Why add Woolsey to the main cast?

[Daniel Jackson]

I like Woolsey as a recurring guest star representative of the IOA, but... most of his appearances (if not all) feature him making catastrophic decissions with SG-1 or Sheppard's team having to clean up the mess. Why on Earth is he being added to the main cast, and why as the Atlantis Expedition leader? I've nothing against Picardo, it's just... it's like putting Kinsey or Maybourne in charge.

[Madeleine]

Much Drama stems from problems and conflicts and danger. Woolsey will provide all three

[Daniel Jackson]

I agree, but isn't that why they use the Stargate to go off world so problems, conflicts, and danger can... gee... happen off world or follow them back to Atlantis? It makes no sense to bring in a new leader who's purpose is to cause problems. That's just stupid. Why put someone in leadership who's demonstrated that he has no leadership skills at all? I'm all for bringing Woolsey to Atlantis as a regular, but... I just feel the role he has is completely wrong for the character.

[Briangate78]

Much Drama stems from problems and conflicts and danger. Woolsey will provide all three

^^ What she said.

[Daniel Jackson]

See my above post in response to what he said. I'm curious as to what ya'll have to say in response.

[Falcon Horus]

Much Drama stems from problems and conflicts and danger. Woolsey will provide all three

And you really think we will get to see that... with the current show runners, who said the same about Carter... There would be friction and conflict... mmm... didn't see it then... probably not going to see it with Woolsey.

[Pandora's_Box]

Rodney McKay's first appearance on SG-1 was the episode '48 hours' wherein his only purpose was to be an extreme character foil for Carter. He was arrogant, condescending, brash. He was a veritable a**hole to her and treated her with extreme disrespect. On top of that, he was very, very wrong about the situation he was brought in to 'help' fix.

His next appearance in the season 6 (I think) season premiere 2-parter redeemed him a little but he didn't really serve more of a purpose than the first time.

TPTB on any show make a habit of using guest characters and sometimes recurring characters (obviously with some exception like Zelenka and Lorne) to bolster the main characters' credibility and abiitities as soldiers, scientists, what-have-you.

Personally, I love Woolsey and Robert Picardo and I think his addition to the cast as Commander of Atlantis will bring up some very interesting topics for the show to discuss.

From what we know of him, he is a man very used to following the rules and doing everything by the book. But we've also seen that he willing to omit certain facts from reports and keep certain things from the IOA because he does realize that the IOA does not in fact want or need to know everything.

I'm interested to see how he balances his duties and responsibilities to Atlantis and Pegasus with his loyalty to the IOA.

This should make for a very interesting season 5.

[Naonak]

I like Woolsey as a recurring guest star representative of the IOA, but... most of his appearances (if not all) feature him making catastrophic decissions with SG-1 or Sheppard's team having to clean up the mess. Why on Earth is he being added to the main cast, and why as the Atlantis Expedition leader? I've nothing against Picardo, it's just... it's like putting Kinsey or Maybourne in charge.

Are you asking why the producers are doing it, or why the IOA are doing it?

I would think the producers are doing it because they think that the character (and actor) can bring something to the show, and the IOA are doing it because they're a bunch of moronic, control-freak bureaucrats...

[Daniel Jackson]

Personally, I love Woolsey and Robert Picardo and I think his addition to the cast as Commander of Atlantis will bring up some very interesting topics for the show to discuss.

What makes you think he'd make a good leader? Have we seen a single episode where his decissions didn't backfire? The only one I can think of is SG-1 "Inauguration" when he learnes that Kinsey was the wrong man to ally with.

From what we know of him, he is a man very used to following the rules and doing everything by the book. But we've also seen that he willing to omit certain facts from reports and keep certain things from the IOA because he does realize that the IOA does not in fact want or need to know everything.

How does doing everything by the book and occasionally omitting stuff from reports make someone a good leader? What does any of that have to do with leadership?

Are you asking why the producers are doing it, or why the IOA are doing it?

I'm asking why the producers are doing it. The IOA want an opperative in Atlantis, so choosing their own leader is their tream come true.

I would think the producers are doing it because they think that the character (and actor) can bring something to the show

I understand that much. What I don't understand is why they think Woolsey will make a good leader when all previous appearances have shown that he's not?

[Briangate78]

Are you asking why the producers are doing it, or why the IOA are doing it?

I would think the producers are doing it because they think that the character (and actor) can bring something to the show, and the IOA are doing it because they're a bunch of moronic, control-freak bureaucrats...

I think Woolsey brought to the show, and made it more interesting. It's like everytime I saw Richard Woolsey in the credits, I said to myself it will be an interesting episode with some conflict. I personally want to see him being an @ss in the beginning and then becoming softer and then eventually respected by the Atlantis team.

We did not get that with Carter. She came on, did her job, and did not have conflict or drama with the other team members. I missed that. Season one with Weir and Sheppard struck a lot of conflict. I also loved how everytime the military would try to push Weir aside she was strong and made it known that she is important and in charge.

[Falcon Horus]

...and the IOA are doing it because they're a bunch of moronic, control-freak bureaucrats...

We call them Vogons. And proceed with caution when they want to read their poetry to you.

[Naonak]

I understand that much. What I don't understand is why they think Woolsey will make a good leader when all previous appearances have shown that he's not?

Who says they do?

(If they have, feel free to correct me... )

We call them Vogons. And proceed with caution when they want to read their poetry to you.

Ah, random Hitch-Hiker's Guide references... Always good.

[Madeleine]

I agree, but isn't that why they use the Stargate to go off world so problems, conflicts, and danger can... gee... happen off world or follow them back to Atlantis? It makes no sense to bring in a new leader who's purpose is to cause problems. That's just stupid. Why put someone in leadership who's demonstrated that he has no leadership skills at all? I'm all for bringing Woolsey to Atlantis as a regular, but... I just feel the role he has is completely wrong for the character.

Agreed, the role is wrong for the character. But whereas before whenever I've said that I've simply been disagreeing with TPTB, I am pretty sure that TPTB themselves see Woolsey as not heroic-leader material, and so will make something out of that.

Yes, they can easilly make all the drama they want from the Stargate trips, but a trip through the gate can be even more dramatic for a team who don't know if their base will support them as they should....

Anyway, it could all end up being a mess, but it doesn't have to. I'm in wait-and-see mode, with positive leanings since I enjoyed s4.

[Pandora's_Box]

What makes you think he'd make a good leader? Have we seen a single episode where his decissions didn't backfire? The only one I can think of is SG-1 "Inauguration" when he learnes that Kinsey was the wrong man to ally with.


How does doing everything by the book and occasionally omitting stuff from reports make someone a good leader? What does any of that have to do with leadership?


I'm asking why the producers are doing it. The IOA want an opperative in Atlantis, so choosing their own leader is their tream come true.


I understand that much. What I don't understand is why they think Woolsey will make a good leader when all previous appearances have shown that he's not?

I never said I thought he would make a good leader because as you pointed out, we haven't seen enough of him to come to that conclusion.

My main point was that what we do know of him has been in the capacity of a recurring star and I mentioned my ideas on why those characters are brought onto a show.

I did say, however, that his addition will be an interesting one and I think people should keep their minds open to the possibility that one TPTB begin to develop the character, we might be surprised by what we learn about Woolsey.

I reiterate this point, because I think it's very important, we have ONLY seen him in the capacity of guest star. Before seeing McKay on SGA I have to admit that although I liked seeing a completely irreverant scientist standing up to Carter, I didn't like the character. Nor do I think anybody could have envisioned that he would become such a well-developed and much-loved character on SGA.

I'm just saying keep an open mind. Don't go in with negativity and expectations of crash-and-burn failure. It's not fair to the show, the writers, or Picardo.

[Madeleine]

And you really think we will get to see that... with the current show runners, who said the same about Carter... There would be friction and conflict... mmm... didn't see it then... probably not going to see it with Woolsey.

Did they say that with Carter?

But they never did much conflict with Carter and anyone-not-a-villain/fool. Carter argued with Maybourne, Kinsey, Woolsey, that general in Chain of Command.... The only 'good guy' she does conflict with has been Rodney, and as a character he was brought in in 48 Hours specifically to wind her up.

Woolsey on the other hand gets to argue with allcomers. I reckon we're reasonably likely to get some real conflict of some degree or other.