Even More Stargate


Stargate: Atlantis failed because there was no overarching plan for the series, and one way or another the same old stories were used as filler. Pretty much the same reasons the most recent versions of Star Trek failed, actually.

Exactly who is responsible and who is to blame – writers, directors, executives, or the network – isn’t really important. What is important is that the basic premise of the new Stargate: Universe series seems to have been cribbed from Star Trek: Voyager.

I’m confident that there isn’t truly copying involved. There are only so many basic premises you can work with, after all. But it’s not an auspicious new beginning.

Look, eventually I wasn’t willing to watch Atlantis even to kill time, and for free. There was no long-term structure to the show, no consistent antagonists (and the ones that were there were fairly silly), and they messed up the mythology of the show quite badly. Many of the characters were never properly used, and the ones who were used well were used too much and too often.

I’m not hopeful that the SyFy network (long, tedious story there) can raise another Stargate series out of the ashes. I’ll probably watch the pilot, though.


4 Responses to “Even More Stargate”

  1. I know… if Jewel Staite was not enough to get me to watch Atlantis, they’re doing something seriously wrong.

    • Agreed. The last season’s storylines were just ridiculous. Okay, so they find a clone of the doctor. Why does the clone have the doctor’s full memories and identity? Ba’al managed it because he has a genetic memory – why should a normal human clone also possess it?

      Staite is adorable, but I can’t help but think she’s too slender now. She looked like a real person when she played Kaylee instead of a model.

  2. Whiskey has been complaining about the name change to SyFy as another sign of how tv is captured by women and/or gays. I rarely watch television myself, but his overconfidence on cultural issues without data to back it off ticks me off.

    • I took a look at Whiskey’s site. Much of his analysis is worthwhile, but he makes many claims (both implicit and explicit) which seem to me to be rather contentious.

      For example, he takes for granted that sexual orientation determines a person’s outlook, personality, and approach to life. It may be the case that male homosexuals are far more female-like, psychologically, but it’s not at all clear to me how much that’s actually the case.

      The comment-writers don’t help things.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: