Welcome to GateWorld Forum! If this is your first visit, we hope you'll sign up and join our Stargate community. If you have questions, start with the FAQ. We've been going strong since 2004, are we are glad you are here.
HUGE FREAKING SPOILER TRUST ME IT HAS ALREADY BEEN POSTED ON THE BOARD BUT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE SPOILED DO NOT READ:
Spoiler:
In "Crossroads: Part 2" at the end Starbuck "returns" and says she has been to earth and is going to lead them there. What If she is "there" in a non-physical way.....dying leader anyone?.....or has little time left on the physical plane for some reason...... imagine what this would do to Lee................
Originally posted by jadeloves_ADAMA_ROSLINView Post
what would the point be of causing tons of angst and bad feelings by killing
Spoiler:
starbuck
and then bringing her back in like two episodes?
honestly...
Spoiler:
plus they already removed katee sackhoffs name from the credits...
Because that makes the storyline work, and most fans understand it wasn't her desinty to die a pointless death. The people that think that are obviously not following the show and are rather dumb.
Wow!!! it's so hard to remove someone's name!!! i mean that musthave taken all of 30 seconds!!! Oh no!!!!
Originally posted by jadeloves_ADAMA_ROSLINView Post
what would the point be of causing tons of angst and bad feelings by killing
Spoiler:
starbuck
and then bringing her back in like two episodes?
honestly...
Spoiler:
plus they already removed katee sackhoffs name from the credits...
The point, which you asked about, is called drama. Why do anything other than just have them skip along their merry way to Earth unencumbered?
As for her name being removed from the credits... ummmm... duh. If you were setting up a huge emotional arc for a character, wherein you want the audience to believe she's dead and come to terms with their own loss, even though she were coming back in a few episodes, would you tip your hat by leaving her in the credits?
If it's supposed to be a twist/surprise when she returns, how much of a surprise would it have been were she still in the opening credits?
Well, Paul McGillion was still in the SG:Atlantis credits after 'Sunday', and I'd have been pretty surprised if he'd popped up again.
#1. The directors of SGA have stated that if savecarson.com gets shown on a major news show that Carson will be written into atleast 2 episodes of the second half of SGA Season 4.
#2. Paul was contracted for the entire season....i don't think Katee was.
As for SGA, good lord. Do any of you people have jobs? You guys don't seem to mind throwing the money around when it isn't yours
Almost no show changes their titles sequence, even if a character is removed, until the next season. Why? Because it's expensive to constantly alter your titles. However, BSG changes theirs every week. So, if you're going to do a new titles sequence each week, what purpose would there be to having it be outdated or unreflective of what has happened?
Well... try quoting the whole post. I explained the comment in the paragraph right after what you quoted.
Let me dissect the joke: People who have never earned money rarely prize the value of money. So when someone starts suggesting easy ways to spend tens of thousands of dollars of other people's money, I think it's a fair question, tongue in cheek.
Shows try to change their titles sequences as little and as rarely as possible because it's usually expensive. BSG changes their titles each week anyway, so there would be no reason to leave KS in the credits unless she were still in the show. Thus, if they're trying to keep her return a secret, keeping her in the credits wouldn't make much sense, would it?
Well... try quoting the whole post. I explained the comment in the paragraph right after what you quoted.
Let me dissect the joke: People who have never earned money rarely prize the value of money. So when someone starts suggesting easy ways to spend tens of thousands of dollars of other people's money, I think it's a fair question, tongue in cheek.
Shows try to change their titles sequences as little and as rarely as possible because it's usually expensive. BSG changes their titles each week anyway, so there would be no reason to leave KS in the credits unless she were still in the show. Thus, if they're trying to keep her return a secret, keeping her in the credits wouldn't make much sense, would it?
As for SGA, good lord. Do any of you people have jobs? You guys don't seem to mind throwing the money around when it isn't yours
Almost no show changes their titles sequence, even if a character is removed, until the next season. Why? Because it's expensive to constantly alter your titles. However, BSG changes theirs every week. So, if you're going to do a new titles sequence each week, what purpose would there be to having it be outdated or unreflective of what has happened?
It must cost a whole 30$ to have someone sit there for 5 minutes, open up windows movie maker and cut him out and paste some extra footage of someone in.
And if it can be done with movie maker then a pro can certainly do it in alot less time..
It must cost a whole 30$ to have someone sit there for 5 minutes, open up windows movie maker and cut him out and paste some extra footage of someone in.
And if it can be done with movie maker then a pro can certainly do it in alot less time..
Please include that comment of yours in any resume where you're trying to control a budget... for the sake of their money.
Comment