i like RDA, but i cant see him as anything but macguyver. granted i cant see kurt russell as anything but jack burton, but come on, its ol' jack burton! he'd stake a knife in Ra's noggin and give credit solely to reflexes. dang, they should re-make the movie AND series with kurt russell as jack burton as col o'neill. guest star victor wong III.
I can sign off on this. Its like, the shows don't really excel at anything. Farscape is a better true blooded American in a fish-out-of-water in a techy alien world story, Trek is better pure scifi, BSG is better drama, and about every syndicated scifi show I can think of has more interesting villains. Even SGU which probably had the potential to be good just sucked into some standard soap opera drama.
i havent watched much of the series, to be honest. a couple eps here and there. i think what turned me off was that every time i saw a commercial it just reminded me too much like the latter seasons of 'sliders.'
The Stargate series was campy as hell but it was still really enjoyable, the Stargate movie was just bad. Also, in a fist fight, Macgyver will always beat Kurt Russell, Consider youself destroyed.
Dude, you are incorrect. While it is difficult to argue the sheer stature of Kurt the chinface Russell, the first Stargate movie sucked bollocks. All three of the series destroy it in terms of quality. RDA shall rule us all one day.
@ShaggyChu: Yeah, I have to agree with you. Richard Dean Anderson brought way more to Stargate then Kurt Russell ever did. Plus Stargate SG1 was just written way better than that crappy movie. At least until SciFi... or is it Scyfy or so stupid shit now... got it's slimy tentacles on it.
@ShaggyChu: But what past them. They already did it. And they made like two stupid spin offs, including Star Gate Universe, which is their attempt to restart the whole Battlestar Galatica money, shaky cam seriousness and all. Its a fucking show about Space Egyptians, SciFi. Get over it.
Stargate is a great franchise but for me its better on TV than the original film. While I enjoyd the original film I greatly prefer the characters, especially the new humorous Jack O'Neill, and the general atmosphere of SG-1 (and Atlantis). Though im not completely sold on Universe yet im enjoying it so far, but only for the two main characters.
" The Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie that came out before the series was the only true Buffy. /actually-knows-nothing-about-Buffy-or-Stargate "
Well that's just plain incorrect. "
One more in the chorus. "
How is it wrong? How?? That movie was one of the greatest movies ever made! The show was such a disappointment in comparison. I mean a character named "Angel"? Really? Pffft, the Buffy show is the reason why we have sparkly vampires now. I hope you're happy!
" The Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie that came out before the series was the only true Buffy. /actually-knows-nothing-about-Buffy-or-Stargate "
Well that's just plain incorrect. "
One more in the chorus. "
How is it wrong? How?? That movie was one of the greatest movies ever made! The show was such a disappointment in comparison. I mean a character named "Angel"? Really? Pffft, the Buffy show is the reason why we have sparkly vampires now. I hope you're happy! "
I thought you knew nothing about Buffy or Stargate...
And don't you ever, ever, utter the good name of Buffy in the same sentence as that Twilight trash again.
" The Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie that came out before the series was the only true Buffy. /actually-knows-nothing-about-Buffy-or-Stargate "
Well that's just plain incorrect. "
One more in the chorus. "
How is it wrong? How?? That movie was one of the greatest movies ever made! The show was such a disappointment in comparison. I mean a character named "Angel"? Really? Pffft, the Buffy show is the reason why we have sparkly vampires now. I hope you're happy! "
I thought you knew nothing about Buffy or Stargate...
And don't you ever, ever, utter the good name of Buffy in the same sentence as that Twilight trash again. "
Prove me wrong! There would be no Twilight without Buffy.
" @ShaggyChu: But what past them. They already did it. And they made like two stupid spin offs, including Star Gate Universe, which is their attempt to restart the whole Battlestar Galatica money, shaky cam seriousness and all. Its a fucking show about Space Egyptians, SciFi. Get over it. "
Woah woah woah WOAH... Atlantis was awesome bro. Now SGU has, well, more ups and downs than I would like, but I still find it entertaining enough to stick with it.
" The Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie that came out before the series was the only true Buffy. /actually-knows-nothing-about-Buffy-or-Stargate "
Well that's just plain incorrect. "
One more in the chorus. "
How is it wrong? How?? That movie was one of the greatest movies ever made! The show was such a disappointment in comparison. I mean a character named "Angel"? Really? Pffft, the Buffy show is the reason why we have sparkly vampires now. I hope you're happy! "
I thought you knew nothing about Buffy or Stargate...
And don't you ever, ever, utter the good name of Buffy in the same sentence as that Twilight trash again. "
Prove me wrong! There would be no Twilight without Buffy. "
Twilight and Buffy are aimed at completely different audiences. In particular Buffy came out when Twilight's audience was far too young to have even seen it. As much as the Buffy series appears like bubble gum puff shit on the outside, it's actually an extremely complex and multifacited story, quite explisitly about female impowerment. Where as Twilight is pop junk for little girls about submitting utterly to male athority. Buffy is far a far more multifacited, intelectual, and, quite frankly, literary story than Stephany Myers could ever poop out.
" @ShaggyChu: But what past them. They already did it. And they made like two stupid spin offs, including Star Gate Universe, which is their attempt to restart the whole Battlestar Galatica money, shaky cam seriousness and all. Its a fucking show about Space Egyptians, SciFi. Get over it. "
Woah woah woah WOAH... Atlantis was awesome bro. Now SGU has, well, more ups and downs than I would like, but I still find it entertaining enough to stick with it. "
No it's not. Atlantis was over produced SciFi channel shit. SG1 lovingly made great fun of sci-fi tropes. Atlantis was just sci-fi tropes on parade.
" The Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie that came out before the series was the only true Buffy. /actually-knows-nothing-about-Buffy-or-Stargate "
Well that's just plain incorrect. "
One more in the chorus. "
How is it wrong? How?? That movie was one of the greatest movies ever made! The show was such a disappointment in comparison. I mean a character named "Angel"? Really? Pffft, the Buffy show is the reason why we have sparkly vampires now. I hope you're happy! "
I thought you knew nothing about Buffy or Stargate...
And don't you ever, ever, utter the good name of Buffy in the same sentence as that Twilight trash again. "
Prove me wrong! There would be no Twilight without Buffy. "
Twilight and Buffy are aimed at completely different audiences. In particular Buffy came out when Twilight's audience was far to young to have even seen it. As much as the Buffy series appears like bubble gum puff shit on the outside, it's actually an extremely complex and multifacited story, quite explisitly about female impowerment. Where as Twilight is pop junk for little girls about submitting utterly to male athority. Buffy is far a far more multifacited, intelectual, and, quite frankly, literary than Stephany Myers could ever poop out. "
Except Buffy came out when the author of Twilight could easily have been influenced by it (she was in her 20s at the time of Buffy's airing, which could be considered part of the prime target demographic of the show). It's not as if today's 14-year-olds wrote Twilight. And wouldn't you know it -- the inspiration came to her in 2003, while Buffy was still very popular and the show was still on the air.
Sure, when asked for where she found inspiration she used classic literature. Hell, it reads like a list of "11th grade required reading". But let's be honest -- There would be no Twilight without Buffy.
" The Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie that came out before the series was the only true Buffy. /actually-knows-nothing-about-Buffy-or-Stargate "
Well that's just plain incorrect. "
One more in the chorus. "
How is it wrong? How?? That movie was one of the greatest movies ever made! The show was such a disappointment in comparison. I mean a character named "Angel"? Really? Pffft, the Buffy show is the reason why we have sparkly vampires now. I hope you're happy! "
I thought you knew nothing about Buffy or Stargate...
And don't you ever, ever, utter the good name of Buffy in the same sentence as that Twilight trash again. "
Prove me wrong! There would be no Twilight without Buffy. "
Twilight and Buffy are aimed at completely different audiences. In particular Buffy came out when Twilight's audience was far to young to have even seen it. As much as the Buffy series appears like bubble gum puff shit on the outside, it's actually an extremely complex and multifacited story, quite explisitly about female impowerment. Where as Twilight is pop junk for little girls about submitting utterly to male athority. Buffy is far a far more multifacited, intelectual, and, quite frankly, literary than Stephany Myers could ever poop out. "
Except Buffy came out when the author of Twilight could easily have been influenced by it (she was in her 20s at the time of Buffy's airing, which could be considered part of the prime target demographic of the show). It's not as if today's 14-year-olds wrote Twilight. And wouldn't you know it -- the inspiration came to her in 2003, while Buffy was still very popular and the show was still on the air. Sure, when asked for where she found inspiration she used classic literature. Hell, it reads like a list of "11th grade required reading". But let's be honest -- There would be no Twilight without Buffy. "
Just like there would be no Ka$ha if there were not Patsy Kline I suppose. They both sang after all.
" @ShaggyChu: But what past them. They already did it. And they made like two stupid spin offs, including Star Gate Universe, which is their attempt to restart the whole Battlestar Galatica money, shaky cam seriousness and all. Its a fucking show about Space Egyptians, SciFi. Get over it. "
Woah woah woah WOAH... Atlantis was awesome bro. Now SGU has, well, more ups and downs than I would like, but I still find it entertaining enough to stick with it. "
No it's not. Atlantis was over produced SciFi channel shit. SG1 lovingly made great fun of sci-fi tropes. Atlantis was just sci-fi tropes on parade. "
"Twilight and Buffy are aimed at completely different audiences. In particular Buffy came out when Twilight's audience was far to young to have even seen it. As much as the Buffy series appears like bubble gum puff shit on the outside, it's actually an extremely complex and multifacited story, quite explisitly about female impowerment. Where as Twilight is pop junk for little girls about submitting utterly to male athority. Buffy is far a far more multifacited, intelectual, and, quite frankly, literary than Stephany Myers could ever poop out. "
Except Buffy came out when the author of Twilight could easily have been influenced by it (she was in her 20s at the time of Buffy's airing, which could be considered part of the prime target demographic of the show). It's not as if today's 14-year-olds wrote Twilight. And wouldn't you know it -- the inspiration came to her in 2003, while Buffy was still very popular and the show was still on the air. Sure, when asked for where she found inspiration she used classic literature. Hell, it reads like a list of "11th grade required reading". But let's be honest -- There would be no Twilight without Buffy. "
Just like there would be no Ka$ha if there were not Patsy Kline I suppose. They both sang after all. "
No, silly. Now you're just getting into the realm of hyperbole. That analogy would make sense if I had said something more along the lines of, "There'd be no Twilight if Gutenberg hadn't created the printing press."
Deny it all you want, but there would be no Twilight were it not for Buffy. Though I'm not sure why you take offense, as it doesn't diminish the value of Buffy to fans such as yourself, does it? It's not like Twilight retcon'd the story of Buffy to have some crazy sparkly vampire origin story. Though wouldn't that have been neat if it did? :D
" @Symphony: Buffy is NOTHING like Twilight. Buffy actually had good looking girls! ;-P "
While that is beside the point, of course they are nothing alike! Well except they're both targeted at young women; are ripe with romantic story-arcs (including vampire x human ones); have vampires as prominent characters; etc etc. So yes, you're right, they are absolutely, positively, 100% nothing alike.
" @Symphony: Buffy is NOTHING like Twilight. Buffy actually had good looking girls! ;-P "
While that is beside the point, of course they are nothing alike! Well except they're both targeted at young women; are ripe with romantic story-arcs (including vampire x human ones); have vampires as prominent characters; etc etc. So yes, you're right, they are absolutely, positively, 100% nothing alike. "
"Twilight and Buffy are aimed at completely different audiences. In particular Buffy came out when Twilight's audience was far to young to have even seen it. As much as the Buffy series appears like bubble gum puff shit on the outside, it's actually an extremely complex and multifacited story, quite explisitly about female impowerment. Where as Twilight is pop junk for little girls about submitting utterly to male athority. Buffy is far a far more multifacited, intelectual, and, quite frankly, literary than Stephany Myers could ever poop out. "
Except Buffy came out when the author of Twilight could easily have been influenced by it (she was in her 20s at the time of Buffy's airing, which could be considered part of the prime target demographic of the show). It's not as if today's 14-year-olds wrote Twilight. And wouldn't you know it -- the inspiration came to her in 2003, while Buffy was still very popular and the show was still on the air. Sure, when asked for where she found inspiration she used classic literature. Hell, it reads like a list of "11th grade required reading". But let's be honest -- There would be no Twilight without Buffy. "
Just like there would be no Ka$ha if there were not Patsy Kline I suppose. They both sang after all. "
No, silly. Now you're just getting into the realm of hyperbole. That analogy would make sense if I had said something more along the lines of, "There'd be no Twilight if Gutenberg hadn't created the printing press." Deny it all you want, but there would be no Twilight were it not for Buffy. Though I'm not sure why you take offense, as it doesn't diminish the value of Buffy to fans such as yourself, does it? It's not like Twilight retcon'd the story of Buffy to have some crazy sparkly vampire origin story. Though wouldn't that have been neat if it did? :D "
No, see, your argument boils down to this: "Without a popular show about blank, there would not have been this popular series of books about blank." That's a shallow argument. The first thing in no way influenced the other, even in your argument. And in particular, there isn't a thread you can tie between Buffy and Twilight other than the fact that they had vampires.
If what you're saying is that in this media system, a popular IP about -insert thing here- is going to open the door for more IPs about -insert thing here- then yes, I will agree with you. But the success of Buffy and the success of Twilight are just too far apart to even make a credible link there.
I recognize that I'm probably taking this too serious cat. But... yeah. Serious cat is serious, ok? Don't cramp my serious styles. With a z.
@Ragdrazi: the only problem is that symphony is making sense. it would be logical to assume that the creator of twilight would have taken, if little, at least some ideas from buffy and implemented them in twilight. Think about it.
" @Ragdrazi: the only problem is that symphony is making sense. it would be logical to assume that the creator of twilight would have taken, if little, at least some ideas from buffy and implemented them in twilight. Think about it. "
Shallow arguments do make sense until you think about them, yes.
To say that there would be no Twilight without Buffy is an absurd argument, because you could say there would be no Twilight without Bram Stoker's Dracula with as much credibility. That's the argument Symphony is making.
If you're going to talk about influence though, because an artist can be influenced by any work for any time period, it's really been widely observed that Twilight is ripping on Anne Rice more than anything else.
Log in to comment