The Samanda Whinge nuts

[RealmOfX]

This is a cross-post... (I got sucked into the WSL thread)... I posted this at the WSL thread, but the post actually addresses more than just WSL, so I thought I'd post it here too

--------

Carter should have been in command of SG-1 once she returned the to SGC (after AT's maternity leave).
Writing anything else, concocting any other storyline, is an insult. Plain and simple.

No one should make the insult worse by trying to rationalize things with contrived expositions.
Wrong is wrong, and everyone should be willing to say so.

Yes, real life can be $hitty sometimes, and in real-life people really do get $crewed, but Stargate SG-1 has typically been an 8pm (occassionally 9pm) show, and not one of Dante's tragedies.

In juxtaposition to tragedy, Wright (et. al.) are now going so far as to state that he's always considered Stargate SG-1 as a comedy, and then later, that the main protagonists are a bunch of screw-ups.

The show has changed.

It's difficult for me to adjust to.
I've stopped watching the episodes.
And so have many others - Stargate has lost an average of more than 14% of it's viewing fan base from Season 8 to Season 9. They have lost many more fans than they have enticed to watch.

It's a sad thing to watch.

I used to really like the show and the characters.
It's sad to experience these types of changes in something that I thought was quality.

Even sadder is to realize that there are folks out there who are revelling in the same changes that I abhor. Not all change is bad, and in some cases change can be a good thing, and a necessary thing.

But writing Carter out of command was heinous.
And should be recognized and acknowledged as such.

Changing the tenor of the show from a scifi drama, with occassional humor and irreverance, to one of an outright comedy/farce where the lead characters are such screw-ups that even the head writers can't explain why anyone continues to watch...?

Sad.

Excellent post. Have you considered writing a version of this and sending it to SciFi?

[KatG]

well, one way to make it easier for them is if they make the eps 30 minutes instead of 60. that could make them making 40 eps a season, and then they could reach their goal faster.

oh, one more thing: i don't like mitchell. i don't like vala. i don't like the farcegate they call stargate. i had probs with the show starting in season 7, but s7 and s8 were so much better than s9 that they could be nommed for academy awards.

mitchell is written as a goober.

vala is written as a poor mans' Xena.

new characters should NOT be given the whole kit and caboodle. they're supposed to be an added spice, not a whole new recipe.

if the writers want a show starring mitchell/bb and vala/cb, then make a new show. don't bring them into a highly successful show and give them carte blanche.

at/cj/ms were quite capable of leading s9 all on their own. i think with rda's continued pulling back in seasons 7 and 8, it gave the other three the opportunity to show their stuff. they showed it and it worked (to me). and it obviously worked for most fans, since s8 had the highest ratings ever at the end. so, it's quite obvious to me, that amanda, chris, and michael could have co-lead the show in s9. facts are facts, and s9's ratings were lower than s8's.

why do the ptb keep promoting mitchell and vala at the expense of the other characters? do they think that pushing them is going to make us love them more? and for some folks, actually like them? when you nag a customer with advertisements, they get sick of it and won't buy the item.

why change a recipe when the dish was so tasty and POPULAR in the first place?

ben and claudia seem like nice ppl; give them another show of their own. again.

in all my years, i have NEVER seen a show handled so disrespectfully to the current cast as i've seen with the additions of mitchell/vala. i've just never seen anything like it. i guess seeing the promoting commercial for s10 just hit home again how it really IS the mitchell and vala show.

i want better for amanda. we'll see if s10 is that, even while wading through what that commercial and leaked spoilers have shown might be the future.


*takes deep breath*


that was one heck of a rant.






sally

Whoa. Sally. Tell us how you feel hon. Go on, don't hold back.

Seriously, feel better?

[Skydiver]

mitchell is written as a goober.

sally

so....he's a chocolate covered peanut????

[Tracy Jane]

so....he's a chocolate covered peanut????

They're holding on the chocolate, unfortunately. Chocolate might make him palatable.

[jckfan55]

well, one way to make it easier for them is if they make the eps 30 minutes instead of 60. that could make them making 40 eps a season, and then they could reach their goal faster.

oh, one more thing: i don't like mitchell. i don't like vala. i don't like the farcegate they call stargate. i had probs with the show starting in season 7, but s7 and s8 were so much better than s9 that they could be nommed for academy awards.

mitchell is written as a goober.

vala is written as a poor mans' Xena.

new characters should NOT be given the whole kit and caboodle. they're supposed to be an added spice, not a whole new recipe.

if the writers want a show starring mitchell/bb and vala/cb, then make a new show. don't bring them into a highly successful show and give them carte blanche.

at/cj/ms were quite capable of leading s9 all on their own. i think with rda's continued pulling back in seasons 7 and 8, it gave the other three the opportunity to show their stuff. they showed it and it worked (to me). and it obviously worked for most fans, since s8 had the highest ratings ever at the end. so, it's quite obvious to me, that amanda, chris, and michael could have co-lead the show in s9. facts are facts, and s9's ratings were lower than s8's.

why do the ptb keep promoting mitchell and vala at the expense of the other characters? do they think that pushing them is going to make us love them more? and for some folks, actually like them? when you nag a customer with advertisements, they get sick of it and won't buy the item.

why change a recipe when the dish was so tasty and POPULAR in the first place?

ben and claudia seem like nice ppl; give them another show of their own. again.

in all my years, i have NEVER seen a show handled so disrespectfully to the current cast as i've seen with the additions of mitchell/vala. i've just never seen anything like it. i guess seeing the promoting commercial for s10 just hit home again how it really IS the mitchell and vala show.

i want better for amanda. we'll see if s10 is that, even while wading through what that commercial and leaked spoilers have shown might be the future.


*takes deep breath*


that was one heck of a rant.



sally

I'm with ya, sister. The disrespect with which AT in particular, but also CJ & I think MS have been treated just burns me up. This whole S9 fiasco actually makes me wish they had let the show die with some dignity intact at the end of S8. AT could have moved on to some starring roles...

Chopingal--I love the idea of an AT/RDA show. RDA's daughter has told him it's ok if he wants to go back to work after all

[jckfan55]

so....he's a chocolate covered peanut????

I think the only chocolate involved is his CMOH.

[Skydiver]

and it's summer now. you know what that means????

runny,melty cmoh

[majorsal]

rant time.

first rant - MY COMPUTER'S GOING SLOW, or something's up with gateworld.

second rant (and the real reason i came here to whine) - all anti shippers sound the same!

i'm reading the new tv guide and reading the letters section.

(spoilers for csi season finale)

Spoiler:

the whole letters section is devoted to csi's finale, with some loving the grissom/sara ship, and others hating it. what got me is that the antis that are blasting the g/s bonding sound *exactly* like anti s/j shippers!

do all anti shippers study their dialog from some anti ship manuel or something? the usual; it trivializes so-and-so, it changes the tenor of the show, and it splits the fan base. THAT last one alone lets me know this person plays online.

yes, i think all anti shippers have a secret society and all learn from the hate ship manuel. (that comes with hidden codes and disappearing ink )

oh, btw, i watch csi casually. meaning, i barely know anyone's names.

there, done, got that off my chest.





sally

[majorsal]

so....he's a chocolate covered peanut????

yes.

good or bad, depending on how you take it.




sally

[ChopinGal]

This is a cross-post... (I got sucked into the WSL thread)... I posted this at the WSL thread, but the post actually addresses more than just WSL, so I thought I'd post it here too

Carter should have been in command of SG-1 once she returned the to SGC (after AT's maternity leave).
Writing anything else, concocting any other storyline, is an insult. Plain and simple.

No one should make the insult worse by trying to rationalize things with contrived expositions.
Wrong is wrong, and everyone should be willing to say so.

Yes, real life can be $hitty sometimes, and in real-life people really do get $crewed, but Stargate SG-1 has typically been an 8pm (occassionally 9pm) show, and not one of Dante's tragedies.

In juxtaposition to tragedy, Wright (et. al.) are now going so far as to state that he's always considered Stargate SG-1 as a comedy, and then later, that the main protagonists are a bunch of screw-ups.

The show has changed.

It's difficult for me to adjust to.
I've stopped watching the episodes.
And so have many others - Stargate has lost an average of more than 14% of it's viewing fan base from Season 8 to Season 9. They have lost many more fans than they have enticed to watch.

It's a sad thing to watch.

I used to really like the show and the characters.
It's sad to experience these types of changes in something that I thought was quality.

Even sadder is to realize that there are folks out there who are revelling in the same changes that I abhor. Not all change is bad, and in some cases change can be a good thing, and a necessary thing.

But writing Carter out of command was heinous.
And should be recognized and acknowledged as such.

Changing the tenor of the show from a scifi drama, with occasional humor and irreverence, to one of an outright comedy/farce where the lead characters are such screw-ups that even the head writers can't explain why anyone continues to watch...?

Sad.

Astro, I'm out of green
Here, instead, is a Royal Bean! Excellent Post

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y11...dAppleBean.jpg

[ChopinGal]

well, one way to make it easier for them is if they make the eps 30 minutes instead of 60. that could make them making 40 eps a season, and then they could reach their goal faster.

oh, one more thing: i don't like mitchell. i don't like vala. i don't like the farcegate they call stargate. i had probs with the show starting in season 7, but s7 and s8 were so much better than s9 that they could be nommed for academy awards.

mitchell is written as a goober.

vala is written as a poor mans' Xena.

new characters should NOT be given the whole kit and caboodle. they're supposed to be an added spice, not a whole new recipe.

if the writers want a show starring mitchell/bb and vala/cb, then make a new show. don't bring them into a highly successful show and give them carte blanche.

at/cj/ms were quite capable of leading s9 all on their own. i think with rda's continued pulling back in seasons 7 and 8, it gave the other three the opportunity to show their stuff. they showed it and it worked (to me). and it obviously worked for most fans, since s8 had the highest ratings ever at the end. so, it's quite obvious to me, that amanda, chris, and michael could have co-lead the show in s9. facts are facts, and s9's ratings were lower than s8's.

why do the ptb keep promoting mitchell and vala at the expense of the other characters? do they think that pushing them is going to make us love them more? and for some folks, actually like them? when you nag a customer with advertisements, they get sick of it and won't buy the item.

why change a recipe when the dish was so tasty and POPULAR in the first place?

ben and claudia seem like nice ppl; give them another show of their own. again.

in all my years, i have NEVER seen a show handled so disrespectfully to the current cast as i've seen with the additions of mitchell/vala. i've just never seen anything like it. i guess seeing the promoting commercial for s10 just hit home again how it really IS the mitchell and vala show.

i want better for amanda. we'll see if s10 is that, even while wading through what that commercial and leaked spoilers have shown might be the future.

*takes deep breath*

that was one heck of a rant.

sally

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y11...l/JackOkay.jpg

Let 'er rip, sally!
I don't like what they did to my team either!

[ChopinGal]

You mean students actually spend their financial aid money on something other than tuition and books? I'm shocked!

And if they do, they certainly shouldn't tell an appeals committee that's why they're failing their classes and need more money. Yes, some of the excuses we hear are almost that lame. A few years ago we had one that went something like this: "I used the money to pay for a hot tub so I could keep my girlfriend. Now she dumped me so I promise I'll study more."

NC

ROTFLMAO! The party-hard crowd always land with a thud!

[NearlyCircular]

rant time.

first rant - MY COMPUTER'S GOING SLOW, or something's up with gateworld.

second rant (and the real reason i came here to whine) - all anti shippers sound the same!

i'm reading the new tv guide and reading the letters section.

(spoilers for csi season finale)

Spoiler:

the whole letters section is devoted to csi's finale, with some loving the grissom/sara ship, and others hating it. what got me is that the antis that are blasting the g/s bonding sound *exactly* like anti s/j shippers!

do all anti shippers study their dialog from some anti ship manuel or something? the usual; it trivializes so-and-so, it changes the tenor of the show, and it splits the fan base. THAT last one alone lets me know this person plays online.

yes, i think all anti shippers have a secret society and all learn from the hate ship manuel. (that comes with hidden codes and disappearing ink )

oh, btw, i watch csi casually. meaning, i barely know anyone's names.

there, done, got that off my chest.

sally

I doesn't apply in my case at least, Sally.

Spoiler:

I'm a non-shipper for Jack and Sam, but I didn't mind the G/S ship. I certainly don't want to see a lot of it, that's not what the show is about, but the ending didn't bother me the way that it did a lot of people. Of course, I'm not a rabid anti-shipper, so maybe I haven't been invited to the secret society

By the way, just to clarify, my feeble mind makes a distinction between anti-ship and non-ship. Do others feel the same way? I consider myself a non-shippper, because I like J/S friendship and comradeship, (if that's even a word), but I don't necessarily need to see them in a romantic attachment. Don't shoot me, please. But it seems to me that anti-shippers look really hard for any kind of interaction between Jack and Sam to hold up as evidence that TPTB are pushing romance at us.

NC

[Tracy Jane]

I also see a distinction between non-shipper and anti-shipper. Non-shippers to me are those who don't particularly like the ship options etc, and anti-shipper is someone who thinks that there is no place for romance on a sci-fi show, etc, etc, etc.

[KatG]

I definitely think there's a clear distinction between non-shippers and anti-shippers. Pretty much in line with TJ's thinking.