okay..

[Daredevil]

okay, who thought Stargate, the first movie where they go for the first time to another world through the gate, was better then the shows?

 

[Rowan]

Better vrs different...

I don't know if it was better, per se. It set the background for the show to follow and was critical, IMHO, to the framework of the show. But, to me, it's like trying to compare apples and oranges.

I like them both, each for their own reasons.

Rowan

 

[PTeppic]

I agree with Rowan. [As explained at length in the Technical forum...] The movie was devised in its own self-fulfilling, complete universe. The TV series has come along and expanded on that, filling in its own details to cover some of the gaps, creating new theories in some places, and in a couple re-writing the movie! [Hoping no one will notice ]

So they're both great: the movie is almost a pilot for the pilot, but DOES set the scene in a stand-alone way too. The series has expanded greatly: it wa sa bit slow to take off, but by series 2&3 was really getting going. Trouble is, by 5-6 its starting to lose steam, re-hashing plots and getting too far up its own behind. They need to go back to what the show does best, IMHO, working as a team, in a series of interwoven stand-alone and multi-episode arc stories, with lots of off-world.

 

[Anni]

Yeah, definitely have to go with Rowan's thoughts here. I like them both for completely different reasons, but without the movie, the show never would have existed in the first place.

 

[summershake]

Can I just say ditto to all of the above (and you all expressed it so much better than I ever could, too)?

I fell in love with the movie and fell in love with the TV show later on.

But you can't really compare a two-hour movie event with a series in it's seventh season.

So...I love them both.

 

[Hatshepsut]

Yes, all of the above goes pretty much for me, too. Love 'em both.

However... I do have to say that 'Stargate, the movie' does have one disadvantage over the T.V. series, and that's Colonel O'Neil's hair-do!

Though, of course, you could argue that this is balanced out by Sam's hair in season 4.

Best wishes,
Hatshepsut :wave:
--

 

[PTeppic]

Originally posted by Hatshepsut
However... I do have to say that 'Stargate, the movie' does have one disadvantage over the T.V. series, and that's Colonel O'Neil's hair-do!
Though, of course, you could argue that this is balanced out by Sam's hair in season 4.

And Teal'c's min-goatee thing at the same time...

 

[Anni]

Now now kiddies.........no more horror stories! I thought that the mini-goatee thingummybob was a nasty fungal infection when I first saw it.

Perhaps Sam could get her hair cut like Kurt Russell, that would make her into a roughie toughie soldier girl! She and Jack could have matching haircuts.



:evil: :evil:

 

[summershake]

Originally posted by Anni
Perhaps Sam could get her hair cut like Kurt Russell, that would make her into a roughie toughie soldier girl! She and Jack could have matching haircuts.



:evil: :evil:

Just give a girl some nightmares, why don't ya?

Well, since I like Daniel's shorter hair better than the wig that's another advantage of the series for me, too.

No, wait, I loved the wig in the movie, just prefer the short hair in the series.

God, all this hair-talk is bound to give me a migraine....

 

[Arc_Angel]

I actually didn't like the movie that much, thought it was okay. It was my dad who got me into the series, just told me that they were showing a series based on the film and I thought I'd watch it and I got hooked (thankyou dad!)

 

[Anni]

There was a wig in the movie? How in hell did I miss that?

Who wore the wig?

 

[summershake]

ROTFLMAO!!!

OHMIGOD! Can I blame it on too much coffee? Lack of chocolate?

Okay, I'm just plain stupid and my fingers are faster than my brain is these days. Although it was never very fast to begin with.

*murmurs* Where did I put my damn dictionary again?

But I guess you still got what I wanted to say, Anni.
Or maybe not.
Or others got it?
Then again maybe not either.
And I can't believe it I'm giving myself nightmares of Daniel with a blond wig.
And I really think I shouldn't have more coffee and I really think I should stop typing and I really *thump*

---- Kids, don't try that at home. It's what too much coffee does to you!

 

[Krystal]

I have to agree with Rowan, I like both. And the movie was the one that got me into the series and definitely was hooked specially when I see that they maintain much of the things we see in the movie. So for me it was a plus. But definitely the series have go beyond and extend the movie portray of the story. So I love that too.

Krystal

 

[Anni]

HEE!!!!

Daniel in a blond wig! :reyes: :dead:

I think you mistook him for one of those horse/camel shaped things!!! What were they called again?

:evil: :evil: :evil:

 

[Rik_the_Riff]

The big furry Yak things? I don't remember them having a name in the film (I just call them big furry Yak things, wich most people seem to understand )

I'd have to say I think the TV show vastly outclasses the film (it doesn't help that I've only seen the film on a grotty old video tape). Mostly, I didn't like how hapless they made Daniel, nor was the O'Neill in the movie sarcastic/funny enough. TV show for me any day of the week (in fact, every day of the week on Sky 1 in the UK )

Rik

 

[PTeppic]

Originally posted by Rik_the_Riff
The big furry Yak things? I don't remember them having a name in the film (I just call them big furry Yak things, wich most people seem to understand )

Mastadge (sp?)

Would have been named in production material, same as the town being named "Nagada" in the script/production notes, but never actually mentioned until COTG.

 

[summershake]

Originally posted by Anni
HEE!!!!

Daniel in a blond wig! :reyes: :dead:

I think you mistook him for one of those horse/camel shaped things!!! What were they called again?

:evil: :evil: :evil:

ROTFLMAO

Yeah, that must be it!

And I looked it up: Shag was what I meant. But I have to admit that the wig image I gave myself is much more amusing.

 

[carkedit]

Though, of course, you could argue that this is balanced out by Sam's hair in season 4.

Best wishes,
Hatshepsut :wave:
-- [/B]

what waaaas she thinking back then??

Carkedit :dead:

 

[captaincarter]

i think the movie is toatally boring!:angryfire

 

[Anni]

Mastadge, that sounds about right!

And..........the film wasn't totally boring at all. It was the forerunner for the series. If the movie hadn't existed then nobody would be on this list obsessing about the bloody show!

It never ceases to amaze me that people make such a difference between the movie and the show. Yes they were made by different folk, but the characters were introduced in the movie. There are many things about it that the show hasn't ever come close to reproducing. The sense of evil, menace and power when Ra's guards were stalking Jack's men through the pyramid. The utter evil and repellent beauty conveyed by Jaye Davidson as Ra. None of the System Lords, save Yu, Cronus and Baal have achieved anything near Jaye's portrayal.

Kurt Russell played Jack exactly as a battle hardened, practically suicidal special ops veteran, despairing over the death of his son should have been played. Someone going through that wouldn't have been the wisecracking, emotionally clumsy Jack that RDA portrays. Yes, by the timeline in the the beginning of the show, he would have been gradually coming to terms with his PTSD and his grief so there would have been a personality change, but to make such a difference between the movie and the show is, in my opinion, completely irrelevant. One follows on from the other, end of story. Personally I thought there was a seamless change of Daniels from James Spader to Michael Shanks.

The movie was anything but boring, however I can see that perhaps young people with their 'I want it now because my attention span will slip in another nanosecond' attitude might not have the ability to sit through the odd 90 minutes of intelligent screenplay. They certainly wouldn't be able to without a few explosions, endless shootouts and perhaps a gratuitous sex scene or two. I've come to the conclusion that to make a movie work these days, meaningful dialogue is the least consideration of the movie makers!

This is not aimed at anyone in particular. Just a general comment and my observations, so don't all jump out of your skins.



:evil: