his name is Aaron Pearl most recent things he's been in were Lost in space as Hapgood / Hilmi Farhan and Man in the high castle as Hank McCrae / Hank McCraie
Am a bit late to the party, but I like to think of this "Bootstrap Paradox" as a kind of "self stabilizing" Time-Line-Loop. SG already confirmed there are multi-verses, so this would fit in-universe too: There HAS to be an "original time-line" where Hamond never got a note to help SG1. But by chaos-theory the circumstances of the "original SG1" were ever so slightly different, maybe they weren't strapped as secure, or Hamond to decided to help them "on a whim" or "going by his guts". Either way the actions of SG1 and Hamond still saw them work together or at least to a "happy ending". This then gave General Hamond the conviction to write himself a note to "help them", and this note then "stabilized the time-line" instead of relying on random chances which would have lead into a different Paradox. This kind of logic can be applied to many time-travel movies and I sometimes humor myself imagining the "original timeline" :D
About like a Doctor Who episode where the Doctor brought a British soldier in 1917 into the Tardis, and then mistakenly called the war he was in, 'The First World War." Seeing that soldier catch that and then say 'First?' in such a deflated tone broke my heart.
They are from 30 years in the future. Even the young Hammond had to realize that his father would have a high chance for another heart attack in the next 30 years.
Jack O'neill: You watched it from your fathers bedside in his hospital room, just 2 days after his first heart attack. Hammond: What do you mean by "first"?
This is one of the most brilliant episodes. I've never liked time travel. But whenever the writers of Stargate do it, the episodes are always so ingenious.
I agree, i loved Star Trek, but used to hate the "crossing over into a parallel universe" stories in DS9. This one was brilliant, my only gripe, Cassie appeared at the end, but, blink and you would have missed her. I just didnt see the point in creating her character, and not developing it fully, she has just been waiting around for all these years, and just walks in and sends them home, how convinient.
@@DavidSmith-fs5qj actually I liked how they brought in Cassie because of exactly what you're talking about. She was a character that got a role and a focus in an episode and then hardly ever mentioned again , but here you see that she actually was an important part of Carter's life , even though that story was never really visited in the series.
@@pershop4950 Yes, there was so much potential, Cassie had some good early episodes, then that was pretty much it. One route the writer s could have gone down, would have explored a relationship between Daniel and Janet Fraiser. Sam and Jack, never happened and was never going to happen(exept in an alternate reality), but there wouldnt have been an issue with Daniel and Janet, he wasnt in the military. Initially, Daniel would ahve felt guilt over any feelings, believing that he was disrespecting the memory of his wife.I think it would have developed and expanded both characters, particularly Janet, and Daniel would have explored new territory. What do you think?
"Curiously enough, the only thing that went through the mind of the bowl of petunias as it fell was: "Oh no, not again". Many people have speculated that if we knew exactly why the bowl of petunias had thought that we would know a lot more about the nature of the Universe than we do now"
It's because, for some unknown reason, that bowl of petunias was constantly reincarnating, trying to live out a satisfying life, and every time it was somehow killed by Arthur Dent. Hilariously enough, this particular instance was during a time in its existence that it had decided to give up on reincarnation and just float in limbo for a while...only for Arthur to inadvertently use the improbability drive to summon it right back out again only to immediately die.
It stuns with one shot, kills with two and apparently can disintegrate with three. Please explain why it's stupid. What am I missing or not understanding?
B20C0 what’s stupid is that the Jaffa and them Egypt terrestrials used staffs and those tasers. Like, why not just use the stupidly simple and overpowered pistol that can capture a enemy in a single shot or kill with two, and if there’s sensitive information just shoot it three times. Like it’s a fucking Deus ex machina in a handheld device
@@Hair2U The General did tell Jack when they got back how much he owed him. Something like 600 bucks. Think maybe they were just making that up, not a bad guess, since he probably didn't give them much from what I can see there.
@@erictaylor5462 Well If I recall the first episode/movie, Hammond almost immediately seemed to know how Jack was, and since he saw all of them in '69, I think that's how he guessed that the gate on Abydos wasn't destroyed, once he was read in on all that. Up till then, he didn't really know anything, even about the stargate, just that he met people under his command from the future, and something wonky went wrong. Not a lot to go on, I don't think they even told him their real names.
Funny thing is, Hammond should have known that no matter the threat, no matter the danger, no matter the matter, it was all going to work out just fine for at the very least himself, sg1, and the earth right up until this mission. Because of the grandfather paradox.
My theory with the zat gun is that it fires out some form of charged particles, this loosens the bonds between atoms with every shot and that most matter can only take three shots before the atoms are literally pulled apart. The first shot hurts like hell and could even cause long term damage, but mostly you'll heal from this over time, although too much exposure to zat energy can only have negative impacts on your long term health. The second shot causes too much damage to survive, in particular to your internal organs.
But why does the effect extend from first box to second box and the contents, but not to the truck as a whole, which is also touching the first box? It was a gun with an "I want this effect this time, so it'll work that way"...
*I do love it when the people who go back in time, in any show, and tell others they've gone back in time, instead of some plausible story they come up with.*
instantly believe he is a young hammond. The way he says 'why?, and the fact he brings up court marshall - general hammond early on threatened jack with that often.
And when those two soldiers wake up, they’re not gonna suspect Hammond had something to do with it when he opened the door and just stood by while they got zat??
This is a sci-fi fantasy show, i dont mind plot holes and leaps of logic as long as we get a well written and exiting episode. What really annoys me, is when you get an episode like Heroes in season seven, in which my favourite character, Janet Fraiser is killed, because the writers wanted to show that war has consequences. The main cast members spend the entire series being saved from consequences by plot armour, yet they sacrifice a character for no creative reason, just to show the gritty reality of war. If you want to see the gritty reality of war, watch Saving Private Ryan.
The first guy probably got zatted immediately before hammond pointed his firearm at the sky, unsure about second guy. Maybe he thought hammond was stunned in place?
@IJN Yamato This is an accent that people from Missouri and areas around it tend to have. I knew a lady that spoke very similarly putting additional emphasis on the H in words. "you know wHuat (what)?" and she was a Missouri transplant just as Don Davis was.
30 years later .... "INCOMING TRAVLLER! ITS SG-1!" *SG-1 comes through* General Hammond. "Colonel Jack O'neill. You are hereby under arrest for attacking a member of the US army 30 years ago. Enjoy your court marshal." Jack "Thats....thats a good one sir...." General Hammond "Air-men, secure O'neill's firearm and detain him!"
Young lieutenant George, a great episode. Whats weird is they reused the actor in what season 7 as a normal airforce officer with about the same amount of lines as this episode. Wonder how many times they reuse cast without us noticing
If hammond for 30 years knew this would happen, why should he act against tealc as he is a stranger that must gain trust in first episodes.. he should already know he will be part of SG1 team.
He didn't know that Teal'c will be part of SG-1. By travelling back in time SG-1 created other timeline in which he gave Sam note so he will help them in past. In first timeline he probably didn't help them and only after Hammond meet them again he decided to help SG-1 and change the timeline.
if you saw a guy 30 years ago then he showed up again today would you recognise him? The first time he saw him as a General, Teal'c was in full Jaffa armour, not SG gear. 1696 Hammond never saw the symbiote or had much contact with Teal'c, he only spoke to Jack and Sam. He probably convinced himself it was all a soviet lie until the day he saw the cut on Sam's hand.
He should've asked Hammond to draw his weapon before being zapped as two of the soldiers saw him with his weapon drawn. Also, one has to wonder about the initial timeline where a message was not sent back in time and how that first timeline's Hammond remembered the prisoners well enough to recognize them in the present and hence send the note back in time to help them return from the past. It did not look like Hammond had a big role in interrogating and incarcerating them, just a subsidiary role in transporting them.
@@christinaclark9754 And Carters paper that Carter wrote but in the very first iteration no note was written and Hammond would only have searched their belongings and not even have met them so what made that first Hammond decide to write the note as he would not have even seen them or heard their time travel story. The cut and paper explains all other iterations of the timeline bit what in the very first iteration without the note triggered Hammond to write that note when his younger self would only have seen some uniforms and some strange devices.
This was a beautifully written episide and an opportunity for the cast to have a lot of fun. I just think that it could have easily been a two parter. Parts of the episode just seem rushed, for instance, the telescope that Jack and Tealc use to predict the neaxt solar flare, its unmanned, is it open to the public 24/7, with no staff? Then there is the stargate itself, totally ungarded, how convienient, they just seenm to get home all to easily.
ian greenacre It was shot on film at least till season 9 when they switched to HD tv cameras. Most film will easily go on to 1080p if not 4K or even 8K. The main problem would be the stuff with the vis effects which probably was never intended to go to much above DVD quality. I'd love to see SG1 on bluray.
@@ianmoseley9910 So what. No one would have had it then. No one on earth used the term "video tape" in the year this was set. Every single person on earth would have said "film". Even the 5 people who might have had this hypothetical video tape machine that you suggest existed. They would each have still said. "film", because film was the predominant technology, and also ingrained in the language.
Funny, the guy playing the Young General Hammond here, is also in another Stargate "Lockdown" S8 E3 & he's not playing General Hammond. In fact, O'Neill is General.
Regarding Jack's "30 year ago" line that has sparked debate, I think we can assume that Jack has not read Dr. Dan Streetmentioner's "Time Traveler's Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations".
And it's just a couple more years until this episode itself is 30 years old. Would you, as a time-traveller, cope with being stranded in the strange past of 1999?
"will stop you being court-martialed" Zzap. Hammonds unconscious body tumbles to the floor, smacking his head on the ground, causing internal bleeding. Half an hour later while blood leaks from his ears and nose Hammond passes away alone on an empty country road, the entire timeline fades to black.🤦