this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2024
242 points (97.6% liked)
Chevron 7
1306 readers
2 users here now
Chevron 7
A community for sharing humor about Stargate in all its iterations.
Rules:
- Follow the Lemmy.World Terms of Service. This includes (but is not limited to):
- Lemmy.World is not a place for you to attack other people or groups of people.
- Always be respectful of the privacy of others who access and use the website.
- Links to copyright infringing content are not allowed
- Stay on topic. Posts must be directly related to Stargate, be it a meme, joke, screenshot, discussion prompt, etc.
- Be good, don't be bad. You're an adult, or close enough, I trust you know how to act around people.
For more general Stargate content, visit [email protected]
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sounds like they're solidly in mid-late s1 or early s2 to me.
The early seasons are not my favorite and when I watched with my wife for her first time we skipped a lot of episodes that I feel aren't necessary for the rest of the show.
Like most shows that were in the early stages of "hey let's make a show with continuity that doesn't just reset to 0 at the end" they were doing a lot of bottle episodes, and really wanted to try and curb the viewers expectations with some episodes. It's a product of its time. Men dominated action roles and women were sidekicks at best, usually arm candy plot devices.
So I understand why they wanted an episode like Emancipation but dear god does it feel like beating a dead horse by the end of the episode to me. We get it. Sam is a woman with reproductive bits on the inside, but she can hold her own. You have shown us this many times. Why do you insist on both showing and telling us over and over and over. Sam kicks ass on her own, it doesn't need to feel forced.
I love the show but dear God is it hard to get through the first two seasons nowadays.
Given that most of this happens early on I always saw it as a somewhat heavy-handed approach to make it unequivocally clear to the machos in the potential audience that they aren't welcome to the fandom. I mean have you met the patriarchally inclined? They aren't the brightest bunch. Reading between the lines is hard for them...
Very well could be. If I were making a show i could see myself doing that. "Hey you guys who typically like shows like this for X reason? This isn't for you. If you don't like it go find your corner of the internet to whine with other losers" that way we don't have that "The Boys" moment several seasons in where it finally clicks and they go "hey they're making fun of us!"
They're also the kind of people who whine about modern star trek being "too political". Take your pick as to whether it's because women are everywhere, people can be gay/bi/other, or even gasp black.
Subtlety is basically invisibility to them, and clearly even heavy-handed metaphors that wouldn't confuse my 2 year old nephew leave them stumped.
I'd love to talk to the writers/director to see what their thought processes were when making it, or watching an interview. I love seeing behind the scenes stuff on controversial episodes, whether I liked the episode or hated it. And I just love BTS for Stargate in general.
Shatner himself is one of those douchebros. I still can't believe that idiot tried to pretend that TOS wasn't political....