quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I just finished Window of Opportunity, which might be my all time favorite episode.
I hit Window shortly before Shabbos. (Watched it and half of the commentary; had to stop to finish getting ready for Shabbos.)
I'm about to head over to my parents' place for game night (my brother is in town), but I know what I'll be doing when I get home. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think I've ever watched the Stargate commentaries, which is odd because I love DVD commentary. On the whole, is it pretty good?
I just started S5, descending on the dark and hopeless road to Ragnarok (otherwise known as Season 6).
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I don't think I've ever watched the Stargate commentaries
!!!
How else would one know all the funny and amusing backstory stuff?
There are none on S1, S2, S3. After that, watch all the ones with Peter DeLuise with someone (pretty much anyone) else. He's hilarious, but when it's just him talking to himself, it gets rather tedious. Martin Wood is not as good, but is sometimes interesting. Any of the ones with the actors are usually good. Skip ones that have none of the above unless you're really into technical details.
As for S6, I happen to like most of that season. I like Daniel quite a lot, but I liked Jonas too. I never felt it was a loyalty thing either -- Shanks made the choice to leave. (And the choice to come back, as well.)
Anyway, the whole season would be worth it for Abyss alone. That episode is brilliant, in so many ways. Other great S6 episodes: The Other Guys and The Changeling. Many of the rest are quite good as well.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why did Michael Shanks leave in the first place? Did he come back because of a failure to find new work?
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jeff C.: Why did Michael Shanks leave in the first place?
I don't think he's ever made a definitive statement (lots of interviews with vague reasons), but the usual story I've heard is that he was tired of the smaller and smaller bits he was getting.
quote:Originally posted by Jeff C.: Did he come back because of a failure to find new work?
I suspect it had more to do with the fact that the fan demands to bring him back encouraged the producers to offer Shanks more money. And that he got them to agree to give him meatier parts.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Skip ones that have none of the above
Oh, oh! Almost forgot. Except if it has Mallozzi & Mullie. They're not only an awesome writing team, they do great commentaries too.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just started S6. I think I'm going to finish this season and then go back to where the commentary started and rewatch them, then I'll watch it concurrently afterwards.
I read that on one disc, they make up lyrics to the theme music.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just started Season 9. Broke my pledge to go back and watch the commentaries, but I have watched a couple here and there, and starting with Season 9 I'll watch them all. Very informative. The ones with the actors are the best, especially Claudia Black because she's just delightful.
I had no idea that Season 9 was actually supposed to be the pilot of a whole new show, Stargate Command. I wonder what the plot was supposed to be if it didn't involve SG1.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
I do support Israel's right to defend itself against belligerents who openly declare they will destroy them. I also recognize we have a formal agreement with Israel to assist them if they need our help. But if our country has already spent out purse elsewhere, how can we keep this commitment if it does come to war?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Without us, Israel simply would not exist...but our help to them isn't a suicide pact. Just because they want to attack Iran doesn't mean we help them out. We've paid a heavy price for our support of Israel over the years, and it's a price that by and large I think was well worth it, from a moral as well as strategic point of view.
But attacking Iran is a whole different kettle of fish, and I'm not in favor. Israel simply doesn't have the capability to attack Iran, not without a minor miracle happening, and even then, their weapons are unlikely to fully destroy Iran's nuclear facilities without us supplying them with far more powerful weapons that even then might not totally do the trick. And then the cat's out of the bag. All the while, world oil prices will blast out of control, despite the fact that Iran's total output actually isn't a huge percentage of worldwide production.
I'm fine with giving sanctions more time to work.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I do support Israel's right to defend itself against belligerents who openly declare they will destroy them.
Well, more specifically, there's a number of ways this could shake out, there's self-defence if Iran really attacks Israel first. There's coming to the aid of an ally if Israel attacks Iran, Iran retaliates in self-defence, and the US joins in. There's pre-emptive war on your own behalf, the case having been made for that by President Bush. And then there's pre-emptive war on behalf of someone else, if it is the case that the US attacks first on Israel's behalf.
I guess we'll see which one this turns out to be.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I do support Israel's right to defend itself against belligerents who openly declare they will destroy them.
Well, more specifically, there's a number of ways this could shake out, there's self-defence if Iran really attacks Israel first. There's coming to the aid of an ally if Israel attacks Iran, Iran retaliates in self-defence, and the US joins in. There's pre-emptive war on your own behalf, the case having been made for that by President Bush. And then there's pre-emptive war on behalf of someone else, if it is the case that the US attacks first on Israel's behalf.
I guess we'll see which one this turns out to be.
Setting aside what the US should do about it, I think that the case for Israel initiating a preemptive war is much stronger than ours could ever be.
Assuming they have reasonable intel suggesting a potential threat, the reality is that a surprise attack against the US would be highly unlikely to completely incapacitate us. Even if they destroyed our seat of government, that would still leave many millions of very stunned, angry Americans willing to retaliate.
Israel, by comparison, is extremely vulnerable because of their small size and density. It's even more important for them to take threats seriously, and strike to disable or neutralize threats preemptively, because failure to do so could essentially result in the nation's complete eradication.
Now, I generally support aiding Israel, but I think Lyrhawn's concerns over our reaction (more specifically, our capacity for reaction) are probably justified.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: The Other Guys is one of my favorite episodes.
Just watched that one. So now it's time for Poisoning the Well-- no, it's called Cure the first time.
SGC was one of several options considered after S8, as I recall. Including the ever-discussed feature, which took a few years longer to happen.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
