PDA

View Full Version : Why Lt Colonel? (Spoilers S9, S10)



Teotl
August 2nd, 2006, 06:56 PM
Added the spoiler tag because I'm still not 100% sure what needs the tag and what doesn't. But to the topic...

While debating in the 'Who should lead SG-1?' thread, it struck me that all the fuss over it could have been avoided with one very simple thing: making Mitchell and Carter of a different rank. Why was it the writers decided to make him a Lt Colonel?

On the one hand, they obviously wanted him to lead SG-1, and they knew Sam would be returning, so making him a full Colonel would make sense. But they didn't.

Making him a Major wasn't much of an option because it has repeatedly been mentioned that a Major wouldn't be assigned command of SG-1 - but then, if Sam was to be returning, he didn't really need to be put in command at all.

dmayor09
August 2nd, 2006, 09:18 PM
at the start of season 9, they showed us that mitchell was given the command of his choice, and he chose sg-1. Carter was leaving the sgc, but eventually came back, only to join mitchell's team. on the reason why having him a lt. colonel, is b/c thats the next rank up. you can't skip ranks just to lead a team, he was a major before during the anubis battle, then he was given a promotion and a command of his choice.

Lightsabre
August 2nd, 2006, 09:42 PM
He was a LT Col before the Antarctic battle.
I think they wanted to give him command, but didn't want to piss off the Carter fans, so they made them the same rank.
She doesn't ahve to call him sir, but he gets to be in charge.

Bragi
August 2nd, 2006, 09:51 PM
Well. . . Ben's a touch too young to be a bird colonel anyway.

Attilitus
August 2nd, 2006, 10:33 PM
Well there are alot of things about Mitchell's leading SG1 that don't exactly make perfect sense. I am really hoping that they pull his character together a bit, because right now he just hogs 2-3 minutes of screen time from the people with actual meaningful dialogue. His rank is really the least of my troubles... but now that I think of it... not only is he way to young to be a Colonel but isn't he just a little too young to be leading the frontline SG team period?

Think about it for a second... So what if he was a great pilot which helped fend off Anubis's attack? Does one heroic act automatically qualify you to jump ahead on the military ladder from pilot to intergalactic hero? Grrr... I am getting more and more angry about Mitchell the more I think about him... so I guess I will just wait until the next episode at which time the fact that he plays no significant role in the episodes will render my discontent largely meaningless. o_O

the fifth man
August 2nd, 2006, 10:47 PM
I say just make him a full Colonel and end the controversy. Some will like it, others won't. But, at least TPTB will have done something about the leadership issue.

Orion's Star
August 2nd, 2006, 11:17 PM
Well. . . Ben's a touch too young to be a bird colonel anyway.
Ben is 43, and while I'm not quite sure how old Mitchell is supposed to be, I wouldn't say it is that far out of the realm of possibility for someone who is 43 to be a full bird colonel.

Metonic
August 2nd, 2006, 11:37 PM
wasn't RDA 46 or 47 when the series began? O'niell was full colonel was roughly the same age as Mitchell? and 10 years later hes like a 2 or 3 star general aint he?

Uber
August 2nd, 2006, 11:42 PM
Added the spoiler tag because I'm still not 100% sure what needs the tag and what doesn't. But to the topic...

While debating in the 'Who should lead SG-1?' thread, it struck me that all the fuss over it could have been avoided with one very simple thing: making Mitchell and Carter of a different rank. Why was it the writers decided to make him a Lt Colonel?

On the one hand, they obviously wanted him to lead SG-1, and they knew Sam would be returning, so making him a full Colonel would make sense. But they didn't.

Making him a Major wasn't much of an option because it has repeatedly been mentioned that a Major wouldn't be assigned command of SG-1 - but then, if Sam was to be returning, he didn't really need to be put in command at all.Mitchell was intended to be a Major but some BRILLIANT PTB thought it'd be better to make him a Lt. Colonel.

And to that BRILLIANT PTB, I'd like to say THANK YOU from the bottom of my heart. /sarcasm

It's a shame because I think I might have liked Major Mitchell.

L.A. Doyle
August 2nd, 2006, 11:45 PM
It's a shame because I think I might have liked Major Mitchell.

Me too.

Major_Griff
August 2nd, 2006, 11:45 PM
wasn't RDA 46 or 47 when the series began? O'niell was full colonel was roughly the same age as Mitchell? and 10 years later hes like a 2 or 3 star general aint he?


2 stars... but he got his second star after just one year as a general becuase he was given a new position that they felt needed a two star general.

ReganX
August 3rd, 2006, 04:35 AM
Well. . . Ben's a touch too young to be a bird colonel anyway.

No he isn't. He was born in 1962, so he would have been old enough to have been recently promoted to full colonel. However, as Mitchell was supposedly born around 1970, he will not be eligible for promotion to full colonel for about five more years.

ShardsofGlass
August 3rd, 2006, 05:29 AM
Mitchell was intended to be a Major but some BRILLIANT PTB thought it'd be better to make him a Lt. Colonel.

And to that BRILLIANT PTB, I'd like to say THANK YOU from the bottom of my heart. /sarcasm

It's a shame because I think I might have liked Major Mitchell.

That's just speculation. THere's no proof that Mitchell was supposed to be a major. It really shouldn't stated as if it's a fact when it isn't.

I think the reason they wanted Mitchell and Carter to both be Lt. Colonels is so that they could be more casual with each other. Neither character wouldn't have to call the other one "sir" or "ma'am." Plus the writers could make Mitchell the leader and still have the egalitarian approach to leadership that they seem to favor right now. If Mitchell was a full colonel, then he'd probably be giving more orders and Carter would be more of a follower and less of a "peer."

Deevil
August 3rd, 2006, 05:33 AM
No, actually, there are many places (offical places) that state Mitchell was intended to be a Major. Even the Sci-Fi website had him listed as a Major.

TBH, I think the reason they are the same rank has nothing to do with not offending people, but so they could address each other by their first names... getting rid of the Sir/Ma'am crap.

ShardsofGlass
August 3rd, 2006, 05:35 AM
No, actually, there are many places (offical places) that state Mitchell was intended to be a Major. Even the Sci-Fi website had him listed as a Major.


Actually, I believe that it is ONLY the Scifi website where it was mentioned that Mitchell was a major. And that could be from any reason such as a simple mistake by whoever runs the website. It's no proof one way or another.

Deevil
August 3rd, 2006, 05:36 AM
Ohh no, I have read interviews where he was discribed as a Major. And TBH, I would accept a mistake if they called him a LT, or a Col. but to mistake it with a Major seems a stretch to me.

Descent
August 3rd, 2006, 05:36 AM
Ben is 43, and while I'm not quite sure how old Mitchell is supposed to be, I wouldn't say it is that far out of the realm of possibility for someone who is 43 to be a full bird colonel.

Camerons supposed to be 30 something. Personally, I like the fact Sam calls him by his name instead of rank and like you said making him a full fledged Colonel would just be unrealistic. Its already a stretch with him being a Lt. Colonel at his age.

ShardsofGlass
August 3rd, 2006, 05:40 AM
Ohh no, I have read interviews where he was discribed as a Major. And TBH, I would accept a mistake if they called him a LT, or a Col. but to mistake it with a Major seems a stretch to me.

Yeah, and maybe some magazine copied it from Scifi. Or the same typo went to two places. It's still not PROOF of anything other than poor fact checking at Scifi or wherever. And in the end, it doesn't matter because he was brought in as a Lt. Col. In fact, according to some fans who have done screen caps of the flashbacks from Avalon, Mitchell was a Lt. Col. before Carter.

ShardsofGlass
August 3rd, 2006, 05:43 AM
Camerons supposed to be 30 something. Personally, I like the fact Sam calls him by his name instead of rank and like you said making him a full fledged Colonel would just be unrealistic. Its already a stretch with him being a Lt. Colonel at his age.

He's probably in his late thirties because a spoiler for an upcoming ep kind of gives away his age. In the ep Mitchell goes to his high school reunion. If he was 17 or 18 when he graduated high school, and it's his 20th high school reunion, then he's 37 or 38 right now. I highly doubt it's his 15th high school reunion because then he'd be way too young. And 25th would make him in his 40s which doesn't jive with what we learned in Collateral Damage.

MarshAngel
August 3rd, 2006, 05:43 AM
Camerons supposed to be 30 something. Personally, I like the fact Sam calls him by his name instead of rank and like you said making him a full fledged Colonel would just be unrealistic. Its already a stretch with him being a Lt. Colonel at his age.

He's about 36. He was ten when he watched the Columbia lift off with his dad in 1981.

Deevil
August 3rd, 2006, 05:44 AM
Yeah, and maybe some magazine copied it from Scifi. Or the same typo went to two places. It's still not PROOF of anything other than poor fact checking at Scifi or wherever. And in the end, it doesn't matter because he was brought in as a Lt. Col. In fact, according to some fans who have done screen caps of the flashbacks from Avalon, Mitchell was a Lt. Col. before Carter.

Yeah, but it appears that Mitchell was intially intended to be a Major. People can comment on it (and incidently, getting a Major from a Lt. Col. is not what I would consider a typo, or incorrect fact checking) as they will.

And frankly, Mitchell could have been a ballet dancer before Avalon, that doesn't change the initial question of the thread - why they were made the same rank. Some people have commented he should have been a higher rank - which is fair enough. It is equally fair to comment that it appears he was meant to be a lower rank and they would have liked that better.

Teotl
August 3rd, 2006, 06:09 AM
When I first heard they were introducing a new military character to be played by Ben Browder, I assumed he would be a Major. However, the first official information regarding his rank that I heard placed him as a Lt. Colonel, which was confusing. Looking back, I too think that I would like a Major Mitchell. We've seen years of the person leading the team being sarcastic and irreverent, it would be interesting to see that kind of person as the 2IC. The team dynamic would be similar enough not to lose fans, but different enough to tell new stories.

I think it's most likely that TPTB wanted him to officially lead the team, but didn't want to annoy the Sam fans, so made them of equal rank. They seem to realise now that this was a bad idea, and will attempt to rectify it. The simplest way to do so would be to promote one of them.

ShardsofGlass
August 3rd, 2006, 06:14 AM
They seem to realise now that this was a bad idea, and will attempt to rectify it.

I'm curious. Why do you think they seem to realise this was a bad idea? I haven't heard them even address this topic in any interviews or articles anywhere.

ReganX
August 3rd, 2006, 06:19 AM
When I first heard they were introducing a new military character to be played by Ben Browder, I assumed he would be a Major. However, the first official information regarding his rank that I heard placed him as a Lt. Colonel, which was confusing. Looking back, I too think that I would like a Major Mitchell. We've seen years of the person leading the team being sarcastic and irreverent, it would be interesting to see that kind of person as the 2IC. The team dynamic would be similar enough not to lose fans, but different enough to tell new stories.

I think it's most likely that TPTB wanted him to officially lead the team, but didn't want to annoy the Sam fans, so made them of equal rank. They seem to realise now that this was a bad idea, and will attempt to rectify it. The simplest way to do so would be to promote one of them.

They can't promote Mitchell for at least a few more years and I don't see them promoting Sam.

I might have liked Major Mitchell. I don't see myself ever not hating the Mitchell they have now.

Teotl
August 3rd, 2006, 06:24 AM
I'm basing that purely on the fact they are actually going to address the question in a future episode. I think one of the spoilers indicated that Landy 'does something' about it.

If they were happy with the situation as it stands, they most likely wuldn't change anything. Of course, this is all based on spoilers for an episode that hasn't aired yet, so I could be wrong. Well, I could be wrong anyway.

Teotl
August 3rd, 2006, 06:27 AM
They can't promote Mitchell for at least a few more years and I don't see them promoting Sam.


I don't see them promoting Sam either, but as to what they can or cannot do, in essence it's still a TV show. If they want to promote him, they will do so, regardless of how the real USAF works. After all, I highly doubt the current situation would be allowed to happen in the real world.

Rachel500
August 3rd, 2006, 07:00 AM
at the start of season 9, they showed us that mitchell was given the command of his choice, and he chose sg-1. Carter was leaving the sgc, but eventually came back, only to join mitchell's team. on the reason why having him a lt. colonel, is b/c thats the next rank up. you can't skip ranks just to lead a team, he was a major before during the anubis battle, then he was given a promotion and a command of his choice.

In Avalon Mitchell wasn't offered the command of his choice, he was offered the assignment of his choice. He requested SG1 expecting to join the old SG1 led by Lt Col Carter. He was assigned as leader on his first day after being informed the rest of SG1 had left.

From a why Lt Col; from a military perspective presumably Mitchell had to be at least the same rank as Carter otherwise when she came back she would have resumed command as the senior officer and I'm happy to accept others comments that Mitchell is too young for a full Col under the current USAF promotion regs.

Personally I don't think the change of a rank from Lt Col to Col would have made much difference to my reaction in terms of Sam being shuffled out of the leadership because they had a new lead actor whether it was Lt Col or Col Mitchell who led SG1. It's still gender discrimination either way as far as I'm concerned.

ShardsofGlass
August 3rd, 2006, 07:34 AM
In Avalon Mitchell wasn't offered the command of his choice, he was offered the assignment of his choice. He requested SG1 expecting to join the old SG1 led by Lt Col Carter. He was assigned as leader on his first day after being informed the rest of SG1 had left.

From a why Lt Col; from a military perspective presumably Mitchell had to be at least the same rank as Carter otherwise when she came back she would have resumed command as the senior officer and I'm happy to accept others comments that Mitchell is too young for a full Col under the current USAF promotion regs.

Personally I don't think the change of a rank from Lt Col to Col would have made much difference to my reaction in terms of Sam being shuffled out of the leadership because they had a new lead actor whether it was Lt Col or Col Mitchell who led SG1. It's still gender discrimination either way as far as I'm concerned.

This comment about gender discrimination is always something I find interesting. Personally, I think you're right in that Mitchell became the leader because Ben was brought in as the lead actor. However, I disagree that it is necessarily discrimination. I mean, what if they had brought in another woman as the new lead actor and made her leader? I still think we'd be facing the same situation.

JudeMorrigan
August 3rd, 2006, 08:02 AM
Camerons supposed to be 30 something. Personally, I like the fact Sam calls him by his name instead of rank and like you said making him a full fledged Colonel would just be unrealistic. Its already a stretch with him being a Lt. Colonel at his age.

Well, if he's 36 it's not really a BIG stretch. Normal TIR for promtion to O5 is 16 years. While it's unusual for someone to receive their commission before their 21st birthday, I did know a few while I was at [Navy] OCS. And besides, as a Medal of Honor recipient, it seems quite possible for him to have been recommended for promotion to O5 even if he were below the zone. Up to 10% of officers being recommended for promtion in a competitive category can be.

But yes, full colonel would be pretty much impossible at the character's given age. Not that I'm sure TBTB really worry an awful lot about times in rank. :)

Cameron Mitchel
August 3rd, 2006, 09:28 AM
at the start of season 9, they showed us that mitchell was given the command of his choice, and he chose sg-1. Carter was leaving the sgc, but eventually came back, only to join mitchell's team. on the reason why having him a lt. colonel, is b/c thats the next rank up. you can't skip ranks just to lead a team, he was a major before during the anubis battle, then he was given a promotion and a command of his choice.
Wrong, it never said he was a Major in the battle over antarctica. he was a lt colonel, otherwise they would have had him getting a promotion, but he didnt, he got the Medal of Honor. Carter got promoted to Lt colonel only because she was going to lead the team in s8 and it wouldnt seem fitting to have a major leading sg1. Cuz she had just gotten promoted to Major a few seasons before that.

Cameron Mitchel
August 3rd, 2006, 09:29 AM
In Avalon Mitchell wasn't offered the command of his choice, he was offered the assignment of his choice. He requested SG1 expecting to join the old SG1 led by Lt Col Carter. He was assigned as leader on his first day after being informed the rest of SG1 had left.

From a why Lt Col; from a military perspective presumably Mitchell had to be at least the same rank as Carter otherwise when she came back she would have resumed command as the senior officer and I'm happy to accept others comments that Mitchell is too young for a full Col under the current USAF promotion regs.

Personally I don't think the change of a rank from Lt Col to Col would have made much difference to my reaction in terms of Sam being shuffled out of the leadership because they had a new lead actor whether it was Lt Col or Col Mitchell who led SG1. It's still gender discrimination either way as far as I'm concerned.
Why, because youre just dying to see AT in the spotlight?

IcyNeko
August 3rd, 2006, 09:34 AM
wasn't RDA 46 or 47 when the series began? O'niell was full colonel was roughly the same age as Mitchell? and 10 years later hes like a 2 or 3 star general aint he?
Guys... being a military colonel has a lot more to do with experience than it does with age. Yes, age is important, but Colonels are expected to have a lot of experience under their belt.

Colonel Jack O'Neill... black ops veteran..
Known field of operations: Iraq, Beruit...

Cameron Mitchel
August 3rd, 2006, 09:38 AM
youre right. No offense to any Carter fans, but I really dont see why Carter deserved two promotions. She got promoted to Major in what season? 3 or 4, any way, why did she deserve two promotions? Cmon, you shouldnt need to be a Lt Colonel or higher to lead a team.

Nefreyu
August 3rd, 2006, 09:45 AM
Wrong, it never said he was a Major in the battle over antarctica. he was a lt colonel, otherwise they would have had him getting a promotion, but he didnt, he got the Medal of Honor. Carter got promoted to Lt colonel only because she was going to lead the team in s8 and it wouldnt seem fitting to have a major leading sg1. Cuz she had just gotten promoted to Major a few seasons before that.

I don't know exactly when sam got promoted to Major but I do know that in season 3 she was a Major. In season 8 she was promoted to Lt. Colonel. At least 5 years in between advancements. The minimum time in grade from O-4 to O-5 is 3 years, on average it usually takes about 6 years. So 5 years for someone who saves the world numerous times isn't really that big of a stretch. To say she just got promoted so she could lead SG-1 is your opinion.

Cameron Mitchel
August 3rd, 2006, 09:51 AM
I'm saying that's the reason TPTB promoted her. But it never said that Mitchell got promoted to Lt Colonel after Sam, or even after the Battle of Antarctica. So I assume with the info and facts that we have that he was a Lt Colonel before the Battle of Antarctica.

Nefreyu
August 3rd, 2006, 10:01 AM
I'm saying that's the reason TPTB promoted her. But it never said that Mitchell got promoted to Lt Colonel after Sam, or even after the Battle of Antarctica. So I assume with the info and facts that we have that he was a Lt Colonel before the Battle of Antarctica.

It looks to me like he has Major patches sewn on his shoulders when he is briefing his team before the Anartica Battle.

I could be wrong I mean it's only a glimpse for like a tenth of a second.

Rachel500
August 3rd, 2006, 11:41 AM
Why, because youre just dying to see AT in the spotlight?

No.

I like SG1 because its primarily a team show made up of four (and now five) core characters. However, a female character was in the position of SG1 leader at the end of S8 and TPTB decided in S9 that the new male actor's character had to be the SG1 leader, (and therefore the same rank as Sam). Whether they did it to return to the S1-7 character formula or for demograpic or business reasons, that to me is simply gender discrimination whether it was conscious discrimination or not. That's why I was upset at a female character losing the position of SG1 leader and why it would not have made a difference to me if the ranks had been different or if indeed another character altogether had been introduced.

As it happens I like Mitchell and I'm a big fan of BB - still doesn't change my opinion that the female character losing the SG1 leader position was gender related and my initial reaction was one of disappointment with TPTB. If they had brought in an actress I wouldn't have the same view (although I would still expect a decent explanation of why Sam's character was no longer leader given I've enjoyed the character for 8 years plus).

And for the record I don't personally equate the role of the SG1 leader as needing to be the character, or indeed the actor, most in the 'spotlight'. It all comes down to how the stories are constructed. RDA was lead actor for a year without his character holding the position of SG1 leader.

DaveSG-3
August 3rd, 2006, 01:15 PM
Added the spoiler tag because I'm still not 100% sure what needs the tag and what doesn't. But to the topic...

While debating in the 'Who should lead SG-1?' thread, it struck me that all the fuss over it could have been avoided with one very simple thing: making Mitchell and Carter of a different rank. Why was it the writers decided to make him a Lt Colonel?

On the one hand, they obviously wanted him to lead SG-1, and they knew Sam would be returning, so making him a full Colonel would make sense. But they didn't.

Making him a Major wasn't much of an option because it has repeatedly been mentioned that a Major wouldn't be assigned command of SG-1 - but then, if Sam was to be returning, he didn't really need to be put in command at all.
maybe the sgc dosen't want them to out rank each other

katejones2005
August 4th, 2006, 10:49 PM
Hi guys,
This is a really interesting discussion and I'm learning a whole bunch about military ranking procedures but aren't we taking it a bit too far. TPTB decided to make Cam a Lt. Colonel along side Sam. If we're going to question why Cam is what he is, shouldn't we question why Jack was promoted to a two star not even a year after first becoming a general? Also on some ofthe remarks as to why Sam wasn't given command of SG-1 after she did a great job in S8, Amanda had her little girl right at the beginning of filming-plus she wanted to actually spend time with her so she wouldn't be able to be on screen as much as some of us would have liked--i.e. not commanding the *star* team, thus TPTB had to make up for that loss-in comes Cam. It's only gender based because Amanda is a woman who gave birth and needed time with that part of her life. I think Cam is in control of the team on paper and they all respect him but Sam (along with Daniel and Teal'c) are showing him the how-to and goings'on of the SGC. It's a joint effort between the four (and with the addition of Vala, now five) of them to make the new SG-1 work. I'd love to see an ep (or two...) where Sam takes the lead because we all know she can do it (she's done it before) but I would also like to see more of the commander in Cam, right now it seems as if they're writing him in awe of the rest of SG-1 (rightly so) but he's a great character with the potential to win over as many fans as Jack did if he's ever given the chance to fiercely protect his team.