Frustration wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:46 pm
I wish Oma wasn't a Caucasian woman. Granted they have to get actors as they can, and they shoot in Vancouver, but it would have been a nice touch.
Sela Ward was a fairly well known actress from the early to mid nineties. The Stargate showrunners likely thought it was a coup to have her play a recurring guest role.
She's played by Carla Boudreau for this episode though (only this one)
I dont think Sela Ward was ever on Stargate so not sure what you mean
Ghilz wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:14 am
I do agree they could've picked someone Asian, but I don't think the difficulty in doing so was from lack of availability. Sadly we can look at Emmancipation where the only female talking role in a village of not!mongols is... white.
That episode never happened. Also, Carter never discussed internal/external sex organs.
[hums loudly while holding hands over ears]
Their zat guns never vaporized people on the third shot. Never. Never!
[hums louder]
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two equals four. If that is granted, all else follows." -- George Orwell, 1984
Swiftbow wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 1:06 am
Interesting thing to note... Daniel acts in that episode as if Oma is more a force of nature than a conscious being, and if they fired their weapons, she'd kill them, too. It's pretty clear later on that no, she would have differentiated between the two sides regardless of whether the team had defended themselves or not.
Distinguishing between the two sides doesn't mean that she wouldn't have wiped out the Earthers. Basically she'll kill anyone stupid enough not to listen to warnings about how the resident Ascended being doesn't permit violence on that world.
Good isn't the same thing as nice. And ultimately even 'good' is too good for its own sake, which is the ultimate conclusion of the Oma storyline, many seasons hence.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two equals four. If that is granted, all else follows." -- George Orwell, 1984
Swiftbow wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 1:06 am
Interesting thing to note... Daniel acts in that episode as if Oma is more a force of nature than a conscious being, and if they fired their weapons, she'd kill them, too. It's pretty clear later on that no, she would have differentiated between the two sides regardless of whether the team had defended themselves or not.
Distinguishing between the two sides doesn't mean that she wouldn't have wiped out the Earthers. Basically she'll kill anyone stupid enough not to listen to warnings about how the resident Ascended being doesn't permit violence on that world.
Good isn't the same thing as nice. And ultimately even 'good' is too good for its own sake, which is the ultimate conclusion of the Oma storyline, many seasons hence.
How much contact has Oma had with the Go'auld? Remember she was the one that ascended one of their worse in Anubis. So she is familiar with them.
Oma is similar to that super hot ascended one in Atlantis that also posed as a force of nature. Maybe Oma took a harder line on peace than Super Hot Ascended Woman from Atlantis.
McAvoy wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:35 am
Oma is similar to that super hot ascended one in Atlantis that also posed as a force of nature. Maybe Oma took a harder line on peace than Super Hot Ascended Woman from Atlantis.
The Ascendant Ancients have a weird punishment rule, they will force the perpetrator to hang out on the planet they used to be or just do some repetitive task till the end of time or something: Oma helping people ascend on Keb and watching helplessly how Anubis and the other Goa'uld destroy and enslave all life in the galaxy, Orlin guarding the dead weapon on on Velona, Anubis still doing Goa'uld stuff, Chaya Sar eternally defending Proculus from the Wraith. The only exception is Ganos Lal, who was just removed from our dimension and later came back to help Daniel find the Ark of Truth and even "showed" him how to activate it. Although IIRC, just like when the anti-Ori weapon was completed, it's likely that in this case The Others just conveniently looked the other way around until the Ori problem solved itself.
The universe divides itself into good and evil. Trying to create a pure essence of one induces the arising of the other. So the Ascended as a whole hold the balance, and let those who attempt purity solve themselves.
The three Ascended we see who devote themselves to goodness either die or end up neutralizing evils as powerful as themselves. The main group of the Ascended practice benign neglect, but do not actively attempt to assist mortals.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two equals four. If that is granted, all else follows." -- George Orwell, 1984
Frustration wrote: ↑Mon Feb 07, 2022 9:20 pm
The universe divides itself into good and evil. Trying to create a pure essence of one induces the arising of the other. So the Ascended as a whole hold the balance, and let those who attempt purity solve themselves.
The three Ascended we see who devote themselves to goodness either die or end up neutralizing evils as powerful as themselves. The main group of the Ascended practice benign neglect, but do not actively attempt to assist mortals.
Daniel notes the principle after Oma sacrifices herself to neutralize Anubis, and again after Morgan Le Fay sacrifices herself to stop Adria. His character changes after realizing that good and evil must be balanced, too - he expresses more frustration and is more willing to accept force as an option, although he still keeps himself carefully regulated.
Pure good is too self-sacrificing to maintain itself properly; pure evil is too self-interested to restrain desire.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two equals four. If that is granted, all else follows." -- George Orwell, 1984
Frustration wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 9:48 pm
Pure good is too self-sacrificing to maintain itself properly; pure evil is too self-interested to restrain desire.
I get that this is useful in maintaining the status quo in films and television, but it strikes me as especially nihilistic when stories do this as a conclusion. The frustrating thing is that it's usually presented as some kind of enlightened beyond-good-and-evil stance without acknowledging that the execution in practice is nihilism. It's not "better than good" despite the implication.
But if a balance between good and evil is preferable to trying to have good win out, then that means a balance between good and evil is actually good, and trying to have good dominate is actually bad. But if balancing good and evil is good, then achieving balance means that good is winning, which means things are unbalanced and ... oh no, I've gone crosseyed.