PDA

View Full Version : Ageism?



kirmit
September 19th, 2008, 12:49 PM
Looking through alot of the threads in this part of the boards I've noticed alot of people making comments about SGU being lame and sucking because TPTB have opted for a younger cast. Now I may be wrong but does this not count as ageism? People are descriminating against the show because the actors/characters will be of a younger age, this does not mean they won't bring emotion, experience, intelligence to the show, that you won't be able to connect with the characters because of their age. I personally look forward to it, much as I love stargate for me the formula was getting stale, Atlantis was basically following the same path as SG-1, it was time to shake things up, add something new to the franchise, a younger cast may be one factor that'll assist this.

NKDietrich
September 19th, 2008, 12:59 PM
I don't think "discrimination" in the sense you mean it applies to what kind of TV shows someone likes.

I think that age is an important factor. In Science Fiction, when they intentionally cast young and inexperienced, the character inevitably becomes a whiny emotional mess. Maybe they'll get it right with Universe, but the character descriptions we have make them sound like teenagers in emotional turmoil, not more mature, grown up 20-somethings.

Hopefully these characteristics don't show up in the actual show.

Madeleine
September 19th, 2008, 01:02 PM
Young actors are often quite startlingly good, and there's no reason why the SGU cast can't be excellent.

I suspect that people's worries are not just about the youth, skills or (in)experience of the cast, but about the fact that the parts usually written for young people, even on good shows, tend to be adolescent angst types of roles.

(I'm thinking for instance of Veronica Mars, which is acted superbly, and written really well, but has less interest for me than it would have fifteen years ago; because all the turmoil and stuff that the central characters are going through, I'm way past.)

kirmit
September 19th, 2008, 01:05 PM
NKDietrich- I'm talking about the comments made on this forum, when people say the show is going to suck simply because there's a younger cast that is ageism, a form of descrimination. Now if you don't like the character descriptions, fair enough, but some people have instantly began bad mouthing the show because the the majority of the cast are in there 20's.

Madeleine
September 19th, 2008, 01:08 PM
some people have instantly began bad mouthing the show because the the majority of the cast are in there 20's.

We don't know who the cast are yet.

People's 'badmouthing' is so far based entirely on the ages and character-descriptions of the *characters*, not the cast.

To be fair, the characters are a large part of what makes a show what it is, and so it does seem one of the less unreasonable things to get worked up over, in the grand scheme of things :)

kirmit
September 19th, 2008, 01:11 PM
We don't know who the cast are yet.

People's 'badmouthing' is so far based entirely on the ages and character-descriptions of the *characters*, not the cast.

To be fair, the characters are a large part of what makes a show what it is, and so it does seem one of the less unreasonable things to get worked up over, in the grand scheme of things :)

I meant characters :cameron:.

I have no problem with people getting 'worked up' over the character descriptions, I'm solely taking about the people who have made up their minds that the show will suck because of a younger cast. It's basically like saying, all 20 year olds are immature, therefore these characters will be, again I'm not directing this at the people who don't like the character descriptions but the people who are basing their negativity solely on the age factor.

NKDietrich
September 19th, 2008, 01:14 PM
We don't know who the cast are yet.

People's 'badmouthing' is so far based entirely on the ages and character-descriptions of the *characters*, not the cast.

To be fair, the characters are a large part of what makes a show what it is, and so it does seem one of the less unreasonable things to get worked up over, in the grand scheme of things :)

Exactly. If the descriptions hadn't read so much like a list of "those people you didn't really like in high school", there wouldn't be so much worry. It isn't so much their age. In fact I think 20-25 year olds can be plenty mature. I am only 25 myself. I worry that they are making 20-25 year olds who act like 15-19 year olds.

kirmit
September 19th, 2008, 01:21 PM
Exactly. If the descriptions hadn't read so much like a list of "those people you didn't really like in high school", there wouldn't be so much worry. It isn't so much their age. In fact I think 20-25 year olds can be plenty mature. I am only 25 myself. I worry that they are making 20-25 year olds who act like 15-19 year olds.

This was happening even before the character descriptions came out though, people had already condemned the show because of the age of the characters, the character descriptions have only given those people more reason. I'm not aiming this at the people who aren't happy with the immaturity of the character descriptions, I myself aren't 100% happy with them, I was just addressing the problem of people making the ages a factor even before they knew what the characters would be like.

NKDietrich
September 19th, 2008, 01:30 PM
I was just addressing the problem of people making the ages a factor even before they knew what the characters would be like.

I think part of that was the fact that the information they released prior to this indicated they were trying to target a younger audience and everyone imagined that one scene from "200".

The_Carpenter
September 19th, 2008, 01:49 PM
Exactly. If the descriptions hadn't read so much like a list of "those people you didn't really like in high school", there wouldn't be so much worry. It isn't so much their age. In fact I think 20-25 year olds can be plenty mature. I am only 25 myself. I worry that they are making 20-25 year olds who act like 15-19 year olds.
Indeed.... I'm 23 and these characters sound just..... diabolically awful. To be perfectly honest I find the fact that TPTB think that I ( a Bachelors of Science with Honours) would appreciate and relate to these jock/ socially inept genius/ spoiled rich b**** socialite cookie cutter characters utterly insulting!

Moao
September 19th, 2008, 02:43 PM
Im 19, the char. sound terrible. Does that make me ageist against my self?

Rise Of The Phoenix
September 19th, 2008, 04:04 PM
I'm just gonna wait and see what the character's are like in the pilot to form my opinion.
You can't really know until it's aired.

JohnDuh
September 19th, 2008, 04:28 PM
Looking through alot of the threads in this part of the boards I've noticed alot of people making comments about SGU being lame and sucking because TPTB have opted for a younger cast. Now I may be wrong but does this not count as ageism?

No, not in the least. People are not criticizing some non existing people of a certain age, they are criticizing the people (of varying ages) who have CHOSEN that group. Very different.

Of course those older and more experienced know that US TV is only for the money, and know the way it moves - this new layout is to get rid of older fans in the hope of snagging younger and more eager buyers.



I personally look forward to it,


How old are you? ;)



... much as I love stargate for me the formula was getting stale, Atlantis was basically following the same path as SG-1, it was time to shake things up, add something new to the franchise, a younger cast may be one factor that'll assist this.

I entirely doubt it - what would be required would be to get rid of all the old producers and writers and directors and hire new ones. Some for whom its not just a meal ticket, someone who won't accept improvisation on stage, someone who actually tells the actors what to do instead of proudly admit on DVD's "I didn't have to do a thing!"

Of course not gonna happen, because there is money in a younger audience - they haven't see as much as the old farts and are easily impressed ;-)

SamJackShipper93
September 19th, 2008, 05:14 PM
I'm only 15, and I've never ever had a problem that SG-1 and SGA has an "older" cast. In fact, I think it's important to have characters who have a longer, more formed back story. Jack O'Neill is the perfect example. Through Sara, Charlie, Colonel Frank Cromwell, and others, we got a nice background that really brought out the depth of the character.

Even though it's obvious that most of the characters' developement will actually be done during the series, I still think that it's nice to have something to work off of, and I'm not talking about the spoiled party girl senator's daughter.

andy tyler
September 20th, 2008, 01:17 AM
Looking through alot of the threads in this part of the boards I've noticed alot of people making comments about SGU being lame and sucking because TPTB have opted for a younger cast. Now I may be wrong but does this not count as ageism? People are descriminating against the show because the actors/characters will be of a younger age, this does not mean they won't bring emotion, experience, intelligence to the show, that you won't be able to connect with the characters because of their age. I personally look forward to it, much as I love stargate for me the formula was getting stale, Atlantis was basically following the same path as SG-1, it was time to shake things up, add something new to the franchise, a younger cast may be one factor that'll assist this.

who said nobody likes younger actors? 90210 gets more viewers than Stargate...

Anda
September 20th, 2008, 01:48 AM
save SGA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:jack_new_anime25::tealc39::indeed::hammondanime0 3::ronananime16::bow::comeon::bratac13::ronananime01::cameronanime12::tecmate::t ealcanime44::bratacanime13::tealcanime23:

katikatnik
September 20th, 2008, 04:16 AM
I personally look forward to it, much as I love stargate for me the formula was getting stale, Atlantis was basically following the same path as SG-1, it was time to shake things up, add something new to the franchise, a younger cast may be one factor that'll assist this.

What I always loved about Stargate was that it was one of the few shows left that didn't jump the "barely legal, hot and bothered" band wagon and I admired them for that. Being 28, I could easily relate to Sheppard or McKay. But now, with character descriptions saying "hot" and "every teenage girl's dream" in connection with barely legal adults with backgrounds more fit for the CW channel... I'm sorry but my enthusiasm for the new show hit rock bottom.

thekillman
September 20th, 2008, 04:25 AM
so its younger people. would you send all the best people to a place they can never return from? no. send some tried and true, and a bunch of younger people.

Fan-e-Gate
September 20th, 2008, 04:48 AM
Well I never really thought of myself as ageist ...

One of my main issues included that this is replacing a perfectly good show that could have had one more season to tie up loose ends.

But in regards to age: I have watched Stargate since I was like ten years of age. I have followed the show and I have become accustomed to Stargate travel, travel in teams of four (of varying roles), and sometimes unique ways of escaping what is certain death.

I don't know how much of this will stay but I just don't see what a pretty girl or a troubled young 20 year old could bring a scific show with roots in a scific franchise. It is pretty unbelieveable that they would have the needed experience.
I mean I would find it hard to believe that these people would be making scientific breakthroughs ala Carter/Rodney. Or commanding strike teams and making sure their team aren't the redshirts.

Its one of the reasons I did not like Mitchell-he had no experience to run a team especially when he had never even seen the gate when he was appointed to the "premier" team. But in this case he is the lesser of the evils

Bytor
September 20th, 2008, 04:49 AM
Looking through alot of the threads in this part of the boards I've noticed alot of people making comments about SGU being lame and sucking because TPTB have opted for a younger cast. Now I may be wrong but does this not count as ageism? People are descriminating against the show because the actors/characters will be of a younger age, this does not mean they won't bring emotion, experience, intelligence to the show, that you won't be able to connect with the characters because of their age. I personally look forward to it, much as I love stargate for me the formula was getting stale, Atlantis was basically following the same path as SG-1, it was time to shake things up, add something new to the franchise, a younger cast may be one factor that'll assist this.

its ageism that they will only higher younger actors... its discrimination against 30/40 year olds ;)

Achiles
September 20th, 2008, 07:23 AM
I think it might be good but if its like the episode 200 I don't think I will like it.
I am in high school don't like a bunch of the tv shows of stuff that relates to younger kids, but that could be that I like things more intellectually stimulating.:daniel:

Mike1989
September 20th, 2008, 07:25 AM
The other factor folks and I've not seen it mentioned in this thread so far is the how much it costs to hire experienced actors. Younger actors will get less money than the older actors as generally they are more experienced. As for this ageism crap its not the case, they are picking a cast that suits what they want. As sure they can hire four people who are RDA's age when he started Stargate, but remember by Season 7 he had enough of the full time filming schedule. This is a problem with older characters, they might lose their drive, they might want to spend more time with their family. Could happen with younger actors, but generally the only reason they leave or want out is so they can go onto other projects eg Jason Momoa.

In reality the Atlantis cast would probably be in their 30s in most cases. So I suppose that is fine in both having youth and experience. So I suppose they could repeat that, but they needed something fresh and hopefully these younger actors and the experience actors bring this to the series. Age doesn't really matter.

alta
September 20th, 2008, 07:37 AM
I don't think it's a case of ageism or anti-young actors, but more of being against a 90210 type of show. Stargate fans are looking for an intelligent show, not a soap opera.

alta
September 20th, 2008, 07:39 AM
Also, I think that the casting sheet showed 5 out of 6 main characters being in the 20-25 age group. It does not seem balanced.

Mike1989
September 20th, 2008, 08:27 AM
I don't think the whole show would compromise of 5 or 6 characters. I think they do need to maybe reconsider some characters, but in reality they did say that they can't stop the ship and if people are left behind then they are stuck there. So who knows how long each of those characters will last. Also I suppose it depends on who is available at what time to take on board. Would the risk a Rodney or a Sam on such a mission were they may never be able to come back?

Probably not. Who knows, but I suppose they have a young team because they want to attract young people. But just because they are young doesn't mean they can't be intelligent or produce an intelligent show. That is quite an ageist comment, as not all soap opera actors are young, and because they are young doesn't mean it will be a soap opera.

Rosehawk
September 20th, 2008, 10:38 AM
I think part of that was the fact that the information they released prior to this indicated they were trying to target a younger audience and everyone imagined that one scene from "200".
For me, I didn't go back to the scene form "200" because I realize that that was a total joke which fit in nicely with that episode. I really can't see TPTB taking things that far in a new Stargate show.
I think alot of the "older" fans felt a slap in the face at how the information that was released gave the impression that they were no longer valued and that is what got alot of people in an uproar at first. And seeing as there is not a big mix in the ages of the characters on SGU, so far, it is a fair concern since Stargate has been pretty good about having that balance in the past.
It won't be until they start promoting SGU to really see where their target audiences are going to be that the fans in their late 30's 40's, 50's etc. are going to know if they have a show that interests them enough to watch.
So while some fans are concerned about the age of the actors/characters on SGU, other fans are concerned that the age of the fans is an issue as well.

Rise Of The Phoenix
September 24th, 2008, 08:07 PM
I don't think it's a case of ageism or anti-young actors, but more of being against a 90210 type of show. Stargate fans are looking for an intelligent show, not a soap opera.

I don't think that TPTB will ever make a 90210 type show, it is gonna be Stargate after all, SG1 & SGA had character developing and some romantic elements in some episodes so in the end I don't think that it will be much different to that in terms of the character dynamic even though there may be younger actors.

Lt.Col.Errandboy
September 24th, 2008, 08:32 PM
Indeed.... I'm 23 and these characters sound just..... diabolically awful. To be perfectly honest I find the fact that TPTB think that I ( a Bachelors of Science with Honours) would appreciate and relate to these jock/ socially inept genius/ spoiled rich b**** socialite cookie cutter characters utterly insulting!

And there we have it folks...straight from the mouth of the 'target audience'. Even they are incensed at the flawed, stereotypical and completely unrealistic-in-a-top-secret-military-operation characters. The true "ageism" in this line up is they obviously consider older actors/characters not good enough to use!!!

What on earth are TPTB thinking that a bunch of trashy bimbos will be realistic in a military-run, highly classified project like Stargate?

Come ON, boys & girls. Get with the program. I know it's science fiction, but at least lend it SOME credibility. Otherwise, start writing reality TV or soaps.

VSS
September 24th, 2008, 08:47 PM
I've been wondering about this myself. I know a lot of younger viewers don't mind watching an older cast in a scifi show, I sure didn't when I was young, because you expect that's the way it would be. I grew up watching older casts in nearly every genre of TV, actually. When you get into TV shows that focus on some kind of skill set, whether it's science, law, medicine or crime solving, that's what's realistic. They are sacrificing realism with SGU, in order to focus on a younger crowd, and scifi has tenuous links with realism as it is.

It's a Catch-22 for the writers for SGU. If they make the cast act their age, they won't be competent. But, if they are written as being more mature or more skilled than they should be at that age, it's not believable. This is the very paradox that afflicted the Keller character, and she's older than this cast!

So, the writers have to fall back on the social interactions- they have no choice, that's the only thing that will ring true. But, they're emphasizing the fiction, not the science, of science fiction.

90210 might have been popular, but it wasn't about science, law, medicine or crime. It was about social interactions, and as Madeline W. said, that's not going to interest anyone who's been there and done that. Which is everyone over 30. But, I really don't know how else the writers can write it.

LostCityGuardian
September 24th, 2008, 11:20 PM
Unfortunately, most of these discussions seem to be boiling down to trust. As in, if you have sufficient trust in TPTB carrying SGU out competently (or at least making it watchable), then you're willing to give the first season a chance and judge the characterisation after the pilot or first few episodes. If you don't trust TPTB, then you're prepared to attack the characters on the basis of a few brief character summaries and some vague statements about wanting to hit a younger target audience.

Please, correct me if you believe I'm wrong (and this is not meant as a personal attack against anyone - just a general observation). But are all the debates about the age of the characters or the plot of SGU really about that, or are they a front for trust issues that have deveolped from general anger at TPTB?

Lt.Col.Errandboy
September 24th, 2008, 11:43 PM
Unfortunately, most of these discussions seem to be boiling down to trust. As in, if you have sufficient trust in TPTB carrying SGU out competently (or at least making it watchable), then you're willing to give the first season a chance and judge the characterisation after the pilot or first few episodes. If you don't trust TPTB, then you're prepared to attack the characters on the basis of a few brief character summaries and some vague statements about wanting to hit a younger target audience.

Please, correct me if you believe I'm wrong (and this is not meant as a personal attack against anyone - just a general observation). But are all the debates about the age of the characters or the plot of SGU really about that, or are they a front for trust issues that have deveolped from general anger at TPTB?

It could be a knee-jerk reaction by some who feel that TPTB canned Atlantis for the wrong reasons (ie, getting SGU off the ground by 'sacrificing' a show which was on a roll). IMO, tho, I am incensed at their apparent lack of trust in their audience! They seem totally oblivious to the fact that sci-fi fans are more than likely better educated, higher intelligence and probably more discerning than the average plebe who loves reality TV/soaps/crime shows. It's a case of TPTB being totally out of touch with the intellectual level of people who WATCH sci-fi. Sure, attract a new audience by all means, but don't resort to the kind of pap and formula that low-IQ semi-evolved RTV simians will want to watch. It's not only demeaning to the majority of fans of Stargate, young and older, but it will not achieve what they ultimately seek - buyers for the twats who advertise during their slot.

Anyone else here go out and buy what the stupid advertisers slot between scenes? Or does everyone do what I do, and use it as a good opportunity to go take a leak, or make a cup of tea?

AvatarIII
September 25th, 2008, 06:17 AM
I don't think it's a case of ageism or anti-young actors, but more of being against a 90210 type of show. Stargate fans are looking for an intelligent show, not a soap opera.

do you really think that SGU is going to be a soap opera? just because it has a younger cast does not automatically make it a soap opera, the producers know what the fans want, that do not want to lose fans, just mix it up a bit to make new fans, i honestly don't think the casting call will reflect the final casting. but i have no problem with characters of the ages of characters like ford, or rya'c, or even cadet hayley

kymeric
September 25th, 2008, 07:10 AM
Looking through alot of the threads in this part of the boards I've noticed alot of people making comments about SGU being lame and sucking because TPTB have opted for a younger cast. Now I may be wrong but does this not count as ageism? People are descriminating against the show because the actors/characters will be of a younger age, this does not mean they won't bring emotion, experience, intelligence to the show, that you won't be able to connect with the characters because of their age. I personally look forward to it, much as I love stargate for me the formula was getting stale, Atlantis was basically following the same path as SG-1, it was time to shake things up, add something new to the franchise, a younger cast may be one factor that'll assist this.

I think the real agesim is not letting us smoke till were 18, drink till 21, drive till 16 and bone till were 16. Until our society solves these ageist practices i am boycotting the realUNIVERSE!

jelgate
September 25th, 2008, 07:41 AM
I think the real agesim is not letting us smoke till were 18, drink till 21, drive till 16 and bone till were 16. Until our society solves these ageist practices i am boycotting the realUNIVERSE!

Can I join you

*burns college textbooks*

prion
September 25th, 2008, 08:51 AM
Originally Posted by kirmit
Looking through alot of the threads in this part of the boards I've noticed alot of people making comments about SGU being lame and sucking because TPTB have opted for a younger cast. Now I may be wrong but does this not count as ageism? People are descriminating against the show because the actors/characters will be of a younger age, this does not mean they won't bring emotion, experience, intelligence to the show, that you won't be able to connect with the characters because of their age. I personally look forward to it, much as I love stargate for me the formula was getting stale, Atlantis was basically following the same path as SG-1, it was time to shake things up, add something new to the franchise, a younger cast may be one factor that'll assist this

Ageism exists in Hollywood and all of the entertainment industry. People routinely lose their jobs becuase they get 'too old.' (for women, once you hit 30, you're skating on thin ice). It used to be you could age, but now they hit Botox and plastic surgery and it's usually horrendously obvious.

I gotta admit I am tired to death of 'shake things up' as an excuse to get rid of a character or even a show. THe thing is that, guess what?, I'm 99% sure you'll get the SAME writers on SGU as you had on the other gates, so you'll probably start recognizing plots shortly. Evil black clouds floating around the ship, anyone? ;)


I think the real agesim is not letting us smoke till were 18, drink till 21, drive till 16 and bone till were 16. Until our society solves these ageist practices i am boycotting the realUNIVERSE!

Wel,l if you want to destroy your body, go ahead and smoke. Personally I think banning drinking till you're 21 and driving till 16 is practical. Face it, young people think they are indestructible, particularly males, which is why insurance rates are high and deaths are high in auto accidents.

But if you want young tv, there's the CW channel and Fox - 90210 the new show, The HIlls, Gossip Girls. I don't see the need to make a scifi version of any of those ;)

Slyke
September 25th, 2008, 09:58 AM
I can't believe 90210 has more viewers then Stargate... but I supose its because its on at around 7-8ish at night, when Stargate is on at like 12:00.

Seriously, 90210 is more unbelievable then Stargate; the acting and story is that bad.

I watched an entire 3 episodes of that show and I wish I hadn't.

@kymeric
There's a reason why they say you have to be a certain age before you can have sex, drink, smoke and all that. Don't ask me what the reason is, because you can't understand it until your old enough to be able to figure it out yourself any way! Things sort of just "click" when you're 20-21, well it is for me any way. I'm sure it will continue to do so for a few more years yet too.

Shpinxinator
September 25th, 2008, 11:12 AM
Alright...time for the 21 year old to make his voice heard...

for the past 12 years or so Stargate has been very much a part of my life (yes I was one of those people who cried when Daniel and Beckett died ). And the beauty of the shows has always been in the character interactions and the depth of those characters...now...forgive me all those my age but I think we can all admit that in general someone who is 20-25 is not as deep as some one 30+. Yes there are exceptions but more often that not that is the case.

There is a reason shows like The OC and The Hills and 90201 are all about sex and who is stabbing who in the back, and that reason is those things are what being a 20 something is mostly about, again not always...but often.

I worked at Disneyland for a long time and I was surrounded by that constantly and my fear with the show is that lifestyle will shine through.

SylvreWolfe
September 25th, 2008, 06:27 PM
NKDietrich- I'm talking about the comments made on this forum, when people say the show is going to suck simply because there's a younger cast that is ageism, a form of descrimination. Now if you don't like the character descriptions, fair enough, but some people have instantly began bad mouthing the show because the the majority of the cast are in there 20's.


Nah, it's not discrimination. What is agism is casting younger people for intentionally younger character FOR THE PURPOSE of attracting younger audiences for ratings and income, while totally alienating or ignoring the older actors and older audience members, like myself.

I am one of those that read the character descriptions and decided that whoever came up with that list needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of non-existent laws for stupidity.

LostCityGuardian
September 26th, 2008, 01:55 PM
It could be a knee-jerk reaction by some who feel that TPTB canned Atlantis for the wrong reasons (ie, getting SGU off the ground by 'sacrificing' a show which was on a roll).

Yeah, I that's definitely part of it. I loved SGA, and I can certainly say that this made me a little cynical when I read that SGU had been approved the next day. This is probably the fair reason to be a little dubious about SGU.


IMO, tho, I am incensed at their apparent lack of trust in their audience! They seem totally oblivious to the fact that sci-fi fans are more than likely better educated, higher intelligence and probably more discerning than the average plebe who loves reality TV/soaps/crime shows. It's a case of TPTB being totally out of touch with the intellectual level of people who WATCH sci-fi. Sure, attract a new audience by all means, but don't resort to the kind of pap and formula that low-IQ semi-evolved RTV simians will want to watch. It's not only demeaning to the majority of fans of Stargate, young and older, but it will not achieve what they ultimately seek - buyers for the twats who advertise during their slot.

This is probably the unfair reason to be dubious about SGU (no offense intended personally). I just think that what TPTB have told us about the characters so far is so brief that its impossible to draw any conclusions either way. I wonder if we are all filling in the huge gaps in the character summaries with our own thoughts depending on where we sit on the pro/anti SGU spectrum.


Anyone else here go out and buy what the stupid advertisers slot between scenes? Or does everyone do what I do, and use it as a good opportunity to go take a leak, or make a cup of tea?

That's why I try to watch TV (or at least Stargate) on DVD. That way, no ads.:cool:

Daedalus-304
September 27th, 2008, 01:59 AM
So if we have young characters, why assume they will act like the young characters on those other shows. These are going to be military / scientists after all, so they'll probably act much older than their counterparts on other shows. I thought that Vala acted like she was half her age, so why not have a 20 year old that acts like a 40 year old? Back when I was 15 / 16 my sister constantly said I acted like I was 80.

If anything the young men on the show should act like people at my college: play warcarft half the night and watch Family Guy.

Also by aiming for a younger audience, I would much rather have the aim for kids rather than teens like everyone is saying. I would rather watch 10 kid shows than any of those teen shows people are mentioning (a lot of those shows on cartoon network are actually quite watchable). Just picture this: the main characters are a bunch of 10 year old kids that are somehow able to stop the bad guy from taking over the galaxy ;)

kali1
September 27th, 2008, 02:40 PM
I think the real agesim is not letting us smoke till were 18, drink till 21, drive till 16 and bone till were 16. Until our society solves these ageist practices i am boycotting the realUNIVERSE!

Boycotting the real universe?? Call your congressman and complain if you're not in favor of the laws. However, laws are set up for a reason. Without those laws...society would be a mess but that's my opinion.

kali1
September 27th, 2008, 03:10 PM
Ageism exists in the entertainment industry and it's been on the rise for many, many years. Just look around because it's everywhere you look. Everywhere from fashion magazines, tv ads, tv shows, to billboard ads.

Anywho....I hope the descriptions of the characters change for SGU but I doubt it will. Descriptions of unrealistic, "prodigy" type characters will continue I'm sure because that is the way the entertainment business is going. They want to attract a younger audience. If TPTB wanted to attract an audience of various ages, the descriptions would reflect that.

Now, if a program like Stargate existed in the real world, you would have a mixture of of people of various experience levels involved in the program. You would have young scientists, older scientists, military personnel, etc. involved. I would rather TPTB be more realistic when it comes to the personnel involved in such a program instead of making it sound like Dawson's Creek meet Stargate Command. Like I said, hopefully that will change.

Now with that said, just because there are younger characters doesn't mean they can't act mature. BUT...characters can only act the way TPTB want them to act. If they want a party girl/guy...well that's what they are going to get. Descriptions such as that doesn't sound very mature to me but...that's just my opinion.

SylvreWolfe
September 27th, 2008, 05:20 PM
Im 19, the char. sound terrible. Does that make me ageist against my self?

You age traitor, you....

:p ;)

jenks
September 28th, 2008, 06:53 PM
So if we have young characters, why assume they will act like the young characters on those other shows. These are going to be military / scientists after all, so they'll probably act much older than their counterparts on other shows. I thought that Vala acted like she was half her age, so why not have a 20 year old that acts like a 40 year old? Back when I was 15 / 16 my sister constantly said I acted like I was 80.

If anything the young men on the show should act like people at my college: play warcarft half the night and watch Family Guy.

Also by aiming for a younger audience, I would much rather have the aim for kids rather than teens like everyone is saying. I would rather watch 10 kid shows than any of those teen shows people are mentioning (a lot of those shows on cartoon network are actually quite watchable). Just picture this: the main characters are a bunch of 10 year old kids that are somehow able to stop the bad guy from taking over the galaxy ;)

They're not aiming for teens, they aiming for people inside the 20-40 age bracket, where the money is.