or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › 'Stargate Universe' on Syfy HD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'Stargate Universe' on Syfy HD - Page 3

post #61 of 1967
Ill stick with this for now, I agree with others that the commercials were cut in at horrible points in the show. It had me thinking this was more of a one shot deal and that this episode will probably be more enjoyable watched uninterrupted. I also agree about the flashbacks, most of the time they were kind of "jarring" and took you out of the moment.

As others noticed I was wondering wth happened to LDP, since he seems to be one of the major people they have been promoting, it seemed kind of weird to to actually show him on the ship. Hes on the previews for next week, but its anyones guess on how he shows up.
post #62 of 1967
I only watched some of the first stargate for Richard Dean Anderson.


This one shouldn't be even call stargate.
post #63 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post

On 1 to 10 scale I'd give a 4.5-5. It held my interest, but other than Eli none of the characters really grabbed me, don't really care if they die or not.

I like your rating, and like you, aside from Eli, I didn't care if anyone died.

The show has good production values. Good special effects (mostly). Good actors (mostly). Decent music. Looks good in HD. But the writing is awful, which is exactly what I was afraid of. These guys just don't have what it takes to create a rich, adult-themed, character-based drama.

They took the visual style of BSG, but left what truly made that show great...the writing. They took the underlying plot of Stargate, but left what made that show fun to watch...the camaraderie and adventure. What we're left with is a show that isn't fun to watch, filled with unlikable/boring/flat characters, and is neither intelligent nor thought-provoking. Worse yet, we're forced to watch them struggle to make it work.

Someone else mentioned it, but it is extremely melodramatic, along with being predictable. Is there anyone who didn't think the Senator would kill himself? Yet we had to sit and watch them come to this inevitable conclusion for however long. And by the way, after he was gone, Rush said that he wouldn't have been his first choice. Really? A guy near death with internal bleeding with no doctors around, and he wouldn't be your first choice? He sure as hell would have been mine. And then the daughter's reaction rang completely false for some reason. And Rush's reaction was even worse. They tried to humanize him, but failed spectacularly. Even Eli's reaction didn't ring true.

But all that being said, if I sat through all seasons of the other Stargate shows, I'll give this one a few more weeks before I drop it.

By the way, anyone else get a strong Sunshine vibe when they walked out onto the observation deck?

By the way (part 2), anyone else lol when they were flying through the gate in the beginning? I found that hilarious for some reason.

By the way (part 3), it took me a while to place her, but the blonde medic is Black Canary from Smallville.

By the way (part 4), RDA needs to lay off the doughnuts.
post #64 of 1967
Ah ha! That's where I recognize her from.

RDA looked a little puffy. Hope his health is okay.
post #65 of 1967
Ratings are in for the premiere of "Stargate Universe" and they're both better than expected (it beat "Dollhouse" on Fox in total viewers and viewers 18-49) but, given the hype, mildly disappointing. "Hot Off The Press" has the numbers: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post17293852.
post #66 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by lax01 View Post

Wow...I'm a little surprised by the comments here. I thought it was excellent...hands down better than SG-1 and Atlantis. MUCH less hokey and much more realistic in terms of the Stargate mythology.

I appreciated the fact they were trying to make this more "realistic" but the creators definition of realistic drama seems to be to just copy the visual style and approach of BSG. Exactly.

Out of all the dramatic shows I watch on television none of them look and feel like BSG and they aren't the worse for it. It wasn't needed to the extent they layered it on here.

They need to lighten up the characters too. That's one of the lynch pins of the entire SG franchise. Having some characters who can actually laugh and find wonder in their predicament beyond the one token guy would go a long way to differentiating the show from BSG.

They are at the furthest reaches of the universe on the most advanced spaceship they have encountered and they just don't seem that interested. If you accepted assignments to work on distant worlds by way of wormhole travel, you would think some of them would appear to be at least a bit curious or look interested, life support problem or not.
post #67 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by VisionOn View Post

They are at the furthest reaches of the universe on the most advanced spaceship they have encountered and they just don't seem that interested. If you accepted assignments to work on distant worlds by way of wormhole travel, you would think some of them would appear to be at least a bit curious or look interested, life support problem or not.

But you have to remember in the SG series (even though they're trying to differentiate themselves from other "SG" shows) they've been traveling to other universes for well over a decade, so I suppose for a lot of these people (like the "Camille Wray" IOA character, who as I recall (correct me if I'm wrong) has made appearances at least on one of the two other SG shows at any given number of times). In any given case, after a decade of traveling around space without being able to tell anyone about it, you'd be jaded too.
post #68 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveFi View Post

In any given case, after a decade of traveling around space without being able to tell anyone about it, you'd be jaded too.

The only thing the majority of them did on the ship was moan about going home. When most of them had obviously signed on to be stationed light years away from home on a top secret assignment without communication and had no problem with that 30 seconds earlier.

They should have been curious about what they could find to solve their immediate problems. Nobody asked questions or attempted a better understanding of their surroundings. For all they knew an entire crew could have been in another room or the next corridor could have led to another working gate with big sign saying "Door to Earth" over the top.

If you don't have the curiosity gene, then they really shouldn't have been on the assignment to begin with. The SG-1 team have been through more gates than anyone else yet they still kept that factor running throughout the show.

This bunch are designed to be just gloomy and miserable because the forced BSG style demands it.
post #69 of 1967
Yeah, the more I think about it , the less I like it. I'll give it a week or two, but if things are not better than I'll dump it off my DVR.

I agree the characters are bad. No spark, no, wonder, no fire. Just lots of whining and poor me attitude. As far as I can tell 98% of them signed up for the project. With such a large group some new lead actors could find their way into the plot without too many issues.

As for the set, I hate it. I hate dark grimy si-fi. It implies to me that things are going to get worse not better, and it sucks the gee-wiz isn't that neat aspect out of any show/movie that employs it. There is no reason that the ship could not have been in hibernation mode and when life signs were detected the lights come on on a visually interesting ship much like Atlantis - after all that was a giant ship also.

For me, STTNG epitomized the future I want to see, mankind's problems minimized, out exploring, and full of technical wonders.
post #70 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post

There is no reason that the ship could not have been in hibernation mode and when life signs were detected the lights come on on a visually interesting ship much like Atlantis - after all that was a giant ship also.

The lights did come on when it detected gate activation but if the crew manage to restore full power and the whole thing still looks like a tomb it's not going to help the BSG comparisons - and that ZPM must be dangerously low after the many thousands of years it's been traveling at light speed.

I always find it hilarious when humans of the future build vehicles and buildings that are badly lit and full of safety hazards. Like corridors you can't see properly to walk in and bridges and stairways over deep chasms without safety rails.

It reminds me of the scene in Galaxy Quest when Tim Allen encounters the area full of giant hydraulic hammers and flames that serve no purpose only to be dangerous and shouts "why would anyone build a room like this?"

edit: your hibernation suggestion just made me think of something else. Why were the CO2 scrubbers failing when there are no humans on board to create the CO2? In fact why was the life support system on all this time if the ship knows when people arrive? Life support would have to be activated at launch and then left active. For no reason.
post #71 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by moob View Post

She did: http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune....y-sci-fi-.html

I wasn't a fan myself.

Neither am I. Watched 3 or 4 episodes & that's it for me. The last one I watched was when the girl/young woman came in to rescue her brother caught between dimensions.

I found W13 downright silly.

Good adult SF is very hard to find. The last 2 great ones were BSG & B5. I thought Farscape was maybe not great, but very good for what it was.

It seems networks think they have to cater to the 10-18 yr old's for SF to be successful. W13 is in the same mold.

Watched SG-U Friday & it does seem BSG-like. Not sure what potential it has but I'll give it a fair chance for 3 epiosodes BTW - I basically ignored SG for quite a few yrs. but did enjoy the intermittent episodes I did watch. The main problem I have with any show that goes 10 yrs is that 10 yrs is about 5 yrs too long for most series!

I found SG-Atlantis more interesting, maybe because of McKay's antics & it was wrapped up in 5 yrs

ss9001
post #72 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltownsend View Post

They really need a Michael Shanks, Ben Browder or Daivd Hewett to get me interested in this crew and their "trek". This cast needs work.

Ben Browder would make a great addition
post #73 of 1967
There was a point in the show where someone walking thru a hall mentioned they'd like to have access to a "Tylenol" for a headache.. My son right away said , "I expect to see a Tylenol commercial soon".
Sure enough ...... A tylenol commercial soon after .
Also seemed funny that someone brought an extra uniform, that happened to fit Eli just fine ( at the end when preparing to go thru the gate)......
post #74 of 1967
(like the "Camille Wray" IOA character, who as I recall (correct me if I'm wrong)

You may be thinking of Tamlyn Tomita who played the Chinese Ambassador on both SG and SGA. I feel the new show attempted a blend between some BSG grittiness in mood and SG lightness in character acting. None of the established actors displayed the skill of an EJO or MM ( don't hurt me Begbie) and the younger actors just didn't seem to have a lot to work with. Still, I'll keep watching in hopes of better writing and more realistic character development. My hope is they steer clear of too many fantastic aliens and deus ex machina plot lines. Make humans figure things out or deal with the consequences. That's what we have to deal with on the other side of the flat panel.
post #75 of 1967
Another typical offering from the dependably yawn-inducing SyFy channel.
post #76 of 1967
I have watched all the stargate shows and thought this one was well done. It has a different feel but still worked I thought. I am curious as well how Lou Diamond Philips is going to fit into the show since he was not shown on the ship.

I think there is going to be a lot more revealed soon that fit all the characters together better. The main scientist obviously is hiding something and the woman and the commander obviously have some personal friction going on. There were just a lot of tidbits mentioned here and there that give you an idea of possible character storylines but I liked how they were fairly subtle about a lot of things almost too much so as I think a lot of people missed a lot of the foreshadowing they did. I don't think this is going to be a "take everythin" at face value kind of show.

As far as the CO2 scrubbers not working, it is not that they were running all this time and were just now failing. The life support kicked on when they arrived but with the damage the ship took in the past and the machinery being in disrepair it was not working properly. The stuff they found in the CO2 units was some sort of decay or corrosion from years of innactivity.

Overall for a sci-fi show I would give it a 7.5/10. At least I feel it is a step up on the intelligence factor compared to the usual fair.
post #77 of 1967
I thought all the folks were total tools except the one soldier who was locked up and released, I hope he gets space fever and kills the rest of them, once the scientists get the ship fixed . I also wish McKay would have been beamed in to save them, then the pilot would be a movie. The Eli/slacker/gamer thing is already too old, I can see the feds putting puzzles like that in games to get a solution, but beaming the cheeto stained finger asshat into the ship was a bit much and any attempt to give him genius cred will fail.


Stargate McKay FTW.
post #78 of 1967
I still say expect an appearance by the evil Asgard sometime in the near future. That's the only reason why I could see them introduced towards the end of SG-1.
post #79 of 1967
Or Sheppard even - someone with some panasch and personality!
post #80 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveFi View Post

I still say expect an appearance by the evil Asgard sometime in the near future. That's the only reason why I could see them introduced towards the end of SG-1.

Ah, interesting... I hadn't thought of that. It didn't really make sense that they would introduce a new, big bad guy literally 8 or so episodes before the well-published end of SG:A. Having them show up in SGU would make a lot of sense.
post #81 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoCortex View Post

Wouldn't the third version of Star Trek be DS9?

But, yeah, I did get a bit of a Voyager vibe from the first episode. I'm hoping they can distinguish themselves quite a bit.

This also seems the most "serious" Stargate so far. It's a far cry from the campy Richard Dean Anderson beginnings. Maybe they're looking at this as picking up BSG viewers, since Caprica is going to be mostly grounded.

I have not anything much about Caprica since I was avoiding spoilers till the premier. What going on with it?
I think they do need to be a bit more serious on this on in either case. I know another ship as been past Destiny but I can't see them just putting in a Stargate and say "one way ticket home please" .
post #82 of 1967
I enjoyed the premiere. I thought it was a good move to get away from the Stargate formula and try something different. I liked the fact that they struggled to get a hang on the Ancient technology. I like the fact there were not any super genius types to come up with some far out wacky techno babble to save the day. McKay's character made that stuff tolerable, but if was not for him it would have struck me just as dumb as Voyager.

I am looking forward to what they have in store since the beginning is much stronger than Atlantis.
post #83 of 1967
I'm on board. The wife and I were both happy with the pilot. It's hard to get all the characters introduced and flushed out in one episode, even if it is 2 hours. But all in all, we really enjoyed it.

I'm excited about the show and eagerly looking forward to the next episode Friday. Probably more so than any other show this year.

Someone mentioned ST:TNG. There isn't a bigger fan than myself, but you have to admit, it took them several episodes to get into a groove.
post #84 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Clemons View Post

Another typical offering from the dependably yawn-inducing SyFy channel.

As poor as the characters were and as slow as the story went, this show is 'light years' (hah) ahead of typical SyFy dreck. Interesting concept. If they could only kill off the entire crew and reboot with all new actors...
post #85 of 1967
Well it was the pilot and some may change but dont hold your breath. I think its the writing that needs work more. I will as always watch it.
post #86 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wytchone View Post

Well it was the pilot and some may change but dont hold your breath. I think its the writing that needs work more. I will as always watch it.

Guilty as charged. There isn't too much else on worth watching, at least this has spaceships.
post #87 of 1967
I very much doubt we'll see the evil Asgard. The evil Asgard were introduced in SG-A before they knew they were being cancelled, I don't think they have a place on this show.

The problem, as I see it, is this show has pushed such a dramatic tone shift from the rest of the franchise that older elements outside of a basic framework just don't fit. The Asgard, even the evil ones, are just don't fit with the serious tone and could never be taken seriously as a menacing threat in this universe. Another example I have of the tone shift is take a look at the focus for the first episode, air. I'm sorry, but after 11 years of Carter and McKay pulling off miracles left and right, life support seems like a rather pedestrian problem to have. I have trouble taking the show as seriously as it takes itself when I know it's in the same universe of Rodney blowing up a solar system or Carter tying a supergate to a black hole.

This is all especially true since we know the stones work since we saw Rush connect with Dr. Lee. That means that the brainpower of Carter and Rodney could be brought to bear on any of the tough situations they have going on with the ship.

Serious just doesn't work for Stargate who's core tenant was always not to take itself too seriously. They tried to go for a re-imaging while keeping it within the existing canon and I just don't think it works. Any time we have crossover with the rest of the established universe it's going to seem really jarring. Because of that, I don't think we are going to see a lot of crossover with any of the two previous stargates.

I don't know. The show needs to find it's own voice and quick and they need to tone down the drama. I think they would have been better off going for a sense of general wonder and unknown rather than going down the 'look at how flawed all our characters are, watch out for the fireworks' route.
post #88 of 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by philw1776 View Post

If they could only kill off the entire crew and reboot with all new actors...

Personally, I've never liked Lou Diamond Philips as an actor in anything. If they kill him off, it'd be a plus

The others, too early to tell, but Rush has potential. Using a slacker/gamer as a counterpart "boy" genius to Rush strikes me as similar in tone to Last Starfighter as a plot device. So far, nothing too original here yet...unfortunately.

I would much rather see Virtuality make it to a full series than have another copycat spin-off Virtuality had all the parts for an interesting show: mankind's 1st interstellar journey, a realistic perspective of what work & life aboard such a spaceship would be like compared to most SF shows, all with bits of Matrix thrown in for a mystery, hell ya

So fans of more "hard" scifi may have to wait for Caprica.

ss9001
post #89 of 1967
It was just OK. Seemed to me like they were going for an SG plot with a BSG feel. No character that I find even remotely likable. Not sure this will last long.
post #90 of 1967
I have issues with the ship itself.

Considering that an advanced race like the ancients had the ability to create a ship to explore the universe, following a path created by a previous Stargate seed ship. They would build such ships to last the eternity it would take to perform this task. Therefore there would have to be automated systems (bots) to repair both inside and outside the ship. As with Atlantis the ship would be beautiful not some bucket of bolts with low ceilings and dark gloomy hallways. The Atlantian’s just did not build ships like Destiny!

And where is the ancient gene! Not once has anyone mentioned that?

I can deal with bad plot lines, but screw with my ancient technology and that’s an issue



my .02 cents
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › 'Stargate Universe' on Syfy HD