enthusiastic for my tastes at times), and Rush was interesting, though I can't say RC's acting really impressed me that much. He was fine, but not 'Wow!' for me personally and I am familiar with a lot of his work.

I found SGU to be dour at times, and quite honestly, a little boring so my attention did wander.

The one thing I'd heard complaints about that I thought would annoy me, the 'darkness' of the episodes visually, didn't bother me. But, I can't say I found the interior of the Destiny that impressive either. And I also found the Stargate itself quite uninteresting.

I think all of the characters from the Stargate franchise have had flaws, some of them serious one's. And, yes, I realise SGU is a different sort of show to the previous two. But, as I said, I just didn't find myself invested in the characters. I found them overly dramatic and felt the drama was forced at times. Sorry!

[Vapor]

My post wasn't directed specifically towards yours, but rather the mindset I mentioned. Many people talk about characters as though they're judging them based on whether they "do the right thing" in a given scenario, or if they're hilariously quippy.

Neither of those things are bad qualities for a character, but I tend to enjoy more diversity than just that, and I feel like past SG veered a lot toward the "happy fun times" and/or "well meaning" characters, with very few shades of gray with the main cast.

The only moment I found perhaps a bit forced was the one with Chloe and Scott. It's natural for Chloe to feel how she did, but it felt like they tried too hard to draw out our emotions when the previous couple scenes had already done that pretty well for me.

If you don't find the characters likeable, that's fair enough. Myself, I grew fond of several almost immediately.

[Khentkawes]

Sir, again that's story-guessing.
Good mysteries give you clues to guess.
Bad works force you to guess.

You're perfectly allowed to hold that opinion if you want... of course, I would say that only "bad works" spell out every single element of the plot and the characters in explicit detail. Good works invite further speculation and further thought... often because some things are left intentionally ambiguous.

In my opinion, "bad works" try so hard to make everything clear and explicit that they remove all ambiguities and deeper meanings. Basically, "bad works" don't require any thought because they over-simply everything. "Good works" (from a literary standpoint) are complex enough to raise questions, to force the audience to think, and to leave some questions unanswered. Why do you think people are still debating Hamlet's motives several hundred years after the play was first performed? If that's "story-guessing" as well... then bring it on!

In the case of SGU, I believe what you're calling "story-guessing" are actually places where story elements (especially characters' motives) were intentionally left ambiguous. Now, ambiguities can create complex themes and issues in a work. But even if you want to discard everything I've said, and hold to your original assessment that there should be no room for "guessing," then let me just remind you that SGU is a serialized TV show and unanswered questions play a fundamental role in the construction of serialized works. They keep the audience actively involved, they keep the audience interested, and they invite the audience to speculate and guess about the how the plot and characters will develop in upcoming portions of the serial. Just because the first two episodes of SGU don't resolve every issue or explain every question does not mean those issues won't be explained or dealt with later.

And this is exactly what I like about SGU, and it's the reason I'm going to keep watching. I want to know more about the characters' motives. I want to see more about the Destiny because there are still so many unanswered questions.

Sure, there are things in the pilot that I wasn't all that happy with. But the fact that there is some amount of mystery, and that the characters are complex enough that I can speculate about their motives, are sufficient reasons to maintain my interest.

[skajkingdom]

the Icarus Mission seems to have marooned the insane and unstable.

Aah, I miss those Jack-Daniel Moments.

[KaKaCarter]

Distinctly under impressed so far after viewing the first 2 episodes. The opening sequence which seemed a blatant rip off off alien annoyed me slightly. I'm a bit confused as to the purpose of the sex scene. The sex scene in BSG(boiomer & the chief) was there to show how a ship board rules had been let slip as it was about to be decomissioned. Maybe it'll become clear.

The use of jumping forward/backwards in time seemed a bit for the sake of it, rather than being used in a manner to tell the story differently from the linear model.

I hate cameos, it's a waste of space and time. Why have o'neill,Carter,Jackson in it as tokens if their characters aren't going to be used.

Plot: distintly average & worse still far too many of the characters still seemed like ciphers by the end. As others have said, people recruited as the best of the best of military wouldn't steal rations, wouldn't let a scientist dial the 9th chevron in the middle of a military emergency. Why wasn't there a trained military dialler klike there was at the SGC. It seemed convulted to get(rag tag group) onto destiny. Why not simply have the attack occurring when they initially have dialled the 9th chevron, instead of this for some reason its not working! The senator sacrificing himself was lame, because he was dying. Wish he'd been hale and hearty and then his sacrifice would have meant something.


Onto the characters.
1) Dr Rush(excellently acted by the superb Carlysle). He's been the one bright spark, that made me think this might not be the train wreck it appeared destined to be. Still it'll all hinge on how believable the reason he's acting so oddly. Baltar had a reason(he was a selfish greedy man who was used & then everything for him hinged on saving himself)

2) Chloe(senators daughter) Acted very well in the aftermath of father's death, made it seem believable for me.

3) Lt Scott. Acting wise i thought he did very well. Not sure charcater has been written coherently though.

4) Ronald Greer. If he's so psychotic why did they give him a gun. Let him out of solitary but let the guy go round threatening to kill people. Why was he on the base anyway, how did he get through rounds of tests to be part of elite stargate military.

5) Senator. Given little to do other than die.

6) Colonel Green. Really wished he'd stayed paralysed. Would have been interesting to see a leader bedbound/wheelchair bound and see if he maintains authority. Can't really judge until he gets some development now he's up and about.

7) TJ. She's a medic, so why's she weeping over a corpse. Ofh she's left to the program to go teaching. So why is she onthe mission?, Surely the SGC's got other medics. Was she going to go on the away mission despite the fact her contract had expired.

8) Ming-Na. A two hour pilot and we still don't know anything about her opther than she works for the IOA.

9) Eli. Leave the worst till last. He gets a lot of screen time and he's awful. Chop him up and feed him to whatever beasties live on the nearby planet. He's a math genius apparently although he never confirms that or seems remotely intelligent. He seems like someone who plays computer games & has won a contest(a la charlie & chocolate factory) to be here. Rush is writing formulas and he's sitting doping nothing. He plays with stuff on ship without a proper knowledge of ancient and after being told not to touch stuff. he's allowed off world without even having to do any training. Apparently he represents the viewer(according to soem reviews i've read.) He doesn't represent me, he's an idiot.

That really sums up my problem. If your going to be comparing to BSG. I like its tele movie. It's extremely well done and you feel for the characters, because they've given you an insight into them that will be fleshed out later. They show you why starbuck's in the brig etc. 2 hours later and i feel no connection with any of the characters. Rush intrigues me but without knowing more than opera and tears i can't empathise because i don't know why he's so messed up. My big worry going in was this(deep,dark vibe) they wanted to convey, not because i don't appreciate such stuff but because i want the creators to have a story that goes dark places rather than go to dark places in search of a story.

I'll watch a few more episodes but it's worryingly mediocre so far. Not terrible just deeply average.

[akuma07]

Hi people

I'm sure some of these topic's have already been covered over and over, but please remember this only premiered in the UK last night. (06/10/2009)

The Good

I enjoyed it start to finish. I enjoyed the darker atmosphere and I'm glad they ditched the constant slap stick humour found in atlantis.

The Destiny looks awesome, and I'm glad they were able to instantly fix it. I'm also glad they've finally presented a problem that cannot be fixed simply on a laptop, they are going to have to actually fix things the old fashioned way.

I like the cast, we all know if Rodney or Carter were there they have the ship fixed and turned around in no time at all, but this crew isn't currently skilled to fix aceint tech, which make the story going forward much more interesting.

The speical effects were as good as I've seen so far.

And finally Robert carlye was better than I though he was going to be.

The bad

Like the Hammond wouldn't have laid waste to the 3 mothership in no time at all. The beam weapons would have cut them down in seconds, so why didn't they? (of course the answer is the story wouldn't have worked otherwise, but its still a BIG ommision)

Other UK people that didn't download, wha do you think?