Page 1 of 6 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 114
  1. #1

    Default Stargate (1994) vs SG-1 : Continuity differences

    This has most probably been noticed before, but I was just watching the Stargate movie, and at the start when they first open the gate one of the scientists in the control room states
    "It's on the other side of the known universe" (referring to Abydos).
    There are two problems with this statement.
    1. The stargate only goes to inside this GALAXY without the 8th Chevron
    2. It is stated in SG-1 that Abydos is the closest planet to earth with a Stargate.

  2. #2
    Harvey jelgate's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2007
    Location
    The Beach of naked Sebeceans and margarita shooter
    Posts
    34,978

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    Adapting Stargate into SG1 resulted in a few contuniity errors on the part of the movie
    Quote Originally Posted by aretood2 View Post
    Jelgate is right

  3. #3
    Chief Master Sergeant
    Member Since
    Feb 2005
    Location
    UK, England.
    Posts
    125

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    that was because scientists thought our galaxy was alot smaller than they've imagined

  4. #4
    Second Lieutenant bfldworker's Avatar
    Member Since
    Sep 2008
    Location
    On the beach in Florida
    Posts
    258

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    There are actually a few continuity errors. With that being the big glaring one.

    There is the size of the Stargate in the movie when you compare it to the one in SG-1, there are the Chevrons that move in the movie and not in SG-1. There is the back of the Stargate in the movie compared to SG-1 (There is a cone shape vortex in the back of the gate in the movie, when there isn't one in SG-1.). There is the Gate room it's self, the one in the movie is tiny compared to SG-1. Then there is the whole mountain situation. In the movie it is Creek Mountain and in SG1 it is Cheyenne Mountain. Then there is what the Control Room looks like.
    Spins and turns, angles and curves, the shape of dreams half remembered. Slip the surly bonds of Earth and touch the face of perfection. A perfect face, a perfect lace, find a perfect world for the end of Kara Thrace.
    End of line.

    http://www.radioshacksucks.biz/BFLD/...ive-invert.jpg

  5. #5
    Major General
    Member Since
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,439

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    They're not exactly errors, the SG-1 canon is separate, the writers knew exactly what they were doing.

  6. #6
    Chief Master Sergeant
    Member Since
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    180

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    TPTB found it easier to manage a galaxy vs managing a universe. that is why they decided to have Abydos in our galaxy vs on the other side of the universe.
    if you see a light at the end of the tunnel, it's just a photon torpedo.

  7. #7
    Probie Arthurdent's Avatar
    Member Since
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Berkeley
    Posts
    18

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    Quote Originally Posted by bfldworker View Post
    There are actually a few continuity errors. With that being the big glaring one.

    There is the size of the Stargate in the movie when you compare it to the one in SG-1, there are the Chevrons that move in the movie and not in SG-1. There is the back of the Stargate in the movie compared to SG-1 (There is a cone shape vortex in the back of the gate in the movie, when there isn't one in SG-1.). There is the Gate room it's self, the one in the movie is tiny compared to SG-1. Then there is the whole mountain situation. In the movie it is Creek Mountain and in SG1 it is Cheyenne Mountain. Then there is what the Control Room looks like.
    You forgot the biggest change of all: Jack O'Neil became Jack O'Neill.

  8. #8
    Probie
    Member Since
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    5

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    In more ways than one!

  9. #9
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Member Since
    May 2004
    Posts
    3,108

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    There are no continuity errors. The movie and SG-1 are not separate. The producers simply made creative changes to the premise so the TV show would be more interesting.

  10. #10
    Major General
    Member Since
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,439

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    The two canons are separate, neither canon directly affects the other. In the movie canon the events of the series don't apply, and in the series the events of the movie only apply loosely.

  11. #11
    Second Lieutenant Anda's Avatar
    Member Since
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Romania(sorry for my english)
    Posts
    263

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    It's nice to think that all started from these movie!!!!!

  12. #12
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Member Since
    May 2004
    Posts
    3,108

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    Quote Originally Posted by jenks View Post
    The two canons are separate, neither canon directly affects the other. In the movie canon the events of the series don't apply, and in the series the events of the movie only apply loosely.
    The main canon consists of...

    Stargate (the movie)
    SG-1 Seasons 1-7
    SG-1 Seasons 8-10 / Atlantis Seasons 1-3
    The Ark of Truth
    Atlantis Seasons 4-5
    Continuum (early SG:A Season 5)

    The differences between the movie and TV show do not make them separate. Use your imagination and accept that creative changes were made to make the premise TV friendly. MGM considers the show an official continuation of the movie as does everyone involved. You can call them separate all you want, but they aren't.

  13. #13
    Major General
    Member Since
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,439

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Jackson View Post
    The main canon consists of...

    Stargate (the movie)
    SG-1 Seasons 1-7
    SG-1 Seasons 8-10 / Atlantis Seasons 1-3
    The Ark of Truth
    Atlantis Seasons 4-5
    Continuum (early SG:A Season 5)

    The differences between the movie and TV show do not make them separate. Use your imagination and accept that creative changes were made to make the premise TV friendly.
    What you've described is the Brad/Rob endorsed canon, there is no 'main canon'. The movie was made by Devlin and Emmerich, they don't endorse the series and therefore the two canons are separate. Brad and Rob don't accept the movie as canon, they've changed the events and characters, therefore in relation to the series, the movie is no more than a reference material, only loosely tied to the series. You can call the changed creative decisions all you want, but the fact is Brad and Rob don't control the movie canon so they're in no positions to make those decisions (neither are MGM), SG-1 was a re-imagined version of the movie if anything, the storyline, tone and even characters have been changed massively, apart from the premise the two canons are nothing alike.

    MGM considers the show an official continuation of the movie as does everyone involved. You can call them separate all you want, but they aren't.
    MGM considers the comics to be a direct continuation of the series, are they canon too?

  14. #14
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Member Since
    May 2004
    Posts
    3,108

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    Quote Originally Posted by jenks View Post
    What you've described is the Brad/Rob endorsed canon, there is no 'main canon'.
    What I described is what I consider the main canon.

    The movie was made by Devlin and Emmerich, they don't endorse the series and therefore the two canons are separate.
    Wether they endorse SG-1 or not is irelavent. SG-1 picks up where the movie left off with the same characters, locations, and stories; therefore it is a canon continuation. Should there be sequels made to the original movie, there would be two official continuations. The original movie and it's two sequels would be one canon. The original movie, TV shows, and movies based on those shows would be another canon.

    Brad and Rob don't accept the movie as canon, they've changed the events and characters, therefore in relation to the series, the movie is no more than a reference material, only loosely tied to the series.
    What? Are you kidding me? "Children of the Gods" plays out as a direct sequel to the movie. Same characters, same locations. O'Neill comes back out of retirement, Daniel is still on Abydos with Sha're, and Ra is revealed to not have been the last of his species as ancient Abydonians had once thought. You're refusal to accept the movie as part of SG-1 is downright hysterical!

    You can call the changed creative decisions all you want
    Thanks, because that's exactly what they are.

    but the fact is Brad and Rob don't control the movie canon so they're in no positions to make those decisions (neither are MGM)
    Since when is MGM not in control? Devlin and Emmerich have been trying to make Stargate 2, but MGM has repeatedly denied them, because they consider SG-1 as the official continuation of the movie.

    SG-1 was a re-imagined version of the movie if anything
    I will agree that a lot was reimagined, but that doesn't mean it's not a continuation.

    the storyline, tone and even characters have been changed massively, apart from the premise the two canons are nothing alike.
    The storyline, tone, and characters did not change. The only thing of any significance that changed was Ra from being a man-like alien within a Human body to being a snake-like parasite who abandoned an alien host in favor of a Human host. All other changes have been cosmetic such as recasting, different sets, the Stargate chevrons glowing, Sha'uri to Sha're, and so on.

    MGM considers the comics to be a direct continuation of the series, are they canon too?
    Comics? What comics?

  15. #15
    Major General
    Member Since
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,439

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    We might as well end this discussion here, as if you don't think the storyline, tone and characters changed then we're obviously living in different realities. Your argument probably should have probably ended after your first sentence: 'What I described is what I consider the main canon.' Because that's true, but that's all it is.

  16. #16
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Member Since
    May 2004
    Posts
    3,108

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    Quote Originally Posted by jenks View Post
    We might as well end this discussion here, as if you don't think the storyline, tone and characters changed then we're obviously living in different realities.
    I see. You can't argue against my points, so the discussion must end, eh? If you can't argue against them, just admit it instead of pushing forward this we must be living in different realities nonsense.

    Your argument probably should have probably ended after your first sentence: 'What I described is what I consider the main canon.' Because that's true, but that's all it is.
    As I've stated before, MGM also considers that the main canon. That is why they've denied Devlin and Emmerich from making sequels to the original movie.

  17. #17
    Major General
    Member Since
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,439

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Jackson View Post
    I see. You can't argue against my points, so the discussion must end, eh? If you can't argue against them, just admit it instead of pushing forward this we must be living in different realities nonsense.
    How can I argue when you refuse to see reason? The series and movie are completely different in tone, the character of O'neill in the show is totally different from the one in the movie, and Devlin and Emmerich's established canon has been changed in the series, these are all facts that you deny.

    As I've stated before, MGM also considers that the main canon. That is why they've denied Devlin and Emmerich from making sequels to the original movie.
    MGM endorse the comics and even Infinity, Brad and Rob don't. Who is right? Neither. There is no MGM canon, canon is decided by the creative parties that contribute to the franchise. Devlin controls the movie canon, Brad & Rob oversee the series, DVD movies and Stargate: Worlds canon. The canon of the series and movie are different, that's a fact, and Rob and Brad don't have the creative control to retcon anything in the movie canon, all they can do is explain in the show how the basic story of the movie relates to the series canon, that is why they are separate.

  18. #18
    Second Lieutenant Anda's Avatar
    Member Since
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Romania(sorry for my english)
    Posts
    263

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    I LOVE this movie!!YOU?

  19. #19
    Captain Ganthet Jr.'s Avatar
    Member Since
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Misery (Missouri)
    Posts
    1,054

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    Daniel Jackson and Jenks... I'd say the answer is between your explanations:


    Yes, the tv series is in a separate canon from the movie. HOWEVER, it is possible to view the original movie within the scope of the series canon. All you do is ignore the aspects that contradict, and voila, you are viewing the canon version of the events.
    Ganthet Jr. is formerly "TheInnkeeper"

    Teal'c: Your world is a strange place.
    Daniel: ...So's yours.



    Carson: Muh tuttles!

  20. #20
    Chief Master Sergeant
    Member Since
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    123

    Default Re: Stargate (1994)

    I rewatched this movie last night and I have two questions and if these has been asked before then please bear with me as I can't find them.

    The first was: from Daniel Jackson explaining that the symbols on the chevrons were constellations to the gateroom where everything was ready was a continuous scene. Did they know that they were constellations but only knew the 6 and were saying nothing to Jackson until he figured out that they were and was able to produce the 7th? I know this sounds confusing, but it was odd to me that they were fully prepared to dial out when he revealed the 7th chevron. I think it might have made more sense if there had been a set up sequence?

    Does this make any sense?

    Also, what do the creators of the movie dislike about the show (other than they were then barred from making sequels)??

Tags for this Thread

Similar Threads

  1. A Stargate 1994 Universe without SG1?
    By Dave2 in forum General Stargate Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: May 30th, 2013, 04:57 AM
  2. Stargate (1994) - Blueprints/Schematics?
    By DIFTOW in forum General Stargate Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: August 13th, 2012, 01:59 PM
  3. Stargate (1994)
    By IrishPisano in forum SG-1 Movies
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: October 30th, 2008, 12:04 AM
  4. Stargate(1994) Action Figures
    By phalnax in forum SG-1 Merchandise
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 9th, 2006, 09:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •