?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Stargate Universe is Space 1999

« previous entry | next entry »
Oct. 6th, 2009 | 11:16 pm

Yes I have been hearing from folks "its Voyager" or "its BattleStar Gallactica".

Wrong! It is Space 1999.

Now for all you who were raised with X-Wing fighters, you should acquaint yourself with the world of the Eagle Transporter. It will be left as an exercise for the reader to go acquaint themselves via wikipedia with the background of the show.

I could claim that the nuclear explosion which sent the moon hurtling away from the earth in Space 1999 forms the opening point to why the shows are twins born decades apart, but that would be basing everything on a very weak argument (...no more then say, the moon being knocked out of orbit and thrown at lightspeed away from the Earth).

In Stargate Universe you have a Stargate Crew which is hurtling through space on a starship they cannot control, much like the crew of the moon in Space 1999. Who can possibly control a moon that has been blown out of its orbit? Each week the crew is going to come into contact with a stargate that they will be able to access for a very limited period of time. They will be able to get onto planets once they come into dialing distance, but they will have to get back to ship before they are out of range.

In Space 1999 you had crews running off on Eagle Transporters once the moon came into distance of a planet (yes... ignore completely the physics of this). They would have a limited time to examine the planet before the moon would go out of range of their craft to join back up with it.

I am wondering if we can just line the episodes up, and play "match that episode".

The main scientist for Stargate Universe outfit would easily fit into the 1970s.

I wonder how many episodes it will take before they reach some sort of Dystopian world?

Alien telepaths?

With both BSG and Atlantis going off the air I thought for sure I would be getting to take a year off from poorly produced and thought out Science Fiction.

Oh well! :)

Link | Leave a comment | Share

Comments {5}

Jonathan Korman

(no subject)

from: jonathankorman
date: Oct. 7th, 2009 07:01 am (UTC)
Link

I am relieved that I am not the only person who made this connection.

In fairness to SGU, it does hint that it will be reflecting what I always considered to be the main charm of Space: 1999—the bleak theme that by the end of the episode, what with another couple of crewmembers dead and an Eagle or three knocked to bits, things always get a little bit worse for our heroes.

And though Stargate has always been pretty hokey, I'm indebted to Lance Mannion who points out that it's at least smart about its hokiness. Likewise its unoriginality; it steals shamelessly, but at least it steals from the best, and does a decent job of it.

To which point, I think Dr Rush is much less a rip of Prof Victor Bergman than of Dr Gaius Baltar: egotistical, egocentric, indispensable, kind of shaggy, kind of sexy, With His Own Agenda ... and even with a cool accent.

Reply | Thread

Dreamer of the Day

(no subject)

from: iamo
date: Oct. 7th, 2009 07:28 am (UTC)
Link

Haha never thought of it that way, but you're completely right.

Reply | Thread

Ivy

(no subject)

from: ivymcallister
date: Oct. 7th, 2009 12:58 pm (UTC)
Link

I thought for sure I would be getting to take a year off from poorly produced and thought out Science Fiction.

If I've ever accused you of pessimism, I take it all back. Sadly, the same goes for realism.

Any franchise-generating operation that's churned out this many spin-offs is destined fall over and die puking. (I always picture a huge, larval insect queen in the middle of their office suite squeezing out fully-formed writers, coated in gelatinous goo, that are immediately whisked away to their keyboards by scuttling intern-drones.

It's more fun that way.)

Reply | Thread

jw1776

(no subject)

from: jw1776
date: Oct. 7th, 2009 04:11 pm (UTC)
Link

At least a ship stopping occasionally at other worlds makes more sence than a Moon traveling at interstellar speeds does.

Reply | Thread

Loitl

(no subject)

from: loitl
date: Oct. 8th, 2009 04:11 pm (UTC)
Link

Don't forget that the explosion in Space: 1999 was on the 'far side' of the moon... the side away from Earth. A logical place to store nuclear waste, I guess.

Any explosion large enough to somehow actually move the moon in the first place (cough) would drive the moon into the Earth.

Reply | Thread