icarus | My First SGA.

Stay with it. The slashiness is there throughout, and not just between John and Rodney.

I still think the wraith are uber cheesy, but after almost 1.5 seasons, I have sort of a fannish fondness for them. That's promoted by the fact that I think the same 4-5 actors play all the wraith (one guys specializes in the females). They're our guys wearing dorky, homemade-looking costumes. *g*

I have to say that while I enjoy SG-1 thoroughly, my fannish squee is pretty much all for SGA.

I still think the wraith are uber cheesy, but after almost 1.5 seasons, I have sort of a fannish fondness for them.

Everything about this show is cheesy, up to and including the acting. There is a cool shot of the Atlantis set that isn't cheesy. That's about it.

I have to say that while I enjoy SG-1 thoroughly, my fannish squee is pretty much all for SGA.

I don't see why. I'll probably still watch the show from time to time since it's on after SG-1, but it is a cheap knock-off from the original.

Icarus

I don't see why.

I'm fannish about SGA when I am not about SG-1 because I don't ship any of the pairings in SG-1. (Sure, I've read and enjoyed J/D slash and Jack/Teal'c and Daniel/Jonas.) It's a mamtter of preference. I don't generally get fannish about a show unless there's slash I;m interested.

Ex. I watch Numb3rs, CSI, and SG-1 regularly, but don't feel much need to seek out fanfic or chat about them to fandom

Personally, I fond both shows to be equally cheesy SF and only watch because I like the characters. Yes, the SG-1 sets and special FX cost more. But that means nothing. Both have bad science and weird storylines. I can't stand that irritating "Ori are so powerful" arc that's playing on SG-1 now.

Ori? *blinks*

I'm in a time warp as far as SG-1 is concerned. I mostly watch the DVDs, replaying the shows I love from season 1-5. The most recent shows I've seen are season 7 -- though I should have season 8 sometime this week. Yep. I'm that far behind.

I said somewhere in this thread that I think SG-1 jumped the shark somewhere in season 7. I'm not against SGA and Tafkar's explanation for the poor production values makes sense to me, giving me some hope that the show will improve (the same timewarp applies to SGA -- I'm watching season one on Fox).

But I enjoyed SG-1 long before I'd even heard of slash, so the slashy content doesn't have any bearing on what I look for in a show. Slashiness is just a bonus. ;)

I see what you mean though. I enjoyed the show but I wasn't a fan per se until I saw the slashy potential of Jack/Daniel.

Icarus

Well, in general I like SF, so I watched SG-1 from season 2. I even bought the DVD sets of 1-7. But...I'm not blind to its flaws. I do think of it as genre television, with occasional outstanding episodes but overall not a whole lot better than Trek was.

I see slashiness as a bonus, too, actually, not a necessity.

About it jumping the shark in S7--I wouldn't disagree. I might even place that event a bit earlier... *g*

But I do like the characters--Jack is up there with my all-time favorite characters. I liked early Daniel, but not so much the current G.I. Joe!Daniel.

The acting actually improves. But I agree that SG-1 is way cooler.

I've seen the sets up close. They're actually very, very cool once you're in them.

Also, it's interesting that now that I know the guy who writes the cheesy episodes (and like him rather a lot), I find it hard to critique them. I mean, he's one of my best friends' dad! I can't hate on his work!

The acting actually improves.

Thank god. I mean, that always happens, there's always a bit of time needed to get into the character and with sci-fi the actors have to learn to visualize a lot more and avoid being distracted by the work on special effects.

But I agree that SG-1 is way cooler.

SG-1 is a higher quality show on every count.
I've seen the sets up close. They're actually very, very cool once you're in them.

But the point of a set is that it looks cool on camera.

Also, it's interesting that now that I know the guy who writes the cheesy episodes (and like him rather a lot), I find it hard to critique them. I mean, he's one of my best friends' dad! I can't hate on his work!

I felt the same when I was working for the theatre. You end up pulling for the person rather than the show.

Icarus

So, yes, I can see the slash. There are two likeable characters: McKay and Shep.
It's like Stargate only with no budget to spend on costumes, props, writers, directors, cinematographers, sets, or actors.

Hee! Finally someone who isn't in love with Atlantis. hehe

I actually think it's the same people working on both shows except for the actors, but I do see what you mean.

Atlantis is actually growing on me, though I wasn't that interested in the beginning and then had to catch up later. Even now I mostly only watch it because it's on right after SG-1 and because of McKay and the Sheppard/McKay slash (which they actually seem to play up on this show).

Which episode did you watch? Rising? I didn't like Rising the first time I saw it, but in retrospect, knowing the characters a little better, I like it now. I bought the slightly longer version on DVD because I was pretty sure I wouldn't buy the Atlantis DVD set.

I'm actually liking Atlantis better in season 2. The new character, Ronon, is also quite a bit slashy, IMHO. I like his interaction with both McKay and Sheppard. They seem to be leaving Dr. Beckett out of the slashiness this season except for in Duet--so maybe not. hehe I like Sheppard, Teyla, and Weir all a bit better in season 2 also--especially Sheppard. My only concern is that in season 2, they seem to be sort of Dr. Smith-izing Rodney a bit. I still love him, though.

Hee! Finally someone who isn't in love with Atlantis. hehe

At this point Atlantis doesn't have anything in it that I enjoy except McKay. And he was not working very hard in this ep.

Which episode did you watch? Rising?

Apparently Rising has RDA and MS in it, so it wasn't that. But this one was pretty bad.

I actually think it's the same people working on both shows except for the actors, but I do see what you mean.

The budget for Atlantis is obviously much smaller, resulting in sets, costumes, special effects and props that are much worse. And I left out music. The music is better on SG-1 also.

But it's clearly not the same people doing the camerawork or the staging. Maybe their assistants. The level of professionalism is not there and that's something that's not budget-dependent. You can do excellent staging with a cheap hand-held video camera.

Icarus

My sentiments exactly! I tried so hard to like this show because so many of my fannish and rl friends do but I couldn't sustain any interest and I've been told by the self same friends that season two is worse! I'm so glad I didn't waste any more time on this then I did.

I'm not sure I should try. I just don't want to encourage production values this low. It's like sending a statement "no, I'm clueless about the quality in the million-dollars-per-ep Star Trek: The Next Generation, the slightly lower but still good production values of Stargate: SG-1, and you can pawn off any crap on me, sure, no sweat, I don't know any better."

Icarus

Frankly, it's not worth the effort.

There are far better offerings on tv at the present time and if I'm looking for good scifi I can always read a book. *g*

You're not the only one. God knows I have tried and tried to like it, and I just can't. I thought it was a holdover of my loyalty to SG1, but then I kept trying, and... it just doesn't grab me.

That said, I LOVE McKay. :)

I was prepared to like it. I like McKay. WG noticed the low production values in the photo stills but I was ready to expand. I figured his was just being picky about military accuracy.

Hoo boy. I'm not sure my standards stretch this low.

Icarus

Stick with it. The dialogue gets better believe. Some of the funniest lines on t.v. occur between John Rodney. The show grows on you like a fungus. In the first year or rather the first part of the first season it was pretty typical sci-fi but then the characters really blossomed and it became even more obvious that the chemistry was just dripping of those two. Sometimes they brought in babe-of-the-week but it's never distracted from the hawt of Rodney and John. Believe me. :-D

I'll probably still watch it from time to time, given there's nothing else on Saturday night and it's scheduled right after SG-1. But in a sense being on after SG-1 is not a benefit. I get to compare the difference in quality, and it's striking.

Icarus

Yeah, when I first saw it I was disappointed too, cheesy sets, cheesy aliens or, at least, so I thought. When the rapport/snark gets going between John and Rodney you'll see what I mean---honest! ^__^

Hee.

I'm kinda there mostly for the pretty (John and Ronon - he shows up S2) and the snark (John and Rodney).

S2 is slightly better, but S1 only has about 3 decent eps where you can't predict everything that happens because you've seen that exact ep before on another sci fi show.

Predict it and seen it done ten times better. After SG-1 this is depressing, and SG-1 has really gone downhill writing-wise since season six (yes, six didn't have Daniel, but the writing was good). I just saw an ep from season 8... sigh. Completely unwatchable.

I think I'm going back to watching my DVDs of season 4.

Icarus

I found the first season amusing enough, but season two has been so tedious it's been difficult to keep watching. I still have four eps queued. Every week, it's a Standard Sci-Fi Plot that I've already seen on, you know, Star Trek (probably more than once), Andromeda, SG1, etc, etc. And since I just don't see the Shep/McKay slash, I haven't got into the fandom at all.

Now Battlestar Galactica, on the other hand...

I'm hearing different takes from different people about season one and two in SGA.

It's hard to imagine the production values getting any worse without a mike dangling into the shot or a guy in a cardboard box stumbling across the stage.

What I'm hearing is that the acting improves, which is good, but that in terms of plots it's not the writing but the deliberate cultivation of slashiness that makes the show "better." *wince*

Even if I somehow start to enjoy it, I don't know if I want to support a show in principle that's this bad. Doesn't that say we didn't value the time and effort put into the production of SG-1?

Icarus

yes yes yes! I so agree!

sociofemme is trying to drag me in, but the more of them I watch, the more 'meh' i become about the the whole. Without a flustered, bespectacled archaeologist, i don't see what the point is.

and no Teal'c eyebrow! No Jack ordering Teal'c he is not to shave the head!

It's on after SG-1, so I probably will watch it from time to time.

But part of why we watch Stargate SG-1 is the high production values. WG is very impressed with the effort at military accuracy they've put into SG-1 -- from weapons to uniforms to protocol -- an effort that is non-existant in SGA. He also enjoys the special effects, the sets, and the tight battle scenes.

I really appreciate the wacky costumes (silly, sexy, and pretty much lifted straight out of a fetish magazine) the gorgeous matte paintings for off-world settings, the music (yes, the music is large part why "One False Step" and "The Fifth Race" work) and the acting: the interplay between Rick Anderson and Michael Shanks is not just slashy, they're both excellent actors who can take a horrible script and make it fly. Amanda Tapping has taken a ridiculous "superwoman" role (soldier, physicist and gorgeous to boot? C'mon...) and made it work. Christopher Judge has developed minimalist acting to an art form.

I also enjoy the writing and storylines when they're good. The writing on SG-1 has always been inconsistent, though there are a couple of seasons where it's across-the-board good.

As far as I'm concerned, the first rule of a good sci-fi show is that the actors have to play it like it's real, or the entire show doesn't work. The Twilight Zone set the gold standard. Aside from the bad acting on SGA (jeeze, people, staying in character is one of the basics) even the good actors... well, you remember the episode "Wormhole X-Treme!"? McKay is playing this like it's a spoof. Or his kid's school play.

No Jack ordering Teal'c he is not to shave the head!

And... augh. I didn't know Jack ordered Teal'c not to shave his head. Just. Augh. I've just ordered the season 8 DVDs but so far I haven't seen past season 7.

Icarus

Christopher Judge is so the best comedian on the show, and i think that sort of understatement is a big part of why SG1 works and SGA does not, at least for me.

That's actually in season 2 (i'm watching my way through the DVDs). during the one where they get body-switched accidentally? And Jack finds Teal'c about to shave his head and freaks out, and Teal'c insists it must be so, and Jack says "I'm going to talk to Hammond! Don't you dare shave THE head!"

speaking of acting, everybody pretending to be everybody else? is quality. Cause you know they do little actor impressions of each other all the time, and the whole thing was just glorious.

Oh, when he starts to shave Jack's head in Holiday! Oh, well, I've seen that a thousand times. I noticed Christopher Judge has hair in the upcoming seasons and I thought -- anyhow, good to be wrong.

speaking of acting, everybody pretending to be everybody else? is quality.

Chris Judge was the best one in that ep. His impression of Jack was hilarious.

Icarus

hehe, I only stuck with Atlantis because it was a marathon run and nothing else was one at 2 am. But I love it now. I agree though "Rising" was very stilted with only RDA and MS natural as actors. But the series gets better as the other actors figure it out, especially DH and JF. And the set gets much better (prettier) I like watching the behind the scenes. Other than the slashiness, I like seeing what characters/actors they had in SG-1 and recycled into SGA, quite a few.

RDA and MS? They weren't in this ep, so I have to guess that it wasn't "Rising" (there's one where the acting was worse?)

I find the recycling irritating, particularly when I spot actors from Andromeda or other defunct TV shows. It actually messes up some of the suspension of disbelief for me (and a bad sci-fi show requires a lot of suspension of belief). I look at the character and think instead of "oh look, the Goa'uld Donny Osmond" -- "oh hey, that's the guy from Andromeda, whathisname, didn't he play the --?"

I dunno, I might get into the slash, but I find the lowering of the quality from SG-1 to SGA really depressing.

Icarus

Oddly enough, I find SGA to be of much higher quality than SG1 in that the stories and characters grabbed me in a way that SG1 hadn't done in a long time. SGA isn't full of great big heros saving the world on a regular basis--it's full of scared, desperate people trying to save their own asses. I also found that SGA manages to include those little character moments that were so missing from the later seasons of SG1. That was one of things I found so frustrating in SG1--you had no sense that these people cared about each other anymore. (Yes, I'm still sulking over "Evolution I and II, can you tell?)

Well let's distinguish aspects of the show.

There's production values, writing, acting, and the overall appeal of the show. It's possible to have the production values, writing and acting all be very bad and yet still have an appealing show for individuals.

The production values on SGA -- the quality of the sets, the costumes, props, music, special effects -- are crap. SG-1 has had consistently high production values and that's never changed.

The acting on SGA, aside from Rodney and Shep, is really bad. The acting on SG-1 has been pretty good and certain people have really carried the show.

The writing in the SGA episode I saw... the dialogue was predictable as was the canned "you've seen it before" sci-fi plot. The writing on SG-1 has always been uneven. It hit the skids after season six.

They got rid of Shanks and were going for an X-Files flavour after the canceling of The X-Files, probably hoping to pick up some desperate X-Files viewers (Stargate's viewership shot up after Star Trek: TNG was canceled). I would guess from the intricate plots of season six that they also picked up some former X-Files writers. That just didn't work for Stargate, so they attempted to go back to their old formula for season seven but by then they'd lost a key ingredient: Rick Anderson.

While they had some good episodes ("Revisions," "Heroes," "Lifeboat") with some exceptional character actors, SG-1 wasn't able to pick up the thread of Stargate's formula again, beyond some retreads of "The Fifth Race" in "The Lost City" and newer, sillier versions of the Goa'uld in "Evolution" I and II (where we learn that a) Michael Shanks is not a writer, and b) when too many cooks try to fix the soup it turns out really foul).

The wheels came off.

From what I've seen of season 8, the attempts to center the series on someone other than Rick Anderson just haven't worked. If they hadn't fired Michael Shanks and gone in the wrong direction they might have been able to make a smooth transition, but as it is... oy.

As for the appeal of the show, I don't see it in SGA at this point. For SG-1, the appeal dropped when they dumped Michael Shanks and season 7 only has occasional moments I enjoy. Season 8 doesn't look like it's going to be much better. Season 9? No comment.

Icarus

sillier versions of the Goa'uld in "Evolution" I and II (where we learn that a) Michael Shanks is not a writer, and b) when too many cooks try to fix the soup it turns out really foul).

Not that I disagree, but Michael Shanks didn't actually write Evolution. The original story idea was his so he got story credit, but his story had more to do with his grandfather and some other stuff they didn't even use. Someone else wrote that episode, though. Or is that what you were referring to? hehe I'm probably just confused, but I know he didn't write that episode.

MS wrote Resurrection (the NID episode with Anna) in season 7. He's said that they used almost nothing from his original story idea for that episode either.

For SG-1, the appeal dropped when they dumped Michael Shanks and season 7 only has occasional moments I enjoy. Season 8 doesn't look like it's going to be much better. Season 9? No comment.

I like season 8 a lot better than season 7, but in some ways it's still disappointing. OTOH, I actually have liked much of season 9 so far. For me, the center of the show has always been MS/Daniel, but it worked best as an ensemble show with everyone contributing. It's when the show forgot that--starting at the end of season 3, really, and then getting worse each season until MS finally left--that the show lost a great part of its appeal for me. Besides season 6, season 4 is my least favorite season. Seasons 5 & 7 tie for the next "least liked." hehe I'd rate the seasons: 2, 1, 3, 8, 5/7, 4, 6. I'm not sure where season 9 will fit, but it had some episodes that I really liked (and I don't like Vala).

Someone else wrote that episode, though. Or is that what you were referring to?

That's what I meant. But they couldn't possibly use Michael's idea -- he was going to have Daniel's grandfather die of cancer. Since they did use Chris' writing, I strongly suspect the reason they didn't use Michael's (in either case) is that the man can't build a story.

OTOH, I actually have liked much of season 9 so far. For me, the center of the show has always been MS/Daniel, but it worked best as an ensemble show with everyone contributing.

I agree with you there on the ensemble concept.

As you can probably tell from my stories I'm a big fan of Jack as well as Daniel. I was hurting in season 7 from Jack withdrawal, and I know I'm going to miss him more in season 8.

Season 9... dear lord. All these actors drifting up on the shores from shipwrecked sci-fi series. Rommie from Andromeda. Another character playing a Goa'uld. It spoils the suspension of disbelief when actors cross from one sci-fi series to another, the worlds collide.

And an attempt to replace Jack? I don't think I'm going to be able to swallow that hairball.

I rank the series, hmm... my favourite season is 4 (the writing, the production quality, the acting all came together brilliantly), then 3 and 2 come in dead-even followed closely by season 1.

Following that is season 5 which had a lot of good shows but it was depressing as they were tying up all the story lines by isolating earth once again (and MS looks irritated and pissed in a lot of the episodes).

Then I have a toss-up between 6 and 7. In terms of the quality of the actual episodes, the writing, etc., season 6 was better than 7 but the fact remains that without Daniel the show just was too different. It wasn't Stargate any more.

But season 7 has the same problem from a different direction: Jack was pretty much gone, and the actors were goofing around and not playing their roles very seriously which wrecked the believability of some episodes.

On top of that, the creation of the "super soldiers" took all the complex social concerns out of the Jaffa "bad guys" making the entire series two-dimensional. The series has never done well when it has just one all-powerful villain, whether it was Sokar, Anubis or the Stay-Puff Marshmallow Man.

Icarus

That's what I meant. But they couldn't possibly use Michael's idea -- he was going to have Daniel's grandfather die of cancer.

I didn't know that. Poor grampy! Even so, I'd so like to have a follow-up to that story even now.

I rank the series, hmm... my favourite season is 4 (the writing, the production quality, the acting all came together brilliantly), then 3 and 2 come in dead-even followed closely by season 1.

A lot of people like season 4 best, it seems. I do think that the production quality went up and the writing was probably better, but my problem was that they stopped writing SG-1. hehe Season 4 was not the same show I watched for 3 seasons. They minimized Daniel and especially minimized the Jack/Daniel relationship in favor of the ship. And then there's the ship. I just hate that.

While there are some good episodes in season 4, it's missing the heart of the show (at least for me). If they had interspersed episodes like The Other Side with episodes that showed the team actually caring about each other, I might have liked it better. I always liked SG-1 best when it was SG-1 against the universe instead of having a great amount of conflict within the team. OTOH, I wouldn't have minded that if the team love had still been there most of the time.

I think The Other Side is a good episode, but when I watch it in the context of season 4, I just don't like it--or The Curse, for instance. How hard would it have been for Jack to show the slightest bit of concern for Daniel when he found out Daniel's professor had died? Or to say, "How you doing?" when Daniel called on the cell phone, instead of treating Daniel like he was crap on the bottom of his shoe. Jack was barely even in that episode, and yet it's one of the worst for Jack/Daniel interaction. If it were just one or two episodes like this in season 4, I don't think it would bother me so much, but the whole season was filled with this kind of crap and almost no good interaction between them. (And it's all about Jack & Daniel for me. hehe Isn't it for everyone?)

One of the reasons I like season 5 slightly better than season 4 is because we had episodes like Beast of Burden and Menace. OTOH, as you said, it wasn't that great. I never noticed MS looking pissed, but maybe he did! hehe The next time I watch season 5, I'm going to try to watch for that. I'm a Daniel watcher anyway. hehe

I think Beast of Burden showed a more mature, but still very caring, relationship between Jack and Daniel, though. I don't care about the Unas (they are not my favorites, but I don't hate them), but the overall story--the moral dilemma and the conflict between Jack and Daniel that was handled so sensitively is what I liked about that episode. Nothing was completely clear-cut for either of the characters, and the fact that they cared for each other was very evident in that episode (at least to me).

Season 7 was just the season of disappointment for me. I expected something great from Fallen/Homecoming and got practically nothing. I expected something great from Evolution and got practically nothing plus ship. I expected something great from Lost City and got SHIP. I was so positive as I watched it that if they gave Sam and Teal'c two emotional scenes with Jack each that Daniel would have at least one. When it ended with Sam in the front like that...grrrr.... hehe

I should point out here that Shanks wasn't so much fired as walked into his contract negotiations one day and said, "Um, nope." Leaving everyone a little high-and-dry.

Also, no writers from X-Files went over to SG-1. There were a lot of changes after S5; the reason was that they moved to the SciFi network, who cut their budget significantly and asked for changes in the direction of the show.

S8 is Season of Flailing. S9 - is a whole new show, and it's better than ever.

I should point out here that Shanks wasn't so much fired as walked into his contract negotiations one day and said, "Um, nope." Leaving everyone a little high-and-dry.

According to one of the producers who's a friend of a friend Shanks asked for more money and they said, "nope."

S9 - is a whole new show, and it's better than ever.

Without Jack? *sighs*

Icarus

I don't find the "recycling" as bad in SGA, because it was more of looking at imdb and oh look they were also in SG-1! Though I don't see the point of having Dr. Lam, to like an android! The problem with the cast is it's too weak (actually Dr. Weir was horrible in the first episode, surprising since she was in sg-1).

Watch a couple more!! You may like it better.

I am there for the characters, no question--and not just the slash. I enjoy how each episode's purpose is to show what changes it's made on each character--not really to further a plot. I cannot disagree with your points about the plot. When I watched the pilot this summer, my reaction was, "So, this was made, what, six years ago? Seven?" It felt oddly dated, plot-wise.

(And did you SEE the collar on the dress Weir was wearing in the episode when she goes back to earth?)

But the characters, especially McKay and Sheppard, keep me.

I enjoy how each episode's purpose is to show what changes it's made on each character

Now that's interesting and something you can't pick up by just watching one episode.

One of the strengths of SG-1 is watching Michael Shanks slowly change his characterization of Daniel Jackson from a carbon copy of James Spader to a person of his own making. While there are a few signposts in the writing, this really was entirely his doing. If SGA recognized this is what tied people to Daniel and capitalized on that, building it into the scripts, then... well done.

When I watched the pilot this summer, my reaction was, "So, this was made, what, six years ago? Seven?" It felt oddly dated, plot-wise.

I agree. The episode I saw felt very much like something written post-Star Trek (the original series).

(And did you SEE the collar on the dress Weir was wearing in the episode when she goes back to earth?)

Haven't seen it, but I definitely miss the fetish-wear of SG-1. It was almost a contest to see how little we can put on the human body and still get past the censors.

Icarus

Heh, I only wish the collar were fetish-wear. Instead it's this lacy, not quite Peter Pan collar thing, but it looks like the '70s version of a cocktail dress. Made me squint, I tell you.

I'm assuming you watched "Hide and Seek", since that was on syndie last night? It's only the second ep, and I assure you, it does get better. *g* There is still a lot of newbie stiffness going on during that ep, although Sheppard and McKay are already flirting with each other.

The show picks up steam in the middle of the season. The writing isn't always the best, but there's lovely character development and some genuine surprises plot-wise. (At least, I was surprised.)

I'm assuming you watched "Hide and Seek", since that was on syndie last night?

Yep. That sounds like the one.

It's only the second ep, and I assure you, it does get better.

I expect the first 5-10 shows to have problems with the acting in particular. People are just getting used to each other, the craziness of a sci-fi set where the attention isn't on the actors, and settling into their roles.

What worries me is the production values. They are very, very low in this series.

some genuine surprises plot-wise.

That would be an improvement. What I saw last night was taken straight out of a Twilight Zone episode, almost verbatum at points.

Icarus

I'm going to join in with what other people said and say, "Stick with it". I was kinda meh on it until "The Eye" (ep 11), as was my fandom gf

fenriss. When I downloaded "The Eye", I brought it down to DC with me when I went to visit her, and we watched it three times that weekend. There's a sudden huge jump in quality between the first half and the second half of the season.

Now, here's a couple of behind-the-scenes aspects in their defense:

One thing about the staging and camera angles - one of the directors said in commentary for Rising that they spent the first half of the season getting used to working with HD instead of regular film. We work with HD all the time at my company, but there's a pretty steep learning curve, and things look very, very different on HD than they do on film or even DV. You really have to use different shooting techniques. I think a lot of the issues with the stuff you're listing is very specifically a result of that transition. (SG1 is done on film. Or at least it was until this year; I think they might have gone HD this season.)

Also, SciFi gave them a ridiculously short amount of time to ramp up the show - they were told in...was it September?... "You know how we said we were going to cancel SG-1 at the end of the season? Not so much. But we still want a second Stargate show to premiere in July." The producers had come up with a concept for a spin-off show that took place at the Antarctica base; suddenly all those sets and concepts and everything else had to be radically changed so they could have two shows running concurrently that wouldn't tread on each others' toes. I know what our lead time is for the crappy little documentary re-cres we do, and the fact that they actually HAD a show ready to premiere by July boggles my MIND. (I could go into details about the whys and wherefores of the mind-bogglingness of it, but I don't know if you'd want to hear it.)

Another aspect to SGA that I think you'll like is that things have repercussions for the characters - sometimes it's one episode down the line, sometimes three or four. The last - mmm, six? - episodes of the season are really one long plot arc, and very well done.

I found the first half of the second season to be largely good; only one or two eps left me cold, and they've suddenly gone for much more naturalistic acting - to the point where it's just a little whiplash-y to get used to. The writers also have a better grasp on the characters; Teyla's gone through a big evolution and is now my favorite character on the show, barring Rodney. Certainly WAY better than S8 SG1, which I think is the worst season EVER for the show. (Worth sticking with SG1, though, because S9 is shaping up to be my favorite season. If you like watching Daniel's metamorphosis, you'll love S9.)

Interestingly, I'm seeing lots of people who are All About BSG in this thread. I thought the first season was great until the last episode. At that point, it jumped the shark, and didn't really recover until about episode 8 of S2. Also, the production values have gone down so far that the crappy FX for the space shots are becoming acutely painful to watch.

Ah. The jump to HD explains the amateurishness. I was looking at these camera angles and thinking "what the fuck--? It looks like college kids filmed this."

If there were ridiculous time constraints (and ten months is absurd, you can't even do a new Broadway play in that amount of time) the poor production values have a chance of improving. The acting is usually awkward at the beginning of a series, especially in sci-fi where you have the equivalent of fireworks going off around you while you're trying to act.

Add the logistics of sharing facilities. Jesus. I'd be very surprised if both SG-1 and SGA didn't suck for half a season.

I thought they were just trying to pass off crap under the Stargate formula knowing there was already an audience. I'll give it a second chance around episode ten or so.

Season 9 sounds wonderful... if it weren't for the lack of Jack. *Icarus puts on a black armband and mourns*

Icarus

If you wait that long to jump back in, you'll miss Rodney's character growth into a team member. Just my opinion. :)

One of the pleasures of watching SGA has been seeing the team become a tight unit.

I missed Jack terribly when he left. Sriously, he's been the main reason I watched, from the beginning.

But you know, if I don't think of him as a replacement for Jack, Cam Mitchell has grown on me quite a bit.

Jack and Daniel together make the essence of Stargate for me. I may enjoy season 9, especially if it explores Daniel in a little more depth (though I'm not fond G.I Joe!Daniel either), but it really wouldn't be Stargate without that team dynamic and the Jack - Daniel interaction.

Icarus

It's all about Jack & Daniel for me, too, but I also have liked season 9. In my mind, Jack & Daniel are together off camera and I can work it out much better in my own mind or through fanfic than I would trust the writers with it. hehe

I was predisposed to dislike Mitchell, too. I just didn't want him on the show. In spite of that, and in spite of being all about Jack/Daniel, I have come to like the character of Mitchell quite a bit. At times I even love him just a little. A great part of that interest is his relationship with Daniel. I don't see them as a slash couple, but just...he treats Daniel different from anyone we've ever seen. Landry, too, has had some great interaction with Daniel, though they seem to have dropped that lately. I hope they pick up on it again.

Nobody could replace Jack on this show, but I see Landry and Mitchell as two entirely different characters. OTOH, I sympathize with you if Jack was your favorite character.

I think the strength of S9 is that they realized they couldn't replace Jack, and came up with a character (Mitchell) to fill the fourth position without being Jack at all. His relationship with Daniel is just so...they're a blast to watch together, but in an entirely different way than Jack and Daniel. (Jack and Daniel are lovers; Mitchell and Daniel are a lot like brothers - because you KNOW Mitchell is off doing Teal'c. Anyway...)

I love Jack, but I missed him painfully in S8. Even though he was THERE, he wasn't there. You know? I'm really enjoying the new characters. I'm also finding it fascinating that people I know who went in DETERMINED to hate Mitchell now really like him.

My First SGA.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

They might as well have named the show Wormhole X-Treme

Re: They might as well have named the show Wormhole X-Treme

Re: They might as well have named the show Wormhole X-Treme

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject