Just read someone's else's take on SG:U, Keith, and they brought up a point that had slipped my mind.
When Dr Rush said that he'd used to egg-like device to contact SGC and speak to General O'Neill, who told him to take command of the mission -- why didn't anyone call him on it, make him hand over the device so that someone else could confirm that? --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Keith Johnson <keithbjohn...@...> wrote: > > I admit it was an entertaining show. Like "Voyager", it struck with with high > production values, and a very competent cast. Everyone fit into his or her > role pretty seamlessly, the FX were good, story moved along. And like > "Voyager", we got glimpses into the backgrounds of the cast, but the details > will be fleshed out later. > The show moved along at a good clip: It starts out with the people fleeing > some as yet undefined danger, literally being tossed through a Gate like > sacks of potatoes. In quick order they discover their plight of being on an > Ancient ship billoiins of light years from Earth. I actually like the concept > of sending the ships out ahead of time, then Gating to them perhaps centuries > later. > > Aside from "Voyager", I detected a decided BSG feeling to the show. The look > and feel of it, the camera work, the mix of characters all reminded me of > BSG. It has potential. But the question is, will it be more like > "Voyager"--or much of the SG-1 years for that matter--and simply devolve into > an adequate story about lost people having an adventure of the week. Or, will > it manage to build upon the promising opening and be a grittier show like > BSG--or DS9. > > I like the cast for the most part. The military leader is an actor we've seen > a lot and he fits. His second is a young guy who's green but able. They > work--and so nice not ot have a O'Neal clone cracking wise all the time! Even > the young Wesley Crusher knockoff is pretty good for now. Although his > inclusion in the team stretches all credibility (from how he was discovered > to how he's taken) he's okay. The resident genius--Dr. Rush--is more > mysterious and infuriating, someone you want to club. Again, a refreshing > change from Daniel Jackson's sometimes nerdy professor thing, or Rodney > McKay's whining arrogance.The actor playing him is often given really serious > roles, and here he seems equal parts arrogant, troubled, and cold. Good > stuff. Lou Diamond Phillips seems to be more of a guest star, which is > unfortunate 'cause he could bring some good stuff to the show. Again, though, > like with "Voyager' the cast clicks and is pretty good. > > Two things I hated. The only Brother in the cast is some psycho who is > literally one step away from cracking p and shooting anyone who pisses him > off. He was in the brig (stockade?) for something, we don't know what yet. > Broken record here, but is there some reason the SG series can't give us > Black men who are cool, stable, and in charge. The Brother in Atlantis turned > into a psycho Wraith hunter and was written out. And yeah, SG-1 gave us > T'ealc, but that monsyllabic Noble Savage thing is played out (applies to > Tela in Atlantis as well). > > There was an unnecessary sex scene which reminded me of the more juvenille > attempts at titillation in Enterprise and BSG. No prude, I, but it seem > shoehorned in. I saw a commercial where one of the actresses said "we differ > from the other Stargate series in that there's a lot more sex on the show". > No necessary, guys, to be too explicit just to look cool. > > The ending was a cliffhanger for next week. I have to say, though I'm really > not looking the one Black man's character, and I'm not a fan of lost-in-space > shows, I enjoyed it. I have doubts about whether it can stay a good, gritty, > exciting show week-to-week, but I'll definitely be checking it out. >
