PDA

View Full Version : Michael Shanks not yet signed for season 10



prion
November 1st, 2005, 04:00 PM
Just reporting the post. Any quibbles over wording, quibble at MS's publicist, as this apepars to be a direct quote. ANd keeping this separate from Amanda Tapping stuff...

From Michael Shanks Online (http://www.michaelshanks-online.com)

Ending much speculation resulting from the London Expo cancellation,
the following information has been provided to MSOL by Michael's
publicist:

"Michael's appearance at the London Expo was actually cancelled awhile
ago as Michael had some general commitments to meet in Los Angeles
that weekend, and not for any specific meeting about any particular
major TV role as has been previously reported. Further, in terms of
his appearance in Season 10 of Stargate SG-1, at this time Michael is
not confirmed as returning and is a free agent."

Which I take to be: MS is in contract negotiations, as whenever I hear free agent, I think of overpriced sports players.... ;)

sueKay
November 1st, 2005, 04:13 PM
I highly doubt that MS will leave SG1, but that's just MO and I'll try and reserve judgement for now...

AGateFan
November 1st, 2005, 04:34 PM
I would be quite unhappy if MS left the show, again. That said I am not too worried he will do so. Considering the new season would seem to be heavy on the Daniel I am guessing that he will sign.

(Funny how the apparent direction of the show leads one to easily beleive certain possibilities while disregard others outright.)

Hatcheter
November 1st, 2005, 05:56 PM
I do know that all members of the cast have made known their desire to return for a 10th season.

I assume Shanks is included in "all". ;)

the fifth man
November 1st, 2005, 07:57 PM
I'm not too worried about the possibility of Shanks leaving SG-1. I just don't think it's going to happen.

Gate Freak
November 1st, 2005, 11:54 PM
I would seriously doubt that Michael will be leaving before the show ends now. He knows that, despite the fact Ben has the lead role in the opening titles, this show is centred on him now. Jack leaving made Daniel the heart of Stargate for most fans and the producers know it. They have purposely worked to create a whole new status quo for him, particularly with the return of Vala, and they will not want to have to rethink now.

Definate negotitation tactics going on here and i say go for it, Michael! You deserve a pay rise! ;)

SGVern
November 2nd, 2005, 12:09 AM
I should note here the GW article on the wrap party dated 10/6. Give the actors a break, all will be well. If not, GW will post.

prion
November 2nd, 2005, 02:35 PM
I would seriously doubt that Michael will be leaving before the show ends now. He knows that, despite the fact Ben has the lead role in the opening titles, this show is centred on him now. Jack leaving made Daniel the heart of Stargate for most fans and the producers know it. They have purposely worked to create a whole new status quo for him, particularly with the return of Vala, and they will not want to have to rethink now.

Definate negotitation tactics going on here and i say go for it, Michael! You deserve a pay rise! ;)

Yes, the actors are in negotiation. Scifi isn't saying anything more past that (I asked a friend who is a reporter to look into it and that's all Scifi will say)

the fifth man
November 2nd, 2005, 06:48 PM
Money is what that business is all about. I'm sure everything will fall into place as it should. I'm pretty optimistic about this.

prion
November 3rd, 2005, 03:23 AM
Michael just landed a role on CSI: Miami (in a guest star capacity) which is why he has just bowed out of the Wolf 10 convention in the UK. That's a big coup!


From the wolf 10 message board :

"To everyone attending SG-10, I want to extend my sincere apology that I have at the eleventh hour to cancel my appearance. This is not something I do lightly but it is unavoidable. I have spend most of today/night with Bryan on the phone trying to work out a plan but we have failed to find a way round my work commitment. After having to cancel the Expo last week I was so sure that there would not be a problem with SG-10.

I will be guest starring on the US hit series CSI Miami and was only booked yesterday and am required on set Friday.

Not the news I wanted you to hear but I do wish you all the best at the event and will be phoning into SG-10 to talk to you all on Saturday."

Jace021903
November 3rd, 2005, 04:41 AM
Michael just landed a role on CSI: Miami (in a guest star capacity) which is why he has just bowed out of the Wolf 10 convention in the UK. That's a big coup!


From the wolf 10 message board :

"To everyone attending SG-10, I want to extend my sincere apology that I have at the eleventh hour to cancel my appearance. This is not something I do lightly but it is unavoidable. I have spend most of today/night with Bryan on the phone trying to work out a plan but we have failed to find a way round my work commitment. After having to cancel the Expo last week I was so sure that there would not be a problem with SG-10.

I will be guest starring on the US hit series CSI Miami and was only booked yesterday and am required on set Friday.

Not the news I wanted you to hear but I do wish you all the best at the event and will be phoning into SG-10 to talk to you all on Saturday."


Congratulations to Michael. :)

Isn't Jonathan Glassner working on CSI: Miami is some capacity?

Jace

LaCroix
November 3rd, 2005, 04:55 AM
JG is a sometimes writer and Cons. producer on the show. Last time he wrote anything for CSI Miami was in s3. Also one guest spot alone is not a big coup. His spot could last 5 mins and they would have to say Guest Starring.

prion
November 3rd, 2005, 08:11 AM
JG is a sometimes writer and Cons. producer on the show. Last time he wrote anything for CSI Miami was in s3. Also one guest spot alone is not a big coup. His spot could last 5 mins and they would have to say Guest Starring.

Actors really want to be on any of the CSI shows because it gives them worldwide exposure you can't get on other shows. Yes, MS could have five minutes or ten; it's hard to tell, but it's exposure. Can't argue that. In my book, getting a gig on a CSI is great.

GateAngel
November 3rd, 2005, 09:57 AM
Just reporting the post. Any quibbles over wording, quibble at MS's publicist, as this apepars to be a direct quote. ANd keeping this separate from Amanda Tapping stuff...

;)

Because you mentioned 'wording', I thought I would share my article I wrote for Eclipse Magazine from the same press release sent to me by Michael Shanks' publicist at the same time it was sent to Msol, Solutions and several others for reporting and news writing:)

http://www.eclipsemagazine.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1545

the fifth man
November 3rd, 2005, 11:28 AM
Yeah, I think this little role on CSI is great for MS. Good for him. And I'm sure he'll be around like we all expect next season on SG-1.

prion
November 3rd, 2005, 02:43 PM
http://www.michaelshanks-online.com/news/index.shtml

now has the details (spoilers) of his role on CSI: Miami.

Dutch_Razor
November 5th, 2005, 02:19 AM
I assume Shanks is included in "all". ;)

Does "all" includes ALL?

(RDA?)

Kas
November 5th, 2005, 07:36 AM
http://www.michaelshanks-online.com/news/index.shtml

Michael has checked in with the people at the Wolf Convention by phone where he says that they now have season 10 and 'he is looking forward to it'.

Guess he's still not yet signed but that like Amanda, he intends to. Just a formality of hammering out those little contract details. :)

NowIWillDestroyAbydos
November 5th, 2005, 11:41 AM
If Shanks has to leave the show again, he should be replaced with Corin Nemec (like when Shanks left after Season 5)

LaCroix
November 5th, 2005, 11:45 AM
If Shanks has to leave the show again, he should be replaced with Corin Nemec (like when Shanks left after Season 5)


I think that'll happen when Ne'tu freezes over.

smurf
November 5th, 2005, 12:06 PM
If Shanks has to leave the show again, he should be replaced with Corin Nemec (like when Shanks left after Season 5)
Would be nice but unfortunately
a) Shanks isn't going to leave
b) Shanks isn't going to leave
c) I wonder if Corin would want to join the show as a regular any more. Guest star, yes, but could he trust them (TPTB) if he returned as a regular?

oh and
d) Shanks isn't going to leave :p

NowIWillDestroyAbydos
November 5th, 2005, 12:14 PM
I think that'll happen when Ne'tu freezes over.
So say you. Don't give red for this but, I'd pick Corin Nemic over Claudia Black as a cast member anyday. Or is it just me.

smurf
November 5th, 2005, 12:16 PM
So say you. Don't give red for this but, I'd pick Corin Nemic over Claudia Black as a cast member anyday. Or is it just me.
I think LaCroix meant that TPTB will never ask Corin back as a regular. And let's be quite honest, they won't.


Unless they did and he told them where to stick it. :D
***This is not fact, or rumour, or anything*** :D

AGateFan
November 5th, 2005, 12:20 PM
So say you. Don't give red for this but, I'd pick Corin Nemic over Claudia Black as a cast member anyday. Or is it just me.
I would also prefer Jonas back full time before making Vala full time.
But I dont know why they cant just go with their first plan for a few years - Mitchell, Carter, Daniel Jackson, Teal'c.

Lets let this run for a few years, then if someone wants to leave you can replace them like you did RDA. This reshuffling the cast twice in two years just shows to me that the shows in trouble. And the addition of Vala (taking the show further away from its roots) will not fix the problem. At least the Jonas character was designed to be a member of SG-1 (a hero, good guy who really wants to help and save people).

Skydiver
November 5th, 2005, 12:21 PM
If Shanks has to leave the show again, he should be replaced with Corin Nemec (like when Shanks left after Season 5)
yeah, like lacroix said, netu will freeze first.

we'll get skippy the talking chihauhaha before they'll bring jonas back

smurf
November 5th, 2005, 12:26 PM
yeah, like lacroix said, netu will freeze first.

we'll get skippy the talking chihauhaha before they'll bring jonas back
I heard Skippy was busy and couldn't do S9.

Skydiver
November 5th, 2005, 12:27 PM
why won't they ask corin back??? cause he doesnt fill out a buster like claudia does. :D

IMHO, they never should have gotten rid of corin, but that's water under the bridge. he's gone and he's got spot #1 on the 'do not mention his name' list


and i personally have no doubt at all that MS will sign.

NowIWillDestroyAbydos
November 5th, 2005, 12:44 PM
You know if Shanks does leave Corin would be (and was during Season 6) a perfect replacement for Shanks than Claudia would be, because Daniel and Jonas are archaeological experts. And Vala is a good replacement for Jack, because they both have a sense of humor (I'm not say Mitchell doesn't have a sense (just watch the last 5 minutes of Avalon, Part 1 "Whoa, Whoa, Whoa man bullets bounce"))

sueKay
November 5th, 2005, 12:49 PM
I really don't get TPTB sometimes...season six was great and well...season nine for me so far...meh

Bring back Jonas and they bring back part of the feel of the show

but maybe that's why they'll never bring him back...

Skydiver
November 5th, 2005, 01:29 PM
I really don't get TPTB sometimes...season six was great and well...season nine for me so far...meh

Bring back Jonas and they bring back part of the feel of the show

but maybe that's why they'll never bring him back...
probably

i'm with you sue, s6 was the highpoint for me, so i'd love to recapture that feeling...but i'm not holding my breath

scifi doesn't care about the quality of the show, just how much they can try to do a live action tripping the rift

NowIWillDestroyAbydos
November 5th, 2005, 01:33 PM
scifi doesn't care about the quality of the show, just how much they can try to do a live action tripping the rift
Well they should, the better the quality the longer the show and the crapier (of the quality) the show, the shorter the show.

prion
November 5th, 2005, 01:39 PM
I heard Skippy was busy and couldn't do S9.

Skippy the Bush Kangaroo? Remember that show as a kid.... ;)

I don't doubt that everybody will sign back for season 10, but with conditions/perks for writing, directing, etc., those coveted things you get because I don't think there are going to be across-the-board astronomical pay raises....

the fifth man
November 6th, 2005, 01:39 PM
For right now, I'm still pretty positive about everyone signing back on for next season. I'd continue to watch either way, but just feel we'd be way better off with things staying like they are now for awhile longer. At least a couple more seasons.

smurf
November 6th, 2005, 01:53 PM
Skippy the Bush Kangaroo? Remember that show as a kid.... ;)

I don't doubt that everybody will sign back for season 10, but with conditions/perks for writing, directing, etc., those coveted things you get because I don't think there are going to be across-the-board astronomical pay raises....
They had intended to sign Flipper for S3 of SGA, but with having to make room for Sam it all fell through.

I think it was on the commentary for Metamorphosis when James Tichnor said something along the lines of they offered writing or directing opportunities to cut back on the pay rises.

I wouldn't be surprised if everyone re-signed. It's a nice gig if you can get it.

Skydiver
November 6th, 2005, 02:05 PM
i can see that happening, and in one way it's a good thing for the actors. yes, more money is always good, however putting writer or director on your resume could make you more marketable

almost every evening when i watch tv, i see familiar names as directors, Betty Thomas, Roxanne Dawson, the guy that played tom paris, plus others

all of these were actors of a decent level, but actos that would never be 'a' list or stars.

however, being a writer or director can give an actor a career beyond that of in front of a fickle camera where, all too often, the emphasis is on looks and not talent

smurf
November 6th, 2005, 02:17 PM
i can see that happening, and in one way it's a good thing for the actors. yes, more money is always good, however putting writer or director on your resume could make you more marketable

almost every evening when i watch tv, i see familiar names as directors, Betty Thomas, Roxanne Dawson, the guy that played tom paris, plus others

all of these were actors of a decent level, but actos that would never be 'a' list or stars.

however, being a writer or director can give an actor a career beyond that of in front of a fickle camera where, all too often, the emphasis is on looks and not talent
Very true, and probably more important to those actors who work in genres with the most risk of typecasting, like sci-fi. Especially now pretty young things in not much clothing is "in" again, and shelf life becomes much shorter.

maddyjames
November 6th, 2005, 05:02 PM
You know, this seems really... I dunno... icky to me. He cancels on Gate Fans at the last minute-- many of whom went to the convention just to see him, so that he can start filming on CSI. Further, he is not yet signing, presumably to get more money... seems quite prima donna-ish to me. I mean, he left for a year, and then because he wanted to come back Corin Nemic was dropped like a hat, and here comes Michael-- with special added billing on the credits. How David Caruso....

I know a lot of people out there like Michael, I don't dislike him. However, I have to say that Daniel's character has become like fingernails on a blackboard, especially when Vala is around. I think it's a mixture of writing and directing, but I really have to say that SG1 is not as good as it used to be, and I am quite tempted to completely stop watching it, it's been so bad.

And I have a few friends who are saying the same things... But it seems quite prima dona to me, he'll probably demand more money or will refuse to sign. This show has jumped the show, and Michael is trying to fish for more money. I think it's rude to his fans, they made him, and look at the way he is treating him. He's probably trying to negotiate for top billing or something. Seems rather egomaniacle to me.

maddy

Skydiver
November 6th, 2005, 05:16 PM
actors canceling con appearances for work is actually quite common

teryl missed part of her commitments to gatecon 2001 because she was playing Heimdal

amanda cancelled gabit the first time because she was taping

i think michael has cancelled before because of work and i know that other, not so main, actors have cancelled because they've gotten roles

not only that, actors have had to drop jobs on stargate because they have other roles. jr bourne was supposed to be in summit and last stand but got the role in 13 ghosts, the actress that played Cassie changed because Katie Stuart was making X-men 2

basically, the life and work of an actor is often last minute and thus, leades to them having to cancel things

it happens

prion
November 6th, 2005, 06:08 PM
You know, this seems really... I dunno... icky to me. He cancels on Gate Fans at the last minute-- many of whom went to the convention just to see him, so that he can start filming on CSI. Further, he is not yet signing, presumably to get more money... seems quite prima donna-ish to me. I mean, he left for a year, and then because he wanted to come back Corin Nemic was dropped like a hat, and here comes Michael-- with special added billing on the credits. How David Caruso

Neither Michael nor Amanda have signed, and heck, we don't know about Chris either. It's a very common practice that when a contract expires and comes up for rengotiation, as it does on SG1 as they do it on a yearly basis, that everybody is going to jockey for added benefits. You'd been a fool not to.

As for the Corin Nemec situation, fans were not privy to what happened behind the scenes so there's no use assigning blame. Magazine articles said that Michael was asked to come back.

As for the credits, agents negotiate for those credits. That's another common practice in HOllywood. Michael's not the only one to do it.

As for actors cancelling out of cons, they're getting work. You wouldn't NOT take a job to go a con, right? ;)

NowIWillDestroyAbydos
November 6th, 2005, 06:13 PM
And Sean Patrick Flannery couldn't reprise his role (as Orlin) in The Fourth Hourseman because he was on The Dead Zone (I think)

Kilharae
November 6th, 2005, 06:24 PM
Yeah, if Shanks leaves it's over. He's one of the two important people from the movie, in complete honesty, to myself included, I can admit that on SG-1 perhaps because of their character's inclusion in the actual movie, he and RDA were more important than Chris Judge and Amanda Tapping. So simply put, if he leaves it's over. This is a team show, I don't want to see characters traded on and off for the rest of it's life. This show was definetly strong enough to sustain it's lead character's loss, however if it loses another character the show will lose credability.

ShadowMaat
November 6th, 2005, 07:13 PM
why won't they ask corin back??? cause he doesnt fill out a bustier like claudia does. :D
I dunno, he looked pretty hot dressed as a hooker in Beer for my Horses. :D But yeah, Corin is never again setting foot on Stargate. Whatever happened, he's permanently blackballed, despite the placating BS TPTB occasionally spout.

Shanks coming back for S10 is about as sure as the stargate coming back for S10- it's an unquestionable certainty, as far as I'm concerned.

Will add to all the commentary about how actors cancel con appearances all the time- even at the last minute. Sometimes they don't know exactly when they're going to be needed on a set and if they're committed to work then they can't very well say, "Sorry, guys, I have to go to a convention instead." Not just because of the money, either. Shooting schedules can't always be flexible and in this case, to toss it all out the window for a guest star... frankly I think it'd have sounded a lot more prima donna if he HAD bailed on CSI to do the con. Screw up production of a show so that he can go and get his ego fed by his adoring fans? :rolleyes:

And no, I'm not saying anything about the size of Michael's ego (or any other parts of him ;)), I'm just showing how ANYTHING could be misconstrued, if folks are inclined to think negatively.

maddyjames
November 6th, 2005, 07:59 PM
teryl missed part of her commitments to gatecon 2001 because she was playing Heimdal

amanda cancelled gabit the first time because she was taping

Ah, but that was for their main show, Gate, wasn't it.

Hey, I used to work in Hollywood, I understand that actors have jobs that sort of pop up and require them to go somewhere asap.

What I'm irritated at is that he pooped out of a gate con to go to an off-gate thing-- the gaters are the ones that made him, and he just drops them off to do whatever.

I just find it.... well, quite frankly, as I said, I find it arrogant.

maddy

maddyjames
November 6th, 2005, 08:06 PM
[QUOTE=ShadowMaat] Corin is never again setting foot on Stargate. Whatever happened, he's permanently blackballed, despite the placating BS TPTB occasionally spout.

Shanks coming back for S10 is about as sure as the stargate coming back for S10- it's an unquestionable certainty, as far as I'm concerned.

Will add to all the commentary about how actors cancel con appearances all the time- even at the last minute. Sometimes they don't know exactly when they're going to be needed on a set and if they're committed to work then they can't very well say, "Sorry, guys, I have to go to a convention instead." Not just because of the money, either. Shooting schedules can't always be flexible and in this case, to toss it all out the window for a guest star... frankly I think it'd have sounded a lot more prima donna if he HAD bailed on CSI to do the con. Screw up production of a show so that he can go and get his ego fed by his adoring fans? :rolleyes:

QUOTE]


I am not saying I loved Corin, what I'm saying is that it seems as tho he was kicked off just because Michael wanted to come back. Where did you hear he was blackballed? Not questioning the accuracy, just curious. Why would they bring him back for s7 if blackballed? Seems to me like they just dropped Corin because Michael wanted his seat back.

As far as season 10 and whether or not Michael will be back, I do expect he will, but I also expect he'll demand a price hike and the show has gone so downhill I don't think that's really worth a tenth season. He'll probably demand top billing or something before he comes back... he's already got a special "and Michael Shanks as Dr. Daniel Jackson,"... Amanda and Chris don't have that, do they?

I do see your point on the convention, my take on it however is that the fans made him. To bail on his fans of stargate to go do an unrelated show on the 11th hour is really to say that his fans are less important than whatever cool new project he has. I think sometimes celebrities forget that it's the fans that made them, and they just drop them like that to go and do something completely unrelated to his previous committment. At least if it was filming for Gate or something that would be a little different, but to just go off because he has a chance to be on a popular tv show....

maddy

ShadowMaat
November 6th, 2005, 08:25 PM
re: Corin- like I said, I don't know what happened, but it's obvious he'll never be back. His appearance in S7 was just to fulfill his contract.

re: bailing on fans- So you'd prefer that the actors do absolutely nothing that isn't Stargate? Stargate made them so that's the only show they should ever be on?

No, I know that isn't what your saying, but my point is... actors have to work. That means that sometimes they work on things OTHER than their main job, particularly when it's in that show's downtime. That means that sometimes they have to "bail" on their fans in order to keep up with their work-related commitments. It might suck, but that's life. Especially in Hollywood. ;)

Madeleine
November 6th, 2005, 09:47 PM
What I'm irritated at is that he pooped out of a gate con to go to an off-gate thing-- the gaters are the ones that made him, and he just drops them off to do whatever.

I just find it.... well, quite frankly, as I said, I find it arrogant.

maddy

Teryl Rothery has bailed on the London Expo three times, all for work, never for Stargate work. Loads of the Trek actors who have been booked for the Expo or similar events cancel, at the last minute or with a few weeks notice, because they got work on other shows. Good for them.

A part in a TV show is not 'whatever'. It's a big deal.

Fans know and understand this. Fans read the bit on the flyer that says 'all guests appear subject to work commitments' and all but the greenest most illiterate con newbies know enough to half expect one or more cancellation from any con they buy tickets for. Fans are mostly generous enough to feel *happy* for the actor who makes his or her apologies on the grounds of a role they landed. Convention-going fans know that they are a tiny weeny part of what 'made' the actor, and know that they will not be able to (or want to) sustain him or her financially beyond the show's run. Fans tend to want to see their favourite show's actors in other things too, so that they know he or she will have an acting career to fall back on rather than the fickle con circuit once the show ends... but also just for the sake of it (witness the happy fuss Stargate Fandom made about MS on Andromeda, AT on Proof Positive).

Most fans would think it weird for an actor to turn down a part in an internationally recognised TV show to fly to a foreign country and natter to fans. I've never heard actual criticism of actors for taking the jobs they can get, or for bailing on cons because of it. If I did hear such criticism from a fan, I'd probably think the fan was extremely arrogant for putting his or her weekend's entertainment above a person's livelihood, and for imagining that fans getting to hear two hours of Q&A with the actor is more urgent / less rearrangeable than a part that could - literally - make a person's career (yes, I know it's unlikely, but still it's MS's first chance to get into the US actors' union and all that, I believe).

ShadowMaat
November 7th, 2005, 03:26 AM
Most fans would think it weird for an actor to turn down a part in an internationally recognised TV show to fly to a foreign country and natter to fans. I've never heard actual criticism of actors for taking the jobs they can get, or for bailing on cons because of it. If I did hear such criticism from a fan, I'd probably think the fan was extremely arrogant for putting his or her weekend's entertainment above a person's livelihood, and for imagining that fans getting to hear two hours of Q&A with the actor is more urgent / less rearrangeable than a part that could - literally - make a person's career (yes, I know it's unlikely, but still it's MS's first chance to get into the US actors' union and all that, I believe).
Amen, Mads. Far from demonstrating anything negative about the actor, it'd demonstrate something negative about the fan(s). How massively arrogant is it to assume that YOU, Joe (or Jane) Fan, are more important than an actor's prior work commitments or the possible future of his career?

prion
November 7th, 2005, 03:48 AM
[QUOTE=ShadowMaat] Corin is never again setting foot on Stargate. Whatever happened, he's permanently blackballed, despite the placating BS TPTB occasionally spout.
QUOTE]


I am not saying I loved Corin, what I'm saying is that it seems as tho he was kicked off just because Michael wanted to come back. Where did you hear he was blackballed? Not questioning the accuracy, just curious. Why would they bring him back for s7 if blackballed? Seems to me like they just dropped Corin because Michael wanted his seat back. maddy

Although this has nothing to do with Michael, there's no evidence except fan conjecture as to why Corin is off the show. As to the 'blackball' conjecture, that's all it is. No fan knows what went on.

LuvsJonasQuinn
November 7th, 2005, 03:50 AM
I'd love to see Corin back on the show as Jonas. I loved season 6. I also thought the scenes of Jonas and Daniel were good.

smurf
November 7th, 2005, 03:51 AM
...but still it's MS's first chance to get into the US actors' union and all that, I believe).
Out of interest, does anyone know how many parts in shows an actor needs to get into the union?
I'm guessing it's counted on x number of speaking roles within x years, am I right?

All credit to MS for getting a part on CSI and putting his career first. I think his year out from Stargate taught him a few useful lessons about ego, and I think it's a shame he wasted a great opportunity at the end of season 5 to go out and spread his acting wings. I don't think many other actors have had the chance to take risks, and have the security of recurring work on their old TV show.

Gate Freak
November 7th, 2005, 04:40 AM
Ah, but that was for their main show, Gate, wasn't it.

Hey, I used to work in Hollywood, I understand that actors have jobs that sort of pop up and require them to go somewhere asap.

What I'm irritated at is that he pooped out of a gate con to go to an off-gate thing-- the gaters are the ones that made him, and he just drops them off to do whatever.

I just find it.... well, quite frankly, as I said, I find it arrogant.

This reminds me of the attitude of many fans of Joss Whedon's series. I used to check out various forums dedicated to Buffy and Angel and i remember there being a sense of the fans believing that they somehow owned the actors and that, just because you happened to watch a series that an actor appeared in then they owed you some sort of debt.

I just don't see it that way at all. Sure, if we didn't watch Stargate then Michael would probably not have had the pleasure of playing Daniel Jackson for the last decade or so but i seriously doubt that an actor of his quality would have had trouble getting work somewhere or other.

These conventions are not something that the actors are obliged to do and they sure as hell don't owe us anything. They do them as a thank you and a way to meet their fans, not because it is a part of their contract. All they owe us for watching their television series is that they make the best of the lines they are given in each episode, nothing more. If they have to cancel one of those appearances because of work commitments, no matter whether it is related to their main show or not, then we should accept that. Shanks has a career to think about and it won't always revolve around Stargate.

As for the Corin Nemec thing, this again reminds me of the Whedonverse and the rumours of bad blood between Joss himself and Charisma Carpenter, when she left Angel at the end of season 4. Those rumours were eventually found to have been blown all out of proportion my internet gossip and i'm certain that this supposed trouble that Corin had with the Stargate PTB is more than likely exactly the same thing. Internet gossip that has taken on a life of it's own, regardless of any actual facts.

Skydiver
November 7th, 2005, 04:42 AM
people can think what they want, but i personally think it would have been pretty arrogant of MS to tell CSI to stuff it so that he could go to a con and get an ego boo.

in the same way i think it would have been silly of amanda to tell her hubby 'gee hon, sorry aobut our anniversary, but i'm gonna do a con instead' (she bailed on gatecon 2001 to go with her hubby to hawaii for thier anniversary)

life comes first and a career (and paycheck) ranks right up there.

something similar is why there's so little janet in s7. the renewal came so incredibly late that teryl couldn't wait so she kept lookingfor work, found jobs and then, when s7 was approved, stargate had to work around her existing schedule

I'm sorry that folks were disappointed but actors cancelling cons is just part and parcel of the whole experience

Madeleine
November 7th, 2005, 04:44 AM
people can think what they want, but i personally think it would have been pretty arrogant of MS to tell CSI to stuff it so that he could go to a con and get an ego boo.

LOL, you're right of course :)

ShadowMaat
November 7th, 2005, 05:06 AM
As for the Corin Nemec thing, this again reminds me of the Whedonverse and the rumours of bad blood between Joss himself and Charisma Carpenter, when she left Angel at the end of season 4. Those rumours were eventually found to have been blown all out of proportion my internet gossip and i'm certain that this supposed trouble that Corin had with the Stargate PTB is more than likely exactly the same thing. Internet gossip that has taken on a life of it's own, regardless of any actual facts.
I didn't always suspect bad blood between Corin and TPTB. Corin has certainly been very positive about his experiences on the show and while I still think he was nastily shafter, it was only as time continued to pass and no mention whatsoever was made of Jonas and no storylines were set to involve him and time passed and the characters continued to act as if Jonas didn't exist and never had that I began to wonder what was happening. TPTB kept saying it was a matter of finding the right story and the usual BS, but you can only hear that so many times before you realize it's exactly that: BS.

I believe one of TPTB also went on record at a convention as flat-out saying that Jonas would never be back (anyone recall who and which con?). No one else has said that, but it confirmed what a lot of fans feared and it's hard to go back to thinking that he might ever really appear on the show again, especially after so much time has passed.

But please excuse me for hijacking the thread. It's an old, sore wound and it's best left for discussion elsewhere. This thread is for discussing the chances of Shanks being in S10. And I still think it's a sure thing, regardless of whether or not he's actually signed on the dotted line yet. He may be spreading his wings a bit, but ALL actors do that, especially in the downtime. I don't think he's going to take flight until Stargate is good and dead.

And I think we can also all agree that only the shallowest and most arrogant of fans could think ill of the actors for doing their job instead of going to a con.

I won't be able to make it to whichever con Michael was scheduled to go to, but I WILL be able to tune in to CSI Miami to see his appearance. And there's a lot to be said for THAT, too.

keshou
November 7th, 2005, 05:17 AM
I am not saying I loved Corin, what I'm saying is that it seems as tho he was kicked off just because Michael wanted to come back. Where did you hear he was blackballed? Not questioning the accuracy, just curious. Why would they bring him back for s7 if blackballed? Seems to me like they just dropped Corin because Michael wanted his seat back.
I'm just interjecting my .02 here. :)

None of us know the truth. Frankly, I've come to believe - in my opinion only - that there are PTB that don't want Corin/Jonas back on the show.

Why do I think that?

The appearances in S7 seemed to be more nods to contract obligations than a real desire to keep the character of Jonas alive in the Stargate universe. The appearance in Fallout wasn't connected to Jonas' story arc they began at the end of S6. It was more a "filler" episode.

They could have easily kept Jonas in contact with Earth thru a series of guest spots in S7 and then used him in the Atlantis spin-off. That was their original intention for the character according to some of Corin's interviews. They didn't do that. Why?

I can only surmise that they decided they wanted to go a different direction with Atlantis. So they decided to just drop the Jonas character. Just like they decided to change actresses for the Weir character. Just like they decided to phase Ford out to a recurring character (a much smarter move than droppping him like they did Jonas, btw).

But that's only my conjecture. Again, none of us will ever know the full story.

Edited to add: Shadow - it was Michael Greenburg who said Jonas wouldn't be back. Sounded pretty final. Think it was at a con last year in England.

I liked Jonas okay - that he had some potential - but don't really miss him now that he's gone. On the other hand I was impressed with the way Corin handled the situation and have tried to follow his career post-Stargate. I watched his CSI appearance (as I will MS's) and even suffered thru Mansquito! :p :D


As far as season 10 and whether or not Michael will be back, I do expect he will, but I also expect he'll demand a price hike and the show has gone so downhill I don't think that's really worth a tenth season. He'll probably demand top billing or something before he comes back... he's already got a special "and Michael Shanks as Dr. Daniel Jackson,"... Amanda and Chris don't have that, do they?
We have no idea what the actors are asking for. More power to AT and MS and CJ if they get raises. I would be surprised if MS is asking for top billing - MS accepted the "and" position for season 9 - why would he demand top billing for S10? TPTB seem fairly entrenched with Ben as their new lead-off actor.


I do see your point on the convention, my take on it however is that the fans made him. To bail on his fans of stargate to go do an unrelated show on the 11th hour is really to say that his fans are less important than whatever cool new project he has. I think sometimes celebrities forget that it's the fans that made them, and they just drop them like that to go and do something completely unrelated to his previous committment. At least if it was filming for Gate or something that would be a little different, but to just go off because he has a chance to be on a popular tv show....
AT cancelled the NJ Creation Con last year with short notice because she had to work on Earthsea - or Proof Positive, I forget which. Rachel Luttrell filled in.

Joe Flannigan just cancelled his Australian con at the last minute because of work obligations. Doubt it was "Gate related" since Atlantis isn't filming.

It happens. Especially during hiatus when these actors have a chance to go out and get other jobs. They have absolutely no time to do that the other 8 months of the year when they're filming Stargate.

I do feel for the fans who pay money to see their favorite actor and they have to cancel. But many fans seem to enjoy the con experience - and seeing their friends - as much as seeing the actors. The con promoters are pretty upfront in telling customers that actors may have to cancel due to other work. To expect MS to cancel a con and pass up a chance for a guest spot on a popular American show? Frankly I'd tell him he was stupid if he did that. :D

And to stay on topic - I'd be shocked if MS wasn't in S10. Or any of the other actors.

smurf
November 7th, 2005, 06:11 AM
I didn't always suspect bad blood between Corin and TPTB. Corin has certainly been very positive about his experiences on the show and while I still think he was nastily shafter, it was only as time continued to pass and no mention whatsoever was made of Jonas and no storylines were set to involve him and time passed and the characters continued to act as if Jonas didn't exist and never had that I began to wonder what was happening. TPTB kept saying it was a matter of finding the right story and the usual BS, but you can only hear that so many times before you realize it's exactly that: BS.
None of us know the truth. Frankly, I've come to believe - in my opinion only - that there are PTB that don't want Corin/Jonas back on the show.

I think it's less bad blood between Corin and TPTB, than between top levels of TPTB themselves. A real shift happened in the running of the show in season 7 and Corin got hit in the crossfire.
I expect the only people who know the reason why are those at the top of TPTB tree (and I have a feeling this may not include JM) and Corin. Corin may regularly repeat the "I don't know" line, but as an experienced actor he knows how the game is played. That said I think he'll be the first to let slip the truth, unless Stargate gets cancelled after next year. He came very close in the last interview before his brain caught up with his mouth. :p
http://www.thescifiworld.net/interviews/corin_nemec_02.htm

Gilles Nuytens: But your time was great there!
Corin Nemec: I had a great time, yeah, absolutely. It's political in a lot of ways. But at the end of the day everybody wants to keep their own jobs. So, no one really cares, which is fine, but the reality is much harsher than the idea of reality.

Steven Reggers: But why had you to go away when Michaël Shanks came back?
Corin Nemec: Because ... actually I don't know.


Back on topic.
I don't think MS would get top billing even if they never hired BB. It would have gone properly ensemble then. For S10 it will be interesting where he gets placed if AT gets taken out of the credits.

LaCroix
November 7th, 2005, 06:25 AM
This reminds me of the attitude of many fans of Joss Whedon's series. I used to check out various forums dedicated to Buffy and Angel and i remember there being a sense of the fans believing that they somehow owned the actors and that, just because you happened to watch a series that an actor appeared in then they owed you some sort of debt.

I just don't see it that way at all. Sure, if we didn't watch Stargate then Michael would probably not have had the pleasure of playing Daniel Jackson for the last decade or so but i seriously doubt that an actor of his quality would have had trouble getting work somewhere or other.

These conventions are not something that the actors are obliged to do and they sure as hell don't owe us anything. They do them as a thank you and a way to meet their fans, not because it is a part of their contract. All they owe us for watching their television series is that they make the best of the lines they are given in each episode, nothing more. If they have to cancel one of those appearances because of work commitments, no matter whether it is related to their main show or not, then we should accept that. Shanks has a career to think about and it won't always revolve around Stargate.

As for the Corin Nemec thing, this again reminds me of the Whedonverse and the rumours of bad blood between Joss himself and Charisma Carpenter, when she left Angel at the end of season 4. Those rumours were eventually found to have been blown all out of proportion my internet gossip and i'm certain that this supposed trouble that Corin had with the Stargate PTB is more than likely exactly the same thing. Internet gossip that has taken on a life of it's own, regardless of any actual facts.




If I seem to recall Charisma Carpenter was witten out of S5 because Joss Whedon said her story arc was over with ( de ja vue anyone) and she only had one episode to get Angel back on track. Also she had a baby too.

But I digress. No I don't believe that actors owe any thing to anyone, but since a lot of people had made reservations to the Con. anyone concerned show get a partial refund if they wish.

Skydiver
November 7th, 2005, 07:19 AM
i agree that corin's departure was very politically motivated. and i think that the decision to dump jonas and bring back daniel came from very high levels

i also agree that jonas' appearances in s7, fallen, homecoming and fallout were nothing more than 'ok, so i know we signed you for 2 years, but we only want you for one...here's your severance pay'

jonas was included because tptb were contracturally obligated to include him

nothing more, nothing less

why did they feel the need to dump jonas????

oh, such a loaded question adn definitely nothing for this thread, or any for that matter since all we have in conjecture and supposition.

corin is professional enough not to air dirty laundry in public

do fans deserve a rebate if their actor doesn't show??? you know, that would be fair in a way..but a logistical nightmare since i have no doubt that someone would claim that skippy the wonder poodle was the only reason they booked and that they deserved a rebate because he didn't show. (ie, people aren't above fibbing to save a few bucks)

cons are expensive to put on. not only in paying the actors (whose fees can range in the 1000 - tens of thousands), but in booking the hotel, expenses, paying staff, travel expenses, food, etc.

a good portion of them don't make much profit at all....while others(as creation's continued existence is evidence of) have gone on for years

and as to s10, i will be very, very, very surprised if shanks doesn't sign.

i dont' think it's 'if' i think it's 'when'

TechnoBoY
November 7th, 2005, 07:27 AM
I think this is Shanks way of asking for more money.

I personally dont mind if he isnt in season 10. His character didnt seem right after they brought him back in season 7 anyways. I liked having Jonas there and then he came back and the show has become more bleh ever since.

I liked the DJ character the first 5 seasons but when they wrote his character out it shoulve stayed out. Or a least have a better way of bringing him back. He came back and then a few eps later Jonas was out. I think this is more of a lazy writer problem though. But still. Like I said before, the character doesnt even seem like before! I dont like the new DJ.

prion
November 7th, 2005, 08:30 AM
Out of interest, does anyone know how many parts in shows an actor needs to get into the union?
I'm guessing it's counted on x number of speaking roles within x years, am I right?

All credit to MS for getting a part on CSI and putting his career first. I think his year out from Stargate taught him a few useful lessons about ego, and I think it's a shame he wasted a great opportunity at the end of season 5 to go out and spread his acting wings. I don't think many other actors have had the chance to take risks, and have the security of recurring work on their old TV show.

If you speak several lines, I believe that entitles you to a SAG (in US) card. A whole part (guest star) would do it.

As for MS departing after season 5, as I recall magazine articles cited that he was financially secure enough to make that decision. Believe, how many of us would ditch the rat race if given the chance like Michael did? ;)

prion
November 7th, 2005, 08:47 AM
This reminds me of the attitude of many fans of Joss Whedon's series. I used to check out various forums dedicated to Buffy and Angel and i remember there being a sense of the fans believing that they somehow owned the actors and that, just because you happened to watch a series that an actor appeared in then they owed you some sort of debt.


It's a common thing that's been going on for decades that it gets to a point, if a show lasts long enough, that fans believe they're 'owed' something by the creators of the show. I think it's more prevalent and hostile when the writer/producer etc. actually joins online forums (it was never as bad before the net) and usually has some juxtoposition to fan fiction, as in 'ship' and other genres. That's when say a producer says "oh, it's a shippy episode" and when the fans watch it they go "waah?" and scream at the 'betrayal.'

As for actors, if they cancel a con appearance due to a job, hey, that's what we WANT them to do. If they don't work, then what? unemployment, or doing cons and rehashing the same story for decades. I don't think any fan wants that. All con contracts have the option for the actor to cancel in event of a job. All decent fan websites say that otherwise they could also leave themselves open for irate fans suing for, who knows, something.

MS canceling a convention in the UK for which he get paid say, geez, I don't know what UK cons pay, but I"m sure the actors like a free trip if nothing else to another country, compared to a REAL paying role on a top 10 US drama show. No contest.

There's been some talk of who gets top billing and I'm sure Ben Browder will or already has resigned, so he'll get top billing, and if he didn't, I don't think SciFi would have been so quick to renew if they lost a key cast member.

ShadowMaat
November 7th, 2005, 09:20 AM
I'd feel no heartbreak if he left, but then, I don't intend to watch the show whether he's on or not so I can't say I'm very invested in his fate. At least in regards to Stargate.

I agree that the character has changed too much for me since returning in S7. I know change is inevitable and given everything that has happened to him, it's understandable... but that doesn't mean I have to agree with the changes and it certainly doesn't mean I have to like them. It'll be interesting to see him in CSI Miami. I doubt the role will be left open to the possibility of recurring, but ya never know.

I think it's fun to see the SG cast in other things. I wish they'd do it more often. Especially on shows or in movies that don't make me wanna jab icepicks into my eyes. ;)

skritsys
November 7th, 2005, 11:39 AM
MS taking off to do other projects is a good thing IMO.
The more diverse he gets, the more we get to see of him.
Granted I will always enjoy seeing him on SG-1, but I hope that he is able to continue his career beyond SG. MS has a lot of talent and he should not be typecasted as an SG actor. SG may have helped his acting career, and he brings a lot to the show, however, the fans should not get upset in the event that he spreads his acting wings into other productions. He deserves a h311 of a lot of respect for staying as long as he has.

smurf
November 7th, 2005, 11:47 AM
If you speak several lines, I believe that entitles you to a SAG (in US) card. A whole part (guest star) would do it.

As for MS departing after season 5, as I recall magazine articles cited that he was financially secure enough to make that decision. Believe, how many of us would ditch the rat race if given the chance like Michael did? ;)
Thanks for the info. I'm surprised he hadn't got one sooner.

I would have thought most actors would be financially secure after 5 years of regular work, unless they're spendthrift. I don't know if he was secure enough to ditch acting/working, but with hindsight it doesn't seem to have been his intention.
Still, it's a shame he didn't take the opportunity to find a few different roles, I could see TPTB leaving him a space open as their glowy jellyfish of choice. Probably even popping up SGA if the original plan had gone ahead.

It will be interesting to see him in CSI: Miami (as long as I manage to ignore David Curuso :S). Personally I haven't been overly enamored by his acting of DJ in recent seasons and it'll be good to see him taking something different.

GateGipsy
November 8th, 2005, 12:44 AM
Still, it's a shame he didn't take the opportunity to find a few different roles


He did. He did a couple of movies, a few guest roles on Andromeda and again on Stargate. And he also did the pilot season in Los Angeles, although nothing came of that. I know of at least one audition where he got quite close to the final cut, and presumably there are more that we the fans never heard about.

It is extremely hard for an actor to break into the US, even for someone already established in a show like Stargate. Even though it is a 'US' show, it is filmed entirely in Canada, and I don't think the industry in the US views it as such. Actor's have to prove themselves each and every time they go for a new role.

There's been some talk of the credits. It is very doubtful that the credits will change. Agents are extremely keen for their actors to have the best possible credit they can negotiate as it reflects on their ability as an agent. Michael's 'and with' credit is, in industry terms, a highly ranked credit, and I can't see the Agent giving that up even though for the fans, the first credit is the one that counts.

smurf
November 8th, 2005, 03:24 AM
He did. He did a couple of movies, a few guest roles on Andromeda and again on Stargate. And he also did the pilot season in Los Angeles, although nothing came of that. I know of at least one audition where he got quite close to the final cut, and presumably there are more that we the fans never heard about.

It is extremely hard for an actor to break into the US, even for someone already established in a show like Stargate. Even though it is a 'US' show, it is filmed entirely in Canada, and I don't think the industry in the US views it as such. Actor's have to prove themselves each and every time they go for a new role.

There's been some talk of the credits. It is very doubtful that the credits will change. Agents are extremely keen for their actors to have the best possible credit they can negotiate as it reflects on their ability as an agent. Michael's 'and with' credit is, in industry terms, a highly ranked credit, and I can't see the Agent giving that up even though for the fans, the first credit is the one that counts.
Sorry, I was being a bit imprecise in my meaning :o.

I meant to say it's a shame he didn't give more time to take the opportunity to find a few different roles. A few years of building a network with the backup of Stargate. I know it might be disheartening, but I could easily see him as a regular on another show by now. Another four years of Stargate may well have pushed him another four years behind career wise. His finishing in season X puts him in the same place as when he left in season 5, since he will still be marked in the industry as supporting cast member on one show.
Not that Stargate isn't a good thing, but we were talking earlier about typecasting and Stargate being sci-fi might be giving himself a big hill to climb.
Unless he loves doing sci-fi, in which case all power to him.

Anyway topic, signing for S10? Yes he will. :)

Skydiver
November 8th, 2005, 04:42 AM
One thing that could be hampering is that so many of his vocal fans seem to only want him to be daniel. Notice that i said SOME.

Yeah, it is possible that had his fans not campaigned so hard he could have gotten more movie roles and possibly some guesting shots on US tv, which often lead to recurring roles....but they wanted him back as daniel so that's what happened.

whether it was good or bad for his career (actors in scifi especially have to worry about being typecast and then never getting other roles because they're always seen as their scifi role.....for example, how many of the trek actors have had non-scifi roles over teh years?????) unless we really have a time machine, no one will know for sure

however it is just as likely that, in getting what they want, MS' fans haven't exactly promoted good things for his career. the longer he's linked to being 'daniel jackson' the harder it'll be for him to ever be seen as anything else

ShardsofGlass
November 8th, 2005, 05:07 AM
But if Michael hadn't wanted to come back as Daniel, I'm sure he wouldn't have. The fans didn't force Michael to come back to SG-1. If he'd wanted to stay away, he has that power. But he's the one who keeps signing up year after year to continue, so there's something about the role or the show that he must really like.

Madeleine
November 8th, 2005, 05:13 AM
I think it helps him that although he's in a SF series he's got a role that's less SF than it might be. AT has been technobabble-girl and CJ has been The Alien, but MS has played a human Archaeologist, wearing non-SF clothes and without a great deal of SF dialogue to spout. I think he's lucky in the same way that the cast of The Dead Zone, X-Files and other shows set in the present day in a terrestrial setting within the SF genre are lucky. They've got cachet with people who are fans of the genre, and that grants them a good chance of cameos and guest roles and even major parts on other genre shows; and they're less likely to be stereotyped by mainstream casting directors as someone who's only good for wearing a prosthetic forehead and silver spandex.

I'm not saying that AT and CJ won't / can't go mainstream, just that MS is in a particularly fortunate position.

ShadowMaat
November 8th, 2005, 05:50 AM
Oh, I don't think that Michael is any safer from typecasting than the rest of them. IMO, they're all pretty much hamstrung at this point. Sure, they choose to keep coming back and I'm sure they dearly love working on Stargate, but part of it also has to be that it's a steady paycheck and a known quantity. At least with Stargate they know more or less what to expect and they know they'll be making X amount of money for it. Throwing themselves into the piranha-filled waters of Hollywood (North or South) is far from a sure thing and I'm sure that steady, high-paying roles are even fewer and further between than the random guest spots.

Skydiver
November 8th, 2005, 07:06 AM
with stargate they are big fish in a little pond. in hollywood???? they're just one of teh massas

and with stargate there is the con circuit to ride, which, i would imagine, is rather lucrative

i'm not saying that MS is the only one who's in danger of being typecast, heck, RDA is still better known as macgyver than Jack O'Neill, but i am saying, while his non-stargate opportunities during s6 weren't all that much, who knows what else he could have done had his character not been intrinsically linked with Daniel via on-line campaigns, fan bought ads and the such. I'm sure he wasn't forced to come back in s7, however if he'd given thought to moving on further that thought was set aside to return to a place where he originally wasn't happy.

for all we know, he could have tried to break into the hollywood market and have a part on a tv show by now if he'd not been drawn back into stargate

now i have to wonder if signing is less of a 'gee, i can't wait to get back' and more of 'well, i may as well since there'll be way too much fuss if i leave, and hey, the money's good, so why not??'

SEREN LWCH (MAL)
November 8th, 2005, 08:04 AM
One thing that could be hampering is that so many of his vocal fans seem to only want him to be daniel.

i just hope that if he is in S10, he will be clearer vocally!

prion
November 8th, 2005, 08:17 AM
One thing that could be hampering is that so many of his vocal fans seem to only want him to be daniel. Notice that i said SOME.

Yeah, it is possible that had his fans not campaigned so hard he could have gotten more movie roles and possibly some guesting shots on US tv, which often lead to recurring roles....but they wanted him back as daniel so that's what happened.


Thank you for saying some. Not everybody who likes Michael Shanks is obsessed with seeing him as Daniel (the same could go for any fan who is so into a character they want it to go on forever). And not everybody who likes daniel is an 'evil dannyranter' (wish some fans had better things to do than think up insults for other fans).

The thing is that many actors who do scifi shows get typecast - not necessarily by fans but by casting agents. 'Oh, he was that guy on trek, right? Nah, we're looking for someone with more experience, etc.' Also, Michael isn't a character actor. He's more in the leading man category and I wouldn't be surprised his agent tries to get him jobs in that category as well. If you're good looking male hunk (sorry for the bluntness), you're not going to get the fascinating role as the whacko street person. Hollywood and its ilk do stereotype. Someone like say John Delancie is a character actor. Good guys, bad guys, comedic roles. Character actors can outlive, career-wise, leading men/women as agents (and audience) can see more variety for them.

RDA is leading man, MS is leading man, BB is leading man, etc.

Dani347
November 8th, 2005, 10:42 AM
All credit to MS for getting a part on CSI and putting his career first. I think his year out from Stargate taught him a few useful lessons about ego, and I think it's a shame he wasted a great opportunity at the end of season 5 to go out and spread his acting wings. I don't think many other actors have had the chance to take risks, and have the security of recurring work on their old TV show.

One thing I never will understand is why anyone leaving a tv show should be "taught a lesson." And, does that only apply if people think the reason for leaving isn't noble? I mean, nobody will say that RDA needs to be taught a lesson, because his reason is a "good" one. (the quotes aren't to suggest some doubt that his reason was good, but to suggest that there is no "bad" reason to leave a show) I don't think anyone needs to be "taught a lesson" regardless of why they leave a show.

As for MS now, for my own selfish purposes, I would like him to stay on. I won't be crying if he decides to sign up for season 10. However, if he decides not to, all I can say is more power to him.

(Can I be a good Danny ranter?)

prion:

Also, Michael isn't a character actor. He's more in the leading man category and I wouldn't be surprised his agent tries to get him jobs in that category as well.

The whole leading man/character actor thing is very interesting to me. What makes MS a leading man instead of a character actor? Or BB, for that matter? Is it possible to tell from one defining role? (Stargate for MS, Farscape for BB)

smurf
November 8th, 2005, 10:45 AM
with stargate they are big fish in a little pond. in hollywood???? they're just one of teh massas

and with stargate there is the con circuit to ride, which, i would imagine, is rather lucrative

i'm not saying that MS is the only one who's in danger of being typecast, heck, RDA is still better known as macgyver than Jack O'Neill, but i am saying, while his non-stargate opportunities during s6 weren't all that much, who knows what else he could have done had his character not been intrinsically linked with Daniel via on-line campaigns, fan bought ads and the such. I'm sure he wasn't forced to come back in s7, however if he'd given thought to moving on further that thought was set aside to return to a place where he originally wasn't happy.

for all we know, he could have tried to break into the hollywood market and have a part on a tv show by now if he'd not been drawn back into stargate

now i have to wonder if signing is less of a 'gee, i can't wait to get back' and more of 'well, i may as well since there'll be way too much fuss if i leave, and hey, the money's good, so why not??'
The difference for RDA is that he is known for MacGyver rather than seen as MacGyver. He isn't typecast because his subsequent roles are different (it help's that he's a big enough star to pick and choose what he does). In the same way, in the mainstream, Corin Nemec best known for being Parker Lewis, but it didn't stop him being cast as Harold Lauder or Jonas Quinn.

On the other hand it can be argued that Michael is already typecast because in quite a few fans eyes Michael Shanks is Daniel Jackson is Michael Shanks (probably not helped by him returning to the role). There isn't a differentiation between actor and character. Like the way William Shatner is Captain Kirk, or Leonard Nemoy is Spock.

Of course the difference between RDA and CN, and MS, WS, and LN, is that for three of them their best known roles are in the less mainstream genre. Although scifi is hip now (I still can't see how Lost is scifi, except because someone said so :rolleyes: ), it wasn't always and I don't think it will be for long (more reality TV and police/medical dramas for everyone ;) ).

I think the person in the best position to not be typecast out of MS, AT and CJ, is going to be Amanda. The same thing which stops her becoming the lead in Stargate is also the thing which will provide her with a longer career. In a setup of (male) lead + supporting, she is the female lead. Taken outside of Stargate she can be cast as either the lead or be placed back into the position she has now of first female actor in a male lead show.
If SG1 was less male dominated with more female support characters she would probably be in the same position as MS and CJ.

smurf
November 8th, 2005, 10:58 AM
One thing I never will understand is why anyone leaving a tv show should be "taught a lesson." And, does that only apply if people think the reason for leaving isn't noble? I mean, nobody will say that RDA needs to be taught a lesson, because his reason is a "good" one. (the quotes aren't to suggest some doubt that his reason was good, but to suggest that there is no "bad" reason to leave a show) I don't think anyone needs to be "taught a lesson" regardless of why they leave a show.

Actually I was referring to the way he handled himself once he left. Not the actual leaving of the show.
Bad mouthing your former work colleagues of the only major job you've had, in a business which relies on word of mouth and personality, may not have been the smartest of moves.

No MS isn't the leading man, BB is. By the simple fact that BB was hired for his name amongst sci-fi fans.
A thought on why CN wasn't hired instead of BB when RDA stepped down. CN would automatically become, in top level PTB eyes, the lead. No matter that he wasn't in season 6. By taking into account his pay, his previous filmography, and the fact they intended to make him the lead in SGA, I think the industry would regard him as the show's lead. That would've rattled a few cages...

ShardsofGlass
November 8th, 2005, 11:12 AM
Actually, I think the problem with BB, MS, etc. is not so much that they are typecast but that they are still unknowns to the rest of the industry. Small scifi shows on a small cable channel just don't make it onto the radar of a lot of casting agents, imo. So people who work on other scifi shows know these actors, but not the mainstream people.

As far as being a lead goes -- I do think it has to do with looks, though I don't know much about it. The best looking people all seem to be the leads, don't they?

Dani347
November 8th, 2005, 11:21 AM
On the other hand it can be argued that Michael is already typecast because in quite a few fans eyes Michael Shanks is Daniel Jackson is Michael Shanks (probably not helped by him returning to the role). There isn't a differentiation between actor and character. Like the way William Shatner is Captain Kirk, or Leonard Nemoy is Spock.

Except WS has managed a successful career post Star Trek. Two(?) Emmys for Boston Legal, and movies where I think the public thought of him first as "William Shatner" rather than Kirk. So, even if an actor does become typecast (and I'd argue that RDA was typecast as Macgyver, and to some people maybe still is) it's no gurantee that they'll suffer a permanent setback. Of course, the road to varied parts is harder when you're so identified with one character, but not necessarily impossible.



I think the person in the best position to not be typecast out of MS, AT and CJ, is going to be Amanda. The same thing which stops her becoming the lead in Stargate is also the thing which will provide her with a longer career. In a setup of (male) lead + supporting, she is the female lead. Taken outside of Stargate she can be cast as either the lead or be placed back into the position she has now of first female actor in a male lead show.
If SG1 was less male dominated with more female support characters she would probably be in the same position as MS and CJ.

Is it because AT's position as female lead is one of default? By default, I mean she's the lead female because there's no other female for her to be supporting to. If the situation was different and MS was a supporting actor in a largely female cast, he could be considered the lead male, but it would be by default. So, people view her in a more flexible light? And, why should that matter? MS can't be cast in any other position except one equivalent to the one he holds now?

Dani347
November 8th, 2005, 11:30 AM
As far as being a lead goes -- I do think it has to do with looks, though I don't know much about it. The best looking people all seem to be the leads, don't they?

Well, I think good looks is a requirement for leading man status, but a good looking man can be a character actor. There's the "character actor trapped in a leading man's body" saying. But, I think it takes more than one role (and although MS has had other parts, the only significant one has been Stargate) to tell.

smurf
November 8th, 2005, 11:40 AM
Except WS has managed a successful career post Star Trek. Two(?) Emmys for Boston Legal, and movies where I think the public thought of him first as "William Shatner" rather than Kirk. So, even if an actor does become typecast (and I'd argue that RDA was typecast as Macgyver, and to some people maybe still is) it's no gurantee that they'll suffer a permanent setback. Of course, the road to varied parts is harder when you're so identified with one character, but not necessarily impossible.
Very true, but as you say it is harder. It's taken him 20+ years to shake it.


Is it because AT's position as female lead is one of default? By default, I mean she's the lead female because there's no other female for her to be supporting to. If the situation was different and MS was a supporting actor in a largely female cast, he could be considered the lead male, but it would be by default. So, people view her in a more flexible light? And, why should that matter? MS can't be cast in any other position except one equivalent to the one he holds now?
It's a sad indictment of how parts of the industry still works that there are fewer interesting female characters about, and by being well known, and by being placed forward because she is, pretty much, the only female character, AT is probably protected a little more from being an unknown quality (in terms of show carrying) to the wider audience/industry.
In the case of MS and CJ, there are more roles for men and therefore more competition for the larger roles. No-one says MS can't be cast in anything, just by being in scifi and not being the lead he is at more of a disadvantage in terms of recognition with the wider audience/industry.
All said, I'm not saying AT is going to suddenly get lead status on a major American production, but be more likely to be offered the lead/2nd in non-scifi shows and so avoid being typecast.

And yes, if the world worked the other way around, MS would be the one in the better position not to be typecast.

LaCroix
November 8th, 2005, 12:12 PM
Actually I was referring to the way he handled himself once he left. Not the actual leaving of the show.
Bad mouthing your former work colleagues of the only major job you've had, in a business which relies on word of mouth and personality, may not have been the smartest of moves.

No MS isn't the leading man, BB is. By the simple fact that BB was hired for his name amongst sci-fi fans.
A thought on why CN wasn't hired instead of BB when RDA stepped down. CN would automatically become, in top level PTB eyes, the lead. No matter that he wasn't in season 6. By taking into account his pay, his previous filmography, and the fact they intended to make him the lead in SGA, I think the industry would regard him as the show's lead. That would've rattled a few cages...


I have to agree with smuf. If you look at it this way, LA is one large city, but Hollywood is a small town in LA. And in Hollywood word does have a habit of getting around.

The interviews that MS did after he decided not to reprise his role of Daniel Jackson could have been the reason(s) why he didn't get the role of Apollo on the current BSG. IMO.

I know that with RDA gone, he may have given MS, AT, and CJ a little advice
about when to look for other options when they felt it was no longer "fun" for
them, to get out as soon as their able. I think in another big way CN's fanbase was also used, just like BB's and CB's are right now. But their"re being asked back. If anything maybe MS's is looking at CN's movie, James Spader's two awards and the fact that as long as he works on this show nothing's going to change for him.


JMHO

Skydiver
November 8th, 2005, 12:35 PM
what i see as more of a leading actor isn't quite his looks, but his attitude. he needs to be, well paternal is too strong a word, but almost like that. he's mentorin, leading but also knows when to step back and let the younger actors under his wing step forth and grow into their own. (that's where the paternal comes in, kinda of parent like)

s/he can't be fussed about number of lines or number of scenes. to me a good leading man is there to hold the show together but doesnt' think that it all has to be about him.

i compare william peterson, who seems to be like this (as was rda) to david Caruso....who seems to let his ego do the walking far too much. i dont' consider caruso a good leading man because he's too wrapped up in "ME" to play well with the rest of the kids.

a good leading actor knows how to share, and has the confidence not to be threatened by someone else getting more lines than he has, or coming into his/her own as a supporting actor

I think that amanda has this ability to mentor and lead. and rda has it.

but that, to me, is what makes a good leading actor/actress

GateAngel
November 8th, 2005, 02:31 PM
One thing that could be hampering is that so many of his vocal fans seem to only want him to be daniel. Notice that i said SOME.

Yeah, it is possible that had his fans not campaigned so hard he could have gotten more movie roles and possibly some guesting shots on US tv, which often lead to recurring roles....but they wanted him back as daniel so that's what happened.

The entertainment industry was in a huge slump during that time right after 9/11. Many well established actors were struggling to find work, let alone someone relatively unknown like Michael Shanks who was striking out on his own. He actually worked quite abit more than most actors did around that time. And, from what I understand from talking to various contacts in the industry (especially a friend of mine who is a British actor), in a strange somewhat patriotic backlash to the terrorist attacks, there was more of a tendency around that time for studios and producers to hire American actors rather than actors from other countries and Michael Shanks is Canadian. For Michael, it wasn't about how his fans were acting or what they were doing, but more about him being caught in the hardship of the times.


whether it was good or bad for his career (actors in scifi especially have to worry about being typecast and then never getting other roles because they're always seen as their scifi role.....for example, how many of the trek actors have had non-scifi roles over teh years?????) unless we really have a time machine, no one will know for sure

Producers and casting directors in Hollywood most likely don't even know that there was a fan campaign. Unless something like that effects their own projects directly, they don't even show up on the producer or casting director's radar. So what the fans had to say or not about Michael Shanks being Daniel Jackson was in all probability irelevant to them.

If they did know about it, then what they saw was an actor that can create publicity for a project. Whether anyone likes it or not, the SDJ was pure publicity for the show. It meant that there were viewers and viewers mean revenue for the advertisers and that meant that the studios can charge more money for the advertising space.


however it is just as likely that, in getting what they want, MS' fans haven't exactly promoted good things for his career. the longer he's linked to being 'daniel jackson' the harder it'll be for him to ever be seen as anything else

Again, fandom for an actor has very little affect on him/her getting jobs or being typecast. It's the ratings for a series that they are in that can have more of an effect. Stargate: SG-1 is a successful scifi show and so the actors are going to be offered parts in other scifi related projects that want that same kind of success for themselves.

An actor's 'look' or trademark can also play a role in leading to typcasting way more than what kind of fanbase they have or what fans say about them or what roles the fans want them in.

The reality is, the SDJ may have played some part in Michael Shanks return to Stargate: SG-1, but it most likely barely registered on the radar of casting directors and producers many of whom most likely don't even know what Stargate SG-1 and Michael's role on it is about. What matters to them is can he as an actor auditioning for them be what they need for the role.

prion
November 8th, 2005, 02:33 PM
Leading men are usually characterized by heroic guys, good looking, over 6' if at all possible as Hollywood is obssesed with that, where as character actors are usually anything but that. They're not Tom Cruise handsome, and usually are like the guy next door, or comedic, or something like that. It's the way Hollywood has always done it.

Alas, once a woman hits 40 it's like she vanishes off the face of the earth unless he plays 'mom' roles. THe fact that AT is still on the show (well, we hope<G>) is great. SHe's never been foisted on the audience as a sex symbol (they get guest stars for that). However, if you look at any scifi shows on, most women, if they are the leads, are all under 30 and pretty much in the gorgeous category. No 'plain janes', so to speak. And the trouble is they all start looking alike!

There are some shows like Numb3rs where the heroes are more intellectual than anything, so they can be more 'geeky' as intelligence can be a draw (after all, McKay on SGA has tons of fans <G>).

Daniel on SG1 is sorta half-half. Heroic, can shoot guns, etc, but also has a brain, which Jack doesn't always display. ;) However, you rarely have seen RDA play the bad guy, whereas MS has, and it's always good to be able to play both villian and bad guy.

Lida
November 8th, 2005, 03:25 PM
I highly doubt that MS will leave SG1, but that's just MO and I'll try and reserve judgement for now...

As I recall, MS left once before.....and as he probably has a much more inflated self image of himself now, the only thing that will probably keep him on board for another season is more air time and MONEY.

Would I care if MS left.....the way "stars", both actors and sports players have been acting lately, I really don't care anymore. I love the character of Daniel Jackson, but we lost Jack and Gen. Hammond, and the show continued. Maybe it's time for all the actors to move on to new things.....10 seasons is a long time for any series. But that's just my opinion.......and I'm not in the best of moods right now. Sorry, don't mean to step on MS fan's toes.:(

prion
November 8th, 2005, 03:30 PM
As I recall, MS left once before.....and as he probably has a much more inflated self image of himself now, the only thing that will probably keep him on board for another season is more air time and MONEY.

Would I care if MS left.....the way "stars", both actors and sports players have been acting lately, I really don't care anymore. I love the character of Daniel Jackson, but we lost Jack and Gen. Hammond, and the show continued. Maybe it's time for all the actors to move on to new things.....10 seasons is a long time for any series. But that's just my opinion.......and I'm not in the best of moods right now. Sorry, don't mean to step on MS fan's toes.:(

WEll, everybody's got an ego. Fact of life. Inflated? I wouldn't know. Any actor worth their salt will negotiate for the best deal possible, and it can't be denied that yes, viewers do like him (and not just fans) as the ratings are maintained on the show. However, I sure woudln't compare an actor to a sports star. Some sports are INCREDIBLY overpaid to just kick balls around. You see some behavior and you wonder, WHY would anybody tolerate it, but the managers and teams and even fans tolerate it because they want their team to win. It's the stupid sports mentality. I'm sure there are plenty of actors who are jerks, idiots, etc., but as long as they don't across that way on the finished product and they're not off doing bad things they tossed in jail for (unless you're a star like Hugh Grant, then it doesn't matter if you're caught with a hooker in a car, ahem, cough cough).

Lida
November 8th, 2005, 03:38 PM
WEll, everybody's got an ego. Fact of life. Inflated? I wouldn't know. Any actor worth their salt will negotiate for the best deal possible, and it can't be denied that yes, viewers do like him (and not just fans) as the ratings are maintained on the show. However, I sure woudln't compare an actor to a sports star. Some sports are INCREDIBLY overpaid to just kick balls around. You see some behavior and you wonder, WHY would anybody tolerate it, but the managers and teams and even fans tolerate it because they want their team to win. It's the stupid sports mentality. I'm sure there are plenty of actors who are jerks, idiots, etc., but as long as they don't across that way on the finished product and they're not off doing bad things they tossed in jail for (unless you're a star like Hugh Grant, then it doesn't matter if you're caught with a hooker in a car, ahem, cough cough).

Sorry, but actors (not all, but MANY), are over paid prima donnas, just as many so called sports "stars" are. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. :o

prion
November 8th, 2005, 03:44 PM
Sorry, but actors (not all, but MANY), are over paid prima donnas, just as many so called sports "stars" are. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. :o

Well most actors don't make a lot of money, but folks like Tom Cruise? Definitely overpaid! But still think sports folks are worse.

Dani347
November 8th, 2005, 03:53 PM
Leading men are usually characterized by heroic guys, good looking, over 6' if at all possible as Hollywood is obssesed with that, where as character actors are usually anything but that. They're not Tom Cruise handsome, and usually are like the guy next door, or comedic, or something like that. It's the way Hollywood has always done it.



I think there are two definitions. An talented actor who doesn't get lead roles, because they don't conform to Hollywood standards of beauty, or (in the case of actors who are labeled "a character actor trapped in a leading man's body") actors who are able to play various roles, including off beat ones. Sometimes character parts are the lead parts in movies. (See: Almost any Johnny Depp part). And, of course, some leading men manages to segue into character roles later on.

So, to at least mention MS in this post, I have no idea what kind of career he'll have post Stargate. Haven't seen him in enough roles.

Skydiver
November 8th, 2005, 04:26 PM
So, to at least mention MS in this post, I have no idea what kind of career he'll have post Stargate. Haven't seen him in enough roles.

that will probably be his hardest handicap to overcome.

yes, he's had some guest roles and a b movie....but not much else. and in many of his other roles, he plays a version of daniel. just like dylan hunt was just another version of hercules....IMHO, he needs to really break out and seek different roles, but hey, it's his career, not mine. his choice

Madeleine
November 8th, 2005, 04:38 PM
His 'bad guy' roles have been few, but decent. He was pretty convincing as a rapist in Suspicious River. (I may have got the title wrong.) How do casting directors work - would actors have an 'audition tape' to send where they can showcase their various skills? or do casting directors just work out of their own heads and think "what have *I* seen this actor in?"

smurf
November 9th, 2005, 04:54 AM
It depends what level the casting director is casting at.
At the top of the tree casting may not be needed because an actor is already attached to the project - as in the case of RDA or William Peterson in CSI.
If not then it will be a case of already knowing an actor's previous work, or having met them or worked with them before, or getting good word of mouth on someone, and asking them to come in and meet with the relevant PTB - as in the case of Corin.
Then to fill out the roles where a "name" or recognition isn't needed, the casting director would put word about to the various acting agencies and rely on them to push forward the actors who would most suit the role. It'll be head shots and resumés at this point, then auditions live or taped.

Producers and casting directors in Hollywood most likely don't even know that there was a fan campaign. Unless something like that effects their own projects directly, they don't even show up on the producer or casting director's radar. So what the fans had to say or not about Michael Shanks being Daniel Jackson was in all probability irelevant to them.

If they did know about it, then what they saw was an actor that can create publicity for a project. Whether anyone likes it or not, the SDJ was pure publicity for the show. It meant that there were viewers and viewers mean revenue for the advertisers and that meant that the studios can charge more money for the advertising space.
I wouldn't say all publicity is good publicity for an actor.
Put it one way; if I were casting for my new show, and obviously I think it will be brilliant and run for years, given the choice between two actors of equal ability and stature I would go with the one I think I can work with in the long term. I want a nice happy set, because I'll have enough stress without having to deal with egos and fan hate mail.

Producers may not know about the fandom campaign or his interviews post-SG1, but I'd bet casting directors would have found out about it at some point during the casting process.

what i see as more of a leading actor isn't quite his looks, but his attitude. he needs to be, well paternal is too strong a word, but almost like that. he's mentorin, leading but also knows when to step back and let the younger actors under his wing step forth and grow into their own. (that's where the paternal comes in, kinda of parent like)

s/he can't be fussed about number of lines or number of scenes. to me a good leading man is there to hold the show together but doesnt' think that it all has to be about him.
Ditto.
Good looks aren't a pre-requisite for me when I think of a lead, looks are completely subjective anyway - for example, BB doesn't float my boat, neither does MS (bringing it back to topic :D).
It's acting ability and attitude. I like my leads to come across as human (flaws and all), and to always have their character "alive" in the scene, but not necessarily dominate every scene. And, for a really good lead, that little extra buzz of connection you get when the actor is on screen. Something about them that allows me forgive the ropeyness of the show if the story isn't all that.

MediaSavant
November 9th, 2005, 07:08 AM
[color=indigo]As I recall, MS left once before.....and as he probably has a much more inflated self image of himself now, the only thing that will probably keep him on board for another season is more air time and MONEY.


It's very interesting to me that actors are seemingly put on a different plane than any other working human being.

Most people today, whatever their profession, will switch jobs for a higher job title, more of a challenge, and, particularly, more money. In fact, it's said the average person will change companies several times in their career for. In my industry, it happens constantly.

Why should having a good self-image and confidence that you can get a better job be an admirable trait for--say--a marketing executive or computer programmer and something to criticize in an actor?

He's just doing something we all should do in our own careers.

ShadowMaat
November 9th, 2005, 07:25 AM
I don't know too many times when people will make a big deal out of leaving their job, badmouthing the bosses, finding other work... and then going back after a year, ousting the guy brought in as a replacement and carrying on as if nothing had happened. ;)

Could happen all the time, for all I know. I just never hear about it.

EDIT: And no, I'm not saying Michael is directly responsible for booting Corin out the door. :rolleyes:

Skydiver
November 9th, 2005, 07:54 AM
I wouldn't say all publicity is good publicity for an actor.
Put it one way; if I were casting for my new show, and obviously I think it will be brilliant and run for years, given the choice between two actors of equal ability and stature I would go with the one I think I can work with in the long term. I want a nice happy set, because I'll have enough stress without having to deal with egos and fan hate mail.



that's my opinion too of folks i work with. if i have two equally qualified people and know that one is easy to work with and another is a bit of a jerk with an attitude problem, i'll take the easy to work with person. heck even if the easy person is a bit less qualified, i'd rather work with them because it's easier to train than it is to deal with attitude issues

all publicity isn't always good. look at Roma Downy, who, after rumors started to spread about how she treated her husband, she was less sought after. or any other celebrity scandals over the years. or the american NBA players, who are facing more stringent behavorial rules because they have a rather negative image and it's affecting the game

stuff like this however, isn't always something that comes naturally to people. sometimes people need the experience to realize that even an off the cuff remark can be blown out of proportion.

I think, in many ways, MS wasnt' happy with leaving the show and his pride got in the way of him asking to come back. and i think that disappointment colored his interviews for many months. and those, ratehr grumpy interviews, certainly didnt' help his public image.

he got a lot of publicity, sure. but i really don't think all of it was good.

this is pretty much why i have no doubt that he'll sign for s10. (see, i got it back on topic too )

smurf
November 9th, 2005, 08:11 AM
Yep, in my previous job I've been asked by my boss what I'd think of X joining my team, and my instant reaction was "oh god, no". I didn't care how good or bad X was I just knew the X's attitude would cause problems in a small team.


It's very interesting to me that actors are seemingly put on a different plane than any other working human being.

Most people today, whatever their profession, will switch jobs for a higher job title, more of a challenge, and, particularly, more money. In fact, it's said the average person will change companies several times in their career for. In my industry, it happens constantly.

Why should having a good self-image and confidence that you can get a better job be an admirable trait for--say--a marketing executive or computer programmer and something to criticize in an actor?

He's just doing something we all should do in our own careers.
A good self-image is one thing, but I don't think I'd do my career much good if I turned around to my clients and told them to "stop being idiots, grow a backbone, and make a decision so we can knock it on the head and go home. It's not as if this is a good use of my skills, we're only selling drain cleaner not sorting out third world debt."
Even though I would absolutely love to sometimes.

Funny thing though (and it seems to be the same with actors), in 10 years time, if all goes well, I probably could say it, and people would mark it down as artistic temperament. One rule for me and MS, and another rule for Brad Pitt. :rolleyes: ;)

ShadowMaat
November 9th, 2005, 08:11 AM
While I know that a majority of people are convinced that Michael will be back... I'm curious about the ones who think he'll "move on" to something else. Why would he do that? Given everything that has been said here about what reasons he might have to stay, what reasons are for him to leave? Where do you think he could go that he'd get more recognition, a higher paycheck, and more storytime?

prion
November 9th, 2005, 09:05 AM
I wouldn't say all publicity is good publicity for an actor.
Put it one way; if I were casting for my new show, and obviously I think it will be brilliant and run for years, given the choice between two actors of equal ability and stature I would go with the one I think I can work with in the long term. I want a nice happy set, because I'll have enough stress without having to deal with egos and fan hate mail.

Hate mail is a byproduct for many actors, not just the popular ones. Talk to any soap actor. You don't want actors like that one just fired off Desperate Housewives today for 'inappropriate behavior' (they won't say WHAT that was). That's bad publicity, but heck, it all depends on if the actor can sell a project. Look at Charlie Sheen, Robert Downey Jr. The 'bad boys' still work despite their bad behavior and even jail time.

Studios also use the Q factor (or something like that) to determine who they want. Sometimes it's "oh yea, I know that face, I'd see his movie" will get an actor a job better than all the acting chops in the world. It's not fair, but Hollywood has its own weird rules.


Producers may not know about the fandom campaign or his interviews post-SG1, but I'd bet casting directors would have found out about it at some point during the casting process.

Not necessarily. Casting directors suggest. They don't make the final suggestion. That's up to the producers. Read http://www.tri7entertainment.com/articles/castingdirectors.htm.

When actors audition, they often send ahead demo tapes (or maybe it's DVDs now) of snippets of all their work to show their range. That helps in securing a role, as does knowing people.

Anyway, I'm positive MS will come back for season 10.

Smegger56
November 9th, 2005, 09:16 AM
I don't know if this is true or not, but the new interview with Ben Browder, it says the Michael Shanks might not be coming back for season 10. But Browder says there shouldn't be a problem, that in all likelihood he will be back.

Should we be concerned by the mere mention of Shanks possibly leaving?

sueKay
November 9th, 2005, 09:22 AM
Firstly, there are already at least two threads on this subject...secondly, I agree...I wouldn't worry

ETA: This, kids, is what happens when you have GW on more than one window...this post was not intended for this thread...:o

The Signal
November 9th, 2005, 09:28 AM
He wouldn't walk away from the show after all this time. Besides, he will be centric during the coming season/s and wouldnt walk away from such a vital role. And, as I have said quite often, MS has said that he will remain with Stargate for as long as he can. I wouldnt worry

Smegger56
November 9th, 2005, 09:33 AM
Firstly, there are already at least two threads on this subject...secondly, I agree...I wouldn't worry

I looked, couldn't find one... next time i'll look properly.

Many apologies for the spamming.

Dani347
November 9th, 2005, 10:02 AM
Can I just say a huge mucho YES! to everything MediaSavant said? And, since every actor who dares to leave a show because of their career (whether they're not happy with their job or because they have the absolute gall to think they might be able to do better) gets tarred and feathered, I'd say it has nothing to do with MS personally. Just once, I'd like an actor, any actor, to announce that he or she is leaving a show, and to say that it's because they want to see if they can make it in the movies (maybe even say that they think they might have a shot), and for the general public to say, "Good luck, hope it goes well." And, if it doesn't, to not say it serves them right. But, that's a pipe dream.


Still, we have no proof one way or the other that MS is leaving. We have interpretations of statements that could easily have a different spin. He's up for a major tv role? People automatically assumed that meant he was being cast in a new tv show, or having a long term part in an existing one. Ergo, he must be leaving. Then, we find out he has a guest starring role on a show. Which, could be major because his role is the biggest in that particular episode. Or, it could be that his role isn't the biggest, but it was phrased that way because he has a guest role on a major tv show. MS' publicist issues a statement that he's a free agent. NOOO! (Or, YES! depending on your perspective) That means he's not coming back! What it means is, he hasn't signed a contract. He's a free agent. It doesn't mean he will stay a free agent.

prion
November 9th, 2005, 10:24 AM
[QUOTE=Dani347]
Still, we have no proof one way or the other that MS is leaving. QUOTE]

It's ALL fan speculation. There is NO news that he is leaving the show, just that he's negotiating his contract, like any of us would too. Well, the smart ones of us would ;)

Ancient 61
November 9th, 2005, 10:56 AM
what i see as more of a leading actor isn't quite his looks, but his attitude. he needs to be, well paternal is too strong a word, but almost like that. he's mentorin, leading but also knows when to step back and let the younger actors under his wing step forth and grow into their own. (that's where the paternal comes in, kinda of parent like)

s/he can't be fussed about number of lines or number of scenes. to me a good leading man is there to hold the show together but doesnt' think that it all has to be about him.

i compare william peterson, who seems to be like this (as was rda) to david Caruso....who seems to let his ego do the walking far too much. i dont' consider caruso a good leading man because he's too wrapped up in "ME" to play well with the rest of the kids.

a good leading actor knows how to share, and has the confidence not to be threatened by someone else getting more lines than he has, or coming into his/her own as a supporting actor

I think that amanda has this ability to mentor and lead. and rda has it.

but that, to me, is what makes a good leading actor/actress


Well Said :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

Joanne

smurf
November 9th, 2005, 11:48 AM
Hate mail is a byproduct for many actors, not just the popular ones. Talk to any soap actor. You don't want actors like that one just fired off Desperate Housewives today for 'inappropriate behavior' (they won't say WHAT that was). That's bad publicity, but heck, it all depends on if the actor can sell a project. Look at Charlie Sheen, Robert Downey Jr. The 'bad boys' still work despite their bad behavior and even jail time.

Hate mail might be a by product for some, but on my theoretical snazzy new show I'd prefer to have at least a couple of years grace before having to deal with it and any ego conflicts. :)
Sure, there are plenty of bad boy types around who get work. It's like I said earlier about my own job, if you don't have the necessary level of fame you won't be given leeway to be insulting.
If RDA stood up tomorrow and said Stargate was the worst experience of his life, and TPTB couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, everyone would nod sagely and think it was (mostly) true.
***that's IF and again, it is not true or a rumour or anything*** :p

Not necessarily. Casting directors suggest. They don't make the final suggestion. That's up to the producers.
I'd expect my casting director to suggest me people who would suit the show, and work with me. If an actor has been a pain in the neck on his previous role I'd like that information when I decide which person I'm going to spend the next five years of my working life with.
I can trade five years of pain for a vast fanbase if I need to. ;)

Back on topic.
I don't think anyone on this thread actually thinks MS will leave - where's he going to go for a start. It's just wandered into a discussion on career, typecasting and deportment when leaving your job. (Or to put it another way, MS' past, present and future)
Off topic I agree, but slightly more interesting than "Is Michael Shanks going to leave?"
"No" repeated x100

Dani347
November 9th, 2005, 12:01 PM
You don't want actors like that one just fired off Desperate Housewives today for 'inappropriate behavior' (they won't say WHAT that was).

OT: Which actor?


Good looks aren't a pre-requisite for me when I think of a lead, looks are completely subjective anyway - for example, BB doesn't float my boat, neither does MS (bringing it back to topic ).

True, looks are subjective. However, I think I have an idea of what Hollywood considers handsome (she says, egotistically). For instance, Brad Pitt does nothing for me, but I do think he fits the mold.

ShadowMaat
November 9th, 2005, 12:23 PM
OT: Which actor?
Page Kennedy, who played Caleb in a couple of eps of Desperate Housewives, was fired for "improper conduct" according to the Associated Press. The role is currently being recast.

There's also Terrell Owens, the football player who may be excellent on the field, but whose badmouthing has made him an unwelcome property.

But in those cases, the bad/lewd behavior resulted in outside forces saying "you're outta here!" Michael chose to leave... and chose to come back.

I'd still like to know why/how anyone could think he'd leave again.

smurf
November 9th, 2005, 12:53 PM
But in those cases, the bad/lewd behavior resulted in outside forces saying "you're outta here!" Michael chose to leave... and chose to come back.

I'd still like to know why/how anyone could think he'd leave again.
Becos Michael Shanks ROX!!!!1!!!! and is the BESTEST ACTOR EVER!!!!111!!!

Want to know why do I love Vala and Vala/Daniel together? Because both Claudia and Michael are BRILLIANT actors, watching these two you are watching really BRILLIANT performance, art with the BIG A. [for the rest please direct yourself to the blog comments]
Darren needs to sort out some sarcasm tags.

You know, one of the things that has annoyed me recently is (some fanatic) people comparing the AT situation with MS at the end of S5. I feel like screaming at each and every one "He chose to leave!", even though Brad Wright said he'd have a big part to play in 6 and the upcoming film.



True, looks are subjective. However, I think I have an idea of what Hollywood considers handsome (she says, egotistically). For instance, Brad Pitt does nothing for me, but I do think he fits the mold.
It also considers Leonardo DiCaprio handsome, fairly opposite in facial structure to Brad Pitt.
I have to say that I do like the feeling recently that handsome doesn't necessarily make lead anymore... or maybe I'm just a bit more choosy about the films I watch.

prion
November 9th, 2005, 12:57 PM
Hate mail might be a by product for some, but on my theoretical snazzy new show I'd prefer to have at least a couple of years grace before having to deal with it and any ego conflicts. :)

Then you'd have to hire an unknown, AND not have that unknown replace anyone ;) Fans have been sending hate mail to replacement cast members, since, geez, at least the late 1980s as far as I can recall. Didn't know squat who that actor was but their favorite actor was getting the boot so they squawked. And I'm sure soap actors have been getting whacko mail since the Corolla typewriter days....

Casting directors go for look and ability, not if they have groupies. I think every actor must have one :)

smurf
November 9th, 2005, 01:06 PM
Then you'd have to hire an unknown, AND not have that unknown replace anyone ;) Fans have been sending hate mail to replacement cast members, since, geez, at least the late 1980s as far as I can recall. Didn't know squat who that actor was but their favorite actor was getting the boot so they squawked. And I'm sure soap actors have been getting whacko mail since the Corolla typewriter days....

Casting directors go for look and ability, not if they have groupies. I think every actor must have one :)
But, but, it's an all new show, all shiny and everything. :( :p
I don't think they openly check out what type baggage the actor carries, but it would be information for the producer (ie. me, ego moi? :D ) to take into account when deciding how much pain for gain they are prepared to handle.
Do I want normal groupies or psycho penguin groupies? Do I mind about hate mail as long as it's not addressed to me? And do I need to upgrade my mailroom? :confused:

ShadowMaat
November 9th, 2005, 01:40 PM
For the record, I didn't make that comment about Daniel/Vala. Hard to tell without an identifier, but 'twas not I. ;)

I know Michael will be back, but I'd still be curious to see what would happen if he said no. TPTB would be completely fracked. Or frelled, I suppose, since Farscape is the new god of Stargate. :P

Dani347
November 9th, 2005, 01:55 PM
It also considers Leonardo DiCaprio handsome, fairly opposite in facial structure to Brad Pitt.

It's also interesting to note that back in his Titanic days, he had been pegged as a teen heartthrob. Nothing else. And, he looks young for his age, so he had that label for awhile. Then, he did Catch Me if You Can, and people started considering him a character actor.

I think the whole lead/character thing is getting more flexible. There are certain leading roles that will only go to Hollywood handsome men, but more people are making stories about different kinds of characters.

I don't want to get into a debate about MS and AT (see, I'm on topic!). I'll just say that if he decides to go (again, no evidence that he will, but no one can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that any of them will stay until they make the official announcements) I support him, and I don't think there would be anything wrong or condemnable about his decision either way.

ShadowMaat
November 9th, 2005, 02:11 PM
I'd actually be kinda proud of him if he stepped out, now. ;) And depending on where he went, I'd be very keen to see how he did in the world outside of Stargate.

sueKay
November 9th, 2005, 02:21 PM
Smegger56 - sorry :o I had 2 browser windows open on GW and posted this in the wrong one...sorry to confuse :o

ShardsofGlass
November 9th, 2005, 02:41 PM
For the record, I didn't make that comment about Daniel/Vala. Hard to tell without an identifier, but 'twas not I. ;)

I know Michael will be back, but I'd still be curious to see what would happen if he said no. TPTB would be completely fracked. Or frelled, I suppose, since Farscape is the new god of Stargate. :P

Personally, I don't think a S10 would've been announced without getting some sort of promise from Ben that he would be back for S10. I just can't imagine them being okay with having the leadership position change after just establishing Mitchell.

Also, I can't see MS not coming back, not unless he had a starring role lined up in a show on a major network. But that's highly unlikely, imo.

prion
November 9th, 2005, 02:48 PM
But, but, it's an all new show, all shiny and everything. :( :p
I don't think they openly check out what type baggage the actor carries, but it would be information for the producer (ie. me, ego moi? :D ) to take into account when deciding how much pain for gain they are prepared to handle.
Do I want normal groupies or psycho penguin groupies? Do I mind about hate mail as long as it's not addressed to me? And do I need to upgrade my mailroom? :confused:

Ha. think you underestimate the extremely thick skin that producers have. They're not in the business to make fan friends, but money :)

smurf
November 9th, 2005, 03:10 PM
For the record, I didn't make that comment about Daniel/Vala. Hard to tell without an identifier, but 'twas not I. ;)

Apologies madam, I didn't mean to imply.
It was actually posted by anonymous, who seems to be a very busy blog commentator.


Ha. think you underestimate the extremely thick skin that producers have. They're not in the business to make fan friends, but money :)
Do you mind! It's genetic, nothing I can do about it. Humph!
True, so it all comes back to whether the actor is a big enough star to outweigh the fact I have an equally capable actor without the baggage.
(For the topic) MS isn't that big a star.

prion
November 9th, 2005, 05:58 PM
Hm, don't see any of the folks on Stargate as 'big stars'; they're working actors who, at least to me, are a lot more appealing than over-hyped folk like Cruise and Dicaprio.

the fifth man
November 9th, 2005, 07:17 PM
Hm, don't see any of the folks on Stargate as 'big stars'; they're working actors who, at least to me, are a lot more appealing than over-hyped folk like Cruise and Dicaprio.

I couldn't agree with you more on this one. They just come off as more "down to Earth", at least to me.

Michelle05
November 9th, 2005, 09:36 PM
True, so it all comes back to whether the actor is a big enough star to outweigh the fact I have an equally capable actor without the baggage.
(For the topic) MS isn't that big a star.

What baggage are you talking about? The baggage is all in a few fans' minds. MS came back because someone on high decided the show was better with him than without him, and he was willing to give it another shot. From what everyone says, he was welcomed back and has been on very good terms with TPTB ever since. Anything else is speculation based on nothing. As for his interviews while he was away, he just tends to be a lot more honest than the average actor; many people didn't interpret his words negatively at all, including me. I respected him for it. I'm sure he didn't appreciate the comments by RCC or BW or even AT about him in their interviews either.

Anyway it's water that passed under the bridge 3 years ago so I have no idea why it's a topic in this thread.

As for the question, I fear he may only sign for a limited number of episodes, perhaps to leave time for other work. I would understand, but I would be very sad. I think he has great chemistry with everyone in the cast, esp Claudia, and I look forward to seeing them together on screen every week.

Lida
November 10th, 2005, 01:59 PM
It's very interesting to me that actors are seemingly put on a different plane than any other working human being.

Most people today, whatever their profession, will switch jobs for a higher job title, more of a challenge, and, particularly, more money. In fact, it's said the average person will change companies several times in their career for. In my industry, it happens constantly.

Why should having a good self-image and confidence that you can get a better job be an admirable trait for--say--a marketing executive or computer programmer and something to criticize in an actor?

He's just doing something we all should do in our own careers.

Gee, you make 7 figures for play acting? Wow, I want your job.....most of us work VERY hard, and most, NOT for 7 figures. We also don't have the ability to play prima donna when the time for raises comes up. As for finding a new job and better job, well that kinda depends on what exactly you do, doesn't it? Be nice if it was a easy as you make it sound, but it just isn't, sorry.

As for making more money, etc......some make plenty with product endorsements....ever see CJ at a Con? ;)

Sorry, I love AT, MS, CJ....however, MS has played this card before and he's just not that great and well known an actor to play it again, so if he decides not to sign for a tenth season, I hope he and David Duchovny enjoy cards......but that's just my opinion. I'd love to see him sign and get on with things.

the fifth man
November 10th, 2005, 02:24 PM
I'd love to see him sign and get on with things.[/color]

Hopefully we'll hear something soon.

prion
November 10th, 2005, 02:28 PM
Originally Posted by MediaSavant
It's very interesting to me that actors are seemingly put on a different plane than any other working human being.

Most people today, whatever their profession, will switch jobs for a higher job title, more of a challenge, and, particularly, more money. In fact, it's said the average person will change companies several times in their career for. In my industry, it happens constantly.

Why should having a good self-image and confidence that you can get a better job be an admirable trait for--say--a marketing executive or computer programmer and something to criticize in an actor?

He's just doing something we all should do in our own careers.



Gee, you make 7 figures for play acting? Wow, I want your job.....most of us work VERY hard, and most, NOT for 7 figures. We also don't have the ability to play prima donna when the time for raises comes up. As for finding a new job and better job, well that kinda depends on what exactly you do, doesn't it? Be nice if it was a easy as you make it sound, but it just isn't, sorry.

As for making more money, etc......some make plenty with product endorsements....ever see CJ at a Con? ;)

Sorry, I love AT, MS, CJ....however, MS has played this card before and he's just not that great and well known an actor to play it again, so if he decides not to sign for a tenth season, I hope he and David Duchovney enjoy cards......but that's just my opinion. I'd love to see him sign and get on with things.


The thing is that VERY few actors make 7 figures. It's also work, not play acting. It's not an easy job, much as you might think it is. First you have to have some degree of talent otherwise you don't get past high school drama classes. If you're a regular on a TV series, you've got long hours, no real life except during breaks, fans who demand things of you, publicists who want you to do things, tabloids who hunt you down (if you're famous enough)

I've never seen or heard of any prima donna behavior on any of the STargate shows. It seems to be just fan speculation that someone might be behaving badly if, god forbid, they renegotiate a contract when their contracts end. Actors know that they're very much the 'flavor of the month' as the viewers tastes are very fickle. A star one year, has-been the next. If they look out for themselves financially, etc., well, hey, kudos to them. Better than being a doormat.

As for David Duchovny, well, he's still working, and making a heckuva lot more money than any of us. ;)

MediaSavant
November 10th, 2005, 07:19 PM
[color=indigo]Gee, you make 7 figures for play acting? Wow, I want your job.....most of us work VERY hard, and most, NOT for 7 figures.

Huh?

Where did this "seven figures" stuff come from? It certainly didn't come from my post.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about a $5,000 increase in salary or a $50,000 increase, most workers, regardless of their profession or job, jump at the chance to better their situation.

Maybe the typical science fiction fan lacks this drive, however, and that's why there is this disconnect with the concept on this forum.


As for finding a new job and better job, well that kinda depends on what exactly you do, doesn't it? Be nice if it was a easy as you make it sound, but it just isn't, sorry.

Easiness or hardness of the process has nothing to do with the drive underlying the desire to better your situation. It might be easy for some people and hard for others, but the point is to have the desire to better one's situation and maximize your potential.

On the easiness/hardness scale of changing situations, acting is probably one of the harder ones because it is very competititive and the really good, career-ascending roles aren't plentiful. Which provides even more of a reason for an actor not to ignore the opportunities that do present themselves.

If Michael has the desire to maximize his potential, I respect him for it the same way I respect anyone with ambition.

Darth Buddha
November 10th, 2005, 08:11 PM
Maybe the typical science fiction fan lacks this drive, however, and that's why there is this disconnect with the concept on this forum.
Oh, you do know how to baith the flames, don't ya?

I for one completely understand Shanks drive, and if I thought he had the talent, I'd be all for him breaking out of the science fiction stereotype career trap. I just haven't seen him deliver anything that convinces me he has it.

On the other hand, he doesn't have the greatest dramatic material to work with. Maybe if I see him in something else, I'll be convinced.

prion
November 11th, 2005, 04:06 AM
Easiness or hardness of the process has nothing to do with the drive underlying the desire to better your situation. It might be easy for some people and hard for others, but the point is to have the desire to better one's situation and maximize your potential.

On the easiness/hardness scale of changing situations, acting is probably one of the harder ones because it is very competititive and the really good, career-ascending roles aren't plentiful. Which provides even more of a reason for an actor not to ignore the opportunities that do present themselves.

If Michael has the desire to maximize his potential, I respect him for it the same way I respect anyone with ambition.

Yup. There's nothing wrong with MS (or AT, remember, she hasn't signed yet either!) looking out for themselves. Do you think RDA didn't negotiate his own perks, etc. when he did the show? Of course he did.

KatG
November 11th, 2005, 07:21 AM
MS came back because someone on high decided the show was better with him than without him, and he was willing to give it another shot.... As for his interviews while he was away, he just tends to be a lot more honest than the average actor; many people didn't interpret his words negatively at all, including me. I respected him for it. I'm sure he didn't appreciate the comments by RCC or BW or even AT about him in their interviews either.

I personally respected MS's decision to leave the show in S5 and pursue other acting jobs. I respect anyone's desire to better themselves if they think they can do it and have the gumption to take the risk. That being said, regardless of whether MS was just being honest about his feelings or not, having come from working in Human Resources, you do not bad-mouth your former employer publicly so that any future employers know about it. It's a bad mark on your application/resume, because the assumption is that if you had such a problem, then you must have been the problem, regardless of whether it's true or not. That translates to future employers as an "attitude problem" and often it's not something they're willing to deal with.

As to RCC's and BW's comments, I'm sure some of them hit a little close to home with MS, maybe making him uncomfortable, but then again, they were the former employers. Right or wrong it happens. They're the big fish.

Now AT on the other hand, I'd be interested in knowing what comments she made that you're talking about. I don't recall her saying anything negative about MS's departure, other than she understood his reasons but hated to see him go. I'm not saying she didn't say anything else, I just didn't read it, and would be interested in knowing what it is you think she said.

prion
November 11th, 2005, 08:26 AM
I personally respected MS's decision to leave the show in S5 and pursue other acting jobs. I respect anyone's desire to better themselves if they think they can do it and have the gumption to take the risk. That being said, regardless of whether MS was just being honest about his feelings or not, having come from working in Human Resources, you do not bad-mouth your former employer publicly so that any future employers know about it. It's a bad mark on your application/resume, because the assumption is that if you had such a problem, then you must have been the problem, regardless of whether it's true or not. That translates to future employers as an "attitude problem" and often it's not something they're willing to deal with.


It's a bit different in the entertainment industry, it seems. You can say stuff about 'former employers' as so much of it is dug up and printed by the press. However, you don't say "the last producer was a total (expletive deleted) who spent all his time chasing production assistants"). You keep the 'dirt' quiet as you would in a 'normal' job.

I won't comment on human resources departments' attitudes except to say I've run across some that have made me cringe.

A lot of being hired in the acting industry is a) looks (which count more than anything as geez, how else could Anna Nicole Smith have had a reality show when she was stoned half the time?) and b) acting ability. It helps immensely if your "Q score" is high. There's a fascinating article in the press today on actor Jake Gyllenhaal and the whole leading man yes or no? question which sorta fits half of what's been bandied about. Not sure if anybody else has it, but the Wall Street Journal does. Hollywood has a different perception than the public, and that's what it boils down to.

Michelle05
November 11th, 2005, 10:26 AM
That being said, regardless of whether MS was just being honest about his feelings or not, having come from working in Human Resources, you do not bad-mouth your former employer publicly so that any future employers know about it.

I did not interpret MS's comments as bashing his former employers at all. He said over and over that he left not because of the writing etc but only because Daniel was no longer central to the stories they were trying to tell. And that when he asked for changes he was told the character didn't warrant an upgrade. To me that's just saying what happened, not bashing. Should he have soft-pedaled and said he was just ready to move on or whatever? I'm sure TPTB would have preferred that, but I don't consider what he said to be bad-mouthing.


Now AT on the other hand, I'd be interested in knowing what comments she made that you're talking about. I don't recall her saying anything negative about MS's departure, other than she understood his reasons but hated to see him go.

The quote that got a lot of people upset was this: "Certainly, there are times when you reach a level of frustration where you know there's so much more potential for your character, but it's not happening," she admits. "But, you have to remember that it is an ensemble show; there are four main characters, so you can't always expect to be the 'A'' story line."

Considering her character was getting the "A" storyline so often, and Daniel practically never in S5, this did not sit well with Daniel fans. You can read the larger excerpt of the interview here (http://www.stargate-sg1-solutions.com/interviews/at/0203starburstat.shtml).

Finally, I really did not mean to drag up old history here. MS should be at the San Jose con this weekend, and I'll be there too. Hopefully we'll get a better feel for his S10 plans!

Dani347
November 11th, 2005, 10:48 AM
What is this "card" MS is supposed to be playing? The same card that everyone else on the show is playing? Because the only thing we know is he hasn't signed on yet. That's it. Period. Neither, as far as I know, have AT or CJ. Possibly BB has signed (although he might be looking it over to make sure the terms are satisfactory. I don't know). And, everyone is going to make sure that all terms of their contract is satisfactory. That's business.

And, David Duchovny is hardly twiddling his thumbs. IMDB may not be a perfect database, but it is somewhat reliable, and he has at two movies that are in the post -production stage. He also wrote and directed a movie. And, it is completely irrelevant that his movies aren't huge box office successes. He continues to act. Having the audacity (insert extreme sarcasm) to leave the X-Files didn't stop that.

As far as acting, no it's not working in a coal mine or heart surgery, but it's not just sooo easy. I certainly couldn't do it. On the other hand, my dream job is to be a writer, sitting on my fat butt all day making up stories, so I can sympathyse with the idea of acting being a real job. There are a lot of actors who don't get anywhere near MS' level of success (a long running series). Extremely talented people, too. So, it can't be all that easy.

And, the fact that actors make a lot of money seems to me to be irrelevant. They still are going to make sure they're fulfilled in their jobs, that's still a good thing.

Was there all this speculation about him last season? Were people assuming motives about his signing, speculating about raises and being prima donnas (unless people are dredging up stuff about season freaking 5 -of which, even in the most negative, I've never heard anything about him angling for more money -then again, I have no problem with an actor trying to get more money. I don't care how much they make)? Does all this come down from fact that there was an announcement that he wouldn't make a con because of a "major tv role"?

Has AT signed her contract yet? Has CJ? I don't spend a lot of time in threads about them (and, I don't even know if there are equivalent threads) so I don't know if anyone is going on about how they aren't big enough stars to "play cards" because they haven't signed yet.

Matt G
November 11th, 2005, 02:31 PM
Hmmm...is MS going to sign on for S10? I'll assume he will till I hear any hint otherwise...but I'm in a similar position to ShadowMaat's.

Anything stopping him from going into a bigger show or breaking iinto movies? Given that Jessica Alba came out of scifi TV, no!

I can't see him getting any leading roles in movies, but he's a solid enough actor to be either a consistant run of medium movie roles or to at least get a recurring role outside scifi. Enough female Gaters drool over him so looks can't be an issue.

Madeleine
November 11th, 2005, 08:29 PM
IAs to RCC's and BW's comments, I'm sure some of them hit a little close to home with MS, maybe making him uncomfortable, but then again, they were the former employers. Right or wrong it happens. They're the big fish.

I don't doubt it. Having a character you'd put effort and time into for five years compared to 'marcel the monkey from Friends' and called 'pointless' by your former employer has got to make you feel ever so slightly undervalued and mocked. He seems to have got over it though, just as everyone else seems to have got over him letting it be known in public that he'd felt frustrated.

The only people who seem to be holding it against him still are a small group of fans who can't let go, perhaps because they can't forgive him for being forgiven by TPTB / for ousting poor old Corin / for allowing a situation where the Dannyranters were allowed to be happy / for not doing the Trust TPTB thing that we were all supposed to be doing at the time / for proving them 'wrong' when they said MS was history and his career was garbage and good riddance / whatever. I doubt most casting staff even know about most of it, after all he's not high profile like Jolene Blalock or even Alex Kingston. They might have picked up a little of it on their radar, but MS's return to the show would have allowed them to file any supposed arguments under "quite obviously very minor" and move on.

EDIT: I bet Jolene Blalock and Alex Kingston keep on getting work. Never mind that JB criticised the actual writing of half of the show, she's a good actress and I think a lot of people will respect her desire for the show she's involved in to be a success. AK especially. She may have 'badmouthed' her ex-employers for how they elbowed her out of ER, but how could that hurt her? She's now coming across as someone who likes to have work to do and who doesn't like leaving a job she likes. It's not going to affect anyone's ability to elbow her out or fire her again in future, and with a brilliant actress like her it'll just be taken as a sign of the work ethic that a lot of actors have. (As opposed to footballers who, when they reach the top, don't seem to care about playing any more and just want their stupidly high pay packet, and often refuse to play - "I don't want to be on the left wing, I'm not going out on the park unless you let me be the striker!")

Dani347
November 11th, 2005, 09:15 PM
I don't doubt it. Having a character you'd put effort and time into for five years compared to 'marcel the monkey from Friends' and called 'pointless' by your former employer has got to make you feel ever so slightly undervalued and mocked. He seems to have got over it though, just as everyone else seems to have got over him letting it be known in public that he'd felt frustrated.

Oh, man. I had not heard these comments before. I think the statute of limitations for blaming the man for being upset should be long over in light of comments like these.





EDIT: I bet Jolene Blalock and Alex Kingston keep on getting work.

Alex Kingston was in an episode of Without a Trace, recently. Very good part, too. I didn't even recognize her, because she was playing an American.

smurf
November 12th, 2005, 04:02 AM
Before people start thinking that people like me "hate" MS because I think his actions post S5 are relevant to his career. Let me put this straight.

I have no problem with people having ambition. In fact, one of the things which annoys me about some people is their total lack of ambition, to the point I want to scream at them, how do they live? I'll happily support anyone who wants to better themselves even if I don't think highly of them - although I admit, somewhat selfishly, I'd prefer it if it didn't impact on me. I'd rather not carry people, or deal with things which make my job harder than it is.

So MS leaving in S5, or now, is fine. It's his career, and all power to him. It's a hard career acting, many actors will never have the career he has.
But that is partly the point, it is hard and yes it's good to be ambitious and self-confident, but shooting yourself in the foot by bad-mouthing the PTB on the only big job you've had, when you are not the star, isn't very productive.
Yes, many other actors have bad-mouthed their former employers, but you'll find normally that either they are part of a group opinion (safety coming from numbers), or they have had a fairly solid career before that role (safety coming from previous form).
Yes, RCC and BW said some things which were equally not as polite, but to not consider their point of view or take into account their experiences at the time is just as bad as saying MS deserved to be dumped. Yes, descending into tit-for-tat name calling is utterly childish and doesn't cover them in glory, but at the start they were respectful and said all the standard nice things. Getting hate mail isn't a laugh. Getting hate mail, when you had nothing to do with his decision to leave* (no he wasn't pushed, CN was hired after he decided to leave), and hearing an SDJer say they'll stop if he (MS) asks them to would make most people less inclined to be nice the next time his name comes up. Human nature.

Looking at the situation in hindsight, in my opinion, the only person his actions harmed was himself. It's the little boy who cried wolf, except, with the firestorm that blew up, he also cried hurricane and meteorite at the same time. So I think you can excuse some people for not believing him in future. (In the same way, post-GABIT some people will choose not to believe AT in future.)

If he had kept his mouth shut, or cried and didn't come back permanantly, he'd be given more respect. You may think he was only being honest, and such things should be water under the bridge. I think that's very sweet, and I'd like to live in that world too.



*That they didn't make much effort in getting him to stay is a standard complaint, but he isn't the star and you wouldn't cut off the arm of your baby just because someone says they don't like the fingers on it.

KatG
November 12th, 2005, 04:24 AM
I don't doubt it. Having a character you'd put effort and time into for five years compared to 'marcel the monkey from Friends' and called 'pointless' by your former employer has got to make you feel ever so slightly undervalued and mocked. He seems to have got over it though, just as everyone else seems to have got over him letting it be known in public that he'd felt frustrated.

The only people who seem to be holding it against him still are a small group of fans who can't let go,

I agree pretty much. I don't have a problem with MS coming back in S7. Obviously he and TPTB were able to come to terms with whatever the original problem was. I think what happened to CN was rather sad, but I don't in anyway blame MS for that decision.

I also didn't have a problem with MS leaving in S6. In fact, I originally admired his courage in choosing to take his chances rather than sticking with the safe bet of a role that he wasn't happy with. And let's face it, if he wasn't happy with the character any more it would have come across in his acting, much like RDA's feeling became more evident in Jack as time went on. My only real problem came with what he said in interviews later. And there again, I'm coming at it from working in human resources/personnel so my viewpoint might well be biased.

If MS decides not to sign for S10 because he wants to try his wings again, I will applaud his decision. It would be a gutsy move, given that S10 with Vala will probably have a lot of Daniel. If he decides to stay, which I really think is the case, and he's able to negotiate a better package than what he's got, then all power to him.

Whether he stays or goes really isn't going to affect my decision as to whether or not to watch S10. I'll probably tune in to the first couple of eps and make my decision based on what I see.

Ali888
November 12th, 2005, 05:35 AM
Before people start thinking that people like me "hate" MS because I think his actions post S5 are relevant to his career. Let me put this straight.
But that is partly the point, it is hard and yes it's good to be ambitious and self-confident, but shooting yourself in the foot by bad-mouthing the PTB on the only big job you've had, when you are not the star, isn't very productive.

Looking at the situation in hindsight, in my opinion, the only person his actions harmed was himself. It's the little boy who cried wolf, except, with the firestorm that blew up, he also cried hurricane and meteorite at the same time. So I think you can excuse some people for not believing him in future. (In the same way, post-GABIT some people will choose not to believe AT in future.)

If he had kept his mouth shut, or cried and didn't come back permanantly, he'd be given more respect. You may think he was only being honest, and such things should be water under the bridge. I think that's very sweet, and I'd like to live in that world too.



*That they didn't make much effort in getting him to stay is a standard complaint, but he isn't the star and you wouldn't cut off the arm of your baby just because someone says they don't like the fingers on it.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. MS did not badmouth his employers. He explained why he left the show, the reason being that his character had been minimised for two years. He spoke to TPTB who told him that the character didn't warrant an upgrade. Yes, MS was unhappy but explaining the facts as he saw them isn't 'badmouthing' anyone. Yes, he was unhappy that TPTB didn't make any effort to keep him on the show. Why wouldn't he be unhappy? It's called being human, we all like to be needed/wanted. I bet that if you were unhappy at work and asked your employer if he could help you, then you'd be upset if he turned round and told you that your job wasn't important enough for him to bother helping you.

Ali

Skydiver
November 12th, 2005, 09:15 AM
I also didn't have a problem with MS leaving in S6. In fact, I originally admired his courage in choosing to take his chances rather than sticking with the safe bet of a role that he wasn't happy with. And let's face it, if he wasn't happy with the character any more it would have come across in his acting, much like RDA's feeling became more evident in Jack as time went on. My only real problem came with what he said in interviews later. And there again, I'm coming at it from working in human resources/personnel so my viewpoint might well be biased.



yeah. when word first broke that he was leaving i was like 'man, that takes guts to give up a year's worth of easy money and strike out on your own.'

in fact, some of the harshest critics of his choice in the beginning were his devout fans. I seem to recall the MSOOF boards imploding with outrage because their favored actor dared to want to leave.

Interpretations vary on the interviews over the next few months, however there was - to many - an increasing level of frustration and anger in each one.

As to being told that his character was worthless or whatever is spreading aroudn now, this is the first i've heard of it. Not that i was in the room, in fact, i sincerely doubt anyone playing on these boards or any other message room on the net was actually in the room to hear the real words and real discussion, so much of what's reported is nothing more than here say and innuendo and, POSSIBLY, memories altered by the passage of time.

the one thing that strikes me the most though is that part of daniel's story died in s3, and it died at MS' request. Shau'ri was killed off because MS requested that it happen. and with Shau'ri's death died daniel's 'mythic quest', his quest for a happy ending and to rescue his wife. She died because MS asked the writers to end that part of his story.

and with her died Daniels' main reason for being involved with the SGC.

smurf
November 12th, 2005, 12:33 PM
the one thing that strikes me the most though is that part of daniel's story died in s3, and it died at MS' request. Shau'ri was killed off because MS requested that it happen. and with Shau'ri's death died daniel's 'mythic quest', his quest for a happy ending and to rescue his wife. She died because MS asked the writers to end that part of his story.

and with her died Daniels' main reason for being involved with the SGC.
That's interesting I didn't know that. What a strange thing to request, feels like we missed a chance for Daniel to deal with Shau'ri as a bad-assed goa'uld. I know they tried it with Sarah/Osiris but still...
I knew they stopped writing innocent, wide-eyed Daniel because MS decided to stop acting it.

Mind you, I never saw Daniel as particularly innocent. Jonas either for that matter (people growing up in warzones generally aren't). Naive, yes, but I always think innocence suggest a purity that neither characters have.
Sorry off topic, my bad. :)

Skydiver
November 12th, 2005, 01:07 PM
i've always seen daniel as far more worldly than others wish to see him. this man grew up traveling all over hte world with his parents. so he was exposed to who knows how many cultures over the years. he then, at age 7, witnesses his parents' deaths and was - presumably - absorved into the foster care sytem of new york state (the parents were killed in new york, nick didn't want to adopt him and i doubt he signed over rights so that someone else could adopt him, something which is supported to this point by no mention of adoptive parents). He was likely never adopted (due to the legal reasons mentioned and the sad fact that older children are massively hard to place) and likely grew up a ward of the state until he was 18, then he was on his own.

he no doubt, had some scholarships to pay for school, but physically he's likelyh been on his own since he was 18 and emotionally on his own for much longer

daniel may have been naive about how the military works and unused to workiing in a system such as the military, where red tape is rampant, but he never was an innocent. at least not in my interpretation of the character

YMMV

Skydiver
November 12th, 2005, 01:16 PM
many of the changes to the character that some fans haven't liked and blamed TPTB for have been changes the actor liked

daniel's hair was cut not only because MS was playing hamlet and needed the shorter cut, but also because MS was tired of taking care of the longer hair.

daniel doesn't wear his glasses as often as is expected because, like many non-glasses wearing people, glasses are tough to get used to. they're hard and can even give you headaches, even plain glass ones - when y ou're not used to seeing little lines in your line of vision, they can be tought to get used to and very distracting

Daniel has buffed up over the years because MS himself has buffed up. He presumably got tired of playing the '98 pound weakling' and wanted to have a more buff and, well manly, image. (and it wouldn't surprise me, given his friendship with CJ, if CJ's emphasis on maintaining his Tea'c physique didn't have an effect on MS buffing up a bit)

Along with the more buff physique, Daniel becoming more competant with weapons and more an equal part of the team instead of the 'weak link' (the civilian that must be protected) is only a natural evolution of his character.

beyond the whole storyline stuff, which can and will be debated ad nauseum, the simply physical changes of the character had most if not all of thier root in the actor and his desire to make Daniel Jackson less an immiation of James Spader and more of his own character

smurf
November 12th, 2005, 01:38 PM
i've always seen daniel as far more worldly than others wish to see him. this man grew up traveling all over hte world with his parents. so he was exposed to who knows how many cultures over the years. he then, at age 7, witnesses his parents' deaths and was - presumably - absorved into the foster care sytem of new york state (the parents were killed in new york, nick didn't want to adopt him and i doubt he signed over rights so that someone else could adopt him, something which is supported to this point by no mention of adoptive parents). He was likely never adopted (due to the legal reasons mentioned and the sad fact that older children are massively hard to place) and likely grew up a ward of the state until he was 18, then he was on his own.

he no doubt, had some scholarships to pay for school, but physically he's likelyh been on his own since he was 18 and emotionally on his own for much longer

daniel may have been naive about how the military works and unused to workiing in a system such as the military, where red tape is rampant, but he never was an innocent. at least not in my interpretation of the character

YMMV
Ooh, that is exactly how I see him. It never made sense to me with what we know of the character's past and what archaeology involves, that a person would come out with innocence intact. Along with the fact in canon the character is 30+ when we meet him. It's like saying Indiana Jones has innocence.

With, Jonas I can see him having a better family life, but the last major conflict was 20 years ago and I can't see him being any younger than 27. So war in his lifetime, threat of war for the next 20 years, he works in politics, and he made one heck of a calculated choice in Meridian.
One of those people, like Daniel, who is too smart to be innocent.

Off, off topic (?) on actors choices:
Although, I'm not enjoying S9 I'm kind of interested in how much control BB is getting with his character. Is it RDA, and to some degree CN, style of developing with the writers, or more along the lines of AT/MS where suggestions are welcome, but possibly ignored?
I haven't read that many BB interviews, but I haven't really seen him talk about how he intends to develop the character.

LaCroix
November 12th, 2005, 02:20 PM
yeah. when word first broke that he was leaving i was like 'man, that takes guts to give up a year's worth of easy money and strike out on your own.'

in fact, some of the harshest critics of his choice in the beginning were his devout fans. I seem to recall the MSOOF boards imploding with outrage because their favored actor dared to want to leave.

Interpretations vary on the interviews over the next few months, however there was - to many - an increasing level of frustration and anger in each one.

As to being told that his character was worthless or whatever is spreading aroudn now, this is the first i've heard of it. Not that i was in the room, in fact, i sincerely doubt anyone playing on these boards or any other message room on the net was actually in the room to hear the real words and real discussion, so much of what's reported is nothing more than here say and innuendo and, POSSIBLY, memories altered by the passage of time.

the one thing that strikes me the most though is that part of daniel's story died in s3, and it died at MS' request. Shau'ri was killed off because MS requested that it happen. and with Shau'ri's death died daniel's 'mythic quest', his quest for a happy ending and to rescue his wife. She died because MS asked the writers to end that part of his story.

and with her died Daniels' main reason for being involved with the SGC.


Wow. I always thought it was VB's decision in light of what was happening
between her and MS in their personal life. I never knew that it was on MS's part that it happened. You learn something new every day.

Dani347
November 12th, 2005, 02:37 PM
Sha're was why he joined SG1, but she certainly wasn't the only reason he stayed there. He's an explorer. I don't even think they needed Shifu to have given him a reason to stay in the program. I think after his grief and his resentment to Teal'c had worn off, it would have been just as realistic for him to choose to stay because he truly enjoyed his job, he wanted to continue being with his surrogate family, and also in a way to avenge Sha're by freeing others. Sha're was a very important part of his time in the SGC, and I'd say the most, but she was never the all and everything.

Skydiver
November 12th, 2005, 04:45 PM
A lot of it is open to each person's personal perception. However the search for Shau'ri, the quest to rescue his wife and love fits in with the 'mythic quest' for a hero. kind of like Luke searching out the meaning of the jedi, or frodo trying to get the ring to mordor.

a quest is a task that has to be completed for the character to reach is growth point or turning point.

teal'c's quest has always been to free his people. sam and jack really don't have any singular quests,and until shau'ri was killed, rescuing and freeing her was daniel's.

with that goal gone, so goes much of daniel's reason for being there. Yes, he is the explorer. so is jack and sam. the need to explore and investigate is what drives them. they may not have any really long standing arcs (jack and the asgard, sam and the tok'ra, daniel and the ancients) but none of them have any real quests or goals

in many ways, had shau'ri survived and was still a part of hte universe, the person who brought up sarah had a point. rescuing her could have been the ultimate love story (i think in many ways introducing Sarah was an attempt to recreate shau'ri. and it was an arc that continued until they thought the show was ending. I think if they'd have known about s9 sooner, sarah wouldn't have been rescued yet. she'd still be out there as a nemesis.)

but now the only real quest the show has is Teal'c's and his journey from slave to leader/king

Dani347
November 12th, 2005, 05:34 PM
with that goal gone, so goes much of daniel's reason for being there. Yes, he is the explorer. so is jack and sam.


And, yet, there was never any question of Jack and Sam's reason for being there. Sha're was the most important reason for him joining, but for her death to mean he had no story left diminishes all the rest of his character. If they don't need a long term quest to justify them being there, there's no reason why Daniel needed one. Daniel's main reason for joining was gone when Sha're died, but my point is, she wasn't the onlyreason. Daniel has always had many reasons for being there. Just because the initial main reason is gone doesn't make the others disappear.

smurf
November 13th, 2005, 06:57 AM
And, yet, there was never any question of Jack and Sam's reason for being there. Sha're was the most important reason for him joining, but for her death to mean he had no story left diminishes all the rest of his character. If they don't need a long term quest to justify them being there, there's no reason why Daniel needed one. Daniel's main reason for joining was gone when Sha're died, but my point is, she wasn't the onlyreason. Daniel has always had many reasons for being there. Just because the initial main reason is gone doesn't make the others disappear.
There isn't a question of Jack and Sam's presence because, being a military show, they are there for their job. They don't need a reason, as part of the airforce setup they have been assigned their positions. They can leave if they want to, but likely only by leaving their jobs as a whole and since both are career airforce I don't see that happening. They can also be reassigned, but their reason/arc for being still on the team isn't completely their choice.

With Daniel he can choose to leave at any time. He didn't really want to get involved in the first place and only joined to save Shau're. In failing to save Shau're his main reason for being there disappears. This doesn't mean he has to leave, he could stay because he likes the job, or the people, or because he hasn't got anything better to do. But like Jack and Sam, who are there to do their job, it means he doesn't have an arc anymore and is no longer forefront because he is no longer the story's driver.

Personally, I see Stargate SG-1 as Teal'c's story because it's the only one which has managed to run all the way through. We should have all Teal'c, all the time. :)

Skydiver
November 13th, 2005, 07:42 AM
Personally, I see Stargate SG-1 as Teal'c's story because it's the only one which has managed to run all the way through. We should have all Teal'c, all the time. :)

in a lot of ways it is teal'c's story. not to the exclusion of anyone, but teal'c's arc was started back in COTG - turning his back on his god, risking his life, his family, his immortal soul, for the good of his people and to try and attain the dream of freedom.

and freeing the jaffa has been a part of the show since day one. teal'c has already gone from slave, murdering at the behest of his 'god' to a leader and has the potential to be even more of a leader before the show ends

it's a long running story of freedom and just how difficult that easy sounding task can be

the fifth man
November 13th, 2005, 02:53 PM
in a lot of ways it is teal'c's story. not to the exclusion of anyone, but teal'c's arc was started back in COTG - turning his back on his god, risking his life, his family, his immortal soul, for the good of his people and to try and attain the dream of freedom.

and freeing the jaffa has been a part of the show since day one. teal'c has already gone from slave, murdering at the behest of his 'god' to a leader and has the potential to be even more of a leader before the show ends

it's a long running story of freedom and just how difficult that easy sounding task can be

Wow, that was really nicely put, Skydiver.:) Just shows how important Teal'c has been, and continues to be.

prion
November 14th, 2005, 08:54 AM
But, getting back to topic...

No word yet that Michael Shanks has signed up for season 10. I heard he was doing a con this past weekend? or is it next weekend? so wonder if any fans who were at (or are going) can report back as I'm sure someone must have asked that question.

Nem2k
November 14th, 2005, 09:04 AM
But, getting back to topic...

No word yet that Michael Shanks has signed up for season 10. I heard he was doing a con this past weekend? or is it next weekend? so wonder if any fans who were at (or are going) can report back as I'm sure someone must have asked that question.

he was meant to be at SG10 last weekend but had to pull out due to work so no, no cons for him recently

Kas
November 14th, 2005, 09:14 AM
Michael's just done the Creation Con in San Jose Ca. this past weekend - reports are starting to emerge :)

Go check out the threads in forums or http://www.michaelshanks-online.com/news/index.shtml for news.

Nem2k
November 14th, 2005, 09:16 AM
ah yes sorry, theres me thinking the UK was at the centre of the world again lol

skritsys
November 14th, 2005, 10:39 AM
And I thought that the UK was the center of the world. Crap! So much for that idea.

prion
November 14th, 2005, 02:28 PM
Michael's just done the Creation Con in San Jose Ca. this past weekend - reports are starting to emerge :)

Go check out the threads in forums or http://www.michaelshanks-online.com/news/index.shtml for news.

Cool.


Michael has been busy recently reading for other television series, including the new series The Ghost Whisperer. No word on the outcomes as yet.

His appearance on that show would be the ONLY reason I'd watch it (and oddly enough, it's against Stargate!)

On Swarmed: Still no word on a air date for the movie.

Geez, what's the holdup? It's not like scifi's giant bug flicks have stellar cgi effects ;)

On the Men of SciFi Calendar: They are in the beginning stages of the 2007 Men of Sci-Fi calendar. Chris will once again be doing the photography. No word on exactly who's in it, other than Michael as a confirmed participant (in front of the camera!).

Okay, I'll buy that one!!! Hope they announce the others. I can think of a few SGA actors I'd love to see in it.

The Signal
November 21st, 2005, 10:39 AM
Now he has :)

the fifth man
November 21st, 2005, 08:11 PM
Now he has :)

And I couldn't be happier. DJ is my favorite character.