Tangenting off into the analytical: now we get to wallow in the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic rationales.
Extrinsic: Michael Shanks doesn't need glasses, and when they blocked the scene, the bit about removing the glasses seemed like a nice moment of physical business to punch up the emotional subtext. (This suggests that the director doesn't wear glasses either, or he'd know better.)
Intrinsic: Daniel has been in and out of sarcophagi so many times that he sometimes forgets that he needs the glasses. So he removes them in a moment of emphatic emotion, then realises he can't see a damned thing. Or maybe his vision actually fluctuates.
Extrinsic is the real reason, but intrinsic is so much more fun as an imaginative exercise, don't you think?
no subject
Extrinsic: Michael Shanks doesn't need glasses, and when they blocked the scene, the bit about removing the glasses seemed like a nice moment of physical business to punch up the emotional subtext. (This suggests that the director doesn't wear glasses either, or he'd know better.)
Intrinsic: Daniel has been in and out of sarcophagi so many times that he sometimes forgets that he needs the glasses. So he removes them in a moment of emphatic emotion, then realises he can't see a damned thing. Or maybe his vision actually fluctuates.
Extrinsic is the real reason, but intrinsic is so much more fun as an imaginative exercise, don't you think?