'Cloverdale' (205) General Discussion

[Kaiphantom]

No. That's how some of you thought of Scott as a character. Now we realize that Scott himself has these doubts. Its very telling and frankly kinda bold to go that route with a main star of a Stargate series, a franchise which tends to make its lead characters perfect and incapable of such weaknesses. But, oh, I forgot. The characters on the previous shows were the most three dimensional and well developed characters in sci fi history. Uh-huh.

Seriously? Are you an SGU writer here undercover? I mean, that's the only way I could explain how you'd find this thing so perfect and lacking in flaws. Here's a hint to take back to your masters: We saw it, because earlier episodes showed it. We were there when Scott cried in that church during a flashback. We were there when Scott voiced his concerns to Chloe in bed. We, the viewers, are not stupid. The moment the writers feel that the audience is "Stupid" for not "getting it" is the moment they've lost it.

And even if you're right, that this episode shows us that SCott does feel that way.. then it's really stupid, because they wasted a whole episode to tell us that Scott feels he's a manwhore. You could have have told us that using a plot that actually took place on the real SG universe, as opposed to one that takes place in Boringsville. Oh, as a writer myself, let me share this tip: Don't take a chapter to tell to the readers something that could be done just as effectively in one paragraph.

Oh, and if one more poster wants to point out how plot on SGU were done before on previous Stargate shows I might have to start pointing out how those previous Stargate shows had plots that were already covered on Star Trek, Sliders, B5, etc. So lets stop the pretense that the previous Stargate shows invented the wheel. All of these sci fi shows rely on storylines and elements that we have seen before. So what's left then is how they tell the stories. With all the problems I do have with SGU (and I have written some rants to JM on his blog), I do appreciate how they try to at least take a different approach to how they allow the story to play out.

Or, we're all well aware it has been done before. That is precisely why we bring these things, to contrast and compare, and see if SGU did it as good, or as bad, as those other shows.

[AndSoItBegins]

I forgot....great use of Greer again. I hope its a trend.

[BadOnion]

Much better than I was expecting, given the premise. The dream stuff was an interesting character study of how he sees the other people on the ship. Never disappointed with Lt. James given large visible roles. Excellent solution with interesting implications for the future.

For the BSG conspiracists, you may wonder if eventually there will be 12 people on the ship infected with the blues' blood, and we won't know who they are. Rush will leave the note.

[Gatefan1976]

No. That's how some of you thought of Scott as a character. Now we realize that Scott himself has these doubts. Its very telling and frankly kinda bold to go that route with a main star of a Stargate series, a franchise which tends to make its lead characters perfect and incapable of such weaknesses. But, oh, I forgot. The characters on the previous shows were the most three dimensional and well developed characters in sci fi history. Uh-huh.

Of course, but I hate to tell you here mate, but within the pilot ep of SGA I knew Shepp was a gung ho freak with suicidal tendancies and authority issues, and that was based on a few lines of dialogue and the way he carried himself. Later on, you actually got to see how "dark" Shepp really was (esp with the "iratus bug" stuff and Vegas)

Oh, and if one more poster wants to point out how plot on SGU were done before on previous Stargate shows I might have to start pointing out how those previous Stargate shows had plots that were already covered on Star Trek, Sliders, B5, etc. So lets stop the pretense that the previous Stargate shows invented the wheel. All of these sci fi shows rely on storylines and elements that we have seen before. So what's left then is how they tell the stories. With all the problems I do have with SGU (and I have written some rants to JM on his blog), I do appreciate how they try to at least take a different approach to how they allow the story to play out.

Sure, I agree, but it has to be a two way street mate.

[AndSoItBegins]

Seriously? Are you an SGU writer here undercover?

If so I wouldn't be foolish enough to waste my time going back and forth with you.

And even if you're right, that this episode shows us that SCott does feel that way.. then it's really stupid, because they wasted a whole episode to tell us that Scott feels he's a manwhore. You could have have told us that using a plot that actually took place on the real SG universe, as opposed to one that takes place in Boringsville. Oh, as a writer myself, let me share this tip: Don't take a chapter to tell to the readers something that could be done just as effectively in one paragraph.

I can understand that. But I would be arguing more about Rush's deceitful ways since that is the most overexplored element of the entire show. With STILL no conclusion in sight. SGU is a show, and maybe this will be the death of it, its slooow time in telling its tale. That gives it a more natural feel. That being said if Scott's relevation had been done in "real time" on the Destiny the whining would still be as great because the subject matter itself is still relationships.

we're all well aware it has been done before. That is precisely why we bring these things, to contrast and compare, and see if SGU did it as good, or as bad, as those other shows.

No. When you folks compare an SGU ep negatively to a similiar storyline of a previous Stargate show, you do not take the time to point out how that previous Stargate's tale had been done before on other series. All you do instead is say "this was already done before with Daniel and Jack on episode 76, blah, blah, blah."

[AndSoItBegins]

Sure, I agree, but it has to be a two way street mate.

Its been a one way street so far, sir.

[Spimman]

Greer was awesome in this episode, he really came across as the good friend to Scott that I would expect him to be. You can see how highly Scott really thinks of Greer!

[goga]

A good episode overall. I think some healthy amount of filler is useful. Plus, this wasn't entirely a filler. This episode definitely has potential roadblocks for our characters now that Scott is infected with the pathogen.

I liked how we got to see the characters outside of the ship. Loved the Rush scene. It was awesome.

The ending was kinda weird when Greer was using the gate as a weapon. Seemed a little too cheesy/convenient.

[Kaiphantom]

If so I wouldn't be foolish enough to waste my time going back and forth with you.

And being part of various writer fandoms, I can recognize the attitude of someone who has written something that they feel is perfect, and thus are unable to take criticism about that work. I've been there. Most writers have. It's really tough to accept that something you've written isn't as good as you thought it was, but in order to grow, one must accept that everything has flaws... like this episode.

I can understand that. But I would be arguing more about Rush's deceitful ways since that is the most overexplored element of the entire show. With STILL no conclusion in sight. SGU is a show, and maybe this will be the death of it, its slooow time in telling its tale. That gives it a more natural feel. That being said if Scott's relevation had been done in "real time" on the Destiny the whining would still be as great because the subject matter itself is still relationships.

Here's another writer's hint: Relationships rarely make a good "A" plot. They are best done as a "B" plot at best, in the context of a larger story. When you force the relationships to the fore, the relationship ends up feeling forced, surprisingly enough. That's partly why this episode felt so bad. A good story will focus on the main "A" plot, and have the relationship stuff naturally fall into line as the "B" plot (Or C, or D, or whatever).

Only do relationships as the A plot if you're writing a chick flick.

No. When you folks compare an SGU ep negatively to a similiar storyline of a previous Stargate show, you do not take the time to point out how that previous Stargate's tale had been done before on other series. All you do instead is say "this was already done before with Daniel and Jack on episode 76, blah, blah, blah."

You need to go back and read. I said it was done better with The Gamekeeper. You know, as an example to look to what figuring out these things. Even The Real World did it a bit better, because it made sense; the nanites were trying to take over Weir's mind and make her think she was crazy. The Changeling did it just as badly. Switching series, ST: TNG did it right with "Tapestry" where Q lets Picard live his life over to teach him a lesson. DS9 did it badly with "Sisko vs. racism" because there was no larger context there, and the characters weren't the characters.

It's not just "This was done before;" It's more like "This was done before, and done better here, and done worse there and this episode falls [here]" where [here] is what someone feels.

[Spimman]

Since when did we (as SG fans) stop appreciating episodes that aren't 100% tie ins to the overall story arc of the show? I personally enjoy a breather episode every now and then as long as it is well done, and I don't consider every such episode to be "filler" which is a word thrown around a little too freely.

This episode offered a nice view into Scott's psyche while still adding to the arc in a few small ways at the conclusion of the episode and the more I digest it the more I appreciate it!

[Lt.Colonel John Sheppard]

Hey anybody know what was the beer that they were drinking at the house in the dream sequence.

[dasNdanger]

The Day of the Triffids.





das

[AndSoItBegins]

Of course, but I hate to tell you here mate, but within the pilot ep of SGA I knew Shepp was a gung ho freak with suicidal tendancies and authority issues, and that was based on a few lines of dialogue and the way he carried himself. Later on, you actually got to see how "dark" Shepp really was (esp with the "iratus bug" stuff and Vegas)

No offense but I never bought any of that type of stuff. People may dislike me for saying this but I'm as likely to believe that a character like that is really suicidal as much as I'd believe Kirk or Bones of TOS were. The tone of the series and the writing don't compel me to take such a leap. TOS for example is a fine and historical show, but I knew where every character stood, never doubted their morality and always felt in the end they would do the "right" thing. The same goes for SG1 (which I really enjoyed) and SGA (no comment). And there's nothing wrong with those shows if that's your thing. But let’s be true: those shows are safe and family friendly enough to be shown alongside Saturday morning cartoons. Doesn't make them bad shows just as shows that are more twisted aren't better just because they have screwed up characters. But there is a difference in how I view them.

When you mention the word "dark" with SGA I just shrug. Babylon 5 could be dark. Space: Above and Beyond could be dark. Deep Space Nine at times could be dark. New BSG....well, that may be too dark. But my point is that shows set such a tone that when a character actually had truly dark thoughts or was thinking about committing dark deeds I could buy it. But SG1 and SGA was full of too much fluff for me to ever buy into even the thought that Shep would consider suicide or commit a truly dark act. Heck I couldn't even take the villains that seriously because they were barely more threatening than COBRA of GI Joe. There were no Shadows, no Cylons. So I suppose I just went around the long way of saying that we have totally different views of what "dark" means when it comes to TV shows. To many of you SGU may be an inferior show compared to the previous Stargate series but is there any doubt that its a darker show?

[Pharaoh Atem]

Hey anybody know what was the beer that they were drinking at the house in the dream sequence.

tv brand

[morbosfist]

Not a bad episode. Filler mostly, and it had some good moments with the plants. I liked that Scott's hallucination wasn't as "in your face" about the fact that it wasn't real, but the characters are still giving him hints here and there. A stronger secondary plot would have helped. Really, the whole thing just sort of comes across as an excuse to get Chloe's infection back in the game, when they could have solved that with the obvious reveal next episode.

Still, it had its moments.