"Continuum"

[StarFuryG7]

Unbelievable --this is a Canadian series that already had its first season aired there, and which is now moving to the SyFy Channel (Yes, note the spelling) in the UK, but not here.

Continuum’s Rachel Nichols on the new Syfy show
27-09-12

Alias star Rachel Nichols on Continuum, airing from 27 September 2012 on Syfy in the UK

www.scifinow.co.uk/interviews/continuums-rachel-nichols-talks-about-the-new-series-airing-tonight-on-syfy/

[gavin1701]

I saw the first 3 or 4 episodes and have the rest to catch up on. For a popcorn show it's fine, just like Heroes was a popcorn boxset kind of show not to be taken seriously. This isn't Shakespeare or even Lost when it comes to writing, but its definitely watchable!

[CRAMBAM]

Would love to see it here.

[StarFuryG7]

Over at io9:

The amazing time-travel cop show Continuum coming to Syfy in January

Syfy will gain a strong new piece of television in a couple months, when the Canadian time-travel drama Continuum debuts. Syfy just announced the premiere date for Continuum:

More » io9.com/5959958/the-amazing-time+travel-cop-show-continuum-coming-to-syfy-in-january

[CRAMBAM]

I hope the show has multiple airings. I want to give it a try but Monday has a lot of TV.

[StarFuryG7]

Nov 14, 2012 14:26:01 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

I hope the show has multiple airings. I want to give it a try but Monday has a lot of TV.

What about recording the late-night rebroadcast? The SyFy Channel always airs their new episodes of shows twice on the same night.

We're getting this show later than they got it in the UK. I'm getting very annoyed with this trend --it now applies to theatrical releases abroad as well as shows. They get them first, and now we get them last.

[CRAMBAM]

Recording a late night broadcast would work fine.

Can't do much about movies, but with TV shows, you punish them by downloading them after they air in the UK. Hurt the ratings and advertisers here. I think that's one of the reasons Doctor Who premieres the same night now.

[gavin1701]

It's a 10 episode run so not too many. Having said that I'm still on about episode 6. Need to wait til I've cleared a lot of other series before I go back. Like I said it's good, but it's not great. It probably would have been a massive hit in the 90s, but we've seen stuff like this way too much before in sci-fi.

[StarFuryG7]

Anyone have thoughts on this show, now that it's finally premiered here in the U.S.?

[CRAMBAM]

Fortunately, I remembered to watch it.

I'm guessing a lot will deal with the time travel elements and probably the lack of thought on the part of the writers.

For example, it's clear that she is going to befriend Alec Sandler. It's also clear that in the future, an old Alec Sandler will be in her life. Therefore, wouldn't it make sense for her to get her friend to prevent her from time traveling?

Will they establish a means to get back to the future?

If they kill an ancestor of someone, then that person doesn't exist, which will mean that the ancestor should never be on anyone's radar, which means they don't need to be killed, and the person exists.

My guess is that this show is not going to be that complicated in writing, which means we will have to ignore these questions.

Now as for the show itself, I definitely liked it. I'll keep going with it.

[StarFuryG7]

Jan 16, 2013 8:10:13 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

Fortunately, I remembered to watch it.

I'm guessing a lot will deal with the time travel elements and probably the lack of thought on the part of the writers.

For example, it's clear that she is going to befriend Alec Sandler. It's also clear that in the future, an old Alec Sandler will be in her life. Therefore, wouldn't it make sense for her to get her friend to prevent her from time traveling?

I didn't have that impression from their exchanges actually. If anything, I think she knows his fate, as in, how he dies/died, according to the future she came from. And they laid out two possibilities with respect to the theory of time travel, while leaving out the newer third possibility altogether. The question that is up in the air presently is whether the future she knows will be changed as a result of her and the criminals having gone back in time to 2012. So either they are a part of events that she knows from the future she came from, or she and they will be responsible for altering the future as events unfold in 2012. What they completely sidestepped was whether traveling to the past would send you back to an alternate dimension, much like what we were expected to believe with respect to Nero and Spock Prime having traveled to the past in ST09, but which the writers didn't substantively support given how they wrote the screenplay. However, that is the third theory of time travel--that you end up in an alternate universe very similar in all likelihood to the one you know, but not the same universe that you came from.

Jan 16, 2013 8:10:13 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

Will they establish a means to get back to the future?

Possibly, but they also indicated that it's far more likely that she'll never be able to actually return to the future she came from, so maybe they'll dangle that carrot in front of her every so often, but she'll be continually thwarted with respect to being able to get back home. I think she's stuck here, and we'll see occasional brief scenes from the future she came from, but that's it. We'll see.

[CRAMBAM]

It's implied that in theory, she can make changes. She can invest in the stock market, bet on sports, and become very rich.

My thing is that she can take action to prevent herself from being sent to the past, but at the same time, if she does that, then how can she prevent herself from going to the past?

Basically, if she can't get back, for all intents and purposes, she's dead to her family. Her son will have to grow up with out her.

The only exception I can think of then would be her family going to the past and they find each other.

[StarFuryG7]

By the way --the first episode of this series airs again tonight at 10:00 EST on SFC for those of you who may not have seen it, but are interested.

I know I screwed up yesterday and said last night. Sorry about that --I didn't realize it until I was watching "American Horror Story".

[StarFuryG7]

Jan 16, 2013 15:10:37 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

It's implied that in theory, she can make changes. She can invest in the stock market, bet on sports, and become very rich.

Yes, she can do all those things, but as Sandler told her, by the time 2077 rolls around there might not be any change to the timeline because her actions were always intended to be a part of how history plays out. He also told her the reverse, that what you just said could be the result as well. We just don't know how it's going to play out yet. We've only seen episode 1, so it still remains to be seen which will be the case.

Jan 16, 2013 15:10:37 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

My thing is that she can take action to prevent herself from being sent to the past, but at the same time, if she does that, then how can she prevent herself from going to the past?

I think we're passed that actually, but of course, who's to say that the timeline can't be changed multiple times?

Jan 16, 2013 15:10:37 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

Basically, if she can't get back, for all intents and purposes, she's dead to her family. Her son will have to grow up with out her.

The only exception I can think of then would be her family going to the past and they find each other.

I suppose it would be possible for her to plant a message into the future she came from at some point ...perhaps, but then you're getting into real paradox territory, and I think she's basically stuck where's now landed in 2012. As the prisoner she interrogated told her, it was always going to be a one-way trip.

[CRAMBAM]

Yes, she can do all those things, but as Sandler told her, by the time 2077 rolls around there might not be any change to the timeline because her actions were always intended to be a part of how history plays out. He also told her the reverse, that what you just said could be the result as well. We just don't know how it's going to play out yet. We've only seen episode 1, so it still remains to be seen which will be the case.

Right, but she can always test the theory by destroying something she knows exists in 2077.

Yes, it was a one way trip, but that really sucks for her. It's not unlike the Weeping Angels in Doctor Who, except here, it makes a little more sense since there is no alien with a time machine that for some strange reason can't magically get them.

[StarFuryG7]

Jan 17, 2013 11:14:39 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

Right, but she can always test the theory by destroying something she knows exists in 2077.

She's very wary about doing that though because she doesn't want to alter the future, inadvertently or otherwise, and she could even erase herself if she's not extremely careful.

[CRAMBAM]

Three episodes in, and I found that episode 3, while not as good as the first 2, was still good.

I did read a non spoiler from people who have finished the season already.

Apparently, the show picks up steam in the middle of the season, and just gets better. That's certainly a good thing.

[StarFuryG7]

That fight sequence in this last episode was well choreographed and pretty cool.

[StarFuryG7]

This guy slams the show pretty harshly, including the end to the fight sequence that I referenced in my last post.

Over at Mania (formerly Cinescape):

Continuum: Wasting Time Review
January29, 2013

www.mania.com/continuum-wasting-time-review_article_136750.html

[CRAMBAM]

It's been a couple days since this episode aired, so I think it's ok to talk about it.

The show explored the "what happens if you kill your grandmother" question a little.

It's interesting that the guy who's grandmother was killed did not disappear. That seems to imply that this is a separate universe, not just a separate timeline, and it's more like the Abrams vision where you are in a parallel timeline.

I think that's actually pretty good for this show, because these are terrorists, and it would be impossible for Keira to protect all her ancestors.

[StarFuryG7]

Feb 13, 2013 8:56:15 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

It's interesting that the guy who's grandmother was killed did not disappear. That seems to imply that this is a separate universe, not just a separate timeline, and it's more like the Abrams vision where you are in a parallel timeline.

That's exactly what I thought while watching it Monday night, and had I not been distracted by my desktop computer having blown out Monday afternoon, I might have actually posted that same thought here myself. Glad to see someone else here picked up on it though.

I'm so pissed ...this was not a good time for my PC to die on me, and it did so without any warning at all.

[StarFuryG7]

Did anyone see this latest episode?

Is it me, or are Basic Cable stations pushing the envelope and getting ever more racier?

I must confess I was a little surprised to see her husband's best friend corner her in the Ladies Room and then blatantly grab her breasts in full camera view.

I'd bet the actor playing that role got a bit of a thrill out of it too, unless the dude is gay.

[CRAMBAM]

If I were that actor, I would have flubbed lines on purpose.

[StarFuryG7]

Feb 26, 2013 12:39:48 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

If I were that actor, I would have flubbed lines on purpose.

I know what you mean, but at the same time I wouldn't have wanted to annoy Rachel Nichols by doing that. She's kind of a prude and was probably uncomfortable about it as things stood. In fact, I'm kind of surprised she even agreed to it.

[CRAMBAM]

How do you know she's a prude?

[StarFuryG7]

Feb 28, 2013 7:26:28 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

How do you know she's a prude?

It's just an impression that I formed fairly recently while reading a few interviews that she did a while back. She has a hang-up about nudity and refuses to do such scenes, which in and of itself may not be a huge deal to some people. After all, not all actresses are keen on nudity and won't do scenes that call for it, but she also starred in a movie called "P2", and she made sure to have it written into her contract that no trace of a nipple could be seen through the slip she was wearing throughout most of the movie. That just struck me as a bit ridiculous and more hung-up than they even were on "Charlie's Angels" way back in the 70s until some viewers actually noticed Jaclyn Smith's nipple in a white bathing suit (I believe) that she was wearing in one of the episodes.

She's a nice looking girl though. She was a model before she started acting, and a nude scene or two certainly wouldn't kill her career, but that's just my opinion of course.

[CRAMBAM]

I would encourage her being naked in any capacity. But I don't know if I would consider a reluctance to get naked to be prudish. She did after all, do the Orion slave girl thing.

[StarFuryG7]

Mar 4, 2013 12:39:05 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

I would encourage her being naked in any capacity.

Well, forget it, because it's never gonna happen --not with that gal.

Mar 4, 2013 12:39:05 GMT -5 CRAMBAM said:

But I don't know if I would consider a reluctance to get naked to be prudish. She did after all, do the Orion slave girl thing.

True, but it was the extra step she felt the need to go that got me thinking that, by making sure it got written into her contract that no visible hint of a nipple could be seen in the slip she had to wear through most of "P2", which as I said, I thought to be a bit ridiculous.

[CRAMBAM]

For some reason my DVR doesn't like this show. I have it set automatically, but it doesn't record it. With JR's funeral last week, I totally forgot about it until last night.

Good thing it's on demand. Will watch it after work.

[StarFuryG7]

The also airs also tonight at 8:00 and again at 11:00 PM.