Talk:Stargate: Continuum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Stargate Portal This article is part of WikiProject Stargate, a collaborative effort to improve all Wikipedia articles relating to the Stargate franchise. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Assessment comments This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

Contents 1 RDA in Continuum - but how much? 2 Ranks in cast list? 3 Timeline? 4 Teal'c's tattoo

[edit] RDA in Continuum - but how much?

One of the last edits put RDA as the first person in the starring list. However, no articles so far indicate that he'll even play a significant/major role. RDA said about two weeks ago [1] that even he doesn't know, so I put his name back somewhere at the end of the list. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball! Also, I've deleted some Original research and speculation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sgeureka (talk • contribs) 19:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

We already know Anderson is in the movie, Anderson comes prior to Browder, I also do not see anything stating the starring section is a "ranking of importance". Matthew

My point was more that we don't know (for sure) whether he was starring at all. For all we know, he could just appear in the first 30 minutes in the setting up of the story, similary to "Rising". Until the producers say more about his involvement, he should not be listed as the first person starring. Just my opinion. (Sorry, forgot to sign the last time.) – sgeureka ^t•c 21:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

That's one thing I hate when people start to try putting actors/actresses in definitions, RDA is in it thus he stars in it, there's no need to split it up in to a multitude of rankings and then put them in an order of importance, if anything it violates WP:NPOV, not to mention it then violates WP:ATT. Matthew

Sorry, non-native speaker here. I thought "starring" refers to "being the star of [a movie/TV show]". wikt:starring seems to back up this interpretation of the word. Again, my point was/is, we don't know at the moment whether RDA will have a lead role at all. (Although it's likely. But likelyhood status, as you said, still violates WP:NPOV and WP:ATT) – sgeureka ^t•c 17:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, the last revert put the original research about Don S. Davis and Teryl Rothery back in. If everyone is fine with that, I'm going to leave it in. But I think it should be deleted. – sgeureka ^t•c 21:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

The starring section is not a "ranking of importance". Credits in movies and television series are not based on that, they're based on contracts. Until we know more about both RDA's role and how he'll be credited in the movie, we should not put him first. I've reordered this list based on the credits for The Shroud, using the normal SG-1 credits first, followed by the guest star credits, substituting Cliff Simon for Morena Baccarin. In those credits, RDA is the last to appear (credited with a Special Apperance). — BrotherFlounder 15:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Who cares if he "appears last" in the credits of "The Shroud"? Matthew

Because that's likely how he'd be credited in the movie, with an "Also Starring" credit. See Bill Shatner's credit in Star Trek: Generations as the first example that comes to mind. Also, why is there no need to tablulate the cast list? — BrotherFlounder 16:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Since O'Neill is no longer an official member of SG-1 (i.e. as of S9, S10 and The Ark of Truth), he should be treated like any other guest star on SG-1, at the end after all SG-1 main characters. Therefore, to list him in the same way as on "The Shroud" seems reasonable. Also, I'd like to suggest to go back to the Cast style we last had in [2]. (It looked less confusing and more orderly.) – sgeureka ^t•c 17:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: using the alphabetic order like it was suggested in the March 18 edit. That would also mean Bridges should be listed before Browder, Judge, Tapping, and Shanks, too. For the time being, that would give a worse impression of the (unknown) contract/involvement status than what we had before. – sgeureka ^t•c 17:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

If we're not going to go with the tabular format, then the cast list should be like that, according to WikiProject Films' style guide. — BrotherFlounder 17:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Since there even is a guide line, I was bold and changed it back. – sgeureka ^t•c 14:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

May I state that RDA plays a very important role, being the original leader of the team and that Carter, Teal'c and Jackson should appear right behind him. Then it should be followed by Mitchell and Vala. But in all reality I don't even see why it matters, as long as all of the information on the page is correct. Another suggestion; why not make a poll to see who the SG-1 fans think should be listed first. They have the right to decide. And that is my theory on the debate. Truthfully though, as long as its a good movie that represents SG-1 (the whole team and all of its past members) well I'm very happy, and won't even care what charactors listed first.-Random Contributor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.242.177.165 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Ranks in cast list?

I'm not certain about the idea of putting ranks in the cast list, since we're not sure what the ranks will really be. For example, since it seems the plot will be the SG1 team being sent to an alternate timeline, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the only time we see O'Neill is within that alternate timeline when the team goes to hunt him down as somebody they trust to help them. So for all we know, he's a fishing boat captain again and not a General at all. Of course, this is all unsourced speculation but then strictly speaking, so is including him as a General... so should we just remove ranks entirely? --Maelwys 15:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree about leaving out the ranks for the time being, but I wouldn't really care about leaving them in either until we know more. – sgeureka ^t•c 17:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we should leave the ranks in. It's only Gen. O'Neill and Gen. Landry who would be affected by this (we know Carter and Mitchell will appear before entering the alternate timeline), and Landry will likely appear before the alterations occur. — BrotherFlounder 17:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Don't forget Sam Carter! I think the names should be listed in the order of people who have been on the show longest, that means Carter, Teal'c, and Jackson all go first, followed by O'Neill, Mitchell, and Vala. Or it should be by rank. Either way works for me.-Random Contributor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.242.177.165 (talk • contribs)

While at it, why not remove the name as well ? Maybe his name is also different in an alternative timeline.

The rank is a part of character's name - a part that changes more frequently than the others. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.0.66.2 (talk) 10:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

This is just a note, I'm not suggesting you geeks change anything.

Mitchell is going to be a Col(O-6) in Continuum, I was watching an Air Force Report and in an interview with the costume people a woman was holding the Mitchell flightsuit which had Colonel insignia on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.83.90 (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Either Mitchell is going to be a Full Bird Colonel or Sam gets demoted. I just changed it but previously it was Sam as a Colonel which would destroy the enite structure of SG-1, Cam being the SG-1 Team Leader. Also putting ranks in the cast list is a good idea, it shows the positions each actor will be playing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.106.126 (talk) 07:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline?

I know this will happen after Ark of Truth, but when will it happen with regards to the Atlantis timeline? Will it be before Season 4 like the other movie or will it take place at a different place in the story? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.113.89.191 (talk) 00:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Reportedly by production team members, it takes place about the time Atlantis's Season 5 starts (Amanda Tapping implying something in the early episodes, possibly just a tease, might pull her off of Atlantis and leading into the movie). Nothing I've seen yet, though, qualifies setting that timeframe in stone.

I think we can expect that the SG-1 and Atlantis schedules will continue to lose sync, though TPTB will probably do their best to make it somewhat still so to avoid confusion.Thinkbui (talk) 22:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Teal'c's tattoo

I'm assuming we've all seen the press photos by now. Anyone know if the slightly altered Ba'al design just for T in those is the final design?
On a side note, I do like the more realistic looking Jaffa armor.Thinkbui (talk) 22:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)