Overall Rating: 9.2
This one is a personal favorite of mine because for once, the good-natured relationship between Jack and Daniel is put to a severe test that is not answered with Daniel being proven right or Jack apologizing. This time, they're left at odds and both positions were reasonable (and presented fairly).
Plot Synopsis:
The description of this next installment in the Replicator arc is here, courtesy of the Stargate Wiki.
The Skinny:
The producers of Stargate do one thing very right (above all of the things they do well on a regular basis)...they listen to and respect the reactions of their fans. One of the reasons their "meta" episodes (like Wormhole Xtreme) are so effective is that they know what the fans think of their efforts, and they're not afraid to admit when they tried something that the fans didn't like. I bring this up because immediately upon introducing the replicators, they heard from the fans that there was a lack of interest because they were a faceless enemy. It was difficult to get interested in a story with an adversary that provided no opportunity for a character driven plot. The Borg were faceless and yet an outstanding enemy for Trek because they reached into our greatest fears about our own nature and the fragility of our identity. But what do a bunch of techno-bugs tell us about ourselves - particularly when their only motivation is to replicate?
This episode is the first attempt to give a face to the bugs. And it works! Now, not only do we have a real (tragic!) back-story to the creation of the replicators...we also know something about the personality (deeply flawed, though it was) or their creator. The writers even manage to make us feel genuine compassion for this robotic Typhoid Mary. Unintentionally, she destroyed her whole world and countless others, and doesn't even realize that she is truly responsible. Her defective mind is literally unable to comprehend her mistakes. That's a real story...that's a hell of a lot more interesting than the bugs she created are on their own. AND...it gives our heroes a chance to actually interact with the enemy in their own unique ways...leading to a conflict that feels very uncomfortable to watch (in a good way...it's nice to see the Gate writers stepping outside their comfort zones occasionally...it gives the positive moments more merit).
That conflict boils down to this, in the simplest terms: how much risk can you take when negotiating with a potential threat. Daniel believes with absolute conviction that the chance to make peace without needless death is worth risk well beyond what many of us would be comfortable with on a daily basis. Jack believes that the safety of his homeland is more important than anything else - he'll try peaceful solutions as long as he feels he's got fallback positions of something goes wrong, but when he's up against the pressure of impending disaster, he's a survivor first and a diplomat last. You need BOTH of these personality types to deal properly with threats to homeland security. In this episode, I believe Jack was entirely justified in shooting Reese (they have a history of learning to ignore her commands, after all), but given the absolute importance of the information Reese possesses about the replicators, you can understand Daniel's desire to protect her and keep her intact. The solution feels fair...and yet the conflict feels real. And that's a nice combination.
Writing: 9.5
The ominous feel to this entire episode pays off big time by the end...they revealed information in just the right order to produce the desired chilling affect on this particular viewer.
Acting: 9.0
The performance of Danielle Nicolet wasn't all that great, unfortunately, but this is more than made up for by the fabulous performances of Michael Shanks and RDA in particular and the regular cast in general.
Message: 9.0
I've already commented on the balance of virtues between Jack and Daniel that make SG-1 so effective as a diplomatic AND military unit representing Earth. I would also like to comment on the point this episode makes (intentionally or not) about the necessity of taking responsibility for (and learning from) your mistakes and the danger posed by people who seem willing to do neither. Reese, I hate to say it, is the perfect stand in for a Washington insider. (ZING)
No comments:
Post a Comment