PDA

View Full Version : Sheppard needs to be demoted....



Pages : [1] 2

npattis
April 11th, 2006, 01:03 AM
and Colonel Caldwell needs to take over the military contingent.

npattis
April 11th, 2006, 01:22 AM
As well, Lorne needs to be killed and Sgt Bates brought back.

FallenAngelII
April 11th, 2006, 01:28 AM
I can see the reason now:
Sleeping with too many alien sluts and contracting God knows what.

Annie Sheppard
April 11th, 2006, 01:35 AM
As well, Lorne needs to be killed and Sgt Bates brought back.
never!!!!! no no no!!!! don't kill Lorne....we need more Lorne is season 3!!!!!...and Bates...he can stay on Earth...:rolleyes:...

Avatar28
April 11th, 2006, 01:35 AM
Now now. I'm sure the ancient chick he slept with didn't have any STDs and, face it, it had probably been several thousand years. That's a long time for ANYONE to go without, um, carnal relations. You can hardly call her an alien slut for wanting a little something something after all that time. :D

npattis
April 11th, 2006, 01:40 AM
never!!!!! no no no!!!! don't kill Lorne....we need more Lorne is season 3!!!!!...and Bates...he can stay on Earth...:rolleyes:...

Bates actually was involved in the storylines and had a good background. Lorne could do that if the writers let him, but throughout season 2 he only seemed to be a utility man.

knocknashee
April 11th, 2006, 01:54 AM
Why does it always have to escalate to killing when people don't like a character? It's kind of like me saying I hate someone then chasing them down with a rusty spork...

Grow the eff up... :rolleyes:

For the record, I like Lorne as a character...shame they don't put him to use a little more. I'd be interested to see an episode with a full secondary team off-world, and maybe keep Sheppard and his merry band of reprobates on base to, oh, I don't know, do some exploring of the city...since it's the one charater we definitely haven't seen enough of...

As to Bates...yes, he was interesting. And it was great to see a voice of concern. Shame more often and not it came down to pure, simple bigotry...

genius21
April 11th, 2006, 04:05 AM
we all know that sheppard can't be killed off becouse of his secret past and his handling of ancient technology he stept true the gate and atlantis begun to light up sheppard with ancient tech is very well ancient it would not surpisse me that he decendent and lost his memmories in some ways his IQ is very high find solutions even mckay didn't think of (episode brotherhood with the stones on the table to get zpm)

it's obvious he's the solution to atlantis the key they have shown that from day one

and his level of ancient gene is higher then recorded for hundreds of years (episode the tower)

i think he's a good actor and what bother me is that they go to much to other planets to explore and not atlantis they could have find schematics of new power source for deadules.

actor good
character he plays good and upgradeable.

you can't kill him off.

Linzi
April 11th, 2006, 04:16 AM
Why does it always have to escalate to killing when people don't like a character? It's kind of like me saying I hate someone then chasing them down with a rusty spork...

Grow the eff up... :rolleyes:

For the record, I like Lorne as a character...shame they don't put him to use a little more. I'd be interested to see an episode with a full secondary team off-world, and maybe keep Sheppard and his merry band of reprobates on base to, oh, I don't know, do some exploring of the city...since it's the one charater we definitely haven't seen enough of...

As to Bates...yes, he was interesting. And it was great to see a voice of concern. Shame more often and not it came down to pure, simple bigotry...
I seem to be following you around the forum agreeing with you, so sorry!

For goodness sake, what is up with people at the moment?
Must be something in the water....worldwide....

prion
April 11th, 2006, 04:34 AM
I seem to be following you around the forum agreeing with you, so sorry!

For goodness sake, what is up with people at the moment?
Must be something in the water....worldwide....

Ya think? Yeah, seems to be open season on Shep for some reason. And not to mention the "kill kill" suggestions.

Linzi
April 11th, 2006, 04:47 AM
Ya think? Yeah, seems to be open season on Shep for some reason. And not to mention the "kill kill" suggestions.
You're not wrong!
Strange thing is it's the same old people slagging off Shep and the same old people defending him! Small world...

In a way, it would be interesting to see what happened if TPTB did kill off Sheppard. Other than me crying into my pillow for probably two years solidly, I think the show would fold pretty quickly without it's leading man. Just my opinion though...

Oh, and no, Sheppard shouldn't be demoted. I've just got used to Lt.Colonel, and don't want to have to revert to Major again!

knocknashee
April 11th, 2006, 04:51 AM
Ya think? Yeah, seems to be open season on Shep for some reason. And not to mention the "kill kill" suggestions.
The 'kill kill' thing is just childish...if you said that about some characters, there would be uproar...

In a way, it would be interesting to see what happened if TPTB did kill off Sheppard. Other than me crying into my pillow for probably two years solidly, I think the show would fold pretty quickly without it's leading man. Just my opinion though...
It would be interesting, though it's definitely not something I want to be seeing for another few seasons yet. I do think at some stage they are going to have to kill off a main character, and alas, the most likely candidate would be Sheppard...

Stuey1221
April 11th, 2006, 04:51 AM
As well, Lorne needs to be killed and Sgt Bates brought back.

If Lorne is the guy im thinkin of then hell no! That guy is fantastic, he's had some great scenes, especially Season 2 in the episode Condemned, he showed some serious force with Elizabeth and her two other guards. Gives me goose pimples everytime!!

http://www.gateworld.net/atlantis/s2/graphics/205_17.shtml

In my humble opinion Lorne must stay!

(i've tried adding an image but it wont work so URL instead http://www.gateworld.net/atlantis/s2/graphics/205_16.shtml )

andrewag
April 11th, 2006, 04:56 AM
I like Caldwell's role at the moment. He should take more of a role stepping in to make sure Speppard's following protocol etc. I think he would be good to deal with Sheppard's self centred decissions that go against Weir's.

Sheppard was rushed into being a colonel and is not experienced enough like Jack was.

Oh and he shouldn't command the Orion!!!!!!!

genius21
April 11th, 2006, 05:17 AM
they need to kill Sgt Bates i hate that guy he is so paranoid that he would blame his own fart if something happend and you can't kill of sheppard becouse he is the key.

ohh and he doesn't sleep with every woman only ascendent ones.

what i want to see is what will develop in sheppard it's obvious he isn't like normal humans hell i can see that and i'm almost blind.

but i think that ancient woman from sancturay at the end they murged maybe she put something in his head or a key for his mind to remember things.

Hatcheter
April 11th, 2006, 05:51 AM
You're not wrong!
Strange thing is it's the same old people slagging off Shep and the same old people defending him! Small world...

In a way, it would be interesting to see what happened if TPTB did kill off Sheppard. Other than me crying into my pillow for probably two years solidly, I think the show would fold pretty quickly without it's leading man. Just my opinion though...I think Atlantis would survive the loss of Sheppard. SG-1 killed off Daniel for a season, and more recently lost Jack, and the show is still going strong. The lesson from those events is to cast a charismatic new lead to replace the lost character, while making sure that the remaining cast carries a heavy load while the audience adjusts to the new guy.

Now, if Sheppard and McKay were to both be lose at around the same time, we might not have a show anymore.


Oh, and no, Sheppard shouldn't be demoted. I've just got used to Lt.Colonel, and don't want to have to revert to Major again!
1. That would be very confusing.
2. If I'm not mistaken, a demotion would mean that he would be forced into retirement as well. Is not immediately, at the very least he would liekly not earn a promotion again, and would be forced out upon reaching the time-in-grade limit.

But he hasn't done anything since his promotion that would deserve a repremand, let alone a punishment anywhere close to the severity of a demotion.

The Prophet
April 11th, 2006, 06:04 AM
I can see the reason now:
Sleeping with too many alien sluts and contracting God knows what.


STATA! Sexually Transmitted Ancient Tech Activation!... Well, if it can be transmitted through blood why not through...You know...?

It's not through blood though, it's through "Gene Therapy" which, in real life, has a high mortallity rate!

knocknashee
April 11th, 2006, 06:11 AM
I like Caldwell's role at the moment. He should take more of a role stepping in to make sure Speppard's following protocol etc. I think he would be good to deal with Sheppard's self centred decissions that go against Weir's.

Sheppard was rushed into being a colonel and is not experienced enough like Jack was.

Oh and he shouldn't command the Orion!!!!!!!
Not to change the focus of the discussion here, but that to me sounds like an inference that Weir is always right. She isn't. Both Ronon and Sheppard voiced their opinions against keeping Michael alive in Michael, and they were right.

The chain of command assumes too many things, namely...

1. That the person in command is fit to be there.
2. That the person in command is educated enough to make the correct choices.
3. That they should be blindly followed because they are always correct.

Your statement makes gross assumptions about Weir's ability to make decisions - she, like any other human being is falliable. And far from his 'self-centered decisions' that go against hers, he's been overly compliant in S2 and gone along with most of what she has said. And when he has disagreed, his input has been largely ignored. She paid more attention to his opinion when he was a Major. I feel a lot this season there has been an aurora of "I got you this promotion, toe my line".

Ladon's comment about the 'Errand Boy' couldn't have been any closer to the truth if it tried...

ShadowMaat
April 11th, 2006, 06:30 AM
People accuse TPTB of lacking imagination (and I would count myself in that number), but how unimaginative is it to kill someone of just because YOU (generally speaking) don't like him/her? :rolleyes:

As I recall, there was one person seriously advocating Shep's death on the Kill Shep thread. Everyone else was saying stuff along the lines of, "I don't think it needs to go that far, but..." or coming up with fun ways to "get rid of" the character- most of them NOT involving death.

I'm also sick of all the people who think that A needs to die for daring to "replace" B. :rolleyes: A little maturity, please. There are easier and more interesting ways to try incorporating BOTH characters (whichever the two and whatever the situation) than by killing one of them. How very Highlander. ;) There are also more imaginative ways of sidelining a character you don't like or even suggesting ways that a disliked character could- *gasp!*- be improved into something that you DO like! If there's something you hate about a character, there must be specific things about him/her that you hate and thus ways for those things to be changed.

Unless you just blindly hate a character for existing. ;) Not much ANYONE can do about that.

I miss Ford. I miss Bates. I'd like to see both of them back as I think they're good, interesting characters (and Bates in particular offered a much-needed perspective that has ben sorely missing this season, IMO). HOWEVER, that doesn't mean I think ANYONE should be killed off to make room for them again and it doesn't mean that I don't like some of the "new" characters that have been introduced- Lorne and Ronon among them. I don't want them to de any more than I want Ford or Bates to die.

Linzi
April 11th, 2006, 06:38 AM
People accuse TPTB of lacking imagination (and I would count myself in that number), but how unimaginative is it to kill someone of just because YOU (generally speaking) don't like him/her? :rolleyes:

As I recall, there was one person seriously advocating Shep's death on the Kill Shep thread. Everyone else was saying stuff along the lines of, "I don't think it needs to go that far, but..." or coming up with fun ways to "get rid of" the character- most of them NOT involving death.

I'm also sick of all the people who think that A needs to die for daring to "replace" B. :rolleyes: Grow up. Get over it. There are easier and more interesting ways to try incorporating BOTH characters (whichever the two and whatever tie situation) than by killing one of them. How very Highlander. ;) There are also more imaginative ways of sidelining a character you don't like... or better yet, try a REALLY novel approach and try suggesting ways that a disliked character could- *gasp!*- be improved into something that you (generally speaking) DO like! If there's something you hate about a character, there must be specific things about him/her that you hate and thus ways for those things to be changed.

Unless you just blindly hate a character for existing. ;)

I miss Ford. I miss Bates. I'd like to see both of them back as I think they're good, interesting characters (and Bates in particular offered a much-needed perspective that has ben sorely missing this season, IMO). HOWEVER, that doesn't mean I think ANYONE should be killed off to make room for them again and it doesn't mean that I don't like some of the "new" characters that have been introduced- Lorne and Ronon among them. I don't want them to de any more than I want Ford or Bates to die.
I miss Bates too. I liked his perspective on things. He was a great antagonist, and I liked the conflict he sometimes brought to the series. I don't know why he didn't return for season 2.
I don't want anyone to die either. I actually like all of the characters, though I have my favourites, obviously.

ShadowMaat
April 11th, 2006, 06:44 AM
There are plenty of characters I don't like or who do nothing for me or who frustrate the hell out of me, but wishing for their deaths, however fictional, seems way too extreme.

About the only time I wish for a character's death is when they pussyfoot around the idea- he's alive, he's dead, he's mostly dead... either kill him or let him live and be done with it, is MY feeling.

Skydiver
April 11th, 2006, 07:50 AM
Let's debate the issue without calling each other names please

Elinor
April 11th, 2006, 09:07 AM
You're not wrong!
In a way, it would be interesting to see what happened if TPTB did kill off Sheppard. Other than me crying into my pillow for probably two years solidly

Me too!!

This is the only 'death of Shep scenario' I'd enjoy! Gets killed after very much whumpage! He ascends...doesn't fit into the Continuum (um...wait...that's Star Trek). OK...don't know what it's called...the Ascendedinuum maybe!! Reason being...won't obey the rules, like cutting his hair, wearing white clothing etc. etc!! Gets 'descended'...like Daniel was...naked...and into Weir's office!!! http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/grinser/grinning-smiley-021.gif

Now that would be a fun episode!!

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/lachen/laughing-smiley-011.gif

lissafoss
April 11th, 2006, 09:18 AM
I cant see him ascending, and i like whumpage but even that is getting boring with Sheppard. I dont think demotion would work but some kind of punishment for his actions would be nice and probably make me like him a little more.
And please dont say kill or death when talking about Lorne. Its upsets me and i spent long enough worrying about that in S2. I'm in a nice place now with Lorne where i think he will live forever and we will get to see him more and more.

:)

IcyNeko
April 11th, 2006, 09:19 AM
I'm not sure Sheppard needs to be demoted. If nothing else, he's shown tremendous courage under fire, creativity under command, and good use of tactics. His... kirking... MAY earn him a reprimand, but for all that he's done, I'm not sure he's worthy of demotion. :)

Now Weir... needs her decisions double checked.
And it looks like it might be now that our favorite NID advisor to the IAC is packing for Atlantis. Gotta Love Woosey.

Remember, the contingent is only as good as the head of the contingent. Blame Weir for the fact that there are 2 Wraith Cruisers heading towards Earth with Two SGA personnel onboard and a security breach (Atlantis Data was stolen off the mainframe).

ShadowMaat
April 11th, 2006, 09:32 AM
If there are valid reasons to kill off a character- beyond "I hate him" and "we need some drama", then I can admit- reluctantly- that death does have a part to play in things. But yeah, it usually happens to my favorite characters and it IS upsetting, whatever the reasons for it to happen. But that's probably a little off topic. ;)

Shep ascending is not something I EVER want to see. EVER. Not him and not anyone. Not even Lorne. I am sick and freakin' tired of ascension being used as some pathetic cop-out for a storyline. It's a "get out of jail free" card and has been so massively abused by TPTB that I now despise it. Every time it shows up it's such an utterly crappy excuse to get out of whatever hole TPTB have dug for themselves. And then, magically, the person can de-ascend, too! Woohoo! Who needs to kill off a character when you can just send them to Glowy Land until you have another use for him? :rolleyes:

Never ascend anyone on Atlantis. Never ever ever ever. [/rant]

Ascension is, in act, one of the instances whre I would PREFER the death of a character. Grow a pair and kill someone off, don't just send them away for a while.

Pharaoh Atem
April 11th, 2006, 10:01 AM
As well, Lorne needs to be killed and Sgt Bates brought back.


don't let shadow maat hear you say that lol

keep shaperd where he is but if he kirking then by all means kick his butt back to major and let someone else take over who won't be distrated

generaloneill
April 11th, 2006, 10:06 AM
there is definitely something in the worldwide water supply if people think sheppard needs to be demoted or killed off or that lorne has to be killed off and sgt bates brought back in his place bates wasn't even that popular with many of the fans because of his racist tendencies that and the fact that he was unevenly written by tptb and the day that colonel caldwell takes over the atlantis military contingent will be the day that i stop watching atlantis. :ronan:

FoolishPleasure
April 11th, 2006, 10:22 AM
Bates was a voice of reason many times. He would have made a good internal security officer, if Atlantis had one. ;)

genius21
April 11th, 2006, 11:03 AM
i hate bates to paranoid would blame his own fart if something would go wrong.

can't kill shepperd he's the key to everything if people can't see that then there not that smart i'm almost blind and i see what key role shepperd plays in atlantis and all it's wonders.

npattis
April 11th, 2006, 11:16 AM
there is definitely something in the worldwide water supply if people think sheppard needs to be demoted or killed off or that lorne has to be killed off and sgt bates brought back in his place bates wasn't even that popular with many of the fans because of his racist tendencies that and the fact that he was unevenly written by tptb and the day that colonel caldwell takes over the atlantis military contingent will be the day that i stop watching atlantis. :ronan:


You people really need to learn the definiton of racism. So accusing Teyla, who was black, while he is black is racism? ROFL

nightowl300
April 11th, 2006, 11:30 AM
Sheppard doesn't need to be demoted, maybe a reprimand for some of his actions.

The Prophet
April 11th, 2006, 11:39 AM
You people really need to learn the definiton of racism. So accusing Teyla, who was black, while he is black is racism? ROFL

So what? An African (Black) calling an Indian (Black) a "Paki" isn't Racism?

Teyla's not Black, she's Mediterainian at best.

generaloneill
April 11th, 2006, 11:58 AM
You people really need to learn the definiton of racism. So accusing Teyla, who was black, while he is black is racism? ROFL

teyla isn't black bates is :teyla:

FoolishPleasure
April 11th, 2006, 12:01 PM
So what? An African (Black) calling an Indian (Black) a "Paki" isn't Racism?

Teyla's not Black, she's Mediterainian at best.
Teyla is Athosian. ;)

Bates was suspicious of all the Athosians and aliens in general. The Wraith were everywhere and he was right to not be so trusting. Later when Teyla was channeling the Wraith, Bates was concerned they could take over her mind and use her as a spy. His concerns all had merit.

As for Sheppard - he needs a good reprimand, but they won't demote him.

generaloneill
April 11th, 2006, 12:13 PM
Sheppard doesn't need to be demoted, maybe a reprimand for some of his actions.

reprimanded for what saving the lives of the expedition members in the city by keeping the wraith from destroying atlantis saving ronon from having to remain a runner. risking his neck on the wraith hive ship to rescue ronon and teyla saving the city and the lives of everyone in it by getting the access code from caldwell in critical mass to prevent the city from exploding. he also rescued rodney from the puddle jumper from the ocean floor and almost an entire civilization in inferno. in season one he succeeded in rescuing the team apart from colonel sumner and teyla's people in the first episode of atlantis he also succeeded in liberating the city from the genii when they took control of the city he also rescued some of teyla's friends in letters from pegasus he also defended teyla and her people from bates' accusations in suspicion the gift and the siege parts 1 and 2 and he was prepared to sacrifice himself in the atlantis season 1 finale and you think he should be reprimanded for putting himself at risk on several occassions.

GhostPoet
April 11th, 2006, 12:20 PM
Don't know what people have against Sheppard now...sigh.
I think it's a great character. He has a bit of comedy element to him, but also does the serious roles fantastic.

generaloneill
April 11th, 2006, 12:30 PM
Don't know what people have against Sheppard now...sigh.
I think it's a great character. He has a bit of comedy element to him, but also does the serious roles fantastic.

i think sheppard is an excellent character and i agree that he has a comedy element to him i don't know what people have against sheppard either.:teyla:

ShadowMaat
April 11th, 2006, 12:36 PM
Racist probably isn't the right term here. Xenophobic is closer: Bates had a deep suspicion (bordering on manic paranoia) regarding Teyla and her people. The color of their skin didn't matter, their place of origin did. They were ALIENS. They weren't from Earth. Therefore, they were not to be trusted.

This is one of the things about Bates I didn't much care for- it's something that could have been built up in an interesting and meaningful way (he could full well have valid reasons for his suspicions based on previous experience) but as with so much else on the show, it was done unevenly and without being put into the proper context to help us understand him.

Or that's how I feel about it, anyway. Bates could have been a much better, stronger character if TPTB had just given a damn.

generaloneill
April 11th, 2006, 01:47 PM
Racist probably isn't the right term here. Xenophobic is closer: Bates had a deep suspicion (bordering on manic paranoia) regarding Teyla and her people. The color of their skin didn't matter, their place of origin did. They were ALIENS. They weren't from Earth. Therefore, they were not to be trusted.

This is one of the things about Bates I didn't much care for- it's something that could have been built up in an interesting and meaningful way (he could full well have valid reasons for his suspicions based on previous experience) but as with so much else on the show, it was done unevenly and without being put into the proper context to help us understand him.

Or that's how I feel about it, anyway. Bates could have been a much better, stronger character if TPTB had just given a damn.

i think that tptb come onto this site and they saw the negative fan opinion being levelled against bates and decided to get rid of him since he wasn't that popular both with the fans and the atlantis expedition members.:ronan:

ShadowMaat
April 11th, 2006, 01:57 PM
i think that tptb come onto this site and they saw the negative fan opinion being levelled against bates and decided to get rid of him since he wasn't that popular both with the fans and the atlantis expedition members.
TPTB don't give a flying **** what the fans think, who they like, who they don't like, or what they want to see. If they did the show would be very VERY different than what it is. ;)

generaloneill
April 11th, 2006, 02:09 PM
TPTB don't give a flying **** what the fans think, who they like, who they don't like, or what they want to see. If they did the show would be very VERY different than what it is. ;)

and how do you know that TPTB don't give a flying **** what the fans think on other sites devoted to tv programs the directors and the producers log onto the site to check on the fans opinions about their program its called consumer feedback.:mckay:

Rodan5757
April 11th, 2006, 02:27 PM
I think TPTB care to a point...and the they put there hands behind there back and entertain us with hand puppets while they do what they very well please.

As long as those hand puppets are good...I don't mind to much!

generaloneill
April 11th, 2006, 02:33 PM
I think TPTB care to a point...and the they put there hands behind there back and entertain us with hand puppets while they do what they very well please.

As long as those hand puppets are good...I don't mind to much!

i'm glad you agree that the TPTB do care to a point.:sheppard:

PG15
April 11th, 2006, 11:09 PM
and how do you know that TPTB don't give a flying **** what the fans think on other sites devoted to tv programs the directors and the producers log onto the site to check on the fans opinions about their program its called consumer feedback.:mckay:

Yeah, but they never actually listen to what we say when we tell them to do something.

I mean, yeah, they'll read our opinions about an episode, but that's pretty much as far as they'll go, and that doesn't necessarily make them rethink their future writing styles.

Personally, I think it's great.

vaberella
April 12th, 2006, 02:12 AM
Racist probably isn't the right term here. Xenophobic is closer: Bates had a deep suspicion (bordering on manic paranoia) regarding Teyla and her people. The color of their skin didn't matter, their place of origin did. They were ALIENS. They weren't from Earth. Therefore, they were not to be trusted.

This is one of the things about Bates I didn't much care for- it's something that could have been built up in an interesting and meaningful way (he could full well have valid reasons for his suspicions based on previous experience) but as with so much else on the show, it was done unevenly and without being put into the proper context to help us understand him.

Or that's how I feel about it, anyway. Bates could have been a much better, stronger character if TPTB had just given a damn.


Uh...reverse that....The Atlantis crew are aliens and they have their own sect...Teyla and her people are not the aliens here. And I guess it would be better termed 'speciesist' (yeah it's a real term).

But I agree with much of it. Although I loved Bates as he was and I may have to say he wasn't a speciesist..more so just really suspicious of them. Which is understandable and I didn't blame him fro that and me in that position I would be too. But then I woul dhave had all my people under suspicion but only the off world teams. Since I know the rest of the people of the Athosians were not able to get in contact without leaving the planet and that must have been monitored.

Another little bit of error that the writers seemed to have omitted.

TPTB don't give a flying **** what the fans think, who they like, who they don't like, or what they want to see. If they did the show would be very VERY different than what it is. ;)
If they did I don't think I'd want to watch...would you?


You can please some of the people some of the time, not all of the people all of the time...and if you do, your doing something wrong!

Which is a quote I agree with. Do you know how many shippers would overrun and how much romantic bull crap I'd have to sit through if TPTB listened to the fans. I like the show as it is...and to quote JF....---'relationships aren't that important to me' which I agree with..sure it has it's place, but it's not necessary. I'm more into development.

And to accomodate all the needs, especialy what I'm seeing on the board....come on..they'd be shooting themselves in the foot with paying attention with the fans.
VB

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 04:37 AM
Uh...reverse that....The Atlantis crew are aliens and they have their own sect...Teyla and her people are not the aliens here. And I guess it would be better termed 'speciesist' (yeah it's a real term).
Doesn't matter. From Bates's perspective I'm still willing to bet that he saw THEM as the aliens, regardless of semantics. ;)

Speciesist... I have a bit of trouble with that word in this context. "Species" to me means an entirely- and visibly- separate species. The Athosians are still human (barring any genetic manip), their ancestors simply weren't born on Earth.

I also don't know if I'd necessarily call Bates xenophobic OR speciesist. He may have some of the characteristics, but I don't think it's full-blown. I was just trying to head off a "race" war in the thread by fixing the terminology. ;)

Deevil
April 12th, 2006, 05:04 AM
Interesting I thought Bates just didn't trust a race of people he didn't know. And really, you can't blame him. Being that far away from home and the head of security, your job is to suspect everything and everyone. If you don't know them, and don't know what code they live by, it is difficult to detirmine what they are going to do, and thus they are difficult to trust.

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 05:08 AM
Interesting I thought Bates just didn't trust a race of people he didn't know. And really, you can't blame him. Being that far away from home and the head of security, your job is to suspect everything and everyone. If you don't know them, and don't know what code they live by, it is difficult to detirmine what they are going to do, and thus they are difficult to trust.
Yup, there's certainly a lot of that, too. But I felt that he took it to extremes sometimes and it made me wonder if there was more to his paranoia/suspicions... or if it was just bad writing. :P

Deevil
April 12th, 2006, 05:12 AM
You could be right Shadow, there could ahve definatly been more to his paranoia. They might have even wanted to explore it, but for whatever reasons he didn't come back this season, so we may never find out.

Willow'sCat
April 12th, 2006, 05:21 AM
and Colonel Caldwell needs to take over the military contingent.You have to love people who go around starting threads and then forget to actually put in the first post the reasons they have for starting the thread. *well no you don't and I don't either*

Why does Col Caldwell (that isn't the correct spelling is it?) need to take over?

Why should that mean Sheppard is demoted?

Why doesn't McKay ever have sex with the hot alien babes? *sorry while I was asking* :o

Why am I bothering to even type this anymore...:P

Aw, leave John alone he has a tough job to do and he is doing his best. :)

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 05:40 AM
Because around here opinions are actually FACTS and FACTS don't need to be explained? ;)

Sorry, I was being sarcastic again, wasn't I? :P

IWantToBelieve
April 12th, 2006, 06:04 AM
All I have to add to this thread is that if they ever did kill off Sheppard, I would stop watching. I enjoy the other characters, but Sheppard is what keeps me there. He's what made me watch. I wasn't even going to tune in to the show till I saw the preview shows where they were talking with Joe Flanigan. Then the ads for 'get in the gate' or whatever they were, with him and Sam, and I thought that maybe this leading guy might actually bring something good to the show. I've been hooked since then.

And okay, I have another point to add, I agree with whomever it was that hates killing off of characters. I'm still stewing over Frasier's completely unwarranted and unnecessary death. *still*

Linzi
April 12th, 2006, 06:06 AM
All I have to add to this thread is that if they ever did kill off Sheppard, I would stop watching. I enjoy the other characters, but Sheppard is what keeps me there. He's what made me watch. I wasn't even going to tune in to the show till I saw the preview shows where they were talking with Joe Flanigan. Then the ads for 'get in the gate' or whatever they were, with him and Sam, and I thought that maybe this leading guy might actually bring something good to the show. I've been hooked since then.

And okay, I have another point to add, I agree with whomever it was that hates killing off of characters. I'm still stewing over Frasier's completely unwarranted and unnecessary death. *still*
Ditto.

Avatar28
April 12th, 2006, 06:09 AM
You have to love people who go around starting threads and then forget to actually put in the first post the reasons they have for starting the thread. *well no you don't and I don't either*

Why does Col Caldwell (that isn't the correct spelling is it?) need to take over?

Why should that mean Sheppard is demoted?

Why doesn't McKay ever have sex with the hot alien babes? *sorry while I was asking* :o

Why am I bothering to even type this anymore...:P

Aw, leave John alone he has a tough job to do and he is doing his best. :)


He shouldn't. He's too busy going back and forth in the Daedalus so would be too often not present.
He wouldn't have to be even IF Caldwell was given command. But he hasn't done anything to warrant that anyways. Last time I checked there aren't any military regs against sleeping with alien women and he hasn't done anything else worthy of getting demoted either.
Um, because he's a nerd/geek and hot women never seem to go for the brainy types. They always seem to prefer the jocks, i.e. Sheppard.
Because you're like the rest of us and have no life? ;-)

Willow'sCat
April 12th, 2006, 06:12 AM
Because around here opinions are actually FACTS and FACTS don't need to be explained? ;)

Sorry, I was being sarcastic again, wasn't I? :PWhere you? Missed it completely.

How bad would SGC look if they had to go and demoted him again... it is again? He was apparently demoted or at least push aside after that incident in Afghanistan. No it would look bad for SGC if they demoted him. It's bad enough they had... spoiler for Critical Mass.

A Goa'uld commanding the Daedalus for a while there. It's like the keystone cops, do they ever get anything write?

On the Ditto no I would still watch, but I would miss him. Like with Daniel, still watched but missed him... like with Jack still watch but really miss him.

Rodan5757
April 12th, 2006, 06:17 AM
Yea, I have a love/hate relationship for Sheppard, I love the fact that he's a Stargate character/I hate what TPTB have choosen to display. He's supposedly a stand up guy, gives everything for his team, smart....and yet, we see very little of this. Your on an alien planet and a giant ray beam destorys some Wraith darts, but he doesn't even suspect that the alien priestess that *really* wants to go back to Atlantis isn't hiding something. This isn't the Mensa test passing military guy I'd expect.

And yes...McKay does need to start have sex with hot alien babes! I don't need a suave Colonel getting all the action, give some to the *GEEK*!

Willow'sCat
April 12th, 2006, 06:17 AM
He shouldn't. He's too busy going back and forth in the Daedalus so would be too often not present.
He wouldn't have to be even IF Caldwell was given command. But he hasn't done anything to warrant that anyways. Last time I checked there aren't any military regs against sleeping with alien women and he hasn't done anything else worthy of getting demoted either.
Um, because he's a nerd/geek and hot women never seem to go for the brainy types. They always seem to prefer the jocks, i.e. Sheppard.
Because you're like the rest of us and have no life? ;-)Hey I have a life it is sitting in a small blue box at the end of my bed. As for the rest well I agree with 1 and 2 not sure I agree on 3 guessing you are a guy?

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 06:19 AM
It's tempting to turn this into a long ranting diatribe about the utter meaninglessness of death in the Stargateverse, but that's probably a subject best left for another thread.

Personally, I don't watch Atlantis for Sheppard. If anything, at this point I watch in spite of him. ;) However, as much fun as it is to theorize about other possibilities and getting rid of Shep and bringing in someone else (or promoting another character), I think it's pretty obvious that it will never happen.

I think it's safe to say that Shep's detractors are a definite minority. Not that it matters too much since the most important thing about Shep is that he's TPTB's Marty Sue- their puppet through which they can live vicariously, fulfilling all their wildest fanboy fantasies, and they aren't about to get rid of THAT golden apple any time soon.

All my opinion, of course.

Rodan5757
April 12th, 2006, 06:23 AM
I think it's safe to say that Shep's detractors are a definite minority. Not that it matters too much since the most important thing about Shep is that he's TPTB's Marty Sue- their puppet through which they can live vicariously, fulfilling all their wildest fanboy fantasies, and they aren't about to get rid of THAT golden apple any time soon.

Very well put. I couldn't agree more...well I could, but I don't think I will...to much effort you know. ;)

Willow'sCat
April 12th, 2006, 06:27 AM
I think it's safe to say that Shep's detractors are a definite minority. Not that it matters too much since the most important thing about Shep is that he's TPTB's Marty Sue- their puppet through which they can live vicariously, fulfilling all their wildest fanboy fantasies, and they aren't about to get rid of THAT golden apple any time soon.

All my opinion, of course.Exactly, and without a shadow of a doubt that was proven with The Tower *just my opinion of course* Sheppard gets to do what TPTB never did or what they have now forgotten how to do...:P *again just my opinion*

IWantToBelieve
April 12th, 2006, 06:33 AM
*shrugs* It is very much an opinion thing. I've enjoyed Sheppard immensely all the way through season one and two. I think the actual writing in season two was poorer than one, scripts seemed rushed, ideas not fully conceptualized, big plot holes, but Sheppard himself has remained to me the character of choice. And I'm in the minority in having enjoyed Tower. It was campy, it was cliche, but I thought it was fun. Of course, I don't have any Chaya hate, either. Or Teer hate. So basically, I don't get the whole 'kirking' fuss but it's very much a personal thing. There are groups of people in the fandom with similar ideas, and a group for almost anything that someone might feel. I'm in the Sheppard club, firmly, and can only hope that the actual scripts in season three show more thought and development than many of them did in season two. But, even looking back at S2, I enjoyed enough episodes to keep me hanging around. Intruder, Aurora, Insinct, Conversion, The Lost Boys (but not The Hive - biggest disappoint for me next to Condemned), Coup De'tat, The Long Goodbye, Inferno and Allies, Critical Mass.

The only episode I'm feeling grudging despair over is the one with McKay's sister. To me, that's a terrible idea. Worse than Grace and Grace Under Pressure.

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 06:36 AM
Exactly, and without a shadow of a doubt that was proven with The Tower *just my opinion of course* Sheppard gets to do what TPTB never did or what they have now forgotten how to do...:P *again just my opinion*
Yeah, and there are so many unpleasant interpretations of "do", aren't there? Especially where TPTB Shep is concerned. ;)

Avatar28
April 12th, 2006, 06:39 AM
Hey I have a life it is sitting in a small blue box at the end of my bed. As for the rest well I agree with 1 and 2 not sure I agree on 3 guessing you are a guy?

*Glances down* Hmm, yep. Looks like it. ;-) Sorry, I work 3rd shift and have been up all night and was stuck here late besides. I'm a bit goofy.

Rodan5757
April 12th, 2006, 06:46 AM
The only episode I'm feeling grudging despair over is the one with McKay's sister. To me, that's a terrible idea. Worse than Grace and Grace Under Pressure.

This I have to disagree on totaly...Grace was very Carter-centric dramatic piece that taught us a little more about who *Sam* was, we've had the Daniel eps and the Teal'c eps and even the O'Neill eps (anyone remember Cold Lazurus), Carter had been very one-dimentional in my opinion.

As for Grace Under Presure...Besides the fact that we see McKay finnaly relize that he may not be smarter then Carter and that he is ego-centric and that we get to see Zelenka save the day (gotta live that guy). We get to see more of Carter then I even could have hoped on cable television. Yes, it may lower the show's standards a bit...but come on...so does Kirking.

Linzi
April 12th, 2006, 06:57 AM
*shrugs* It is very much an opinion thing. I've enjoyed Sheppard immensely all the way through season one and two. I think the actual writing in season two was poorer than one, scripts seemed rushed, ideas not fully conceptualized, big plot holes, but Sheppard himself has remained to me the character of choice. And I'm in the minority in having enjoyed Tower. It was campy, it was cliche, but I thought it was fun. Of course, I don't have any Chaya hate, either. Or Teer hate. So basically, I don't get the whole 'kirking' fuss but it's very much a personal thing. There are groups of people in the fandom with similar ideas, and a group for almost anything that someone might feel. I'm in the Sheppard club, firmly, and can only hope that the actual scripts in season three show more thought and development than many of them did in season two. But, even looking back at S2, I enjoyed enough episodes to keep me hanging around. Intruder, Aurora, Insinct, Conversion, The Lost Boys (but not The Hive - biggest disappoint for me next to Condemned), Coup De'tat, The Long Goodbye, Inferno and Allies, Critical Mass.

The only episode I'm feeling grudging despair over is the one with McKay's sister. To me, that's a terrible idea. Worse than Grace and Grace Under Pressure.
I agree with everything you say here.
I've never had a problem with Chaya or Teer. Then again, I don't ship for any character pairing on the show, so everyone's free to snog who they like, as far as I'm concerned. Of course, that's as long as that's not ALL we get!
The Tower could have been a better episode, with some interesting ideas about the Ancient gene in it, that was a little disappointing for me. But, it was a light-hearted bit of fluff, that made me howl with laughter. As for Mara being a teenager, perleeeze! I don't think so!
I loved Conversion, Aurora,Coup, Inferno, Siege III, Intruder, Instinct and The Long Goodbye, and can happily ignore any little gripes I have with certain parts of these episodes. Sheppard ws great in all of those episodes as far as I'm concerned.
Butthen again, Sheppard is the series for me, though I love McKay too, but only is small controlled doses!

I have to admit McKay and Mrs Miller has me really worried too. Especially as Martin Gero said McKay and his sister are in the first act and a half just by themselves. Unless you are a die hard McKay fan, that's not going to be too thrilling. I hope to be proved wrong though.
Shame Sheppard doesn't get that amount of screen time and character stuff, maybe people could understand him more if we did?

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 07:05 AM
Actually, speaking as a die-hard McKay fan, I'm getting a bit sick of the character. Yes, I love him, yes, I think he's funny and obnoxious and cool and all that, but it doesn't mean I want to see him front & center ALL THE FRACKING TIME. Ye gods. How about remembering there are OTHER people on the team, eh? And other characters on the show.

I'm not as leery of the ep as some seem to be (or at least not yet), but I'm not looking forward to it as much as I should because we already get so much McKay stuff I don't really see a point in showcasing him yet again.

It's possible to overdose on something you love and I'm in danger of that with McKay thanks to all the Rodney-heavy storylines.

Willow'sCat
April 12th, 2006, 07:08 AM
I have to admit McKay and Mrs Miller has me really worried too. Especially as Martin Gero said McKay and his sister are in the first act and a half just by themselves. Unless you are a die hard McKay fan, that's not going to be too thrilling. I hope to be proved wrong though.
Shame Sheppard doesn't get that amount of screen time and character stuff, maybe people could understand him more if we did?Well I am looking forward to being thrilled then. :D I think the argument about McKay is as old as this one about Sheppard and yes the same old people with the same old arguments... where have I heard that before? :cool:

Deevil
April 12th, 2006, 07:17 AM
I love McKay to death... But I would like to see more of Teyla and Weir...

Which has nothing to do with Sheppard I know, but while we don't know much about Sheppards past - I think it's interesting that we focus on his development in the present until something acts as as trigger to give us more information.

Personally, I think when they were back on Earth and Weir was arguing to have Sheppard promoted, that would have been a perfect time to give us some info on his career. But it isn't a lost cause, and I don't think they are going to leave their lead flapping in the wind.

Linzi
April 12th, 2006, 07:30 AM
Well I am looking forward to being thrilled then. :D I think the argument about McKay is as old as this one about Sheppard and yes the same old people with the same old arguments... where have I heard that before? :cool:
Well, I'm pleased someone will be thrilled then!
As another poster said, if you're a McKay fan you are lucky, coz you get it all. Well except him being with the hot alien chicks ;)

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 07:34 AM
Shep's TEH HERO, that's all we need to know. :rolleyes:

Character development seems to be something we get whenever TPTB can't think up a "real" plot... and a lot of the time, it involves a woman (or, in the case of the female characters, a male).

It'd be nice if the producers could... oh, I dunno... integrate the character development directly into a relevant plot arc and NOT have it be about sex/relationships, but I have a feeling that's asking an awful lot. *sigh*

I'd like to learn more about Shep. I may hate his character right now, but if I understood more about him I might be able to change my mind. Unless he gets development AND they keep up with the kirking. :rolleyes: It may not bother everyone, but it bugs the everlasting heck out of me.

And if he keeps up with the wooing of the sexy alien chicks, I'd like to see it have cataclysmic repercussions for the rest of Atlantis and for him to get called on the carpet for it. Demoted? Yes, maybe. I'm just vicious enough to want that sort of thing, but I'd settle for any kind of official reprimand and an order that he keep it in his pants or he WILL get demoted.

You can make up all the excuses you want to pardon his actions, but I still don't like it and I still think he should suffer for it. And if others have to suffer as well, so much the better. Maybe it'll be enough to shake him out of his smug complacency. At least until someone hits the reset button. ;)

Linzi
April 12th, 2006, 07:35 AM
Actually, speaking as a die-hard McKay fan, I'm getting a bit sick of the character. Yes, I love him, yes, I think he's funny and obnoxious and cool and all that, but it doesn't mean I want to see him front & center ALL THE FRACKING TIME. Ye gods. How about remembering there are OTHER people on the team, eh? And other characters on the show.

I'm not as leery of the ep as some seem to be (or at least not yet), but I'm not looking forward to it as much as I should because we already get so much McKay stuff I don't really see a point in showcasing him yet again.

It's possible to overdose on something you love and I'm in danger of that with McKay thanks to all the Rodney-heavy storylines.
My son is a die hard McKay fan, and feels pretty much as you do. Too much of a good thing gets old very quickly. He likes Sheppard and would like to see him get better storylines, and no, he doesn't think Sheppard is hot, and yes he gets annoyed with all the pretty girls throwing themsleves at Shep. He believes it trivialises the character. It doesn't bother me that much, though I can think of better storylines for Sheppard.

Deevil
April 12th, 2006, 07:39 AM
Ohh I love the idea of other people paying for Sheppards mistakes. The drama and the angst - 2 of my favourite things.

Now that is something I really really want to see.

IWantToBelieve
April 12th, 2006, 08:21 AM
I like McKay. I really do. I like Sheppard. Yes, Sheppard for me comes before McKay, but I love the McKay/Sheppard banter, the friendship - it makes the show very enjoyable. But I also really enjoy what Ronon brings, I like Carson, and I like Weir. The only character I didn't care for was Ford. Bates did what he was meant to do, Kavanagh I think was a bit OTT but there are people like that in real life so, not so much of a stretch, but McKay centric stories should *include* the team, Atlantis. GuP was great, until the hallucination kicked in, because it's been done before and even though I think there was good dialogue in there, it was just stupid because they've done it before. It seemed pointless. I did enjoy Zelenka and Sheppard in it. I hated Grace. It was boring. They introduce these bad aliens and we NEVER learn more or why or anything. And then we spend the entire episode with her hallucinations that do what? It didn't do anything.

Legacy was a good hallucination story. Grace and GuP were not.

I have no issues with stories taking turns with character focus. What I dislike is how they do the McKay focus. It's forced. The stories are created around wanting the focus instead of creating an interesting story and using it to highlight a character. That's where their problem is, at least, how I feel.

maxbo
April 12th, 2006, 09:39 AM
If it would lead to character development for Sheppard, I would love to see him either demoted or threatened with demotion. Season 1 Sheppard was too much of a maverick to be SGA's CO and when he was promoted I was looking forward to seeing him try to marry his loose canon tendencies with his new responsibilties as the military head of SGA. Instead, we got episode after episode where he was either strangely subdued/compliant or where he was inappropriately getting busy (or trying to get busy) with the ladies.

I know his behavior has been called *kirking* (for ease of reference), however, in the second half of Season 2 TPTB had poor Sheppard out-kirking Kirk because whatever you may think about Kirk, no one came before his ship and his responsibilities as captain of the Enterprise. For instance, I can't see Kirk behaving the way Sheppard was written in the Tower because Kirk would have been too concerned about both his safety and the safety of his team to consider taking the woman up on her offer. I also can't imagine Season 1 Sheppard behaving that way either.

I didn't realize how much I had separated Season 1 Sheppard from Season 2 Sheppard until I saw Inferno. Sheppard was written as such an over-the-top sexual aggressor in this episode that I realized that this could be all that TPTB has planned for Sheppard. In lieu of character development, he's become the guy who gets the chicks and it's a damn shame.

A well-written demotion storyline (where there are consequences for Sheppard's actions) would have to delve into why Sheppard behaves the way he does and could be the first step to salvaging this character long-term.

npattis
April 12th, 2006, 10:32 AM
Actually, that would make an interesting story arc. If Sheppard was demoted/incapacitated to perform his duties, and Caldwell were to take over for a few espisodes. Sort of like O'Neill was out of the picture in Season 6 with the Tok'ra healing him from the plague. It would give time to let other characters shine, if they cut back on McKay.

npattis
April 12th, 2006, 10:34 AM
P.S. Lorne just needs to be killed and Bates brought back. He is the most useless character ever to be brought into the Stargate universe. Indeed that would be a good episode, watching the Wraith feed on him for like 10 minutes.

generaloneill
April 12th, 2006, 12:31 PM
P.S. Lorne just needs to be killed and Bates brought back. He is the most useless character ever to be brought into the Stargate universe. Indeed that would be a good episode, watching the Wraith feed on him for like 10 minutes.

i disagree with you lorne should stay and bates can go to hell for the way he treated teyla towards the end of season 1 :teyla:

generaloneill
April 12th, 2006, 12:40 PM
If it would lead to character development for Sheppard, I would love to see him either demoted or threatened with demotion. Season 1 Sheppard was too much of a maverick to be SGA's CO and when he was promoted I was looking forward to seeing him try to marry his loose canon tendencies with his new responsibilties as the military head of SGA. Instead, we got episode after episode where he was either strangely subdued/compliant or where he was inappropriately getting busy (or trying to get busy) with the ladies.

I know his behavior has been called *kirking* (for ease of reference), however, in the second half of Season 2 TPTB had poor Sheppard out-kirking Kirk because whatever you may think about Kirk, no one came before his ship and his responsibilities as captain of the Enterprise. For instance, I can't see Kirk behaving the way Sheppard was written in the Tower because Kirk would have been too concerned about both his safety and the safety of his team to consider taking the woman up on her offer. I also can't imagine Season 1 Sheppard behaving that way either.

I didn't realize how much I had separated Season 1 Sheppard from Season 2 Sheppard until I saw Inferno. Sheppard was written as such an over-the-top sexual aggressor in this episode that I realized that this could be all that TPTB has planned for Sheppard. In lieu of character development, he's become the guy who gets the chicks and it's a damn shame.

A well-written demotion storyline (where there are consequences for Sheppard's actions) would have to delve into why Sheppard behaves the way he does and could be the first step to salvaging this character long-term.

i have to disagree with you about sheppard being a loose cannon and a maverick they are at war with the wraith so the fact that he is a loose cannon and a maverick is a good thing because he can make the tough decisions that have to be made during times of war and as for sheppard's supposed kirking 3 women chaya in season 1 the blonde in the tower and the scientist in inferno that's not enough to say that he has been kirking the women of the pegasus galaxy.:sheppard:

generaloneill
April 12th, 2006, 12:49 PM
All I have to add to this thread is that if they ever did kill off Sheppard, I would stop watching. I enjoy the other characters, but Sheppard is what keeps me there. He's what made me watch. I wasn't even going to tune in to the show till I saw the preview shows where they were talking with Joe Flanigan. Then the ads for 'get in the gate' or whatever they were, with him and Sam, and I thought that maybe this leading guy might actually bring something good to the show. I've been hooked since then.

And okay, I have another point to add, I agree with whomever it was that hates killing off of characters. I'm still stewing over Frasier's completely unwarranted and unnecessary death. *still*

i agree with you about fraiser's death it was unnecessary death but at the same time it was a tragic death because she was a much loved character and the memorial service was my favourite scene of that episode my other favouite scene from that episode was when bregman finally got to interview colonel o'neill and he said okay first question and o'neill said ok then it faded out i liked that part as well.:jack:

Deevil
April 12th, 2006, 05:08 PM
The thing about death in real life, it is unwarrented and unnecessary and that's why Fraiser's death love or hate it actally mirrored reality.

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 05:14 PM
The thing about death in real life, it is unwarrented and unnecessary and that's why Fraiser's death love or hate it actally mirrored reality.
I find it incredibly ironic that when people complain about how this and that are unrealistic, they get chastised and reminded that, "Hey, it's FICTION! Get over it!" But as soon as folks complain about something like death or the relationships or whatever, they get chastised and told, "Hey, it's REALISTIC! Get over it!" :rolleyes: Can't tell if it's the same people complaining/replying to both (or all) things, but really... which is it supposed to be? :P

Not meaning to pick you out of the herd, Deevil, but your post reminded me of that particular fandom quirk. ;)

And yes, I know Stargate is fiction with a bit of realism thrown in, but I happen to have issue with which bits are fictiony and which ones are realistic. :P

Deevil
April 12th, 2006, 05:27 PM
I understand where you are coming from Shadow. I have a quirk where I like a bit of realism in my fiction, and as much as I hate the fact we have no more Frasier, it was nice in a twisted and disturbed way to have someone we care about die - and stay dead.

It was just 'unrealistic' (sorry, couldn't thik of a better way to put it) that everyone we cared about had a get out of death free card, or was teh energiser bunny and never died to begin with. Someone had to go, it sucks it was Janet.... but ya know, it happened...

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 05:41 PM
Mmm... yes and no. I agree that it's "unrealistic" for the core people to always come through (or come back from the dead), but while Fraiser might have been a good example of that, I think part of my problem with it is that she was ONLY used as an example. It was a "Hey, look, sometimes the good guys die, too!" moment, but it had no lasting effect. She was dead, folks were upset in the ep where it happened and then... that was it.

I really should start a thread for this. Or dig up the discussion thread from that old GW article about death and resurrection. Don't want to keep veering off topic.

Anyway, I think it would be realistic to make Shep atone for his sins. So there. :P

Deevil
April 12th, 2006, 05:43 PM
Keeping on topic can be hard can't it - but just one thing, I agree we needed more fallout from the loss of Janet.

But Shep should have to face the consequences of his actions. Because on topic is fun!

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 06:37 PM
Started a thread about death and undying (http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=27355)if anyone wants to check it out. :)

On the subject of Shep, can we all more or less agree that he needs more depth, better character development, and maybe needs to be shown having to live with some of the decisions he's made and any fallout that may accompany those decisions?

Or is everything all puppies and rainbows and it's just a bizarre little subset who finds reason to complain? :)

Deevil
April 12th, 2006, 06:46 PM
It's just the bizzare subset mate!!

:)

ShadowMaat
April 12th, 2006, 07:16 PM
It's just the bizzare subset mate!!
Shouldn't that be M8?? :P

I guess that being the jaded little perfectionist that I am, I have trouble imagining ANY character to be 100% absolutely perfect with no room for improvement or change. Seems boring to me. But hey, if that's what floats your boat, M8... :P

(and yes, in the spirit of good fun I'm overstating things a bit)

Lightbane
April 15th, 2006, 05:35 AM
Man, what is with the Lorne and Shep hate? Lorne gets far to little plot and screen time to see what kind of a character he really is two really good episodes (Conversion, Coup D'Eat and maybe The Lost Boys/The Hive) are not a great indicator of a character

Same with Shep they are overdramatisinig the character too much of this action stuff and sex over dramatises the character and makes him boring

Moments where Mckay manages to blow up 3/4 of a solar system are what makes a character (Trinity)

Sheppard doesn't need to be demoted or killed just toned down and made more realistic to his role

Lorne just needs a thicker plot line in the 8 episodes of Season 3 plot lines they have released theres only a small scene in "Sateda" where Shep and the team get captured by the Wraith and Ronon and gets taken to Sateda for "Runner" activities, Lorne says he will put together a strike team to get him back, out of the first 8 episodes of Season 3 Lorne is only mentioned in one he needs more storyline or just more air time to make this really REALLY minor character a bit less meaningless, cus if its just to "kill" him what was his purpose of being in it anyway?

ShadowMaat
April 15th, 2006, 07:28 AM
Lorne gets hated by certain people for the same reason that some folks hate Ronon or Jonas: they suck because they aren't someone else.

Yeah, there are lots of folks who dislike Ronon and Jonas on their own merits (or demerits, I suppose) and the same could be true of the Lorne bashers, although in that case I find it a bit... suspect that the ones doing the loudest screaming about what a crap character Lorne is are praising Bates unto the high heavens in the same breath. But that's probably a subject for another thread. ;)

I'd like to be Shep held accountable for his actions. He's just as "guilty" as Weir in some areas and he has a whole raft of his own guilt where decision-making is concerned. Particularly in regards to the kirking. But TPTB will never admit that Kirk Shep is doing anything wrong, so that part at least is never going to happen. *sigh*

Just let him get an incurable STD or something. Please...

prion
April 15th, 2006, 08:52 AM
It's tempting to turn this into a long ranting diatribe about the utter meaninglessness of death in the Stargateverse, but that's probably a subject best left for another thread.

Personally, I don't watch Atlantis for Sheppard. If anything, at this point I watch in spite of him. ;) However, as much fun as it is to theorize about other possibilities and getting rid of Shep and bringing in someone else (or promoting another character), I think it's pretty obvious that it will never happen.

I think it's safe to say that Shep's detractors are a definite minority. Not that it matters too much since the most important thing about Shep is that he's TPTB's Marty Sue- their puppet through which they can live vicariously, fulfilling all their wildest fanboy fantasies, and they aren't about to get rid of THAT golden apple any time soon.

All my opinion, of course.

Uh, it you want TPTB Marty Sue, it's Felger. That one's pretty obvious. ;)

prion
April 15th, 2006, 08:59 AM
Lorne gets hated by certain people for the same reason that some folks hate Ronon or Jonas: they suck because they aren't someone else.

Yeah, there are lots of folks who dislike Ronon and Jonas on their own merits (or demerits, I suppose) and the same could be true of the Lorne bashers, although in that case I find it a bit... suspect that the ones doing the loudest screaming about what a crap character Lorne is are praising Bates unto the high heavens in the same breath. But that's probably a subject for another thread. ;)

I'd like to be Shep held accountable for his actions. He's just as "guilty" as Weir in some areas and he has a whole raft of his own guilt where decision-making is concerned. Particularly in regards to the kirking. But TIIC will never admit that Kirk Shep is doing anything wrong, so that part at least is never going to happen. *sigh*

Just let him get an incurable STD or something. Please...

Sheesh. The acrimonious attitude toward some characters in this thread is really astounding. Shouldn't it be over at the Kill Sheppard thread? Oh wait, that got changed to 'get rid of' but you can see still the orignial title when you respond...

I haven't witnessed all this Lorne hate and bashing you talk about (but then I don't read every post on this board). The characters who seem to engender hte most hostility are either McKay or Sheppard (Mckay due mostly to his in your face attitude) and Shep because, well, take your pick. The writers haven't never pushed Shep to be perfect. If anything, you know right off the bat he's screwed up.

As for Bates, etc. I happened to like Bates because he was a good antagonistic foil for Shep; however, in bringing in Caldwell, who provides the same attitude at a higher rank, the writers probably decided they didn't too much antagonism. I never saw him as a racist or anything but someone whose job was security and the people had to prove their trust; he didn't give it out. He didn't like that Sheppard had implicit trust in Teyla and heck, they're all aliens! Woudn't be surprised if he'd done a lot of off-world duty with the SGC before going to Atlantis.

But basically

O'Neill4prez
April 15th, 2006, 09:31 AM
Are you kidding me? Sheppard is brillant, he's like a young O'Neill. he has a sense of humour, he's brave, he's honourable and he never leaves a man behind. since he's been promoted he's borne the burden of responsibility much better. he's even winning over Caldwell:sheppard:

ShadowMaat
April 15th, 2006, 09:52 AM
I like Bates, too, as I've said in several threads (particularly the Bates appreciation thread) but liking ONE character doesn't mean you have to automatically hate another character. Not in my book, anyway.

In regards to Sheppard, as I said in the other thread, I don't want Sheppard dead, I just want him to have repercussions from his actions. If that means demoting him, great. If it means his catching an STD, great (;)), if it means that he keeps his position but some of the shine comes off the apple, fantastic! And if it means Shep starts to realize he isn't perfect, that he doesn't have all the answers, and that sometimes he fraks up in royal and dangerous ways, so much the better.

I guess what I want most of all- for Shep and all the other characters- is for the producers to stop hitting the reset button. It's very hard for characters to grow and change when they never suffer any lasting effects from their mistakes. They aren't perfect, they've been shown as being imperfect, but as wonderful as it is, it'd be nice to see them learn lessons the hard way. Something beyond sensationalized one-ep disasters, something that actually stays with them and results in some kind of change/growth. And showing a bit of caution and, dare I say, intelligence once in a while might be nice, too. Stop inviting the enemy in for tea and crumpets and then acting all shocked when things go terribly wrong.

Linzi
April 15th, 2006, 12:06 PM
You see I still don't understand what Sheppard needs to be demoted for. This season he's only followed orders from Weir, so how are any dubious decisions his fault?
As far as his flirting is concerned, I don't see how any of that has interfered with any missions, so again, how could he be demoted for that?
As for the alien STD comments. Erm, where exactly did he get those from? He's only slept with Teer, and even that wasn't seen on screen, and as she was portrayed as somewhat virginal I would think it unlikely he contracted anything from her. Any other sexual encounter is speculation and not canon.
I honestly believe the whole Kirking thing has got totally out of proportion. I want better character development for Sheppard, and better storylines too, but, sorry I still think we've learned alot about him in Season 2, and still feel he's a likeable character. Of course, if you've never liked him in Season 1, there's no reason you should like him in season 2, is there?
Who knows, maybe Season 3 will bring some great caracter stuff that will change some people's mind. Then again, there is no reason everybody should like Sheppard, is there?

FoolishPleasure
April 15th, 2006, 12:32 PM
I honestly believe the whole Kirking thing has got totally out of proportion.
*waving* I'm one of those who likes Lorne AND Bates. :D

As for Shep's kirking - I don't care how many women he bedded - it doesn't matter. What bugs me is that he is a monster FLIRT and it has become BORING as heck. Every time a pretty girl walks onscreen, you just know Shep is going to smile, run his eyes up and down, lick his lips like he has just seen the most scrumptous dessert. I don't want to see this any more!

Both "Aurora" and "Inferno" were pretty good episodes that were ruined for me by Shep's flirting. In "Aurora" he has the opportunity to finally talk to Ancients about their incredible ship, and the war with the Wraith, and their technology, but what does he do? He tries to pick up on the pretty First Officer. Gag me! In "Inferno" he flirts like crazy to get the blonde. Pleeeeze! Those are just two standouts other than the turkeys "Epiphany" and "Tower", but there were even more episodes.

With the exception of "Stanktuary", I don't remember Shep behaving like this in all of season 1, so WHY did TPTB decided to go this way? I just want to toss bricks at them for turning my fav character into something bordering sleazy.

The guy really needs to be paying more attention to his troops and the safety of Atlantis. Instead of a demotion, I'd like to see his flirty behavior cause him to miss something crucial, resulting in death and destruction on Atlantis. That might give him something to think about.

Linzi
April 15th, 2006, 02:58 PM
*waving* I'm one of those who likes Lorne AND Bates. :D

As for Shep's kirking - I don't care how many women he bedded - it doesn't matter. What bugs me is that he is a monster FLIRT and it has become BORING as heck. Every time a pretty girl walks onscreen, you just know Shep is going to smile, run his eyes up and down, lick his lips like he has just seen the most scrumptous dessert. I don't want to see this any more!

Both "Aurora" and "Inferno" were pretty good episodes that were ruined for me by Shep's flirting. In "Aurora" he has the opportunity to finally talk to Ancients about their incredible ship, and the war with the Wraith, and their technology, but what does he do? He tries to pick up on the pretty First Officer. Gag me! In "Inferno" he flirts like crazy to get the blonde. Pleeeeze! Those are just two standouts other than the turkeys "Epiphany" and "Tower", but there were even more episodes.

With the exception of "Stanktuary", I don't remember Shep behaving like this in all of season 1, so WHY did TPTB decided to go this way? I just want to toss bricks at them for turning my fav character into something bordering sleazy.

The guy really needs to be paying more attention to his troops and the safety of Atlantis. Instead of a demotion, I'd like to see his flirty behavior cause him to miss something crucial, resulting in death and destruction on Atlantis. That might give him something to think about.
Well sorry, as far as Aurora is concerned you obvoiusly watched a different episode to me. Nowhere did I see Shepard salaciously licking his lips or looking the first officer up and down in a sleazy way. Most men subconsciously look at pretty women, and that's a perfectly normal response. My impression was that he was trying to charm her to get an audience with the captain. Which means he was USING his charm to further the mission. Also, Sheppard actually reminded McKay that the first officer was a Wraith when he was drooling over her.
I don't disagree that certain bits of Inferno were cliched, to put it mildly, however, again having just re-watched the episode I again haven't seen Sheppard licking his lips. In fact he only does that when he's concentrating or nervous.
Again, obviously I'm watching an AU SGA. Then again I'm not looking for every possible look on Sheppard's face to be a flirting one. I'm just watching the episode, with no preconceived ideas.
As I said before, not everyone likes Sheppard, nor should they. However, accusing him of being some sort of sleazy predator is totally ridiculous, IMO. However we all see what we want to see, I'm sure.

generaloneill
April 15th, 2006, 03:11 PM
You see I still don't understand what Sheppard needs to be demoted for. This season he's only followed orders from Weir, so how are any dubious decisions his fault?
As far as his flirting is concerned, I don't see how any of that has interfered with any missions, so again, how could he be demoted for that?
As for the alien STD comments. Erm, where exactly did he get those from? He's only slept with Teer, and even that wasn't seen on screen, and as she was portrayed as somewhat virginal I would think it unlikely he contracted anything from her. Any other sexual encounter is speculation and not canon.
I honestly believe the whole Kirking thing has got totally out of proportion. I want better character development for Sheppard, and better storylines too, but, sorry I still think we've learned alot about him in Season 2, and still feel he's a likeable character. Of course, if you've never liked him in Season 1, there's no reason you should like him in season 2, is there?
Who knows, maybe Season 3 will bring some great caracter stuff that will change some people's mind. Then again, there is no reason everybody should like Sheppard, is there?

well said you make a lot of good points about how sheppard was only following orders and any consequences that happened as a result of those actions cannot be blamed on sheppard. :sheppard:

npattis
April 15th, 2006, 03:19 PM
Not to add to the fact his bright military planning in Coup D'etat was a disaster from the start.

generaloneill
April 15th, 2006, 05:18 PM
Not to add to the fact his bright military planning in Coup D'etat was a disaster from the start.

it wasn't a disaster in my opinion his military planning was ok until that ladon guy gassed him and held him prisoner to get cowen to come to the planet so he could eliminate cowen he couldn't do that without sheppard. :sheppard:

npattis
April 15th, 2006, 05:38 PM
it wasn't a disaster in my opinion his military planning was ok until that ladon guy gassed him and held him prisoner to get cowen to come to the planet so he could eliminate cowen he couldn't do that without sheppard. :sheppard:


Well most people will disagree with you. They should have gone in more with what they had, a few puddle jumpers cloaked or at least a team keeping an eye on the gate secured or a wormhole opened back to Atlantis so no one could dial into the gate. Hell they should have tried to use the Daedalus. Sheppard's plan was botched from the beginning.

Lightbane
April 15th, 2006, 10:47 PM
Well most people will disagree with you. They should have gone in more with what they had, a few puddle jumpers cloaked or at least a team keeping an eye on the gate secured or a wormhole opened back to Atlantis so no one could dial into the gate. Hell they should have tried to use the Daedalus. Sheppard's plan was botched from the beginning.

yeah...most truely botched, man they had 3 SGA personel captive (all of whom had the ancient gene) and Sheppard goes into and obvious trap with ALL of atlantis' OTHER ancient gene people (except for Beckett, but then again its weak and not much use) and gets gassed in of course was an obvious trap, if the daedaulus there they could have all be asguard beamed aboard with the dead ZPM and the prisoners

The Genii are intellegent, and Shep underestimated them, i wonder if they will underestimate the Asurans

Primus Commander Woden
April 16th, 2006, 04:51 AM
:ford: I'm going to have to disagree...i love Shep, i think he has done a great job under the circumstances, for instance in the very first episode, well RIsing part 2 he manged to save nearly all those captured by the wraith, and by doing so showing his skill. Think about it how good would you do with the wraith against you and the genii being utter idiots every time you see them....

I think the reason people have started to dislike him is simple, since Ford has left there is no bond between the characters, Ford and Shep had a special bond and they really clicked and showed that on screen and i loved watching them, however since Ford's departure nothing is the same, no offence to Ronan or anythign but there isnt the same bond....so in my opinion bring back Ford and Atlantis will be a lot better.

Fellowship of Rainbow defenders!!!!

generaloneill
April 16th, 2006, 11:08 AM
Well most people will disagree with you. They should have gone in more with what they had, a few puddle jumpers cloaked or at least a team keeping an eye on the gate secured or a wormhole opened back to Atlantis so no one could dial into the gate. Hell they should have tried to use the Daedalus. Sheppard's plan was botched from the beginning.

if sheppard had told a team to stay by the gate cowen would have never reached the warehouse where ladon had sheppard prisoner and had they kept a wormhole open to atlantis cowen would never have gotten to the planet and ladon's plan would have failed and the whole point of that plan was to get rid of cowen. you are determined to find something wrong with what sheppard did the plan was perfect up until he got gassed if he had known ladon was going to gas him do you really think he would have gone to ladon's planet. :mckay:

prion
April 16th, 2006, 03:01 PM
Well most people will disagree with you. They should have gone in more with what they had, a few puddle jumpers cloaked or at least a team keeping an eye on the gate secured or a wormhole opened back to Atlantis so no one could dial into the gate. Hell they should have tried to use the Daedalus. Sheppard's plan was botched from the beginning.

Uh, please don't pretend to speak for the masses ;)

mckaychick
April 16th, 2006, 03:17 PM
Uh, please don't pretend to speak for the masses ;)
yeah

npattis
April 16th, 2006, 05:06 PM
if sheppard had told a team to stay by the gate cowen would have never reached the warehouse where ladon had sheppard prisoner and had they kept a wormhole open to atlantis cowen would never have gotten to the planet and ladon's plan would have failed and the whole point of that plan was to get rid of cowen. you are determined to find something wrong with what sheppard did the plan was perfect up until he got gassed if he had known ladon was going to gas him do you really think he would have gone to ladon's planet. :mckay:


No, as with any military strategy, you go in with OVERWHELMING force. As demonstrated, Sheppard did not do that and had more than enough chances to go in there with overwhelming force with stealth being no problem. I know it's the writers' fault. But regardless they wrote Sheppard's plan out poorly, and no Pro-Sheppard can prove otherwise.

generaloneill
April 16th, 2006, 06:21 PM
No, as with any military strategy, you go in with OVERWHELMING force. As demonstrated, Sheppard did not do that and had more than enough chances to go in there with overwhelming force with stealth being no problem. I know it's the writers' fault. But regardless they wrote Sheppard's plan out poorly, and no Pro-Sheppard can prove otherwise.

i agree that sheppard didn't go in with overwhelming force but sg-1 neither did usually it was just him carter teal'c and daniel and if you recall they managed to destroy apophis' ships that were going to destroy earth 4 people managed to take out 2 motherships which shows that a small strike team can accomplish anything so sheppard's plan would have gone ok as he had a small heavily armed strike with him and the only times i can recall sg-1 having an entire army of sgc troops with them were on the planet where the freed the abydonians from the goa'uld where daniel's wife was killed and on the planet where dr fraiser was killed i'm not sure how many sgc troops were on the planet but there was a lot and when jonas was having visions and foresaw the destruction of the sgc there was a small army packed into the gate room with even more troops in the corridors on either side of the gate room so a big strike force is not always necessary as that would maximize loss of life
so sheppard's decision to take a small strike force was correct in the hopes of minimizing loss of life. if anyone doesn't agree with me i would like to say for the record that this thread is full of stargate haters who seem to be determined to find something wrong with every aspect of stargate SG-1 and stargate atlantis.

npattis
April 16th, 2006, 08:15 PM
i agree that sheppard didn't go in with overwhelming force but sg-1 neither did usually it was just him carter teal'c and daniel and if you recall they managed to destroy apophis' ships that were going to destroy earth 4 people managed to take out 2 motherships which shows that a small strike team can accomplish anything so sheppard's plan would have gone ok as he had a small heavily armed strike with him and the only times i can recall sg-1 having an entire army of sgc troops with them were on the planet where the freed the abydonians from the goa'uld where daniel's wife was killed and on the planet where dr fraiser was killed i'm not sure how many sgc troops were on the planet but there was a lot and when jonas was having visions and foresaw the destruction of the sgc there was a small army packed into the gate room with even more troops in the corridors on either side of the gate room so a big strike force is not always necessary as that would maximize loss of life
so sheppard's decision to take a small strike force was correct in the hopes of minimizing loss of life. if anyone doesn't agree with me i would like to say for the record that this thread is full of stargate haters who seem to be determined to find something wrong with every aspect of stargate SG-1 and stargate atlantis.

Obviously you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. At least having a team secure the gate wouldn't increase loss of life, it would just be smart. And SG-1 disregarded direct orders and went in on their own and was lucky Bra'tac was there to help. Can't compare apples and oranges.

prion
April 17th, 2006, 10:01 AM
Obviously you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. At least having a team secure the gate wouldn't increase loss of life, it would just be smart. And SG-1 disregarded direct orders and went in on their own and was lucky Bra'tac was there to help. Can't compare apples and oranges.

Er, well, that's what you're doing. comparing apples and oranges, too. Comparing that Shep's team/actions against a hypothetical team/action.

Primus Commander Woden
April 17th, 2006, 10:07 AM
well they are still alive so no complaints from me, i love Atlantis and Stargate so it doesnt both me and probably most of us that you dont like Sheppard...he knew there were at least dozen people in the building so he didnt think it necessary to secure the gate, and your right SG1 do it all the time, at the end of the day it makes for good tv that they were caught and seeing where the story goes.

prion
April 17th, 2006, 03:20 PM
well they are still alive so no complaints from me, i love Atlantis and Stargate so it doesnt both me and probably most of us that you dont like Sheppard...he knew there were at least dozen people in the building so he didnt think it necessary to secure the gate, and your right SG1 do it all the time, at the end of the day it makes for good tv that they were caught and seeing where the story goes.

I may whinge over the writing, but I do like the characters, but hey, at least you missed the thread where someone was insisting Shep be booted off Atlantis cuz his hair touched his ears (ack, the horrors!). I mean, it's a tv show....

Vegeta
April 17th, 2006, 03:35 PM
In my opinion there was nothing wrong with the way that Sheppard did things, I know that people will probably disagree with me but I like Sheppards and Ronons interactions between those two way better than Sheppards and Fords. Sheppard is my fav character followed by Ronon and Teyla and Mckay, anyway I hope that they don't demote Sheppard but instead let him keep his rank.

Artha O'neill
April 17th, 2006, 05:50 PM
:ford: I'm going to have to disagree...i love Shep, i think he has done a great job under the circumstances, for instance in the very first episode, well RIsing part 2 he manged to save nearly all those captured by the wraith, and by doing so showing his skill. Think about it how good would you do with the wraith against you and the genii being utter idiots every time you see them....

I think the reason people have started to dislike him is simple, since Ford has left there is no bond between the characters, Ford and Shep had a special bond and they really clicked and showed that on screen and i loved watching them, however since Ford's departure nothing is the same, no offence to Ronan or anythign but there isnt the same bond....so in my opinion bring back Ford and Atlantis will be a lot better.

Fellowship of Rainbow defenders!!!!
INDEED!!!:tealc:

prion
April 17th, 2006, 06:54 PM
In my opinion there was nothing wrong with the way that Sheppard did things, I know that people will probably disagree with me but I like Sheppards and Ronons interactions between those two way better than Sheppards and Fords. Sheppard is my fav character followed by Ronon and Teyla and Mckay, anyway I hope that they don't demote Sheppard but instead let him keep his rank.

The demotion discussion is not something at the studio, but just with some fans.

The relationship between the character is never the same when one leaves. The Shep-Mckay relationship, SheP & Ford, between Shep and WEir, or Shep and Teyla, all have different parameters. The relationship between Shep and Ronon may be similar to that of commander and subordinate, but it won't the same as it was with Sheppard and Ford as Ford and Ronon are two different people entirely. Shep treated Ford more like a kid brother at times, but is has a more wary stance with Ronon as the man has demonstrated he can be downright dangerous.

Vegeta
April 17th, 2006, 08:14 PM
well that is true that Ronon can be downright dangerous, but I'd be like that when it appears to me that he has been hunted by the Wraith for a very long time.

prion
April 18th, 2006, 09:40 AM
well that is true that Ronon can be downright dangerous, but I'd be like that when it appears to me that he has been hunted by the Wraith for a very long time.

Yup. But he's not dangerous so much to people... except those who done him wrong ;) ... as he is to Wraith. If he had a car, he'd have a bumpersticker that would say "the only good wraith is a dead wraith"...

npattis
April 26th, 2006, 03:18 PM
Er, well, that's what you're doing. comparing apples and oranges, too. Comparing that Shep's team/actions against a hypothetical team/action.

Nope, comparing stupidity to intelligence.

LORD MONK
April 27th, 2006, 11:06 PM
and Colonel Caldwell needs to take over the military contingent.
Well, I know what you want to happen. Although, I don't know why you feel this why.
Shep should lead the military aspet of the expedition because he is likeable as a character and funny in an imature way all rapped up in his mature self.

ShadowMaat
April 28th, 2006, 04:24 AM
Shep should lead the military aspet of the expedition because he is likeable as a character and funny in an imature way all rapped up in his mature self.
That's your opinion and that's obviously what TPTB want us to think, but I see very little about Shep that's mature or funny and I'd say he's more tolerable than likeable. Or he was tolerable before S2 decimated his character for me. :rolleyes:

Maybe if someone would cut off his "downstairs brain" he might remember to use the upstairs one once in a while. ;)

prion
April 28th, 2006, 04:39 AM
Nope, comparing stupidity to intelligence.

Is this thread still dragging on???

LORD MONK
April 28th, 2006, 12:35 PM
That's your opinion and that's obviously what TPTB want us to think, but I see very little about Shep that's mature or funny and I'd say he's more tolerable than likeable. Or he was tolerable before S2 decimated his character for me. :rolleyes:

Maybe if someone would cut off his "downstairs brain" he might remember to use the upstairs one once in a while. ;)
I see your point. SG-1 and Atlantis are my Action/ Adventure shows and BSG is my Drama show. So it does't realy bother me that Shep is running round with his Mini Me directing him.

npattis
April 28th, 2006, 10:18 PM
Is this thread still dragging on???

If you have a problem, you don't have to come in here.

npattis
April 29th, 2006, 12:10 AM
Seems to me alot of time is spent downing Sheppard. If it wasn't for this character I would not have bought into the whole Stargate: Atlantis thing. I like him. I do cring sometimes at the writing but if he were to be demoted or his time on the show decreased I would totally give up watching the show.

I sometimes wonder if the people who have the most problems with him are actually jealous of the character and wish they were him. :sheppard:


Saying I'd be jealous of this guy would be like saying I'm jealous of a guy with 40 IQ.

Linzi
April 29th, 2006, 12:29 AM
Seems to me alot of time is spent downing Sheppard. If it wasn't for this character I would not have bought into the whole Stargate: Atlantis thing. I like him. I do cring sometimes at the writing but if he were to be demoted or his time on the show decreased I would totally give up watching the show.

I sometimes wonder if the people who have the most problems with him are actually jealous of the character and wish they were him. :sheppard:
Well said!
I agree with Prion. Is this thread still meandering away? Well, obviously the answer is yes.
Nobody here has actually presented a sound reason why Sheppard should be demoted yet. All of his decisions, certainly in Season 2, have either been okayed by Weir, or have been direct orders from her. In season 1, they were all out of their league, and made mistakes - so what?
As far as I'm aware you can't demote a man for finding women attractive, especially if it doesn't interfere with his job. And, again, when has Sheppard flirting, (which is a matter of opinion as to whether he is or isn't anyway), ever jeopardized a mission?
So, sorry, I just see this thread as an excuse for a minority of people to vent their frustrations, as they don't like Sheppard. That's fine - not to like him. Why should everyone? But to say he should be demoted when there is no basis for it is pointless - in my opinion.

ShadowMaat
April 29th, 2006, 06:29 AM
I sometimes wonder if the people who have the most problems with him are actually jealous of the character and wish they were him. :sheppard:
Am I jealous of Shep? No. For starters, I'm a girl. Second, I don't find him all that attractive. Third, he's always been more tolerable than likeable to me and fourth, letching after everyone of the opposite sex (or being lusted after by them) has NEVER been my idea of entertainment. "Disgusted and embarrased" is much closer to describing how I feel about him and his behavior.

And for god's sake, if you don't like a thread and want to see it die, STOP REPLYING TO IT!!! And don't come on specifically rile up the thread's denizens. It's rude, it creates a lot of misunderstanding, and it only makes people LESS inclined to stop posting.

thegatebuilders
April 29th, 2006, 08:56 AM
Now now. I'm sure the ancient chick he slept with didn't have any STDs and, face it, it had probably been several thousand years. That's a long time for ANYONE to go without, um, carnal relations. You can hardly call her an alien slut for wanting a little something something after all that time. :D

i gree, but i do think that shepard need to be demoted, he has proved to be no millitary tactician and he lacks any respect for the chain of command. we cannot have a guy like him defending the faith of earth because once atlantis is captured earth is next.

npattis
April 29th, 2006, 12:19 PM
Am I jealous of Shep? No. For starters, I'm a girl. Second, I don't find him all that attractive. Third, he's always been more tolerable than likeable to me and fourth, letching after everyone of the opposite sex (or being lusted after by them) has NEVER been my idea of entertainment. "Disgusted and embarrased" is much closer to describing how I feel about him and his behavior.

Except for the girl part, and finding him attractive since I am a guy, I agree :)

npattis
April 29th, 2006, 12:20 PM
Well said!
I agree with Prion. Is this thread still meandering away? Well, obviously the answer is yes.
Nobody here has actually presented a sound reason why Sheppard should be demoted yet. All of his decisions, certainly in Season 2, have either been okayed by Weir, or have been direct orders from her. In season 1, they were all out of their league, and made mistakes - so what?
As far as I'm aware you can't demote a man for finding women attractive, especially if it doesn't interfere with his job. And, again, when has Sheppard flirting, (which is a matter of opinion as to whether he is or isn't anyway), ever jeopardized a mission?
So, sorry, I just see this thread as an excuse for a minority of people to vent their frustrations, as they don't like Sheppard. That's fine - not to like him. Why should everyone? But to say he should be demoted when there is no basis for it is pointless - in my opinion.


After reading that, have you even watched Atlantis?

npattis
April 29th, 2006, 12:23 PM
i gree, but i do think that shepard need to be demoted, he has proved to be no millitary tactician and he lacks any respect for the chain of command. we cannot have a guy like him defending the faith of earth because once atlantis is captured earth is next.

Agreed, Caldwell needs to assume command. Though, I would have rather have Sumner or Everett take command. Given that won't happen since one is dead and the other is a 90 year old vegetable.

Elinor
April 29th, 2006, 01:24 PM
we cannot have a guy like him defending the faith of earth because once atlantis is captured earth is next.

...but it could be much more fun to watch a 'not your regular military type of guy' come up trumps and actually save the day!

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/aktion/action-smiley-007.gif

Linzi
April 29th, 2006, 02:25 PM
After reading that, have you even watched Atlantis?
Oh yes. More times than I care to admit. Let me ask you the same, have you? I don't think there's much doubt that you and I obviously aren't watching the same show....

ShadowMaat
April 29th, 2006, 02:37 PM
It really is a shame that people can't stick to discussion of opinions and keep getting this overwhelming compulsion to insult anyone who dares to disagree with their viewpoint. :rolleyes:

I, for one, would still like to see Shep suffer some serious repercussions for his actions, his behavior, and his part in the decision-making process. I wouldn't mind a demotion, but I can see how that might seem a little extremist to others. I would settle for something less, but I'd want it to be something that had some by-god lasting repercussions and not just an idiotic slap on the hand or an "oops, my bad" coupled with a sheepish grin from Shep. I want to see him suffer. Or better, I want those around him to suffer and for him to have to live with it. And I don't want it to be something he can pass off as a joke three eps later.

If you disagree with me, that's fine. But don't tell me I'm watching the wrong show, don't tell me I'll complain about anything, don't tell me I'm blind, and IN NO WAY WHATSOEVER should you EVER tell me or anyone else that an opinion is wrong, stupid, or doesn't count. It's MY opinion, NOT yours, and my opinion is no more "right" or "wrong" than yours- it's just different. That's why it's called an OPINION and not a FACT.

Major Tyler
April 29th, 2006, 02:51 PM
This thread seems to be taking a dramatic dive into "personal attack" territory. Please be cognizant of what you are saying before you click "reply." The topic of this thread is whether or not Sheppard should be demoted, not about your personal opinion of the people who post here.

lissa1000
April 29th, 2006, 02:59 PM
I don't understand why it's so upsetting when someone doesn't like a character you like. I like Vala and I have yet to be bothered by anything anyone has said about her. I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with the people that don't like her. People perceive things differently. No big woop.:cool:

Feel free to tell us why you don't think he should be demoted. I like a good debate.;)

prion
April 29th, 2006, 03:24 PM
I don't understand why it's so upsetting when someone doesn't like a character you like. I like Vala and I have yet to be bothered by anything anyone has said about her. I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with the people that don't like her. People perceive things differently. No big woop.:cool:

Feel free to tell us why you don't think he should be demoted. I like a good debate.;)

Well, this thread ran parallel for a while with another thread that was "Kill Sheppard" so there seemed to be, for some unknown reason, anti-Sheppard sentiment going on. I'm still not sure WHY Shep needs to be demoted. He's not going to be demoted becuase he's hte hero of the show, like Jack was in SG1. You didn't seem any threads about demoting Jack after he disobeyed orders left and right.... it's odd. I don't know how folks can watch a show if they dislike a character that much.

Major Tyler
April 29th, 2006, 03:27 PM
I don't know how folks can watch a show if they dislike a character that much.One character does not an entire show make. I'm not particularly fond of *a particular character* but I still watch the show because I enjoy other aspects of it.

As for Sheppard, I think his character is a little overrated but I still like him.

lissa1000
April 29th, 2006, 03:37 PM
I don't know how folks can watch a show if they dislike a character that much.
What motivates me has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

Sheppard acts immature, Jack didn't. It makes him look ill suited for his position. I'm upset and complain because I want to like Sheppard again.:o

ShadowMaat
April 29th, 2006, 03:39 PM
It's very easy to dislike ONE character and still love the rest of the show.

As for the "I can't understand why..." There have been a variety of reasons stated in amongst the various arguments, counter-arguments and personal attacks. Many (or possibly all) of the reasons may not be valid in terms of the military, but it's still a reflection of how people feel about the character.

Likewise it isn't really a matter of what it would "add" to the show to have him demoted, but just a wish expressed by some to see some repercussions for his perceived "wrongs" (as defined by individual posters).

There have also been several comments along the lines of, "I don't know about demotion, but SOMETHING should be done."

As for the Jack vs. Shep thing: Jack had more maturity, more experience, and, IMO, more common sense than Sheppard has and his attitude was- to me- generally a lot better than Shep's.

ShadowMaat
April 29th, 2006, 03:53 PM
One of the problems for me is that the things about Shep that make me cringe seem to be the points the producers love best about the character. I know carping about it here isn't going to change things, I know the producers aren't going to change him, but it makes me feel better to air my grievances rather than letting them fester and it's good to know I'm not alone in disliking certain things.

lissa1000
April 29th, 2006, 05:11 PM
To be really fair this should be a problem for the writers to work on instead of just saying demote the character.
I agree. I wouldn't actually like to see him demoted. I just want to see him like he was in the first half of s2. I had the biggest crush on Sheppard. I still have the biggest crush on Joe Flanigan.:sheppardanime23:

I think most people in this thread don't actually want to see him demoted. We are mostly just complaining about what the writers have done with Sheppard. I have a feeling Sheppard will be better in s3. TPTB are probably sick of all the complaining.;)

KRiZ
April 29th, 2006, 05:18 PM
Maybe if someone would cut off his "downstairs brain" he might remember to use the upstairs one once in a while. ;)

You mean the upstairs one which lead to him saving the Daedalus and his team in the Hive?

The one which lead to him thinking of methods to disable the attacking hives in allies?

The same upstairs brain which gets him and his team out of trouble time and time again?

npattis
April 29th, 2006, 05:48 PM
Oh yes. More times than I care to admit. Let me ask you the same, have you? I don't think there's much doubt that you and I obviously aren't watching the same show....

Yes many times, his foul-ups have been quite numerous this season. His tactical decisions have been in question, especially the screw up in Cout De'tat (Sp?). His whole thing bringing the ancient back to Atlantis (before they even knew what she was)..etc.

ShadowMaat
April 29th, 2006, 05:48 PM
You mean the upstairs one which lead to him saving the Daedalus and his team in the Hive?

The one which lead to him thinking of methods to disable the attacking hives in allies?

The same upstairs brain which gets him and his team out of trouble time and time again?
Yes, that would be the one. ;)

npattis
April 29th, 2006, 05:51 PM
You mean the upstairs one which lead to him saving the Daedalus and his team in the Hive?
Give it to him on this, though I find it weird how he mysteriously knew how to pilot a Dart.......


The one which lead to him thinking of methods to disable the attacking hives in allies?
Disable them how? The Hives jumped into Hyperspace on their way to Milky Way. We'll have to wait till season 3 if he actually accomplishes anything.


The same upstairs brain which gets him and his team out of trouble time and time again?

Luckiness, and McKay is usually the one with the bright ideas.

npattis
April 29th, 2006, 05:54 PM
It really is a shame that people can't stick to discussion of opinions and keep getting this overwhelming compulsion to insult anyone who dares to disagree with their viewpoint. :rolleyes:

I, for one, would still like to see Shep suffer some serious repercussions for his actions, his behavior, and his part in the decision-making process. I wouldn't mind a demotion, but I can see how that might seem a little extremist to others. I would settle for something less, but I'd want it to be something that had some by-god lasting repercussions and not just an idiotic slap on the hand or an "oops, my bad" coupled with a sheepish grin from Shep. I want to see him suffer. Or better, I want those around him to suffer and for him to have to live with it. And I don't want it to be something he can pass off as a joke three eps later.

If you disagree with me, that's fine. But don't tell me I'm watching the wrong show, don't tell me I'll complain about anything, don't tell me I'm blind, and IN NO WAY WHATSOEVER should you EVER tell me or anyone else that an opinion is wrong, stupid, or doesn't count. It's MY opinion, NOT yours, and my opinion is no more "right" or "wrong" than yours- it's just different. That's why it's called an OPINION and not a FACT.

Couldn't have said it better myself Shadow :)

ShadowMaat
April 29th, 2006, 06:14 PM
I'd say his positive traits probably outweigh his negative traits, but the problem is that the negative traits I hate the most are so inherent to his character that they're unavoidable. Or I consider them negative traits. As I said upthread somewhere, at least SOME of what I call "negative" is what TPTB (and probably a goodly portion of fandom) would call "positive".

I don't like his attitude. I don't like his sense of humor. He just plain rubs me the wrong way. Another character could probably say the same lines and I'd like it, but coming from Shep it just annoys me.

He has done a lot of good an I like it when he does, but he isn't a character I can ever love and when he DOES do stuff that's "wrong", it annoys me even more than usual. And I'm much less forgiving of his actions because he isn't a favorite of mine.

Major Tyler
April 29th, 2006, 06:57 PM
You need to get a wake up if you think these are insults. Then again, you thought me saying "get over it" was a serious offense. If you don't have anything to contribute to the discussion, please leave.My only concern is to maintain a positive environment for intellectual discourse and discussion. I would very much appreciate your contribution to that effort. :)

LORD MONK
April 29th, 2006, 11:15 PM
Am I jealous of Shep? No. For starters, I'm a girl. Second, I don't find him all that attractive. Third, he's always been more tolerable than likeable to me and fourth, letching after everyone of the opposite sex (or being lusted after by them) has NEVER been my idea of entertainment. "Disgusted and embarrased" is much closer to describing how I feel about him and his behavior.

Sounds like someone has a crush. j/k


Shep is alright. We don't want someone in there that will undermine Weir. Rememberthe last people in charge. For that, I think Shep is right for the job. Anyone in his postion will make mistakes. They are all in uncharted waters.
As for the sex thing. Well, I don't mind that. If I was on another planet I would have already have gotten some to. It's only natural............. and that all I got.

Linzi
April 30th, 2006, 02:47 AM
They promoted him at the beginning of S2. I really can't find a reason to demote him. This statement goes beyond my like of the character. I can't find a really good reason to reverse the act. I don't understand what it will do for the show. I'd rather that they move forward with the plot lines instead of digressing.
Yes, this sums up my opinion.
Obviously I like Sheppard's character, though I wouldn't disagree he needs better storylines and more development.
I maintain I haven't seen a solid reason to demote him here. Not one poster has given a reason that the military would use to demote someone, and with Caldwell lurking in the background, I'm sure he would seize upon any mistake to use against Sheppard, and further his own agenda.
I certainly don't care if anyone likes or dislikes the character. However, EVEN if he had done something to warrant a demotion, what would demoting Sheppard accomplish?
Would anybody like to see Caldwell in charge? I'm not sure that would work, and he would be the logical replacement for Sheppard.
Who else could become military commander?
If not demoting him, what would he be punished for? What has he done that needs punishing?
I can't think where Sheppard has acted in an immature way. Look at all the orders O'Neill disobeyed, and the flirting he has done over the years. Every time a pretty woman walks by, O'Neill has looked her up and down. Not that that has ever bothered me - I always found it amusing, and rather true to life!Nobody seems to mind about that, and some people do as far as Sheppard is concerned.
As far as making bad decisions, I believe, for example, the events in Michael and Allies to show ALL of the team to be culpable. Especially Weir, who is in charge, and even poor Beckett, who is ridden with guilt.
So what I'm trying to say is, if someone has acted badly, or made poor decisions, acted unprofessonally then it is the whole team.

KRiZ
April 30th, 2006, 04:09 AM
Disable them how? The Hives jumped into Hyperspace on their way to Milky Way. We'll have to wait till season 3 if he actually accomplishes anything.


His plan was to use the 302s to disable the hives hyperdrives so they couldn't jump, it didnt suceed, but it shows he was thinking and not just relying on his trouser brain...

lissa1000
April 30th, 2006, 02:09 PM
Maybe it would be a good idea to have a general anti-Sheppard thread. Since he is the lead in sga, it makes sense that people would need a place to voice their concerns about him. I would start one, but I'm hoping I won't feel anti once the new season starts.

prion
April 30th, 2006, 02:46 PM
Maybe it would be a good idea to have a general anti-Sheppard thread. Since he is the lead in sga, it makes sense that people would need a place to voice their concerns about him. I would start one, but I'm hoping I won't feel anti once the new season starts.

There the "kill shep" thread which after people pointed out it was rather nastily titled, got changed to 'get rid of' but yes, a place to constructively criticize characters would be nice, but it doesn't last long.

KRiZ
April 30th, 2006, 03:08 PM
Yes, but anti/pro threads are all pointless, they don't generate interesting discussion its either bunch of people picking holes and *****ing about something, or a thread of people who won't hear anything against it...

Gateworld is a FORUM where people are supposed to come and discuss their views and hear other peoples, creating sects of entirely like minded people just causes abuse to occur whenever these sides clash.

You know it would be so much better if we could all hold rational debates about why we think something is good or bad and actually accept that other peoples views may differ from our own and that doesn't mean we have to find the nearest insult to throw at them...

npattis
April 30th, 2006, 03:38 PM
His plan was to use the 302s to disable the hives hyperdrives so they couldn't jump, it didnt suceed, but it shows he was thinking and not just relying on his trouser brain...

Of course it was Sheppard who did that. For the facts of storytelling, they wouldn't have left to another F-302 pilot. And he only wanted to disable them, not knowing they were going to jump to hyperspace on their way to the Milky Way.

Demonique
April 30th, 2006, 03:50 PM
Remember, the contingent is only as good as the head of the contingent. Blame Weir for the fact that there are 2 Wraith Cruisers heading towards Earth with Two SGA personnel onboard and a security breach (Atlantis Data was stolen off the mainframe).

Actually, I'd blame Wodney for that. Didn't Weir advise him to upload the info the Wraith sent them to a non-networked computer and he dis-regarded her and threw common-sense to the wind?

Demonique
April 30th, 2006, 03:54 PM
Never ascend anyone on Atlantis. Never ever ever ever. [/rant]



Not even to see them come back naked and get a glimpse of their naked posterior?

ShadowMaat
April 30th, 2006, 06:51 PM
Not even to see them come back naked and get a glimpse of their naked posterior?
No. There are much more creative ways to get characters nekkid. And considering that it'd probably be Shep who wound up in the buff, I'm one of the ones who doesn't worship at his altar, so that wouldn't be a bonus to me. :P

ShadowMaat
April 30th, 2006, 06:57 PM
You know it would be so much better if we could all hold rational debates about why we think something is good or bad and actually accept that other peoples views may differ from our own and that doesn't mean we have to find the nearest insult to throw at them...
Yes, it WOULD be nice if the forum could be like that. But it isn't and it never will be and thus we have pro and anti threads. They exist as more of a sanctuary than anything else because SOME people can't tolerate anyone disagreeing with them and feel compelled to flame, attack, dismiss and generally insult anyone who disagrees with them.

People would spend more time attacking each other, trying to "prove" theirs is the right view and justifying their opinions ad nauseum than they would actually discussing the subject of the thread.

People are nasty, spiteful, intolerant and so full of themselves and their hatred of anything "different" that there is little room for open discussion in certain "hot spot" areas such as the seasons, the characters, the ships, and what color the walls are. :rolleyes:

knocknashee
April 30th, 2006, 08:23 PM
No. There are much more creative ways to get characters nekkid. And considering that it'd probably be Shep who wound up in the buff, I'm one of the ones who doesn't worship at his altar, so that wouldn't be a bonus to me. :P
There are some things best left to people's over-fertile imaginations...and in the SG universe, nekkidness is one of them.

I honestly can't think of a good reason for it...and I see no point in something that isn't going to further the storyline...

And no, I'm not coming down with anything, despite the fact that I do worship at that particular altar... :P ;)

Major Tyler
April 30th, 2006, 08:26 PM
No. There are much more creative ways to get characters nekkid. And considering that it'd probably be Shep who wound up in the buff, I'm one of the ones who doesn't worship at his altar, so that wouldn't be a bonus to me. :PYou never know...TPTB might use the whole "ascension" deal to get Ford back. As much as I loathe that particular death-cheating trick, it would be worth it to get Aiden back. As for the bare heiny, I can hear the girls in F.O.R.D. sqeeing already. :P

knocknashee
April 30th, 2006, 08:30 PM
You never know...TPTB might use the whole "ascension" deal to get Ford back. As much as I loathe that particular death-cheating trick, it would be worth it to get Aiden back. As for the bare heiny, I can hear the girls in F.O.R.D. sqeeing already. :P
Let's be honest - you mention nekkidness, and all the fangirls (and fanboys, not to be discriminatory) squee...I don't think it matters which character.

Back to topic...I read back to where I last replied in this thread, and I agree with a fair few of the points. Some repercusions for actions would be good, however, they should apply to all the characters. Sheppard seems to be getting singled out for his poor decisions, however, he's not the only party guilty of those - Weir, McKay and Beckett all have plenty they could be held accountable for as well.

It seems to me that a lot of people can't get past the 'Kirking' thing - fact of life - men look at anything that has boobs that is reasonably attractive. Which isn't a crime. As much as I loathe this character development, a man thinking with his d*** isn't a crime, and so far it hasn't brought harm to anyone. If it resulted in a bad judgement call in the performance of his duties, fair enough, reprimand him for being a hussy, but since it hasn't...

ShadowMaat
April 30th, 2006, 08:44 PM
Oh, I'm fully in support of the other characters suffering repercussions. I've definitely asked for Weir to suffer SOMETHING for her poor decision-making and I think I've expressed disgust at the lack of follow-through to events in Trinity, and Beckett... hopefully he'll angst all on his own. He should, after his part in things. But this is a Sheppard thread. :P

I do agree about the nekkidness thing, though. Squeeing aside, it serves no real purpose. At least not the way TPTB tend to do it.

knocknashee
April 30th, 2006, 08:56 PM
Oh, I'm fully in support of the other characters suffering repercussions. I've definitely asked for Weir to suffer SOMETHING for her poor decision-making and I think I've expressed disgust at the lack of follow-through to events in Trinity, and Beckett... hopefully he'll angst all on his own. He should, after his part in things. But this is a Sheppard thread. :P

I do agree about the nekkidness thing, though. Squeeing aside, it serves no real purpose. At least not the way TPTB tend to do it.
I think a lot of the plots have suffered lack of follow-through - Trinity is a classic example of that. The betrayal of trust was not mined nearly enough, and it has been relegated to being a standing, and very unfunny, joke.

I guess I'm wondering why there haven't been threads to address this same issue with other characters...or one to address it for all. It kind of gives the impression to me that people seem to think only the one character has faults, which is possibly the case with some of the people who have replied in here...

There will probably be people who wish to smite me for saying this, but I thought the whole Daniel-descended nekkidness was pointless.

ShadowMaat
April 30th, 2006, 09:09 PM
Well, I've seen the complaints about lack of repercussions on a variety of threads, but I guess there isn't a thread specifically dedicated to that subject.

And the Nekkid Daniel thing was an obnoxious stunt, IMO. No purpose at all. Punish Haze Michael and make his fans squee. :rolleyes:

okelay
April 30th, 2006, 09:46 PM
i just read the title, haven't actually gone through all the pages, but i want to say i don't want sheppard to get demoted.
he may not make the best decisions,but he's the best CO for atlantis.
i think caldwell would be too much of the "play it safe" type and while living in a another galaxy, fighting creatures like the wraith, you have to think outside of the box.

Also, i don't want lorne to get killed. he's a good character, i see him as more of a replacement to ford than ronon is. bates could be back though, but that doesnt mean they have to kill lorne.

npattis
April 30th, 2006, 10:50 PM
Oh, I'm fully in support of the other characters suffering repercussions. I've definitely asked for Weir to suffer SOMETHING for her poor decision-making and I think I've expressed disgust at the lack of follow-through to events in Trinity, and Beckett... hopefully he'll angst all on his own. He should, after his part in things. But this is a Sheppard thread. :P

I do agree about the nekkidness thing, though. Squeeing aside, it serves no real purpose. At least not the way TPTB tend to do it.

True, there have been so many poor decisions and no repercussions. And that is probably why
Woolsey will be making the trip to Atlantis to evaluate Weir in Season 3.

Linzi
May 1st, 2006, 12:59 AM
Let's be honest - you mention nekkidness, and all the fangirls (and fanboys, not to be discriminatory) squee...I don't think it matters which character.

Back to topic...I read back to where I last replied in this thread, and I agree with a fair few of the points. Some repercusions for actions would be good, however, they should apply to all the characters. Sheppard seems to be getting singled out for his poor decisions, however, he's not the only party guilty of those - Weir, McKay and Beckett all have plenty they could be held accountable for as well.

It seems to me that a lot of people can't get past the 'Kirking' thing - fact of life - men look at anything that has boobs that is reasonably attractive. Which isn't a crime. As much as I loathe this character development, a man thinking with his d*** isn't a crime, and so far it hasn't brought harm to anyone. If it resulted in a bad judgement call in the performance of his duties, fair enough, reprimand him for being a hussy, but since it hasn't...
I agree with your points here, and as I said in an earlier post, I don't understand why Sheppard has been singled out here.
As far as the nekkidness is concerned - I don't want to see any. Even from my favourite character, who has been known to make me squee like a 15 year old fangirl, on occasion. The Daniel nekkidness was not to my taste, and quite honestly, how did it further the plot? I have no problem with nudity when it is essential in a plot, but gratuitous nudity is a little galling for me to endure, to be honest. I also don't think nudity fits well into Stargate, it's just not gritty enough for that.

prion
May 1st, 2006, 04:52 AM
I think a lot of the plots have suffered lack of follow-through - Trinity is a classic example of that. The betrayal of trust was not mined nearly enough, and it has been relegated to being a standing, and very unfunny, joke.

I guess I'm wondering why there haven't been threads to address this same issue with other characters...or one to address it for all. It kind of gives the impression to me that people seem to think only the one character has faults, which is possibly the case with some of the people who have replied in here...

There will probably be people who wish to smite me for saying this, but I thought the whole Daniel-descended nekkidness was pointless.

A lot of the problem isn't withShep - it's with the writers! No, they're not very keen on follow-through or building more complicated arcs. A lot of 'character development' like McKay rebuilding trust in Sheppard is done off-screen, between episodes. aka, left to the imagination. They did that in SG1 too right after Daniel descended and everythign was basically hunky-dory.

There's no one without faults on Atlantis; heck, through sheer arrogance, McKay obliterated 5/6th of a solar system. Now, that's a bit more serious than smiling at a dumb blonde princess.

As for the nekkidness, nah. I thought the stuff with Daniel was just to pander to the female fans ;) okay, maybe some guys too ;) ;)

The Shadow
May 4th, 2006, 07:45 PM
Col. Caldwell is a good character......he should stay so to create the feeling of rivalry, I like those things......but taking over the military contigent of Atlantis is going a little too far.......we all know what happens when a commander who is not loose or creative enough to think of solutions......heck..even Jack at least thinks out weird things....Caldwell is a good back-up but he is too strict on protocol and commanding Atlantis needs a little bit of thinking outside the box which I think Sheppard fits very well.

Sheppard is not a character that can be easily killed off.....other than he runs into too much trouble...I think he's good at sort of bringing a bit of comic relief in serious situations. And besides....we need Sheppard to use the Ancient tech so that's at least one reason to keep him around. As for demoting.....it was a bit rushed, but I think he's growing into his rank. Jack had 7 and more years of experience as a Colonel....give Sheppard some time and he'll grow out of his sometimes immaturity.

Lorne is a character that I absolutely loves....he's a good back-up for Sheppard's team. If anyone remembers Enemy Mine from SG-1's Season 7, Lorne threw up at the site of one of his teammates strap like a scarecrow, but now he can stare at death in the eye....I think he is growing and will be a great leader.

Bates, I never liked him but he is an important character....we need characters that can go against our heroes and tell them what they don't want to hear even if they're right. I respect Bates as a character...and do hope that he comes back....every character needs a bit growing..

Seeing as the show is only going into its 3rd Season, the characters are still growing...give them time and by season 10 or something....we'll get what we want.....just look at Daniel...you can clearly see the difference from season 1 to season 9. Give them some time to grow and then we can judge who is good and who is not.....but I think evey character is useful in someway even if we don't see it....

My point.....let's keep things the way it is now and we'll see who gets out later.....Caldwell, Sheppard, Lorne, and Bates are all important characters that have their own use in the Atlantis universe.....it's not just one character that saves the world, it's the whole team working together...it's back to the whole team work concept.

LuxFestinus
May 4th, 2006, 10:59 PM
Well, I've seen the complaints about lack of repercussions on a variety of threads, but I guess there isn't a thread specifically dedicated to that subject.

And the Nekkid Daniel thing was an obnoxious stunt, IMO. No purpose at all. Punish Haze Michael and make his fans squee. :rolleyes:

Actually Daniel being Naked was Oma's idea. She seemed to enjoy and relish the idea of him being in that condition, although I think there are further ascended implications to this beyond the obvious.

npattis
May 5th, 2006, 10:15 AM
Actually Daniel being Naked was Oma's idea. She seemed to enjoy and relish the idea of him being in that condition, although I think there are further ascended implications to this beyond the obvious.

Back on topic please

npattis
May 5th, 2006, 10:18 AM
You never know...TPTB might use the whole "ascension" deal to get Ford back. As much as I loathe that particular death-cheating trick, it would be worth it to get Aiden back. As for the bare heiny, I can hear the girls in F.O.R.D. sqeeing already. :P

God, please not the ascension thing again. That has been used so many times for filling in the writers trying to actually write something else creative, I am going to shoot somebody if they ascend and then descend someone back to life.

bluealien
May 6th, 2006, 06:38 AM
Well I have no problem with Sheppard or his decisions and I can see see no reason for him to be demoted. I don't expect any of the characters to be perfect and I like Sheppard, faults and all. I really don't get this whole kirking thing. It was usually the woman who were doing the chasing - so what if he recipicated a few times - it never interfered with his job , unlike McKays Trinity fiasco where he nearly got Sheppard killed and blew up 5/6 of a galaxy.

All of the characters could be accused of bad decisions. I would have Weir on the top of the list with McKay a close second, and what about Becketts retrovirus. They all have their faults and good and bad personality traits but that is what I enjoy about the show as I don't want perfect characters.

Raziel
May 6th, 2006, 09:30 AM
oh, don't flame about Sheppard, he's great!.....

I think the writers are the ones that makes mistakes with the characters.....

If the character have certain profile, make their actions according whit that, but no, some times they put out the characters from their original profile..... that is the point !.....


:mckay:

Damar
May 7th, 2006, 09:38 AM
Everyone, besides Zelenka and Lorne, have made bad orders.

But the reason why i would want Sheppard demoted is because he is too hot-headed to be the CO, and too irresponsible. I mean, he's the military commander of Atlantis yet he goes on every offworld mission.

He needs to be more behind a desk, if he wants to keep being supreme commander.

KRiZ
May 7th, 2006, 11:39 AM
Everyone, besides Zelenka and Lorne, have made bad orders.

But the reason why i would want Sheppard demoted is because he is too hot-headed to be the CO, and too irresponsible. I mean, he's the military commander of Atlantis yet he goes on every offworld mission.

He needs to be more behind a desk, if he wants to keep being supreme commander.

Actually its Weir whos at fault for Sheppard's hotheadedness, she's his superior, she can make him stand down or recommend him removed.

I don't think Sheppard has made a bad call, he may Kirked it up a bit too much for some peoples tastes, but that doesn't make him a bad CO everyone has certain urges...

I have never once seen him through negligence or poor decision making put his team in jeopardy, if i'm wrong here give me an example..?

prion
May 7th, 2006, 11:59 AM
Everyone, besides Zelenka and Lorne, have made bad orders.

But the reason why i would want Sheppard demoted is because he is too hot-headed to be the CO, and too irresponsible. I mean, he's the military commander of Atlantis yet he goes on every offworld mission.

He needs to be more behind a desk, if he wants to keep being supreme commander.

Because he's the star. Hello? ;) That's the way the show is designed. If you don't want him out on every mission, then they'd have to get someone to sit at desk and go "hmm, don't open the iris" if something goes wrong. SGA doesn't need a George Hammond type as Elizabeth can also perform that function.

Shep does NOT need to be demoted. Yes, the writers need to more fully explore consequences of decisions, but since McKay hasn't suffered much at all after BLOWING UP 5/6TH OF A SOLAR SYSTEM.... what's the big deal? ;)

What is boils down to is the writers need to be smarter. Since SG1 began, they make mistakes and get into jeopardy. Same thing with SGA. The shows would be darn boring if they didn't make mistakes.

the fifth man
May 7th, 2006, 12:47 PM
Because he's the star. Hello? ;) That's the way the show is designed. If you don't want him out on every mission, then they'd have to get someone to sit at desk and go "hmm, don't open the iris" if something goes wrong. SGA doesn't need a George Hammond type as Elizabeth can also perform that function.

Shep does NOT need to be demoted. Yes, the writers need to more fully explore consequences of decisions, but since McKay hasn't suffered much at all after BLOWING UP 5/6TH OF A SOLAR SYSTEM.... what's the big deal? ;)

What is boils down to is the writers need to be smarter. Since SG1 began, they make mistakes and get into jeopardy. Same thing with SGA. The shows would be darn boring if they didn't make mistakes.

Good post.:) And I agree with you. These shows would be pretty boring if mistakes weren't made occasionally. And personally, I don't feel Shep should be demoted either. He's doing just fine.

Willow'sCat
May 7th, 2006, 03:42 PM
There's no one without faults on Atlantis; heck, through sheer arrogance, McKay obliterated 5/6th of a solar system. Now, that's a bit more serious than smiling at a dumb blonde princess.
I totally agree.

That is why Weir tore him a new one and why as much as this show can McKay was ostracised by his team leader and smacked over the head by Sheppard and told in no uncertain terms by Sheppard that he had lost his trust. Why McKay had to grovel to almost everyone in Atlantis.

Just because the writers don't or cannot show it blow by blow doesn't mean the inference wasn't there. ;) We are watching the same show right? :S

As I said in my previous post here Sheppard is doing a hard job, a job he didn't except to be doing and no he shouldn't be demoted. I do however take umbrage with the idea that he has never made bad judgement calls, he has let himself be distracted and never saw it coming. :rolleyes: He put his personal wants ahead of what is best for Atlantis, as CO he cannot afford to do that, but he is taking on a role he wasn't meant to so I cut him some slack, he is still learning how to be a good leader.

I know some don't like the comparison but I think O'Neill had similar problems when he was dragged back to work with SGC. Viewers of course gave O'Neill time to grow into the position, Sheppard is unfortunately by many not given the same opportunity. That is kind of the problem with the whole of SGA, people want it all and they want it now, no time for reasonable development, no we want it now god dam it! *sorry tangent* :o

I think we can all agree that the Team and the Atlantis crew have all made or at least gone along with, what has turned out to be bad calls and really no one has been held to account. As much as I hate the idea S3 may hold the final solution to that, we will see. ;)

Adam628749
May 7th, 2006, 10:19 PM
I really hated bates, he was weird, and somewhat obsessed and was unable to trust anyone, which really results in having no allies and just more enemies. As for Sheppard getting demoted well thatís just darn crazy.:cool:

prion
May 8th, 2006, 05:17 AM
I really hated bates, he was weird, and somewhat obsessed and was unable to trust anyone, which really results in having no allies and just more enemies. As for Sheppard getting demoted well thatís just darn crazy.:cool:

This should actually be its own thread, but Bates was a necessary character. Not there to be liked, he took on the unpopular job of policing his own police (sort of like iNternal Affairs in a police department). He was also there to take a stance that Sheppard might not take, so we could have conflict. However, since they introduced Caldwell to the show, they didn't need two who questioned Shep's decisions, so, I suspect, there went Bates...

Damar
May 8th, 2006, 07:32 AM
This brings me to a question for you. What makes you think he is hot-headed toward Weir? I feel he and Weir work well together. At least we Sheppard as the head of security, Weir has a better chance of keeping command of Atlantis. I don't see Caldwell working with Weir that well. In "Condemned, he told her flat out that he didn't have to tell her anything he didn't as far as the military was concerned. That seems to me to split the leadship of Atlantis rather then keeping it strong. I think Caldwell would like to see the city in military hands. This could cause problems between the scientist and military. Remember this is a scientific expedition as well.

I believe that Sheppard must not have any discussion with Weir, nor allow discussion. He's the commanding military officer, and when he thinks it's his concern, it becomes his problem not Weir's.

Cadwell would not have a single problem of taking inmediate command of Atlantis in a military situation, and would not allow any disccusion.

And what difference would it make for Sheppard if he wasn't in charge anymore, and now would serve as a XO for Cadwell? He would still be making all those trips to other worlds.

AtlantisForever
May 8th, 2006, 07:43 AM
comon lol this thread is old drop it.. sheppard is good what he dose... Wier is about hmmm what can i put it Sluttish sheppard dosnt need to be demoted Wier dose..

prion
May 8th, 2006, 09:44 AM
comon lol this thread is old drop it.. sheppard is good what he dose... Wier is about hmmm what can i put it Sluttish sheppard dosnt need to be demoted Wier dose..

Agreed.

One thing I don't think anyone has considered is that Weir would NOT demote Sheppard. Weir is in charge. She made that abundantly clear in "Intruder" that she didn't want anybody else and fought to keep him. So, who would demote him? Caldwell? Weir would fight tooth and nail to keep him in charge as he's had now nearly 3 years experience in the Pegasus Galaxy. Anybody else coming in woudl be sorely ill-equipped to deal with Wraith, despite reading reports (let's not forget what happened to the over-confident Everett in "Siege 3").

Plus, Shep's the star of the show. That's fact ;)

lissa1000
May 8th, 2006, 09:58 AM
Plus, Shep's the star of the show. That's fact ;)
I disagree, it looks like Rodney is the star of the show.:(

prion
May 8th, 2006, 10:07 AM
I disagree, it looks like Rodney is the star of the show.:(

First person on the screen in the credits is the star; however, to all fans, you can pick whichever you want as the 'star' but well, credits are credits. ;)

lissa1000
May 8th, 2006, 10:26 AM
First person on the screen in the credits is the star; however, to all fans, you can pick whichever you want as the 'star' but well, credits are credits. ;)
I agree with you, that was my way of complaining that there was too much Rodney. A little bit of him goes a long way. As long as they drop the kirking I would love to see lots more Sheppard.:)

Avenger
May 8th, 2006, 01:58 PM
But the reason why i would want Sheppard demoted is because he is too hot-headed to be the CO, and too irresponsible. I mean, he's the military commander of Atlantis yet he goes on every offworld mission.

He needs to be more behind a desk, if he wants to keep being supreme commander.

No one complained that O'Neill, who was a full colonel and second in command of the SGC was always going off world. I smell a double standard.

HIMluv
May 8th, 2006, 10:25 PM
I think Sheppard is doing ok.
For fear of actually quoting Caldwell, he's made some rookie mistakes.
But how would he learn to be a better CO without his rookie mess ups?
I, personally, don't like Caldwell all that much.... I'd be really happy if he'd keep his butt on the Daedalus. But, alas, he does serve a purpose, and he is an overall good guy. Does he deserve to run Atlantis???
NO!
As for Bates....
I rejoiced in his disappearance.
He bothered me, a lot.
He was too paranoid, as has been said.
Lorne??
He needs to stay put, and end up in A LOT more episodes!!

I have come to find that anyone who comes in to boss Shep around just doesn't suit me.
Col. Everett.... ew.
Sumner..... ew.
Caldwell...... meh.
It's Sheppard's city.... he just let's Elizabeth think she runs it!! :)

prion
May 9th, 2006, 04:36 AM
No one complained that O'Neill, who was a full colonel and second in command of the SGC was always going off world. I smell a double standard.

Just noticed, eh? ;)

Elinor
May 10th, 2006, 04:13 AM
It's Sheppard's city.... he just let's Elizabeth think she runs it!! :)

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/grinser/grinning-smiley-034.gif....now that's an interesting thought!!

atlantis_babe34
May 10th, 2006, 04:19 AM
For whoever started this Topic.. i totally disagree with you.. Cardwell is the one who needs to be Demoted.. hes an Ass.. hes always trying to steal Sheppards position, always trying to crack on to Weir (thank god shes smart enought not to take his very poor lines "i must warn you im a militry stragiest") or how ever u spell it.. thats just a coney pick up line!... and for the thing about Lorne.. there is something wrong with people who want to get rid of Lorne..... seriously something wrong!


and just a question to finish off my ranting... if you hate the lead character.. why are you watching the show???

Avenger
May 10th, 2006, 08:28 PM
For whoever started this Topic.. i totally disagree with you.. Cardwell is the one who needs to be Demoted.. hes an Ass.. hes always trying to steal Sheppards position, always trying to crack on to Weir (thank god shes smart enought not to take his very poor lines "i must warn you im a militry stragiest") or how ever u spell it.. thats just a coney pick up line!... and for the thing about Lorne.. there is something wrong with people who want to get rid of Lorne..... seriously something wrong!


Calwell feels slighted because he didn't get the job, and he doesn't like that someone he doesn't like and is of lower rank got the job he wanted. He probably also knows that he's not ever going to get the gig as long as Weir has the president's ear. That said, I like that he can be an ass at times because a little tension with in the expedition makes it more realistic.

vaberella
May 10th, 2006, 10:03 PM
For whoever started this Topic.. i totally disagree with you.. Cardwell is the one who needs to be Demoted.. hes an Ass.. hes always trying to steal Sheppards position, always trying to crack on to Weir (thank god shes smart enought not to take his very poor lines "i must warn you im a militry stragiest") or how ever u spell it.. thats just a coney pick up line!... and for the thing about Lorne.. there is something wrong with people who want to get rid of Lorne..... seriously something wrong!


and just a question to finish off my ranting... if you hate the lead character.. why are you watching the show???


Now I'm going to have to jump in on this. Caldwell is one of the best military officers I've seen. Now I dont't hink that John needs to be demoted, but he does need to be reprimanded and or put up for questioning, there's no doubt in my mind. But to have his Lt. Col. Title taken is a bit exreme, when in my eyes there is one person taking the mass amount of blame as he again has his opinion overruled on countless occasions.

But to get back to Caldwell, am I the only one who saw 'The Long Goodbye'---Caldwell was the only one next to Teyla with a brain. He was the one who took charge and the one who put up the first fight against having John's body over taken. But because he's not in charge, he's overruled by John, and John goes through with a move that he seemed to be very hesitant about. And as for the problems in Allies and Michael---I didn't see Caldwell around...He came in after the fact that something bad was gonna happen, and since he's not in charge in anything, since John is military commander, and Weir is the head of Atlantis and who makes ALL final decisions, on Atlantis he has to agree to having the Wraith come to Atlantis.

So please get the facts right before you start attacking Caldwell. Now as for wanting JS position, that could be true, but I havent' seen it. In Conversion, I felt he was doing what he was supposed to do, while things were under his command. He doesn't work like John so you can't expect him to conduct things as John did. He had to do what he had to do..and I don't blame him for that. I think Weir was mainly upset with the fact that Caldwell was taking the initiative so quickly and not kissing ass about it.
_____________________________________________________________

I don't find John to be the lead character. I find John to share that lead clearly with McKay. Their both head lead characters...and have been in every single ep together and have prevalent roles. John is just the 'beauty' of the list. Nor do I think that the people who do have a problem with Shep necessarily hate Shep. But he did make stupid mistakes, which cannot be denied or erased. And those mistakes are things that annoy people. Do I blame them, no way. As an objective viewer you can clearly see mistakes have been made and mainly by those running Atlantis. Criticism DOES NOT equal HATE! Most people need to remember that!

I think in all this people are not looking at the facts of the matter, but are just slighted over who's favorite is being affected and what not. This is not about that. The discussion is if he should be demoted...and with revelant data to establish that...not petty nonsense.

When watching the ep, I can see where the need to demote comes from. John is head of security by OUR estimation at the loss of Bates. If that's the case, then John did a lot of bad security maneuvres when it came into the handling of Michael and Allies! I don't think he holds total blame, or even the blame that is entirely Weirs..but he holds a good amount.

Should he be demoted for that..as I said no. Because ultimately if things were gonna go bad, it was gonna go bad, because a Wraith was brought back to Altantis a city thought to be eliminated. So then?! The security side adds fuel to the fire, but the fire was already an inferno (excuse the pun).

VB

defending
May 10th, 2006, 10:40 PM
First person on the screen in the credits is the star; however, to all fans, you can pick whichever you want as the 'star' but well, credits are credits. ;)Actually in TV land, long history of this, when the last to screen has his/her name and character in the credits 'like David Hewlett as Dr McKay' it is common knowledge in the industry for that to be seen as meaning the character is as significant as the lead characters, it is a sign of great respect to the actor. ;) I guess that is why they also use McGillion/Beckett, otherwise they would have done it with all the characters. To be honest the whole star thing is more to do with looks then ability IMO no slight against Mr Flanigan, but he wouldn't be the lead *no man would* if he didn't look the way he does... just truth in advertising. :cool: It sucks but that is how TPTB think, we need a good looking actor in the lead.

I think also Sheppard and McKay spend more time on screen that they are the leads, weir has hardly any real time on screen and I personally think if she was male she would not be the second in the credits.

atlantis_babe34
May 10th, 2006, 11:15 PM
ok for a start i totally except what you have written in reply to my post. this is a discussion thread..i am at easy to express my point of view about a character, not what everybody wants me to post and if i get attacked for it fine. it's my point of view.

In this saying.. im sorry to all the cardwell lovers... this is just my opinion



:sheppard: =;)

npattis
May 10th, 2006, 11:56 PM
Sheppard has made unbelievably huge mistakes. The military blunder when trying to take the Geni stronghold and the ZPM. The whole Michael situation (though everyone screwed up on that). The body snatching in TLG, if hadn't been for Rodney's expertise and Caldwell keeping things cool, 1/3 of the expedition would have been lost. Etc, etc, etc.

npattis
May 11th, 2006, 12:01 AM
No one complained that O'Neill, who was a full colonel and second in command of the SGC was always going off world. I smell a double standard.


It was never stated that Col O'Neill was in 2nd in command of the SGC. He was the commanding officer of SG-1, nothing more. The SGC, located on Earth, with a general in a military base on earth. While Atlantis is in an outpost in another galaxy with the highest rank being a Lt. Colonel when Caldwell isn't around. Throughout the seasons there have always been full Colonels other than O'Neill, such as Colonel Maypeace, etc at the SGC. Sorry, you are comparing apples and oranges.

bluealien
May 11th, 2006, 02:31 AM
Well this thread is getting pretty depressing. I'm not really sure what people want out of the show. If we want PERFECT characters who NEVER make mistakes then I would not be interested. Its fine to throw blame around and say in HINDSIGHT that Sheppard makes lots of bad decisons and should be demoted. I only saw him doing the BEST he could. We never know how our decisions will turn out and even with the best planning and foresight things can go wrong. The characters have found themselves thrown into a situation that is completely new to them so things are not going to run smoothly all the time. The writers obviously write the stories so we can have conflict and drama otherwise the stories would be boring if everything turned out perfect each time.

Sheppard and his team are in another galaxy where they don't really have a lot of back up. They have to make life threatening decisions at the spur of the moment with the threat of the Wraith constantly in the background. Bringing Michael to Atlantis wasn't a problem for me as he was just one Wraith for gods sake. It was pretty much A HUGE PLOT DEVICE that allowed him to escape. It was written like that so we could get Allies and by this time Weir or Sheppard didn't really have a whole lot of choice in declining Michaels offer. Blaming Sheppard for a lack in security in Allies doesn't really seem justified. The main area that was breached in Allies was the computer system and this is McKays expertise and not Sheppard. What else could Sheppard have done HIMSELF to prevent what happened in Allies.

It had been Weirs decision to go along with their plan and everyone except Teyla (and she didn't even argue the point very strongly) seemed to think it was a good idea.


I also have no problem with Caldwell. The guy is doing a good job and I don't see him as being after Sheppards job. Its usually Weir who constantly brings this up to the point of sounding quite childish about the whole thing. I don't like how the writers have written the so called CONFLICT between her and Caldwell. To me there is no conflict except what Weir creates herself.

All the characters could be singled out at sometime or other for bad decisions and poor judgement - so why are we singling out Sheppard. The writers as I said before do this possibly to give us some drama. Look at Rodneys situation. The man by sheer arrogance, ignored everyones advise and blew up 5/6 of a Solar System and almost killed himself and Sheppard. Are we calling for him to be replaced or sent back to earth because of his actions. Trinity highlighted McKays obsessional side of his personality and I loved the ep but I thought he got off to lightly at the end. I would have liked to have seen some reprecussions and to how his friendship with Sheppard was effected. This is a fault of MANY shows - no consequences or follow up so I guess I wasn't too bothered that we didn't get any.

Finally as to who is the lead star of the show. Well in my eyes it is Sheppard. He is the first name on the credits and he is the lead male. This doesn't mean that he has to be everyone favourite. Everyone will of course have their own favourite character. McKay does come in a close second but he is not the lead male. As in SG1 O' Neill was the star of that show with Daniel and Carter coming in as close seconds.

Joe Flanigan is a great actor and he would not get a part as important as lead male on a big show just on his looks. There are LOTS of good looking wannabe actors around who have got more in the looks department then in the talent department and for me Joe Flanigan is not one of them.

atlantis_babe34
May 11th, 2006, 04:50 AM
Yes Sheppard has made mistakes, but isnt that the whole point for becomeing the military leader.. especailly straight away.. i no i would be and so would every body else

prion
May 11th, 2006, 05:03 AM
Sheppard has made unbelievably huge mistakes. The military blunder when trying to take the Geni stronghold and the ZPM. The whole Michael situation (though everyone screwed up on that). The body snatching in TLG, if hadn't been for Rodney's expertise and Caldwell keeping things cool, 1/3 of the expedition would have been lost. Etc, etc, etc.

Perhaps you should just watch SG1 instead? Of course, you're blaming Shep for "THe Long Goodbye" when it hadn't even been his idea. Shep's here to stay, so you might want to just get used to it.

atlantis_babe34
May 11th, 2006, 05:09 AM
Perhaps you should just watch SG1 instead? Of course, you're blaming Shep for "THe Long Goodbye" when it hadn't even been his idea. Shep's here to stay, so you might want to just get used to it.


Omg thank you!

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 09:15 AM
ok for a start i totally except what you have written in reply to my post. this is a discussion thread..i am at easy to express my point of view about a character, not what everybody wants me to post and if i get attacked for it fine. it's my point of view.

In this saying.. im sorry to all the cardwell lovers... this is just my opinion

:sheppard: =;)

But this isn't about loving or hating Caldwell. This is about the facts behind the character, which you misconstrued and I wanted to correct. It moves the discussion somewhere else.


Sheppard has made unbelievably huge mistakes. The military blunder when trying to take the Geni stronghold and the ZPM. The whole Michael situation (though everyone screwed up on that). The body snatching in TLG, if hadn't been for Rodney's expertise and Caldwell keeping things cool, 1/3 of the expedition would have been lost. Etc, etc, etc.

I agree with this 75%. I don't blame him entirely for this problem. I do blame who ever has to hire the security official. For the Genii...I was expecting better for John. But for anything on Atlantis...this is something to do with man power, and why they didn't bloody hire a new head of security while Bates was incapcitated.

It boggles the mind that they assume that John can successfully complete and strategize off world misions and any sort of military contingent, as well as complete his duties as head of Security on Atlantis. I have no idea who's in charge of the hiring. I'm sure that was up to Weir and John to make a decision and nothing. I doubt it was the budget thing, since Stackhouse was pretty much replaced by Lorne. What happened to Stackhouse anyway? Ford and Bates are no longer on the pay roll, as well as Kavanaugh. I think there was enough money to send another military guy to head that department.

I think this is what really resulted in the disaster we saw. Not enough help and little time for quick thinking.


Perhaps you should just watch SG1 instead? Of course, you're blaming Shep for "THe Long Goodbye" when it hadn't even been his idea. Shep's here to stay, so you might want to just get used to it.

I agree he was hesitant and didn't want to do it. But in the end he did do it. He should have stuck to his guns. In my opinion 'TLG' would have been better had it been McKay taken over by the transient being.

VB:teyla:

prion
May 11th, 2006, 09:27 AM
It boggles the mind that they assume that John can successfully complete and strategize off world misions and any sort of military contingent, as well as complete his duties as head of Security on Atlantis. I have no idea who's in charge of the hiring. I'm sure that was up to Weir and John to make a decision and nothing. I doubt it was the budget thing, since Stackhouse was pretty much replaced by Lorne. What happened to Stackhouse anyway? Ford and Bates are no longer on the pay roll, as well as Kavanaugh. I think there was enough money to send another military guy to head that department.

I agree he was hesitant and didn't want to do it. But in the end he did do it. He should have stuck to his guns. In my opinion 'TLG' would have been better had it been McKay taken over by the transient being.

VB:teyla:

Alas, Stackhouse and Bates just got replaced by the producers for, well, we'll never know why, but at least they didn't get blown up like Markham, so they could put in a reapparance. Kavanagh - he'll NEVER come back to Atlantis after "Critical Mass"!

As for "Long Goodbye," it would make no sense for McKay to be taken over as he's been there, done that, in "Duet" and would probably stick his hand in a light socket before he let ANYBODY sublet his body again. After all, the stress of the first time nearly killed him. The writers blew the motivation part in between scenes; never gave the viewer a GOOD reason why Shep decided to go along with this scenario, especially since Caldwell was against it. I don't know of a fan who didn't have a problem that setup... Unless 'Weir' resurfaced with some reason that er, whoever went into Shep's body had critical strategic information to impart.

However, I did like see Weir shoot up Atlantis; it was just... fun :)

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 09:48 AM
All in all, it comes down to how one sees the show. Sheppard has done alot for the expedition. Most of The Storm/ The Eye was Sheppard out numbered and yet taking out the Genii. Destroyed the virus in The Hot Zone ( in fact at that time he was probably the only pilot who could have fone it.). The Defiant One, he took a bad beating but still managed to come up with a clever plan to destroy the wraith he was fighting. In Intruder, risked his life to take out the last fighter that had the computer virus in it. In Aurora, got the self -destruct code for the ship saving the Daedalus and keeping the fact that Atlantis was still there from getting out. ETC. ETC. ETC.

As far as The Long Goodbye is concerned. He gave his weapons to Caldwell so the one who would be taking over his body would be unharmed. Caldwell oversaw the takeover of Sheppard witout stopping it. He should never have left them alone in the room (Why not put them in the prison cell to be safe?)

This reasoning could go on and on. Throwing blame around has always been a useless act. I think the expedition has been learning from their experiences. Remember life in the Pegasus galaxy is very different then back home. It is like having to learn a whole new culture. Viewing things from a earth point of view doesn't always work.


We know how great John was in S1, that's not up for debate, and he got promoted for his heroics for it, hence he's Lt. Colonel.

But are we forgetting the fact that the Milky Way Galaxy is under possible Wraith attack because of stupid mistakes?! I think it's right to question, and it would be humanising and realistic to the show to display what your actions can do. I'm sure this was done in SG1. I can't see a show that would just whitewash the situation and move on. And anyway I'm all for healthy discussion.

I had mentioned this in my last post, John may have done his best to try to protect people...but in the end it was for naught wasn't it?! And they were all fooled by Phoebus. But on top of all this, John should never have been the one to be taken over. I felt that episode was actually hurting John's character than helping it. Actually the more and more I think about it, the more and more I dislike 'TLG'. I want Shep with quality story lines like in 'Aurora' or even 'Allies', 'Instinct', 'Lost Boys', 'The Hive'---i felt these and more in the S2 really helped him. But that ep as well as, Michael hurt him, not to mention the two ultimate disasters.


Well this thread is getting pretty depressing. I'm not really sure what people want out of the show. If we want PERFECT characters who NEVER make mistakes then I would not be interested. Its fine to throw blame around and say in HINDSIGHT that Sheppard makes lots of bad decisons and should be demoted. I only saw him doing the BEST he could. We never know how our decisions will turn out and even with the best planning and foresight things can go wrong. The characters have found themselves thrown into a situation that is completely new to them so things are not going to run smoothly all the time. The writers obviously write the stories so we can have conflict and drama otherwise the stories would be boring if everything turned out perfect each time.

The problem is not that they make mistakes. I would never think that's the problem. This is reminding me of my Weir discussion....more and more. Anyway, let's take for example 'Lost Boys'--John was completely out of order, what he did..was a mistake..cause it could have led to the death of his team. But he risked it and I don't blame him for that. But I do find it out of character for him, to not maintain a level of security in 'Michael'---actually that's a double-edged sword...he was to blame for Michael, but again both him and Weir should have hired a security specialist to help with what the plans are for Atlantis, especially since Lorne is not enough.

But the mistakes that were done were just plain stupid. Their not even good mistakes, or mistakes you can excuse. They just made a lot of the characters appear OOC; and I think that's the problem. Not the fact of the mistake, but how the characters just were not the same as they were in S1, when they made plenty of mistakes, which some looked better than others.


Sheppard and his team are in another galaxy where they don't really have a lot of back up. They have to make life threatening decisions at the spur of the moment with the threat of the Wraith constantly in the background. Bringing Michael to Atlantis wasn't a problem for me as he was just one Wraith for gods sake. It was pretty much A HUGE PLOT DEVICE that allowed him to escape. It was written like that so we could get Allies and by this time Weir or Sheppard didn't really have a whole lot of choice in declining Michaels offer. Blaming Sheppard for a lack in security in Allies doesn't really seem justified. The main area that was breached in Allies was the computer system and this is McKays expertise and not Sheppard. What else could Sheppard have done HIMSELF to prevent what happened in Allies.

My blame in security is not about 'Allies' and whoever mentioned 'Allies' is completely incorrect. The problem was 'Michael' and centrally the security detail watching Michael and also the situation on the Alpha Site.

Let's move away from plot device right now. Because that just takes away from the discussion and it's marginalizing the reason for even having a discussion and actually any of the discussions on the thread. Actually it makes the entire board pointless....because EVERYTHING could be put down to plot device and we should move on.

And bringing Michael to Atlantis is a problem. The problem is...he may be one wraith..but you as they were are underestimating his abilities. Carson never ever ever said that his little potion will work. He said it was a test. As such you make Michael the enemy as any other foreign enemy, even if he might turn human. The Ex is ONLY lucky, because Michael lost his memories. Now what if Michael never lost his memories?! What would happen then?! Hmm....And we don't know the brain functions of a Wraith turned human and what info they can relay. It was just plain old stupid to bring him to Atlantis. Because that is a massive risk...and of course the ep set that up perfectly. There is always a chance of something going wrong....no matter how arrogant you are, that the threat is easily put down to 'one wraith'. Come on now...


It had been Weirs decision to go along with their plan and everyone except Teyla (and she didn't even argue the point very strongly) seemed to think it was a good idea.

Which plan, and anyway even if Teyla argued up the wazoo...she wouldn't be agreed with; she's not the leader. As John said, he thought they had worked to convince her, which means the girl was adamant about not having the Wraith come back. In Michael and Allies, we're just stuck with the inevitable..and then Teyla's loss about what to do. Remember for all the advancement of the people in the PG world, and those who aren't, their medicine is primitive, and I'm sure Teyla would never have expected a Wraith to be turned into an outward human. I'd be a bit shocked too.


I also have no problem with Caldwell. The guy is doing a good job and I don't see him as being after Sheppards job. Its usually Weir who constantly brings this up to the point of sounding quite childish about the whole thing. I don't like how the writers have written the so called CONFLICT between her and Caldwell. To me there is no conflict except what Weir creates herself.
I have to agree with you there. Caldwell is a good guy to me, although I did have a slight problem towards the end of 'TLG'...but that actually showed how much of a good guy he is, and how he doesn't have a problem with Shep. So I have a good/bad feeling about that part.


All the characters could be singled out at sometime or other for bad decisions and poor judgement - so why are we singling out Sheppard. The writers as I said before do this possibly to give us some drama. Look at Rodneys situation. The man by sheer arrogance, ignored everyones advise and blew up 5/6 of a Solar System and almost killed himself and Sheppard. Are we calling for him to be replaced or sent back to earth because of his actions. Trinity highlighted McKays obsessional side of his personality and I loved the ep but I thought he got off to lightly at the end. I would have liked to have seen some reprecussions and to how his friendship with Sheppard was effected. This is a fault of MANY shows - no consequences or follow up so I guess I wasn't too bothered that we didn't get any.

Actually there have been threads about that situation with Rodney, and I really like Rodney, he's my fave character. But I had to post about how reckless Rodney is and lay him flat out. There are mistakes...and then there are deadly problems. I liked Trinity though..he was cool. I did have a small problem with him in 'TLG' and a tiny one with 'Allies'.


Finally as to who is the lead star of the show. Well in my eyes it is Sheppard. He is the first name on the credits and he is the lead male. This doesn't mean that he has to be everyone favourite. Everyone will of course have their own favourite character. McKay does come in a close second but he is not the lead male. As in SG1 O' Neill was the star of that show with Daniel and Carter coming in as close seconds.

I still say lead is shared on SGA between McKay/Shep, and the rest of the team fluctuate. But it's about them and Wraith. They dominate. And they have equal representation if you look carefully at the eps throughout S1 and S2, the credits really don't mean nothing. It's the episode themselves. I know some credits that go in alphabetical order, so the person who would be the main, comes up 3rd or something.


Joe Flanigan is a great actor and he would not get a part as important as lead male on a big show just on his looks. There are LOTS of good looking wannabe actors around who have got more in the looks department then in the talent department and for me Joe Flanigan is not one of them.

I agree...but we're not talking about JF or are we?! I thought this was only about John.

VB

DelTrax1
May 11th, 2006, 09:57 AM
I like the way it is now....can't and wouldn't change a thing. Although, I kinda like the episodes where it's finding old technology.

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 09:59 AM
Alas, Stackhouse and Bates just got replaced by the producers for, well, we'll never know why, but at least they didn't get blown up like Markham, so they could put in a reapparance. Kavanagh - he'll NEVER come back to Atlantis after "Critical Mass"!
A mate of mine who watches SG1, suspects that Kavanaugh is a spy....I forget what she named them, but their out for the ending of the SGC, and hence the reason Kavanaugh is the way he is, and how suspicious his actions as listed by Weir in 'CM'! So you never know, he might just come back.


As for "Long Goodbye," it would make no sense for McKay to be taken over as he's been there, done that, in "Duet" and would probably stick his hand in a light socket before he let ANYBODY sublet his body again. After all, the stress of the first time nearly killed him. The writers blew the motivation part in between scenes; never gave the viewer a GOOD reason why Shep decided to go along with this scenario, especially since Caldwell was against it. I don't know of a fan who didn't have a problem that setup... Unless 'Weir' resurfaced with some reason that er, whoever went into Shep's body had critical strategic information to impart.
Well I agree with you about McKay. But you'd think John would have gotten fed up with having little control over his body, he's been taken over more than anyone on the show---even Teyla! http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e308/vaberella/teylaanime34.gifhttp://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e308/vaberella/teyla39.gifhttp://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e308/vaberella/teyla51.gif

Actually that's a good point about the critical military information. But I definitely don't know why he went along with it..and your right the writers really messed up there...reminds me of the disaster in cutting when watching 'Inferno'.


However, I did like see Weir shoot up Atlantis; it was just... fun :)
I thought it was cool too. S2, definitely gave her more development (bad or good) than S1, I felt she was barely given anything in S1.


Bring back STACKHOUSE and BATES!!!--Please I beg of you TPTB, or similar characters.

VB

Linzi
May 11th, 2006, 10:05 AM
Let's be honest, in TLG, Sheppard wasn't keen to participate - he said as much. He did it because Weir asked him to. Period. That was a total plot device by the writers, obviously, so judging Sheppard on that is totally pointless, IMO. Caldwell, as Sheppard's senior officer could easily have ordered Sheppard not to do take part in the transferring of the alien's consciousness, or at least put up many more objections. Yes, it was silly, but so was the whole plot. I could overlook the stupidity of the initial concept and still enjoy the episode as a fun 'romp'.
I disagree with the poster who says Caldwell is a great officer. How do we know that? What have we actually seen him do? In TLG, he did nothing wonderful, in fact, as McKay pointed out, he didn't think ahead about the control codes. Phoebus had him by the proverbial short and curlies. He seems a good officer, but he is a full colonel, so he's more experienced than Sheppard.
As far as the mistakes in Michael and Allies. Well, to my mind all of the team had a hand in the disastrous events, but, Weir, as leader makes the decisions - the buck stops with her. So how is that just Sheppard's fault?
I've still not read anything here that illustrates why Sheppard should be demoted or punished. Just because you don't like a character, doesn't mean you should demote him. Sheppard has always done his best in difficult situations, when he was never meant to be military leader. Yet his original thinking saved the whole expedition on several occasions. Can't imagine seeing Caldwell running around systematically taking out the Genii.
As far as the opening credits, 'who's the lead man' debate goes. It's simple. Joe Flanigan is the leading man, and is often referred to as such by the writers and producers. Brad Wright said Sheppard is the centre of the show, and he should know. David Hewlett is definitely number two in the pecking order.
I do think Joe Flanigan was partly chosen because of his looks, as was RDA and Michael Shanks, and Rachel Luttrell, need I go on?
However, Joe Flanigan is a great actor as well. Stargate does not employ mindless male bimbo's as their lead men. Looks are very important in the t.v. industry for heroic characters, but so are acting skills.

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 10:20 AM
Let's be honest, in TLG, Sheppard wasn't keen to participate - he said as much. He did it because Weir asked him to. Period. That was a total plot device by the writers, obviously, so judging Sheppard on that is totally pointless, IMO. Caldwell, as Sheppard's senior officer could easily have ordered Sheppard not to do take part in the transferring of the alien's consciousness, or at least put up many more objections. Yes, it was silly, but so was the whole plot. I could overlook the stupidity of the initial concept and still enjoy the episode as a fun 'romp'.

No Caldwell couldn't order John not to, it's not a military situation. When it is, then John has to take a back seat. And they did believe Weir as being able to share her mind with Phoebus. So Caldwell really plays no role in that. And Caldwell did put up objections, we just didnt know how much and for how long, but he was against it. Meh...'TLG'-tolerable...I loved Aurora and Lost Boys/Hive. Condemned I see as a fun 'romp' same for 'inferno'.


I disagree with the poster who says Caldwell is a great officer. How do we know that? What have we actually seen him do? In TLG, he did nothing wonderful, in fact, as McKay pointed out, he didn't think ahead about the control codes. Phoebus had him by the proverbial short and curlies. He seems a good officer, but he is a full colonel, so he's more experienced than Sheppard.

That poster would be VBlicious, vaberella! And I think he's good because out of everyone in 'TLG' he had the most sense. And it was McKay who was spending time debating over who should be leader and being petty, while lives were in danger. And sure Phoebus did...but Caldwell doesn't know Atlantis like the back of his hand...had that would never have happened on the Daedy, but again he does what he does well..in what few eps with him there.


As far as the mistakes in Michael and Allies. Well, to my mind all of the team had a hand in the disastrous events, but, Weir, as leader makes the decisions - the buck stops with her. So how is that just Sheppard's fault?
I've still not read anything here that illustrates why Sheppard should be demoted or punished. Just because you don't like a character, doesn't mean you should demote him. Sheppard has always done his best in difficult situations, when he was never meant to be military leader. Yet his original thinking saved the whole expedition on several occasions. Can't imagine seeing Caldwell running around systematically taking out the Genii.
As far as the opening credits, 'who's the lead man' debate goes. It's simple. Joe Flanigan is the leading man, and is often referred to as such by the writers and producers. Brad Wright said Sheppard is the centre of the show, and he should know. David Hewlett is definitely number two in the pecking order.

I'm actually a fan of Shep, one of his biggest...as MajorTrip can attest too, but then again, you were speaking generally, and I'm sure there are haters here. But as for his mistakes between 'Allies' and Michael. I wonder who brought up 'Allies'---John play absolutely no role in that. The problem was Michael, the level of security on the Alpha site, and of course when Michael was roaming free....but to think back on it, you can't blame John for the failure of the officers to complete their tasks and WATCH 'Michael'---but he is their head officer as they don't have a head security.

And for the disaster of Michael and Allies...your right..it does end with Weir. :D


I do think Joe Flanigan was partly chosen because of his looks, as was RDA and Michael Shanks, and Rachel Luttrell, need I go on?
However, Joe Flanigan is a great actor as well. Stargate does not employ mindless male bimbo's as their lead men. Looks are very important in the t.v. industry for heroic characters, but so are acting skills.

What is this thing about JF..how did he come up for discussion?! I thought this was a character debate. http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e308/vaberella/teylaanime22.gifhttp://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e308/vaberella/teyla56.gif

Bring back STACKHOUSE and BATES!!

Linzi
May 11th, 2006, 10:26 AM
What is this thing about JF..how did he come up for discussion?! I thought this was a character debate.

Bring back STACKHOUSE and BATES!!
I was agreeing with bluealien's post. I presume someone, somewhere made comments about the looks of Mr F as lead man.

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 11:14 AM
I was agreeing with bluealien's post. I presume someone, somewhere made comments about the looks of Mr F as lead man.

Sorry...I need quotes.

Bring back BATES and STACKHOUSE!!
VB

GateLadyM
May 11th, 2006, 11:20 AM
Joe Flanigan is a great actor and he would not get a part as important as lead male on a big show just on his looks. There are LOTS of good looking wannabe actors around who have got more in the looks department then in the talent department and for me Joe Flanigan is not one of them.
I think this is the post Linzi was referring to. I think we all agree with it. :)

Elinor
May 11th, 2006, 11:49 AM
I think this is the post Linzi was referring to. I think we all agree with it. :)

Sure do. When they were casting the leading man, well, I remember reading that TPTB were finding it hard to find the right guy. There are thousands of good looking actors to choose from if that's all they were looking for, so, they must've wanted something more than that!

As for characters screwing up on the show? I love it...it makes great entertainment...and that's all I watch Stargate for. To have a darn good time and for it to put a smile on my face!! Shep/McKay banter does that for me every time!

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/aliens/monstereyeroll_lightgreen.gif

Linzi
May 11th, 2006, 11:59 AM
Sure do. When they were casting the leading man, well, I remember reading that TPTB were finding it hard to find the right guy. There are thousands of good looking actors to choose from if that's all they were looking for, so, they must've wanted something more than that!

As for characters screwing up on the show? I love it...it makes great entertainment...and that's all I watch Stargate for. To have a darn good time and for it to put a smile on my face!! Shep/McKay banter does that for me every time!

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/aliens/monstereyeroll_lightgreen.gif
I agree!
As humans - we all make mistakes, all the time. I don't want to watch a show where everybody is perfect beyond belief. The Atlantis expedition is very much about learning about ourselves, as humans, as well as the Ancients and other cultures. So, if the Atlantis team come across as idiots sometimes - well, the show is just mirroring the real world, isn't it?
If we look at history, let's be honest, the military and those in power don't always make the best, most logical or most moral decisions.
And, ona sidenote, yes, Shep/McKay banter does make the show for me too!

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 12:19 PM
I think a lot of us can agree equally that it's human to make mistakes and for those to see that those mistakes are vital and they also help in developing the character.

But there is a problem! Do you not find that some of these mistakes that have been done make the character seem OOC? That their so stupid, that even those with half a brain would never have done it?! That's what I see. I see a lot of reckless mistakes. Of course in Shep's case when it comes to 'Michael'....I still lay a large amount of blame on the fact they don't have a Head of Security.

That's the kicker of this whole thing...and why Shep does get partial fault in some of what happened. I should have seen a HoS, Shep, and pretty much all heads of teams meeting and discussing what's to be done..then a briefing with Shep, HoS, and Weir. Not only that Weir should have listened to Shep.

But again is he worth demoting..as I've said from the beginning...no bloody way!

VB

Bring back STACKHOUSE and BATES!!
Congrats, I finally got 2 green bars! Lucky me!

npattis
May 11th, 2006, 04:02 PM
I agree he was hesitant and didn't want to do it. But in the end he did do it. He should have stuck to his guns. In my opinion 'TLG' would have been better had it been McKay taken over by the transient being.



Agreed, but there has been entirely too much focus on Rodney in the 2nd season.

npattis
May 11th, 2006, 04:04 PM
Sorry...I need quotes.

Bring back BATES and STACKHOUSE!!
VB


Yes, Bates needs to be brought back. Unfortunately, Stackhouse is dead.

prion
May 11th, 2006, 04:09 PM
Yes, Bates needs to be brought back. Unfortunately, Stackhouse is dead.

Stackhouse is NOT dead. That was Markham who got blown up in the jumper. Bates got a subdural hematoma and, no doubt, was med-evaced back to Earth.

atlantis_babe34
May 11th, 2006, 08:43 PM
correct all you like.. thats not what i am saying

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 08:46 PM
Agreed, but there has been entirely too much focus on Rodney in the 2nd season.
From what I saw John had as much air play as Rodney in S2....the only thing, is that McKay is obnoxious and in your face, so it looks like he gets more airplay. Admittedly McKay can be exhausting just in one ep...so that reflects on the season, but it's a fairly equal pair up.


correct all you like.. thats not what i am saying
But it was...maybe you should read back on your post.

VB

atlantis_babe34
May 11th, 2006, 09:04 PM
lol.. i have no idea wat i am saying

i dont like carwell Sorry but i dont

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 09:16 PM
I mentioned Intruder which is a season 2 show. He nearly had to fly into the star to destroy the last place for the virus. This is just one time when he was willing to risk his life to save others. The character puts the lives of the people of the expedition and other worlds over his own.
I know you mentioned....Intruder, my focus was just to mention that S1 was not under debate. And I agree with your statement of his heroics in S2.


How can this be only Sheppard fault? The Wraith are a pretty formidible enemy if truth be said. I believe they knew all alone they couldn't stop the wraith. It would take more then just the expedition to stop the enemy. Help from the Milky Way would have been needed. Why didn't the SGC send in more help. I don't know of any of the military leader who have been to Atlantis who really could have done better.
I have stated this in my last posts. And I never put the blame ENTIRELY on Shep. The blame is clearly on the leader, we all know this. My statement was that he is at fault to an extent when it comes to a department of the level of security in 'Michael'...again 'Allies' is nothing to me when it comes to Shep, because he was on par there. But in Michael..security wasn't upto par. And I already said that this does fall on Shep not only because security was lacking..but the fact that John and Weir should have looked for a Head of Security so John can manage and distribute himself better. I strongly believe with a Head of Security---a lot of the security problems wouldn't have occured. But since there was failure....

My focus on the eventual leading of the Wraith to the Milky Way Galaxy is only to match it with the resulting military fairlure in Michael. Again, let's say we forget the whole 'could have killed Michael'--If the security was up to par and definitely more careful..I do think that Michael woulnd't have made it to the Gate and this drama could have been stopped. Oh and lets forget 'PLOT DEVICE'.


You are not the only one but I do forgive some of the episodes because it is good to have light-hearted shows mixed with others. I get tired though to see threads where only Sheppard is called for anything. This is a team. I don't want to see the series go all military on us either because the expedition idea was part of what sold me on the show. Leave the mostly military time to SG-1.
Go to S2 thread, dude I call out ALL the characters. So far Teyla has been safe except in 'LFP', but I understand the writers reasons for it. On other boards, and remember I really like McKay...I call Mckay out for things he's done. Again I have nothing against mistakes, I have problems when the mistakes make characters appear stupid, rather than helping the character; it destroys a level of credibility with me.


In the Lost Boys, Sheppard tried to do what he could. He couldn't know the Athosian message was false and I do believe that going to that meeting was a call by Weir. He was tryng to keep his team alive and safe. What was he supposeed to have done?
I'm not talking about him going on the mission. I'm talking about actually following through with Aiden's idea which could have lead to their death. They've been in tighter spots and have come out fine...but rather than having a coup, he allowed the risk. Again, as I said, I don't blame him...it was destructive. But I actually loved Shep in that ep, because it showed me a calculating and anti-hero Shep. I am a big supporter of the Anti-hero.


I haven't seen Micheal yet but from what I have read it was mostly Weirs' call.
It was so was 'Allies'.


I am willing to give them a break here. They have been under alot of stress since their first real contact with the wraith in the Siege. I always feel like if people want to complain about something maybe they ought to come up with a solution that is satisfactory. I get tired of 'It's Sheppards fault'. That's not fair.
After watching Hot Zone, my feeling is that when push comes to shove Weir is in charge.[/qoute]
I personally get tired it's Sheps fault, as well. I like to look at things objectively, though and I don't stand on any pedestal to defend any character, espeically when they've done wrong. I find that these characters are up for discussion, and they do good and bad, so why not talk about it. I know there are people who like saying it's whoever's fault without any valid proof. I prefer having some bloody back up when I diagnose something. And John's is very minimal in Micahel hence the reason I don't think he should be demoted.

And as for solution, all I can say is better and SMARTER writing; as I've said before.

[QUOTE=Atlantis1]What got Joe Flanigan into this thread was a statement that he got the part only for his looks which isn't truth.
Ahh..thanks for telling me. I was lost for a minute there. All I saw was JF, and I'm like, actor not up for debate..only character.

VB

Bring back STACKHOUSE and BATES!!

vaberella
May 11th, 2006, 09:21 PM
lol.. i have no idea wat i am saying

i dont like carwell Sorry but i dont

:D Okay are you really not knowing how to spell C-A-L-D-W-E-L-L's name or just taking a piss?! :D This is like the third time you've missed spelled it, I'm interested...darn it. Excuse the OT.

And it's alright... I just thought it was unfair for Caldwell to be trashed when there was absolutely no necessity for it---because people feel he's a threat to Shep. And I feel tht Shep has absolutely nothing to fear from Caldwell. He's a good guy. Anyway on top of that..I do believe there is some level of honor amongst officers, even if they have felt slighted.

Bring back STACKHOUSE and BATES!!

VB

bluealien
May 12th, 2006, 12:35 AM
In Lost Boys - I don't see that Sheppard had any other choice but to follow along with Ford. It would be interesting to hear what other options Sheppard had rather than saying that he did was wrong. They were outnumbered by Fords men and unable to get off the planet. What else could he have done.

Well I don't really have a problem with any of Sheppards decisions. No more than any other character and once again I don't see how he could have done anything different in Allies. And why was it up to Sheppard to appoint another head of security - it was Weir who put Bates in charge and as I said before the problem with Allies was that the Wraith infiltrated their computer systems and McKay did assure Sheppard and Weir that their so called firewall would protect them so again not really Sheppards fault.

Joe was brought into the thread when it was implied that he only got the part because of his looks. I answered that I disagreed with this.

Linzi
May 12th, 2006, 01:24 AM
In Lost Boys - I don't see that Sheppard had any other choice but to follow along with Ford. It would be interesting to hear what other options Sheppard had rather than saying that he did was wrong. They were outnumbered by Fords men and unable to get off the planet. What else could he have done.

Well I don't really have a problem with any of Sheppards decisions. No more than any other character and once again I don't see how he could have done anything different in Allies. And why was it up to Sheppard to appoint another head of security - it was Weir who put Bates in charge and as I said before the problem with Allies was that the Wraith infiltrated their computer systems and McKay did assure Sheppard and Weir that their so called firewall would protect them so again not really Sheppards fault.

Joe was brought into the thread when it was implied that he only got the part because of his looks. I answered that I disagreed with this.
I agree about Lost Boys. What else could Sheppard do? The team had already been drugged in their food, and would have been forced to take the enzyme anyway. Going along with Ford's plan was just a ruse on Sheppard's part, and he planned to escape as soon as possible. So I don't see that he was at fault for anything there. There was no other way out. Sheppard made it clear he didn't trust Ford, or his plan.
I also agree that the head of security issue is Weir's concern. What difference would it have made anyway?
In Michael, it was Weir's decision to let him wander around and integrate into the community, and that was against Sheppard's wishes; Weir overruled him.
In Allies, again the virus was the problem. The team were caught out. Again, what choice did they have? The Wraith were going to reveal Atlantis' survival, so they were blackmailed into a collaboration. Don't see how they could have done anything else again.
However, the whole situation would have been avoided had the experiment on Michael not occurred. Then again we wouldn't have the storyline we did.

atlantis_babe34
May 12th, 2006, 01:39 AM
:D Okay are you really not knowing how to spell C-A-L-D-W-E-L-L's name or just taking a piss?! :D This is like the third time you've missed spelled it, I'm interested...darn it. Excuse the OT.

And it's alright... I just thought it was unfair for Caldwell to be trashed when there was absolutely no necessity for it---because people feel he's a threat to Shep. And I feel tht Shep has absolutely nothing to fear from Caldwell. He's a good guy. Anyway on top of that..I do believe there is some level of honor amongst officers, even if they have felt slighted.

Bring back STACKHOUSE and BATES!!

VB



lol i didnt notice sorry lol i'll try to spell it better next time... i see your point... i just dont like him theres a personality clash between me and him:P ... maybe it was from when i watched the X-Files...:confused:

prion
May 12th, 2006, 04:45 AM
Joe was brought into the thread when it was implied that he only got the part because of his looks. I answered that I disagreed with this.

We should not be bringing the actual actor into this discussion. Of course actors are cast on looks (duh) but if they don't have talent, they don't get the role. Otherwise we'd have nothing but models on TV (and if you watch many models go into acting, you can see why their careers are short-lived) ;)

vaberella
May 12th, 2006, 08:56 AM
In Lost Boys - I don't see that Sheppard had any other choice but to follow along with Ford. It would be interesting to hear what other options Sheppard had rather than saying that he did was wrong. They were outnumbered by Fords men and unable to get off the planet. What else could he have done.

Well I don't really have a problem with any of Sheppards decisions. No more than any other character and once again I don't see how he could have done anything different in Allies. And why was it up to Sheppard to appoint another head of security - it was Weir who put Bates in charge and as I said before the problem with Allies was that the Wraith infiltrated their computer systems and McKay did assure Sheppard and Weir that their so called firewall would protect them so again not really Sheppards fault.

Joe was brought into the thread when it was implied that he only got the part because of his looks. I answered that I disagreed with this.

I agree with Prion, it should never have been talked about, since it's not necessary. Which makes me think it's not even worth defending, since that was a below the belt hit by whoever posted such a silly comment. It was just continuously throwing me off.

Anyway, as for 'Lost Boys' there are plenty of things that could have been done. In Condemned, Ronon took out what? 2-4 guys on his own, we have Teyla who could take on about 2-3, and we have John, even without the enzyme could have taken a few out. Not only that they knew those cats had the Wraith. All I kept thinkign was let the wraith loose then you can get out.

But as I said before, John and his team have been able to get out of a lot of sticky situations even when they've been out numbered. I don't think this is different. John chose to go along with Ford, because he wanted to bring Ford back for help.

But by doing that he risked the lives of his crew....if it all went to hell, he would have killed 3 people to save 1 man. That's how bad that was. Your like he couldn't have done anything else....one minute he's the prince of heroics, with seemingly little to no limit of his skill---now he's got his hands tied behind his back---when he has two super powerful people on his team and McKay. That makes no bloody sense.

I like John just as the next person, but I'm not about to marginalize his ability here. Not to mention that John was asking both Teyla and Ronon if they were alright with the plan. John was wrong in doing what he was doing, becuase he could have definitley thought up several plans....this is not like 'LFP' where the odds were innumerable and yet he was still successful in saving lives. But as i said I don't have a problem with Lost Boys, I like the anti-hero.

Who keeps on bringing up 'Allies', it plays no role on Sheppard at all. Sheppard did absolutely nothing wrong in Allies...there's no point in even defending him. 'Michael' is the ONLY ep that I would question his ability.


Let me explain as to why it was up to John. Let's sit back and REWIND to 'Intruder'---When Weir was talking with Beckett, they were choosing his new staff. See? Beckett chooses who he'd like and Weir gives the okay in the end. That's why John was to sit with Weir in choosing the head of Security. The head of security would work under both John and Weir. Bates was chosen, because they needed someone spur of a moment...and he was the best qualified and we saw he was Sumner's right hand. But in Intruder I was to also see John and Weir discussing domestic Security. That's why John shares a bit of fault.



I agree about Lost Boys. What else could Sheppard do? The team had already been drugged in their food, and would have been forced to take the enzyme anyway. Going along with Ford's plan was just a ruse on Sheppard's part, and he planned to escape as soon as possible. So I don't see that he was at fault for anything there. There was no other way out. Sheppard made it clear he didn't trust Ford, or his plan.
I also agree that the head of security issue is Weir's concern. What difference would it have made anyway?
In Michael, it was Weir's decision to let him wander around and integrate into the community, and that was against Sheppard's wishes; Weir overruled him.
In Allies, again the virus was the problem. The team were caught out. Again, what choice did they have? The Wraith were going to reveal Atlantis' survival, so they were blackmailed into a collaboration. Don't see how they could have done anything else again.
However, the whole situation would have been avoided had the experiment on Michael not occurred. Then again we wouldn't have the storyline we did.


Okay let's try this again. Again now see seem to be marginalizing John when he risked his life to near death on many occasions. Instead in LB he almost killed his team mates---see...that's what I find interesting. I don't blame him for it..but I find it interesting dynamic on his part. And again I'm sure they could have come up with something, they choose not too. We seem to forget his loyal team mates, and the fact that there are two military strategist, 2 amazing fighters, and 1 scientist---taking on juiced kids, it can be done. He also believed Ford, when Ford said he wanted to go home...it was clearly seen on his face. Both John and Ford was faking each other, it just turned out that Ford had a slight upper hand, but that doesn't mean that the other's couldn't have helped in this.

I answered the Head of Security question above, check back on 'Intruder' when Carson was choosing medical staff. It is John's duty to be helping in choosing along with Weir a Head of Security.

I won't deny it was Weir's decision in 'Michael' to allow Michael to roam, but it was also John's duty to try and minimize as much as a fall out as he could have and---also having his officers at ready attention and to remember the guy is not to be trusted. I thought Michael needed more than 2 guards, and further more....John should have tried to leash Ronon....Ronon was absolutely no help with the situation. And in the major fall out, John was there!

I don't care about 'Allies' at tihs point the blame can only be put on in Michael, Allies was just a continued domino affect, their chooses were between crap and crap. Not much of a selection there is there?

The experiment would have been fine to me. The whole thing could have been avoided had it been done on an Alpha Site. Overall the risk of lives would have been greatly minimalized, and the death count I don't think woul dhave been so much! Even if Michael saw the disks, he wouldn't have been able to gather intel about Atlantis, only that people kidnapped him and ran tests on him.

VB

knocknashee
May 12th, 2006, 10:29 AM
We should not be bringing the actual actor into this discussion. Of course actors are cast on looks (duh) but if they don't have talent, they don't get the role. Otherwise we'd have nothing but models on TV (and if you watch many models go into acting, you can see why their careers are short-lived) ;)

Sorry, but I don't agree even the looks comment. If that were the case, half the actors currently on TV would be out of work. Actors need to be cast realistically. A TV show full of beautiful people is not representative of the society we live in, and for the sake of realism there has to be ugly ones.

Bringing Joe into the discussion however, I agree with everyone who says it was unnecessary. Joe's talent as an actor is not in question - his character's actions are.


Who keeps on bringing up 'Allies', it plays no role on Sheppard at all. Sheppard did absolutely nothing wrong in Allies...there's no point in even defending him. 'Michael' is the ONLY ep that I would question his ability.

Let me explain as to why it was up to John. Let's sit back and REWIND to 'Intruder'---When Weir was talking with Beckett, they were choosing his new staff. See? Beckett chooses who he'd like and Weir gives the okay in the end. That's why John was to sit with Weir in choosing the head of Security. The head of security would work under both John and Weir. Bates was chosen, because they needed someone spur of a moment...and he was the best qualified and we saw he was Sumner's right hand. But in Intruder I was to also see John and Weir discussing domestic Security. That's why John shares a bit of fault.
I don't even agree with the fact that John has anything to answer for in 'Michael' to be honest. While he was happy to take the Wraith prisoner, he was against the reconditioning and intergration of 'Michael' into the community from the off. And when things went south, he AND Ronon both stated emphatically that the only course of action was to kill Michael. Only they were ignored and subsequently, the softly-softly approach taken meant he got away, leading to the situation in 'Allies'. If anything, Michael showed the areas where Elizabeth is lacking in leadership skills, NOT John.

As for 'Intruder', considering John wasn't even going to be the military commander of Atlantis as far as the headsheds were concerned, I seriously doubt he got to pick the replacements and new staff on his military team. The military does not work in the same way as civilian operations, no matter how entertwined they are. It is likely that all the military contingent would have been picked by people higher up the chain of command, most likely Landry and Caldwell, as it was the intent for them to be his men, not John's. It was like the comment someone made about 'The Long Goodbye'. Caldwell COULD have ordered John not to take part in having Thalen's consciousness transferred into him. Regardless of Elizabeth being the Expedition Commander, John would still be accountable to Caldwell and would still have to obey the direct orders of an officer of higher rank. Of course, Elizabeth could have overruled them, however, that would have appeared as a conflict of interests, and sparked questioning as to her motives for making John disobey a superior officer. It would have been interesting to see that happen, and her have to explain her way out of it at a later date.


Okay let's try this again. Again now see seem to be marginalizing John when he risked his life to near death on many occasions. Instead in LB he almost killed his team mates---see...that's what I find interesting. I don't blame him for it..but I find it interesting dynamic on his part. And again I'm sure they could have come up with something, they choose not too. We seem to forget his loyal team mates, and the fact that there are two military strategist, 2 amazing fighters, and 1 scientist---taking on juiced kids, it can be done. He also believed Ford, when Ford said he wanted to go home...it was clearly seen on his face. Both John and Ford was faking each other, it just turned out that Ford had a slight upper hand, but that doesn't mean that the other's couldn't have helped in this.
Again, I don't agree. It is easy to say the team could have taken them on past experience, or that John's feelings for Aiden as a friend were clouding his judgement to justify this argument. However, to me, in 'Lost Boys', there were too many unknown variables. Even if they took those few people we saw, there was no way to know exactly how many rebels there were following Ford, or whether they would turn up. They were definitely outnumbered, by people who were all hyped up on the enzyme. Let's be fair, they knew how powerful Aiden could be on his own. Ronon couldn't take him before the Enzyme, and I seriously doubt two team members hyped up could take several of Aiden's foot soldiers, Ronon and Teyla's skills or not. These 'kids' were not untrained louts on drugs - from what we saw they had the benefit of Aiden's marine training and experience, and many other fighting techniques and tactics.

As talented and brilliant as Rodney is, I don't honestly see what help his seriously lacking fighting and weaponry skills would have been in this situation, and John wouldn't have stood a chance in a fight with even one of those guys. As for your comment earlier in your post about letting the Wraith loose...sorry but that is just ludicrous. That would have been tantamount to committing suicide.

Factoring in everything, and with so little information about Aiden's operation, I think the right choice was made, no matter what the motivation was and even if it didn't go right. I think the assertion that only John wants to get Aiden back is a crock of crap. Rodney and Teyla have also expressed their wishes to bring him, to try and help. While it might seem that Rodney's motivations in 'Runner' were purely survival instinct, I think he does actually care enough about Aiden to want to bring him home.


I won't deny it was Weir's decision in 'Michael' to allow Michael to roam, but it was also John's duty to try and minimize as much as a fall out as he could have and---also having his officers at ready attention and to remember the guy is not to be trusted. I thought Michael needed more than 2 guards, and further more....John should have tried to leash Ronon....Ronon was absolutely no help with the situation. And in the major fall out, John was there!

..edit..

The experiment would have been fine to me. The whole thing could have been avoided had it been done on an Alpha Site. Overall the risk of lives would have been greatly minimalized, and the death count I don't think woul dhave been so much! Even if Michael saw the disks, he wouldn't have been able to gather intel about Atlantis, only that people kidnapped him and ran tests on him.
John's duty was to minimise the fallout, and not just from the inherant danger 'Michael' posed, but also to keep the secret of what they done. He had to weigh up security against keeping their test subject from getting suspicious of what was happening. You could have surrounded 'Michael' with security, however that would have defeated the point of the experiment.

In short, the experiment was a bad idea, and the only people to blame for it are the ones who thought it was a good idea in the first place, which to my mind, doesn't include John, Ronon, Teyla or Carson, who ALL expressed concerns and misgivings at the course of action, whether verbally like John and Ronon, or by behaviour like Teyla and Carson, and had to continue with it because Weir ordered them to. At the end of the day, anyone can be the head of something, however the buck stops at the person who gives them the orders. The chain of command assumes a lot of things, the main one being that the top person there is capable of making the right choices. And from what I've seen this season, I've seen nothing to me that justifies the vilification that John seems to be getting over other characters whose decisions have been equally as poor, if not worse.

What it boils down to to me is that a lot of people cannot and will not get over the whole 'Lt. Col. Kirk' thing. Basically, he eyes a few women and gets seduced and suddenly he's a crap military leader. Never mind that Jack O'Neill pulled almost as often in 7 years at the leader of SG1...

Linzi
May 12th, 2006, 01:10 PM
I agree wholeheartedly with Beanie here. Great post, cutting to the chase, so to speak.

prion
May 12th, 2006, 01:39 PM
[QUOTE=knocknashee]Sorry, but I don't agree even the looks comment. If that were the case, half the actors currently on TV would be out of work. Actors need to be cast realistically. A TV show full of beautiful people is not representative of the society we live in, and for the sake of realism there has to be ugly ones.

Just to clarify, I didn't say actors were cast on *good* looks (just 'looks'), but yes, people in that business are cast on what they look like. Short, fat, balding, gorgeous, blonde, brunette, etc. etc. Many people are cast becuase they are NOT gorgeous (as in the 'normal' folk). :)

knocknashee
May 12th, 2006, 02:09 PM
Just to clarify, I didn't say actors were cast on *good* looks (just 'looks'), but yes, people in that business are cast on what they look like. Short, fat, balding, gorgeous, blonde, brunette, etc. etc. Many people are cast becuase they are NOT gorgeous (as in the 'normal' folk). :)

*Teal'c-like head tilt*

My bad...apologies... :)

vaberella
May 12th, 2006, 02:19 PM
I don't even agree with the fact that John has anything to answer for in 'Michael' to be honest. While he was happy to take the Wraith prisoner, he was against the reconditioning and intergration of 'Michael' into the community from the off. And when things went south, he AND Ronon both stated emphatically that the only course of action was to kill Michael. Only they were ignored and subsequently, the softly-softly approach taken meant he got away, leading to the situation in 'Allies'. If anything, Michael showed the areas where Elizabeth is lacking in leadership skills, NOT John.
Hiya knocknashee...I like your posts at the Thunk threads by the way, been meaning to pm you. Now on to your statement. I agree with you in what you've stated above, but that's not my concern, as I've stated. We all can clearly see that Weir was in the wrong completely---but that's for another thread.
What I have stated is that when it comes to security measures when we look at 'Michael' they were weak. We have to look at the security officials allowed when Michael got the discs...Yes, it was Weir's fault to let him out, but John also should have had strict orders about things. And if he did put those orders--but the security failed, then he is still responsible since they take orders from him.
Then it's the amount of detail on the Alpha Site. If I saw two guards outside of Michael's location, even if Teyla was inside, and two around the perimerter---roughly about 6 guards...then I'd be like, John took all necessary precautions and that is not his fault.
But I didn't see that the security was up to par. Do I blame John for that? No...because he has other duties, to take on being Head of Security as well. It weakens his effectiveness.


As for 'Intruder', considering John wasn't even going to be the military commander of Atlantis as far as the headsheds were concerned, I seriously doubt he got to pick the replacements and new staff on his military team. The military does not work in the same way as civilian operations, no matter how entertwined they are. It is likely that all the military contingent would have been picked by people higher up the chain of command, most likely Landry and Caldwell, as it was the intent for them to be his men, not John's. It was like the comment someone made about 'The Long Goodbye'. Caldwell COULD have ordered John not to take part in having Thalen's consciousness transferred into him. Regardless of Elizabeth being the Expedition Commander, John would still be accountable to Caldwell and would still have to obey the direct orders of an officer of higher rank. Of course, Elizabeth could have overruled them, however, that would have appeared as a conflict of interests, and sparked questioning as to her motives for making John disobey a superior officer. It would have been interesting to see that happen, and her have to explain her way out of it at a later date.
First I want to address 'TLG', only in times of military action am I aware that John would take orders from Caldwell if he's there. But this wasn't a military issue and Phoebus was able to fool them into being Elizabeth. In that case, Caldwell can't order John, because on Atlantis John is head of military even if Caldwell is there, ---again unless it's military situation and they seek aid, but that was not the case. So that means Caldwell has no authority over John unless there's a military situation; which is what I assumed, when I see Conversion and Allies, as well as the Siege II-III.
But as for intruder you maybe right. But then that still leaves open the fact that no one seemed to ask for a Head of Security and I still think John should have asked for one, even if he can't pick one. But then again, there's no way of knowing whether he asked or not. Same as Weir should have wanted that enforced, since they lost Bates.


Again, I don't agree. It is easy to say the team could have taken them on past experience, or that John's feelings for Aiden as a friend were clouding his judgement to justify this argument. However, to me, in 'Lost Boys', there were too many unknown variables. Even if they took those few people we saw, there was no way to know exactly how many rebels there were following Ford, or whether they would turn up. They were definitely outnumbered, by people who were all hyped up on the enzyme. Let's be fair, they knew how powerful Aiden could be on his own. Ronon couldn't take him before the Enzyme, and I seriously doubt two team members hyped up could take several of Aiden's foot soldiers, Ronon and Teyla's skills or not. These 'kids' were not untrained louts on drugs - from what we saw they had the benefit of Aiden's marine training and experience, and many other fighting techniques and tactics.
I agree with that statement, but they did get an idea of how many there were, because the majority of them came with Ford on the mission. Not only that, I think that the team was there for a certain amount of days..they must have gathered some intel.

Actually based on what we've seein the past eps and even what we saw in Lost Boys, was it me or wasn't Ronon and Teyla kicking all the boys butts?! Yes I believe they were winning the fights. I know they weren't untrained
but as I stated before I think that Ronon and Teyla coudl have taken them on!


As talented and brilliant as Rodney is, I don't honestly see what help his seriously lacking fighting and weaponry skills would have been in this situation, and John wouldn't have stood a chance in a fight with even one of those guys. As for your comment earlier in your post about letting the Wraith loose...sorry but that is just ludicrous. That would have been tantamount to committing suicide.
Dude, devils advocate here...I was grasping at a plan idea. And I can never really think around an ep...Muche like when people say, how did an ep go and rewriting it to fit them, I literally cannot do that. But I'm sure based on John's military brain and also Ronon's background, and with Rodney's skill and access to a lof the Boys equipment, and also Teyla's fighting abilities, something could have come up. That was my only point on the matter.



Factoring in everything, and with so little information about Aiden's operation, I think the right choice was made, no matter what the motivation was and even if it didn't go right. I think the assertion that only John wants to get Aiden back is a crock of crap. Rodney and Teyla have also expressed their wishes to bring him, to try and help. While it might seem that Rodney's motivations in 'Runner' were purely survival instinct, I think he does actually care enough about Aiden to want to bring him home.
I won't deny that they all wanted Aiden back. I also think the right choice was made and I'm not angry that the decision was taken. I wasn't against it at all. But I do believe it was life risking, especially for the team, and I wondered at there being another way. But then as I said...I like anti-hero Shep. This was a man doing his duty!



John's duty was to minimise the fallout, and not just from the inherant danger 'Michael' posed, but also to keep the secret of what they done. He had to weigh up security against keeping their test subject from getting suspicious of what was happening. You could have surrounded 'Michael' with security, however that would have defeated the point of the experiment.
Yes, this I agree with, but my focus was the lackluster performance that falls on the military which reflects on John as their superior. And I did expect a bit more military around during their time on the Alpha site which I mentioned previously. :D


In short, the experiment was a bad idea, and the only people to blame for it are the ones who thought it was a good idea in the first place, which to my mind, doesn't include John, Ronon, Teyla or Carson, who ALL expressed concerns and misgivings at the course of action, whether verbally like John and Ronon, or by behaviour like Teyla and Carson, and had to continue with it because Weir ordered them to. At the end of the day, anyone can be the head of something, however the buck stops at the person who gives them the orders. The chain of command assumes a lot of things, the main one being that the top person there is capable of making the right choices. And from what I've seen this season, I've seen nothing to me that justifies the vilification that John seems to be getting over other characters whose decisions have been equally as poor, if not worse.
With this I completely agree, and have made no objections in past posts.


What it boils down to to me is that a lot of people cannot and will not get over the whole 'Lt. Col. Kirk' thing. Basically, he eyes a few women and gets seduced and suddenly he's a crap military leader. Never mind that Jack O'Neill pulled almost as often in 7 years at the leader of SG1...
I don't know about Jack..but damn it to hell I'm fed up with Kirking. People need to get over him with other people. I always think that subconciously their either jealous, or they feel it hurts their ship, or some other unknown silliness. I didn't even notice it, until I heard the arguments. So with that..I soooo agree with you.

VB

knocknashee
May 12th, 2006, 02:49 PM
First I want to address 'TLG', only in times of military action am I aware that John would take orders from Caldwell if he's there. But this wasn't a military issue and Phoebus was able to fool them into being Elizabeth. In that case, Caldwell can't order John, because on Atlantis John is head of military even if Caldwell is there, ---again unless it's military situation and they seek aid, but that was not the case. So that means Caldwell has no authority over John unless there's a military situation; which is what I assumed, when I see Conversion and Allies, as well as the Siege II-III.
But as for intruder you maybe right. But then that still leaves open the fact that no one seemed to ask for a Head of Security and I still think John should have asked for one, even if he can't pick one. But then again, there's no way of knowing whether he asked or not. Same as Weir should have wanted that enforced, since they lost Bates.

Since we agreed on most of the other points...to clarify this particular one...

Shep and Caldwell's relative positions make no difference. Caldwell is a 'Bird' Colonel, and outranks Sheppard. Whether Sheppard is the CMO of Atlantis or not, he still has to obey orders of higher ranking officers. The way you are putting it makes it sound like no-one can order Sheppard to do anything on Atlantis, irrespective of rank. So if General Landry ever visited, Sheppard could just disregard his orders as well? The military really doesn't work like that.

Technically he could order Sheppard to do something, and if Sheppard had good sense, he'd obey, since it's not good for the men under you to see their commander not obeying the people he's under. The reason he likely wouldn't try ordering Sheppard on Atlantis, is he'd most likely be countermanded by Weir, who as the Expedition Leader 'outranks' him.

I think it generally works on Atlantis that he defers to Sheppard because it is his command, and regardless of what Caldwell thinks, Sheppard earnt it (in Weir's eyes, at least) and he as to respect that. Just the same, once on board the Daedalus, John is expected to toe the line as a subordinate officer. And so he should.

Just FYI, it was my understanding that the head of security these days is Major Lorne...

atlantis_babe34
May 12th, 2006, 05:14 PM
Really thats Cool. Go Lorne!

vaberella
May 12th, 2006, 06:32 PM
Since we agreed on most of the other points...to clarify this particular one...

Shep and Caldwell's relative positions make no difference. Caldwell is a 'Bird' Colonel, and outranks Sheppard. Whether Sheppard is the CMO of Atlantis or not, he still has to obey orders of higher ranking officers. The way you are putting it makes it sound like no-one can order Sheppard to do anything on Atlantis, irrespective of rank. So if General Landry ever visited, Sheppard could just disregard his orders as well? The military really doesn't work like that.

Technically he could order Sheppard to do something, and if Sheppard had good sense, he'd obey, since it's not good for the men under you to see their commander not obeying the people he's under. The reason he likely wouldn't try ordering Sheppard on Atlantis, is he'd most likely be countermanded by Weir, who as the Expedition Leader 'outranks' him.

I think it generally works on Atlantis that he defers to Sheppard because it is his command, and regardless of what Caldwell thinks, Sheppard earnt it (in Weir's eyes, at least) and he as to respect that. Just the same, once on board the Daedalus, John is expected to toe the line as a subordinate officer. And so he should.

Just FYI, it was my understanding that the head of security these days is Major Lorne...

Well I never 'really' disagreed with you guys. Most of it I'm playing devils advocate...and I can see where people are looking. But in the end, we all know where the total issue lies.

As for Lorne, I'm unsure as to what he is. I thought he had is off world missions. And so he was just head of another team. From what I gathered when Bates was Head of Security, he never left Atlantis for off world missions, well after Rising, I don't remember seeing him off world. So I figured Lorne was just another team member not Head of Security. So I naturally thought John took care of those details.

See this is one of my problems....the distribution of power. Let's just say that when I saw 'TLG' that I just figured that John has more authority than Caldwell when there is no military issue and when Caldwell is not around. It was the language Caldwell used and when McKay was complaining over who was in charge. So I made various assumptions...I think I need TPTB to give me a run down on authority here..

Although I do know that John has to relinquish power, but I put it down to time of military action when the head of military on atlatnis was off---again something I picked up from Caldwell's words. Cause I know in the Siege II, John was not the head of military.

VB

Linzi
May 12th, 2006, 11:38 PM
Well I never 'really' disagreed with you guys. Most of it I'm playing devils advocate...and I can see where people are looking. But in the end, we all know where the total issue lies.

As for Lorne, I'm unsure as to what he is. I thought he had is off world missions. And so he was just head of another team. From what I gathered when Bates was Head of Security, he never left Atlantis for off world missions, well after Rising, I don't remember seeing him off world. So I figured Lorne was just another team member not Head of Security. So I naturally thought John took care of those details.

See this is one of my problems....the distribution of power. Let's just say that when I saw 'TLG' that I just figured that John has more authority than Caldwell when there is no military issue and when Caldwell is not around. It was the language Caldwell used and when McKay was complaining over who was in charge. So I made various assumptions...I think I need TPTB to give me a run down on authority here..

Although I do know that John has to relinquish power, but I put it down to time of military action when the head of military on atlatnis was off---again something I picked up from Caldwell's words. Cause I know in the Siege II, John was not the head of military.

VB
Sgt. Bates certainly did lead off world missions. Think back to Underground. Weir tells Sheppard that Bates brokered the deal with the Manarians. I'm sure he also was off world, leading a mission on the Alpha site, in The Gift when the Wraith attacked.
As far as the chain of command goes, Beanie is right. Sheppard is subordinate to Caldwell - full stop. Sheppard calls him sir all the time, and often is seen holding back and not answering him back as he would an equal. However, Weir is the boss on Atlantis and as far as operations on Atlantis are concerned both Sheppard and Caldwell defer to her. So, as far as the military running of Atlantis goes, Sheppard runs it how he wants, but Weir gets the final say on everything, though she trusts Sheppard and defers to him at the appropriate times. This appears to be true in Conversion. When Weir says she agrees with some of Caldwell's changes, but it's up to Sheppard to decide if they are implemented or not

vaberella
May 13th, 2006, 10:56 AM
Sgt. Bates certainly did lead off world missions. Think back to Underground. Weir tells Sheppard that Bates brokered the deal with the Manarians. I'm sure he also was off world, leading a mission on the Alpha site, in The Gift when the Wraith attacked.
As far as the chain of command goes, Beanie is right. Sheppard is subordinate to Caldwell - full stop. Sheppard calls him sir all the time, and often is seen holding back and not answering him back as he would an equal. However, Weir is the boss on Atlantis and as far as operations on Atlantis are concerned both Sheppard and Caldwell defer to her. So, as far as the military running of Atlantis goes, Sheppard runs it how he wants, but Weir gets the final say on everything, though she trusts Sheppard and defers to him at the appropriate times. This appears to be true in Conversion. When Weir says she agrees with some of Caldwell's changes, but it's up to Sheppard to decide if they are implemented or not

Okay thanks Linzi...I'll look at the Underground and The Gift again and get back to you, I just don't remember him going off world at all. Maybe they didn't show that he went off world...I have no clue.

And yeah you might be right as to how that works...it was really the debate in 'TLG' that got me wondering about the distribution of authority--and if it depends on a situation. It brings back to the debate in Intruder, when Teyla had the comp and people have said Zelenka was in charge, when that clearly was not apparent.

VB

cohnee
May 23rd, 2006, 08:00 AM
Re: Sheppard needs to be demoted....

He does.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0786616/

prion
May 23rd, 2006, 09:21 AM
He does.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0786616/

I honestly wouldn't count on IMDB for accuracy ;)

npattis
July 10th, 2006, 07:23 PM
Sheppard needs to be demoted

parisindy
July 10th, 2006, 09:16 PM
Sheppard needs to be demoted

as long as he remains one of the main characters i think it would be kind of cool... great angst... as long as he could get promoted again eventually

LORD MONK
July 11th, 2006, 12:29 AM
Shep doesn't need to be demoted for anything. O this and O that. I am sorry, all I heard was wa wa wa. Shep is the man and he handles things as it comes and for the safty of his team. He is in uncharted worlds in a Galaxy far far away. There are know rules and regulations when it comes to the enemy. There are only us, and survival, and whoever else we can safe. Shep is doing one fine job I might add.

Atlantis1
July 11th, 2006, 10:02 PM
He does.

Exactly why do you think this? I haven't seen a good reason in this whole thread to justify demoting Sheppard. I think it would really mess up the show. I don't see anywhere that it would fit with the way the stargate PTB have presented the series.

prion
July 12th, 2006, 09:53 AM
Huh? Hmm, I thought this thread croaked a long time ago? Still going.... Hmm....

LORD MONK
July 12th, 2006, 02:21 PM
Huh? Hmm, I thought this thread croaked a long time ago? Still going.... Hmm....
Someone dug through the pages and revived it for some unknown reason.

The.Prior.of.The.Ori
July 13th, 2006, 01:50 AM
Someone dug through the pages and revived it for some unknown reason.
:indeed:

Linzi
July 13th, 2006, 04:06 AM
Someone dug through the pages and revived it for some unknown reason.
Indeed.
I must say, I love your avatar.That is really cool! Shame about the thread though....

LORD MONK
July 13th, 2006, 02:54 PM
Indeed.
I must say, I love your avatar.That is really cool! Shame about the thread though....
I just found it. Pretty cool ah. I think I seen someone with it a long time ago but I might be mistaken.

Lets change the thread to 'Shep need to be promoted'.
I think McKay should do the honors. He should put the little symbol that they wear on Star Trek on Shep and say, 'There, you can now officially Kirk on any planet you want."