'Stargate: Universe' Will Get Darker, Tougher

[Saquist]

I know what the formal stance of Gateworld is, and it was interesting to read what the lead admin and other folks had to say about it. And it is their site, they can do what they want with it.

I'm only telling you what I observe on the forums my self. I'm a huge critic of SGU on Gateworld and they all know it. Currently I'm being censored through moderation. The moderators were giving me static about overly sarcastic comments use of logical debating styles so I requested them to put me on moderation as as to let them make the call on what is posted.

And while it might still technically be within the rules to critique the show in certain ways, what their crackdown has done is create a chilling effect on all negative discussions or critiques of SGU. Gateworld used to have some interesting debate and give and take, nowadays that is mostly gone. And the website is far less dynamic because of it.

It's true the effect is almost China like it's it's communist fashion. (that's just a metaphor of course) I say so because people are allowed to GUSH about the show, which means they can post

I HEART SGU
This show is so awesome!

But they can't do the opposite. They can't says:

This show sux!!
This show BLOWS CHOPS!!

Because then it's viewed as spamming when negative. That's Skydiver's greatest flaw. She seems like an older woman on a constant PMS trip. She is frequently short with people and has a clear bias for one member in particular Deevil who will be allowed to say just about anything she wants without censorship. I suspect she was a moderator as well.

Not to mention that I've noticed almost all the mods are women. The mods are not all bad though. I just question two of them. The other mods are rather business like and even. They defuse hot tempers rather well.

I could care less about this or that "thunk" thread or so and so appreciation thread. I want to read what people think of SGU, warts and all. And Gateworld no longer offers that, at least not entirely.

You are correct in my estimation. But it's just a feeling. Sites don't have to have the same democractic attitude towards free speech.

I personally don't believe that all speech is good speech but this isn about the voicing of profanity...just opinions and on Gateworld opinions have become some what limited.

 

[bigdaddy]

Kill people off. You can't have drama when we know no one important will die.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The funny thing is Stargate Universe isn't even that dark. The show has this "grim" atmosphere to it, but that's entirely artificial. The few times the show goes for real darkness (Young's attempted murder of Rush, the mutiny, Eli and the Gang being left behind, etc.) it restores the status quo by the next episode. Stargate SG-1, despite its lighthearted nature, was actually far darker.

That's exactly my impression of my admittedly brief tryout of the show. I figured that if the idiots in charge had figured out what they've doing wrong all these years (no-consequences, gutless approach) it would be apparent pretty quickly. But these clowns think dark sets, unlikable characters, arguments and random sex = "gritty." Yeesh.

I'd have more respect for them if they'd unabashedly continue the light-hearted, jokey Stargate style, and embrace that as their style, and if anyone doesn't like it, they can change the channel. But to try to imitate BSG without having the slightest idea what made BSG good is just pathetic.

I'll check back in when Robert Knepper does his guest arc, but I'm not expecting any whiff of improvement.

I think I would welcome a darker Stargate Universe.

Not just SG:U. SG-1 wasn't really "dark," either. The no-consequences style has been with them from the first. I'd love to see a total reboot, starting over with the Goa'uld story but not backing off when things get a bit uncomfortable. Turn the whole shebang over to Ron Moore & his gang - now that might be interesting!

Yeah, Gateworld a couple months ago in essence did away with posting anything negative about SGU. It made me sad because Gateworld is widely read by people who work on SGU, and hearing the fans tell you what is wrong can improve the show, if you have a thick enough skin to take the criticism.

The morons working on the show obviously don't have the slightest idea how to solve what's wrong with it, so what's the point of them reading complaints? The only constructive thing they can do now is quit their jobs and make room for (possibly) better talent.

She seems like an older woman on a constant PMS trip.

Impossible! They're all on TWOP.

 

[TiberiusMaximus]

Temis the Vorta said: Not just SG:U. SG-1 wasn't really "dark," either. The no-consequences style has been with them from the first. I'd love to see a total reboot, starting over with the Goa'uld story but not backing off when things get a bit uncomfortable. Turn the whole shebang over to Ron Moore & his gang - now that might be interesting!

When exactly did they 'back off' because the story was uncomfortable? Can you give me an example? I liked SG-1 because of it's mix between a decent continuing storyline and self contained episodes that expanded the larger picture but could also be enjoyed by themselves.
I agree about SGU's fake darkness/grittiness. It needs consequences to be dark. SG-1 didn't try to be so dark so the 'consequences' weren't always huge but I still think the story kept going well.

 

[Star Wolf]

Well first the Wraith became killable and they started talking to their food. Secondly the Ori did not go in as the God of Abraham and had Priors instead of God's Prophets

 

[JarodRussell]

They should replace Young with Sheppard and Rush with McKay. There would be no fucking issues with the command hierarchy, and the ship would be in Earth orbit in a week.

 

[The Wormhole]

Kill people off. You can't have drama when we know no one important will die.

How often do important people actually die on TV shows? Unless the actor wants to leave, or the writers are operating under a misguided desire to "shake things up" it never happens.

And yet we still get qaulity drama out of other shows.

 

[Harvey]

^^
Well, unless you're 24 or Spooks. Then, just about everybody dies.

 

[Kelthaz]

Kill people off. You can't have drama when we know no one important will die.

How often do important people actually die on TV shows. Unless the actor wants to leave, or the writers are operating under a misguided desire to "shake things up" it never happens.

I can think of plenty of examples actually. It's not common, but randomly killing main characters off does happen on shows.

 

[bigdaddy]

They are on an alien spaceship and fighting bad guys, a few more you think would die. Plus BSG also made secondary characters like able and gave them backstory and then killed them off. Stargate can do that, but having 5 main characters on a planet whining if they will make it back in time when EVERYONE knows they will is bad TV.

 

[The Wormhole]

Plus BSG also made secondary characters like able and gave them backstory and then killed them off.

Even BSG rarely killed off its secondary characters. Off the top of my head, I can think of only four: Billy (because the actor wanted to leave), Ellen Tigh (who was later brought back), Gaeta and Dee. The last two it should be noted only died because it was the final season, so they weren't really written out. And of the main cast, the only one to die was Starbuck, and that was confusing to say the least.

So, really the only prominent character on BSG to have been truly killed and written off the show before their time was Billy, and that only because the actor wanted to leave.

 

[David cgc]

Well, it also depends on where you draw the line between "secondary" and "recurring." You've also got Crashdown, Socinus, Elosha, Kat, Cally, and a few others, especially closer to the end, like Zarek and Laird.

Still, a lot of those characters would've been nameless, barely-recognizable redshirts in a Gate or a Trek show, though I suppose Socinus and Laird are the only ones in that list who were killed exclusively to show the situation was serious, and the others all had big plot stuff coming in or out of their deaths. The point still holds, though.

 

[bigdaddy]

Well, it also depends on where you draw the line between "secondary" and "recurring." You've also got Crashdown, Socinus, Elosha, Kat, Cally, and a few others, especially closer to the end, like Zarek and Laird.

Still, a lot of those characters would've been nameless, barely-recognizable redshirts in a Gate or a Trek show, though I suppose Socinus and Laird are the only ones in that list who were killed exclusively to show the situation was serious, and the others all had big plot stuff coming in or out of their deaths. The point still holds, though.

Yes I count them, if you are in 15ish episodes of a show with less than 80 than that's a secondary character, they gave them depth. Stargate needs to do that and then kill some of them off.

 

[Danny99]

How will SGU get darker?

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CVLP-_sT1k[/yt]