SGU Plots
Tim Bruening
Tim Bruening
The Destiny's crew discovers that the galaxy they are currently in is
about to turn into a quasar.
The Destiny gets caught in a black hole.
A Wrath mother ship shows up.
The Destiny has a female android avatar, which Video game kid falls in
love with.
The crew de-evolves.
The ship gets shattered into multiple time zones (as in Voyager
"Shattered").
Time windows appear, linking the ship to various Earth time zones. A
crew member finds himself next to Hitler and accidentally saves him from
a bomb (Red Dwarf).
Crew members find themselves careering through parallel universes (TNG:
Parallels, SG:Atlantis: Daedalus Variations, SG-1 Ripple Effect).
The Destiny visits Earth's past (Voyager: Future's End, first two
episodes of last season of ST: Enterprise, TOS: Tomorrow is Yesterday,
TOS: City at the Edge of Forever, etc.).
whodunit
> The legendary Furlings show up.
>
> The Destiny's crew discovers that the galaxy they are currently in is
> about to turn into a quasar.
>
> The Destiny gets caught in a black hole.
Already done on a Doctor Who episode not long ago.
>
> A Wrath mother ship shows up.
Wouldn't have the power to do so, unless they hitchhiked on a different
Ancient ship hopping and bopping around the universe.
>
> The Destiny has a female android avatar, which Video game kid falls in
> love with.
Already done on Andromeda.
>
> The crew de-evolves.
Already done on Star Trek: The Next Generation.
>
> The ship gets shattered into multiple time zones (as in Voyager
> "Shattered").
Already done on Star Trek: Voyager AND The Next Generation.
>
> Time windows appear, linking the ship to various Earth time zones. A
> crew member finds himself next to Hitler and accidentally saves him from
> a bomb (Red Dwarf).
Already done on the original Star Trek series "The City On The Edge of
Forever".
>
> Crew members find themselves careering through parallel universes (TNG:
> Parallels, SG:Atlantis: Daedalus Variations, SG-1 Ripple Effect).
I think you mean 'careening'. As you note, already been done multiple times.
>
> The Destiny visits Earth's past (Voyager: Future's End, first two
> episodes of last season of ST: Enterprise, TOS: Tomorrow is Yesterday,
> TOS: City at the Edge of Forever, etc.).
I personally don't think the Destiny should be traveling through time.
Might run into the TARDIS and that would be bad.
>
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Tim Bruening wrote:
>> The legendary Furlings show up.
>>
>> The Destiny's crew discovers that the galaxy they are currently in is
>> about to turn into a quasar.
>>
>> The Destiny gets caught in a black hole.
>
> Already done on a Doctor Who episode not long ago.
Not to mention voyager... First season.
>> Time windows appear, linking the ship to various Earth time zones. A
>> crew member finds himself next to Hitler and accidentally saves him from
>> a bomb (Red Dwarf).
>
> Already done on the original Star Trek series "The City On The Edge of
> Forever".
And doctor who, girl in the fireplace.
--
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
| Andrew Halliwell BSc | "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
| in | suck is probably the day they start making |
| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
Leo Sgouros
> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
There are plenty of possibilities already in turning the "survivors"
into a workable crew of a starship.There are also alot of
possibilities while dropping by different planet stargates, as long as
that doesnt become "crew meets and defeats new alien threats in 12
hours" nonsense.I too would like to meet the furlings, and if the name
is an issue perhaps just make it that it was an epithet that doesnt
translate well and their real name is the fill in the blanks.Someone
commented a while back the name "furlings" was a stumbling block.
whodunit
> And so it was that in the sacred domain of alt.tv.stargate-atlantis, whodunit <whod...@invalid.invalid> uttered the following pearls of wisdom:
>> Tim Bruening wrote:
>>> The legendary Furlings show up.
>>>
>>> The Destiny's crew discovers that the galaxy they are currently in is
>>> about to turn into a quasar.
>>>
>>> The Destiny gets caught in a black hole.
>> Already done on a Doctor Who episode not long ago.
>
> Not to mention voyager... First season.
>
>>> Time windows appear, linking the ship to various Earth time zones. A
>>> crew member finds himself next to Hitler and accidentally saves him from
>>> a bomb (Red Dwarf).
>> Already done on the original Star Trek series "The City On The Edge of
>> Forever".
>
> And doctor who, girl in the fireplace.
>
>
TB
Your Name
"Tim Bruening" <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
>
> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
NOT a silly musical episode.
NOT silly episodes where they all play in the 'holodeck'.
Your Name
"whodunit" <whod...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:had419$vvu$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Tim Bruening wrote:
> >
> > The legendary Furlings show up.
> >
> > The Destiny's crew discovers that the galaxy they are currently in is
> > about to turn into a quasar.
> >
> > The Destiny gets caught in a black hole.
>
> Already done on a Doctor Who episode not long ago.
Plus a movie called "The Black Hole" years ago, and I vaguely recall
something called "Event Horizon", but don't ask me what that was.
ga...@quadrant.com
<tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>What plots would you like to see for SGU?
Destiny stops by the Furlings planet. But the Furlings have been
recently overcome by a Plague that turned them into huge fury
monsters. Once detecting an away team from Destiny the Monstrulings
attack it but are quicky gunned down. The Destiny then obliterates the
planet from orbit...
Seriously... a hundred thousand years old Destiny is billions of light
years from Milky Way. They are even further than Horogulum
Supercluster. They couldn't possibly meet any of the races and
characters from SG1 or Atlantis. However, given that the Ancients had
been exploring the Universe for hurndred thousand years and sending
automated ships all over the place, the Destiny crew might stumble on
one of the newer ships eventually. In the meantime they can continue
to explore various opportunities of fixing their old flying bucket and
sniff out various Ancient trails.
TB
> "whodunit" <whodu...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
I bet that in the near future, someone will steal Rush's
communications stones, use one to communicate with the SGC, and thus
discover that Rush is NOT the duly appointed leader of the Destiny.
Plot: Someone uses a communications stone to contact the Lucian
Alliance. Rush might not be the only one with communications stones!
Akira Norimaki
> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
I would like to see SGA coming back, and I would like to see SGU shot to
hell.
No offense intended.
--
Take care now, bye bye then,
My web site.
http://www.zolnetwork.com/x-mad/
AC
"Tim Bruening" <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
>
Dunno about plots, but I'd like the series to end with them all dying and
never getting home. Or getting home but the process kills them all. All
that's left is the footage from the floating camera thing.
AC
whodunit
(((Hugs)))
Dillon Pyron
>The legendary Furlings show up.
>
>The Destiny's crew discovers that the galaxy they are currently in is
>about to turn into a quasar.
>
>The Destiny gets caught in a black hole.
>
>A Wrath mother ship shows up.
>
>The Destiny has a female android avatar, which Video game kid falls in
>love with.
"So I can finish my robot. My female robot. Man, this is going to be
the best prom ever."
From? Anyone? (I know the answer, I have the whole series on a DVD
for comic relief during my presentations)
>
>The crew de-evolves.
>
>The ship gets shattered into multiple time zones (as in Voyager
>"Shattered").
>
>Time windows appear, linking the ship to various Earth time zones. A
>crew member finds himself next to Hitler and accidentally saves him from
>a bomb (Red Dwarf).
>
>Crew members find themselves careering through parallel universes (TNG:
>Parallels, SG:Atlantis: Daedalus Variations, SG-1 Ripple Effect).
>
>The Destiny visits Earth's past (Voyager: Future's End, first two
>episodes of last season of ST: Enterprise, TOS: Tomorrow is Yesterday,
>TOS: City at the Edge of Forever, etc.).
--
- dillon I am not invalid
Patrick Swayze, now there was talent
Tim Bruening
AC wrote:
SGU: Voyage Oblivion.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> "So I can finish my robot. My female robot. Man, this is going to be
> the best prom ever."
>
> From? Anyone? (I know the answer, I have the whole series on a DVD
> for comic relief during my presentations)
Weird science?
--
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
| spi...@freenet.co.uk |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
| |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
| Andrew Halliwell BSc |Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
| in |good to you so far... |
| Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|
Anim8rFSK
wrote:
Ooo, ooo
They all kill each other, and the floating camera captures it all for
our repeated viewing enjoyment!
--
Stargate Universe SGU: It puts the "U" in "SUCKS"!
It's the show 'Defiling Gravity' would be if DG had more regulars,
fewer abortions, worse writers, and no budget for lighting.
Count Floyd
series should have started that way! Have the ship/camera ball get to a
gated planet, then have the only evidence/story shown from the flying
ball's perspective.
jill
Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote:
>In article <xfRym.7901$x61....@newsfe23.ams2>, "AC" <x...@xxx.xxx>
>wrote:
>
>> "Tim Bruening" <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
>> news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
>> > What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>> >
>>
>> Dunno about plots, but I'd like the series to end with them all dying and
>> never getting home. Or getting home but the process kills them all. All
>> that's left is the footage from the floating camera thing.
>>
>> AC
>
>Ooo, ooo
>
>They all kill each other, and the floating camera captures it all for
>our repeated viewing enjoyment!
The foating camera is the one that actually KILLS them! Kind of like
in Dark Star when the beach ball attacked.
Jill
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The colors blend, the edges soften. Swirling and mixing
we are becoming white light.
ji...@tuells.org
Anim8rFSK
Count Floyd <Count...@MonsterChillerHorrorTheater.com> wrote:
I like it!
TB
> In article <xfRym.7901$x61.1...@newsfe23.ams2>, "AC" <x...@xxx.xxx>
> wrote:
>
> > "Tim Bruening" <tsbru...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
> >news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
> > > What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>
> > Dunno about plots, but I'd like the series to end with them all dying and
> > never getting home. Or getting home but the process kills them all. All
> > that's left is the footage from the floating camera thing.
>
> > AC
>
> Ooo, ooo
>
> They all kill each other, and the floating camera captures it all for
> our repeated viewing enjoyment!
On the Human Sacrifice Channel, created by the Supreme Court?
TB
> In article <ANIM8Rfsk-E8C108.06314307102...@news.dc1.easynews.com>,
>
>
>
> Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
> >In article <xfRym.7901$x61.1...@newsfe23.ams2>, "AC" <x...@xxx.xxx>
> >wrote:
>
> >> "Tim Bruening" <tsbru...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
> >>news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
> >> > What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>
> >> Dunno about plots, but I'd like the series to end with them all dying and
> >> never getting home. Or getting home but the process kills them all. All
> >> that's left is the footage from the floating camera thing.
>
> >> AC
>
> >Ooo, ooo
>
> >They all kill each other, and the floating camera captures it all for
> >our repeated viewing enjoyment!
>
> The foating camera is the one that actually KILLS them! Kind of like
> in Dark Star when the beach ball attacked.
What does the verb "To Foat" mean?
Plot: The kinos get infected by replicators or viruses, and attack the
crew! The crew has to make the kinos self destruct.
AC
"whodunit" <whod...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
No, not al all.
Look, we have to accept a contrivance to get the main plot of the series
going. Ok, I can accept that. As long as we get out characters on the iffy
ship, then all is cool. But in reality, that must mean an equally huge
contrivance to get them home again. Why bother? And I'll tell you right now,
if this show does the full 5 seasons, if they mostly get home in one piece,
it will be universally slagged off. And its very easy to see why.
Some of the best ending of shows are when they all die. You know darn well
its all over and if handled well, highly emotional. And you remember it. The
ending of Blackadder 4 is burned in to my mind!!!!
I like what I see so far, and there is already huge potential. From what I
see, I think they have character and plot arcs already planned, although I
don't know if they were bold enough to plot out 5 years!! Even so, I think
SGU could surprise. If it does, if must have a fitting ending and not a
ST:Voyager / BGS hacked on nonsense ending.
Killing them all and leaving the ball as a record would be perfect. Perhaps
the ball makes it back with a message from Rush, left alive stuck for ever,
alone. Something like that. I'm sure some writer can come up with something
like that but much better.
AC
whodunit
classic Twilight Zone.
I see what you mean now. I thought you hated the premiere and just
wanted to do away with everyone because of that! Thanks for clarifying.
Legend11
Actually, in scientific terms, it would tear a whole in the fabric of
the space time continuum whoozamajig. And the Doctor would then tear
Rush a new crapper for spoiling up his ride. So yus, very bad indeed.
--
Legend11
Manchester United - Premiership Champions Three Times Running.
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 14 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
The Professional version does not have this message
Legend11
> An automated ship built by the pre-ascension Ori shows up.
Hallowed are the Ori!
Sorry...force of habit. I'll get me coat.
Legend11
> Tim Bruening wrote:
>> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>
> I would like to see SGA coming back, and I would like to see SGU shot to
> hell.
>
> No offense intended.
>
Not for me. SG-1 was a great show and the only one to leave me wanting
more (even after it went Farscape I still enjoyed it), which considering
it was 10 seasons is testament to just how good a show that really was
(for a camp and light hearted sci-fi show that is). SGA IMO was merely a
decent show that perfectly ran its course, but without overstaying its
welcome. Just enough, you might say.
IMO it really is time for something different and little more gritty in
this franchise. Not to confuse dark with gritty, that is. As I'll bet
you any money that the essence of SGU will be no way near as dark as
BSG. I'm happy with how things are.
--
Legend11.
"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
Legend11
How about having just one character make it alive? Say, Eli, for
instance, who seems to be an early favourite amongst those of us who
liked the pilot. If they all die, then all those 'Save SGA' petition
signers who managed to be won round by SGU will be screaming blue
murder. It has become increasingly clear over the last week that a
significant portion of the Stargate fan base actually liked the light
hearted/camp, easy viewing, heroes always save the day type of vibe.
Doing it your way might mean the opposite of what you say would happen,
and that by killing them ALL it would be "universally slagged off". One
champion of people's hearts...Eli...knocking on his mum's door with the
camera panning out, might just be enough to strike the right balance
(although not if he has his arm around sweet young Chloe...LOL...barf!).
Don't forget, the end of BSG was pretty much celebrated as a good ending
by a LOT of viewers and reviewers, even if you (and I) thought it a bit
'tacked on', and sweet.
--
Legend11
Manchester United - Premiership Champions Three Times Running.
Dillon Pyron
>And verily, didst Dillon Pyron <invalid...@austin.rr.com> hastily babble thusly:
>> "So I can finish my robot. My female robot. Man, this is going to be
>> the best prom ever."
>>
>> From? Anyone? (I know the answer, I have the whole series on a DVD
>> for comic relief during my presentations)
>
>Weird science?
Actually, if you don't live in the US, you probably never saw them.
CitiBank was running a series of commercials about their identiy theft
protection in which they had some "plain old American" talking
(mouthing) while another person actual spoke the words. And it was
usually something to do with how the person would use the stolen
money.
This one had an African-American woman in a beauty salon, under a hood
hair dryer, with a geeky adolescent male voice talking aobut how he
had stolen $10,000. "So I can finish my robot. My girl robot.
(sorry, I had to go back and look at it) Man, this is going to be the
best prom ever."
Others had two huge GOBs talking with male and female NYC accents, a
Wall Street exec speaking Valley Speak, etc.
Dillon Pyron
>
>"whodunit" <whod...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>news:hah2dd$40g$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> AC wrote:
>>> "Tim Bruening" <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
>>> news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
>>>> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Dunno about plots, but I'd like the series to end with them all dying and
>>> never getting home. Or getting home but the process kills them all. All
>>> that's left is the footage from the floating camera thing.
>>>
>>> AC
>> Having a bad day, AC?
>> (((Hugs)))
>
>No, not al all.
>
>Look, we have to accept a contrivance to get the main plot of the series
>going. Ok, I can accept that. As long as we get out characters on the iffy
>ship, then all is cool. But in reality, that must mean an equally huge
>contrivance to get them home again. Why bother? And I'll tell you right now,
>if this show does the full 5 seasons, if they mostly get home in one piece,
>it will be universally slagged off. And its very easy to see why.
>
>Some of the best ending of shows are when they all die. You know darn well
>its all over and if handled well, highly emotional. And you remember it. The
>ending of Blackadder 4 is burned in to my mind!!!!
Watched Shaun of the Dead yesterday. I thought it was going to end
that way and was okay with it.
>
>I like what I see so far, and there is already huge potential. From what I
>see, I think they have character and plot arcs already planned, although I
>don't know if they were bold enough to plot out 5 years!! Even so, I think
>SGU could surprise. If it does, if must have a fitting ending and not a
>ST:Voyager / BGS hacked on nonsense ending.
>
>Killing them all and leaving the ball as a record would be perfect. Perhaps
>the ball makes it back with a message from Rush, left alive stuck for ever,
>alone.
Ogg like.
>Something like that. I'm sure some writer can come up with something
>like that but much better.
"I wouldn't fuck you if we were the only two humans left." THAT would
be interesting to add somewhere along the line (say the Sen's daughter
to Rush) and then wind up with only those two.
>
>AC
whodunit
Dillon Pyron
Yeah, it left a lot to be desired. And felt a bit 'tacked on', and
sweet.
Partly I think because it was about 15 episodes too soon.
Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
At the very end of the series, the Destiny and its crew go back in time
millions of years, and become the ancestors of the Ancients!
Dillon Pyron
>Possible Spoilers For Series:
Um, I actually like that.
Most of the characters seem to be in their reproductive prime and
while it's small pool, the number of combinations certainly appears to
be sufficeient. In my anthro class, the prof said that about 25 to 30
of each sex would easly create a safe population. But each pairing
has to produce at least one of each sex and ideally two of each to
permit expansion and more like a total of five to allow for
preproductive mortality.
Tim Bruening
Dillon Pyron wrote:
Say farewell to monogamy!
Tim Bruening
The Great Evil is a really big and mean intelligent entity that makes
matter dissolve by altering the laws of physics.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> The Destiny discovers a Great Evil that is headed for the Milky Way.
> The Great Evil is a really big and mean intelligent entity that makes
> matter dissolve by altering the laws of physics.
>
Been done, both in star trek AND andromeda!
Tim Bruening
spi...@freenet.co.uk wrote:
> And so it was that in the sacred domain of alt.tv.stargate-sg1, Tim Bruening <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> uttered the following pearls of wisdom:
> > The Destiny discovers a Great Evil that is headed for the Milky Way.
> > The Great Evil is a really big and mean intelligent entity that makes
> > matter dissolve by altering the laws of physics.
> >
> Stop nicking scifi from other shows!
> Been done, both in star trek AND andromeda!
I nicked the Great Evil from Alan Dean Foster's Pip and Flinx series, not from Star Trek or Andromeda. The Great Evil is bigger than galaxies.
Akira Norimaki
<snip>
> SGA IMO was merely a
> decent show that perfectly ran its course, but without overstaying its
> welcome. Just enough, you might say.
Well, I'm frankly hoping in something more. Some movies would be nice.
However the point is that when I watch a Stargate something I wanna
laugh, I don't wanna see a BSG thing or something. What's the point in
naming SG* something that simply it isn't? They should have called it in
another manner, 'cause it's another thing. I don't know if I made myself
clear, I hope so.
> IMO it really is time for something different and little more gritty in
> this franchise.
No for me pal. I liked very much the old sitcom like show, and I'd want
it back. :)
As I said I'm waiting for movies, SGA and SG1 as well. I really hope
they didn't play bullshit in talking about a SGA moive.
<snip>
> I'm happy with how things are.
I'm not, point of view I guess.
--
Take care now, bye bye then,
If a prior visits your world... leave.
Your Name
"Akira Norimaki" <sutte...@rx78.org> wrote in message
news:hb74f...@news5.newsguy.com...
> Legend11 wrote:
> <snip>
> > SGA IMO was merely a
> > decent show that perfectly ran its course, but without overstaying its
> > welcome. Just enough, you might say.
>
> Well, I'm frankly hoping in something more. Some movies would be nice.
> However the point is that when I watch a Stargate something I wanna
> laugh, I don't wanna see a BSG thing or something. What's the point in
> naming SG* something that simply it isn't? They should have called it in
> another manner, 'cause it's another thing. I don't know if I made myself
> clear, I hope so.
Exactly the same thing I've been saying all along about Hollyweird's idiotic
"in name only remakes", with Ron Moore's so-called "Battlestar Galactica"
being a prime example. There's absoluetly zero point (other than trying to
con the audience into watching) in re-using the same name for a completely
different show.
Dillon Pyron
Sounds good to urk, gak, it uh was gak gak urggg a jo gaaaa
Hi, this is Dillon's wife Carol. He won't be participating in the
group for a while. Say until the sun expands and consumes the earth.
He'll be buried in a few New York garbage scows. The exact number
depends on how much gas I have in the chain saw.
Tim Bruening
"Sir F. A. Rien" wrote:
> spi...@freenet.co.uk found these unused words:
>
> >And so it was that in the sacred domain of alt.tv.stargate-sg1, Tim Bruening <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> uttered the following pearls of wisdom:
> >> The Destiny discovers a Great Evil that is headed for the Milky Way.
> >> The Great Evil is a really big and mean intelligent entity that makes
> >> matter dissolve by altering the laws of physics.
> >>
> >Stop nicking scifi from other shows!
> >Been done, both in star trek AND andromeda!
>
> New to Timmette, MUST be 'new' to the world ...
I got the Great Evil from the Pip and Flinx series (Alan Dean Foster), not from TV.
I do remember a Next Gen novel titled "Intellivore" about a planet sized intelligence which ate intelligence.
Tim Bruening
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I bet that at some point in this series, Greer (the soldier who was in
detention and appears trigger happy) will be accused of murder.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
syndrome" from the original trek and that massive great
solar-system-planet-ship thing in andromeda?
Just stop it, OK. I for one don't want to hear about your latest "let's nick
this idea from some other scifi work and shoehorn it into universe"
bullshit.
And I doubt anyone else does either.
--
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
| Andrew Halliwell BSc | "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
| in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
| Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
Dillon Pyron
Yeah, at least honesty prevails
BSG: old or new? That was a commone discussion in the OR for several
months prior to the conclusion.
Dillon Pyron
>Possible Future Spoilers:
Yes, and the real criminal will turn out to be the downstairs maid's
youngest brother, who works in the kitchen shoveling coal using a
different name.
SPOILER OF A DIFFERENT KIND
Ooops, Gosford Park.
Legend11
> Legend11 wrote:
> <snip>
>> SGA IMO was merely a
>> decent show that perfectly ran its course, but without overstaying its
>> welcome. Just enough, you might say.
>
> Well, I'm frankly hoping in something more. Some movies would be nice.
> However the point is that when I watch a Stargate something I wanna
> laugh, I don't wanna see a BSG thing or something. What's the point in
> naming SG* something that simply it isn't?
Well the original movie wasn't in any way light hearted or sprinkled
with humour, so they have every right to take it in a direction more in
line with the original source material.
--
Legend11.
"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 15 of my spam emails to date.
Legend11
Well the original BSG was a pile of particularly rancid horse puckey in
comparison to most other sci-fi shows of the era. I always have a little
giggle to myself at people who argued against the new BSG by holding up
the original as "better", when at the time (I watched it in the 70's &
80's) the general consensus was that it was nothing more than average,
or funny for all the wrong reasons - but with some very admirable visual
qualities and a fantastic basic premise. So taking its name, the good
bits and making a wholly better product was a fantastic idea.
I know from reading posts of your in the past that you never liked the
new BSG, but you have to hold your hands up and accept it is considered
a success. For me that renders all arguments, for or against, academic.
Basically, they took a license and made it better...and that can only
ever be an argument *for* what you call "in name only remakes".
--
Legend11.
"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 15 of my spam emails to date.
Your Name
"Legend11" <Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:hbie1q$4h7$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
The original, and propre, "Battlestar Galactica" was made as "Star Wars for
TV" and that's exactly what it was.
> I know from reading posts of your in the past that you never liked the
> new BSG, but you have to hold your hands up and accept it is considered
> a success. For me that renders all arguments, for or against, academic.
>
> Basically, they took a license and made it better...and that can only
> ever be an argument *for* what you call "in name only remakes".
"Better" is purely opinion-based. I don't deal in wishy-washy opinions.
The FACT is that Moore-Ron's version was a very different show (as
acknowledged by many of the people making it) and should have had a
different name - it was "Battlestar Galactica" in little more than name
only, so why bother re-using that name?? The same goes for all the other
idiotic in-name-only remakes that are barely recognisable as having anything
to do with the original.
But as usual, the facts and actual point are completely missed and ignored
by people who simply and irrelevantly want to say the new version is
"better". :-\
Akira Norimaki
> Well the original movie wasn't in any way light hearted or sprinkled
> with humour, so they have every right to take it in a direction more in
> line with the original source material.
I'm not talking about right or wrong, they have the right to do whatever
they want to. I'm talking about my expectations, I'm talking about what
SG1 was. Come on, you have to admit that SGU doesn't fit in the "idea"
of what SG1 was, it's something different. Why don't they call it
accordingly? (Rhetorical question)
By the way, SG1 and the movie are/were two different beast and I'm
really surprised you're using the movie to "justify" SGU.
--
Take care now, bye bye then,
Sam staring at the DHD:
"Amazing. This is what was missing from the dig at Giza. This is how
they controlled it. It took us 15 years and three supercomputers to
MacGyver a system for the gate on Earth."
Akira Norimaki
> I'm not talking about right or wrong, they have the right to do whatever
> they want to. I'm talking about my expectations, I'm talking about what
> SG1 was. Come on, you have to admit that SGU doesn't fit in the "idea"
> of what SG1 was, it's something different. Why don't they call it
> accordingly? (Rhetorical question)
> By the way, SG1 and the movie are/were two different beast and I'm
> really surprised you're using the movie to "justify" SGU.
This is an interesting point, Stargate:SG1 evolved in a very different
way form the original movie but it started as a spin-off, and I think it
was clear since day one that it was going to be something else.
I think I've just shot myself in the back. LOL.
Well, I'll put it in this way. Newsgroups are good 'cause they make you
think. ;)
--
Take care now, bye bye then,
Okay. You people sit tight, hold the fort and keep the home fires
burning. And if we're not back by dawn... call the president.
Jack Burton
Legend11
I feel that buzz word coming on again. 'Reboot' - does that makes it sit
better for you than remake? I guess they should have used the same
stories, scripts and chuck in a few more of the old actors? The reboot
was a great show for a lot of people, and it had more than BSG's
name...it took a lot of the fantastic visual qualities, a great bunch of
bad guys and roughly the basic premise. Easily enough to justify using
the title. So what if it also has the added plus of putting a few bums
on seats? They make shows like this to make money...period. People who
liked the old show and the new show are not mutually exclusive
either...I know many who enjoyed both, and none have a problem with them
calling it Battlestar Galactica. I guess it's just your problem if you
do, and the same for others who share that opinion. I'm sure Ron Moore
aint losing much sleep over it...and neither am I.
I've also read your opinions on the show away from the fact they used
the same name, and it was clear you never liked it. I should say at this
point I don't deal in "wishy-washy opinions"...but I won't. I appreciate
you don't like it, and that you never liked them using the BSG tag, but
if you can't appreciate it was a successful project I really do think
you're burying your head in the sand. The more popular sci-fi shows
there are, the more chance there is of a show you do like getting
commissioned. Although I have a hard time believing that...as some
people seem to have a hard time not picking fault in every new show that
comes along.
Legend11
> Akira Norimaki wrote:
>> I'm not talking about right or wrong, they have the right to do whatever
>> they want to. I'm talking about my expectations, I'm talking about what
>> SG1 was. Come on, you have to admit that SGU doesn't fit in the "idea"
>> of what SG1 was, it's something different. Why don't they call it
>> accordingly? (Rhetorical question)
>> By the way, SG1 and the movie are/were two different beast and I'm
>> really surprised you're using the movie to "justify" SGU.
>
> This is an interesting point, Stargate:SG1 evolved in a very different
> way form the original movie but it started as a spin-off, and I think it
> was clear since day one that it was going to be something else.
>
No less clear than the fact SGU was going to be different again. That's
my point.
Your Name
>
> I feel that buzz word coming on again. 'Reboot' - does that makes it sit
> better for you than remake?
Nope. "Reboot", "remake", "reimaginging", and whatever other "re" words they
can come up with all mean the same thing: idiotic changes that are
ill-fitting with what came before. :-(
When done mid-season this idiocy is called "jumping the shark" and is almost
always an incredibly bad sign that leads to even sillier nonsense to follow,
and then cancellation.
TB
> "Sir F. A. Rien" wrote:
>
> > spi...@freenet.co.uk found these unused words:
>
> > >> The Destiny discovers a Great Evil that is headed for the Milky Way.
> > >> The Great Evil is a really big and mean intelligent entity that makes
> > >> matter dissolve by altering the laws of physics.
>
> > >Stop nicking scifi from other shows!
> > >Been done, both in star trek AND andromeda!
>
> > New to Timmette, MUST be 'new' to the world ...
>
> I got the Great Evil from the Pip and Flinx series (Alan Dean Foster), not from TV.
>
> I do remember a Next Gen novel titled "Intellivore" about a planet sized intelligence which ate intelligence.
Can you suggest any plots which have never been seen in any other Sci-
Fi shows or books?
Mysterious Traveler
Dillon Pyron
I agree. Let's ask ourselves a question. Which show barely lasted a
season? Which show had a "sequal" that is generaly regarded as one of
the ten worst shows of its era?
>
>I know from reading posts of your in the past that you never liked the
>new BSG, but you have to hold your hands up and accept it is considered
>a success. For me that renders all arguments, for or against, academic.
What has always been confusing and amusing was the number of people in
the BSG NG who would constatnly rant that "this episode sucked GDD".
Which meant that the hated the show so much they had to watch the
show.
>
>Basically, they took a license and made it better...and that can only
>ever be an argument *for* what you call "in name only remakes".
Here's another example. In about 2000, the Ferrrari F! team took on
very major sponsorship from Marlboro. And may have changed the shade
of their red slightly. And people bitched and whined. In the
meantime, the team won the constructor's championship 5 times and
Michael Schumacher become the winningest driver and is regarded as one
of the greatest drivers of all time.
Of course, I suspect that the $200M sponsoship helped thieir $500M
budget might have helped.
>
>--
>Legend11.
>"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
>'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
--
- dillon I am not invalid
"Always shoot first. At the very least you'll
distract the guy enough to make the second one count"
-- Lazurus Long
Dillon Pyron
So, when did it jump the shark? It seems, according to you, by the
second hour of the pilot.
In consider RDM's version to be the BSG for thinkers. The original
was thought of as "Star Wars for TV" but it lacked something that Star
Wars had going for it. A plot arc. That was also my problem with
Star Trek and ST:NG. DS9 had an arc, although it was kind of buried
in the first season, it became very clear. And Voyage, which is
regarded as the worst of the Star Treks (at least until Enterprise
came along), had the clearest arc. It was a victim of poor writing
and weak acting.
For me, some shows don't need an arc, because they are "purposful"
shows. NCIS is an example of that, although for several seasons they
did have a buried arc. Arcs.
Your Name
"Dillon Pyron" <invalid...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:tcfud5pc5r5eru5g5...@4ax.com...
Quantity doesn't equal quality ... but yet again you talking opinions, which
I've already said are irrelevant since I'm talking FACTS. :-\
Your Name
> [Default] Thus spake "Your Name" <your...@isp.com>:
> >
> >"Legend11" <Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> >news:hbknsq$rrk$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> >>
> >> I feel that buzz word coming on again. 'Reboot' - does that makes it
sit
> >> better for you than remake?
> >
> >Nope. "Reboot", "remake", "reimaginging", and whatever other "re" words
they
> >can come up with all mean the same thing: idiotic changes that are
> >ill-fitting with what came before. :-(
> >
> >When done mid-season this idiocy is called "jumping the shark" and is
almost
> >always an incredibly bad sign that leads to even sillier nonsense to
follow,
> >and then cancellation.
>
> So, when did it jump the shark? It seems, according to you, by the
> second hour of the pilot.
You completely missed the point. Ron Moore's in-name-only show "jumped the
shark" from the original show ... it's a very different show which should
have had a different name. There is only one product called "Battlestar
Galactica", and that was created by Glen Larson. Unfortunately there are so
many idiots on this planet that apparently names means absoutely nothing to
them, just slap any old name on any old product - so I'm off to the shops to
buy a load of things using the name "Dillon Pyron" and with you address for
the bills, aparently nobody will worry about it. :-\
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> You completely missed the point. Ron Moore's in-name-only show "jumped the
> shark" from the original show ... it's a very different show which should
> have had a different name.
But THAT is only a worthless opinion.
So why do you keep griping about it?
If you didn't like it, don't watch it, simple.
And leave the rest of us alone to enjoy this new take on an old series which
was EXCELLENT.
Are you going to start griping that the new doctor who should've been called
something different because it was so different to the OLD doctor who that
got cancelled in the 80s?
--
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
| Andrew Halliwell BSc | "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
| in | suck is probably the day they start making |
| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
Legend11
Now that is a completely nonsense analogy.
Do you know why they never called the new BSG 'The A-Team'? Because it
wasn't about a gang of of avenging ex-military mercs going around
kicking the arses of bad guys. They also saw fit not to call it
'Superman', primarily as it had naff-all to do with some super powered
alien bloke with a penchant for wearing his undertroos over his pants.
Is it me or is there a pattern emerging here? As I said, it is more than
"BSG in name only". Sure, it took free licence and made a lot of
changes, more often than not for the better, but you only had to glance
at a single short scene of a battle with the Cylons and it became
immediately clear it was an update of Battlestar Galactica.
So the name brought with it X amount of viewers? They're in the business
of making money after all. In fact I was one of those who made a plan to
watch it based on the name, as even though I wasn't at all fond of the
original, I really did like the visual qualities of it. I was hoping
they'd take the visual style, the rough premise...basically the good
bits of the original, and make a better turn of it. For me and many
others, that is exactly what they did. Fair play to them.
--
Legend11.
"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 17 of my spam emails to date.
Legend11
No, you're talking opinions like the rest of us. Here's some BSG facts
for you:
3 Primetime Emmys and another 18 wins & 41 nominations of various other
awards.
--
Legend11.
"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 17 of my spam emails to date.
ga...@quadrant.com
<Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>Akira Norimaki wrote:
>> Legend11 wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> SGA IMO was merely a
>>> decent show that perfectly ran its course, but without overstaying its
>>> welcome. Just enough, you might say.
>>
>> Well, I'm frankly hoping in something more. Some movies would be nice.
>> However the point is that when I watch a Stargate something I wanna
>> laugh, I don't wanna see a BSG thing or something. What's the point in
>> naming SG* something that simply it isn't?
>
>Well the original movie wasn't in any way light hearted or sprinkled
>with humour, so they have every right to take it in a direction more in
>line with the original source material.
>
>--
>Legend11.
>"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
>'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
I haven't heard more pathetic arguments than in this group. People
with foam in their mouth argue about names. Rediculous!
Who the hell cares what the names are? Watch or don't watch them. Like
or don't lile them. Period. What do names have to do with it? It's
just intertainment. nothing to worry about.
Your Name
<ga...@quadrant.com> wrote in message
news:437vd59771kv90ufj...@4ax.com...
And herein lies the problem - most people don't care less. Most people who
laughingly call themselves "fans" are nothing by fly-by-nighters who quickly
move on to the next toy on the block. :-(
Dillon Pyron
>And verily, didst Your Name <your...@isp.com> hastily babble thusly:
>> You completely missed the point. Ron Moore's in-name-only show "jumped the
>> shark" from the original show ... it's a very different show which should
>> have had a different name.
>
>But THAT is only a worthless opinion.
>So why do you keep griping about it?
>If you didn't like it, don't watch it, simple.
>
>And leave the rest of us alone to enjoy this new take on an old series which
>was EXCELLENT.
>
>Are you going to start griping that the new doctor who should've been called
>something different because it was so different to the OLD doctor who that
>got cancelled in the 80s?
Damn straight he ain't. Baker or no one.
Oh, BTW, I am a "reboot". Jr.
Dillon Pyron
<mysteriou...@dot.net>:
Yeah. Two guys argue. One guy kills the other one. The killer gets
punished. Hmm, Genesis.
Man and woman meet. Woman does something stupid. Man gets blamed.
They both get punished. Woman hounds man for rest of his life. Hmm,
Genesis
And not the band. Particularly after Gaberial left. That version
sucked.
ga...@quadrant.com
wrote:
I don't see any problems here. Being a fan doesn't mean arguing about
triffles untill you're red in the face. Simply discussing the subject
matter of those shows any enjoying them is enough. Instead some people
plunge themselves into irrelevant nonsense.
Your Name
<ga...@quadrant.com> wrote in message
news:1p31e51e6m10cb9ca...@4ax.com...
See what I mean. Apparently completely changing a show into a very different
show is "irrelevant nonsense". As I said, most people simply don't care -
they are not really "fans" at all. It's no wonder Hollyweird (and the comic
book industry) keeps getting away with such stupidity. :-\
Legend11
Ahh, now we descend into the "you're not a real fan at all!" part of the
argument, I wondered how long it would take you. I'm reminded of the
fiasco over the Star Trek movie all over again. Wait a minute, that's
because you're actually one of the dumb idiots who dragged out this
exact insult then too. Surprised? Not much.
For my amusement and entertainment (let's face it, we all need a purpose
in life...even you), please explain to me how you class someone who has
spent thousands on DVD's, collectables, props, travelling to conventions
(many abroad) and spends as much free time and expendable income as
possible surrounding themselves in the fandom of both Stargate and Star
Trek as "not a real fan at all"? Or considering (in the case of Star
Trek at least) that this accounts for way over half my life, how you can
class me as a "fly-by-nighter who quickly moves onto the next toy on the
block"? Or is it solely because I don't agree with your ridiculous
opinion regarding the naming of new shows? This I have to hear.
--
Legend11.
"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 17 of my spam emails to date.
Your Name
A franchise is MUCH more than simply it's name. A "fan" by the definition of
the word means the person like something because of the way it is. If people
are happy for idiots in Hollyweird to make changes and create something that
is very different and / or ill-fitting with what has already been establishd
within the franchise, then obviously they are not actually "fans" of that
franchise. You, for example, may well be a fan of sci-fi or spaceships,
etc., but not really "Star Trek".
Your Name
"Your Name" <your...@isp.com> wrote in message
news:hbqtht$v3n$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
Of course, here I'm using the name "fan" ... and we've already established
that the name of something is apparently completely irrelevant. :-\
ga...@quadrant.com
wrote:
No, what is irrelevant is bickering over nothing. Why would I poison
my blood arguing about how Hollywood or whoever names their shows?
Folks, this is just ENTERTAINMENT! Or do you seriously consider these
issues worthy of some kind of serious dispute and even call each other
names while at it?
I'm also a fan, but believe me, there's such thing as COMMON SENSE,
really!
Apparently, some fans just don't have one.
Jette Goldie
While "a good fanbase" is good, TPTB don't want "rabid fans" - they
want a high number of "viewers", who will watch regularly but not
b*tch about inconsistencies in the show on usenet!
--
Jette Goldie
jette....@gmail.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wolfette/
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://wolfette.livejournal.com/
("reply to" is spamblocked - use the email addy in sig)
Legend11
In the case of Star Trek, and increasingly Stargate, too, it was these
"rabid fans" who had the producers and writers running scared and living
in abject fear - scared to put a foot out of place for fear of offending
their increasingly precious sensibilities. I bet I know whose support
they would welcome between myself and Mr No Name. Not to mention he'd
probably soil his trousers at the money I've spent on something that
according to him I really don't care about (makes sense?) Not that I
would judge a fan's worth on a monetary score, as it is not my place to
- it's just a fair indication of what my hobby means to me. To me
someone who can't afford the DVD's and paraphernalia who sits around
waiting for re-runs on TV is no less of a fan. A fan is simply someone
who gains an exceptional and unusual amount of enjoyment out of their
particular interest. Period. No Name would have us believe you only fit
the criteria if you enjoy something on *his* terms. We Brits have a name
for people like that. Six letters, starts with 'W' and ends with 'R'.
The dictionary defines a fan simply as:
An ardent devotee; an enthusiast.
I guess No Name should apply for a job with the Dictionary people...he
seems to know better than them, let alone anyone here.
Legend11
By your definition anyone who enjoyed Deep Space Nine wasn't a true fan
of Star Trek. Sat around on a space station not boldly going where no
one had gone before? Doesn't sound like what had been "established
within the franchise" to me. Let alone using multi-season story arcs
instead of the rigid episodic formula. How dare they? No, DS9 fans are
no fans of Star Trek in your world.
Your Name
Deep Space Nine did (mostly) fit within the established Star Trek universe.
Enterprise did not thanks to glaring holes as Beavis & Butthead tried to
make a "non-Trek Trek show" ... a moronically stupid idea at best, and the
same as trying to do a "remake" / "reboot". The only difference between
Enterprise and Abrams Star Trek is that most fans disliked Enterprise while
they are happy to ignore the same sort of illfitting changes in Abrams
version simply because it is "good". Brains ar in short supply in the human
race. :-\
Your Name
"Jette Goldie" <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:hbrjvs$sdm$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> While "a good fanbase" is good, TPTB don't want "rabid fans" - they
> want a high number of "viewers", who will watch regularly but not
> b*tch about inconsistencies in the show on usenet!
TPTB don't give a damn about fans or the franchise. All they care baout is
stuffing their pockets with money.
Jette Goldie
Exactly - they're business men (and women). Fans go to conventions
and make a lot of noise, but there aren't *enough* of them (us) to
really make the ratings - for that a show depends on Joe Viewer, who
doesn't hang out on usenet, doesn't go to conventions, might buy the
odd bit of merchandise *if* it's sold in the stores he goes to but
probably won't go looking for it, and because he probably doesn't
watch every episode obsessively, mostly doesn't notice the odd
inconsistency.
Your Name
> Your Name wrote:
> > "Jette Goldie" <jgold...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > news:hbrjvs$sdm$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
> >> While "a good fanbase" is good, TPTB don't want "rabid fans" - they
> >> want a high number of "viewers", who will watch regularly but not
> >> b*tch about inconsistencies in the show on usenet!
> >
> > TPTB don't give a damn about fans or the franchise. All they care baout
is
> > stuffing their pockets with money.
>
> Exactly - they're business men (and women). Fans go to conventions
> and make a lot of noise, but there aren't *enough* of them (us) to
> really make the ratings - for that a show depends on Joe Viewer, who
> doesn't hang out on usenet, doesn't go to conventions, might buy the
> odd bit of merchandise *if* it's sold in the stores he goes to but
> probably won't go looking for it, and because he probably doesn't
> watch every episode obsessively, mostly doesn't notice the odd
> inconsistency.
That may be true for say "Enterprise", but anyone who thinks the original
Battlestar Galactica and Ron Moore's version (for example) are just an "odd
inconsistency" should probably have been "euthanised" at birth. :-\
Re-using the same name for a very different show is simply sheer idiocy.
Legend11
Yes, they had those wonderfully coloured uniforms and those shiny, shiny
com badges. Not to mention the cool phasers, huh? How cool were they? Cough!
> Enterprise did not thanks to glaring holes as Beavis & Butthead tried to
> make a "non-Trek Trek show" ... a moronically stupid idea at best, and the
> same as trying to do a "remake" / "reboot". The only difference between
> Enterprise and Abrams Star Trek is that most fans disliked Enterprise while
> they are happy to ignore the same sort of illfitting changes in Abrams
> version simply because it is "good". Brains ar in short supply in the human
> race. :-\
>
>
I'm not talking about ENT, or JJ's movie, I'm talking about DS9 - it was
a completely different formula and well you know it. It was on a space
station, it explored darker and riskier subject matters (religion and
war) and it employed a multi-season arc never before seen in the
franchise. Also, you're either too young or don't have a very good
memory if you don't remember *vast amounts* of the fan-base kicking off
to high heaven about all these "changes". In the end they accepted it as
Star Trek....because it was. A new take on Star Trek.
--
Legend11
Manchester United - Premiership Champions Three Times Running.
Your Name
Whatever ... yet another brainless waste of space on the Internet adde to
the killfile. :-\
Legend11
Obviously you know you're on a hiding to nothing with your ridiculous,
nonsensical argument. And considering not a single person here has
defended your argument, you must have some sense of intellectual
superiority to keep banging on with the "brainless" comments. When you
grow up, you just might learn that someone not agreeing with you doesn't
mean they're any less intelligent.
BTW, "whatever...I'm not going to talk to you any more" isn't the
greatest advertisement for this intellectual powerhouse you think your
brain is.
--
Legend11.
"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
TB
> The legendary Furlings show up.
>
> The Destiny's crew discovers that the galaxy they are currently in is
> about to turn into a quasar.
>
> The Destiny gets caught in a black hole.
>
> A Wrath mother ship shows up.
>
> The Destiny has a female android avatar, which Video game kid falls in
> love with.
>
> The crew de-evolves.
>
> The ship gets shattered into multiple time zones (as in Voyager
> "Shattered").
>
> Time windows appear, linking the ship to various Earth time zones. A
> crew member finds himself next to Hitler and accidentally saves him from
> a bomb (Red Dwarf).
>
> Crew members find themselves careering through parallel universes (TNG:
> Parallels, SG:Atlantis: Daedalus Variations, SG-1 Ripple Effect).
>
> The Destiny visits Earth's past (Voyager: Future's End, first two
> episodes of last season of ST: Enterprise, TOS: Tomorrow is Yesterday,
> TOS: City at the Edge of Forever, etc.).
Proposed plot: Destiny personnel set up an alcohol distillery. Scott
and Chloe protest the distillery violently, due to their experiences
with alcoholism.
TB
> Akira Norimaki wrote:
> > Tim Bruening wrote:
> >> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>
> > I would like to see SGA coming back, and I would like to see SGU shot to
> > hell.
>
> > No offense intended.
>
> Not for me. SG-1 was a great show and the only one to leave me wanting
> more (even after it went Farscape I still enjoyed it), which considering
> it was 10 seasons is testament to just how good a show that really was
> (for a camp and light hearted sci-fi show that is). SGA IMO was merely a
> decent show that perfectly ran its course, but without overstaying its
> welcome. Just enough, you might say.
>
> this franchise. Not to confuse dark with gritty, that is. As I'll bet
> you any money that the essence of SGU will be no way near as dark as
> BSG. I'm happy with how things are.
I bet that at some point, food will become so short on Destiny that
there will be talk of EATING Senator Armstrong!
TB
> In article <xfRym.7901$x61.1...@newsfe23.ams2>, "AC" <x...@xxx.xxx>
> wrote:
>
> > "Tim Bruening" <tsbru...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
> >news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
> > > What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>
> > never getting home. Or getting home but the process kills them all. All
> > that's left is the footage from the floating camera thing.
>
> > AC
>
> Ooo, ooo
>
> They all kill each other, and the floating camera captures it all for
> our repeated viewing enjoyment!
Were they infected by alcoholic water, as in Star Trek's "The Naked
Time", and Star Trek:TNG's "The Naked Now"?
Plot: The crew sets up a farm.
Jette Goldie
Was I imagining it, or when they were itemising their supplies, did I
see packets of seeds? I thought at the time they might solve their
air crisis by setting up a hydroponic garden (but it wouldn't have
been fast enough)
MoSn
(in article <hcafmg$3os$1...@news.eternal-september.org>):
> TB wrote:
>> On Oct 7, 6:31 am, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> In article <xfRym.7901$x61.1...@newsfe23.ams2>, "AC" <x...@xxx.xxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Tim Bruening" <tsbru...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
>>>> news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
>>>>> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>>>> Dunno about plots, but I'd like the series to end with them all dying and
>>>> never getting home. Or getting home but the process kills them all. All
>>>> that's left is the footage from the floating camera thing.
>>>> AC
>>> Ooo, ooo
>>>
>>> They all kill each other, and the floating camera captures it all for
>>> our repeated viewing enjoyment!
>>
>> Were they infected by alcoholic water, as in Star Trek's "The Naked
>> Time", and Star Trek:TNG's "The Naked Now"?
>>
>> Plot: The crew sets up a farm.
>
>
> Was I imagining it, or when they were itemising their supplies, did I
> see packets of seeds? I thought at the time they might solve their
> air crisis by setting up a hydroponic garden (but it wouldn't have
> been fast enough)
>
>
>
A garden of Eden?
QJ
(in article <0001HW.C70E4611...@news.x-privat.org>):
Check with Chung for an answer
MoSn
(in article <0001HW.C70E49EE...@news.x-privat.org>):
Is Chung an alien or the owner of a Chinese restaurant Chung King?
Jette Goldie
>
>> TB wrote:
>>> On Oct 7, 6:31 am, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> In article <xfRym.7901$x61.1...@newsfe23.ams2>, "AC" <x...@xxx.xxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Tim Bruening" <tsbru...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4AC9CD0B...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
>>>>>> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>>>>> Dunno about plots, but I'd like the series to end with them all dying and
>>>>> never getting home. Or getting home but the process kills them all. All
>>>>> that's left is the footage from the floating camera thing.
>>>>> AC
>>>> Ooo, ooo
>>>>
>>>> They all kill each other, and the floating camera captures it all for
>>>> our repeated viewing enjoyment!
>>> Were they infected by alcoholic water, as in Star Trek's "The Naked
>>> Time", and Star Trek:TNG's "The Naked Now"?
>>>
>>> Plot: The crew sets up a farm.
>>
>> Was I imagining it, or when they were itemising their supplies, did I
>> see packets of seeds? I thought at the time they might solve their
>> air crisis by setting up a hydroponic garden (but it wouldn't have
>> been fast enough)
>
>
I think it's called "let's introduce something and see if anyone spots
it later when we actually USE it".
Frank Frank
Aka Checkhov's Seeds?
Legend11
He'll be a bit smelly now, fella.
--
Legend11
Manchester United - Premiership Champions Three Times Running.
Jette Goldie
> TB wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 11:30 am, Legend11 <Slithee...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Akira Norimaki wrote:
>>>> Tim Bruening wrote:
>>>>> What plots would you like to see for SGU?
>>>> I would like to see SGA coming back, and I would like to see SGU
>>>> shot to
>>>> hell.
>>>> No offense intended.
>>> Not for me. SG-1 was a great show and the only one to leave me wanting
>>> more (even after it went Farscape I still enjoyed it), which considering
>>> it was 10 seasons is testament to just how good a show that really was
>>> (for a camp and light hearted sci-fi show that is). SGA IMO was merely a
>>> decent show that perfectly ran its course, but without overstaying its
>>> welcome. Just enough, you might say.
>>>
>>> IMO it really is time for something different and little more gritty in
>>> this franchise. Not to confuse dark with gritty, that is. As I'll bet
>>> you any money that the essence of SGU will be no way near as dark as
>>> BSG. I'm happy with how things are.
>>
>> I bet that at some point, food will become so short on Destiny that
>> there will be talk of EATING Senator Armstrong!
>
> He'll be a bit smelly now, fella.
>
Without air and exposed to vacuum, he'll be "freeze dried".
Legend11
Well now you've gone and convinced me. Put me down for a succulent
senator bum steak. LOL :D
--
12 days to save her life - help make a difference (As seen on ITN News)
http://www.justgiving.com/Sophie-appeal/
Tim Bruening
Legend11 wrote:
In the episode "Darkness", Destiny passed through the atmosphere of a gas
giant. Gas giant gases would have gotten into the leaky shuttle Armstrong died
on, and likely have smushed his body!
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds
<4AEBE866...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us>,
Tim Bruening
<tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
Not enough density, or it would have
smushed the shuttle