PDA

View Full Version : who hates that guy in the 'heroes' episode



rebel jaffa
May 7th, 2004, 09:53 AM
i 4 got his name he was documenting about the stargate ( little short p***k)
every time he talked i wanted 2 kill him

Who agrees??

Anubis
May 7th, 2004, 09:54 AM
I'm guessing you're talking about the document writer to was in charge of filming the documentary. He wanted footage and wanted to go to great lengths to get some action. I ahve to agree, he was very annoying!

rebel jaffa
May 7th, 2004, 10:00 AM
yep thats the guy AGHHHHHHHHH id kick him till he were mush

bcmilco
May 7th, 2004, 10:01 AM
I didn't like him in the first half of the 2 parter, but what he had to say, and his actions in the second half redeemed his character for me.

rebel jaffa
May 7th, 2004, 10:01 AM
sorry abt that......i just watched the episode again today

spg_1983
May 7th, 2004, 10:29 AM
he was trying to do his job as requested of him by the PRESIDENT!! he was trying to show how hard the people there work and what they go through everyday and they gave him nothing but a hard time about it. they were down right hostile. i found the attitudes of the team (with the exception of maybe sam) absolutely reprehensible. oneills "I hope shots of my ass serve you well" was the worst he was tottaly ignorant and an ass (god i can just imagine the flames im gonna get for that last part)

Anubis
May 7th, 2004, 10:35 AM
*I guess you're a UK resident and watched it on Sky One today, Rebel Jeffa?*


Anyway, although the President did authorise him to do the documentary I think it was quite pointless of that really since it wasn't going public anyway

bcmilco
May 7th, 2004, 10:50 AM
he was trying to do his job as requested of him by the PRESIDENT!! he was trying to show how hard the people there work and what they go through everyday and they gave him nothing but a hard time about it. they were down right hostile. i found the attitudes of the team (with the exception of maybe sam) absolutely reprehensible. oneills "I hope shots of my ass serve you well" was the worst he was tottaly ignorant and an ass (god i can just imagine the flames im gonna get for that last part)

Not a flame. :p He might have been trying to do his job in the Heroes Part 1 I felt like he was doing a lot digging and I wasn't sure if he was trying to portray the SGC in a good or bad light, thus I didn't like him in the first half. I was leary of him and his actions.

However in the Heroes Part 2 he proved that his actions were honorable and honest and that he was trying to show the SGC in a good light, thus I thought he redeemed himself.

I can understand Jack's reluctance to trust Beckmen, but I also agree that Jack was a bit of an ass towards him.

You have to admit though that it was a very O'Neill comment especially since Beckmen had been harassing him :p

SGSlugger
May 7th, 2004, 10:58 AM
He was noisy :p If YOU got a chance to go visit the 'real' SGC, wouldn't you be trying to photograph and get footage of everything you could?

His character was annoying for the first part, and I also agree that he redeemed himself in part 2.

rebel jaffa
May 7th, 2004, 11:02 AM
yeah i watched it 2day on sky1 its still a kool episode just he was in it thats all

spg_1983
May 7th, 2004, 11:09 AM
*I guess you're a UK resident and watched it on Sky One today, Rebel Jeffa?*


Anyway, although the President did authorise him to do the documentary I think it was quite pointless of that really since it wasn't going public anyway
the point was that the stargate program will go public someday and when that happens they want to show that the SGC wasnt some secret evil nefarious organization doing horrible things and thats why it was secret. they want to be able to show how imprtant and noble the work they are doing is, and the ffact that they face danger every single day to keep the planet safe, and do so because they actually care, and dont get any of the glory normally associated with that kind of work

spg_1983
May 7th, 2004, 11:13 AM
You have to admit though that it was a very O'Neill comment especially since Beckmen had been harassing him :p
it could have been a very oneill comment except for the way it was delivered. the way it was delivered made oneill just seem like a self important, jerk. the look on his face is very disturbing because it makes it seem like he is this really mean, guy. a friend of mine who does not really watch stargate was watching that episode with me and when that scene happend he asked if that was the same guy from other episodes because he seemed like a very unpleasent unlikable character. thats what did it for me. if someone can see that scene and get the impression that oniell is this horrible horrible person, then there is something seriously wrong.

AgentOfApophis
May 7th, 2004, 11:17 AM
I agree, I thought he was an ass in the first half of the episode, and I think he did a little too much digging and trying to portray SG-1 in a poor light...

But I really do think he redeemed himself in the second episide, which is now probably one of my favorite ones ever, despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that the ending was so sad.

rebel jaffa
May 7th, 2004, 11:19 AM
wot?????? id do the same asa jack i wudnt want 2 b nagged by sum little gimp u already told 2 shove it.. :D :D :D :D :D :D

spg_1983
May 7th, 2004, 11:21 AM
wot?????? id do the same asa jack i wudnt want 2 b nagged by sum little gimp u already told 2 shove it.. :D :D :D :D :D :D
they were under presidential orders to allow the guy access and interviews! jack was just being extremely petty and ignorant.

Major Clanger
May 7th, 2004, 11:24 AM
I have to admit that I agree with you. Jack was being childish.

Having said that, if someone had tried to film my unit when I was serving, we would have most likely said nothing, or made up a whole bunch of stuff

;)

bcmilco
May 7th, 2004, 11:26 AM
if someone can see that scene and get the impression that oniell is this horrible horrible person, then there is something seriously wrong.

I hadn't thought of it like that... If you don't have the background for the character I guess it would come off as pretty nasty. :S

Teal'c
May 7th, 2004, 11:28 AM
I love Saul Rubenik and I love Bregman! :D

spg_1983
May 7th, 2004, 12:38 PM
I hadn't thought of it like that... If you don't have the background for the character I guess it would come off as pretty nasty. :S
yeah but you shouldnt need to know the back ground to be able to tell what kind of character jack is. if you take any scene with him from other seasons and episodes you can tell right away what kind of guy jack is and you dont need to see the entire back ground. the scene was very out of character for jack because there was no real joking ness or brevity in it, it was just very malicious and meant to be insulting. definately not the jack we know and love. my hope is that it was not meant to be that way and it was just a bad take, end of the day whatever and there was time to reshoot the scene. if that is the direction the writers are taking oneill im not sure i like that

bcmilco
May 7th, 2004, 12:49 PM
the scene was very out of character for jack because there was no real joking ness or brevity in it, it was just very malicious and meant to be insulting. definately not the jack we know and love. my hope is that it was not meant to be that way and it was just a bad take, end of the day whatever and there was time to reshoot the scene.

I've noticed that a lot of the scenes I consider to be substandard with regards to Jack and some of his comments tend to seem less... polished. They don't have the same qulity and I tend to think that it is due to the fact that they have less time to shoot. :( :S


if that is the direction the writers are taking oneill im not sure i like that

Me either.

I'm especially disapointed with a scene I've heard about in season 8 if it plays out...

spoilers for New Order s8
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)

I've heard that one of the takes when They are introducing Gen. O'Neill for the first time RDA passed gas and when the door opens he's waving his hand behind him... IMO For the future Gen. in charge of the SGC that just seems so inapropriate, and I really hope they don't use that scene in the episode.

That said I would love to see it on the out-takes reel :p :)

stargate barbie
May 7th, 2004, 07:07 PM
I've noticed that a lot of the scenes I consider to be substandard with regards to Jack and some of his comments tend to seem less... polished. They don't have the same qulity and I tend to think that it is due to the fact that they have less time to shoot. :( :S



Me either.

I'm especially disapointed with a scene I've heard about in season 8 if it plays out...

spoilers for New Order s8
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)

I've heard that one of the takes when They are introducing Gen. O'Neill for the first time RDA passed gas and when the door opens he's waving his hand behind him... IMO For the future Gen. in charge of the SGC that just seems so inapropriate, and I really hope they don't use that scene in the episode.

That said I would love to see it on the out-takes reel :p :)

i like bregman in a similar way to kinsey in part one and in part two i like him in a similar way to mckay.

as for RDA's comments in the episode, i thought it was very jack and have no problem so far with his behaviour. i still enjoy the characters quirks immensely.

the rumoured scene for season 8's new order, as mentioned in the above quote, i seriously cannot imagine them using that in the final cut. as far as i know that was just a funny story from the set, in relation to flatulance among the male cast members. i would be very surprised if that take was used, but then again, thats what i thought about the season 7 opener and the following lines; "you are jaffa?" "no, but he plays one on tv". i saw it in a behind the scenes bit first, and was shocked (but amused) to see it in the final cut.

bcmilco
May 7th, 2004, 07:43 PM
Spoiler Space New Order s8
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)

I'm really hoping that that scene doesn't make the final cut, it would be a terrible way to introduce a new Jack, and it would turn General O'Neill in to a clown. Who's going to respect a clown as a leader?

However I wouldn't put it passed RDA to keep it in. :S

As for the "no, but he plays one on TV" I think a comment like that is in the higher/better class then Gen. O'Neill passing gas.

Anthro Girl
May 8th, 2004, 12:23 AM
I've always liked Saul Rubinek and thought he was great in Heroes 1&2. Bregman was supposed to be annoying...a stereotypical self-serving, ulterior-motive type of "journalist" who didn't quite grasp the scope of what he was covering. He did eventually redeem himself, I guess, even if it was in a trite, overused, made-for-tv-movie manner.

spg_1983
May 8th, 2004, 09:51 AM
I've always liked Saul Rubinek and thought he was great in Heroes 1&2. Bregman was supposed to be annoying...a stereotypical self-serving, ulterior-motive type of "journalist" who didn't quite grasp the scope of what he was covering. He did eventually redeem himself, I guess, even if it was in a trite, overused, made-for-tv-movie manner.

bregman wasn't annoying and the point was that he DID grasp the scope of what he was covering and the the SGC personel didnt grasp the scope of it.

and as a journalist i resent the implication that we are self-serving and have ulterior motives :p thats how the papparazzi are, the rest of us arnt like that....for the most part

bcmilco
May 8th, 2004, 09:59 AM
bregman wasn't annoying and the point was that he DID grasp the scope of what he was covering and the the SGC personel didnt grasp the scope of it.

In retrospect I think both sides knew how big the scope was, but the SGC personel didn't know that Bergman knew. They also didn't know that Bergman was going to do it justice, so I can understand them being leary around him.

And as a person who REALLY doesn't like to be in front of a camera, I can feel for them. :p

spg_1983
May 8th, 2004, 10:09 AM
In retrospect I think both sides knew how big the scope was, but the SGC personel didn't know that Bergman knew. They also didn't know that Bergman was going to do it justice, so I can understand them being leary around him.

And as a person who REALLY doesn't like to be in front of a camera, I can feel for them. :p
ah but there is a difference between being leary and being being downright hostile. sam could be classified as leary because she wasnt sure about it but still went along and was helpful, daniel wasnt exactly helpful but was still better than the rest, everyone else was just down right hostile toward bregman, and was tottaly inappropriate toward him

MagnoliaAnaglypta
May 8th, 2004, 11:09 AM
he was trying to do his job as requested of him by the PRESIDENT!! he was trying to show how hard the people there work and what they go through everyday and they gave him nothing but a hard time about it. they were down right hostile. i found the attitudes of the team (with the exception of maybe sam) absolutely reprehensible. oneills "I hope shots of my ass serve you well" was the worst he was tottaly ignorant and an ass (god i can just imagine the flames im gonna get for that last part)
I agree with you completely. I was very disappointed in the attitudes of the SGC regulars in this episode. Even given that they had had trouble with press before, and that they knew the order itself was politically motivated, they all came across as people who were deeply resentful of the need for what they did to be documented, and also quite afraid at the idea that the program would go public one day. I kind of got the impression in this episode that they viewed the stargate program as their own personal little club that they didn't want anybody to disturb. If that is the case, then they are more than overdue for an attitude adjustment, since their salaries and activities are funded by the American public and they are therefore answerable to them, even if only through an oversight committee.

Eventually, the SGC and the Stargate will have to become public knowledge, and the President was absolutely right to think that one of the ways to smooth that path would be to have some sensible, responsible, pro-SGC reporting prepared and ready to go in that eventuality. But no one in the SGC seemed willing to give Bregman the chance to prove them wrong about him. It was clear from very early on in the first episode, I thought, that he was actually 'on their side' and should have been allowed much more access.

I also agreed *completely* with his words about secrecy and the military. I think they deliberately made him rather socially inept so that we, as audience, didn't automatically feel attracted to his personality. In consequence, in the end, he stood on his own merits, not on how much he could charm people.

Lil Naitch
May 8th, 2004, 11:17 AM
you know, I keep missing this episode. The first time was due to it looking stupid, the second time was because I went to the movies.

bcmilco
May 8th, 2004, 12:43 PM
ah but there is a difference between being leary and being being downright hostile.

I agree, which is why I said this in my first post:


I can understand Jack's reluctance to trust Beckmen, but I also agree that Jack was a bit of an ass towards him.

majorsal
May 9th, 2004, 07:31 PM
i 4 got his name he was documenting about the stargate ( little short p***k)
every time he talked i wanted 2 kill him

Who agrees??


I liked Emmet Bregman a lot. Yeah, he had a bit of tabloid journalism in him, but I think he sincerely wanted to do a good job of recording the lives of the ppl of the SGC. Sam and Janet were pretty honest with him -as much as possible- but Jack, Teal'c, and even Daniel a bit were giving him a hard time. The main opposition to him being there was that they didn't want to do the interviews. Once they realized that he was the lesser of two evils -Kinsey being the first evil- they started to open up to him. And then after Janet died, they really started to see his sincerity. The last scene(s) showed that even Hammond and Jack were seeing him and his contribution differently. Personally, I wouldn't mind a person like him documenting the events going on in Irac right now. The truth is important, and like Bregman was trying to say to one of his assistants, it's the secrets that can hurt us the most (big paraphrasing there).

Sally :)

Liebestraume
May 10th, 2004, 06:02 PM
Bregman was a very effective character. Besides being the protagonist who set the "A-plot" in motion, his characterization also served a very subtle "C-plot" point. At least IMHO.

Bregman did not start as a very appealing character. He gave every indication of being a typical tabloid reporter, who had little interest in who his subjects were as people, except the sensational value their private lives could provide. However, as we discovered later on, lurking beneath the veneer of cynacism was a decent man who had not completely forgotten the higher purpose of journalism. Being around the honorable people of SGC and bearing witness to their heroism finally inspired Bregman to be a better man, the journalist that he could and should be. And, somehow, I think that is what heroism does for ordinary people and, hence, why the documentary was so important in the first place.

MAJKawalsky
May 10th, 2004, 06:43 PM
Actually, I hated everyone else in "Heroes" part 1 (except Janet). Everyone was so rude to Emmit, except Sam (who was so ditsy in front of the camera), very out of character IMO. :eek:

I did think that Emmit nailed them in "Heroes" part 2 with his speech: "What do you think they are doing out there, protecting and defending? Secrecy? That's the world of Mao. The world of Stalin. The world of secret police. Secret trials. Secret...secret deaths. You force the press into the cold and all you will get is lies and innuendo. And nothing! Nothing is worse for a free society than a press that is in service to the [false gods of the] military and politicians. Nothing!" I added the the words in the brackets because I thought that it added a delicious touch of irony considering who the SGC is fighting against and it seems right in line with what Emmet is railing against.

Maj. Kawalsky

bcmilco
May 10th, 2004, 07:29 PM
Bregman did not start as a very appealing character. He gave every indication of being a typical tabloid reporter, who had little interest in who his subjects were as people, except the sensational value their private lives could provide. However, as we discovered later on, lurking beneath the veneer of cynacism was a decent man who had not completely forgotten the higher purpose of journalism. Being around the honorable people of SGC and bearing witness to their heroism finally inspired Bregman to be a better man, the journalist that he could and should be. And, somehow, I think that is what heroism does for ordinary people and, hence, why the documentary was so important in the first place.

Very nicely said. I feel so inadequate when people post stuff like that :o

Of course it won't stop me from posting :p

bcmilco
May 10th, 2004, 07:38 PM
except Sam (who was so ditsy in front of the camera), very out of character IMO. :eek:

I like to consider myself a pretty self-confident and self assured kinda guy, and I can get up in front of a small group and be very confident and poised, but put me up in front of a large group or a camera and I get nervous and say dumb stuff. I've gotten better, but I'm still not great, so I could totally relate to her in those scenes, so I didn't feel it was all that out of character. :)

just my 2 cents

MAJKawalsky
May 10th, 2004, 08:51 PM
I like to consider myself a pretty self-confident and self assured kinda guy, and I can get up in front of a small group and be very confident and poised, but put me up in front of a large group or a camera and I get nervous and say dumb stuff. I've gotten better, but I'm still not great, so I could totally relate to her in those scenes, so I didn't feel it was all that out of character. :)

just my 2 cents

Granted that most of us, myself included, get nervous in front of the camera, I just did not like the way that TPTB portrayed Sam. Neither Tel'c, Daniel, nor Janet were as scatter-brained as Sam. Just disappointing from a character I had come to believe is cool under fire.

Maj. Kawalsky

Torley
June 2nd, 2004, 10:01 PM
Ha, does anyone else remember Rubinek from Star Trek: TNG as Kivas Fajo? He was annoying that too! I don't think he's that way in real life... but he sure does play annoying well!

SeaBee
June 19th, 2004, 07:33 AM
I disliked the film-maker on sight, but then I'm biased, as I've yet to like a character the actor has portrayed. I know it's irrational, but I just don't like them. :(

I'm not having a go at the actor, btw, just the parts he's played.

Lostinmyownvoid
July 2nd, 2004, 06:54 PM
I really liked Bregman from hereos part I but his tirade in Part II just won me over:
"...What do you think they're doing out there ... protect and defending secrecy! That's a word of Mau and Stalin and secret police, secret trials ... secret ... secret deaths. You force the press into the cold and all you will get is lies and innuendo and nothing. Nothing is worse for a free society than a press that is in service to the ... to the military and the politicians. Nothing. You turn that camera off when I tell you to turn it off. You think I give a damn what you think about me? You serve the people ... So do I! "

Uncle Dick
September 23rd, 2004, 09:22 PM
Ha, does anyone else remember Rubinek from Star Trek: TNG as Kivas Fajo? He was annoying that too! I don't think he's that way in real life... but he sure does play annoying well!
I remembered him most clearly from the Holocaust episode of The Outer Limits where he plays a sympathetic character trying to expose an old Nazi dude. Because of that, I started out liking him and found him to be the best part of the otherwise weird (in a bad way) Heroes two-parter. His conversation with Daniel was ultra awesome.