Take a glance at our reader comments section on our “Stargate: Universe” posts, and you’ll start to notice a couple of patterns: loyal fans of the previous two “Stargate” shows have almost no interest in the new “Universe” show besides going out of their way to call it every name in the book; meanwhile, non-fans of the franchise have grappled onto “Universe” but in doing so are making it be known that the previous two incarnations were utter shit in their opinion. And then there are those guys in-between, like me.
As a fan of “Stargate: SG1″ (I have seen every single episode more than once), but only a casual fan of “Stargate: Atlantis” (more of the same to me, but without the characters I loved), I approached “Universe” with great trepidation. Then the pilot aired, and as you can tell from my review, I dug it. In my opinion it has great potential, and its pluses far outweigh any minuses. Yes, I had issues with it. The sex scene in the beginning made me shake my head, not because I’m a prude or have anything against sex on TV, but my oh my it was just so … gratuitous.
The rest of the show? Dug it. I like the characters. The military types are still the tough and hands-on kind that I loved about the military characters on all the “Stargate” shows. The one major addition is the civilians. Let’s face it, civilians just never had all that much to do in “SG1″ (and to a similar extent, on “Atlantis”) except to show up every now and then to make our military guys’ life miserable with their bureaucracy and civvy nonsense. As you may have surmised, I was never a big fan of “SG1’s” planet-focused episodes, many of which were designed primarily to save money on production while the show geared up for its more space-focused episodes.
The premise of “Universe” remains excellent, and the pilot (and last week’s episode) continues to exceed my expectations. There are interpersonal conflicts, as there must be, but the people aren’t going around the ship shagging in corridors as I had feared ala “Battlestar Galactica”. At least, not yet. When it comes right down to it, this is still very much a “Stargate” show; it just isn’t the often-times vanilla-flavored brand that many “Stargate” fans have become accustomed to. Change is not an easy thing to accept, and I will admit I feared it as much as the rest of you after seeing all the promos, teasers, and pictures, but for the life of me, I don’t see why many think “Universe” is a complete repudiation of the franchise, because it is not by a longshot.
I opened this article by talking about patterns I’m seeing from comments on our “Stargate: Universe” posts, which basically boils down to two passionate sides: the one that believes this is not a “Stargate” show, therefore it must be hated with a passion; the other side seems to agree that this is not a “Stargate” show, but comes to a very different conclusion, which is because this is not a “Stargate” show, they are loving it.
One of the primary objections seems to be that the show features too many unlikeable characters. Robert Carlyle’s Nicholas Rush has not become a hit with “Stargate” fans as the producers probably thought. But the very reason why most people don’t like Rush is precisely the reason why he’s so interesting: he’s not supposed to be likeable, and you’re supposed to question this guy’s every motive. What fun would it be if Rush just fell in lock-step with our military heroes? There are plenty of likeable characters on the show: young Lieutenant Matthew Scott, when he’s not shagging a fellow soldier in the back room of a kitchen, has the makings of a fine leading man. Colonel Everett Young is an immensely likeable George Hammond-type. And Chloe Armstrong, though a tad bracing at first, is quickly growing on me. Even the ill-tempered Ronald Greer is becoming a favorite; he’s such a hardass, you can’t help but love the guy, especially since he values loyalty almost as much as he dislikes Rush and the rest of the civvy population.
One of the reasons why I believe some longtime “Stargate” fans may be reacting poorly to the new show is all the non-“Stargate” fans coming onboard with “Universe”; specifically, these non-fans’ reasons for finally jumping on the “Stargate” bandwagon. The newcomers seem unable to like “Universe” without throwing around terms like “cheesy” when it comes to the franchise up to this point, which I’m sure rubs a lot of “Stargate” loyalists the wrong way. And I don’t blame them, it’s only human nature. Think of it this way: it’s your party, but the guest list is different and the decorations are a little bit darker than you usually like it; then your neighbor shows up and starts chowing down on the nachos and gulping beer and tells you, with that condescending tone, that he digs this party, but only because it’s not as shitty as your previous parties. Yeah, that tends to rub people the wrong way, alright.
But let’s further follow up on this “I like ‘Universe’ because it’s not like the previous shows” train of thought. I will grant you that “SG1″ rarely ventured past the PG landscape, but that was one of its charms. It managed to tell an exciting, intergalactic story without having to indulge in crass language, gross violence, or flashing T&A. “SG1″ was good old fashioned storytelling that parents knew they could sit down to watch with their kids and not have to constantly cover the little one’s ears or eyes at the inappropriate parts. Those who are praising “Universe” while gleefully insulting the two previous series (but in particular “SG1″) are misguided. “Universe” is still very much a “Stargate” show, it just has a new cast, a new setting, and a tad grittier approach. But it’s still the same writers and producers, so really, how much different could it possibly be? You’re deluding yourself if you think “Universe” is a complete departure from the franchise, because it’s not.
So, conclusion: “Stargate: Universe” is a different version of “Stargate”, but it’s still “Stargate”. Sure, the corridors are darker, the characters greasier, and the civilians more prominent, but three episodes in and it’s still very much a “Stargate” show to me. For those who are hating on it because it’s not “Atlantis”, my advice is to get over it, and enjoy “Universe” because I promise you, it’s really not as bad as you may have heard, or initially thought from the pilot. And for those who tuned into “Universe” and liked it, do yourself a favor and actually watch “SG1” with an open mind. You’ll be surprised how much you end up digging it, PG “cheese” and all.



I actually think making it a mishmash of “Lost”, “Battlestar Galactica”, and “Stargate” was the point. It's a lot of what you've already seen, but presented in a new format — a dash of “Lost” here, “BSG” here, and wrapped up with the familiar “Stargate” universe.
Acting-wise, I've learned not to be too harsh on the actors during early episodes of a new show. I've watched enough TV to know that if you were to go back to the first season of every show (yes, even “Lost” or “Battlestar Galactica”) you'll notice how uneasy they are in their character's skin. It takes time to get comfortable, so allowances must be made.
Rush — I don't know why people have such problems with him. He's a great character, and Robert Carlyle is brilliant in the part. I can see now why he would take a hiatus from a thriving movie career to suffer through the grind of a weekly TV show.
If you, Nix, are the moderator, you ought to be commenting on his language. as a gay scifi nerd myself, i think it is crap that a whole forum will sit their and have no problem with someone throwing around the word gay as an equal to lame, stupid, crappy.
“soap opera for gay and lesbians,” seriously?
if you are a moderator, then try a little harder.
Have you not been reading anything in this thread? This other guy is complaining because I deleted all his gay-bashing comments, and now here you are telling me I'm not doing enough? Good grief. There's no pleasing some people.
Fair play – I totally agree with the mishmash being intentional – that's what I thought after the first ep. And I will concede pt 2 – the actor probably isn't one who we will see a lot of, so getting me knickers in a knot isn't worth it.
Robert — he may be a great actor, and brilliant in his part, but he's playing a dislikeable character. I guess this could be personal taste – and a tangent – I like Hugh Laurie in House, who can be quite dislikeable as a character but always tends to redeem himself with some pretty dark and funny lines which you can't help laffing at. That's all I guess i'm after – some humour perhaps? A spark of brilliance?
The humor will come once the life and death stuff is out of the way, I think. Obviously it was a gamble for the producers to dive into the “hard” stuff so early on; they really took a big risk, and from all the comments I've read from Stargate loyalists, it blew back in their faces. I think, if you give them a chance, and the current story arc — finding a way to survive their initial landing on the Destiny — is out of the way, things will, literally, brighten up. But that's just a guess, of course, I could be wrong.
I'm enjoying Universe.
One of the things it's doing right for me- early Stargate (SG1 especially) conveyed a strong sense of happy-go-lucky explorers wandering blindly into the unknown. For me at least, that feeling decayed considerably once the Tau'ri had multiple Daedelus class ships.
It's nice to see them lost again…
I actually don't like. I had tuned in thinking oh, great a new Stargate. Instead no humor, not even the wry quip, a bunch of unlikeable people (except for Eli), and no plot. No, I don't have to have someone dying every other moment or something blowing up every moment to find it entertaining. Some of Stargate SG-1 episodes were like that. But anymore character driven seems to mean no plot–just characters agonizing over something. It might be what would actually happen, hopefully I would keep it in in front of strangers, but it's not entertaining to watch.
I don't find Dr. Rush so bad, yes he's someone you need to watch because he has his own agenda, but I don't like the Colonel in charge, and the sargent. And the Kewpie doll, the senator's daughter, has to go.
Battlestar Galactica with a hint of stargate = not stargate and not for stargate fans. This show does not deserve the stargate titles. Extra boring battlestar galactica crap. I give this show 5 el crapo out of 5. As a show on its own i give it 2 out of five. Stargate Universe is a boring meth factory in space. Really SG-1 and SGA should get back on syfy SGU should stay on for who ever watches it but change it to “Universe” its just not a stargate show. I really think people want to see stargate and this crap shoot is all that is offered. SG-1 and SGA are great shows you have to start them from season one episode one. SGU if you watch it you try to hold on waiting for it to get good and it just drags on with boring OH wow she has tata's boring boring gritty dragging time wasted again stargate no show.
i loved and i still love SG1 and i dislike SGA.SGU is quite ok .Of course is not like SG1 they didn't meant to do that just like torchwood it's not doctor who.Just give it a rest ,only 4 episodes aired till now.I don't say i love SGU but i'll give it an 8
Hav to agree its a boring Battlestar Gallactica clone. I will watch a few more episodes to see if it improves then it will be Stargate black hole.