Sfdebris.net

I may be cynical, but for some reason, I kinda like it when the heroes show a certain ruthless pragmatism from time to time. I'm reminded of the Voyager episode "Prey" where 7 of 9 decides that she really doesn't want herself or the rest of the crew to die to save a single member of Species 8472 from the Hirogen.

Don't get me wrong, I loved McNeill's awesome moment to Apophis about being good guys and not condemning another person to suffering as a host. But regarding holding onto Apophis when Earth is being threatened with destruction if they don't turn him over ... I'm less certain. It's one thing to have a moral code you're willing to live and die by. Putting other people, who may not share that moral code, in harm's way just so you can sleep well knowing that you upheld your moral code ... is that really moral?

Trinary wrote: Putting other people, who may not share that moral code, in harm's way just so you can sleep well knowing that you upheld your moral code ... is that really moral?

According to Benjamin Sisko, not always. Sometimes the line you'd never cross is up against another line you'd never cross, and you find out which compromises you're actually willing to make. And the fandom is still divided over that.

I do like that we keep asking those questions, though. Torture vs. the ticking bomb. Collateral damage vs. letting terrorists have a safe haven to attack from. Less filling vs. tastes great. I'm not going to respond to anything on those questions on this forum, BTW.

One of my favorite SG-1 moments was when O'Neill fatally shot a Jaffa in the back as he's running away. He's grim, but not torn up over it; the Jaffa could have warned others. He was retreating, not surrendering. It occurred to me that Kirk probably would not have done that. The universe would have arranged itself so that he didn't have to. And war is supposed to be ugly.

But even SG-1 had to learn about the sarcophagus after Apophis was through the gate.

You're not being cynical, you're being realistic, Captain Sisko would agree with your line of thinking, seeing as he had to be pragmatic himself on many occasions. That's why he is the favourite Captain amongst a sizeable portion of the Trek fanbase.

As for this episode, it's one of my favourite of the series, the actor playing Apophis does a great job here, giving some much needed depth to both the main villain of the series so far and the Goauld overall. It helps that he had some good material to work with as well.

I do like how the episode spares a few moments to show us the host who wakes up from a living nightmare of millennia performing atrocities with no control on his body.

I'll never believe that Apophis isn't the best SG-1 villain. Anubis is a faceless (literally!) supervillain. Ba'al is fun but he's just a campy villain who was cheapened by the parade of Ba'al clones that the show ended up killing one by one, or even in groups. Apophis was the main baddy when the show was still fresh, and he's the one primary villain with a real connection to the characters. He's the only one that multiple characters have a personal reason to hate. Plus, I like his hands-on approach and his smarts (for the most part).

You couldn't do this episode with most of Stargate's villains. The cast put in some good performances and seeing the reality of an innocent's millennia-long enslavement is heartbreaking. Not a flawless episode, but pretty good.

As far as different theories of morality and pragmatism vs. strict adherence to your ethical code- I don't mind seeing characters cross the line sometimes, but it's also refreshing to see a firm ethical stand on the part of O'Neill. Frankly, I think Atlantis and Universe both crossed the line so many times that you had to wonder which side of the line was their actual starting position.

The part of this episode where Daniel reads the Ancient Egyptian version of Last Rites to the Host is one of my favorite scenes in all of Stargate.

I always had mixed feeling about Apophis' return, even if it was foreshadowed by Martouf at the end of this episode. On one hand, this episode was such a perfect end for him that it was a shame to see it undone. On the other hand, Sokar was so uninteresting as the big bad and brought absolutely nothing new to the table that I was glad to see him gone and replaced with someone with a much more personal connection to SG-1.

ChiggyvonRichthofen wrote:As far as different theories of morality and pragmatism vs. strict adherence to your ethical code- I don't mind seeing characters cross the line sometimes, but it's also refreshing to see a firm ethical stand on the part of O'Neill. Frankly, I think Atlantis and Universe both crossed the line so many times that you had to wonder which side of the line was their actual starting position.

Well said!

ChiggyvonRichthofen wrote:I'll never believe that Apophis isn't the best SG-1 villain.

I'd argue Replicarter is the best villain. Amanda Tapping's performance as her is pretty damn good. She doesn't get a lot of screen time, but she shines. And while Anubis is a faceless evil, his appearance as "Jim" in the cafe is fucking amazing. Especially the way the actor's demeanor and the music change after the reveal, making the jovial guy look way sinister. And I love the idea that the guy who's 200% melodrama just enters Daniel's vision to dick with him and rub salt on the wound while looking like a friendly banker.

Apophis never really hit the mark for me. He has good moments (There's a reason I requested this episode), but often he's just a guy who stands there looking stern and haughty. At least post-Sokar he gets a bit more menace, but for the first 2 season, he mostly feel like "Just a Goa'uld". He rarely feels more menacing or that unique compared to the others.

If we're counting Atlantis, which suffered far more from having terrible villains, I'll give props to Kolya. He's barely in the show, but the guy's episodes were great.

Ghilz wrote:

ChiggyvonRichthofen wrote:I'll never believe that Apophis isn't the best SG-1 villain.

I'd argue Replicarter is the best villain. Amanda Tapping's performance as her is pretty damn good. She doesn't get a lot of screen time, but she shines. And while Anubis is a faceless evil, his appearance as "Jim" in the cafe is fucking amazing. Especially the way the actor's demeanor and the music change after the reveal, making the jovial guy look way sinister. And I love the idea that the guy who's 200% melodrama just enters Daniel's vision to dick with him and rub salt on the wound while looking like a friendly banker.

Apophis never really hit the mark for me. He has good moments (There's a reason I requested this episode), but often he's just a guy who stands there looking stern and haughty. At least post-Sokar he gets a bit more menace, but for the first 2 season, he mostly feel like "Just a Goa'uld". He rarely feels more menacing or that unique compared to the others.

If we're counting Atlantis, which suffered far more from having terrible villains, I'll give props to Kolya. He's barely in the show, but the guy's episodes were great.

Heh, I've never really been a fan of Replicarter. Your mileage may very I guess.

I could say a lot about Threads. Maybe that one will be a review someday. I'm a big Twin Peaks fan, so I'm certainly not opposed to surrealism, diner scenes, or terrible evil hidden beneath a veneer of wholesome small town life. It does feel a little weird in a Stargate episode though, and is kind of an odd fit for Anubis.

Kolya is great, and he happens to be in several of Atlantis' best episodes (with Common Ground being arguably the best episode of the show, at least of the standalones)

This episode stuck to my mind for pretty much all the reasons Mister Sonnenburg mentioned. It's not a critical part of any major storyline, but the concepts and characters it explores elevate it to one of the best episodes. Honestly, to me the "You know he has a sarcophagus" bit is the weakest part of the episode. My reaction to it was "Well, duh!" That shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, or the knowledge that it can bring back someone who has been clinically dead for a brief time. I think the final scene would've worked much better if someone on the SG-1 team brought up the sarcophagus as a "You know this doesn't change anything" statement and everyone reacted to it as a grim acceptance of facts.