Ripple Effect
I have to say that this season has been a mixed bag. For every enjoyable part, there’s something to temper the experience. I like the Ori but there was no need for the King Arthur plot in the first episode. I’ve watched with interest the Jaffa gain their freedom only to see them stand around in corridors being dull.1 When the Ori and Jaffa plots intersected for an engaging two-parter, we get a 5 month mid-season hiatus. Cameron Mitchell is very watchable when he’s not ‘not giving up’ nor being John Crichton.
And then there’s Sam. I’m having trouble seeing her silver lining.2 In Ripple Effect, SG-1 teams from alternate dimensions gate into Stargate Command and before you can say ‘one Sam, two Sam, threesome,3 four’ there’s twenty Sams hanging out discussing technobabble. For 10 minutes. She wouldn’t shut up. Whenever Carter looked about to stop, there’d be a scene change and she’d begin again. And then all Carter’s crapping on was irrelevant as the bizarro SG-1 already knew the solution! What a kick in the teeth. Her failure to solve the problem again didn’t shut her up. Jack O’Neill’s zero tolerance policy for Sam spam is sorely missed. Landry half-heartedly tells her to get on with it at the end of the episode; only to stop them running overtime I imagine. It’s disappointing to see the progress Stargate has made over the years be undermined like this.
I’ve watched Sam change from season to season becoming duller as the years pass. I want Sam to have things to do; I want to like her; but it’s oh so difficult when all she does is conjecture on the possible cause of the episode’s problem 23% of the episode. There must be something the writers can do with her. Perhaps they could write something for Vala and give it Sam. Vala was always doing interesting things. Perhaps they could give Sam a boyfriend with a spine. And what’s going on with the Carter and O’Neill plot? While never saying as such, Sam and Jack seemed to get together, yet here Sam tries to make out with Martouf. Then there’s the hints of Sam’s future from Martouf and Janet.4 This would have been exciting pre stupid Sam but now it’s an irritating reminder of Sam’s continual waste of our time.
The events that didn’t involve Sam theorising were a short section about the green and black clothed SG-1s onboard Prometheus in which SG-1 outwitted themselves. While these scenes were nothing special, Mitchell switching uniforms to disguise himself as himself was far better than Jet Li’s shirt removal purely so the audience knew who the good Jet Li5 was. More time was needed in this section; more twists and turns as each team gained the upper hand would have been better than all those Sam scenes.
This is mostly conjecture but the black clothed SG-1 appeared to be from a more evil dimension than the other SG-1s. This bizarro team figured out how to punch through a wormhole to an alternate dimension, plotted how to get aboard the Prometheus and use it to steal a ZPM and return to their dimension, presumably with the full support of bizarro Stargate Command. Evil Teal’c maliciously beat up normal Mitchell. This leads me to believe that evil Mitchell’s final words are not good advice.6
This episode is full of wasted opportunities. Window of Opportunity, the Groundhog Day episode, attributes the repeated days to a mysterious alien machine and spends the episode examining what Jack and Teal’c would do with all their free time. Ripple Effect does the opposite, with Sam wasting all the time with her stupid theories, trying to explain the problem. I like Stargate because it is a sci-fi show using current technologies and current scientific theories, but I’d rather an episode of Jack and Teal’c goofing off because of an unknown device than Sam explaining how interdimensional travel might work.7 There was no poking fun at meeting multiple alternate versions of one’s self. I would have liked to see more variety between the teams and more interaction between the multiple teams. As it was SG-1 only talked to the black clothed SG-1.8
It’s not all bad. I loved seeing Dr. Janet Fraiser again.9 The episode in which she died is one of my favourites and it was moving to see her, Teal’c and Daniel reunited. It can be difficult to care about the fate of our parallelselves10 but Janet’s plea to Landry for more time did make me concerned about her universe’s fate. I hope her Prior plague can be cure the same way as ours.
I give this episode 2 chevrons; strictly for Sam fans only.
- If their freedom is this dull, I kinda wish they would be enslaved again for the excitement it brings. ↩
- So is Daniel. Several times in the background (usually just after Carter says something like “in the multiverse theory of quantum physics posits” the existence’) he yawns or rolls his eyes and has a this-could-take-a-while expression on his face. ↩
- Credit for this joke belongs to Tom. ↩
- Unless mention of her pregnancy and returning to duty was a reference to Amanda Tapping’s pregnancy and not Sam’s future, which is possible. ↩
- By ‘good’ I mean the character’s morals, not my opinion of him. ↩
- I’m reading far too much into this, aren’t I? Maybe a careless disregard for alternate universes is normal. Landry wasn’t persuaded by Janet’s request for more time so she could get back to help her own universe. ↩
- While this is mostly because Teal’c and Jack are my favourite characters, explaining things isn’t funny nor gripping television unless everyone’s gathered in the parlour for the public revelation of the murderer’s identity. ↩
- There was also a missed opportunity for a reality spin-off series in which a dozen Sams vie for the hand of Martouf the Bachelor on a tropical planet. ↩
- The same can’t be said for Martouf. ↩
- Even we don’t gain power by killing them. ↩
Tom
January 29th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
I agree almost completely with your assessment. You covered my main problem — the complete lack of drama — so I’ll just mention some of my lesser problems.
Personally, I wasn’t at all moved by the scene where Landry and Dr Dead discussed the fate of a single parallelverse. In a previous scene they had mentioned that a key reason for closing the rift thing was to stop more innocent SG-1s from coming through. Landry conveniently forgets this reason when arguing with Dead Girl, presumably so as to make her point seem in some way feasible and not (as it in fact was) incredibly selfish.
I find it very hard to sympathise with parallel characters, especially if we’re going by Sam’s early theory that we live in a multiverse of billions of alternate universes. Surely there’s another parallel universe where everyone’s fine? And another one where this story didn’t happen? I want to live in that one. Presumably the universe isn’t quite infinite, otherwise we’d have infinite SG-1s in mortal danger.
A few side points: If the writers noticed that their technobabblicious episode was boring, then the correct response is not to make all the characters look grumpy, it’s to junk the episode. Unless Daniel’s eye-rolling was ad-libbed. Bringing back ex-characters and then miserably failing to use them in the plot seems like a waste of time and money; bending the story into a multiple rather than parallel universe episode for the sole purpose of including them (as it seemed to be) is the most heinous fanwank. As far as I can see, there’s no other reason for the multiple teams turning up apart from some almost-jokes in the background.
And finally: establishing that Stargate takes place in a multiverse cheapens the whole series. I like my universes singular, with the occasional Donnie Darko-esque offshoot that is inevitably destroyed. This is personal taste and somewhat nitpicky though. Gosh I’ve rambled. Bedtime.
Tom
January 29th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
Incidentally, have a look here for the writer’s unashamed commentary on the episode. He really does think that just throwing in a continuity reference in every scene makes the episode worthwhile. The last unincluded scene however desperately needed to be in the story, even if it does have some embarassing dialogue:
Andy
January 29th, 2006 at 10:41 pm
I figured Daniel’s was ad-libbed or added by the director. The writers couldn’t expect to write something that would bore Daniel yet interest the audience.
We see the hand of man in the commentary. It’s nice to know that if all the extra scenes were in, the Carter scenes would have been in a better proportion to the rest of the episode. It’s disappointing that that they cut the scenes of SG-1 talking to their alternate selves and none of Carter’s crap. These extra scenes and the one in which black SG-1 discussed the morals of their actions would have made the whole episode about looking after one’s own universe first, rather than Landry seeming selfish and black SG-1 evil.
If the episode was about a single parallel universe it would have avoided the multi-verse issues, Tom would have cared about the fate of the parallel universe, Carter could have explained it in two minutes, all the extra scenes could have been included and Janet and Martouf could have done something on board Prometheus.
Tom
January 29th, 2006 at 11:59 pm
Your hypothetical ‘Ripple Effect’ sounds much better. I’d like to see that. How much cooler would the story have been if good old, nice, much-missed Martouf and Janet turned out to be acting against them on the bizarro SG-1?
I wonder when Shannon will find this review. Rumour is, she loved this episode, but when pressed, she just mumbled “Martouf Martouf Martouf Season Two” and fell into a coma.
Andy
January 30th, 2006 at 12:04 am
Do you have enough Sands of Time to go back and change 913’s plot?
Tom
February 2nd, 2006 at 3:42 am
Browsing the Outpost Gallifrey Doctor Who forum, I noticed someone refer to ‘Stargate Syndrome’, which he defines as:
Which sums up the problem with ‘Ripple Effect’ perfectly to me. The post is here but you need a registration to view it.
Andy
February 2nd, 2006 at 4:05 am
I’m still blown away by the idea of an evil Martouf and Janet.
That is the problem with Ripple Effect but I don’t think it should have the name Stargate Syndrome. It could just as easily be called CSI Syndrome. Also, the definition of syndrome is a group symptoms and I don’t think 2 counts as a group.
Tom
February 2nd, 2006 at 4:47 am
Presumably the group is the hundreds of episodes they’ve made, all displaying similar symptoms to greater or lesser degrees? I’m no CSI fan but it’s got more than “no connection” to the real world, unlike quantum singularities, wormhole manipulation and the nature of parallel universes.
There’s going to be a parallel world in Doctor Who this season… I’m reasonably confident they’ll avoid the Ripple Effect Effect though.
Shannon
February 2nd, 2006 at 5:03 am
Tom is just bitter because it was two against one in our arguemnt over whether this episode was any good. Thank you Conrad.
So not even a little part of you thought that this was old-school stargate? All season you have been whinging that Carter doesn’t get to show off like she used to and be smart. And then when they supply, you whinge. There is no pleasing you people.
I agree with some of the points about why it was a little slow-running in the technobabble scenes, but this was far outweighed by the good parts. Being, the return of two much-loved characters. Tom, using “but I didn’t watch season two” as an excuse for Martouf to suck is well, highly flawed to say the least. Just because YOU dont love and remember him, doesn’t mean that others dont. Remember the thing about how you share the universe with others, hon? :-P
Other good parts, evil SG1 and the whole sequence on the Prometheus with outsmarting each other. Dr Lee not being hysterical with more Carters than even his imagination ever dreamt up for him. Further mention (although oddly non-mention) of the progression of the Carter/O’Neill relationship. No stupid Jaffa politics to spoil the mix and waste perfectly good air time. Stupid jokes for the in crowd like Daniel missing Thor.
It seems that if there isn’t any utterly dire, and utterly boring cataclismic stuff going on with either the priors or them bloody Jaffa, you are impossible to please. This episode was fun, silly, funny and completely sci-fi. Isn’t that what stargate is meant to be?
Tom
February 2nd, 2006 at 5:33 am
It was 3-0 when Andy, Jackson and I were watching the episode together. Conrad went onto say in our conversation that the only good thing in the episode was Martouf so I don’t think you can really call it 2-1.
I’ve been whinging that Sam is boring and dull and that she should be replaced with Vala. Doing an episode where she spends half the episode being boring and talking technobabble is in no way supplying me with anything I want.
Bringing back two much-loved characters is a waste if they don’t get to do anything. I’ll defend that statement to the hilt. Martouf got to do nothing, Janet got to have one argument that didn’t make sense. I don’t believe that it’s an acceptable defence for an episode to tell people “It may look like bad TV but that’s because you didn’t see the episodes eight years ago with this guy in. They were good.” If I loved and remembered Martouf I’d be massively pissed that his one-off return was so utterly pointless.
The battle between black and green SG-1 was some of the best stuff in the story. Unfortunately it went for less than five minutes. Not enough to justify the 30 preceding minutes of crap. The non-mention of Carter and O’Neill seemed odd given that they’d practically mentioned every other character and event in their universe. I’m not disputing the number of in-jokes but I’m certainly disputing whether they add to an episode. I find they amuse me in a good one and irritate me in a bad one.
Your last paragraph would make sense if we had also hated, say, ‘Collateral Damage’. As it stands you’re just making a strawman for yourself to hit. I dispute the “fun” and “funny” interpretation. I don’t recall more than two jokes being made. ‘Beachhead’ was way funnier and managed to tell a pretty cool story too. To my mind, ‘Collateral Damage’ is an example of good science fiction (exploring the impact of science with reference to real people in dramatic situations) and ‘Ripple Effect’ is an example of bad science fiction (exploring highly theoretical ideas with little or no real drama and failing to link the two interestingly).
Tom
February 2nd, 2006 at 7:02 am
Incidentally, a quick check reveals that ‘Ripple Effect’ spends almost 11 minutes (25.5% of its running time) on long-winded exposition. I’m not including Mitchell’s explanation of how the black SG-1 was able to jump realities because that to me is an example of how the technobabble should have been done.
Meanwhile, a further 5 and a half minutes (13.1%) was spent on scenes with Martouf and Janet (I’m not counting the Janet-Landry argument) that consisted mainly of explaining past episodes. I don’t get those scenes at all. Surely the only people who care about those characters wouldn’t appreciate having a whole bunch of crap they already know retold to them again for no reason?
Would it be fair to say, Shannon, that if an episode presses enough of your fan buttons (pointless continuity, returning characters, in-jokes) then you let your critical faculties slide a bit and don’t judge it by the same criteria you’d judge any other art?
Tom
February 2nd, 2006 at 2:07 pm
I forgot that Andy had counted the amount of technobabble too — though he allowed a non-sam, still useless scene to escape his counting wrath. Hence the discrepancy. Sorry Andy.
Andy
February 2nd, 2006 at 10:51 pm
Feel free to plagiarise my review and post my comments in the comment section of the review you stole them from as if they were your own. Please go ahead. Blatant coping is the sincerest form of laziness. My point in the review was the amount of Sam related technobabble.
My attitude to Sam is this: I’ve liked her in the past but recently she just screws up and spouts technobabble. Her abilities are to solve technical problems and babble technically. Right now when the writers allocate time to Sam all she does is the latter. I was complaining that people were stealing her exposition so she had nothing to do; now she’s got too much exposition, which is just as bad. Her character development for each season is to get a boring boyfriend and dump him. She needs another skill or hobby so she doesn’t spend her entire ten minutes yabbering. In this episode, Sam made me hate the episode after twenty minutes so I couldn’t enjoy the rest of the it. A silly episode can go bad, especially if it has a terrible start. It did have an old school feel but Sam ruined it. She also doesn’t’ve the interesting quirks that the other characters have.
Merely seeing the old characters is good, as long as they don’t do something stupid. Of course it’d be nicer if they did something. It’s a waste that they didn’t but their presence is better than their abscence. If you loved and remembered Martouf you’d be happy just to see him on screen, Tom.
In defense of Shannon, continuity(pointless or not), returning characters, in-jokes are part of the criteria for which Shannon and I judge tv shows. Are you saying you judge all art by the same standards?
Finally, a syndrome is a group of symptoms that characterise something. Most sci-fi is guilty of the first symptom; Stargate isn’t the first example of it. I think it’s unfair to name this syndrome after Stargate.
Tom
February 2nd, 2006 at 11:51 pm
I agree about Sam. It might be an Amanda Tapping problem.
This episode did have a woeful start. The vast majority of the technobabble is in the first half and then there’s only fifteen minutes to go once they actually get on board the prometheus and the ‘plot’ starts.
Call me unsentimental but I don’t sympathise at all with your “old characters brought back as set decoration for a small percentage of the viewers” argument. I’d say I judge all art by similar standards, and certainly all TV by the same standards. We might have to agree to disagree about in-jokes, continuity and returning characters for no purpose. Where I come from that’s known as “fanwank” and is to be scorned when it takes the place of characterisation and plot.
If you can come up with another show that deserves the syndrome name more, then we could certainly rename it. This has been the only story this season to suffer strongly from it, in fairness.
Shannon
February 3rd, 2006 at 1:25 am
Ultimately Tom, I think you just care to much. Or think too much. Or whatever. My point is, its entertainment, its meant to be fun, and hey I HAD FUN. Now I find myself trying to justify it (and being one of your favourite hobbies, that is what grapefruits is all about, granted) but personally I dont really care if you think I’m wrong for liking it.
Dont get me wrong, over-analysing tv can be an interesting past-time, but I simply dont look into the depth that you do, therefore when trying to justify why I liked or didn’t like something I have to sit and think hard about something that I never had any intention of giving a second thought to. Which is why I sometimes find it hard to rebut your arguments – because I dont see the need. Call that laziness I guess. Shmeh.
Anyway seeing as you do love a debate, I shall indulge you, depsite my opinion that its pointless and neither of us will suceed in changing either others minds…
“Doing an episode where she spends half the episode being boring and talking technobabble is in no way supplying me with anything I want.” My point was that you are impossible to please, because they do one thing and you dont like it. They do the opposite, which would seem to be a degree of what you were asking for, and you dont like it. Dont you WANT to like stargate? What did it ever do to you, hmm?
“Bringing back two much-loved characters is a waste if they don’t get to do anything.” Nup. Sorry. Incorrect. There are a million points granted for bringing them back to begin with. So much so it would seem that the stars in our eyes blind us from noticing that they don’t do anything. I can think of Angel/Buffy episodes where crossover people did “nothing”, never heard you complaining – and you know why? Cos you enjoyed the simplicity of seeing the characters interact again. Seeing Sam and Martouf interact is PLENTY reason to bring him back, even if ultimately his presence does not mammothly alter the overall plot. Why does a character need to affect the plot? Teal’c spent the good part of 5 seasons never affecting the plot, I never heard you saying “boot him, he doesn’t actually DO anything”.
Does this help?: Just as Sam and Martouf realised they had mutual things for each other, he was killed. For years the fans have been going “oooooo wouldnt I love just to see those two together in a scene again, knowing that they both had a thing for each other, and to see how that goes…”, and they granted us that. Unless you were yearning for that scene, I can see how it would seem unimpressive to you – but for the sake of loyal viewers I’m still glad they put it in. What was the point of bringing Connor back at the end of Angel? Well, just to tie that up. But new viewers wouldn’t have cared, cos they wouldn’t have had the emotional connection. I know you’ll argue that, but there it is.
“If I loved and remembered Martouf I’d be massively pissed that his one-off return was so utterly pointless.” But you dont love and miss him, and we do. Don’t you think we’re a better example then? Conrad, myself, and I think Andy backed me up on this one. Since you dont in fact, love and miss him, aren’t we the better judge of “if i loved and missed him?”. We enjoyed having him back. You didn’t, cos you dont know him. Therefore saying that people who love and miss him wouldn’t like having him back er… flawed logic Tom, as we clearly DO..
“I’m not disputing the number of in-jokes but I’m certainly disputing whether they add to an episode.” You are kidding me, right? You’re disputing whether in-jokes ADD anything to an episode?!? Seriously?!!? Oh, I’m sorry, I thought we were talking about Stargate … I must have been mistaken. Cos you know, Stargate is all about the in-jokes. They have been going on for 9 seasons and its a nice reward for the loyal fans – that they get a nod every now and again from the writers. So you must be talking about some other show that doesn’t pride itself on its in-jokes… And I’ll let that one go..
Anyway, I’m bored of trying to explain to you why I liked this episode. Just like I’m sick of explaining why episodes like “Beachead” are utterly the crappest episodes since that stupid Jonas phase back in season 5. And lets face it, even he was better than these stupid Prior plots. If they insist on carry on with this bollocks storyline, well I’d rather have Jonas back. Are you feeling the weight of that? So don’t even get me started on you thinking “Beachead” was good. Pfft.
Side note, you TIMED the technobabble? Did you set out to prove me point that you are over thinking this? Aaawww thats so sweet. Thanks, man!! Really appreciate the help in burying you. Good work.
And as one final note “juding art” is almost an oxymoron if you ask me. Art is, by nature, subjective. Yes its there to be discussed and enjoyed, but there aint no right or wrong. You’re technobabble is my ‘cute old-school Carter speak’. So whatever. I’m done now.
Jack
February 3rd, 2006 at 2:07 am
Impossible to please? That’s twice you’ve said that Shannon. It’s almost like you aren’t actually reading what people are saying. Have you read Andy’s review?
He was saying he wants Sam to have stuff to do, but he doesn’t want it to be irrelavent, boring stuff. You are talking like there are only two possibilities. If you thought the technobabble scenes were cute and interesting and didn’t become increasingly pointless then fine.
For my part, I don’t particulary want Sam in the show at all. I think the Martouf and Sam thing undermined the Sam and Jack thing. I think actually that Tom HAS mentioned he wants to get rid of Teal’c.
Tom
February 3rd, 2006 at 2:20 am
Hullo hullo! I apologise if it seems I’m taking this too seriously. All I really know is that ten minutes into this episode I didn’t want to watch any more, and the only thing that kept me going was the opportunity to jeer. So I’m just trying to decipher my reaction too. Of course I don’t think you’re wrong — you just clearly watch Stargate for different reasons than the ones I do. That’s fair enough. Anyhow, let’s move on…
The Sam issue: it’s partly my fault but you’re conflating my position and Andy’s position. Andy wanted more Sam in her proper role. I wanted less or no Sam because the character’s dull. I never asked for this, never never never. Promise. I’m clearly not impossible to please because I’ve liked over half the episodes this season.
The characters coming back and not doing anything might, as I said last post, not be worth discussing further. I didn’t think I was saying anything odd. I’d think it peculiar if they hired anyone in a talking role and had them do nothing all episode to the extent that Martouf didn’t. I can’t think of any Buffy and Angel crossovers that were this level of pointless. Even Oz (probably the most pointless) brought the Gem of Amarrah and got to drive the van and fight Spike.
I didn’t watch Stargate regularly until season seven. If I had and you’re right about Teal’c, I would have said exactly that. Sorry. One of my main irritations with late Buffy was that Xander sat around doing absolutely bloody nothing all the time. It’s especially annoying when it’s your favourite character.
I think there’s a difference between Connor and Martouf — an eight year interval and a half-year interval seem quite different. Connor was, after all, a regular last season. And when he came back… yes, the plot was about him. Martouf must be so jealous. I completely take your word for it that you were aching to see what would happen between Sam and Martouf if he returned — I’m glad you’re satisfied that the answer is “almost kiss”. I suppose in the Stargate world that’s a pretty big deal, if I think about it.
I apologise if it sounded like I was saying you didn’t feel what you were feeling. I was trying to say that if I were in that situation, I’d be pissed. I’ve read much Doctor Who over the years, and I’ve always hated the books that just bring back old characters just because the author thought that’d be cool and don’t do anything with them (or, kill them because they can’t think of anything else interesting to do). I’ve been in this situation before. Just not with Stargate.
Basic point as Christmas Tree metaphor here. If you don’t agree, then that’s fine, we just watch TV differently. Drama first. A good story well told, with good characters. That’s the tree. You can hang your decorations off it after you’ve got that, and that’d make it even cooler. But if you don’t have a tree, then the decorations are just in a mess on the ground. And not cool. I’m not anti-decoration. I’m anti-decorations-with-no-tree.
I liked ‘Beachead’. The script was the wittiest of the season, the plot was cool and a character got to sacrifice herself nobly. This script wasn’t witty, the plot was a shambles and nothing was different at the end. I’m sorry you didn’t and I’m sorry you hate the Ori plots (I don’t love them but they make an alright villain to me). Let’s not get into it. I imagine we’ll have no more luck understanding each other than we are here.
And now, onto the Shannon conclusion! Ooooh, nasty. Point form:
And finally, an obvious point — if someone does something crappy, and then eight years later they do it again, it might be “old school” but it’s still unnecessary, frequently contradictory, off-putting and circular technobabble. Phew. These comments are getting long.
Andy
February 3rd, 2006 at 4:38 am
So we’ve reached an impasse. I’m just going to try to get the last word with these comments. They’re an attempt to summarise, draw a conclusion and pick nits all rolled into one.
Tom, who favoured English in his BA and writes reviews, analyses things way more than Shannon. That seems fairly obvious. That’s not a point of contention. Neither of you score can points from that. I like to analyse something I dislike more than something I like, in the same way analysing why a train crashed is more interesting than analysing why a train completed its journey safely. This may apply to you two too.
My timing of Sam babble took less than a minute. My media player has an advance 30 seconds button and I counted each time I saw Sam explaining something. It can be done quickly and isn’t necessarily an indication of over-analysis.
I disliked Connor before he left and I disliked him when he came back, despite his efffect on Angel’s character development. My previous opinion of the returning character, like Shannon, is more important than their effect on the plot or character developments. I’m sorry if you’ve been scarred in this respect Tom.
I can confirm that Tom and I talked about it before we discussed it. After that we had words, followed by a conversation and an argument which degenerated into a series of contradictions.
Finally, if someone does something great, and then eight years later they do it again, fans will become nostalgic.
Tom
February 3rd, 2006 at 8:02 am
On a largely unrelated but unaddressed note, and thus I’m not after the last word, Jackson and I are both very concerned about Sam’s almost kiss. Does this mean she was (almost) cheating on Jack? Is she with Jack in all the parallel universes? Why are we dancing around whether she’s with Jack? Didn’t Jack quit precisely to be with her? Wouldn’t it undermine things rather if she weren’t? What’s going on???
I don’t care much about Sam but I’d like to think that it was more than an off-putting Asgard that stopped her from being unfaithful to the love of her life.
Shannon
February 3rd, 2006 at 1:03 pm
Haha!! Whoooooooaaah nelly. It would appear the tone of my last post, which was really fricking long incidentally (who did that?! looks around skeptically..) was way darker than I intended. Let me clarify, I was laughing the whole time I was writing that. If you could have heard my tone you would have deduced that I was just arguing for the sake of arguing and to see if I could make Tom go all blusterey at the prospect of trying to rebut my nonsensical arguments. I guess they made too much sense for that to work? Shmeh. Hehe worked anyway..
This is what it would have said, if I wasnt trying to be crafty and slyly annoy Tom..
Para 1 (read) Hehe Tom has is arguing about TV again. Man we are geeks this makes me chortle.
Para 2 read: Tom is way smarter at this than I am, I’m gonna have to fight dirty to get anywhere… rolls up sleeves
Para 3: Anyway seeing as you do love a debate, I shall indulge you, cos I have nothing better to do with my afternoon, and I’m oddly passionate about stargate so its prob the only tv I could be bothered to dicuss in tom-level detail
Para 4: Mixed up Andy’s viewpoint and yours, my bad. You both look so alike in font..
5: Aaw but i liked the recurring characters. Does that make me shallow. I guess so. Better start bagging Angel so Tom gets blinded by rage and doesnt notice the holes in my argument..
6: More useless Angel bagging for the sake of it. Personally, I liked bringing Connor back. But i couldnt think of anything better. Ahem.
7: Dont know what was going on there. Moving on..
8: Stargate makes me giggle cos I’m a fanboy nerd who knows the insider stuff.. cough, Loser, cough… SSSSHH
“Anyway, I’m bored of trying to explain to you why I liked this episode.” = I have run out of mostly lame excuses why I am so easy to please…
“So don’t even get me started on you thinking “Beachead” was good. Pfft.” That part can stay just as is. Beachead. Pfft.
9: Hehe they timed the technobabble – they’re as geeky as I am!! Must press this point as much as possible.. die, die..
And as one final note “juding art” – is exactly what art is for. Why observe art if not to judge it? Pfft I was grasping at straws at the end there.
Now. New rebuttals. Still laughing, kiddies..
“For my part, I don’t particulary want Sam in the show at all.” – Aaaawwww.. but, but… Yeah ok, she sucks this season. A bit. Compared to Vala. Sob. Such potential. Maybe they’re going easy cos she just had a baby? Maybe we’ll see her do ONE stunt before the season is over..?
“I think the Martouf and Sam thing undermined the Sam and Jack thing.” – Aaah but WHAT Sam and Jack thing? They are making a point of there not being a Sam and Jack thing. So a Sam and anyone thing is better than nothing. Well, unless its stupid Pete.
“I think actually that Tom HAS mentioned he wants to get rid of Teal’c.” So it would seem. Wait, you mean we AGREE on something? Pfft. Thats no fun at all. ;)
“I apologise if it seems I’m taking this too seriously. ” Not at all Tom, thats what this forum is for isnt it? It just amuses me that we go into this level of detail, thats all.
Mixed Andy and your viewpoints up, Tom. My bad. Next!
Conner/Martouf, grasping at straws. But I still like Martouf, and you dont have that history, so I still reckon I’m allowed a little clingy moment.
“I apologise if it sounded like I was saying you didn’t feel what you were feeling.” What kind of crazyass overreacting woman do you think I am?! Wait. Do NOT answer that. Ahem. I knew perfectly well what you were saying. What you were saying made sense. Therfore by the rules of debate I just had to make you sound nuts. Which may have backfired. Slightly. Next!
Love the Christmas tree metaphor. Totally agree. I like we already have the tree though. The tree is fine. Missing the main branch these days but I think Mitchell does a great job as replacement foliage.
“And finally, an obvious point  if someone does something crappy, and then eight years later they do it again, it might be “old school” but it’s still unnecessary,” – I never though it was crappy to begin with. I’m surprised we never had this argument in earlier seasons. I always like that element, mostly for Jacks reactions, and I thought it was old school because Mitchell and Daniel tag-teamed and filled that void.
When did they say that Jack left the program to be with Sam?? I certainly didnt have that impression. I’m not really sure what I thought. Hmm. I certainly didn’t think they were together though.. I mean she went away on the Prometheus for months there..
Why can’t they go offworld anymore? Someplace where there are no Ori, just nice crazy decendants of different periods of earth timeline, like Dark Age christians or cold-war era generals? And dont say because of the budget because that is highly dissatisfying.
Jackson, HELP! Not that I’m using that disgusting rather visual phrase, but I seem to be having a waffling episode…
Tom
February 4th, 2006 at 1:16 am
It’s OK, Andy warned me what you were up to! I’m not used to such nefarious debating techniques… All I was really hoping for from you was to admit that using a quarter of a show’s running time on discussing in an aimless way what’s actually going on seemed a very bad thing on some level. That didn’t mean you had to denounce the whole episode. Have you had a look at the gateworld deleted scenes linked above? Would you agree that the one with ‘black’ SG-1 would have made the episode better? Anyhow, on to more important things…
I’d like more stand alone, off world adventures too.
I thought there was an implication that at the end of last season, Sam decided she wanted to be with Jack, and Jack agreed and accepted the promotion so that finally they wouldn’t be working together. I took all the hints about maternity and marriage to be references to their relationship. I vaguely recall another reference earlier in the season but I can’t back it up with useful facts. If they’re not together then I’m damn grumpy.
Shannon
February 4th, 2006 at 8:06 am
There probably was that implication and I have just forgotten. I’m not so good at remembering details that are vague to begin with. Seems a waste of brain space. Not that there aren’t plenty of vacancies up there already. I haven’t checked that gateworld link. I dont want to read anything that will mean I have to admit I’m wrong. ;P
Off-topic.. Bililla’s gates are open to the public on a Saturday it seems.. i reckon we could sneak in and whip a camera out for 3 minutes and no one would ever know. We sure as hell aren’t paying a “shooting fee” and if I dont call and ask, then I can claim ignorance if we get caught doing it for free…
Shannon
February 4th, 2006 at 12:47 pm
Aegh! Now I can’t watch an ep without thinking about whether Sam is bablling or not! She only spattered techojargon for less than a minute there on the Prometheus.. and all i could think was “shut up, quick!! the boys’ll be onto you again!!” …
Shannon
February 4th, 2006 at 1:47 pm
PS that was hardly a spoiler so dont yell at me.
this weeks galactica was so friggin awesome!~!!!!! hurry up and catch up!! tv hasnt been this good since… well no that will just get us into a far longer debate. but wow this stuff is COOL.
Andy
February 8th, 2006 at 3:55 am
Sam can have two minutes of jargon. She can fix the rings teleporter. But that’s all she’s allowed to do in one episode until she proves that she canbe an interesting member of the team. I’d rather she had her two minutes in every episode than saving them up to ruin an episode.
Andy
March 23rd, 2006 at 1:53 pm
I’ve been thinking about online medication and gambling for some time but never sure where to go.
Tom
March 24th, 2006 at 12:29 am
I feel sorry for the kind of inept spambot/person who finds itself in this ridiculously quiet and ineffective area of the interweb and decides to post a bunch of links without checking how to actually make them on this site.
andy BSc
March 24th, 2006 at 12:55 am
You can’t delete valid posts about Stagate. Me and uh … spambot were having a nuanced conversation about Ripple Effect before Mr Censor showed up. You can’t silence the truth!
Now my previous post makes me look crazy.
Tom BA BSc
March 24th, 2006 at 1:52 am
I can silence anyone. I could silence you if I had half a mind to. I have made you look no crazier than anyone already assumes you are.
Mattt
March 24th, 2006 at 10:14 am
I like the term “Sam Spam”. it should be used more often. its very accurate, can we put her in the junk mail folder?
Tom
March 24th, 2006 at 11:52 pm
I hadn’t considered the possibility of identity theft on these boards. Matt, don’t go using other people’s email addresses or you’ll end up looking like that.