S10: Critique & Contemplation

[Skydiver]

what i don't get is, they screw up show after show after show...and they don't get it

they don't see that shows die AFTER they start to dictate plot adn method and means. if they would just keep thier paws out of it they'd have no end of successful shows to air and build the network, but they keep screwing themselves over by meddling

are they really that arrogant or blind?

[ShardsofGlass]

what i don't get is, they screw up show after show after show...and they don't get it

they don't see that shows die AFTER they start to dictate plot adn method and means. if they would just keep thier paws out of it they'd have no end of successful shows to air and build the network, but they keep screwing themselves over by meddling

are they really that arrogant or blind?

Which shows have they screwed over?

[LaCroix]

Which shows have they screwed over?

I'm not Skydiver, but one show that they ruined is Forever Knight.

[golfbooy]

Totally, completely agree. They're all pawns now, right down to Mallozzi. Sony's come on board (along with NBC/Universal, as of last year), and they've taken over - big time.

I don't blame Ben Browder for taking this role. That's ludicrous. But I do blame writing and I'll blame the producers. It would seem that everyone's on a leash here, and the ones at the other end are Scifi execs.

I can't help but feel that they sold their collective souls when they started Atlantis two years ago. Now they can't afford to rebel or bite the hand that feeds a la Farscape - or they risk screwing over another series. How depressing.

Thank you. For quite awhile now I've felt as if I were the only one who thought they made a real mistake with Atlantis. Or to be clearer, Bridge made a mistake with Atlantis. For Skiffy, bullying TPTB into giving them a second series was absolutely a good move. For so long they were unable to successfully pair a show with SG-1 on Friday nights--I can't fault them for a good business move.

Still, Atlantis seems to have wrought (in my view) nothing but hard times and diminished quality at Bridge. Aside from RDA's reduction in availability, nearly all of the difficulties associated with SG-1 over the past few years stem from Atlantis' creation and production. To start, there's the obvious budgetary concerns TPTB have been dealing with over the past few years. They've publicly stated that they simply didn't have the money to do many of the scenes, effects, and off-world storytelling that they wanted to do. On the season eight DVDs Michael Greenburg even states somewhat bitterly that Reckoning was an even grander vision than it turned out to be, with a lack of funds resulting in fewer build-up moments between the Jaffa and Replicator fleets.

Then there's the increased burden on the production team. TPTB at Stargate are a talented bunch, but going from 22 hours of television being created and produced to 40 hours of television in the same amount of time, while not expecting attention to detail and quality to be somewhat diminished, is flat out unrealistic. Too many decisions have to be made according to what's best for production, not what's best for either show. If SG-1 needs a set for a shoot but Atlantis needs it tomorrow, the pressure on everyone to get shots filmed as quickly as possible overrules the desire to get things filmed as well as possible. Actors don't get the time to get scenes as perfect as they could be, directors don't get to shoot from all of the angles they wish, designers don't get the time to really add those little touches that transform a stage into another world. None of these make much a difference individually or occaisonally, but when combined together over the course of years and when occurring often enough, they are noticable to the audience.

And as you mentioned, Spaz, Bridge lost their real bargaining chip with Skiffy when it bankrolled Atlantis. Coupled with the one time (not sure if it's the case anymore) belief that SG-1 would end and that Atlantis would continue, saying "Yes" here and there to a few of the network's "notes" was the right course of action. But with each acquiescence Bridge lost more and more it's ability to say "No" to demands from Skiffy. At this point, I have serious doubts as to whether or not true creative control of either series rests with TPTB at Bridge anymore. I do think that both Browder's and Black's sojourn into the Stargate Universe was instigated by Sci-Fi, and the revelation that Vala's return at the end of this year (and seemingly her addition next year) is at Skiffy's behest only demonstrates to me that even the fundamental plotting of the show is now as much in the network's hands as it is Bridge's. They are going to massively disruptive lengths, both to the series and to the actress, to include Vala this year. I can't see how any of TPTB think it's a good idea. I just don' think they have the power to say "No" anymore, and that's largely due to Atlantis.

Lastly, I don't think that making Atlantis while SG-1 is still on the air is fair to either show. I think it hurts Atlantis creatively, and I think it hurts Atlantis in the eyes of many viewers. Already the series has borrowed heavily from SG-1's extensive library of ideas and episodes, and the drastically increasing frequency of crossovers (both story, prop, and character) only further embed it in it's position as a supplement to SG-1 rather than as a series in it's own right. Atlantis should have been the next step for Stargate, rather than merely marching in step with SG-1's lead.

And don't get me wrong, I still enjoy the show. I always will. And like a good many others I've seen online, I enjoy episodes far more after they've aired on Sci-fi and have moved on to sydication or DVDs. But that doesn't effect my ability to critically analyze what's going on behind the scenes and what direction the show is taking. I'm feeling awfully critical at the moment, though, and in my eyes much of that criticism is rooted in Atlantis' and Skiffy's needs clashing with SG-1's.

[ses110]

Excellent post.I think even Bridge could not argue with anything you said in this post.Scifi has killed SG-1 and it may kill Atlantis.I always though Atlantis would start after SG-1 was off the Air.I almost wish SG-1 was never picked up by Scifi.We could have had a couple of great SG-1 Movies by now.I never watched Atlantis but I always felt Atlantis should have nothing to do with SG-1.No crossover of any chararcters and let Atlantis stand on it's own.RDA was always blamed for the lack of team episodes the last couple of Years and RDA is not on the Show this year so where are the team episodes?It's clear Scifi is behind the BB and CB hiring.I do not blame CB and BB for taking the Job.TPTB need to keep there paws of the TV Shows and just hire good people and get out of the way.Bridge must feel like there working with both hands tied behind there backs and Scifi looking over there shoulder.I feel bad Bridge has to defend alot of the problems with the Show caused by Scifi.

[frellu2]

they can argue ben is the lead because his name is first....but someone's had to be...if no one was first, no one would be second.

and others have argued that the 'and' denotes more importance than a first name.

potato-potahto

one place where ben's name isn't is 'ben browder in stargate', which does put him in more of and equal standing with the others.

personally i think that Lead is more the attitude of the actor than his/her place in the credits.

to me, a lead actor helps to nurture the others. s/he is usually an actor of more experience who kinda forges the way for the others. they act as a mentor to help the others grow and develop and has the confidence to not be jealous if one of the supporting actors happens to grow up beyond the lead. instead of being threatened by a growing popularity, the lead is happy, because it means that s/he's done their job

so, to me, while ben may have the experience leading a show, he is not and will never be of rda's caliber simply because he's a child compared to rda. And if it wasn't for farscape, he'd be yet another relatively nameless male actor

that's not to say that he can't develop into a lead actor...but he's gotta get some years under his belt first.

RDA and Ben Browder are at two different points in their careers. At the age of 55, after a long career in television (General Hospital, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, Emerald Point N.A.S., MacGyver and Stargate), RDA decided to retire and focus on his personal life. BB is just starting his career as a lead actor.

The difference between BB and AT, MS and CJ is breadth versus depth of experience. BB’s career has been more varied, while Stargate has made up the bulk of AT, MS and CJ’s careers. AT, MS and CJ have worked for nine years on Stargate and their non-Stargate experience is predominantly for genre shows made in Canada for American consumption (Andromeda, The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, and Highlander).

BB has worked on three continents (UK, Australia and USA/Canada), has lead actor experience (Farscape), has been a recurring guest on an American network series (Party of Five) and had numerous guest appearances on various American television series (CSI: Miami, Murder, She Wrote, Melrose Place, Grace Under Fire).


Starlog #328, November 2004
Ben Browder:

“When I was auditioning for series and they inevitably chose some guy who [had been a lead] before, I used to wonder, ‘Why won’t they give me a chance?’ And then I got a job as a lead on a show, and I began to understand why they didn’t give me a chance as an untried actor who had never carried a show before. It’s a qualitatively different job than being a guest star, or even a regular, and people handle it with varying degrees or success and in various ways.”

[AGateFan]

All the main characters on SG-1 are considered Leads.

[esoap524]

yeah i agree with that
Ben is a great actor who has experience with a leading role on another show. But AT, MS and CJ have 9 years experience with the way SG works on and offscreen

I think it is a bit rude for BB to step in to take the 'leading role'
whether you think the show has an ensemble lead or not, i think the majority of first time watchers would think Ben was the star of the show purely because he leads SG1 and his name is first on the credits

of course the majority of us old school fans would think that the 4 of them play the leading roles, but then TPTB arent directing this show towards us anymore

Someone's got to take the "lead role."

I would guess that if the other actors felt put upon by that, they'd have jumped ship, if indeed it's even an issue for them. So far, Browder hasn't gotten any more screen time than CJ or MS or even AT once she returned from her leave.

People watching the credits might think he's the "star" but people actually watching the show would see that no one character actually gets the limelight every time out, the first 5 episodes of season 9 notwithstanding.

Plus, if you're comparing Browder and RDA, well, I remember watching RDA on General Hospital when I was 14 years old (I'm the same age as Browder). Of course RDA has more experience. He's older. His name also came before the name of the show, as I recall. Now you get Browder, et al, and he's not set apart from the rest of the cast. So he didn't actually replace RDA in the credits.

Oh, one more thought. You also have to consider behind the scenes things. Browder was the lead in Farscape, which was a show that was produced in a very collaborative environment. The actors on that show pretty much had to do a lot of their own "directing" so to speak, because of the vast array of technical issues with puppets and green screens, re-voicing 90% of the dialogue AFTER the episode was shot and the like. It's very possible that the folks at SG1 took that into account as well. It's not just the amount of shows on his resume, but the type of work he did on those shows.

Like I said, someone's got to play the lead. SG1 hired a very capable and dedicated person. Not to say the others aren't, but I'm sure there was a method to their madness.

What's most ironic about this Ben's the star thing, is that he's probably one of the least egotistical guys I've ever seen interviewed or seen in person. I know he's an actor (isn't everyone who appears on screen?) but I've never seen or heard him take credit even when he should. He gave the lion's share to his co-stars on FS, or the directors or even the puppets on Farscape. He's just a self-deprecating kind of guy.

[AGateFan]

All the main characters are considered Leads.

Hey here’s an idea. Lets say something negative about season 10.

I am quickly starting to get a sick feeling every time I think of Stargate Season 10.
Is it Stargate? Me? (or) This website?


EDITED for formatting, because I want all my lovely anti-positive comments to be readable.

[PG15]

A little bit of all three me thinks.

[dreamer]

All the main characters are considered Leads.

Hey here’s an idea. Lets say something negative about season 10.

I am quickly starting to get a sick feeling every time I think of Stargate Season 10.
Is it Stargate? Me? (or) This website?


EDITED for formatting, because I want all my lovely anti-positive comments to be readable.

I think it is a bit of both. All the negative feedback all though it seems to be deserving is also very uncomfortable. Hopefully the comments can get picked up by those who can see what people are upset about and try to change before it is too late. Some people feel it is already over. I hope they save themselves and go back to being a team show. It worked as a team show without all the half dressed through yourself at everyone stuff. Doesn't need it. The ships were cute and kind gave a realness to the characters. However, it seems to have caused a lot of problems for everyone. Get back to exploring and saving the world.

[Skydiver]

i think it comes down to balance. yes, sam getting a boyfriend did flesh out her character...but did her love life really need to be the focus of three episodes? (parts of grace, chimera, affinity)

why this sudden need to fit in for Teal'c? for 8 years he hadn't cared, all of a sudden it's important

if the relationships were bits and pieces of episodes maybe they would have been better received than when they're the focus of 40 odd minutes of earth bound fun and games

[binkpmmc]

Thank you. For quite awhile now I've felt as if I were the only one who thought they made a real mistake with Atlantis. Or to be clearer, Bridge made a mistake with Atlantis. For Skiffy, bullying TPTB into giving them a second series was absolutely a good move. For so long they were unable to successfully pair a show with SG-1 on Friday nights--I can't fault them for a good business move. snip, snip

Excellent post - I tried to green rep you and it told me I have to spread it around first so I hope that means it's working and I am not just getting that message for everyone (I got it for everyone I tried to rep so far - is anyone else having that problem?)

[Skydiver]

the rep system seems to be working. instead of a popup box, you get send to a new page that opens in the same browser window, then goes back to the page you were on.

[Skydiver]

i think this answers a lot of it

from joe's thread

SciFi does provide input on major casting decisions and inputs on the various scripts and cuts as well.

so, the fine :sarcasm: folks at skiffy are calling the shots. which, i think, explains a lot