Stairgate: Universe

Rot your brains, then rot our boards

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Tue May 11, 2010 7:55 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:If they had done the deed, wouldn't that technically be rape against Camille?
Not in the context of the show. Remember that Camille herself had sex with her girlfriend once, when she was back on Earth in someone else's body. So presumably she understands that the reverse might also happen on occasion.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
EdgarJPublius
Official Propagandi.... Nifty Poster Guy
Posts: 3715
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: where the wind takes me

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby EdgarJPublius » Tue May 11, 2010 8:30 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
SlyReaper wrote:If they had done the deed, wouldn't that technically be rape against Camille?
Not in the context of the show. Remember that Camille herself had sex with her girlfriend once, when she was back on Earth in someone else's body. So presumably she understands that the reverse might also happen on occasion.

I don't think 'well you did it too' is a valid defense against a rape charge...
Roosevelt wrote:
I wrote:Does Space Teddy Roosevelt wrestle Space Bears and fight the Space Spanish-American War with his band of Space-volunteers the Space Rough Riders?

Yes.

-still unaware of the origin and meaning of his own user-title

User avatar
Alder
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:20 am UTC
Location: Scotland

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Alder » Tue May 11, 2010 8:55 pm UTC

Basically: it depends on how deep into the show you are.

If all you do is watch what's on the TV, then the whole 'sex-in-someone-else's body' thing is particularly murky, since there's nothing said onscreen about what people are technically allowed to do with the other person's body during a swap. (The Camille thing itself is also murky, since some folk think she *did* sleep with her partner [in the episode 'Life'?], but some folk don't think it's clear that that happened. Then you have Chloe in the same episode getting steaming drunk, and Young definitely having sex with his wife while in Telford's body.)

However! If you're a huge fan and watch the 'kinosodes' that have been released online (which as it happens, I don't!) there's apparently one that deals with the 'ethics' of the stones and says that anyone who is involved in the swaps signs a release form, so the Destiny crew can do what they want with their borrowed bodies.

Note: I think the kinosodes are something of a copout. I don't mind wee extras for the fans, but if basic premises of your TV show can't be fully understood by folk watching the show, I think you need to re-write your script, not plug the plot-holes via the internet. But that's just me.
Plasma Man wrote:I might have to get rid of some of my breadbins.

Kulantan wrote:I feel a great disturbance in the Fora, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and then kinda trailed off to a grumble.

User avatar
ArgonV
Posts: 1792
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:08 pm UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby ArgonV » Tue May 11, 2010 10:19 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:If they had done the deed, wouldn't that technically be rape against Camille?


Not sure. But how about Camille and her wife kissing? That'd be harassment then, right?

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Princess Marzipan » Wed May 12, 2010 2:09 am UTC

SlyReaper wrote:If they had done the deed, wouldn't that technically be rape against Camille?
Yes...although Camille's not innocent in that regard. Reciprocity is as good as we'll get; doesn't exactly seem as if the show is keen to actually examine the ethical questions raised by the actions the characters are taking. Because that's something science fiction would do.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Wed May 12, 2010 2:37 am UTC

EdgarJPublius wrote:I don't think 'well you did it too' is a valid defense against a rape charge...
It's a valid point to bring up when trying to demonstrate that everyone who uses the stones knows what they're getting into. In other words, I don't think you need to be very deep into the show and watch the webisodes or whatever to see that Camille is probably giving tacit permission to the person using her body to have sex with it, since it's heavily suggested that she did the same thing in someone else's body in an earlier episode.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
EdgarJPublius
Official Propagandi.... Nifty Poster Guy
Posts: 3715
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: where the wind takes me

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby EdgarJPublius » Wed May 12, 2010 7:18 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
EdgarJPublius wrote:I don't think 'well you did it too' is a valid defense against a rape charge...
It's a valid point to bring up when trying to demonstrate that everyone who uses the stones knows what they're getting into. In other words, I don't think you need to be very deep into the show and watch the webisodes or whatever to see that Camille is probably giving tacit permission to the person using her body to have sex with it, since it's heavily suggested that she did the same thing in someone else's body in an earlier episode.


I'm not watching the webisodes (Which I guess says something about how little this show has encouraged me to get involved in it's back story. If SGU were just about any other show I watch regularly, I would be eagerly consuming all additional media regarding the show).

And anyway, it seems to me that this is something that should have been cleared up on-air, they could have taken all of thirty seconds to show someone signing a waver before using the stones. Instead, none of the writers actually thought about the lazy cop-out they were employing enough to realize there were actually profound ethical ramifications until it was too late to cover them up within the show so they had to cram an explanation into a webisode.

Really, the ethical questions brought up when the stones are used is just about the only interesting story aspect of them, so if they're just going to whitewash that, why even have the stones in the first place?
Roosevelt wrote:
I wrote:Does Space Teddy Roosevelt wrestle Space Bears and fight the Space Spanish-American War with his band of Space-volunteers the Space Rough Riders?

Yes.

-still unaware of the origin and meaning of his own user-title

User avatar
psyEDk
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 5:42 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby psyEDk » Wed May 12, 2010 8:09 am UTC

Alder wrote:Basically: it depends on how deep into the show you are.

..

However! If you're a huge fan and watch the 'kinosodes' that have been released online (which as it happens, I don't!) there's apparently one that deals with the 'ethics' of the stones and says that anyone who is involved in the swaps signs a release form, so the Destiny crew can do what they want with their borrowed bodies.

Note: I think the kinosodes are something of a copout. I don't mind wee extras for the fans, but if basic premises of your TV show can't be fully understood by folk watching the show, I think you need to re-write your script, not plug the plot-holes via the internet. But that's just me.


I wasn't aware of these Kinosodes, they sound like a great idea!
Naturally the internet is where the pickier of viewers will discuss the episodes and ponder the plot irregularities and deeper workings of the shows universe, so why not release small online episodes to attend to the points raised.

You're right that this kind of thing should be in the show in the first place, especially given that SG:U is on SyFy (or does that explain why they're not?), but to cater to a wider audience i've noticed their recent productions skipping over non-critical plot elements like this 'ethics of the stones' point to keep the action moving.
psy/OPs :.
Soundcloud - Facebook - Twitter
¯ Project 2501

Chen
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Chen » Wed May 12, 2010 12:21 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:If they had done the deed, wouldn't that technically be rape against Camille?


If it was something commonplace (the whole switching bodies thing) I'd imagine there'd be some provisions put into the laws with regard to it. I mean something like assault which would harm the person's body would be criminal but things like harassment would probably tend to be applied to the mind rather than the body. Assuming no pregnancy or STDs sex with someone's body when their mind wasn't there (and someone else's was) to me wouldn't be considered rape, unless the sex did some sort of damage to said body.

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Sockmonkey » Wed May 12, 2010 8:55 pm UTC

If you didn't get consent before the switch then it's still rape. Think of it this way: If someone drugs you and has sex with you it's still rape even though you aren't conciously aware of it. It's still your body, part of you, and it happened.
People who get their houses robbed generally aren't there when it happens either but they still feel violated.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Wed May 12, 2010 9:42 pm UTC

Sockmonkey wrote:If someone drugs you and has sex with you it's still rape even though you aren't conciously aware of it.
Sure, that's really not at all analogous to a situation where you voluntarily give someone else the temporary use of your body and they decide to have sex with it during that time in a way that doesn't leave any lasting damage when you're back in it. Would masturbating in someone else's body also be rape in your estimation? After all, it's someone else using your body sexually when you're not in control of it, right?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Pez Dispens3r
is not a stick figure.
Posts: 2079
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:08 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Pez Dispens3r » Thu May 13, 2010 1:04 am UTC

Yeah, it seems a bit iffy to me. Do you own your body when your mind is in somebody else's? I mean, if someone is having sex in your old body, it's not like you're undergoing the psychological torment that is rape. But, then, I don't know how I'd react if I got my body back and found a condom had accidentally been left inside me. Though I still don't think that would compare to the experience of having been raped.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:I feel like you're probably an ocelot, and I feel like I want to eat you. Feeling is fun!
this isn't my cow

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Princess Marzipan » Thu May 13, 2010 2:22 am UTC

psyEDk wrote:You're right that this kind of thing should be in the show in the first place, especially given that SG:U is on SyFy (or does that explain why they're not?), but to cater to a wider audience i've noticed their recent productions skipping over non-critical plot elements like this 'ethics of the stones' point to keep the action moving.
Uhhhh what action?
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
EdgarJPublius
Official Propagandi.... Nifty Poster Guy
Posts: 3715
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: where the wind takes me

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby EdgarJPublius » Thu May 13, 2010 4:00 am UTC

Pez Dispens3r wrote: But, then, I don't know how I'd react if I got my body back and found a condom had accidentally been left inside me.


Or y'know, a fertilized egg, or an STD.
Roosevelt wrote:
I wrote:Does Space Teddy Roosevelt wrestle Space Bears and fight the Space Spanish-American War with his band of Space-volunteers the Space Rough Riders?

Yes.

-still unaware of the origin and meaning of his own user-title

Chen
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Chen » Thu May 13, 2010 12:15 pm UTC

Sockmonkey wrote:If you didn't get consent before the switch then it's still rape. Think of it this way: If someone drugs you and has sex with you it's still rape even though you aren't conciously aware of it. It's still your body, part of you, and it happened.
People who get their houses robbed generally aren't there when it happens either but they still feel violated.


Again, assuming no damage to the body (which would fall under other crimes), it'd be more akin to having sex with someone's blow-up doll. I mean whats the actual crime if I lend something to someone and tell them "you can't do X with it" and they end up doing X with it? Like if I lend you my car and tell you not to take it on the highway, but you do (with no damage or anything)? Is that even a crime?

User avatar
thecommabandit
Posts: 1884
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:25 pm UTC
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby thecommabandit » Thu May 13, 2010 2:56 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
Sockmonkey wrote:If you didn't get consent before the switch then it's still rape. Think of it this way: If someone drugs you and has sex with you it's still rape even though you aren't conciously aware of it. It's still your body, part of you, and it happened.
People who get their houses robbed generally aren't there when it happens either but they still feel violated.


Again, assuming no damage to the body (which would fall under other crimes), it'd be more akin to having sex with someone's blow-up doll. I mean whats the actual crime if I lend something to someone and tell them "you can't do X with it" and they end up doing X with it? Like if I lend you my car and tell you not to take it on the highway, but you do (with no damage or anything)? Is that even a crime?

While it's not a crime in law, it would be a violation of trust. And your analogy doesn't really capture the severity of the situation. You live in your body. Most (if not all) of the time. If you let someone stay in your house while you were gone for a few weeks, then come back to see they've changed something; redecorated your front room or thrown out a bunch of sentimentally important stuff. What's your reaction? Now imagine you're barely paying rent/mortgage and utilities and can't afford to fix the damage or move. That's a slightly more accurate analogy.
Image

Chen
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Chen » Thu May 13, 2010 4:35 pm UTC

thecommabandit wrote:While it's not a crime in law, it would be a violation of trust. And your analogy doesn't really capture the severity of the situation. You live in your body. Most (if not all) of the time. If you let someone stay in your house while you were gone for a few weeks, then come back to see they've changed something; redecorated your front room or thrown out a bunch of sentimentally important stuff. What's your reaction? Now imagine you're barely paying rent/mortgage and utilities and can't afford to fix the damage or move. That's a slightly more accurate analogy.


Sure I can accept that analogy. My point was that "sex while your mind is in someone else's body" should not be considered anywhere near the severity of rape. Similarly to how the above analogy is not as severe as say trespassing or burglary . A breach of trust perhaps, depending on what types of limitations you had imposed (or implicitly imposed) when the body swap occurred but I doubt I'd consider it a crime.

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Sockmonkey » Thu May 13, 2010 4:39 pm UTC

So if I consent to let a surgeon remove my appendix and he has buttsex with my unconcious body before he does it it's "ok" because I consented to be rendered unconcious and be cut open? I think not.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Thu May 13, 2010 4:58 pm UTC

Sockmonkey wrote:So if I consent to let a surgeon remove my appendix and he has buttsex with my unconcious body before he does it it's "ok" because I consented to be rendered unconcious and be cut open? I think not.
No, fucking of course not. But how is that remotely the same as granting someone else full use of your body while you inhabit theirs? I ask again, would it be wrong to masturbate in someone else's body?

And the house analogy is fine as far as breach of trust goes, but positing that you don't have the money to fix the damage is wrong, because you're responding to a hypothetical where there *is* no damage to the body. If there is, then obviously that's a different and more serious situation.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Chen
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Chen » Thu May 13, 2010 5:06 pm UTC

Sockmonkey wrote:So if I consent to let a surgeon remove my appendix and he has buttsex with my unconcious body before he does it it's "ok" because I consented to be rendered unconcious and be cut open? I think not.


No the difference lies in the fact that YOU (you mind or consciousness or whatever) is still in your body at that point. In the mind swap case you've already given your body to the other person to use. I mean you wouldn't say that scratching an itch in the borrowed body would be assault would you? Sure consequences of sex could lead to problems. And said things would generally be considered under assault, or maybe damage of property. Still at the point where you can just give your body to someone else, it loses any "special" quality it has and just becomes another object like a car or power tool. I'd attribute rights to the mind in this case rather than to the body or to both.

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Sockmonkey » Thu May 13, 2010 6:09 pm UTC

Just because you let someone walk around and talk to people in your body does not mean you gave them permission to have sex in it or that you have given up all rights regarding it. That's the point I'm trying to make.

The unconciousness analogy is perfectly valid since it involves something happening to your body that you are not initially aware of.

Just another tool? I think you underestimate how attached the average person is to their own body.

Chen
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Chen » Thu May 13, 2010 6:23 pm UTC

Sockmonkey wrote:Just another tool? I think you underestimate how attached the average person is to their own body.


Uh because there's no way to take yourself out of your body? I said its just another tool with the understanding that was in a universe where body swapping was available (and ostensibly not too uncommon for there to have to be laws/rules about it).

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Sockmonkey » Thu May 13, 2010 6:44 pm UTC

Ah, I didn't know you were still coming from the premise of it being common like changing clothes.

From what I've seen on the show and the previous series it's not an actual body swap. It's more like assuming wireless controll of each other's bodies so if you got hit by a car while switched you would go back to your own body and they would be dead. You do still need to trust them not to get you killed.
I suppose you wouldn't care as much if it were a true swap.

Chen
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Chen » Thu May 13, 2010 7:03 pm UTC

Sockmonkey wrote:From what I've seen on the show and the previous series it's not an actual body swap. It's more like assuming wireless controll of each other's bodies so if you got hit by a car while switched you would go back to your own body and they would be dead. You do still need to trust them not to get you killed.
I suppose you wouldn't care as much if it were a true swap.


Is that actually the case? When Vala and Daniel went to the Ori galaxy, it seemed to me like THEY were the ones dying (even though it was in the bodies of the local people). I don't recall if that was the same device or not though. I was kind of curious actually as to what would happen if you died while swapped but I don't think they've really showed it.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Princess Marzipan » Thu May 13, 2010 7:58 pm UTC

Vala and who?
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Sockmonkey » Thu May 13, 2010 8:12 pm UTC

I'm pretty sure the connection was broken because the host bodies were killed. Allthough that didn't seem to be the typical swap anyway since the other two weren't awake in their bodies at the same time. The fact that Their real bodies were being affected by the stresses they experienced while swapped suggests a constant connection. My guess would be that the exchange was flawed or incomplete in some way. Could have been the devices Daniel and Vala were wearing at the time I suppose.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Thu May 13, 2010 9:02 pm UTC

Sockmonkey wrote:if you got hit by a car while switched you would go back to your own body and they would be dead. You do still need to trust them not to get you killed.
I suppose you wouldn't care as much if it were a true swap.
In addition to Vala and DanielJackson providing evidence against this, there's the fact that the Earth folks abandoned ship (by switching back to their bodies) once in SGU when they had been there to make sure the folks on the ship did what they wanted. I don't remember the details, but I remember that they chickened out and went back to their safe original bodies on Earth when things started to look bad on Destiny. Which suggests that it would have been bad for them if they were still occupying the bodies on the ship, which suggests that for all intents and purposes it is indeed a true swap.

(But in any case, there's no effective different between wireless control and a "true" swap except when one of the bodies dies. And since we're positing here that there is no lasting damage done to the body, there is no relevant difference between wireless control and a "true" swap, either.)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Sockmonkey » Fri May 14, 2010 5:44 am UTC

The V&D swap wasn't typical so it's of limited use as an example.

As for the chickens, was it chickening out or just them leaving because everyone was going to die and there was nothing they could do so why stick around to watch the screaming?
If we assume they left because they thought there was some risk there is no way to know if it was actually dangerous or if they were just being cautious.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Sat May 15, 2010 1:40 am UTC

Even first-graders know that the way to take care of lice is to have someone just check everyone in the whole class all at once. But apparently these fuckers never think the same thing might be a good idea with space ticks...
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Xeio » Sat May 15, 2010 7:05 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:If they had done the deed, wouldn't that technically be rape against Camille?
Wait, so you're saying that every time people switched bodies (and proceeded to have sex), it was rape?...

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Zorlin » Sun May 16, 2010 7:04 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Even first-graders know that the way to take care of lice is to have someone just check everyone in the whole class all at once. But apparently these fuckers never think the same thing might be a good idea with space ticks...

argh argh argh this-this-so-much-this.
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Sat May 22, 2010 1:04 am UTC

Well O'Neill's in this one, so maybe it'll kind of be good for once?

Edit: As the first episode in rather a long time that actually acknowledges the rest of the Stargate world this takes place in, I'm finding it not bad for once. Could have done with all the episodes that weren't the first or last three episodes in the season, though...
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sat May 22, 2010 4:58 am UTC

Yeah, what the fuck...this was, uh...this one was enjoyable and I find myself looking forward to next week's.

They did a great of actually setting up a plotline for the episode, while still weaving threads from various previous episodes in such that they all came together coherently.

Looking at the episode list on Wikipedia, the writer/director team for the finale is the same two people from "Space", the one with the aliens - which I remember enjoying. Things are looking up?
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
sarahnade
Sexiest Man on the Forum
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:00 am UTC
Location: right under your nose
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby sarahnade » Sat May 22, 2010 5:34 am UTC

I don't get it. It's proof they know what Stargate's supposed to be, but have just decided not to do it that way, save a few good episodes.

I also appreciated that there was minimal baby drama. I mean, they had the one scene of the baby shower and a crying scene. But I guess it makes sense to show, "Look, there's going to be a baby. Born in space. It's kind of a big deal." I'm just glad it... HOLY CHEEZEBALLS! GUYS! I know why that episode didn't suck!

There was no. musical. montage.

SWEET MUSTACHE!
Image

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby SlyReaper » Sat May 22, 2010 12:30 pm UTC

You'd think the Scottish accent would be more of a giveaway than the lack of secret code.
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7572
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby phlip » Sat May 22, 2010 12:41 pm UTC

I think the change of face and voice are supposed to be for our benefit - to everyone on Earth, Rush would have looked and sounded exactly like Telford.

Spoiler:
One thing I loved about this episode was the massive twist ending... In the opening, it's revealed that Rush really did have his dream, he's not potentially making it up. Then, after the people in charge talk about how they don't know if Telford or Rush is the mole, after Rush is captured he claims to be the real mole, making it seem almost plausible that he is, and the possibility is kept up for almost double-digits of seconds before being shot down by the very next line. And then at the end, it turns out Telford is the mole after all. I never saw it coming.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby SlyReaper » Sat May 22, 2010 12:58 pm UTC

Except an accent is dependant on your mind rather than your body. It would make sense that accents get transferred over the communication stones.
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Sat May 22, 2010 2:01 pm UTC

phlip wrote:
Spoiler:
One thing I loved about this episode was the massive twist ending...And then at the end, it turns out Telford is the mole after all. I never saw it coming.
Never saw it coming? It was only in doubt at all for a couple of minutes here and there.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
sarahnade
Sexiest Man on the Forum
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:00 am UTC
Location: right under your nose
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby sarahnade » Sat May 22, 2010 2:39 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:Except an accent is dependant on your mind rather than your body. It would make sense that accents get transferred over the communication stones.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Although, I'm willing to look over that idea because the rest of the episode was so watchable and interesting.
Image

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Stargate: Universe

Postby gmalivuk » Sat May 22, 2010 2:46 pm UTC

sarahnade wrote:the rest of the episode was so watchable
Hehe, which is as ringing an endorsement as when Budweiser (I think?) goes on about "drinkability" in their commercials. :-)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)


Return to “Movies and TV Shows”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests