View Single Post
Old June 28 2013, 06:38 PM   #21
Vice Admiral
Admiral2's Avatar
Location: Langley
Re: is the stargate movie any good

Christopher wrote: View Post
Admiral2 wrote: View Post
Any sufficiently advanced technology would seem like magic to the less advanced.
That's a saying that's often abused. There is, in fact, a fundamental difference between technology and magic, in that the former is constrained by the fundamental laws of physics. Not to mention that we're talking about biology here, not technology.
How do you know we're not talking about technology? Ra's sarcophagus raised Jackson from the dead and fixed his fatally wounded girlfriend. How do you know it wasn't also capable of merging two humanoid beings so that one's consciousness can supplant the other's?

You don't, because it was never addressed in the movie and the series retconned Ra's race into a bunch of eels so we can have dramatic shots of slippery green phalluses jumping into people's mouths to take them over.

Anyway, yes, certainly, some fiction is more fanciful than others, but that's my point -- that while the Stargate movie was essentially a work of fantasy (as is Doctor Who, of course), the Stargate TV franchise often managed to be one of the more scientifically literate SF shows around. Some of its ideas were quite fanciful, but on the whole it generally tried to take the silly ideas from the movie and rework them into something more scientifically plausible. Sometimes it managed to do excellent hard SF, notably in the episode "Tangent." Given how rare it is for any SF on television or film to be remotely scientifically literate, that's a noteworthy accomplishment and helps make the TV franchise stand out from the pack in a way the movie totally failed to do.
I guess that depends on what ideas you define as silly. We disagree on which. Not a shock. As much as I loved SG-1, it has always fallen short of the quality of the movie in my eyes.

And just in general, the TV franchise's worldbuilding and conceptual development was far, far richer than what the movie managed.
Bull. All they really did was pick new mythologies to turn into aliens, which is just the movie in multiple.

I mean, come on, Devlin and Emmerich came up with this idea with limitless potential, a wormhole allowing instant travel to anywhere in the galaxy,

and the best they could come up with was a hackneyed ancient-astronaut story and a replica of ancient Egypt?
And all the producers of the show did was tack on more ancient cultures using the same ancient astronaut trope! They even had a race frigging called THE ANCIENTS!

What a profound failure of imagination.
One without which the TV guys would have had nothing rework.

The movie is a tremendous letdown.
To you. I thought it was great. I enjoy it every time I see it.

What impresses me so much about the TV franchise is how they managed to take such a shallow foundation and build such a rich and imaginative universe upon it. I daresay it's the only SFTV universe that can compare with Star Trek for sheer scope, richness, and coherence. In some ways it's even more coherent than ST managed to be, since it remained mostly under the same creators' control throughout its tenure. (Although unlike ST, its short-lived animated incarnation is unambiguously non-canonical.)
The series is better than Star Trek. I've said it before and I'll keep saying it.

Doctor Who's universe certainly has scope and richness, but coherence has never been one of its features.
Yet, it has been on for decades, and its fans generally don't give a shit if it makes any kind of rational sense.
"Understand, Commander: That torpedo did not self-destruct. You heard it hit the hull, and I was never here."

-Admiral James Greer
Admiral2 is offline