Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stargate (1994) vs SG-1 : Continuity differences

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Snowman37 View Post
    You all are simply not understanding Rushy. He is saying that the SG-1 movies were not as good as the original due to their "TV movie" budget and production style.
    Clarity...is all I'm sayin'....
    sigpic

    Comment


      Originally posted by Snowman37 View Post
      You all are simply not understanding Rushy. He is saying that the SG-1 movies were not as good as the original due to their "TV movie" budget and production style.
      Y'know, English is my first language. I'm simply pointing out to him WHY they have that particular quality or lack thereof.

      (Yes, I'm female. Okay?)
      Sum, ergo scribo...

      My own site ** FF.net * All That We Leave Behind * Symbiotica ** AO3
      sigpic
      now also appearing on DeviantArt
      Explore Colonel Frank Cromwell's odyssey after falling through the Stargate in Season Two's A Matter of Time, and follow Jack's search for him. Significant Tok'ra supporting characters and a human culture drawn from the annals of history. Book One of the series By Honor Bound.

      Comment


        Originally posted by SF_and_Coffee View Post
        Y'know, English is my first language. I'm simply pointing out to him WHY they have that particular quality or lack thereof.
        But the thing is, I've watched all of SG-1 and I know why it is the way it is.
        "I have never understood why it should be necessary to become irrational in order to prove that you care... or why it should be necessary to prove it at all."

        Comment


          Originally posted by rushy View Post
          But the thing is, I've watched all of SG-1 and I know why it is the way it is.
          Honestly, based on your posts...that is not the impression that I got.
          sigpic

          Comment


            Perhaps you misinterpreted his posts? I admit, they were structured in such a way that suggested confusion on why the original movie was different. Upon reading further posts, I realized he was trying to convey that the original film is a superior piece of cinema due to the later movies being TV-grade productions.

            Comment


              That's absolutely right. But well, english ain't my first language anyway so it's understandable.
              "I have never understood why it should be necessary to become irrational in order to prove that you care... or why it should be necessary to prove it at all."

              Comment


                There's a lot of back-and-forth about terminology going on in this thread while, at the root of all of it, it looks like everybody is basically on the same page. Or close to it. This is interesting. The different terms have different interpretations, in some cases based on the contexts within which they are used, and in other cases given the general differences in their connotations and denotations.

                Canon, for example, can be perceived as the original - where it all began - and that there can be only one true canon. On the other hand, it is commonly used as a synonym to the word official. Yet, then again, it is also used in multiples, in reference to different continuities.

                Sometimes there are different ideas on the term franchise. One individual might see the original movie and the television series as two separate franchises, while someone else might see all of those productions combined as being part of one, single franchise that owns both, i.e., MGM.

                Perhaps the least confusing term is continuity, or at least until other similar terms are thrown into the mix, like retcon and continuity errors.

                One individual might see the television series as a conglomerate retcon of the original movie, while another might see it as not a retcon at all, saying that it would have to hold on to the facts from the original, or preserve the original continuity, while otherwise changing the interpretation of that information.

                An example of how retcon might differ would be the location of Abydos. One person could say that there's no misinterpreting the planet being in another galaxy versus the Milky Way, yet another person might have a completely different understanding of the term retcon.

                Continuity errors almost always refer to errors that occur within one branch of the franchise, such as errors that occur exclusive to the television series.

                Then we finally move on to the subject of what makes a movie a movie - or what type of movie - and how different people interpret those differences, be they budgets, durations, big or small screen presentations, or the syntax of each production and how they compare to one another. Then we get into the pilot or premiere episodes of the different series and how they are later altered and edited to fit within movie contexts.

                I opened up this thread when I saw the subject title "Stargate (1994)" - while I was looking for a forum dedicated to Stargate, the original movie, though unfortunately there is not one - and I ended up finding this discussion. Very interesting, indeed.
                Are you in the Kansas City area? Do you know any SG fans in the area?
                Email me and join the local group of Stargate enthusiasts! (Email address in my profile.)
                What if... events occurred differently in Stargate? | Which version Stargate fan are you?
                An all new crew: Who would you want MGM to hire for a new Stargate show or movie(s)?
                When have you met SG cast or crew (excluding conventions)?
                Stargate Enthusiasts in the Kansas City Area | Being Introduced to Stargate

                Comment


                  For Me the series SG-1 is not canot because the movie have other stories created for dean devlin

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by jsonitsac View Post
                    So if they were only able to dial 6 chevrons before Daniel showed up why couldn't they light up 7, after all they had this:



                    The Tau'ri POO was right on the cover stone.
                    My theory on this was that the dialing computer was programmed to allow for Snyder number of chevrons in an address. Remember, there are 9 in total, and they had no way of knowing that only 7 were needed for basic functionality.

                    They probably started off attempting 9 chevron addresses and it wouldn't work. Then they noticed the 6 symbols in the cartouche and tried a 6 chevron setup.

                    I like to think that offscreen someone clicked on the "7 chevrons" button to open the dialing software symbol entering screen that we saw.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X