Cast Changes

[jelgate]

And what would be their explanation for killing of Beckett and Weir?

You missed the point.

[Skie]

You missed the point.

Nope, I did not. Good explanations for killing of people I can except (if it is needed for story/character development). You shouldn't even need an explanation because it should be in the show itself, if rightly done. But TPTB of SGA couldn't even give a decent explanation for their decisions.

[maxbo]

Nope, I did not. Good explanations for killing of people I can except (if it is needed for story/character development). You shouldn't even need an explanation because it should be in the show itself, if rightly done. But TPTB of SGA couldn't even give a decent explanation for their decisions.

Exactly. If TPTW had given consistent and reasonable explanations for the cast changes, I would have been able to respect their decisions even if I didn't agree with them. Unfortunately, TPTW either rarely offered reasonable explanations or they offered conflicting explanations for their decisions. You would think that decisions as important to the show as changes in the status of major characters would have been better thought out. That's why I think there is some merit in believing that Carson was removed because they wanted to add Jewel Staite's character and that Elizabeth was removed because they wanted to add Sam.

They probably knew those explanations wouldn't have gone over well, so they came up with a laundry list of conflicting reasons that just annoyed me more than if they had just told the truth. IMO, TPTW should have stood by their decisions, no matter how unpopular they were. I suspect that they thought fans would eventually grow to love the changes and if that had happened, TPTW would have proudly taken responsibility for the changes. However, as long as fans were pissed off, they were going to try to distance themselves from the decisions, which is what they did.

[Ben 'Teal'c would WIN!!' Noble]

It would have been better if Carson would have stayed dead, the clone thing was dumb IMO.

[Arica15]

It would have been better if Carson would have stayed dead, the clone thing was dumb IMO.

Oh the clone thing was badly handled (naturally) however the really dumb part was the killing off of a popular character to make way for an idiotic Mary Sue who contributed nothing. If they hadn't done that then the scrambling aroun d trying to undo their big mistake storyline would not have been necessary

[bluealien]

Nope, I did not. Good explanations for killing of people I can except (if it is needed for story/character development). You shouldn't even need an explanation because it should be in the show itself, if rightly done. But TPTB of SGA couldn't even give a decent explanation for their decisions.

The writers did give their reasons but the fans didnt like them. To be honest I don't think they owe us any explanations really when it comes to cast changes. I think they wanted to shake things up with the death of Carson, this isn't somehting that hasn't been implemented before on other shows. I also think they wanted to bring in Keller.. so one doctor had to go to make room for another. They thought Jewel would bring in the Firefly fans and raise new interest in the show.

They had clearly run out of ideas for Weir's character and by season 3 they were forcing her into episodes. I thought her best scenes were as repliWeir and she would have been great as a recurring character, but Torri turned their offer down.

I don't blame the ptb for making cast changes, I blame them for how they executed them.

[maxbo]

You shouldn't even need an explanation because it should be in the show itself, if rightly done. But TPTB of SGA couldn't even give a decent explanation for their decisions.

I agree. I've lost count of the number of shows I've enjoyed in the past where I either never knew the reasons for cast changes or didn't find out until after the show had ended. As long as there was an interesting in-show reason for the change, I wasn't bothered by not knowing the real-life reason.

Unfortunately, TPTW didn't handle the cast changes well because even when the ideas for the changes sounded okay, the execution often sucked. For example the reason first given for killing off Carson was to shake things up, but then they preceded to pretend that the character never existed until they had his replacement briefly mention him several episodes after they got rid of him. And then they made things worse by bringing the character back as a clone at the end of S4, but then trying to pretend that he wasn't a clone by the beginning S5. How the hell was that shaking things up?

Oh the clone thing was badly handled (naturally) however the really dumb part was the killing off of a popular character to make way for an idiotic Mary Sue who contributed nothing. If they hadn't done that then the scrambling aroun d trying to undo their big mistake storyline would not have been necessary

Yep, they knew they had messed up when as time went on more and more fans became ticked off. Usually, in these situations there is an initial period of anger and then most angry fans calm down -- the reverse happened here.

There was so much short-sighted arrogance surrounding this decision that everyone involved with approving it should be poster children for what not to do as a TV exec. Each of those execs had been around long enough to know that, in the long-term, audiences don't like Mary Sue characters -- instead, they mock and ridicule them.

I don't blame the ptb for making cast changes, I blame them for how they executed them.

Same here. Over the years, many of the shows I loved went through cast changes and I didn't have a problem with them -- unless those changes resulted in hurting those shows. In SGA's case TPTW made those cast changes for the wrong reasons -- to get rid of characters they didn't want to write anymore and not because they truly planned to shake things up. In each case they replaced those characters with characters they thought would be easier to write.

Unfortunately, they also screwed up the writing for the new characters. In the case of Keller they seemed to think that Jewel's Firefly connection was all the character needed to be a hit because they gave the actress very little to work with while they shoved her character in our face ever chance they got.

I'm still amazed at how stunned and angry they were when they realized they were wrong.

[Skie]

That's why I think there is some merit in believing that Carson was removed because they wanted to add Jewel Staite's character and that Elizabeth was removed because they wanted to add Sam.

Oh, I think that is spot on!!

The writers did give their reasons but the fans didnt like them. To be honest I don't think they owe us any explanations really when it comes to cast changes.

They didn't give the true reasons, that is what annoys me. They owe it to us when they hurt the show and those cast changes were not for the show but for themselves. Anyway, a writer who cares about the show should be gladly giving reasons why he did certain things. He should be exited to explain his motives. It's like if you have put a lot of work into something you really care about, can't you hardly wait to show it to people and explain your thoughts behind it?

I don't blame the ptb for making cast changes, I blame them for how they executed them.

I blame them if they did it for their own convenience.

[Conky]

I thought I heard that Weir and Carson had to go because Carters character cost more.(could be wrong) If that is the case, then yes it did hurt the show. The writers could have focused on the story instead of the changes. Don't take me the wrong way, Carter is always great, and Woolsey turned out better than I thought he would. But I was bummed when Weir left.(and Carson)

[maxbo]

They didn't give the true reasons, that is what annoys me. They owe it to us when they hurt the show and those cast changes were not for the show but for themselves. Anyway, a writer who cares about the show should be gladly giving reasons why he did certain things. He should be exited to explain his motives. It's like if you have put a lot of work into something you really care about, can't you hardly wait to show it to people and explain your thoughts behind it?

That's so true. Writers who give a damn about their work usually look forward to discussing their work and their decisions with their viewers. This is the first time that I've ever had the misfortune to love a show with writers as disinterested in the details of their show as this group. It's been weird to hear writers of the same show contradict themselves so often. And it's been disappointing to discover just how little thought went into many major decisions for the show. The way Robert C. Cooper described it in his last interview and Mallozzi confirmed throughout his blog, SGA's writers preferred a very loose working style where in the writing room they went with what interested them at the time. That explains so much.

Usually, when I get into the behind the scenes info for a show I come away with a renewed appreciation for what went into it. In contrast, with this bunch, I come away amazed that SGA did as well as it did with such a cavalier group of writers behind it.

I blame them if they did it for their own convenience.

And that's the root of the problems with SGA's cast changes - they were done for the convenience of the writers and not to further the storytelling of SGA. At the very least, when they discovered that they didn't want to write for certain character anymore they should have taken the time to craft exits that worked within the overall context of the show for more than an episode or two. There is something so wrong about SGA's writers getting rid of major characters and then pretending that they never existed - until they decided to bring them back for lame reasons.

[Arica15]

That's so true. Writers who give a damn about their work usually look forward to discussing their work and their decisions with their viewers. This is the first time that I've ever had the misfortune to love a show with writers as disinterested in the details of their show as this group. It's been weird to hear hear writers of the same show contradict themselves so often. And it's been disappointing to discover just how little thought went into many major decisions for the show. The way Robert C. Cooper described it in his last interview and Mallozzi confirmed throughout his blog, SGA's writers preferred a very loose working style where in the writing room they went with what interested them at the time. That explains so much.

Usually, when I get into the behind the scenes info for a show I come away with a renewed appreciation for what went into it. In contrast, with this bunch, I come away amazed that SGA did as well as it did with such a cavalier group of writers behind it.



And that's the root of the problems for SGA's cast changes - it was done for the convenience of the writers and not to further the storytelling of SGA. At the very least, when they discovered that they didn't want to write for certain character anymore they should have taken the time to craft exits that worked within the overall context of the show for more than an episode or two. There is something so wrong about SGA's writers getting rid of major characters and then pretending that they never existed - until they decided to bring them back for lame reasons.

Sadly I think you've hit the nail square on the head. I think unfortunately the writers were just downright lazy when it came to the stories for Stargate Atlantis. They never seemed to have challenged themselves - let alone the viewer - and unfortunately it showed.

Beyond the first year what did we have, rehash of sg-1 stories and characters mainly. They dumped characters because they didn't know what to do with them.......well frankly that was unprofessional and an indicator of writers without an imagination. Ford really should have been the warning bell, instead of actually scratching a little beneath the surface they just dump the character and bring in Ronan, who frankly was a Teal'C rip off. And it went on from there. At every opportunity the writers chose the stories which required them to do the least and frankly the Rodney storylines were never the deepest, lots of technobabble but very little depth (with the honourable exception of Tao, which explains I suppose why they did it twice).

[Skie]

At every opportunity the writers chose the stories which required them to do the least and frankly the Rodney storylines were never the deepest, lots of technobabble but very little depth (with the honourable exception of Tao, which explains I suppose why they did it twice).

Yes, just thinking about the time when Todd was their prisoner. Every time they had a convenient solution. Instead of dealing with their mistake of taking Todd captive, ANOTHER hive ship appears and destroys Todd's ship. Oh, big surprise. And then they did it AGAIN, when the question arose how to feed Todd, uh, luckily we have that mean Wallace. Same with INQUISITION. Their decisions came never really back to bite them, in the end EVERYTHING always fell neatly into place for them. That drove me nuts!