PDA

View Full Version : So Vala Mal Doran is not expected to appear in the next SG1 movie...



Pages : [1] 2

Flyboy
January 4th, 2009, 09:11 AM
What do you guys think about this? Are you a massive Vala fan and hate this move, or does this come as a massive relief?

I'd like this thread to be a place that we can ALL discuss our views on whether Vala has a place in the new movie and what effect her absence will cause.

Simply put, all are welcome to discuss and argue their views.

Automission
January 4th, 2009, 09:18 AM
Massive fan and it'l feel shoddy to have a one liner explaining her absence. She deserves to be given a part, as she is a member of the team, etc. See the fan thread for my full reasons.
Cleary this thread is aimed at negativity, which as I recall, is frowned upon.

Crazedwraith
January 4th, 2009, 09:19 AM
I'll paraphrase what I said in the oither thread.

I don't like Vala's character. I don't see any depth to her beyond being the sexy female alien who whinges to Daniel. A lot. I don't find her whining in critical situations as cute as others seem to.

On the other hand; she was a member of SG-1 s a regula through season 10 and in the proper timelines of both movies. They shouldn't really just drop her or emotionlessly kick her out the door the flimsiest of pretexts like Jonas.

I can sympathise with not wanting the character to play a major role in the movies, but she needs to at least appear enough in the 3rd movie to be sensibly written away out in a way that's respectful to the character.

Flyboy
January 4th, 2009, 09:32 AM
Massive fan and it'l feel shoddy to have a one liner explaining her absence. She deserves to be given a part, as she is a member of the team, etc. See the fan thread for my full reasons.
Cleary this thread is aimed at negativity, which as I recall, is frowned upon.
Excuse me. But I believe I said all are welcome. And incidentally negativity is not frowned upon. Character bashing is, but having an opinion opposite to be very happy about Vala being in the movie, is not negative. Besides. One could argue that people are being POSITIVE, becausse they're HAPPY Vala isn't in the movie.

But that's beside the point.

This thread is intended to be a discussion between people who do and do not want Vala in the new movie. It is NOT taking sides, hence I expressly lefy my opinion OUT of the original post. But its a place to allow some interesting discussion about Vala as a character as opposed to the other thread which is, due to the original posters wishes - entirely based on loving Vala to pieces. Contrary (not negative opinions) are not welcome there because it is a "Save Vala" thread. not a discussion.

This is a discussion.

Not everything which you do not agree with is 'negativity'.

Sllimy
January 4th, 2009, 09:35 AM
Does anyone know why she isn't appearing? I thought it might have something to do with her new baby, because if memory serves she was pregnent during production of both of the two previous movies and had a hard time filming them both. So maybe it was her own concious decision not to appear.

ShardsofGlass
January 4th, 2009, 09:37 AM
How do you know she's not appearing? Has Mallozzi or CB said something? Has there been an annoucement about who's in the next movie?

Flyboy
January 4th, 2009, 09:37 AM
Does anyone know why she isn't appearing? I thought it might have something to do with her new baby, because if memory serves she was pregnent during production of both of the two previous movies and had a hard time filming them both. So maybe it was her own concious decision not to appear.
It could very well be, all we know however is simply that Brad Wright said the next SG1 movie will not include her. This could of course change, but that's as far as we know.

It would make sense though, if it was related to her child.

Automission
January 4th, 2009, 09:40 AM
BW said in his blog quite clearing "Vala will not be appearing in the third SG1 movie"
http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=62656
See this link for the thread that explains it and to support fans of Vala.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 09:43 AM
I can sympathise with not wanting the character to play a major role in the movies, but she needs to at least appear enough in the 3rd movie to be sensibly written away out in a way that's respectful to the character.

Brad Wright didn't say that Vala would never be in another movie, he said that she wouldn't be in this one. The aren't going to pay an actor's salary just to have them go "Bye, I'm off to such-and-such a place", and if it's more than that, well, they're in the movie... If folks push for a complete resolution of the Vala character, they may find her written out entirely-not that I have any idea if they plan on bringing her back in the future. Still, there's a possibility that she might come back now.

willkani
January 4th, 2009, 09:47 AM
shes prob off stealing something lol

Flyboy
January 4th, 2009, 09:50 AM
BW said in his blog quite clearing "Vala will not be appearing in the third SG1 movie"
http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=62656
See this link for the thread that explains it and to support fans of Vala.
Indeed.


Now I know there's not much incentive for the Vala fans to discuss here when there's another thread where they don't have to worry about dealing with opposing views but, it really would be nice if we could get both views in here, as I really don't want this to become the 'Anti' thread, with the other being the 'Pro' thread.


Now my personal view, and please, if you disagree TELL ME, is that this is no big deal. Vala has only been around since S9 properly, and only as a team member since S10. Her story arc was directly linked in to the Ori, similar to Teal'c with the Goa'uld, but Vala hasn't spent 8 years working with the SGC to warrant her sticking around. The fact Vala decided to help Ba'al's host at the end of Continuum suggested to me that she thinks she's found something she can devote herself to. Afterall, with the fight against the Ori over, is there much incentive for her to be part of an Earth military unit exploring the galaxy? She's SEEN the galaxy.

And as pointed out in a previous post, this doesn't mean her story is over, just that THIS particular story has no need of her - which makes sense considering that the main SG1 characters Carter, O'Neill, Mitchell and Jackson are all on USAF payroll and can be posted where ever they're needed (sans Jackson for the latter). Teal'c is the only anomaly really, and considering that he returned to the Jaffa nation at the end of S8, I wouldn't be surprised if that's where he is now.

MerryK
January 4th, 2009, 10:05 AM
I'll paraphrase what I said in the oither thread.

I don't like Vala's character. I don't see any depth to her beyond being the sexy female alien who whinges to Daniel. A lot. I don't find her whining in critical situations as cute as others seem to.

I can see your opinion when it comes to Season 9...but not in Season 10. She may still have a bit of bluster and attitude, but mostly she enjoys herself and is both affectionate and protective of her team. I think what happened with Tomin and Adria scared her straight, in a sense—she's hardly selfish or overtly sexual at all in Season 10.


Now my personal view, and please, if you disagree TELL ME, is that this is no big deal. Vala has only been around since S9 properly, and only as a team member since S10. Her story arc was directly linked in to the Ori, similar to Teal'c with the Goa'uld, but Vala hasn't spent 8 years working with the SGC to warrant her sticking around. The fact Vala decided to help Ba'al's host at the end of Continuum suggested to me that she thinks she's found something she can devote herself to. Afterall, with the fight against the Ori over, is there much incentive for her to be part of an Earth military unit exploring the galaxy? She's SEEN the galaxy.

Has she seen the galaxy? Has anyone? SG-1 has been to hundreds of planets, but they still want to see more; SG-1 went to planets where Vala hadn't gone. She seems to have the exploring gene, with more of a bent towards treasure-hunting, granted, but she doesn't seem to object to SG-1's style.

But the one thing I really can't quite understand about your point of view is how Ba'al's host could somehow be more important to SG-1 for her. First of all, I never understood her to be staying permanently, just skipping the team lunch. But aside from that, do you remember Morpheus, Memento Mori, and Dominion? She was heartbroken when she thought they didn't trust her in the beginning; that trust was almost her strongest memory in her amnesia; and she fell apart when she thought she had lost it again. Apart from her desire to explore other planets (see the end of AOT for the most obvious example), she seems to have found her family with SG-1.

And that's the one thing that has me upset about this change. She may have attitude, but it's clearly a cover like Jack's "stupidity", and I see Vala as loving and needing all of SG-1. So there had better be an extremely solid reason for not seeing her with the rest of them in the third movie, or I won't be convinced that BW can write character well.

Xaeden
January 4th, 2009, 10:26 AM
Well I remember them saying it would be hard to get all the actors together for future movies and Continuum may be the last time we see them all together for the simple sake of actor schedules. So, I wouldn't be surprised if it was an issue on Claudia's end. In which case, I don't really mind (I'm certainly not happy about it though) as I've been prepared for news like this. I hate to see anyone cut out or not be available for filming, but it was only a matter of time before it happened.

Korean_Turtle87
January 4th, 2009, 11:01 AM
for me, it depends on the movie plot. If the writers want to do an original SG-1 team story, so, the original 4, carter, jack, daniel, teal'c, then i don't think there's a need for Vala or Mitchell. I would like them to be mentioned in the movie, like "oh, Vala's off stealing a cargo ship, mitchell's kicking' sheppard's ass in socom"...kinda like that. but right now, i don't feel so angry about it.

Michelle05
January 4th, 2009, 12:14 PM
I think there have been hints of trouble for a while concerning Claudia and the production, for those like me with suspicious minds. She wasn't in any of the promotional pictures for the movies (granted, she was pregnant, but could they not have done some head-shots?), she wasn't at the Continuum premiere in Vancouver, and BW didn't mention Vala as necessary to the franchise in that interview months ago. So I'm not surprised by this news. I think there's a lot that goes on behind the scenes that we only get glimpses of! Sorry I ended that sentence with a preposition. :)

For me, Jack's relationship with Daniel is similar but more compelling than Vala's relationship with Daniel. I liked Vala in S9/10 and the movies, but as long as there is good Jack and Daniel interaction in the 3rd movie, I'll be okay with her not being there.

Automission
January 4th, 2009, 12:21 PM
So by hints do you mean Claudia Black causing problems, or Brad Wright just not liking her character, or Claudia herself?

discodiva
January 4th, 2009, 12:25 PM
For me, Jack's relationship with Daniel is similar but more compelling than Vala's relationship with Daniel. I liked Vala in S9/10 and the movies, but as long as there is good Jack and Daniel interaction in the 3rd movie, I'll be okay with her not being there.


Yep this about sums my views on the situation up too......I find a little Vala goes a long way and my problems all stemmed from too much her and Daniel all the time - I loved her interaction with Teal'c and wished that there could have been more done with that scenario..:vala::tealc:.....Ms Black is a superb actress and has portrayed much of the serious side of Vala with the same skill she showed in Farscape....and for that I salute her.....her speaking tone is still one of the most outstanding female voices I've heard for a long time....:)

I just preferred the "snark" Jack/Daniel stylee....:jack::daniel:

However, I hope that Vala is not consigned to oblivion and will make a welcome return in the 4th film, if there is one....:vala:


Deeds xx

Flyboy
January 4th, 2009, 12:35 PM
Yep this about sums my views on the situation up too......I find a little Vala goes a long way and my problems all stemmed from too much her and Daniel all the time - I loved her interaction with Teal'c and wished that there could have been more done with that scenario..:vala::tealc:.....Ms Black is a superb actress and has portrayed much of the serious side of Vala with the same skill she showed in Farscape....and for that I salute her.....her speaking tone is still one of the most outstanding female voices I've heard for a long time....:)

I just preferred the "snark" Jack/Daniel stylee....:jack::daniel:

However, I hope that Vala is not consigned to oblivion and will make a welcome return in the 4th film, if there is one....:vala:


Deeds xx
I definitely agree about Claudia Black being a good actress. I just wish she'd stayed closer to the S8 character she presented us with, or at least, the S9 character. The only time I really started to get annoyed with her portrayal (and this is not Black's fault) was when she went all pig tailish and "I like Jam! :D", such as in AoT when she was complaining about breaking her nails. She's supposed to be a strong confident woman, not the sort to be nervous and aprehensive, which is what she was later portrayed as if you ask me, as well as being quite childish.

It's a shame, really because,I think everyone will admit that shes changed characters twice, it's a question of which you prefer. And for me it's S8 and 9 Vala.

madaboutdanny
January 4th, 2009, 12:37 PM
I love Vala and Daniel/Vala, and I love Jack and Daniel, I'm angry with BW's choise because Vala is a Team member now, simply as that, and instead he dismisses her like she is a third wheel. This is my problem with that choice, if he does the same thing with Daniel Teal'c or, impossible I know, Sam how do you feel? I wanna a good reason for her absence, a damned good one.

Jeffala
January 4th, 2009, 12:42 PM
I'm not in love with the character, but I think that if they're doing an SG-1 movie, it should include SG-1 and leaving out one of the members (unless there's a really, really good reason) is...I dunno. It's not "wrong" per se, but I don't like it. I guess "stupid" is the closest thing that my brain's dredging up.

Flyboy
January 4th, 2009, 12:44 PM
I'm amazed we haven't had a Jonas Quinn comparison yet... oh well. I'm making it now.

MerryK
January 4th, 2009, 01:01 PM
I'm amazed we haven't had a Jonas Quinn comparison yet... oh well. I'm making it now.

*sigh* I think that was a bad decision as well, but at least he got a defined exit.


The only time I really started to get annoyed with her portrayal (and this is not Black's fault) was when she went all pig tailish and "I like Jam! :D", such as in AoT when she was complaining about breaking her nails. She's supposed to be a strong confident woman, not the sort to be nervous and aprehensive, which is what she was later portrayed as if you ask me, as well as being quite childish.

I always thought she was trying to fit into Earth culture...just picked up on the wrong part of culture to imitate. ;) And she seemed to lose more of that the later the series went, which made me think she (Vala) realized that she was coming across poorly. It was like the opposite of Teal'c, who started out too conservative and had to loosen up...

And discodiva, I know what you mean about the Jack/Daniel interaction. That's one of the reasons I was looking forward to Vala and Jack being in the third movie, so we could see the similarities and the differences between those two and how they relate to Daniel.

Thunderbird 2
January 4th, 2009, 01:23 PM
I think there are two threads on this now? Anyhow, - this is what is making me disilusioned with any new Gate - SG1, Atlantis or Universe. It seems the thinking has become characters can be thown about like confetti, and doesn't make a damned difference if they go out the window. Well, as someone who loved SG1 from the off, and Highly rates Atlantis's first two seasons only, it is making me want to watch any new adventures less and less.

TPTB seem to treat Gate as an indistructable franchise. - They keep experimenting and tinkering and changing things, whether good or bad, to see what happens. Most of these decisions seem to work, but offing characters is where they fall flat on their faces. Jonas, Frazier, Ford, Beckett, Weir, in fact the only "exits" that worked were General Hammond and O'Neill from SG1 and Carter from SGA , because they were written to accomodate the actors for possible return appearances.

It was interesting to note in Brad Wrights Q&A via Joe M's site that he was surprised people still think about Jonas six years on. I say that simply because its a very linear way of looking at these things. To anyone who has any single DVD of SG1 or Atlantis, it doesn't always work that way. - It could simply be yesterday from their perspective.

As I said when Star Trek Voyager ended, I am not greedy. all 10 years of SG1, the first 2 years of Atlantis, with COTG and AOT to bookend SG1's adventures if need be. - Anything else I like the look of is a bonus. I will reserve judgement on Universe until I have seen it.

As for Vala not being in SG1 Movie 3? Well, we have been down this road before with the characters I listed above. (See also the Save Dr B, Dr W and Lt Frd threads too). I can honestly say I give up!

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 01:37 PM
TPTB seem to treat Gate as an indistructable franchise. - They keep experimenting and tinkering and changing things, whether good or bad, to see what happens. Most of these decisions seem to work, but offing characters is where they fall flat on their faces. Jonas, Frazier, Ford, Beckett, Weir, in fact the only "exits" that worked were General Hammond and O'Neill from SG1 and Carter from SGA , because they were written to accomodate the actors for possible return appearances.

I would disagree that Jonas and Frasier fall into the same pattern that SGA has shown. One thing about SG-1 is that they thought season seven was their last. They wanted to bring Daniel back to tie up some plots, and Michael Shanks was fine with that, since the main reason he left was that they weren't giving him anything to do. They didn't have the budget to keep Jonas too-which is really a shame, since he and Daniel worked so well. Heroes, parts one and two, wasn't a mere throwaway, it was arguably the most moving and dramatic episode of the entire series.

If there was improper experimentation with SG-1, I would say that it was writing Vala to be more comic relief than a serious character, at least in the beginning. All the other characters are treated with more depth, so it came off as very strange. I'll agree with the above posting, that if they'd kept her more like the character she first appeared as, things would have gone much better.

yesman
January 4th, 2009, 01:38 PM
Sorry to the anti_Vala crowd. I don't have a great reason, other than I love Vala and Claudia Black and I think she adds alot to the chemistry of the team. I dont have a problem with including her just for the "sexy" character angle. Not one bit. Although I think she brings more than that. Comic relief is a good thing.

KowalRoyale
January 4th, 2009, 02:05 PM
Realistically, theres no way the Air Force or the IOA would allow her to remain on the team. While Teal'c provides combat and military expertise, she brings almost nothing to the table. Sure she can negotiate well with other humans, but that was Daniel's job. It would be nice for a little more realism to get back into the movies.

Automission
January 4th, 2009, 02:12 PM
Realistically, theres no way the Air Force or the IOA would allow her to remain on the team. While Teal'c provides combat and military expertise, she brings almost nothing to the table. Sure she can negotiate well with other humans, but that was Daniel's job. It would be nice for a little more realism to get back into the movies.

The amount of insubordination performed by Jack would result in him losing his job, not to mention all the other things SG1 have done to get kicked off the Air force staff.
You can easily put entertainment value infront of accuracy regarding events. Half the sci tech shows this to be true, why not the same for the characters, I.e Vala.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 02:19 PM
You can easily put entertainment value infront of accuracy regarding events. Half the sci tech shows this to be true, why not the same for the characters, I.e Vala.

This is really what it comes down to, I suppose. Initially, I found the character the antithesis of entertaining. I thought she was astonishingly irritating. I did grow to like her more, partly because Claudia Black is such a charming actress, and partly because they toned the character down a lot for season 10. Still, I didn't find her to be a believable member of an SG Team. Now, if they'd found some other function for her, something more in keeping with her skill set, AND kept the innuendo toned down. I would have been fine with that. I'd still be fine with that.

Michelle05
January 4th, 2009, 02:23 PM
So by hints do you mean Claudia Black causing problems, or Brad Wright just not liking her character, or Claudia herself?

I speculate that BW had some issue(s) with Claudia. JMO of course, based on things like the promotional pics, the premiere(s), her not being at Comic Con, and BW's interviews. It's like Claudia disappeared from the Stargate world after Continuum finished filming. Who knows, maybe she blew them off instead! Obviously Michael Shanks loves working with her, and Lexa referred to her as a best friend... Anyway, it's very confusing, but IMO something happened besides BW not liking Vala as a character. In fact I never had that impression.

MerryK
January 4th, 2009, 02:25 PM
This is really what it comes down to, I suppose. Initially, I found the character the antithesis of entertaining. I thought she was astonishingly irritating. I did grow to like her more, partly because Claudia Black is such a charming actress, and partly because they toned the character down a lot for season 10. Still, I didn't find her to be a believable member of an SG Team. Now, if they'd found some other function for her, something more in keeping with her skill set, AND kept the innuendo toned down. I would have been fine with that. I'd still be fine with that.

I had the exact same opinion about Jack...he's grown on me, though, even if I still have a bit of a hard time seeing why he's well suited for an SG team. ;) That's neither here nor there, of course, but I think we probably have different ideas of what functions are needed on SG teams.

Automission
January 4th, 2009, 02:27 PM
Anyway, it's very confusing, but IMO something happened besides BW not liking Vala as a character.

I'l admit this does feel the case somewhat, but unless someone from the team comes forward to clarify it to at least some degree, this'l become an ever lasting rumour mill.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 02:33 PM
That's neither here nor there, of course, but I think we probably have different ideas of what functions are needed on SG teams.

What an elegant way to agree to disagree. Bravo! : )


I'l admit this does feel the case somewhat, but unless someone from the team comes forward to clarify it to at least some degree, this'l become an ever lasting rumour mill.

I don't think we need to know. It's none of our business. Gossip is always bad, and rarely, if ever, true. It just gets nasty.

Hetshepsu
January 4th, 2009, 02:45 PM
I agree i wasn't exactly a fan of Vala joining the team full time, but they made that choice. They can't just leave her out because she's not needed, she's a member of SG1, so an SG1 movie needs to have SG1 there!!!

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 02:53 PM
I'm certain that there will be a perfectly acceptable explaination. This is certain to happen again as not all the actors may be available for all the movies, and they will need to find ways to explain that, not just this time, but each time it happens.

queen_hathor
January 4th, 2009, 02:57 PM
Sorry, I'm a bit behind on the news these days....has it been confirmed Vala's not in it? And a link?

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 03:07 PM
Yes, it has been confirmed, in the Q&A with Brad Wright on Joe Mallozi's blog. I don't have the link handy, but if I find it, I'll come back and post it.

EDIT: Here you go.
http://josephmallozzi.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/january-2-2009-brad-wright-answers-your-questions/

queen_hathor
January 4th, 2009, 03:40 PM
Yes, it has been confirmed, in the Q&A with Brad Wright on Joe Mallozi's blog. I don't have the link handy, but if I find it, I'll come back and post it.

EDIT: Here you go.
http://josephmallozzi.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/january-2-2009-brad-wright-answers-your-questions/
Thanks, I'm off to bed but I'll read it tomorrow :)

VSS
January 4th, 2009, 03:44 PM
It was interesting to note in Brad Wrights Q&A via Joe M's site that he was surprised people still think about Jonas six years on. I say that simply because its a very linear way of looking at these things. To anyone who has any single DVD of SG1 or Atlantis, it doesn't always work that way. - It could simply be yesterday from their perspective.


Truly, that's an insightful statement. It is just yesterday from my perspective that I watched the early seasons of stargate, and when I look at the later ones I just think to myself- "My goodness- can't they see what they screwed up?" But the truth is, they can't. They have no time to, among other things. I was surprised as he** to find out most of the actors never even watch the finished eps.

I swear, all TPTB need to be made sit down and watch a SG marathon from time to time.


Realistically, theres no way the Air Force or the IOA would allow her to remain on the team. While Teal'c provides combat and military expertise, she brings almost nothing to the table. Sure she can negotiate well with other humans, but that was Daniel's job. It would be nice for a little more realism to get back into the movies.

That's what this is all about, for me. Realism- both with the external setting of being a part of the present-day military and also internal realism, or coherency within the story arcs and past history of SG-1.

One stupid thing really sticks in my mind. Vala's low-rise BDUs. I saw those and just laughed. Sam wore the real ones for ten years, as ugly as they are. I mean, if they're going to ignore certain rules, fine. But don't change horses in the middle of the stream, so to speak. It becomes terribly obvious what they're up to that way- in this case, it was putting more T & A on the team.


The amount of insubordination performed by Jack would result in him losing his job, not to mention all the other things SG1 have done to get kicked off the Air force staff.
You can easily put entertainment value infront of accuracy regarding events. Half the sci tech shows this to be true, why not the same for the characters, I.e Vala.

Sorry, that's not true. I think RDA even asked the Air Force Chief of Staff himself about that, because he thought Jack was pushing the envelope a bit. And General Ryan said he'd definitely had far worse under his command.

But, be that as it may, his superiors put up with Jack because he was valuable. It's always that way, in every walk of life, starting in grade school where the straight A students get away with murder.:) If you do your job very well, you can get away with pushing the envelope. Although I have to point out that Hammond warned Jack more than once that he was close to crossing the line. And one of the benefits of being a Colonel instead of a team member is getting to shoot off your mouth when the majors and captains and adopted stray aliens can't. That's also real life.

But Vala constantly had to be reigned in or managed. Was she really that valuable that they had to put up with it? To me, it was disrespectful to the entire team who worked hard to be where they were to add Vala to the team just like that. The flagship team.

Rosehawk
January 4th, 2009, 03:45 PM
I think there have been hints of trouble for a while concerning Claudia and the production, for those like me with suspicious minds. She wasn't in any of the promotional pictures for the movies (granted, she was pregnant, but could they not have done some head-shots?), she wasn't at the Continuum premiere in Vancouver, and BW didn't mention Vala as necessary to the franchise in that interview months ago. So I'm not surprised by this news. I think there's a lot that goes on behind the scenes that we only get glimpses of! Sorry I ended that sentence with a preposition. :)

I wouldn't read too much into Claudia not being in any of the promotional pictures. I know fans that have been to conventions that she has attended while she was pregnant and she has asked to not have pictures to be taken. She just may not have perfered to be in the promotional pictures for similar reasons or felt up to attending the premiere as pregnancy's can make one tired and physcially drained.

mateodh
January 4th, 2009, 03:46 PM
Sometimes things happen with casting so I'm okay with Vala not being in the movie, but I love the character. Vala is new, and yes she was the "sexy female alien" but she "hung a lantern" with it pretty well. She was supposed to be attractive but she used that, flaunted it to the shallow characters, but you saw the way Daniel reacted to her that clearly, beauty isn't everything, and the team knew it. When it caused her to feel disrespected, she showed it. Her past thieving and manipulation made her useful in certain situations, but she was so flawed. What makes Vala special is that she is so unpredictable. I hated the pregnancy arc, but things happen.

majorsal
January 4th, 2009, 03:51 PM
What do you guys think about this? Are you a massive Vala fan and hate this move, or does this come as a massive relief?

I'd like this thread to be a place that we can ALL discuss our views on whether Vala has a place in the new movie and what effect her absence will cause.

Simply put, all are welcome to discuss and argue their views.

nothing against vala and/or claudia, but i'm not sorry that she's not going to be in the 3rd movie.

to me, she's a high maintenance character, and i didn't like seeing our team (including mitchell) have to bend their sensibilities for the writers to let her be on the base 'and' the team.

i think she would have worked better as a recurring character, where the team dealing with her outrageousness wouldn't look so out of character for them.

having said that, i do feel for the vala/claudia fans, because i know if i found out sam/amanda wasn't going to be in the movie, i wouldn't watch it.

MerryK
January 4th, 2009, 03:52 PM
But Vala constantly had to be reigned in or managed. Was she really that valuable that they had to put up with it? To me, it was disrespectful to the entire team who worked hard to be where they were to add Vala to the team just like that. The flagship team.

Really? When she was on the team? I don't remember much of that at all...Daniel bickered with her, but most of the time it wasn't necessary, just that she was pushing his buttons. Other than that, she seemed to stay within the line or at least on the edge. Especially when Daniel wasn't there.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 04:49 PM
to me, she's [edit:Vala] a high maintenance character, and i didn't like seeing our team (including mitchell) have to bend their sensibilities for the writers to let her be on the base 'and' the team.

i think she would have worked better as a recurring character, where the team dealing with her outrageousness wouldn't look so out of character for them.

having said that, i do feel for the vala/claudia fans, because i know if i found out sam/amanda wasn't going to be in the movie, i wouldn't watch it.

I would agree with this, except that I would still watch an SG-1 movie without my favorite character in it. I still like all the characters of the SGC, I would still want there to be more movies (perhaps with my favorite character in it next time, perhaps not), which each individual purchase contributes toward. Heck, I watched a whole season without my favorite character. It's about team and adventure, not individuals. I'm not saying I wouldn't be profoundly disappointed, but I would certainly watch, and enjoy the story of the other characters.

VSS
January 4th, 2009, 04:50 PM
Really? When she was on the team? I don't remember much of that at all...Daniel bickered with her, but most of the time it wasn't necessary, just that she was pushing his buttons. Other than that, she seemed to stay within the line or at least on the edge. Especially when Daniel wasn't there.

Why would she want to push his buttons, really? Is it a good idea to have people bickering with each other when they're on a team that could be in some very stressful situations at times? I don't think that it is. It's that kind of baseline disharmony that was such a contrast to the preceding seasons.

To be honest, however, there wasn't a clear team leader to crack down on it. But that's a debate for another day.

SylvreWolfe
January 4th, 2009, 04:54 PM
I think it sucks wad. Vala is part of Sg1 and not including that character is just wrong. If there is going to be an Sg1 movie it needs to include all of Sg1

VSS
January 4th, 2009, 04:55 PM
I would agree with this, except that I would still watch an SG-1 movie without my favorite character in it. I still like all the characters of the SGC, I would still want there to be more movies (perhaps with my favorite character in it next time, perhaps not), which each individual purchase contributes toward. Heck, I watched a whole season without my favorite character. It's about team and adventure, not individuals. I'm not saying I wouldn't be profoundly disappointed, but I would certainly watch, and enjoy the story of the other characters.

Not me. I didn't buy TAoT for that reason. If I were a Vala fan, I'd feel perfectly justified not buying the next movie. For one thing, some people clearly feel the team consists of Vala, Cam, Sam and Teal'c. It throws the whole team interaction off for them.

That's how I felt about seasons 9 & 10 so I could see a Vala fan feeling that way about the next movie.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 04:59 PM
Why would she want to push his buttons, really? Is it a good idea to have people bickering with each other when they're on a team that could be in some very stressful situations at times? I don't think that it is. It's that kind of baseline disharmony that was such a contrast to the preceding seasons.

Yeah, I never got how it was funny that she was driving Daniel crazy. They kind of need Daniel concentrating on the task at hand. It really bothered me that they let that kind of harrassment go on in a top line military base, too. I always found it astonishing that Daniel wan't much more rude to her than he was. He really wanted to give her a chance. I sure got tired of Daniel being pissed off all the time, though.

I'm not saying that the idea was entirely a bad one, or that there weren't funny moments, but it went way too far. That's not a problem with the character, really, but it is a writing problem.

Just had a thought-if they come up with a good enough reason for Vala not to be there, it might be something that would lend itelf to the storyline in another movie, something where Vala could have integral function, rather than being there with nothing much to do.


Not me. I didn't buy TAoT for that reason. If I were a Vala fan, I'd feel perfectly justified not buying the next movie. For one thing, some people clearly feel the team consists of Vala, Cam, Sam and Teal'c. It throws the whole team interaction off for them.

That's how I felt about seasons 9 & 10 so I could see a Vala fan feeling that way about the next movie.

That is totally your right, and the right of people who don't think that a movie without Vala in it is worth watching. Of course, one wonders if those people also hate seasons 1-8, but that's beside the point. I guess I just find it odd that so many people would rather see the movies fail if they aren't just what they want, rather than enjoy them for what they are.

Jumper_One
January 4th, 2009, 05:08 PM
Not me. I didn't buy TAoT for that reason. If I were a Vala fan, I'd feel perfectly justified not buying the next movie. For one thing, some people clearly feel the team consists of Vala, Cam, Sam and Teal'c. It throws the whole team interaction off for them.

That's how I felt about seasons 9 & 10 so I could see a Vala fan feeling that way about the next movie.

Joe confirmed that the current team's made up of Cam, Daniel, Teal'c and Vala

MerryK
January 4th, 2009, 05:13 PM
Why would she want to push his buttons, really? Is it a good idea to have people bickering with each other when they're on a team that could be in some very stressful situations at times? I don't think that it is. It's that kind of baseline disharmony that was such a contrast to the preceding seasons.


Yeah, I never got how it was funny that she was driving Daniel crazy. They kind of need Daniel concentrating on the task at hand. It really bothered me that they let that kind of harrassment go on in a top line military base, too. I always found it astonishing that Daniel wan't much more rude to her than he was. He really wanted to give her a chance. I sure got tired of Daniel being pissed off all the time, though.

I don't think she drove Daniel crazy all the time (after Season 9 of course). Most of the time they worked quite well together (he often turned to her for confiding, plus she offered some ideas, and they shared several serious but not angry moments). There were just those times...and they weren't really different from when Jack pissed Daniel off. And she certainly worked well with the rest of the team.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 05:23 PM
I don't think she drove Daniel crazy all the time (after Season 9 of course). Most of the time they worked quite well together (he often turned to her for confiding, plus she offered some ideas, and they shared several serious but not angry moments). There were just those times...and they weren't really different from when Jack pissed Daniel off. And she certainly worked well with the rest of the team.

To be fair, that is true. In 'The Powers That Be', they were equally disturbed by what was happening on the planet, and the appearance of the Ori in the Milky Way. Vala certainly did her best there. In my opinion, which is clearly not the opinion of many, she was a potentially fine character who was written and introduced so badly at the beginning that it took almost two years for the hard work of a fine actress to pull it out of the uh... bad place. If if the character had started like the Vala we saw there (well, the second part-the pretending to be a goddess thing was just anti-SG-1), and then progressed to being a person who fit in at the SGC and on an SG team, things would have gone a lot better.

VSS
January 4th, 2009, 05:29 PM
I don't think she drove Daniel crazy all the time (after Season 9 of course). Most of the time they worked quite well together (he often turned to her for confiding, plus she offered some ideas, and they shared several serious but not angry moments). There were just those times...and they weren't really different from when Jack pissed Daniel off. And she certainly worked well with the rest of the team.

I thought a bit about that Jack/Daniel thing, too. And I have to say that their disagreements were mostly substantial ones- often the entire ep was based around them. In a way, they were a metaphor of the two ways to approach any difficult problem- action and thought. Military might and compromise. Strategy and sympathy.

Not little stuff like Vala wanting to go "sightseeing" in Atlantis and then shoplifting some scientific trinket off of Radek's desk in the Pegasus Project. Of course, Daniel caught her and put it back and then herded her back to where they were supposed to be accessing the database. How is that helping out? And that was right after Landry decided to keep her!

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 05:35 PM
I thought a bit about that Jack/Daniel thing, too. And I have to say that their disagreements were mostly substantial ones- often the entire ep was based around them. In a way, they were a metaphor of the two ways to approach any difficult problem- action and thought. Military might and compromise. Strategy and sympathy.

Not little stuff like Vala wanting to go "sightseeing" in Atlantis and then shoplifting some scientific trinket off of Radek's desk in the Pegasus Project. Of course, Daniel caught her and put it back and then herded her back to where they were supposed to be accessing the database. How is that helping out? And that was right after Landry decided to keep her!

I have to agree with this. The philosophical disagreements between Jack and Daniel were often the heart of the story.

I'd forgotten about 'The Pegasus Project'. Yeah... Not her finest hour. One member of a team should not have to ride herd on another. Given that it is important that SG-1 be trusted wherever they go, important enough for Jack to alienate his team in 'Shades of Grey', well...

ses110
January 4th, 2009, 05:46 PM
I agree Sally. I'm not a fan of Vala or Mitchell and it has nothing to do with BB and CB. They both seem like great people. I use the X-Files as an example. Doggett was on the show for a short time and was not in the X-Files movie. I'm not sure why Vala or Mitchell need to be in every Movie? They were only on the show for two years. Jonas was on the Show for one year and the ratings were great and there was no Jonas in the movies. Sorry if I offended any Vala or Mitchell fans.

MerryK
January 4th, 2009, 05:50 PM
I have to agree with this. The philosophical disagreements between Jack and Daniel were often the heart of the story.

I'd forgotten about 'The Pegasus Project'. Yeah... Not her finest hour. One member of a team should not have to ride herd on another. Given that it is important that SG-1 be trusted wherever they go, important enough for Jack to alienate his team in 'Shades of Grey', well...

One should remember that The Pegasus Project was BW's work, and I think 99% of people who like Vala think that he did the worst job with the character (Beachhead and Continuum also). But I've no problem with characters like Teal'c and Vala atoning for past crimes and making mistakes, as long as those mistakes are few and far between after their supposed conversion. I think Vala puts herself on the line for the team and the galaxy much more often than proves herself untrustworthy.

Probably a good point about Jack/Daniel, although I wasn't referring to the big ones like in "Menace" and "The Other Side" but rather the little things. For that matter, though she was irritating about it, Vala wasn't necessarily wrong about everything that got Daniel upset.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 06:00 PM
I think Vala puts herself on the line for the team and the galaxy much more often than proves herself untrustworthy.

I'm not saying that Vala isn't brave and loyal, she certainly demonstrated that she was. I think for me what it really boils down to (ignoring the bickering, which really, truly made me insane) is a matter of where Vala's morals lie. She got to the point where she could restrain herself for the sake of the team, but I never got the feeling that she really regretted any of the lying and stealing, or thought that being self-serving was a bad thing. I guess I needed more reformation if I was going to accept that Vala was an appropriate person to be on the SGC's flagship team, and representing Earth to the galaxy.

Slightly off topic, there's a lovely story by Random, called Good Man, that takes place after 'Company of Thieves' that puts Vala and Cam squarely on the team, and offers the notion that SG-1 might have to move into her area in their fight. Have you read it? Here's the link if you haven't. I think you'd enjoy it.
http://www.alldanielfic.com/viewstory.php?sid=763

Amaunet
January 4th, 2009, 06:33 PM
Well I'm definitely not Vala’s biggest fan…but I don't mind the character and I understand if she can't appear due to personal reasons. Apart from that...she should be in the third movie. The character belongs to SG1, therefore she should stay with SG1 ;)

Jeffala
January 4th, 2009, 06:54 PM
I agree Sally. I'm not a fan of Vala or Mitchell and it has nothing to do with BB and CB. They both seem like great people. I use the X-Files as an example. Doggett was on the show for a short time and was not in the X-Files movie. I'm not sure why Vala or Mitchell need to be in every Movie? They were only on the show for two years. Jonas was on the Show for one year and the ratings were great and there was no Jonas in the movies. Sorry if I offended any Vala or Mitchell fans.

Except...

By the time that I Want To Believe came around, the X-files division in the FBI had been shut down, no? Agent Doggett would have been reassigned if he was still even a part of the FBI.

Scully and Mulder weren't with the FBI anymore, but they were brought in because they had expertise that the current investigators felt that they needed.

For me, the analogy doesn't hold.

VSS
January 4th, 2009, 07:05 PM
Except...

By the time that I Want To Believe came around, the X-files division in the FBI had been shut down, no? Agent Doggett would have been reassigned if he was still even a part of the FBI.

Scully and Mulder weren't with the FBI anymore, but they were brought in because they had expertise that the current investigators felt that they needed.

For me, the analogy doesn't hold.

It's possible SG-1 doesn't exist any more, either. Or it's re-assembled on an ad hoc basis whenever the universe needs saving- which has already happened once. In fact, it's hard to see how Sam would be back on it again if that were not the case.

the fifth man
January 4th, 2009, 07:14 PM
I think it is horrible if Vala is not in this film. They could at least have her appear briefly. All of SG-1 should be in this third film. Cutting her out, if that is the case, IMO, is not fair at all.

ses110
January 4th, 2009, 07:24 PM
I understand and respect your point. I still think the analogy holds. I hear the argument many times regarding SG-1 has moved on from the Jack character. Why would TPTB want to move on from what was most successful. Right or wrong SG-1 is mainly known as Jack Sam Daniel and Teal'c. The show enjoyed 99.9% of there success from this team. It makes sense to me that these four should do the bulk of the movies.

ses110
January 4th, 2009, 07:31 PM
It's possible that CB is not available for the movie. I have no problem with Vala having a small part. I'm not directing this comment about you but I do not know why some Fans flip out when they hear RDA wants to come back to SG-1. Other Actors have left Shows and Movies and came back and no complaints. If my favorite Actor was on a long running show for one or two years and the two years were not very successful, I would not expect my favorite Actors to be in many of the Shows movies.

the fifth man
January 4th, 2009, 07:33 PM
I understand and respect your point. I still think the analogy holds. I hear the argument many times regarding SG-1 has moved on from the Jack character. Why would TPTB want to move on from what was most successful. Right or wrong SG-1 is mainly known as Jack Sam Daniel and Teal'c. The show enjoyed 99.9% of there success from this team. It makes sense to me that these four should do the bulk of the movies.

They can't just discard Mitchell and Vala though either. Besides, Jack is a General. I love him being in this third film, but we can't expect him to end up on these missions all the time.

There better be a very good reason why Vala, a member of SG-1, isn't in this film. That is all I am really getting at.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 07:37 PM
Jack is a General. I love him being in this third film, but we can't expect him to end up on these missions all the time.
Unless Jack gets reassigned to command , say, an offworld base in the thick of some kind of action...

ses110
January 4th, 2009, 07:39 PM
Why Jonas was just discarded and Janet as well. Vala and Mitchell are better than Jonas and Janet? Jonas and Janet had more of a positive impact on the show than Vala and Mitchell. The ratings improved when Jonas was on the show and the ratings had a big drop with Vala and Mitchell. Those are facts and not opinions. Actors are replaced all the time. if it happens to one it can happen to another.

the fifth man
January 4th, 2009, 07:52 PM
Why Jonas was just discarded and Janet as well. Vala and Mitchell are better than Jonas and Janet? Jonas and Janet had more of a positive impact on the show than Vala and Mitchell. The ratings improved when Jonas was on the show and the ratings had a big drop with Vala and Mitchell. Those are facts and not opinions. Actors are replaced all the time. if it happens to one it can happen to another.

But both SG-1 movies have sold really well, with Mitchell and Vala in them. There is no reason to discard their characters. I am not saying that is necessarily what is happening. Vala may very well be in the 4th SG-1 movie. What I am saying is that it shouldn't happen, and there is no reason for such a move.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 07:56 PM
I really think people are borrowing trouble. Jack wasn't in the first one, Vala won't be in the third, and depending on storyline and availability, there may be actors missing from future movies. It doesn't mean anyone is out for good.

ses110
January 4th, 2009, 07:57 PM
Trust me the movies will sell even better with just Jack Sam Daniel and Teal'c. I would love to see which Movie sells the most. A season 1-8 movie or Season 9 and 10 movie? I still would like to know why Jonas and Janet were discarded? What is the reason they were discarted? It could not have been about performance.

ses110
January 4th, 2009, 07:58 PM
You may be right. I will not say anything more on this subject. I do not want to offend anyone. I'm in enough trouble.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 07:58 PM
Trust me the movies will sell even better with just Jack Sam Daniel and Teal'c. I would love to see which Movie sells the most. A season 1-8 movie or Season 9 and 10 movie? I still would like to know why Jonas and Janet were discarded? What is the reason they were discarted? It could not have been about performance.
We don't have to go here, do we? 'My team is better than your team'? Let's not...


You may be right. I will not say anything more on this subject. I do not want to offend anyone. I'm in enough trouble.
Heh, not to worry. You came to your senses. ; ) That's more than a lot of folks!

the fifth man
January 4th, 2009, 08:23 PM
We don't have to go here, do we? 'My team is better than your team'? Let's not...


Heh, not to worry. You came to your senses. ; ) That's more than a lot of folks!

Yeah, we don't have to go there. It is really hard on a fan like myself, who loved both Seasons 1-8, and 9-10.

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 08:26 PM
Yeah, we don't have to go there. It is really hard on a fan like myself, who loved both Seasons 1-8, and 9-10.

Not to worry! I may have had some issues with seasons 9 and 10, but I still loved them! It's still SG-1, and that's always a good thing. There are episodes in those seasons that are the equal of any of the seasons. : )

MerryK
January 4th, 2009, 09:18 PM
I'm not saying that Vala isn't brave and loyal, she certainly demonstrated that she was. I think for me what it really boils down to (ignoring the bickering, which really, truly made me insane) is a matter of where Vala's morals lie. She got to the point where she could restrain herself for the sake of the team, but I never got the feeling that she really regretted any of the lying and stealing, or thought that being self-serving was a bad thing. I guess I needed more reformation if I was going to accept that Vala was an appropriate person to be on the SGC's flagship team, and representing Earth to the galaxy.

Slightly off topic, there's a lovely story by Random, called Good Man, that takes place after 'Company of Thieves' that puts Vala and Cam squarely on the team, and offers the notion that SG-1 might have to move into her area in their fight. Have you read it? Here's the link if you haven't. I think you'd enjoy it.
http://www.alldanielfic.com/viewstory.php?sid=763

I love that story, Amconway, but thanks for the link again. It was nice to reread. :)

I guess it may be a matter of opinion, but I believed Vala when she told her father that she had wanted to change, that she had wanted to earn their trust—it fit with all her other sincere moments and actions, and it didn't seem like a time when she would lie. It took me a while to believe Vala on the show, but once I did, I didn't catch any later indications that she hadn't truly changed her mind about the right way to do things.

But I won't push the issue if you're convinced otherwise...

amconway
January 4th, 2009, 09:30 PM
I guess it may be a matter of opinion, but I believed Vala when she told her father that she had wanted to change, that she had wanted to earn their trust—it fit with all her other sincere moments and actions, and it didn't seem like a time when she would lie. It took me a while to believe Vala on the show, but once I did, I didn't catch any later indications that she hadn't truly changed her mind about the right way to do things.

But I won't push the issue if you're convinced otherwise...

Actually, you've given me some interesting things to think about! I'll keep our discussion in mind next time I watch those episodes. I'm due to rewatch seasons 9 and 10 anyway, perhaps I will see things differently. :)

tommy wayne
January 4th, 2009, 09:45 PM
I could go both ways on this. Vala's character was an interesting attempt to bring in a more lively character. I think she was written a little campy as her character went on so the development wasn't terribly great (that's how I see it). A lot of people like the character, (I'm on the fence) but it would be strange to just leave her out unless it was for her own personal reasons.

Major_Griff
January 4th, 2009, 10:45 PM
I don't hate Vala, nor am I a Huge Vala fan, but I think it's kinda lame not to include her in the movie. She is a member of Sg-1 and therefore should be present. I mean I'd be happy as long as Carter, Daniel, and Teal'c are in it (Jack too, but I know RDA might not want to do one every time the ptb want to), but Cam and Vala are part of SG-1 and it would be awkward if either of them just disappeared or something. Basically there better be at least a decent story reason why she doesn't show up.

Rachel500
January 5th, 2009, 02:19 AM
What do you guys think about this? Are you a massive Vala fan and hate this move, or does this come as a massive relief?

I'd like this thread to be a place that we can ALL discuss our views on whether Vala has a place in the new movie and what effect her absence will cause.

Simply put, all are welcome to discuss and argue their views.

I like Vala as a character. For me, there is a clear development arc from her opportunistic survival days as a thief and a con artist to her finding a place on SG1 with her underlying need for redemption and experiences with the Ori underscoring that change from point A to B (an arc which in reality was required to take her from a one-off guest character in S8, to a recurring guest character in S9 and to a regular main character in S10).

In S9, she was tolerated because the bracelets she used created a physical link between her and Daniel which meant he was at risk if she wasn't around; in S10 her experience in the Ori galaxy and her position as the Orici's mother gave her a valid reason for being tolerated by the SGC while the team came to accept her as a friend and team-mate, and she clearly stated at the end of AoT that she hoped her place was with them.

I am disappointed Vala's not going to be in the third movie.

However, I'm keeping in mind that these movies are being tagged 'Stargate' movies not 'Stargate: SG1' movies. So I think the idea that the SG1 team in whatever its current formation has to be featured is flawed. It seems to me TPTB are more interested in telling stories about the characters that are or have been part of the SG1 team rather than the team itself. And in all honesty that's probably not a bad position to take because otherwise you get into Star Trek territory and trying to justify why character X is still in SG1 or has randomly turned up when in reality they would have moved on.

The third movie storyline from all accounts is about Jack and moving his story arc forward again. From what we've seen on screen, Vala as a character has no real connection with Jack beyond her own friendships with his old friends and team-mates so it makes sense that she wouldn't feature heavily, if at all, in this story. The original team characters being front and centre makes sense if this is a Jack story and as the original SG1 was my first love as far as the Stargate universe is concerned, (although I grew to like the S9/S10 formation), I'm looking forward to that. So while I'm disappointed Vala won't appear (as I think Jack and Vala interaction could have been incredibly funny), on the other hand, I'm believing that there is a reason why from a story perspective she isn't required and frankly I'm still looking forward to the movie.

I also think from a scheduling perspective that TPTB may have learned from the previous two movies. Trying to juggle so many actors in terms of availability clearly impacted the story telling and what they were able to do - focusing back on a smaller number may help produce a better overall story.

My two cents for what they are worth.

CaramelMonkey
January 5th, 2009, 02:56 AM
I wanna a good reason for her absence, a damned good one.


Me too! I mean, Vala IS an important part of the team. She's really...I dunno...Vala. (:

But yeah. I really wanna know why they aren't putting her in this movie!

Jeffala
January 5th, 2009, 04:39 AM
You may be right. I will not say anything more on this subject. I do not want to offend anyone. I'm in enough trouble.

LOL If I stopped talking just because I might offend someone, I'd wind up never saying another word.

;)

Flyboy
January 5th, 2009, 05:28 AM
Why Jonas was just discarded and Janet as well. Vala and Mitchell are better than Jonas and Janet? Jonas and Janet had more of a positive impact on the show than Vala and Mitchell. The ratings improved when Jonas was on the show and the ratings had a big drop with Vala and Mitchell. Those are facts and not opinions. Actors are replaced all the time. if it happens to one it can happen to another.
Janet was NOT discarded. Killing off a character does not equate to discarding. Jonas WAS, Janet wasn't.

Integrabyte
January 5th, 2009, 06:05 AM
I want vala!!!

Bytor
January 5th, 2009, 07:25 AM
What do you guys think about this? Are you a massive Vala fan and hate this move, or does this come as a massive relief?

I'd like this thread to be a place that we can ALL discuss our views on whether Vala has a place in the new movie and what effect her absence will cause.

Simply put, all are welcome to discuss and argue their views.

Praise be to god.

Integrabyte
January 5th, 2009, 07:26 AM
Seeing a few comments here, we are bound to be moderated soon.

ses110
January 5th, 2009, 12:00 PM
LoL. I have very strong feelings regarding Season 9 and 10. This is just my opinions and it does not mean I'm right and everyone else is wrong. There are no right and wrong answers for what we want to see.

Mandysg1
January 5th, 2009, 12:13 PM
LoL. I have very strong feelings regarding Season 9 and 10. This is just my opinions and it does not mean I'm right and everyone else is wrong. There are no right and wrong answers for what we want to see.

Very true :) To me I'd prefer no Vala in the movie, but I know there are a lot of fans who would like to see her. I guess once we see it, we'll be able to judge it more on how it is handled...but that is a long time to wait to find out ;)

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 12:14 PM
Seeing a few comments here, we are bound to be moderated soon.

I don't know,given the heated nature of the topic, I think we're doing pretty darn well!


However, I'm keeping in mind that these movies are being tagged 'Stargate' movies not 'Stargate: SG1' movies. So I think the idea that the SG1 team in whatever its current formation has to be featured is flawed. It seems to me TPTB are more interested in telling stories about the characters that are or have been part of the SG1 team rather than the team itself. And in all honesty that's probably not a bad position to take because otherwise you get into Star Trek territory and trying to justify why character X is still in SG1 or has randomly turned up when in reality they would have moved on.

The third movie storyline from all accounts is about Jack and moving his story arc forward again. From what we've seen on screen, Vala as a character has no real connection with Jack beyond her own friendships with his old friends and team-mates so it makes sense that she wouldn't feature heavily, if at all, in this story. The original team characters being front and centre makes sense if this is a Jack story and as the original SG1 was my first love as far as the Stargate universe is concerned, (although I grew to like the S9/S10 formation), I'm looking forward to that. So while I'm disappointed Vala won't appear (as I think Jack and Vala interaction could have been incredibly funny), on the other hand, I'm believing that there is a reason why from a story perspective she isn't required and frankly I'm still looking forward to the movie.

I also think from a scheduling perspective that TPTB may have learned from the previous two movies. Trying to juggle so many actors in terms of availability clearly impacted the story telling and what they were able to do - focusing back on a smaller number may help produce a better overall story.

I think you bring up some very interesting points here. Actor availability is certainly going to be a problem as the movies go forward. While one hopes for as many of the actors to appear as possible, I'm certain they won't all be available for every movie.


I guess once we see it, we'll be able to judge it more on how it is handled...but that is a long to wait to find out

These are the folks that made the show that I like above all others. I believe that they'll handle it appropriately. My personal hope is that Vala will be off doing something important to the SGC, that will lend itself to her having a real function on the team in any future appearences.

ses110
January 5th, 2009, 01:59 PM
Excellent points Rachel. It will be very difficult to fit all the Actors in the Movies. Some hard choices are going to have to be made and some Actors are just not going to be available. I guess the most we can hope for are good Movies. The chances of everyone getting what we want is slim and none.

ses110
January 5th, 2009, 02:02 PM
Good point about Janet. Janet was a tough loss to the Show IMO.

poundpuppy29
January 5th, 2009, 02:03 PM
I am not buying the third move because I have no interest in living in the past with Jack and I believe Vala is a member of SG-1 and should be in the movie.

Gate Rider
January 5th, 2009, 02:07 PM
I think she made S9-10 better than they would have been.....

I like Vala, but I'm not a huge fan.

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 02:13 PM
Excellent points Rachel. It will be very difficult to fit all the Actors in the Movies. Some hard choices are going to have to be made and some Actors are just not going to be available. I guess the most we can hope for are good Movies. The chances of everyone getting what we want is slim and none.

Absolutely. And if one faction gets what they want another faction will lose out. I realize that there is a possibility that, at some point, my favorite character won't appear. That doesn't mean that it can't be a good movie.

ses110
January 5th, 2009, 02:14 PM
I felt a similar way regarding not buying the first movie because no Jack. To me it's not SG-1 without the Jack character. If were talking about an Atlantis Movie than Jack does not belong IMO. It all goes back to want you like and do not like. No wrong answers. To me I need certain characters to remain or the show or Movie can lose a lot of interest. Cheers was never the same to me when Shelly Long left.

Major_Griff
January 5th, 2009, 02:23 PM
Absolutely. And if one faction gets what they want another faction will lose out. I realize that there is a possibility that, at some point, my favorite character won't appear. That doesn't mean that it can't be a good movie.

I agree, my favorite character (O'Neill) wasn't in AoT, but It was still a good movie and I loved it.

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 02:29 PM
I agree, my favorite character (O'Neill) wasn't in AoT, but It was still a good movie and I loved it.

I didn't expect to get any agreement on that. How very pleasant and surprising! : )

Major_Griff
January 5th, 2009, 02:32 PM
I didn't expect to get any agreement on that. How very pleasant and surprising! : )

Haha, although I suspect the fact that Jack wasn't in the last two (really four;)) seasons of the show, might have softened to blow for me. Fans of other characters might have a harder time dealing with their favorite not appearing in every film.

Mandysg1
January 5th, 2009, 03:17 PM
I am not buying the third move because I have no interest in living in the past with Jack and I believe Vala is a member of SG-1 and should be in the movie.

I guess that sort of evens things out, because I didn't and have no intention of ever buying AoT...but to each their own. ;)

nx01a
January 5th, 2009, 03:31 PM
[Just going by the comments I've read here re: BW and Vala...]
If your boss had such open contempt for your character and wanted to write you out, wouldn't you be looking for something else to make money doing? I'm sure the lovely and talented Claudia Black won't have to want for work, either in the Northern or Southern hemispheres, and she hopefully won't have to put up with uncertainty about her current job.

I enjoy Vala's character greatly and could not imagine Continuum without her in it. Black's Qetesh was easily the best performance and the one of the most pivotal in the movie. The fact that the consideration of simply removing Vala/Qetesh had to be thwarted is quite disturbing.

If the next SG-1 movie features Sam/Jack/Daniel/Teal'c solely, then I can accept losing Vala and Cam. If she's not there, why should Ben Browder be? Keep it to the originals and I'll be happy to skip Vala for a movie.

Goauld System Lord
January 5th, 2009, 03:37 PM
I'm saddened by the fact that Claudia Black may not be in the third SG-1 movie. Whether by her choice or TPTB's choice, it just wouldn't feel the same without her. She worked hard to earn her place with the team. There better be a logical reason in the movie to describe her absence! She better not be pushed to the side like Weir and Ford were! :weiranime22: :vortex04:

ses110
January 5th, 2009, 03:50 PM
I'll say this. There have been way to many characters pushed to the side on SG-1 and Atlantis. Especially on Atlantis. Makes me glad I never watched. No offense to Atlantis fans.

PG15
January 5th, 2009, 04:00 PM
[Just going by the comments I've read here re: BW and Vala...]
If your boss had such open contempt for your character and wanted to write you out, wouldn't you be looking for something else to make money doing?

You have a very strange view of what "open" is.

I'd post a quote from BW saying the exact opposite, but there's no point, because someone will just say he's lying or something (though if you're curious, check out Joe Mallozzi's Blog thread in the news section). Fact is, there is no solid evidence whatsoever that he dislikes Vala.

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 04:07 PM
I'll say this. There have been way to many characters pushed to the side on SG-1 and Atlantis. Especially on Atlantis. Makes me glad I never watched. No offense to Atlantis fans.

I can't agree with the phrase 'pushed to the side'. Creative decisions are made all the time. Sometimes we like them, but a lot of the time we don't. Fandom isn't big on change.

Janet wasn't 'pushed aside'. They wanted to bring the risk back after pulling the rug out of it by introducing ascention and having Daniel return. They seem to have decided, rightly, I think, that someone had to die. It had to happen to one of the main characters to have an impact, so Janet was killed. Now, I'm not happy about it, but I can see why they did it.

While I may not agree with all their creative decisions (most notably killing Ford to make way for Ronan, and killing Beckett in such a ridiculous way), the only one that I can't see the reasoning behind is killing Beckett, since he was not replaced by another character until much later.

But I digress. My point is that they don't do these things just to snub actors or piss the fans off. They do it in an effort to resolve a problem. The more trouble a show is in, the more you are going to see it, hence the revolving cast of Atlantis.


I'd post a quote from BW saying the exact opposite, but there's no point, because someone will just say he's lying or something (though if you're curious, check out Joe Mallozzi's Blog thread in the news section). Fact is, there is no solid evidence whatsoever that he dislikes Vala.

Gossip has completely taken over, I'm afraid.

ses110
January 5th, 2009, 04:12 PM
Pushed to the side may not be the right phrase. I will say there have been to many changes for whatever reason IMO. It's difficult for a cast and show to grow when there are so many changes. I feel the key to SG-1 long term success was the lack of constant cast changes. Having RDA and Gekko was also a big help.

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 04:21 PM
Pushed to the side may not be the right phrase. I will say there have been to many changes for whatever reason IMO. It's difficult for a cast and show to grow when there are so many changes. I feel the key to SG-1 long term success was the lack of constant cast changes. Having RDA and Gekko was also a big help.

I'll agree with that! Luckily, SG-1 started out with both the perfect cast and a rock solid creative vision, so changes were unnecessary for the most part. That almost didn't happen. Brad Wright had to fight to get Michael Shanks and Amanda Tapping cast, as the studio was pushing for other people. Atlantis seemed to be flailing after the first season, and never did manage a strong unified team.

nx01a
January 5th, 2009, 04:56 PM
You have a very strange view of what "open" is. Open? You've lost me.

Well, if his 'opinions' on Vala and the Vala/Qetesh nixing are just rumours, then I should once again remember not to pay too much attention to what I read here.:mckay:
Still, I'd only want her sidelined to see a focus on the original Fantastic Four.

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 05:06 PM
Well, if his 'opinions' on Vala and the Vala/Qetesh nixing are just rumours, then I should once again remember not to pay too much attention to what I read here

I think PG15 meant that Brad Wright said nothing demeaning about either the character or the actress, just that she wouldn't be in the third movie. Sorry, If I'm wrong on that, PG15...

PG15
January 5th, 2009, 05:09 PM
^Yeah, that's pretty much it.


Open? You've lost me.

You said BW had "open contempt" for Vala; I took that to mean that it was obvious that he disliked her, which I disagreed with.

Sorry if that's not what you meant. :o

Briangate78
January 5th, 2009, 05:24 PM
What do you guys think about this? Are you a massive Vala fan and hate this move, or does this come as a massive relief?

I'd like this thread to be a place that we can ALL discuss our views on whether Vala has a place in the new movie and what effect her absence will cause.

Simply put, all are welcome to discuss and argue their views.

This is the best news I have heard in the longest time and it came at a perfect time since I am still pissed about SGA. I am glad we are getting an O'neill focused movie. As long as the original SG-1 is there, then I am all good. Vala never really grew on me until Season 10. She just felt forced into the show.

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 05:25 PM
Hey, PG15! You've been holding out on us. Why didn't you mention this earlier, given that you were there, hmmmmm?


Brad Wright
Executive Producer, Stargate SG-1/Atlantis Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2


Re: Joe Mallozzi Blogs Again! (Massive Spoilers ALL Seasons)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, you're right, I just hated how it looked and where we decided to put them. I liked the concept a lot.

And now that I'm here, let me use this obscure thread I happened upon while waiting for my 18 hours delayed plane to clarify a couple of other things from the q/a:

I am immensely proud of Atlantis.

I like Vala. If I thought there was a role for her character in the third movie, she would be included.

I meant no disrespect when I suggested that fan reaction to such things as cancellation was predictible.

There were many, many factors that went into how we moved forward. Please know that we chose what we thought was the best path considering all of the financial and creative variables, some of which you will never be aware of. It very very easily could have been nothing. No Atlantis, no SGU, no movies.

I meant no disrespect to fans in general, but it was clear from several of the questions that many of you have no respect for me. I thought I was just giving as good as I got. The condensing comment was a joke. Go back and look at the question.

I probably shouldn't do anymore q/a's.

Brad Wright

I couldn't find what he was responding to at the beginning, do you know?
Man, what a brave guy! I wouldn't come near this place!

nx01a
January 5th, 2009, 05:41 PM
You said BW had "open contempt" for Vala; I took that to mean that it was obvious that he disliked her, which I disagreed with. Sorry if that's not what you meant. :o
Oh no, that's what I meant. :P I was reading through some of the comments re: Vala and the impression I got was that he was actively anti-Vala. If those're just rumours [and the post above confirms that], they're quite sad ones.

This is the best news I have heard in the longest time and it came at a perfect time since I am still pissed about SGA. I am glad we are getting an O'neill focused movie. As long as the original SG-1 is there, then I am all good. Vala never really grew on me until Season 10. She just felt forced into the show.I never found Vala forced. If I get Jack for the movie and not for a cameo death scene, I'll gladly forego Vala, but Cam has to go with her. I need my Fargate people together. :P

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 05:55 PM
Oh no, that's what I meant. I was reading through some of the comments re: Vala and the impression I got was that he was actively anti-Vala. If those're just rumours [and the post above confirms that], they're quite sad ones.

Yikes! Don't believe what gets posted on Gateworld! (seriously-don't). You have to approach it like news gathering. If you can't confirm it from 3 indepenedent sources, it didn't happen (Forums can only be one source-not just 3 posts ; )
It is sad, but this place is a hotbed of hysteria, gossip, character assisination, innuendo, baseless slagging and everything else that is vile. I wish I could add a winky face, but I cannot. It is sad, especially since some people know this stuff is baseless, but like whipping up a frenzy.
Do not believe what you read! Especially here... Er... Except this, of course...

nx01a
January 5th, 2009, 06:08 PM
That sounds alot like the "How can I shut up and tell you my plans at the same time?" scenario. :D

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 06:13 PM
Heh... ;)

PG15
January 5th, 2009, 06:15 PM
Hey, PG15! You've been holding out on us. Why didn't you mention this earlier, given that you were there, hmmmmm?

Like I said; with the way TPTB is treated around here, I didn't want to risk a feeding frenzy by tossing overboard some chum, if you know what I mean. ;)


I couldn't find what he was responding to at the beginning, do you know?

Yep. He was talking about the Jaffa symbiote pouches; he didn't like that Jaffa had a pouch so close to their stomach, or something.

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 06:22 PM
Like I said; with the way TPTB is treated around here, I didn't want to risk a feeding frenzy by tossing overboard some chum, if you know what I mean.

I figured that might be the case, and thought about that too, but I thought it might be good for folks to see that the way they talk to, and about people, has an effect on the respnses they get. And whether they get access to direct information again. I wouldn't blame him if he never did another Q&A. I wouldn't. I swear, some folks forget that the actors and production people are human beings.

I also wanted them to see that bit about how, if decisions weren't made as they were, there would be no more Stargate of any kind-and that almost happened. That's kind of important.

Not to mention all the nonsense about Brad Wright hating Vala that was being warped even further into him hating Claudia Black.

MerryK
January 5th, 2009, 06:30 PM
Do not believe what you read! Especially here... Er... Except this, of course...

:) It's unfortunately true, but I do have to smile at that sentence.

I'm very happy to see BW come out and clarify some of the things he said...rumor is a nasty thing, and its bothersome and troubling, though I will say in this case it didn't seem unwarranted. When someone questioned him on his earlier quotes in interviews about not considering Vala part of the team, and therefore not liking her, his only response was that he thought Claudia Black was great in Continuum...which seemed to be neatly avoiding the question and proving the questioner right. Always nice to hear that that was a wrong assumption, though I think Vala fans look at his portrayal of her and wonder what Vala he likes... ;)

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 06:45 PM
I'm very happy to see BW come out and clarify some of the things he said...rumor is a nasty thing, and its bothersome and troubling, though I will say in this case it didn't seem unwarranted. When someone questioned him on his earlier quotes in interviews about not considering Vala part of the team, and therefore not liking her, his only response was that he thought Claudia Black was great in Continuum...which seemed to be neatly avoiding the question and proving the questioner right. Always nice to hear that that was a wrong assumption, though I think Vala fans look at his portrayal of her and wonder what Vala he likes...

I personally think that the abrupt tone, and brevity of responses has to do with the unrelenting stream of bile directed at TPTB. If I got slagged and insulted that loudly and often, I would consider anything I said as potential ammunition to be used against me and the things I cared about. And I would say as little as possible.

Killdeer
January 5th, 2009, 07:30 PM
What do you guys think about this? Are you a massive Vala fan and hate this move, or does this come as a massive relief?

I'd like this thread to be a place that we can ALL discuss our views on whether Vala has a place in the new movie and what effect her absence will cause.

Simply put, all are welcome to discuss and argue their views.

Oh boy. :( I just come home from the holidays to this news. Well, it's not really a surprise. After BW's interview a while back I was pretty much expecting it, but yeah, I'm a Vala fan, and obviously I don't like the idea. Not that I think her character was always well written, but my opinion was and is that she and Cam added some new life to a show that I was ready to give up on after a dismal S8. And those two are the only reasons I stuck around to the end. So...yeah. I might change my mind, but can't see myself catching this one. Especially since I'm really not much of a Jack fan. :S

suse
January 5th, 2009, 07:56 PM
Oh boy. :( I just come home from the holidays to this news. Well, it's not really a surprise. After BW's interview a while back I was pretty much expecting it, but yeah, I'm a Vala fan, and obviously I don't like the idea. Not that I think her character was always well written, but my opinion was and is that she and Cam added some new life to a show that I was ready to give up on after a dismal S8. And those two are the only reasons I stuck around to the end. So...yeah. I might change my mind, but can't see myself catching this one. Especially since I'm really not much of a Jack fan. :S

Oh, I have no intention of buying this movie without a thorough vet by someone I trust. But chances have gone up a bit, as now large bits (and I don't necessarily mean *only* the Vala character I liked her later in S10 and as Quetesh) of what I disliked about S9/S10 will of necessity now be gone.

:D And Jack (hopefully the best of Jack) will be there for more than a glorified cameo.

suse

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 08:13 PM
Oh, I have no intention of buying this movie without a thorough vet by someone I trust. But chances have gone up a bit, as now large bits (and I don't necessarily mean *only* the Vala character I liked her later in S10 and as Quetesh) of what I disliked about S9/S10 will of necessity now be gone.

And Jack (hopefully the best of Jack) will be there for more than a glorified cameo.

Why the need for the reference? You're pleased the it's shaping up to be classic team, you're pleased that it will feature Jack prominently, and movies cost, what, sixteen dollars?

suse
January 5th, 2009, 08:23 PM
Why the need for the reference? You're pleased the it's shaping up to be classic team, you're pleased that it will feature Jack prominently, and movies cost, what, sixteen dollars?

I refuse to give even that much to something I don't think I'll like. If I know someone who will buy it and knows my tastes why shouldn't I take advantage of it?

To be honest I wouldn't have bought Continuum if I'd have waited for their review. :S I liked bits, but other segments... :( And that was also from Brad. Who I respect.

suse

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 08:31 PM
I guess the reason I asked is that gateworld is divided into a multitude of small factions, all saying that they will only buy the movie 'if'. The thing is, a lot of these 'ifs' are diametrically opposed. This means that even though we have a fandom that is large enough to support the movies for a very long time, which would pretty much ensure that everyone gets something pretty close to what they want, the actual sales figures may be much smaller as people cherry pick for exactly what they want. And yet most of these people will be beside themselves if the movies stop from lack of sales. It's..., well, I can't thing what it is, but it's not so good...

ses110
January 5th, 2009, 08:50 PM
You make some good point. I just did not like Season 9 and 10 at all so I did not buy AOT. I did buy Continuum and was not impressed at all. To be fair I have not liked SG-1 at all when it's no Jack or very lite Jack. When I did not buy AOT it made me feel I was taking a stand and voting my disproval by not buying. It's about the principle. I felt TPTB were trying to leave the Season 1-8 fans behind with the new direction of the show. I could be wrong it's just how I felt at the time. I have never been the type of fan who supports a show or movie no matter what. I need to have certain things to keep my loyalty and interest. I will be buying the third movie since it's Jack heavy and the odds of me liking the movie are very good.

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 09:02 PM
You make some good point. I just did not like Season 9 and 10 at all so I did not buy AOT. I did buy Continuum and was not impressed at all. To be fair I have not liked SG-1 at all when it's no Jack or very lite Jack. When I did not buy AOT it made me feel I was taking a stand and voting my disproval by not buying. It's about the principle. I felt TPTB were trying to leave the Season 1-8 fans behind with the new direction of the show. I have never been the type of fan who supports a show or movie no matter what. I need to have certain things to keep my loyalty and interest. I will be buying the third movie since it's Jack heavy and the odds of me liking the movie are very good.

But you know that the only result that can have (if there is any effect) is no more movies, including ones which might be more to your liking, right?

suse
January 5th, 2009, 09:02 PM
I guess the reason I asked is that gateworld is divided into a multitude of small factions, all saying that they will only buy the movie 'if'. The thing is, a lot of these 'ifs' are diametrically opposed. This means that even though we have a fandom that is large enough to support the movies for a very long time, which would pretty much ensure that everyone gets something pretty close to what they want, the actual sales figures may be much smaller as people cherry pick for exactly what they want. And yet most of these people will be beside themselves if the movies stop from lack of sales. It's..., well, I can't thing what it is, but it's not so good...

I wouldn't be one of those that is beside myself. I'm over it. If it's what I want to watch, I'll buy it, if it's not... <<shrug>> :) I don't think I'll "do" a fandom again. OT:I was bitterly disappointed in certain decisions, whatever the reason.

suse

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 09:06 PM
Well, as long as everybody realizes the whole 'cause and effect' thing...

ses110
January 5th, 2009, 09:07 PM
It was just something I had to do. I also always thought there would be enough people to buy the movies. I knew that most people are not as picky and most people do not think crazy like me. I have very specific needs when it comes to my TV shows and I'm just not that flexible. I can deal with change in real life just do not mess to much with my shows and movies or you lose me. In real life you cannot walk away so easily from change. In the TV world you can change the channel.

suse
January 5th, 2009, 09:10 PM
Yup, understood. :)

suse

MerryK
January 5th, 2009, 09:34 PM
I personally think that the abrupt tone, and brevity of responses has to do with the unrelenting stream of bile directed at TPTB. If I got slagged and insulted that loudly and often, I would consider anything I said as potential ammunition to be used against me and the things I cared about. And I would say as little as possible.

I guess we have very different personalities, then. ;) But honestly, who takes that kind of job and doesn't expect vile? And then agrees to a written interview but doesn't work on diplomacy? I guess I just identify too much with Daniel to think that wise...

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 09:39 PM
But honestly, who takes that kind of job and doesn't expect vile?
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.
Uh, I mean, most people actually. This fandom is a slavering horde filled with bats**t insanity. ;) I kind of mean the winky face, but, y'know, I kind of don't...

PG15
January 5th, 2009, 09:44 PM
On the other hand, what kind of person thinks that, if he/she posts a disrespectful question/statement, that the answer man will just bend over and take it?

amconway
January 5th, 2009, 09:46 PM
On the other hand, what kind of person thinks that, if he/she posts a disrespectful question/statement, that the answer man will just bend over and take it?

The Spanish Inquisition... : )

Osiris
January 6th, 2009, 02:51 AM
TPTB don't seem to like her character that much, do they?

First she's almost absent of all the promotional pics of the first movies, then this... She's the most interesting Stargate character in years but I guess she doesn't fit that "family appeal" Brad Wright is going for (with the whole Children of The God remaking etc.).

MerryK
January 6th, 2009, 07:04 AM
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.
Uh, I mean, most people actually. This fandom is a slavering horde filled with bats**t insanity. ;) I kind of mean the winky face, but, y'know, I kind of don't...


On the other hand, what kind of person thinks that, if he/she posts a disrespectful question/statement, that the answer man will just bend over and take it?

I understand that, really, I do. But I've never been in a fandom that didn't have its insane portions (sometimes insanely large ones), and even if you think that the SG fandom is worse, Rob Cooper and Joe Malozzi (among others, but these two especially) have maintained a good humor in their posts and interviews, so that's the standard I have for people who chose to work in a genre with crazy rabid fans. Especially in a written interview where you can a) ignore questions, and b) take time to calm down before responding to them. I just don't see why we should excuse behavior that is hardly professional, especially when it's clear that it can be avoided.

This is getting off topic, but it is an interesting subject...

GateofDOOM
January 6th, 2009, 07:05 AM
I'll only buy the movie if I like it and that's just the way I roll. :)
It's renting for me till then.
No franchise loyalty here I guess!

On Topic:

I really like Vala and it's too bad she'll not be in this one, but it's not as if her being in TAoT actually made me enjoy that movie, or Continuum for that matter so I'm sure her presence won't have too much impact on how I enjoy the movie. If it's the kind of thing I like then it won't really matter if Vala's in it or not.

Still, I'll miss her and here's hoping she'll appear in movie four if there is one.

leiasky
January 6th, 2009, 10:27 AM
I like Vala, in some situations. I don't think her antics on a military team were quite believable but I do like the funny aire she lended to the show. That said, however, since the rumor is this will be an old-school Jack-centric SG-1 movie, I won't miss her. I just don't think Jack would have at all tolerated her behaviour.

Apep
January 6th, 2009, 11:14 AM
Well I have to be brutally honest here….Vala not being in the next movie is probably the best piece of Stargate news since..i don’t know….because I am of the opinion that vala mal doran is the worst thing to ever happen to Stargate.

Ripple in Space
January 6th, 2009, 12:17 PM
The main reason I'm disappointed about this is because I was looking forward to seeing how Vala would react to being given orders by Jack. I mean, Jack didn't even let Carter call him by his first name when she was recovering in the infirmary. It would be really interesting to see Jack's reaction to a team member hitting on him in the field.

That being said, if we had to lose one of the six members, I guess Vala is the best choice. Jack, Sam, Daniel & Teal'c are the original team, and Cam has been written as the star for several years now. While I like Vala better than Cam, I think it might be more interesting to see Cam (as he'll be the second/third in command).

Really, the only similar team dynamic would be "The Return," where Sheppard is in the field with not one, but two of his direct superiors (Weir, the Expedition Leader & Jack, the General of the entire Homeworld Security Department). And I really liked that episode. This should be even better. Heck, if you threw Shep, McKay, Ronon & Jonas into the 3rd SG-1 Movie-team, they wouldn't even need a ship to defend the universe against the bad guys, the raw brain & muscle power would be more than enough :P.

Jackie
January 6th, 2009, 12:36 PM
IMO I would like to see a film with just the original 4. No Vala, no Mitchell. (Somehow, I get the feeling we're gonna get;s loads of Mitchell in the next film.)

I like CB and Vala is enjoyable in small doses for me. I actually wrote a fic where I made Vala an allies and she was actually a member of a royal family. That turned out funny.

But I do notice that Vala is the female version of Jack. She's the "kid-like" counter to Daniel. I think a movie with a lot of Vala and Jack would be rather redundant.

Poor daniel wouldn't know what to do. LOL.

poundpuppy29
January 6th, 2009, 12:39 PM
Why I am really am unhappy about this is because I would like to see Jack interact with Vala and I was hoping for more Sam and Vala interaction too we got a little in season 10 but I was hoping for more I am really uncomfortable with assertion by some that Jack would have a problem with Vala because I see it as some projecting their opinion on Jack I don't like Vala therefore Jack has a problem with her and or doesn't like her, we do not know what Jack thinks about Vala only the writers know anything else is speculation I would prefer to know one way or another before we say what Jack thinks.

I also don't like this move because I fear what will happen with Daniel now because IMHO Vala broke down those walls around Daniel and in a way brought Daniel back to life. So Daniel will go back to being his emotionally guarded self now. Daniel doesn't make connections easily I don't want hime to lose what connections he has made hasn't he lost enough people.

Mandysg1
January 6th, 2009, 01:00 PM
Why I am really am unhappy about this is because I would like to see Jack interact with Vala and I was hoping for more Sam and Vala interaction too we got a little in season 10 but I was hoping for more I am really uncomfortable with assertion by some that Jack would have a problem with Vala because I see it as some projecting their opinion on Jack I don't like Vala therefore Jack has a problem with her and or doesn't like her, we do not know what Jack thinks about Vala only the writers know anything else is speculation I would prefer to know one way or another before we say what Jack thinks.

I also don't like this move because I fear what will happen with Daniel now because IMHO Vala broke down those walls around Daniel and in a way brought Daniel back to life. So Daniel will go back to being his emotionally guarded self now. Daniel doesn't make connections easily I don't want hime to lose what connections he has made hasn't he lost enough people.

With Jack 'not liking' Vala, I think it would be more of not trusting her. He was there when PU happened, and I'm pretty sure he didn't like what she did to Hammond, the crew of the ship or to Daniel. When she came knocking on the 'door' stargate, I don't think he would have let her on base (that is if Jack is in character). If you think about Maybourne, his crimes were not as bad as Vala's and Jack never trusted Harry, even when he was helping Jack out.

I actually preferred Vala when she wasn't with Daniel, she seemed to have more depth in those scenes. And the scene in Unending with Daniel and Vala I thought Daniel was way OTT with his being mean.

But I guess we all see things differently. I am definitely looking forward to this movie, I like how Brad writes the characters ;)

PG15
January 6th, 2009, 04:40 PM
I understand that, really, I do. But I've never been in a fandom that didn't have its insane portions (sometimes insanely large ones), and even if you think that the SG fandom is worse, Rob Cooper and Joe Malozzi (among others, but these two especially) have maintained a good humor in their posts and interviews, so that's the standard I have for people who chose to work in a genre with crazy rabid fans. Especially in a written interview where you can a) ignore questions, and b) take time to calm down before responding to them. I just don't see why we should excuse behavior that is hardly professional, especially when it's clear that it can be avoided.



Well, I suppose Brad Wright is just a different person from Rob Cooper and Joe Mallozzi. ;)

MerryK
January 6th, 2009, 07:25 PM
With Jack 'not liking' Vala, I think it would be more of not trusting her. He was there when PU happened, and I'm pretty sure he didn't like what she did to Hammond, the crew of the ship or to Daniel. When she came knocking on the 'door' stargate, I don't think he would have let her on base (that is if Jack is in character). If you think about Maybourne, his crimes were not as bad as Vala's and Jack never trusted Harry, even when he was helping Jack out.

I think if Daniel, Sam, and Teal'c trust her...then Jack will, no questions asked. May not be the smartest thing to do, but it's Jack's loyalty at its best. And by this point, I don't think you can say that the team doesn't trust Vala. Regardless of the trust issue, I think Jack would enjoy Vala's simple delight in funny situations and her cut-to-the-chase way of dealing with the rest.


Well, I suppose Brad Wright is just a different person from Rob Cooper and Joe Mallozzi. ;)

Oh, I wasn't contesting that...they're not pod people. ;) But that's not exactly an argument for or against anything.

Krichton
January 6th, 2009, 07:48 PM
I don't think "massive fan" and "Vala" can go in the same sentence. What a horrible character. What the producers did to her and Ben Browder after the wonderful characters they portrayed on Farscape is almost unforgiveable.

PG15
January 6th, 2009, 08:01 PM
I don't think "massive fan" and "Vala" can go in the same sentence.

Oh, but it can.

the fifth man
January 6th, 2009, 08:16 PM
Oh, but it can.

And for me, it does. I adored CB on Farscape. And I adored her on SG-1 as Vala.

MerryK
January 6th, 2009, 09:53 PM
I don't think "massive fan" and "Vala" can go in the same sentence. What a horrible character. What the producers did to her and Ben Browder after the wonderful characters they portrayed on Farscape is almost unforgiveable.

As a huge fan of Farscape, John and Aeryn, and Mitchell and Vala...I have to say, that's definitely just one opinion.

Major_Griff
January 6th, 2009, 11:25 PM
Is anyone else getting a kind of "Doggett and Reyes feeling"?

Crazedwraith
January 7th, 2009, 03:49 AM
I don't think "massive fan" and "Vala" can go in the same sentence. What a horrible character. What the producers did to her and Ben Browder after the wonderful characters they portrayed on Farscape is almost unforgiveable.


Oh I don't know the sentence: I'm Not a massive fan of Vala seems to scan to me.

ValaJackson
January 7th, 2009, 05:50 AM
Well I have a few theories:

Before AoT was released I saw an interview with Claudia Black saying that she got very sick during season 10, asked for time off and it was denied.
During the films she was pregnant again and had to cut her working hours a lot because of miscarriage risks.

So, to me, I think the producers don't like Claudia Black because the health problems she had caused problems on the production of the series.

On the other hand, I have been a fan from day one, but I was one too that hated how things were developed after season 4, this "I am no person I am a scientist/soldier/whatever and have no other life" was not my liking.
So I dropped.
It was only when some friends gifted me with the stargate dvds and I saw Prometheus unbound that I thought Stargate writers may be learning something interesting.
Hence I sticked around a little more.
And I saw season 9, and liked it, was well organized, and Vala had a very good reason to come an to go. No that I didn't miss her but was coherent.
Then it comes season 10 and was totally Vala centric! they were putting all the strength on a character whos actress was sick.
Moreover, they put all the strength in that character while at the same time stripping it of its maturity.
So stargate sg-1 failed. And my second theory is that, the writers see Vala Maldoran as a mistake, hence the reason to the lack of promotion.

My personal opinion, Vala is a great character thats been missused, and Claudia Black a great actress that gave stargate two more seasons. If she is not in the movie I am not interested.

Infinite-Possibilities
January 8th, 2009, 08:09 AM
If it were a "normal" SG-1 movie, I'd feel the film was weaker for it and then move past my disappointment, but with it being a Jack centric movie, and probably one of the few times we'll ever see him in the franchise agan and therefor ever interact with Vala, I'm exceedingly deflated in anticipation for the film now.

Ripple in Space
January 8th, 2009, 08:34 AM
I think if Daniel, Sam, and Teal'c trust her...then Jack will, no questions asked. May not be the smartest thing to do, but it's Jack's loyalty at its best. And by this point, I don't think you can say that the team doesn't trust Vala. Regardless of the trust issue, I think Jack would enjoy Vala's simple delight in funny situations and her cut-to-the-chase way of dealing with the rest.

Jack's last season 10 appearance had him saying he doesn't trust anyone, lol. I don't think there would be any extra mistrust directed at Vala though. Jack's super-loyal, but he's also a big skeptic. I'm not sure if Jack would enjoy Vala's style, but I know I'd enjoy watching him reacting to her. Remember, Sam, Teal'c & Daniel are all relatively "proper" in the field, sure Daniel will clash with Jack, but he usually did it with respect. I have no idea how Jack would react to a member of his team blatantly hitting on him and others.

GateMan2000
January 8th, 2009, 09:02 AM
I am glad Jack is back an Vala is out. Hopefully this will be an old school SG1 type of movie.

Killdeer
January 8th, 2009, 09:13 AM
If I thought there was a prayer of going back to the original team I loved - the team in S1-5 - I'd be all for this. But for me those characters don't even exist anymore. They all changed after that, and by the end of S8 I wasn't overly enthused about any of them - some less than others. I guess to me I feel like this movie isn't going back to the period of SG-1 I loved, because it isn't possible to go back to that. Instead, with Vala out and the apparent increasing likelihood that Cam will not appear or at best play a much diminished role, it's going back to the period of SG-1 I hated most, S7-8.

I know there were a lot of people who loved those seasons, and I'm sure they will love this movie as well. For me, I'm sorry, but I'm just not interested.

Mandysg1
January 8th, 2009, 09:45 AM
If I thought there was a prayer of going back to the original team I loved - the team in S1-5 - I'd be all for this. But for me those characters don't even exist anymore. They all changed after that, and by the end of S8 I wasn't overly enthused about any of them - some less than others. I guess to me I feel like this movie isn't going back to the period of SG-1 I loved, because it isn't possible to go back to that. Instead, with Vala out and the apparent increasing likelihood that Cam will not appear or at best play a much diminished role, it's going back to the period of SG-1 I hated most, S7-8.

I know there were a lot of people who loved those seasons, and I'm sure they will love this movie as well. For me, I'm sorry, but I'm just not interested.

I can understand how you feel about those seasons, the biggest difference though is behind the camera. RCC was in charge of those seasons, Brad is writing this movie, so I am cautiously more optimisitc.

Flyboy
January 8th, 2009, 09:51 AM
If I thought there was a prayer of going back to the original team I loved - the team in S1-5 - I'd be all for this. But for me those characters don't even exist anymore. They all changed after that, and by the end of S8 I wasn't overly enthused about any of them - some less than others. I guess to me I feel like this movie isn't going back to the period of SG-1 I loved, because it isn't possible to go back to that. Instead, with Vala out and the apparent increasing likelihood that Cam will not appear or at best play a much diminished role, it's going back to the period of SG-1 I hated most, S7-8.

I know there were a lot of people who loved those seasons, and I'm sure they will love this movie as well. For me, I'm sorry, but I'm just not interested.
I don't see why Cam wouldn't appear.

As a character, he's very usable. He's a USAF Officer and Pilot, as well as being the SG1 team leader. Whatever the crisis, he can be utilised. Vala is more difficult as she doesn't have any official position or expertise.

ciannwn
January 8th, 2009, 09:55 AM
I'm disappointed that she won't be in it. She's one of my favourite Stargate characters because she's outrageous, completely over the top and I find her a lot of fun. This is just my personal opinion, though, and I know others can't stand her.

poundpuppy29
January 8th, 2009, 09:56 AM
I don't see why Cam wouldn't appear.

As a character, he's very usable. He's a USAF Officer and Pilot, as well as being the SG1 team leader. Whatever the crisis, he can be utilised. Vala is more difficult as she doesn't have any official position or expertise.
So only military people are always useful Vala could be useful she has some great knowledge of MW Galaxy as a former Goa'uld she probably knows about weapons stash or labs all sorts of things you really sell her short, she would know things because of her pirate days too.

Madwelshboy
January 8th, 2009, 10:01 AM
I don't see why Cam wouldn't appear.

As a character, he's very usable. He's a USAF Officer and Pilot, as well as being the SG1 team leader. Whatever the crisis, he can be utilised. Vala is more difficult as she doesn't have any official position or expertise.

True, but the character has been developed in a way that vala can be used in many different situations. she has good knowlage of the milky way and how things work in the galaxy, she has a good understanding of technology(due to retaining knowlage from when she was a host), she can handle her self in combat....

Flyboy
January 8th, 2009, 10:01 AM
So only military people are always useful Vala could be useful she has some great knowledge of MW Galaxy as a former Goa'uld she probably knows about weapons stash or labs all sorts of things you really sell her short, she would know things because of her pirate days too.
That's not what I said and you know it.

But in SG1, which is a show about the military and military threats, it's EASIER to write a character that is MILITARY in to the story, because they fit well.

Vala isn't. Sure you can shoe horn her in, but unless the story is the type to utilise her very specific expertise, then you'd get the Teyla scenario again. And people would complain. She's a VERY specific character. Her role in S9 and 10 of SG1 was VERY specific to the Ori plot. Mitchell is generic. He can be applied to everything easily. Vala is more difficult. Think about it, her most useful and important scenes in SG1 were to do with her pregnancy and her interaction with the Orici.

MerryK
January 8th, 2009, 11:03 AM
Jack's last season 10 appearance had him saying he doesn't trust anyone, lol. I don't think there would be any extra mistrust directed at Vala though. Jack's super-loyal, but he's also a big skeptic. I'm not sure if Jack would enjoy Vala's style, but I know I'd enjoy watching him reacting to her. Remember, Sam, Teal'c & Daniel are all relatively "proper" in the field, sure Daniel will clash with Jack, but he usually did it with respect. I have no idea how Jack would react to a member of his team blatantly hitting on him and others.

I didn't fully believe Jack when he said that; I think his loyalty to his team runs deeper than anything else in him. If you look at how many times he risked everything on their judgment...that proves the kind of man he is more than the words he says. (And Vala hitting on Jack? :eek: I don't see that happening.)


But in SG1, which is a show about the military and military threats, it's EASIER to write a character that is MILITARY in to the story, because they fit well.

Vala isn't. Sure you can shoe horn her in, but unless the story is the type to utilise her very specific expertise, then you'd get the Teyla scenario again. And people would complain. She's a VERY specific character. Her role in S9 and 10 of SG1 was VERY specific to the Ori plot. Mitchell is generic. He can be applied to everything easily. Vala is more difficult. Think about it, her most useful and important scenes in SG1 were to do with her pregnancy and her interaction with the Orici.

In principle, yes. But Vala has other aspects to her character than her relationship to the Ori. And if the military characters are only there for their basic purpose on the team, then they're not interesting characters to watch—they're the red shirts of the week. Any character with more going for them than their essential purpose on the team will "fit" in any story if the writer wants them to.

Flyboy
January 8th, 2009, 11:09 AM
I didn't fully believe Jack when he said that; I think his loyalty to his team runs deeper than anything else in him. If you look at how many times he risked everything on their judgment...that proves the kind of man he is more than the words he says. (And Vala hitting on Jack? :eek: I don't see that happening.)



In principle, yes. But Vala has other aspects to her character than her relationship to the Ori. And if the military characters are only there for their basic purpose on the team, then they're not interesting characters to watch—they're the red shirts of the week. Any character with more going for them than their essential purpose on the team will "fit" in any story if the writer wants them to.
They may 'fit' but will they do anything?

I keep mentioning Teyla because it's one of the biggest bug bears of the SGA fans. She may be in an ep, but more often than not she has no real role to play. Vala COULD end up the same in THIS PARTICULAR movie if she was put in for the hell of it.

MerryK
January 8th, 2009, 11:12 AM
They may 'fit' but will they do anything?

I keep mentioning Teyla because it's one of the biggest bug bears of the SGA fans. She may be in an ep, but more often than not she has no real role to play. Vala COULD end up the same in THIS PARTICULAR movie if she was put in for the hell of it.

I know...I love Teyla, and it's great when she has something to do, but most of the time she's wallpaper. And I'd hate that for Vala, but I'd rather her be wallpaper and at least acknowledged as part of the team, than simply left out. As I've said before, if only part of the team is in the movie, then Vala's absence won't be a very big issue for me. But if she's the only one gone, then I'll be upset.

Ripple in Space
January 8th, 2009, 11:34 AM
I didn't fully believe Jack when he said that; I think his loyalty to his team runs deeper than anything else in him. If you look at how many times he risked everything on their judgment...that proves the kind of man he is more than the words he says. (And Vala hitting on Jack? :eek: I don't see that happening.)

Vala hits on every male (and some female) character.

Flyboy
January 8th, 2009, 11:35 AM
Vala hits on every male (and some female) character.
Female? Really?

Madwelshboy
January 8th, 2009, 12:33 PM
That's not what I said and you know it.

But in SG1, which is a show about the military and military threats, it's EASIER to write a character that is MILITARY in to the story, because they fit well.

Vala isn't. Sure you can shoe horn her in, but unless the story is the type to utilise her very specific expertise, then you'd get the Teyla scenario again. And people would complain. She's a VERY specific character. Her role in S9 and 10 of SG1 was VERY specific to the Ori plot. Mitchell is generic. He can be applied to everything easily. Vala is more difficult. Think about it, her most useful and important scenes in SG1 were to do with her pregnancy and her interaction with the Orici.

Yes the SGC is run by the air force, but unless ive missed something the SG1 team has only ever had a maxium of 2 military offices on it at any given time and in 10 season only 3 member of SG1 have been military, compared to 4 non millitary characters. so considering the history behind the team, its just as easy to write in a non military member as it is a military member

Flyboy
January 8th, 2009, 12:38 PM
Yes the SGC is run by the air force, but unless ive missed something the SG1 team has only ever had a maxium of 2 military offices on it at any given time and in 10 season only 3 member of SG1 have been military, compared to 4 non millitary characters. so considering the history behind the team, its just as easy to write in a non military member as it is a military member
Granted but let us also consider this. Daniel jackson has proven essential to the team because of his speciality - archeology. Teal'c has been essential to the team because of his expertise on the goa'uld and the involvement of the Jaffa Nation with the Ori threat.

I simply said it's easier if they're military officers. Carter, Mitchell and O'Neill don't need any justification to play ANY part, as the show is about the military. The nature of the threats that SG1 face are usually related to something ancient or indeed, Ancient (capital A), hence Daniel's involvement. Teal'c himself left SG1 when the Goa'uld were defeated, but was brought back for the Ori threat because it threatened the Jaffa nation.

In short, the defining features of Daniel and Teal'c make them easy to include in a movie, Jaffa politics and archeology. Vala? Not so much.

It's easy to write in a non military member when theres a situation requiring them. It was easy to write Vala into AoT because the situation required her. However in a crisis situation, whcih has nothing to do with the Ori, what good is Vala?

MerryK
January 8th, 2009, 06:58 PM
It's easy to write in a non military member when theres a situation requiring them. It was easy to write Vala into AoT because the situation required her. However in a crisis situation, whcih has nothing to do with the Ori, what good is Vala?

Vala isn't the sort of character who has one specialty that defines her role...she's a whole lot more rounded than that. ;) Just like Teal'c, who doesn't need to be in a story simply for muscle power or Jaffa politics—in fact, his best scenes do not involve those at all. Just like most of the other characters, although granted their specialties come up a lot more often. But really, defining characters by their own purpose is lowering them to 2D personalities. Sam pulled off episodes that weren't science related; Daniel did the same in ones without archaeology or history. And what was Jack's specialty? Witty quips?

Good writers can find purpose and conflict for characters that isn't necessarily a "job". How many episodes of Stargate have needed a character there for emotional support? Needed a voice of moral outrage? A voice of reason? Someone to give another character a needed push in some direction? It may not be "obvious" storytelling, but it's quality, and it's shown up in Stargate in many many episodes.

Ripple in Space
January 8th, 2009, 07:08 PM
Female? Really?

Yeah, some nameless lady SGC personnel in S9, I forget the ep.

Ripple in Space
January 8th, 2009, 07:20 PM
And what was Jack's specialty? Witty quips?
Um, leader, star, the Tau'ri closest to having Ancient physiology, strategist, master pilot, master marksmen, buddies with the Milky Way's guardians (Asgard), etc., etc., etc.

With Vala, are we talking about her as a character or specialty skills? With skills, I guess Goa'uld technology proficiency and general cunning. In terms of personality, initially I'm pretty sure she was just thrown in to fill the huge void SG-1 had losing 3 of its stars at one time (Jack, Sam & Hammond). S9 was probably the only time that 3 leads were missing, so tptb brought in a popular guest star to fill the void. Later on I think she was meant to fill Jack's old role of pointing out the obvious to the wise & brilliant teammates who may overlook it. And she did so in a humorous manner, also like Jack.

MerryK
January 8th, 2009, 07:37 PM
Um, leader, star, the Tau'ri closest to having Ancient physiology, strategist, master pilot, master marksmen, buddies with the Milky Way's guardians (Asgard), etc., etc., etc.

With Vala, are we talking about her as a character or specialty skills? With skills, I guess Goa'uld technology proficiency and general cunning. In terms of personality, initially I'm pretty sure she was just thrown in to fill the huge void SG-1 had losing 3 of its stars at one time (Jack, Sam & Hammond). S9 was probably the only time that 3 leads were missing, so tptb brought in a popular guest star to fill the void. Later on I think she was meant to fill Jack's old role of pointing out the obvious to the wise & brilliant teammates who may overlook it. And she did so in a humorous manner, also like Jack.

I'd have to disagree somewhat about Jack's specialties. To be sure, he had the Ancient gene and was closest to the Asgard, but marksmen/pilots were rarely called for, and I wouldn't call all of his strategies masterful. ;) Like Vala, he was there for other reasons than his skills, usually. I recall Jacob's line in The Serpent's Venom after stating why he needs Teal'c, Sam, and Daniel: "Oh, and Jack's just great fun." Not his only role, of course—he had range over the series, but often he had a more abstract than concrete one.

(Oh, and I think Vala has several interesting angles to her personality, like Jack. Similar in some areas, but different enough to make the idea of their interaction very intriguing to a lot of fans.)

StarCapnRa
January 8th, 2009, 07:59 PM
I'll paraphrase what I said in the oither thread.

I don't like Vala's character. I don't see any depth to her beyond being the sexy female alien who whinges to Daniel. A lot. I don't find her whining in critical situations as cute as others seem to.

On the other hand; she was a member of SG-1 s a regula through season 10 and in the proper timelines of both movies. They shouldn't really just drop her or emotionlessly kick her out the door the flimsiest of pretexts like Jonas.

I can sympathize with not wanting the character to play a major role in the movies, but she needs to at least appear enough in the 3rd movie to be sensibly written away out in a way that's respectful to the character.
I did like the character of Vala. Personally I thought that Claudia Black was the most talented actor to hit the show - ever.
Having said that, thank you for having the class to realize that a character you didn't like deserved better treatment. I commend you.

Ripple in Space
January 8th, 2009, 08:01 PM
I'd have to disagree somewhat about Jack's specialties. To be sure, he had the Ancient gene and was closest to the Asgard, but marksmen/pilots were rarely called for, and I wouldn't call all of his strategies masterful. ;) Like Vala, he was there for other reasons than his skills, usually. I recall Jacob's line in The Serpent's Venom after stating why he needs Teal'c, Sam, and Daniel: "Oh, and Jack's just great fun." Not his only role, of course—he had range over the series, but often he had a more abstract than concrete one.

(Oh, and I think Vala has several interesting angles to her personality, like Jack. Similar in some areas, but different enough to make the idea of their interaction very intriguing to a lot of fans.)
It would be very interesting to me anyway.

And marksmen not important? I can't think of many episodes when Jack didn't fire a gun, lol

PG15
January 8th, 2009, 08:21 PM
Whatever quality Jack had, it was clear what his role was: commander of SG1.

MerryK
January 8th, 2009, 08:22 PM
And marksmen not important? I can't think of many episodes when Jack didn't fire a gun, lol

True. ;) I thought you meant having special gun-firing skills that made him unique.

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 04:09 AM
Vala isn't the sort of character who has one specialty that defines her role...she's a whole lot more rounded than that. ;) Just like Teal'c, who doesn't need to be in a story simply for muscle power or Jaffa politics—in fact, his best scenes do not involve those at all. Just like most of the other characters, although granted their specialties come up a lot more often. But really, defining characters by their own purpose is lowering them to 2D personalities. Sam pulled off episodes that weren't science related; Daniel did the same in ones without archaeology or history. And what was Jack's specialty? Witty quips?

Good writers can find purpose and conflict for characters that isn't necessarily a "job". How many episodes of Stargate have needed a character there for emotional support? Needed a voice of moral outrage? A voice of reason? Someone to give another character a needed push in some direction? It may not be "obvious" storytelling, but it's quality, and it's shown up in Stargate in many many episodes.
Jack's speciality is obvious. Ex-special forces military leader. He has a level of military training that surpasses both Carter and Mitchell.

Now it's all well and good in a tv series having people who's core identifying features aren't called for in a certain episode, but will be in the next episode for example, because a TV series is different from a movie.

But in a one shot deal such as a movie, you're less likely to be able to pull off a character that frankly has no easy way of getting them into the plot. Ie - is part of the institution dealing with the threats. Daniel is on USAF payroll and has an office in the SGC. He may not be military personnel, but he works for the military, as a lot of civilians do. Teal'c is a bit more of an issue frankly. And tbh, I can't comment on his involvement until I know the movie's plot - what I do know though is that if Vala isn't in the movie, the plot probably means she wouldn't fit.

As for Vala being more rounded - I fail to see how. At least now anyway. I'm not a Vala hater - I enjoyed S8 and S9 Vala quite a bit. But she's most certainly not my favourite character. I think, and I mean this with no disrespect, that you're being a bit biased, as is everyone when they discuss their favourite characters. But apart from Vala's nifty little tricks with goa'uld healing devices, she has little going for her now in terms of being rounded. her defining feature was her relationship to the Orici, and the fact that she used to be a goa'uld host. Neither are really relevant any more.

MerryK
January 9th, 2009, 06:17 AM
As for Vala being more rounded - I fail to see how. At least now anyway. I'm not a Vala hater - I enjoyed S8 and S9 Vala quite a bit. But she's most certainly not my favourite character. I think, and I mean this with no disrespect, that you're being a bit biased, as is everyone when they discuss their favourite characters. But apart from Vala's nifty little tricks with goa'uld healing devices, she has little going for her now in terms of being rounded. her defining feature was her relationship to the Orici, and the fact that she used to be a goa'uld host. Neither are really relevant any more.

Well, of course I'm being biased. ;) How could I not be? Everyone is. But you keep returning to that "defining feature" of Vala's that only showed up for the second half of her tenure on the show. As a student of literature and a writer, it rubs me the wrong way to think of a character in terms of their "defining feature". Which is why I balk when people say Sam's only there for science, so therefore she has no place on Atlantis where they have Mckay, etc. Vala is probably one of my favorite characters just because she can't be put in a box. She's not "the Jaffa", "the scientist", "the military leader", or "the archaeologist".

But she does have talents and skills, both from an in-universe and out-universe perspective. She's ingenious, intuitive, technologically adept, familiar with Goa'uld, familiar with much of the galaxy in general, persuasive to people who don't already know her, and loyal to the team. And from a meta point of view, she provides spirit and humor and emotional/moral support, not to mention the rounding out of the personalities of the team. I could pull up examples of all of these from various episodes in a longer meta, and most of them show up more than once, but they all fit into a 3D character. (I probably will do that meta someday.)

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 06:24 AM
Well, of course I'm being biased. ;) How could I not be? Everyone is. But you keep returning to that "defining feature" of Vala's that only showed up for the second half of her tenure on the show. As a student of literature and a writer, it rubs me the wrong way to think of a character in terms of their "defining feature". Which is why I balk when people say Sam's only there for science, so therefore she has no place on Atlantis where they have Mckay, etc. Vala is probably one of my favorite characters just because she can't be put in a box. She's not "the Jaffa", "the scientist", "the military leader", or "the archaeologist".

But she does have talents and skills, both from an in-universe and out-universe perspective. She's ingenious, intuitive, technologically adept, familiar with Goa'uld, familiar with much of the galaxy in general, persuasive to people who don't already know her, and loyal to the team. And from a meta point of view, she provides spirit and humor and emotional/moral support, not to mention the rounding out of the personalities of the team. I could pull up examples of all of these from various episodes in a longer meta, and most of them show up more than once, but they all fit into a 3D character. (I probably will do that meta someday.)
Well, I can't help but think from a military point of view, but she doesn't bring anything to the team now, particularly since she became 5 year old Vala as opposed to hard ass Vala of S8 and 9.

Regardless of whether or not you like thinking of people in terms of defining feature, it's important. SG1 NEEDED a scientist, thus Sam was posted onto it. Now Sam does MORE than be a scientist, she's a military officer, and has, on occasions I believe, acted as a diplomat, but first and formost - scientist. SGA is a different ball game, because as a military officer you can be posted anywhere, and that was a command tour for her. However back to SG1, the same can be said of Danny and Jack, quite easily.

MerryK
January 9th, 2009, 06:34 AM
Well, I can't help but think from a military point of view, but she doesn't bring anything to the team now, particularly since she became 5 year old Vala as opposed to hard ass Vala of S8 and 9.

Regardless of whether or not you like thinking of people in terms of defining feature, it's important. SG1 NEEDED a scientist, thus Sam was posted onto it. Now Sam does MORE than be a scientist, she's a military officer, and has, on occasions I believe, acted as a diplomat, but first and formost - scientist. SGA is a different ball game, because as a military officer you can be posted anywhere, and that was a command tour for her. However back to SG1, the same can be said of Danny and Jack, quite easily.

Ah, now that may be where we disagree most strongly. Because I don't think the SGC is mainly a military operation anymore. Not without an enemy to fight. And therefore, more needs to be considered than tactical advantage. Including fit-ness on a team. Vala wasn't hand picked for her skills and then stuffed like a round peg in a square hole onto SG-1. She wandered in the back door, and gradually migrated on a team, and I think it's pretty clear that they all became attached to her in some way and vice versa, otherwise she wouldn't be there or there would be some kind of conflict. And do you deny that Vala has provided such advantage in episodes, apart from her relationship to the Ori (which, for the matter, was equally Daniel's role in Season 10)? If she was absolutely useless, I would understand your perspective better—but she isn't, and so unless you're evaluating her with rigid labels and cold detachment from personal ties, she belongs on SG-1.

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 09:17 AM
Ah, now that may be where we disagree most strongly. Because I don't think the SGC is mainly a military operation anymore. Not without an enemy to fight. And therefore, more needs to be considered than tactical advantage. Including fit-ness on a team. Vala wasn't hand picked for her skills and then stuffed like a round peg in a square hole onto SG-1. She wandered in the back door, and gradually migrated on a team, and I think it's pretty clear that they all became attached to her in some way and vice versa, otherwise she wouldn't be there or there would be some kind of conflict. And do you deny that Vala has provided such advantage in episodes, apart from her relationship to the Ori (which, for the matter, was equally Daniel's role in Season 10)? If she was absolutely useless, I would understand your perspective better—but she isn't, and so unless you're evaluating her with rigid labels and cold detachment from personal ties, she belongs on SG-1.
Personel ties are one thing, but then, that's a wishy washy reason (not aiming that at YOU, aiming that at the SGC if it were the case) to put someone onto a flagship team. There may be no specific 'big bad' anymore for the Milky Way, but that doesn't mean that the SGC isn't running a miitary exploration of the galaxy that can still encounter hostilities of some form, afterall, how many enemies did we meet that weren't the goa'uld?

Daniel's Ori relationship was important yes, but then look who it was who got THE vital scenes with the Orici, Vala (apart from The Quest).

Even diplomatically speaking, Vala in S10 has demonstrated an astonishing lack of professional behaviour, the Shroud, going on about the Da Vinci Code which could actually have damaged Mitchell's arguments.

I'm automatically sceptical of aliens on SG teams, compare me to Sergeant Bates as much as you like, but the man has a point. Teal'c was an exception, particularly due to the massive advantage he brought and the alliances he helped forge. Vala however is an individual who, may have been a tough not out there in the galaxy, has had no formal training, and serves no SPECIFIC role on the team - Jackson wouldn't have been allowed on the team if he hadn't had a specific role to play.

She might have this strange friendship with most of SG1, but professionally speaking it doesn't matter much. And she's the one member of SG1 that I would not trust to watch my back in a fire fight. At least, after S10 that is. Now if we still saw aggressive, powerful, commanding ,'hair down' Vala, then I might conceed that she could play a part on the team, at least in terms of combat skills and usefullness. Little miss pigtails Vala from S10 who skips through the Stargate and doesnt even wear her issue trousers properly would, if I were General Landry, make me grip the arms of my chair, and widen my eyes before shouting at Walter to get her off my base.

I guess my point is, automatically, I see no place for her in a crisis since the Ori threat was dealt with, she was usefull then but not now. Had she remained her S8 and 9 character, I would probably overlook this fact and submit to your arguments that despite not being military, or having a specific role, she could still be useful on the team. But currently she just strikes me as being a liability.

A shame, because interestingly enough, I went off Carter a lot in S9 - AoT (yet liked her a lot in S1-8, Continuum and SGA), and in S9, I asked myself why they couldn't have just stuck with Vala, because in that season, she replaced Carter quite well imo.

Integrabyte
January 9th, 2009, 09:25 AM
Vala was a new ingredient offering them opportunities to explore. I loved every moment with her on screen. Claudia's chemistry was perfect with Shanks but with Ben it was even better. The scene in The Quest when Danny is losing his mind was superb. At the end of the day, we all do what we want with our money. I bought the last SG1 seasons because of Claudia Black and her part in the ORI arc. I bought both AOT and Continuum because of her. If she is not in the other films I will not bother to buy or see them.

No offence to Jack, Daniel, and Teal'c fans but I don't want a Stargate film exploring their characters....again. We had 8 Seasons for that, I've had enough. The best SG seasons are with Vala. Continuum was great because of Quetesh. The rest was overdone and 10 years of goa'uld is overkill.


(c), batteries sold separately.

Killdeer
January 9th, 2009, 09:28 AM
and in S9, I asked myself why they couldn't have just stuck with Vala, because in that season, she replaced Carter quite well imo.

I agree with that part - I did the same. I always wished they had given Carter a ship command for the last couple of seasons and made SG-1 Mitchell, Teal'c, Daniel, and Vala. I loved the episodes with just the four of them, although I know a lot of people hated them. *shields from incoming fire* ;)

Mandysg1
January 9th, 2009, 09:37 AM
I agree with that part - I did the same. I always wished they had given Carter a ship command for the last couple of seasons and made SG-1 Mitchell, Teal'c, Daniel, and Vala. I loved the episodes with just the four of them, although I know a lot of people hated them. *shields from incoming fire* ;)

No fire, but it would have been easier for me to stop watching the show all together ;)

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 09:40 AM
Personel ties are one thing, but then, that's a wishy washy reason (not aiming that at YOU, aiming that at the SGC if it were the case) to put someone onto a flagship team. There may be no specific 'big bad' anymore for the Milky Way, but that doesn't mean that the SGC isn't running a miitary exploration of the galaxy that can still encounter hostilities of some form, afterall, how many enemies did we meet that weren't the goa'uld?

Daniel's Ori relationship was important yes, but then look who it was who got THE vital scenes with the Orici, Vala (apart from The Quest).

Even diplomatically speaking, Vala in S10 has demonstrated an astonishing lack of professional behaviour, the Shroud, going on about the Da Vinci Code which could actually have damaged Mitchell's arguments.

I'm automatically sceptical of aliens on SG teams, compare me to Sergeant Bates as much as you like, but the man has a point. Teal'c was an exception, particularly due to the massive advantage he brought and the alliances he helped forge. Vala however is an individual who, may have been a tough not out there in the galaxy, has had no formal training, and serves no SPECIFIC role on the team - Jackson wouldn't have been allowed on the team if he hadn't had a specific role to play.

She might have this strange friendship with most of SG1, but professionally speaking it doesn't matter much. And she's the one member of SG1 that I would not trust to watch my back in a fire fight. At least, after S10 that is. Now if we still saw aggressive, powerful, commanding ,'hair down' Vala, then I might conceed that she could play a part on the team, at least in terms of combat skills and usefullness. Little miss pigtails Vala from S10 who skips through the Stargate and doesnt even wear her issue trousers properly would, if I were General Landry, make me grip the arms of my chair, and widen my eyes before shouting at Walter to get her off my base.

I guess my point is, automatically, I see no place for her in a crisis since the Ori threat was dealt with, she was usefull then but not now. Had she remained her S8 and 9 character, I would probably overlook this fact and submit to your arguments that despite not being military, or having a specific role, she could still be useful on the team. But currently she just strikes me as being a liability.

A shame, because interestingly enough, I went off Carter a lot in S9 - AoT (yet liked her a lot in S1-8, Continuum and SGA), and in S9, I asked myself why they couldn't have just stuck with Vala, because in that season, she replaced Carter quite well imo.
__________________

This is interesting, because I hadn't pegged the 'let's go play'/pigtails-Vala as season ten, maybe because when I think of finding Vala irritating, I think of season 9. I like the strength of season 9 Vala, but I find the sexual harrassment pretty appalling.

I really didn't go for the 'entertain me-it's ever so much more important than the fate of the galaxy' in either season, and yet, I liked the resourceful Vala of Memento Mori, I liked her in the 'The Powers that Be', with the exception of her impersonation of Qetesh at the beginning. I didn't think SG-1 should have gone along with that. SG-1 is always very clear about false gods.

Much as there were times that I did grow to empathize with Vala (which is a testement to Claudia Black, because it didn't come out of the writing), her lack of respect for other people's boundries, and the need to babysit her, made me pretty crazy.

To me, this was, and is, a character that I could like, but they have to bring her into the same level of realism that is consistantly exercised with the other characters.

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 09:43 AM
This is interesting, because I hadn't pegged the 'let's go play'/pigtails-Vala as season ten, maybe because when I think of finding Vala irritating, I think of season 9. I like the strength of season 9 Vala, but I find the sexual harrassment pretty appalling.

I really didn't go for the 'entertain me-it's ever so much more important than the fate of the galaxy' in either season, and yet, I liked the resourceful Vala of Memento Mori, I liked her in the 'The Powers that Be', with the exception of her impersonation of Qetesh at the beginning. I didn't think SG-1 should have gone along with that. SG-1 is always very clear about false gods.

Much as there were times that I did grow to empathize with Vala (which is a testement to Claudia Black, because it didn't come out of the writing), her lack of respect for other people's boundries, and the need to babysit her, made me pretty crazy.

To me, this was, and is, a character that I could like, but they have to bring her into the same level of realism that is consistantly exercised with the other characters.
Intriguing. I may have to rewatch S9 and 10 to see what you mean, but the 'entertain me' thin was definitely present in S10. Let's not forget that in Unending, one of my most hated scenes ever saw Vala throwing a fake birthday party for Daniel with the crew just because she wanted something to do, having already tricked them into thinking it was her birthday before.

As for sexual harassment, whilst I don't agree with it, I prefered the strong harassing Vala to the "aren't I cute, now sleep with me" Vala.

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 09:47 AM
Let's not forget that in Unending, one of my most hated scenes ever saw Vala throwing a fake birthday party for Daniel with the crew just because she wanted something to do, having already tricked them into thinking it was her birthday before.

I am so with you there!

MerryK
January 9th, 2009, 10:01 AM
Personel ties are one thing, but then, that's a wishy washy reason (not aiming that at YOU, aiming that at the SGC if it were the case) to put someone onto a flagship team.

<snipped for length>

And she's the one member of SG1 that I would not trust to watch my back in a fire fight. At least, after S10 that is.

Strangely, I'd trust her just as much as Daniel, possibly more (since he might get distracted). She's got loyalty down pat, once she's on your side. That may be why I think she's a good fit on the team, although it's also related to this:


Intriguing. I may have to rewatch S9 and 10 to see what you mean, but the 'entertain me' thin was definitely present in S10. Let's not forget that in Unending, one of my most hated scenes ever saw Vala throwing a fake birthday party for Daniel with the crew just because she wanted something to do, having already tricked them into thinking it was her birthday before.

As for sexual harassment, whilst I don't agree with it, I prefered the strong harassing Vala to the "aren't I cute, now sleep with me" Vala.

I never took Vala's pigtails and strange "playful" behavior as indicative of a shallow character, rather an overactive curiosity about Earth and a lack of knowledge about what things are "professional" for Earth people. When she got serious, it didn't feel like a change of character, which it would have if she really was all parties and hair ties at heart.

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 10:04 AM
Strangely, I'd trust her just as much as Daniel, possibly more (since he might get distracted). She's got loyalty down pat, once she's on your side. That may be why I think she's a good fit on the team, although it's also related to this:



I never took Vala's pigtails and strange "playful" behavior as indicative of a shallow character, rather an overactive curiosity about Earth and a lack of knowledge about what things are "professional" for Earth people. When she got serious, it didn't feel like a change of character, which it would have if she really was all parties and hair ties at heart.
But can you *really* see the Vala who beats up and sexually abuses Daniel in Prometheus Unbound as the Vala in S10? Who complains about breaking nails and how the guys stink to high heaven in AoT?

flynn1959
January 9th, 2009, 10:19 AM
But can you *really* see the Vala who beats up and sexually abuses Daniel in Prometheus Unbound as the Vala in S10? Who complains about breaking nails and how the guys stink to high heaven in AoT?

I can. Vala is a character of incredible depth and many, many facets. That's what makes her so real. And I must have a different version of PU than you because I totally missed her sexually abusing Daniel! I did notice Daniel stripping her naked and then joking about it though, so I think he gave as good as he might have got.

I just can't imagine the next movie without Vala, she is a part of the team now and should be there. I was looking forward to seeing here interact with Jack - I see many similarities between them and it might have been fun to get those two together in a few scenes. I have a lot less interest in this movie now that I know my favourite female character isn't going to be in it.

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 10:28 AM
Strangely, I'd trust her just as much as Daniel, possibly more (since he might get distracted). She's got loyalty down pat, once she's on your side.

I have to disagree with you here. Daniel might not have always had his eye on the ball in seasons 1 and 2, but it's been a long time since that was the case. And it was never as pronounced as it is in fiction.
Vala is loyal, but her ideas of helpful are sometimes dubious.


I never took Vala's pigtails and strange "playful" behavior as indicative of a shallow character, rather an overactive curiosity about Earth and a lack of knowledge about what things are "professional" for Earth people.

Vala isn't even remotely stupid, and she is constantly surrounded by examples of professional behavior. Heck, Daniel tells he in no uncertain terms what she is doing wrong, and yet she persists. I can only assume that she willfully ignores what she sees and hears, because she wants to.

BTW, I do agree with you about the scenes in The Quest, with her, Daniel, and Cam. Those were very well done.

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 10:30 AM
I have to disagree with you here. Daniel might not have always had his eye on the ball in seasons 1 and 2, but it's been a long time since that was the case. And it was never as pronounced as it is in fiction.
Vala is loyal, but her ideas of helpful are sometimes dubious.



Vala isn't even remotely stupid, and she is constantly surrounded by examples of professional behavior. Heck, Daniel tells he in no uncertain terms what she is doing wrong, and yet she persists. I can only assume that she willfully ignores what she sees and hears, because she wants to.

BTW, I do agree with you about the scenes in The Quest, with her, Daniel, and Cam. Those were very well done.
This is the thing. We KNOW Black is a good actress. It comes down to writing. In many ways, I see a similarity between early Vala and Aren Sung (really can't spell that name) from Farscape. - SHE is the sort of woman who I could see on SG1. Pigtails Vala? No. And that's the writing. And I wonder if that's because in S10, they had a very strong woman already. Ie Carter.

Killdeer
January 9th, 2009, 10:33 AM
Aren Sung (really can't spell that name)

Aeryn Sun :)

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 10:35 AM
Aeryn Sun :)
Cheers!

Killdeer
January 9th, 2009, 10:37 AM
Cheers!

No problem. ;) My favorite female character ever, bar none.

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 10:45 AM
They were very worried about both Claudia Black's and Ben Browder's characters not being differentiated from their Farscape characters. I think that most of Vala's excesses result from over-compensation in that area.

Killdeer
January 9th, 2009, 10:49 AM
Possibly, but I think FOB has a point too. Playing up Vala's technology skills and ass-kicking skills would have cut into Sam's areas of expertise. After all, in Bad Guys she's smart enough to figure out a way to rig the gate to work - no Sam required. *shrugs* Not to mention what she did to the Prometheus and its crew the first time we meet her. She's obviously someone to be reckoned with when she wants to be.

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 10:53 AM
Possibly, but I think FOB has a point too. Playing up Vala's technology skills and ass-kicking skills would have cut into Sam's areas of expertise. After all, in Bad Guys she's smart enough to figure out a way to rig the gate to work - no Sam required. *shrugs* Not to mention what she did to the Prometheus and its crew the first time we meet her. She's obviously someone to be reckoned with when she wants to be.
Which is exactly why I don't buy pigtails Vala.

Say what you want about depth, but I've never seen someone who's THAT tough and yet acts like a 5 year old child.

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 10:57 AM
Which is exactly why I don't buy pigtails Vala.

Say what you want about depth, but I've never seen someone who's THAT tough and yet acts like a 5 year old child.

I'd raise that to sixteen-just so the harrassment isn't beyond creepy. ; )

MerryK
January 9th, 2009, 11:07 AM
But can you *really* see the Vala who beats up and sexually abuses Daniel in Prometheus Unbound as the Vala in S10? Who complains about breaking nails and how the guys stink to high heaven in AoT?

Absolutely. She's without a foundation in PU and early Season 9, and so her identity isn't truly defined. But her hand puppet routine in that is motivated by the same feelings as her complaints about BO in AOT, IMO. She gets frustrated and becomes bluntly honest.


I have to disagree with you here. Daniel might not have always had his eye on the ball in seasons 1 and 2, but it's been a long time since that was the case. And it was never as pronounced as it is in fiction.

Oh yes, fanon!Daniel is oblivious to the world around him. But even in canon, he follows his own motivations—be that his team, his wife, the "right" thing, or even revenge/payback sometimes. You're never exactly sure what side he'll fall on. I love the man, but I wouldn't trust my life to him. Once Vala's made her choice, though, I don't see her going back on it.


Vala isn't even remotely stupid, and she is constantly surrounded by examples of professional behavior. Heck, Daniel tells he in no uncertain terms what she is doing wrong, and yet she persists. I can only assume that she willfully ignores what she sees and hears, because she wants to.

Daniel tells her that stealing and lying are wrong. That does not equal what is "professional" behavior, that wearing pigtails makes her look "cute"; I don't think anyone ever told her that. And there's no one standard for professional behavior anyway. Look at Mckay, and Felger—held to much different standards than the military personnel. She's only been at the SGC for a year or so—how quickly do you realistically expect an alien exposed to hundreds of strange mores and norms to seamlessly adapt herself to a new one? The point is, I don't think she's trying to be "cute" or "irreverent".

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 11:12 AM
I'm pretty sure that while we might find common ground on Vala, we will never agree, so I will confine my comments to Daniel.


But even in canon, he follows his own motivations—be that his team, his wife, the "right" thing, or even revenge/payback sometimes. You're never exactly sure what side he'll fall on. I love the man, but I wouldn't trust my life to him

Daniel demonstrates over and over that he will not only put himself in harm's way for the people around him, but will knowingly sacrifice his life. You can't ask anyone to do more to watch your back.

MerryK
January 9th, 2009, 11:14 AM
Daniel demonstrates over and over that he will not only put himself in harm's way for the people around him, but will knowingly sacrifice his life. You can't ask anyone to do more to watch your back.

Not exclusively, unless by people around him you mean his team and very very close friends. Other than them, only if he thinks you're worth it.

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 11:21 AM
Not exclusively, unless by people around him you mean his team and very very close friends. Other than them, only if he thinks you're worth it.

If that were the case, I don't see Vala as being any different in that regard. She's not going to go out of her way for people that she doesn't think are worth it. But, in fact, there is a one word rebuttal. Kelowna.

Hubble
January 9th, 2009, 12:28 PM
Which is exactly why I don't buy pigtails Vala.

Say what you want about depth, but I've never seen someone who's THAT tough and yet acts like a 5 year old child.


I agree totally. I loved Vala in PU. I thought it would have been great to have to her show up occasionally (like Maybourne). Claudia is such a good actress; heck, they could have given her her own spin off and I would have watched THAT Vala.

But the one of S9 and 10 as a regular member was such a turn off for me. I absolutely loathed the scene (can't remember the episode) where she was in the room casting her little sexual innuendoes and put downs at the Congressmen thing during the budget meeting; the packing of her hair dryer on a mission, the chocolate ice cream on her nose, the little girly, constant sexual harrassment stuff, etc. The alien, not knowing earth's customs, trying to fit in, being reduced in some respects to a little kid, has been done so many times and far better. And not only did she behaved like a five year old on several occasions, but a very spoiled one at that.

I wasn't interested in seeing her vulnerabilities, in seeing her fit in, being accepted, proving herself to SG-1 and finding a home. In doing that, they took away all that I found intriguing and loved about the character in the first place and turned her into a mostly annoying character (for me). I won't even discuss the pigtails......

Flyboy
January 9th, 2009, 12:47 PM
I agree totally. I loved Vala in PU. I thought it would have been great to have to her show up occasionally (like Maybourne). Claudia is such a good actress; heck, they could have given her her own spin off and I would have watched THAT Vala.

But the one of S9 and 10 as a regular member was such a turn off for me. I absolutely loathed the scene (can't remember the episode) where she was in the room casting her little sexual innuendoes and put downs at the Congressmen thing during the budget meeting; the packing of her hair dryer on a mission, the chocolate ice cream on her nose, the little girly, constant sexual harrassment stuff, etc. The alien, not knowing earth's customs, trying to fit in, being reduced in some respects to a little kid, has been done so many times and far better. And not only did she behaved like a five year old on several occasions, but a very spoiled one at that.

I wasn't interested in seeing her vulnerabilities, in seeing her fit in, being accepted, proving herself to SG-1 and finding a home. In doing that, they took away all that I found intriguing and loved about the character in the first place and turned her into a mostly annoying character (for me). I won't even discuss the pigtails......
Ick! The hair drier. That is most certainly not something I'd have expected from the PU Vala.

MerryK
January 9th, 2009, 12:59 PM
If that were the case, I don't see Vala as being any different in that regard. She's not going to go out of her way for people that she doesn't think are worth it. But, in fact, there is a one word rebuttal. Kelowna.

You're correct, I should have qualified that "with rare exceptions". Mea culpa. But seriously, if you read Random's story "Good Man" and sg-fig-newton's "Canon vs. Fanon" series on Livejournal, there is no way that Daniel can be considered as pure-hearted and self-sacrificial in canon as a lot of people seem to think he is. He doesn't try to save everyone; he coldly ignores some people; and if you mess up in his mind, you're toast. Vala, for all her issues, seems more unequivocably caring once her priorities are sorted out (heck, even before that she risked her own life several times for the sake of others)--it may come down to personal impressions in the end, but I think that Vala would vouch and maybe risk her life for me, while I'm not sure if I'd even make it onto Daniel's radar.

ValaJackson
January 9th, 2009, 06:11 PM
Vala was a new ingredient offering them opportunities to explore. I loved every moment with her on screen. Claudia's chemistry was perfect with Shanks but with Ben it was even better. The scene in The Quest when Danny is losing his mind was superb. At the end of the day, we all do what we want with our money. I bought the last SG1 seasons because of Claudia Black and her part in the ORI arc. I bought both AOT and Continuum because of her. If she is not in the other films I will not bother to buy or see them.

No offence to Jack, Daniel, and Teal'c fans but I don't want a Stargate film exploring their characters....again. We had 8 Seasons for that, I've had enough. The best SG seasons are with Vala. Continuum was great because of Quetesh. The rest was overdone and 10 years of goa'uld is overkill.


(c), batteries sold separately.

Indeed!
Personally I can not stand series that don't evolve.
I know this is sci-fi, but, do you know anybody that stays always the same?
Just doesn't make sense.
I have many friends that got bored after season 5, and the reason was precisely that they did alwasy the same.
My point here is, I hate the idea of going back on the concept.
So the question is, which would be heavier, the purists concept or the evolving concept?

Anyway, if SG-1 is going on mission, what has to do a big General with it?
While I love Jack's character, I just don't see the logic on sending the big guy to do field job.

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 06:13 PM
You're correct, I should have qualified that "with rare exceptions". Mea culpa. But seriously, if you read Random's story "Good Man" and sg-fig-newton's "Canon vs. Fanon" series on Livejournal, there is no way that Daniel can be considered as pure-hearted and self-sacrificial in canon as a lot of people seem to think he is. He doesn't try to save everyone; he coldly ignores some people; and if you mess up in his mind, you're toast. Vala, for all her issues, seems more unequivocably caring once her priorities are sorted out (heck, even before that she risked her own life several times for the sake of others)--it may come down to personal impressions in the end, but I think that Vala would vouch and maybe risk her life for me, while I'm not sure if I'd even make it onto Daniel's radar.

I actually have to agree with that assesment of Daniel (I can't actually think of a case that demonstrates this where I haven't agreed with his point of view, though), if not of Vala. ; ) We do see Vala rather differently. At least we agree, generally, about Daniel. : )

Ripple in Space
January 9th, 2009, 06:18 PM
True. ;) I thought you meant having special gun-firing skills that made him unique.

Well him being a master marksmen out of the special forces does make him unique. With the exception of physical strength he was almost on par with Teal'c in terms of usefulness in combat situations. That skill was utilized in around 150 episodes, lol. I'd rank Jack among the top in combat usefulness.

Rough Usefulness in Combat:
10 - :tealc:
9.5 - :ronan: & :teyla:
8 - :jack:
7.5 - :sheppard: (his ATA gene pushes him above the other Lt. Colonels)
7 - :cameron: & :sam:
5 (seasoned Marine lvl)- :daniel:, :jonas: & :vala:
3 - :mckay: & :beckett:
1 (untrained Civilian lvl)

amconway
January 9th, 2009, 06:20 PM
Rough Usefulness in Combat:
10 - Teal'c
9.5 - Ronan & Teyla
8 - Jack
7.5 - Sheppard (his ATA gene pushes him above the other Lt. Colonels)
7 - Cam & Sam
5 (seasoned Marine lvl)- Daniel, Jonas, & Vala
3 - McKay & Beckett
1 (untrained Civilian lvl)

Wow! I couldn't disagree with that list more, but I won't respond directly since it's bound to derail the thread. I'm sure a lot of people would enjoy debating it, though. Why don't you start a new thread with that topic?

MerryK
January 9th, 2009, 06:29 PM
Wow! I couldn't disagree with that list more, but I won't respond directly since it's bound to derail the thread. I'm sure a lot of people would enjoy debating it, though. Why don't you start a new thread with that topic?

I don't disagree with it that much, but I agree, it would make an interesting topic of its own.

AnalogSun
January 10th, 2009, 12:55 AM
Vala not appearing in the next SG-1 movie, would be no loss.

Vala would add nothing to the story, other than being a recent addition to the SG-1 team. Sure, at the end of Continuum we see Vala reaching out to comfort Ba'al's host; an act of maturity uncharacteristic of Vala's typical behaviour and a potential story to explore. Look, we don't care about Vala's backstory, we care about SG-1's adventures and fights. Vala would just be there for the class rollcall.

No, for Vala to ever again appear in SG-1, the character must first and foremost be written to have lost her all too often childish demeanour and behaviour.

Vala the funny, street-smart, adult is fine. Vala, the woman who sacrificed herself to stop the first Ori fleet is fine. Vala impersonating Quetesh was fine. Vala, the space pirate with enough smarts and nous to hijack one of Earth's first hyperspace capable spacecraft was fine. Vala the "Shady Lady" with contacts to dangerous criminals is fine. Vala the tragic character who suffered the control of a Goauld and witnessed untold horrors is fine.

Vala the:

Pigtail wearing
Socially inappropriate
Tiara wearing
Irresponsible
Lewd
Loud-mouthed
Kleptomaniac
member of an elite SG military unit is downright unreasonable and stretches credibility at best.

Vala not appearing in the next SG-1 movie is no loss.

Bagpuss
January 10th, 2009, 01:02 AM
Guys,if someone posts in an inflammatory way,report the post ,then get back to the topic.:)

It makes clean-ups a lot easier.



Bagpuss
GateWorld Moderator

Integrabyte
January 10th, 2009, 05:05 AM
Vala not appearing in the next SG-1 movie is no loss.

Jack not appearing in the new movie is no loss either. In the last one he gave me the impression that with him or without him, the same thing. His jokes were not funny, his acting was predictable and it was the same thing over again.

If the new film is about SG1 without Vala, they can do only a few things:

1. Jack gets his head sucked in and starts doing things. Gee, we haven't seen that before.
2. Daniel dies...we haven't seen that before either.
3. Sam gets taken over by some alien entity. Nope, not seen this one.
4. Teal'c is an outcast and has to fight for his honour. This will be new.
5. Travel to a few medieval planets to meet people with technology. This sounds good and fresh.
6. Introduce...the Goa'uld...again after 10 seasons and 2 films. Discover a new one, 1/3 Nox, 1/4 Fox, 1/2 Ascended, 1/16 Human. His name will be Mil'ka.

The list is long and distinguished. On the other hand, Vala brought humour to the show. Humour Jack could not provide anymore. She was the typical good looking woman, silly, dumb, but with a skill to survival. She was the best thing that happened to SG.


(c)

g.o.d
January 10th, 2009, 05:11 AM
movie about Jack, no Vala in this movie. Another SG movie I don't care about. Vala was on of the best things in SG-1

Flyboy
January 10th, 2009, 05:16 AM
Jack not appearing in the new movie is no loss either. In the last one he gave me the impression that with him or without him, the same thing. His jokes were not funny, his acting was predictable and it was the same thing over again.

If the new film is about SG1 without Vala, they can do only a few things:

1. Jack gets his head sucked in and starts doing things. Gee, we haven't seen that before.
2. Daniel dies...we haven't seen that before either.
3. Sam gets taken over by some alien entity. Nope, not seen this one.
4. Teal'c is an outcast and has to fight for his honour. This will be new.
5. Travel to a few medieval planets to meet people with technology. This sounds good and fresh.
6. Introduce...the Goa'uld...again after 10 seasons and 2 films. Discover a new one, 1/3 Nox, 1/4 Fox, 1/2 Ascended, 1/16 Human. His name will be Mil'ka.

The list is long and distinguished. On the other hand, Vala brought humour to the show. Humour Jack could not provide anymore. She was the typical good looking woman, silly, dumb, but with a skill to survival. She was the best thing that happened to SG.


(c)
I respectfully disagree - but then I never watched SG1 for the humour anyway.

And the best bit of RDA in Continuum imo was his alternate reality self. Reminded me of Old Jack. Before he became a clown.

shockwave
January 10th, 2009, 05:23 AM
anyone know if cameron mitchell is supposed to be in the third movie?
thanks

Integrabyte
January 10th, 2009, 05:26 AM
I respectfully disagree - but then I never watched SG1 for the humour anyway.

And the best bit of RDA in Continuum imo was his alternate reality self. Reminded me of Old Jack. Before he became a clown.

I respectfully disagree ;)

Flyboy
January 10th, 2009, 05:30 AM
I respectfully disagree ;)
Which is fair enough. I CAN see that Vala brought a new-fresh level of humour to the show, after Jack's specific brand got stale in S7 and 8. So if you watched it for the humour AND you liked Vala's kind of humour, then fair play.

Me?

I'd be happy if there was no humour at all in the show. Because the only humour I care about is the occasional stuff that came about when no one was TRYING to make a joke, the situation just became funny - eg Jack and Daniel's dialogue in One False Step with Danny shouting "You SEE!? YOU SEE YOU SEE YOU SEE!?", Jack responding with "What does THAT mean?", Daniel: "I DON'T KNOW!!!!!".

But there we go, each to their own.

Crazedwraith
January 10th, 2009, 07:02 AM
You're correct, I should have qualified that "with rare exceptions". Mea culpa. But seriously, if you read Random's story "Good Man" and sg-fig-newton's "Canon vs. Fanon" series on Livejournal, there is no way that Daniel can be considered as pure-hearted and self-sacrificial in canon as a lot of people seem to think he is. He doesn't try to save everyone; he coldly ignores some people; and if you mess up in his mind, you're toast.
Like who? Who has he ignored? Who has he 'toasted' after the mess up? I can't recall Daniel toasting anyone. (other than a tub full of baby goa'uld of course) Of course Daniel doesn't try to save everyone; like the Nazis on Euronda but he always tries to do the right thing. Even the slaver in Beast of Burden; he didn't want to kill any of them either if they didn't have to.



Jack not appearing in the new movie is no loss either. In the last one he gave me the impression that with him or without him, the same thing. His jokes were not funny, his acting was predictable and it was the same thing over again.

If the new film is about SG1 without Vala, they can do only a few things:

(c)

What is your basis for actually saying that? why does having Jack restrict them to those plots if they don't have Vala? I'm not seeing any actual reasons for this. They did nine years of varied plots without Vala, there's no reason cutting her at this point will restrict them again.

MerryK
January 10th, 2009, 08:10 AM
Like who? Who has he ignored? Who has he 'toasted' after the mess up? I can't recall Daniel toasting anyone. (other than a tub full of baby goa'uld of course) Of course Daniel doesn't try to save everyone; like the Nazis on Euronda but he always tries to do the right thing. Even the slaver in Beast of Burden; he didn't want to kill any of them either if they didn't have to.

I provided those two resources for a reason, since it's off topic for this post. :) But just for a couple examples: how about the Jaffa in Maternal Instinct? These Jaffa that they were supposed to be helping convert? They were coming after his team, so instead of telling them to put their weapons down, he coldly waved goodbye to them and watched Oma scorch them. He had no problem with the Unas starting war on their planet because the slavers "deserved" it. He beamed the guy who was threatening his people in Company of Thieves out into space without even a blink. And yes, they're bad guys—the point is, Daniel is not hasty to "save everyone".

And on the good guys side? Did you notice in Abyss how Jack was the one who wanted to save Ba'al's lotar, and Daniel was discouraging him from it? Because Jack was worth it to Daniel, and she wasn't. What happened to his sympathy for Goa'uld hosts? Once Sha're and Sarah were out of the picture, Daniel just didn't care anymore. I can't justify going into this further in this particular thread, but honestly, I could come up with a lot more examples of this. And I adore Daniel—but part of that adoration acknowledges that he's flawed like the rest of us.

kymeric
January 10th, 2009, 09:06 AM
Poochie: I have to go now, my planet needs me
/crappy visual edit of him flying away

Lol, kidding. Valas fun but if #3 i a movie about a Earth General theres little need for her there. If the actress has something going on right now then nows the time to do a movie that dosent need Vala. Better than planning a Vala centric movie and not being able to get the actress.

Integrabyte
January 11th, 2009, 06:14 AM
What is your basis for actually saying that? why does having Jack restrict them to those plots if they don't have Vala? I'm not seeing any actual reasons for this. They did nine years of varied plots without Vala, there's no reason cutting her at this point will restrict them again.

Varied plots? Please do continue...what was so varied in SG1 ? Why would I be interested in a film about a General? The name STARGATE implies something else. All this crap with the Army, NID,trust, Air Force...was not my cup of tea. I loved exploration, the ancients, and exploration and the ancients. The rest ...fillers.

Flyboy
January 11th, 2009, 06:45 AM
Varied plots? Please do continue...what was so varied in SG1 ? Why would I be interested in a film about a General? The name STARGATE implies something else. All this crap with the Army, NID,trust, Air Force...was not my cup of tea. I loved exploration, the ancients, and exploration and the ancients. The rest ...fillers.
Ouch.

The thing is, Stargate SG-1, and indeed Star Gate, has always been about the military. Even back to the first movie the military's motivations and thoughts on the Stargate were vital to the plot. SG-1 carried this over, and whilst exploration was vital to the show, IS vital to the show, the military is equally vital to it. Stargate's identity is the unique combination of both. Exploration, military threats, military motives, and ancient cultures. I'd very much like to see a movie centring on a USAF General, because that means that we're looking at a significant security threat. Not just another episode of the week.

And as for varied plots, well just because it's not your cup of tea, as indeed, some eps weren't mine, doesn't mean it wasn't varied. There were a lot of very different SG1 episodes, and even those that bore some similarity were usually sufficiently different.

Crazedwraith
January 11th, 2009, 07:00 AM
Varied plots? Please do continue...what was so varied in SG1 ?
SG-1 was a pretty much done any type of sci-fi plot you can imaging. Varying from simple exporation and meeting of other cultures. (emancipation et al) action (Serpent's Lair et al) comedy (Holiday, WoO) Mystery/Conspiracy (Shadow Play/Nightwalkers) Time Travel (1969 et al) AU (there but for the grace of god) the list goes on.



Why would I be interested in a film about a General? The name STARGATE implies something else.
You know. I'd very hard pressed to find an SG-1 episode without a General in it.



All this crap with the Army, NID,trust, Air Force...was not my cup of tea. I loved exploration, the ancients, and exploration and the ancients. The rest ...fillers.

So because you didn't like them, they don't count as existing?

amconway
January 11th, 2009, 09:08 AM
Varied plots? Please do continue...what was so varied in SG1 ? Why would I be interested in a film about a General? The name STARGATE implies something else. All this crap with the Army, NID,trust, Air Force...was not my cup of tea. I loved exploration, the ancients, and exploration and the ancients. The rest ...fillers.

Oh, wow... Uh.
At least you're self-confident. That's nice.
So, you liked about a quarter of stargate. One wonders why you stuck around when you liked so little of it.
Was it just to tell us how many of our favorite episodes were just filler and worthless? If so, we got it. No need to feel a further obligation to correct our thinking. You can call it a day.

Integrabyte
January 11th, 2009, 12:03 PM
Ouch.

The thing is, Stargate SG-1, and indeed Star Gate, has always been about the military. Even back to the first movie the military's motivations and thoughts on the Stargate were vital to the plot. SG-1 carried this over, and whilst exploration was vital to the show, IS vital to the show, the military is equally vital to it. Stargate's identity is the unique combination of both. Exploration, military threats, military motives, and ancient cultures. I'd very much like to see a movie centring on a USAF General, because that means that we're looking at a significant security threat. Not just another episode of the week.

And as for varied plots, well just because it's not your cup of tea, as indeed, some eps weren't mine, doesn't mean it wasn't varied. There were a lot of very different SG1 episodes, and even those that bore some similarity were usually sufficiently different.


I saw 5 minutes when the first film came out, and left. I will never see the original Stargate film. It was horrible. With a capital H :). Anywho, the military thing made me avoid SG as long as I could. I saw Window of Opportunity a few months before I joined GW. I had no idea who was who and which was which but I laughed and loved the gate fluke. So, yeah I saw everything afterwards. Hated all the eps on Earth and from S3 started getting bored with the Goa'uld.




SG-1 was a pretty much done any type of sci-fi plot you can imaging. Varying from simple exporation and meeting of other cultures. (emancipation et al) action (Serpent's Lair et al) comedy (Holiday, WoO) Mystery/Conspiracy (Shadow Play/Nightwalkers) Time Travel (1969 et al) AU (there but for the grace of god) the list goes on.


You know. I'd very hard pressed to find an SG-1 episode without a General in it.



So because you didn't like them, they don't count as existing?


So because you liked them I have to count them as masterpieces?



Oh, wow... Uh.
At least you're self-confident. That's nice.
So, you liked about a quarter of stargate. One wonders why you stuck around when you liked so little of it.
Was it just to tell us how many of our favorite episodes were just filler and worthless? If so, we got it. No need to feel a further obligation to correct our thinking. You can call it a day.


If you want to debate why am I here, try next door. Coming back on topic, Vala fans exist if you like it or not and their money is real just like yours. After so many dreaded years of Goa'uld stories and the same characters please excuse me for wanting something fresh and different.

Vala was the fresh thing SG1 needed to revive some of the "quality" they promoted during the years. If I want to see SG1 back in the day and stories about Generals, I'll slip in S1 or S4. I don't need to buy the new film or see it. Not everything with an SG1 sticker is quality.

This applies to SGA too.



P.S: ...in my opinion. To avoid any confusion...I would not want people to say I am expressing my neighbour's point of view or my dog's.

Flyboy
January 11th, 2009, 12:16 PM
I saw 5 minutes when the first film came out, and left. I will never see the original Stargate film. It was horrible. With a capital H :). Anywho, the military thing made me avoid SG as long as I could. I saw Window of Opportunity a few months before I joined GW. I had no idea who was who and which was which but I laughed and loved the gate fluke. So, yeah I saw everything afterwards. Hated all the eps on Earth and from S3 started getting bored with the Goa'uld.






So because you liked them I have to count them as masterpieces?





If you want to debate why am I here, try next door. Coming back on topic, Vala fans exist if you like it or not and their money is real just like yours. After so many dreaded years of Goa'uld stories and the same characters please excuse me for wanting something fresh and different.

Vala was the fresh thing SG1 needed to revive some of the "quality" they promoted during the years. If I want to see SG1 back in the day and stories about Generals, I'll slip in S1 or S4. I don't need to buy the new film or see it. Not everything with an SG1 sticker is quality.

This applies to SGA too.



P.S: ...in my opinion. To avoid any confusion...I would not want people to say I am expressing my neighbour's point of view or my dog's.
The thing is, even S9 and 10 was about 'Generals' the majority of S9 and 10 still had a distinctly military feel to it.

Let's take a look:

Avalon and Origin - Very much based around the USAF with half of the action taking place in the SGC whilst we get to know a new General, and Cam Mitchell is shown to be very much a USAF pilot.

Ties That Bind & Powers That Be - I'll give you that one, not overtly military, but obviously, being SG1, it's still a feature.

Beachhead - well this is very much a massive military threat, with issues surrounding Mitchell detonating a nuclear device, Landry dealing with a goa'uld one on one over the negotiating table, and a USAF ship.

Ex Deus Machina - was one of the political earth based episodes... so you know...

Babylon - Nice and Jaffa-ish, not overly military but obviously plays a role.

Prototype - DEFINITELY a military ep, as it's practically entirely in the SGC and deals with high up decision making and the possibility of a massive security risk.

Fourth Horseman 1 & 2 - Plague breaks out on Earth, military has to deal with the fall out.

Collateral Damage - significant part of this is about the fact that Mitchell, as a pilot, dropped a bomb on the wrong people.

Ripple Effect - set in the SGC, what more can I say?

Stronghold - Based around a dying USAF pilot as well as the Goa'uld

Ethon - aprt a deadly new Ori satellite, the USAF ship prometheus engages it.

Off The Grid - meh

The Scourge - accident on a USAF science base.

Arthur's Mantle - accident in the SGC

Crusade & Camalot - revolving significantly around politics and interaction between Landry and other political figures.


I don't want to do S10, as I;m bored now :P but the point is, whilst it;s fine that you prefer new Sg1 to old, everyone has their favourites, and personal tastes, the military thing and the show focusing heavily on USAF officers and Generals has always existed, even in S9 and 10. Vala doesn't change that.

amconway
January 11th, 2009, 12:29 PM
If you want to debate why am I here, try next door.
Not interested in debating with or about you. You know what I was saying. Said it. Done.

Crazedwraith
January 11th, 2009, 04:01 PM
So because you liked them I have to count them as masterpieces?


Of course you don't. Did I make any claims as to the quality of any episodes? My point was that it doesn't matter if they have jack or if they have Vala or if they have both; they can still tell the same wide range of stories with either character.

flynn1959
January 12th, 2009, 01:15 AM
Has there been any confirmation of when this movie is due to start shooting?

A_PophisandhisFran
January 12th, 2009, 11:30 AM
Personally I don't mind Vala not being in the movie. It will allow them to concentrate on specific characters, and honestly I never thought her character really fit in. It was difficult even getting Mitchell to fit in (and even he didn't do it until the second half of season 10 imo), but Vala just never did. Totally anti-Daniel/vala as well.

StargateSG1
January 12th, 2009, 11:19 PM
Honestly I'm excited, having RDA / O'Neill character in a important role like he was in seasons 1-8 is something I'm looking forward to see. The team chemistry / dynamic of the original team is what made the show what it is, allowing for the show to last as long as it did. If the movie recaptures what made Stargate SG-1 a great show for many, then this movie should be great. Right now my expectations for this movie is higher then anything that came out in the Stargate franchise after the first 8 seasons of SG-1.

Don't get me wrong last two seasons and the movies were enjoyable to watch, but it just wasn't Stargate SG-1 that I enjoyed watching so much. Also a Stargate Atlantis fan, so I am also excited about the movie we should be getting as well as future movies for SGA. I also can't wait to see what SGU. But when it comes down to it, SG-1 is where it started for me so yea I'm excited for this movie coming out.

I do feel for the fans of the last two seasons and fans of Vala, but come on you guys had the last two seasons plus two movies with the new SG-1 team. Can't we get at least one movie that the O'Neill character play a more important role as well as focusing on the original team? If this movie does great in sells, we should expect couple more movies at least which will have the new SG-1 team in order to further the SG-1 series and bring it to the end in the last movie. From where I'm standing you guys have two movies and will most likely get the last movies to come out for SG-1. I don't think letting us have one movie with O'Neill focusing on the original team is to much to ask for, if anything we deserve it. The show ran for 8 seasons before Cam and Vala join, so you can see why people prefer and want a movie about the original SG-1 team.

StargateSG1
January 12th, 2009, 11:27 PM
I just noticed my posts are in moderation. When a moderator approves them ignore my first post only allow for the second and third to be posted.

Had no idea why my first post didn't show, so I did a second post (retype the whole thing) noticing the moderation part. lol

Thanks in advance.

Bagpuss
January 13th, 2009, 12:25 AM
*Waves to StargateSG1.*

Sorry for delay in the queue.:)
I've done what you asked for and deleted the first post in the line
.
( There was nothing wrong with it,btw) :)

StargateSG1
January 13th, 2009, 08:06 AM
*Waves to Bagpuss*

Thanks for approving my posts and deleting the first one. :jack:

Madwelshboy
January 13th, 2009, 01:26 PM
Honestly I'm excited, having RDA / O'Neill character in a important role like he was in seasons 1-8 is something I'm looking forward to see. The team chemistry / dynamic of the original team is what made the show what it is, allowing for the show to last as long as it did. If the movie recaptures what made Stargate SG-1 a great show for many, then this movie should be great. Right now my expectations for this movie is higher then anything that came out in the Stargate franchise after the first 8 seasons of SG-1.

Don't get me wrong last two seasons and the movies were enjoyable to watch, but it just wasn't Stargate SG-1 that I enjoyed watching so much. Also a Stargate Atlantis fan, so I am also excited about the movie we should be getting as well as future movies for SGA. I also can't wait to see what SGU. But when it comes down to it, SG-1 is where it started for me so yea I'm excited for this movie coming out.

I do feel for the fans of the last two seasons and fans of Vala, but come on you guys had the last two seasons plus two movies with the new SG-1 team. Can't we get at least one movie that the O'Neill character play a more important role as well as focusing on the original team? If this movie does great in sells, we should expect couple more movies at least which will have the new SG-1 team in order to further the SG-1 series and bring it to the end in the last movie. From where I'm standing you guys have two movies and will most likely get the last movies to come out for SG-1. I don't think letting us have one movie with O'Neill focusing on the original team is to much to ask for, if anything we deserve it. The show ran for 8 seasons before Cam and Vala join, so you can see why people prefer and want a movie about the original SG-1 team.

Based on whatt you've said well, someone could easly argue "well there was 8 seasons with the original team which adds up to a lot more time that 2 seasons ans 2 movies of the new SG1 or in the case of Vala's case 1 an a half seasons" but im not gonna do that, I'd just thought id point that out first.

I can understand that people want Jack, Sam, Daniel & Teal'c together just one last time, and if thats the movie im more than happy to watch it. But having rewatch SG1 from season 1 to Continnum over the past few 2-3 months its more than easy to see that the show has evolved from what it was and part of that evolution was the introduction an regular inclusion of Vala. That's something that cant be changed and leaving the character out, due to BW's "potenisal dislike" for the character is the wrong thing to do, even if the character dosent have a significant role. In contnnium for example the character wasnt essitial to the story and was only added after RCC suggested to BW, but the character was still there. Thats why i support the inclusion of Vala in the 3rd SG1 movie. At the end of the day, it more than likely that no matter who much fan support there maybe that Vala wont be there, i just hope these a good enough on screen explanation.

amconway
January 13th, 2009, 01:43 PM
Honestly I'm excited, having RDA / O'Neill character in a important role like he was in seasons 1-8 is something I'm looking forward to see. The team chemistry / dynamic of the original team is what made the show what it is, allowing for the show to last as long as it did. If the movie recaptures what made Stargate SG-1 a great show for many, then this movie should be great. Right now my expectations for this movie is higher then anything that came out in the Stargate franchise after the first 8 seasons of SG-1.

Don't get me wrong last two seasons and the movies were enjoyable to watch, but it just wasn't Stargate SG-1 that I enjoyed watching so much. Also a Stargate Atlantis fan, so I am also excited about the movie we should be getting as well as future movies for SGA. I also can't wait to see what SGU. But when it comes down to it, SG-1 is where it started for me so yea I'm excited for this movie coming out.

I do feel for the fans of the last two seasons and fans of Vala, but come on you guys had the last two seasons plus two movies with the new SG-1 team. Can't we get at least one movie that the O'Neill character play a more important role as well as focusing on the original team? If this movie does great in sells, we should expect couple more movies at least which will have the new SG-1 team in order to further the SG-1 series and bring it to the end in the last movie. From where I'm standing you guys have two movies and will most likely get the last movies to come out for SG-1. I don't think letting us have one movie with O'Neill focusing on the original team is to much to ask for, if anything we deserve it. The show ran for 8 seasons before Cam and Vala join, so you can see why people prefer and want a movie about the original SG-1 team.

I agree with you on this. We don't know the plot, so we really don't have any way of knowing why Vala isn't in this one, but I'm certain there is a reason. There's no evidence at all that BW doesn't care for the Vala character--in fact he has denied that being the case. The needs of the story have to come first. We can judge that story once it comes out--prejudging it based on no knowledge isn't all that productive, I think...

Oh, and welcome to the forum!

StargateSG1
January 13th, 2009, 03:11 PM
Based on whatt you've said well, someone could easly argue "well there was 8 seasons with the original team which adds up to a lot more time that 2 seasons ans 2 movies of the new SG1 or in the case of Vala's case 1 an a half seasons" but im not gonna do that, I'd just thought id point that out first.

I can understand that people want Jack, Sam, Daniel & Teal'c together just one last time, and if thats the movie im more than happy to watch it. But having rewatch SG1 from season 1 to Continnum over the past few 2-3 months its more than easy to see that the show has evolved from what it was and part of that evolution was the introduction an regular inclusion of Vala. That's something that cant be changed and leaving the character out, due to BW's "potenisal dislike" for the character is the wrong thing to do, even if the character dosent have a significant role. In contnnium for example the character wasnt essitial to the story and was only added after RCC suggested to BW, but the character was still there. Thats why i support the inclusion of Vala in the 3rd SG1 movie. At the end of the day, it more than likely that no matter who much fan support there maybe that Vala wont be there, i just hope these a good enough on screen explanation.

Your absolutely right, we had 8 seasons of the original team which adds up to a lot more time when comparing it to the 2 seasons & 2 movies of the new team. The show did evolved over time, more so when you look at the last seasons of the show. I understand that a good number of fans became fans in the last seasons which included Vala. But when you compare the first 8 to the last two, they almost seem like two different shows. Because of that it is hard to accept the last seasons and the new team as Stargate SG-1.

I have only been a fan for a couple years now, but I watched the earlier episodes in a marathon and went on-line to watch the show from the very start so unlike most people who became fans near the end of the show I watched the original team first and prefer them. I would really like to see a movie with the original team, being a fan only for a couple years of Stargate franchise I feel for those who followed the show from the start to end for 10 years. They probably miss the original team more then me.

Again you make a good point the show evolved which brought in fans who prefer the new team, that pretending all of a sudden like the last seasons never existed would be a slap in the face to the fans of Vala. I feel for the Vala fans, but my more selfish side is glad the movie will be more focused on the original team with the O'Neill character returning to a more important role at least for this one movie.

Depending on the story most likely her character doesn't have a role, just adding her the movie to just add her would be a waste of her character and movie time / money which can be used elsewhere. A lot of Vala fans seem to think she is being pushed to the side, but most likely there is no place for her character in the story they want to use and she will be back in the future movies.


I agree with you on this. We don't know the plot, so we really don't have any way of knowing why Vala isn't in this one, but I'm certain there is a reason. There's no evidence at all that BW doesn't care for the Vala character--in fact he has denied that being the case. The needs of the story have to come first. We can judge that story once it comes out--prejudging it based on no knowledge isn't all that productive, I think...

Oh, and welcome to the forum!

Hey :jack:


If the story (plot) doesn't a role for her character to play, just throwing her character in there wouldn't be best. For the fact having a character without a role would seem out of place and would drag down the movie. If the character doesn't fit in the story, it is best to leave her out for this movie and bring her back in future movies where they have a story (plot) they can better use her.

It really bothers me when fans go over the top for example some Vala fans say they won't even watch the movie. When I read something like that, I ask myself are they really fans of the Stargate Franchise. If you are a Stargate fan, you would enjoy the the movie regardless. Personally, I would watch the movie either way, regardless of who is in it.

Before all else I'm a Stargate fan, and enjoy almost everything Stargate, but like most people I have my favorite moments in the franchise that I prefer to the rest.

ciannwn
January 13th, 2009, 04:18 PM
It really bothers me when fans go over the top for example some Vala fans say they won't even watch the movie. When I read something like that, I ask myself are they really fans of the Stargate Franchise.

Why is anyone obliged to be a fan of the Stargate Franchise? People in this forum vary. Some like SG1 but not SGA. Others like SGA but never got into SG1. There's likely to be people who love SG1 and SGA who don't take to Stargate Universe. SGU could attract a lot of new viewers who have never seen Stargate before and some of them might try SG1 and SGA but not become interested in either.


If you are a Stargate fan, you would enjoy the the movie regardless.

Maybe some people are just Vala fans so a movie without her doesn't appeal.

amconway
January 13th, 2009, 04:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by StargateSG1
It really bothers me when fans go over the top for example some Vala fans say they won't even watch the movie. When I read something like that, I ask myself are they really fans of the Stargate Franchise.


Why is anyone obliged to be a fan of the Stargate Franchise? People in this forum vary. Some like SG1 but not SGA. Others like SGA but never got into SG1. There's likely to be people who love SG1 and SGA who don't take to Stargate Universe. SGU could attract a lot of new viewers who have never seen Stargate before and some of them might try SG1 and SGA but not become interested in either.



Quote:
Originally Posted by StargateSG1
If you are a Stargate fan, you would enjoy the the movie regardless.


Maybe some people are just Vala fans so a movie without her doesn't appeal.

I get your point, and agree in terms of Atlantis and SGA--they are very different. I really have trouble getting my head around the notion that anyone would watch a TV show/movie, just for one character, without caring about the others that they've seen go through so much. Sure, I have a favorite character, but if that character wasn't in the movie, for whatever reason, I'd still want to see what happened to the others, and how the over all history of the group moved forward. It's clear that some people don't share that interest, but I just can't fathom it. I care about what happens to all of them.

StargateSG1
January 13th, 2009, 04:35 PM
Why is anyone obliged to be a fan of the Stargate Franchise? People in this forum vary. Some like SG1 but not SGA. Others like SGA but never got into SG1. There's likely to be people who love SG1 and SGA who don't take to Stargate Universe. SGU could attract a lot of new viewers who have never seen Stargate before and some of them might try SG1 and SGA but not become interested in either.



Maybe some people are just Vala fans so a movie without her doesn't appeal.

I know not everyone is a fan of the whole franchise. But to only like or watch the show because of one character hardly makes you a fan of the show. If there were going to be a bunch of characters missing from the movie then yea I would be mad as well.

To be honest that wasn't even what I was talking about, it is one thing to not watch the movie because you have no interest in it. It is another to overreact attacking the writers, refusing to watch the movie without a real reason, which a lot of Vala fans seem to be doing.

Honestly if I was the writers I don't think I would be able to put up with all the crap they take from the many years of doing the franchise. Guys are lucky that they even want to continue doing SG-1 movies at all, when they could just say screw it, and just do SGA movies along with SGU.

MerryK
January 13th, 2009, 04:42 PM
I get your point, and agree in terms of Atlantis and SGA--they are very different. I really have trouble getting my head around the notion that anyone would watch a TV show/movie, just for one character, without caring about the others that they've seen go through so much. Sure, I have a favorite character, but if that character wasn't in the movie, for whatever reason, I'd still want to see what happened to the others, and how the over all history of the group moved forward. It's clear that some people don't share that interest, but I just can't fathom it. I care about what happens to all of them.

There's something very visceral about certain characters. I'm with you, generally—I don't want to watch a show unless I like most of the characters. There have been some exceptions, though, when one of the characters just grips me in an unexplainable way and I'll watch a bunch of people I don't particularly care about just to see that one. Maybe I can relate to them, maybe they're the perfect mix of qualities for me to enjoy, maybe they're just fascinating in the way some people are...but I'll endure everything to see more of them. And if that character left, I'd have nothing left to watch. Stargate isn't like that for me, but there are other shows that are, so I can completely sympathize with certain SG-1 fans who won't watch this new movie.

amconway
January 13th, 2009, 04:47 PM
There's something very visceral about certain characters. I'm with you, generally—I don't want to watch a show unless I like most of the characters. There have been some exceptions, though, when one of the characters just grips me in an unexplainable way and I'll watch a bunch of people I don't particularly care about just to see that one. Maybe I can relate to them, maybe they're the perfect mix of qualities for me to enjoy, maybe they're just fascinating in the way some people are...but I'll endure everything to see more of them. And if that character left, I'd have nothing left to watch. Stargate isn't like that for me, but there are other shows that are, so I can completely sympathize with certain SG-1 fans who won't watch this new movie.

Hmmm. Okay. This is one of those things that's I'll just have to understand on an intellectual level without understanding how it could actually be--especially in terms of SG-1. But, hey! If people only like one person and they aren't there, of course they shouldn't watch it! At the same time, they can't really be surprised when most folks don't feel the same...

egoa
January 13th, 2009, 05:08 PM
Unfortunate she will not be in it, hoping she did not turn down the part or that there will be a story arc of why she is not around - I enjoy loyalty of an actor to a series.

amconway
January 13th, 2009, 05:21 PM
Unfortunate she will not be in it, hoping she did not turn down the part or that there will be a story arc of why she is not around - I enjoy loyalty of an actor to a series.

Hoo, boy! The fat's in the fire now! I'm going to go hide until the dust settles. I suspect that you know not what you have wrought... ; )

Oh, and Vala defenders? Notice that this person has very few posts. Be nice...

Kickoutwoolsey
January 13th, 2009, 06:20 PM
Unfortunate she will not be in it, hoping she did not turn down the part or that there will be a story arc of why she is not around - I enjoy loyalty of an actor to a series.

than amanda is your actor :)

MerryK
January 13th, 2009, 06:31 PM
Hoo, boy! The fat's in the fire now! I'm going to go hide until the dust settles. I suspect that you know not what you have wrought... ; )

Oh, and Vala defenders? Notice that this person has very few posts. Be nice...

Why would that post cause fire? Very polite and to the point...I fail to see what was "wrought". *confused*

amconway
January 13th, 2009, 08:00 PM
Why would that post cause fire? Very polite and to the point...I fail to see what was "wrought". *confused*

Well, I appear to have been wrong, about this, but I expected a wave of... unpleasantness, for the mere suggestion of the possibility that Ms. Black might be seen as less than loyal if she turned down a role in the movie. I further expected comments that the show producers were not loyal to her in leaving Vala out of the next movie.

In short, I expected it to get ugly and for great piles of doo doo to be heaped on the unsuspecting poster's head. I was clearly wrong. Perhaps recent events have lead me to expect a greater level of, uh, vocal unhappiness than I should. I must admit a new spirit of congeniality does seem to be taking root around the forum.

Basically, I expected something other than the grace and reason of which your posts provide an example, MerryK. :)

Konrad9
January 13th, 2009, 08:30 PM
Was there not a press release saying we might see mixed casts due to availability of certain actors during filming?

amconway
January 13th, 2009, 08:41 PM
Was there not a press release saying we might see mixed casts due to availability of certain actors during filming?

Yes, they did, and that is certain to be the case given all the projects that the actors have in the works. While one wishes to see them whenever possible, I certainly wish them success in their efforts!

Ganthet Jr.
January 13th, 2009, 10:30 PM
I love the Vala character, but am not overly bothered that she won't be in the next movie. I'm sure she'll be in the one after that. Simply put, Brad Wright wasn't as involved in SG1 when she was a major player, and since he's helping to write the thing, probably doesn't have a good enough feel for her to appropriately depict her. So, at least for his run around the block, she won't be in it. Assuming a 4th SG1 movie is made, she'll be back.

amconway
January 13th, 2009, 10:34 PM
I love the Vala character, but am not overly bothered that she won't be in the next movie. I'm sure she'll be in the one after that. Simply put, Brad Wright wasn't as involved in SG1 when she was a major player, and since he's helping to write the thing, probably doesn't have a good enough feel for her to appropriately depict her. So, at least for his run around the block, she won't be in it. Assuming a 4th SG1 movie is made, she'll be back.

The awesomeness of you reasonableness is... awesome! :)