bluesquirrel2004
10 years since the final episode, and 20 years since the first episode, and I finally watched the series in it's entirety. Although I had previously seen upto Season 7 from previous viewings (TV or DVD purchase) I never did see Seasons 8-10 and the two TV Movies.Wow, 20 years later, and the story lines, the scenery, costumes and the general feel of the show still have a current day feel to it. Certainly does not feel like a 20 year old show. It certainly helps that all the episodes I have are in the 16:9 TV format. Unlike Star Trek TNG (which I tried to watch immediately before SG-1) and three episodes in I was already cringing and rolling my eyes.A show well done! The cast dynamics were critical in it's success. For me, the standout was Richard Dean Anderson and Amanda Tapping. And that is why I felt Seasons 9 & 10 stumbled a bit.. maybe a 7 rating for those two seasons, instead of the overall 9 rating.We haven't had a worthy, long running sci-fi show since... what a shame.
ryaning
During my teenage years I was a huge fan of SG-1, making sure to catch every episode and I loved to fantasize about being a member of the team. Fast-forward 10+ years later, and the show doesn't look nearly as impressive.I have since seen Star Trek: TOS, TNG and DS9, as well as Babylon 5, Farscape and countless other sci-fi shows. The bottom line is that SG-1 blatantly steals from other (much better) shows and simplifies the concepts behind them to an insulting degree. It also tends to suck the fun of out these ideas, with most scenes consisting of characters standing around in a bland gray room talking.More importantly, many of these episodes seem to run together, especially the season premieres and finales which are "the world is doomed unless SG-1 can save the day from some one-dimensional villain" every time.Furthermore, even Star Trek never got as irritatingly preachy as SG-1 gets. The main characters are completely hypocritical, lecturing aliens for doing things that they would probably due if they were in the same situation, and have sometimes actually even done in previous episodes.They make snap judgments before knowing all the facts, all of course based on "infallible" 20th century liberalism, ideals which naturally apply to everyone in the galaxy. This is moral imperialism and American arrogance at their worst.In the end, there are far better shows out there. I recommend Farscape.
jrgerken
I created this account only to address the three main complaints the SG-1 naysayers, haters, and otherwise completely ignorant individuals and their raucous babbling keep griping about. Most, if not all, of the negative reviews are composed by those who have only a residual amount of higher-order thinking. With that said, critical thought for these poor souls is a sort of brownish-yellow after-birth, useless; base; and pitiful. So, lets get down to brass tacks, separate the wheat from the chaff, and yolk this contemptuous beast of non-sense. I took the liberty of quoting three "prolific" authors in order to showcase, in their own words, how ill-founded and otherwise illogical their reviews really are.MAIN COMPLAINT #1: "How is it that everyone can understand each other perfectly without devices like universal translators or translator microbes? Did the creators of this show realize that people who were taken from different parts of the earth, in different time frames (Attilla the Hun wasn't a contemporary of preliterate Hellenic cultures, nor were the Vikings contemporary to the Pyramid builders) speak different languages and can never develop a language so similar to modern day English(except for the inflections they "do not" use), which has been influenced by Latin, ancient Greek, Danish and French?" - Aaron DriessenRETORT #1: Given the average episode length of roughly 44-45 minutes, having to establish new methods of communication every time the SG-1 team encounters a new race would consume significant portions of time, time better spent establishing and adding to the plot. The creators do acknowledge, several times through character dialogue in-fact, that different human cultures have been taken at different times throughout the course of earth's history. Dr. Jackson, the linguist, frequently comments on the language differences, as well as pointing out many root words that have similarities to Latin, Greek, and Mongolian. Also, the Hellenistic cultures were not pre-literate, they were arguably one of the most influential cultures in terms of advancing mathematics, astronomy, philosophy, and literature. MAIN COMPLAINT #2: "What bothers me the most, is that the show was shot in Canada. I know it's cheaper, but they should have shot it in California, so we could have had scenes in the desert. That would have been more true to the movie. The first scene where they are outside in another world is in the mountains, with lots of pine trees where it looks cold. That does'nt feel very Egyptian. What worked so well in the movie was that it felt like you were in the ancient Egypt. Here it feels like they're running around fighting aliens in a Canadian forest. And it's so lame that apparently, on other planets, the fall comes as well. You can see leaves on the ground in the forests that all look like forests outside Vancouver. It just makes the show even more unbelievable and dumb." - krycek19RETORT #2: Krycek, you are either incredibly stupid, or possess an impressively short attention span. The episode you're referring to is the pilot, where the team travels to the planet "Abados", a desert planet, where they meet up with Daniel Jackson and subsequently Skaara is taken by Apophis. Unfortunately, you must have been playing with yourself when they left Abados to travel to Chulak, an entirely different planet, where yes, evergreens along with a different climate exist. Furthermore, why would you argue against fall existing on another planet?! It's a completely logical assumption that, due to the axial tilt of the planet, certain hemispheres could easily experience what we call "fall". Krycek, I advise you stick to shows that require minimal effort on your part, like Bad Girls Club or Pawn Stars. MAIN COMPLAINT #3: "I have to admit that my review is based only on the first half of the first season… Who said that all planets should have a breathable atmosphere? How come all the "military" personnel, besides saying sir, do not behave like, or take any decision like a military man would? How come they are so reluctant to use advanced "alien" weapons, which are scattered everywhere because the race that conquered hundreds of planets cannot hit four poorly trained and armored soldiers." - Andrei ARETORT #3: Since you didn't watch the whole show, you missed out on the numerous occasions in which the SG-1 team encounter atmospheres and climates that are not breathable, in fact there is one where they almost die from narcoleptic induced sleep by a hostile airborne bacteria. This is why writing a review on something without knowing anything about it makes you look like an ass. Concerning your military question, how would YOU have them act then? Are you some military expert? Furthermore, it's a show for TV, of course not everything is going to be entirely realistic, so unclench your butt-hole and enjoy the show for what it is, space exploration, not military imperialism. They are neither reluctant to use advanced alien weapons and technology. Again, countless times throughout the show, they request to use, borrow, and have many different technologies encountered throughout the series. In fact, the whole point of SG-1 is to discover new cultures and acquire new knowledge and technologies for Earth, so your question is entirely irrelevant.
