Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Elizabeth Weir/John Sheppard Appreciation/Ship/Discussion Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    A quick hello before to go. I won't be here today and tomorrow. I don't think it's a big loss for you but I have to say it.lol
    I will see ten fireworks, spend time with my friends and eat eat eat.lol I love "Bastille day".
    See you soon and please when I will be back I want to read 10 pages at least.
    sigpic
    Sig made by nephty and avi by Kris....THANK YOU!

    Comment


      Originally posted by Probie View Post
      A quick hello before to go. I won't be here today and tomorrow. I don't think it's a big loss for you but I have to say it.lol
      I will see ten fireworks, spend time with my friends and eat eat eat.lol I love "Bastille day".
      See you soon and please when I will be back I want to read 10 pages at least.
      ZOMG, it's Bastille Day tomorrow! I need to get some brie and baguettes.

      Enjoy your holiday, Probie!

      10 pages? We'll try!
      (This is legal notice that any attempt to censor or delete, for the purpose of oppressing fair and open discussion, any statement made by me will be considered a violation of my right to free speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and will be dealt with in accordance with federal law.)
      Sparky is on screen. Therefore, it is canon. Elizabeth is still out there. And John WILL bring her home.

      Comment


        Originally posted by Eri13 View Post
        I haven't gotten to watch Joe's interviews with Martin yet. Perhaps I'll do that at lunch while simultaneously working on my continuity timeline.



        I don't know about Moonlighting; I was too young to understand chemistry at that point. But I do agree with SR; I don't think people know how to write simmering UST and then evolve it into something progressive. They sort of treat it like once two characters say "I love you" (or do the deed) that it's happy-land for everyone until all of a sudden they realize they have serious issues, like they're attracted to other people or an old love interest comes back or something stupid. I'd love to see a show that puts two characters together then deals with the stuff that goes with building a relationship. Like, let's say it had been Sparky--what are the issues that could have been brought up?

        1) How does a personal relationship affect their professional one? That would take at least half a season to hammer out
        2) How does their being more intimate change the dynamic of the teams? Not only on awkwardness during, say, conferences, but also stuff like--does Ronon's perception of protecting John change if he knows John has a shot of happiness? Do they take less risks? Jokes about other women now off the table?
        3) What happens when one is used against the other (like in Common Ground)
        4) What happens when their viewpoints fundamentally differ on a course of action--how does that affect the personal relationship?
        5) Do other base personnel see the relationship as needing to change the way they speak to the bosses?
        6) Do people get mad at Elizabeth because they see favoritism (whether or not it is there)?

        And other things like how does the characters' personalities shift because of the relationships. What do other people notice?

        And if you do it right, it doesn't dominate the show--it's a sidebar story.

        I think Castle can show how it's done right if their writers stay smart. *crosses fingers*
        Some of these very things have been brought up as being too "soap opera" in some people's minds. I'm afraid the adamant non-shippers won't like anything that even hints at a relationship.

        Originally posted by KrisRussel View Post
        Oh man, I really hope the Castle writers aren't afraid to be 'jumping the shark' when they want to take it further between Castle and Beckett. *crosses fingers too*
        Did you see the season finale? I wasn't happy. I may have to slap a writer next season.

        Originally posted by Scary Kitty View Post
        In a sense, 3, 4 and 5 (and maybe even 6) have been touched on in the show, albeit in the context of a friendship with UST that perhaps the writers didn't intend, but the fans and perhaps the actors saw it and ran with it. So we've already started to see a little of how things might have gone.

        Certainly, the points you've outlined here are the things that we'll need to explore as we move forward with Atlantis Rising. Even by the end of Season 6, we should start touching on some of them in a pre-ship context. But then, I always liked foreshadowing.



        I really need to watch that show, don't I?
        Yes, yes you do. My friend who was here for a visit had never seen it so we taped a rerun and made her watch it. She's a fan now. And I think it was SR. Jr saying he loves it that was the last bit of convincing she needed.

        Originally posted by Probie View Post
        A quick hello before to go. I won't be here today and tomorrow. I don't think it's a big loss for you but I have to say it.lol
        I will see ten fireworks, spend time with my friends and eat eat eat.lol I love "Bastille day".
        See you soon and please when I will be back I want to read 10 pages at least.
        10 pages? Piece a cake.
        sigpic

        Visit us at SGA Rising for our version of season six.

        Comment


          Originally posted by gateraid View Post
          That's one thing that doesn't resonate that well with me - she didn't argue that the action wasn't necessary, more that it was "an ineffectual first strike" and could make matters worse. The negotiation idea seemed to be more about stalling them (until the weapons were done) than anything else. And the way it played out, in effect, was more like Sam disagreeing with Jack, but still carrying out the order/mission. So much so that when she is talking to Oberoth on the tv it sounds like it was her idea to bomb Asuras.
          Uhm, maybe I need to re-watch First Strike? Because I don't remember the details. Just that she had some sort of argument against it.

          And can somebody please PM me what happened on Bones?

          I got annoyed with the UST-drag on the X-files. They had past the point of no return, but they kept on dragging and dragging. And then they come up with: Oh, surprise, she's pregnant, but it happened off-screen. Haha.

          Sparky Shipper. Genetically predisposed to being stubborn... really pesky.

          Comment


            Originally posted by Southern Red View Post
            Some of these very things have been brought up as being too "soap opera" in some people's minds. I'm afraid the adamant non-shippers won't like anything that even hints at a relationship.

            Did you see the season finale? I wasn't happy. I may have to slap a writer next season.

            Yes, yes you do. My friend who was here for a visit had never seen it so we taped a rerun and made her watch it. She's a fan now. And I think it was SR. Jr saying he loves it that was the last bit of convincing she needed.

            10 pages? Piece a cake.
            The Sparky stuff was just an example. Even I wouldn't have liked anything that relationship heavy in SGA. But in shows where the relationships are more center focused, like Castle, I wish they'd try and work through 'real world' stuff rather than have relationships get to that climactic moment then sort of have the writers go 'what next? what next? I know! Let's bring back an ex-wife! That'll ramp up tension!'

            But then, no matter what you do I think shows just end up getting labeled one way or another and you'll always have fans disagree on how far things should or shouldn't go.
            Visit SGArising.com to read our virtual continuation of the Atlantis series!

            Comment


              Originally posted by Eri13 View Post
              The Sparky stuff was just an example. Even I wouldn't have liked anything that relationship heavy in SGA. But in shows where the relationships are more center focused, like Castle, I wish they'd try and work through 'real world' stuff rather than have relationships get to that climactic moment then sort of have the writers go 'what next? what next? I know! Let's bring back an ex-wife! That'll ramp up tension!'

              But then, no matter what you do I think shows just end up getting labeled one way or another and you'll always have fans disagree on how far things should or shouldn't go.
              Yep and you always have writers who back down and change things which just makes everybody mad. Why not stick with your plan? Why tease fans with multiple possible relationships? Why not make it clear? At least show us a couple has an interest. A look, a sigh, a touch. Something. And then don't do all those things with a couple you don't intend to get together. But in show after show they keep on doing it wrong until even the die hard fans lose interest. X Files, I'm looking at you!
              sigpic

              Visit us at SGA Rising for our version of season six.

              Comment


                Originally posted by Southern Red View Post
                Some of these very things have been brought up as being too "soap opera" in some people's minds. I'm afraid the adamant non-shippers won't like anything that even hints at a relationship.
                Perhaps not. But as Eri pointed out, if it's done right, it'll be a sidebar story instead of taking over the entire show. Rodney/Jennifer, I'm looking at you.

                Originally posted by Southern Red View Post
                Yes, yes you do. My friend who was here for a visit had never seen it so we taped a rerun and made her watch it. She's a fan now. And I think it was SR. Jr saying he loves it that was the last bit of convincing she needed.
                Heh!

                Originally posted by Fionnait View Post
                Uhm, maybe I need to re-watch First Strike? Because I don't remember the details. Just that she had some sort of argument against it.

                And can somebody please PM me what happened on Bones?

                I got annoyed with the UST-drag on the X-files. They had past the point of no return, but they kept on dragging and dragging. And then they come up with: Oh, surprise, she's pregnant, but it happened off-screen. Haha.
                Oh, I was totally thinking of the X-Files as yet another example of ship gone bad. And really, it's just as good an illustration of how dragging out any storyline, ship or non-ship, too much will only end up ruining it.

                Originally posted by Southern Red View Post
                Yep and you always have writers who back down and change things which just makes everybody mad. Why not stick with your plan? Why tease fans with multiple possible relationships? Why not make it clear? At least show us a couple has an interest. A look, a sigh, a touch. Something. And then don't do all those things with a couple you don't intend to get together. But in show after show they keep on doing it wrong until even the die hard fans lose interest. X Files, I'm looking at you!
                Heck, SGA, we're looking at you!
                (This is legal notice that any attempt to censor or delete, for the purpose of oppressing fair and open discussion, any statement made by me will be considered a violation of my right to free speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and will be dealt with in accordance with federal law.)
                Sparky is on screen. Therefore, it is canon. Elizabeth is still out there. And John WILL bring her home.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Southern Red View Post
                  Moonlighting curse has been talked about a lot including by JF in an interview. It's a pretty common belief in show biz. But I think they're wrong. A good writer could take a couple, build up the relationship and write them as still attracted when together. Hart to Hart comes to mind. Also McMillan and Wife. I think this is part of why Sheyla never happened but has nothing to do with Sparky because they insisted that didn't exist. The whole thing to me was a case of telling not showing. They kept saying they were developing Sheyla but Sparky was on the screen and a lot of fans saw that instead. Everyone ended up being confused including the actors which is why you hear about them having to discuss how to play scenes. They got no direction on how they actually felt about each other.

                  Am I the only one who thought Bruce and Sybil had great chemistry? But I was young then. LOL

                  I think that usually if the show starts out with two people as being an established couple it usually works more or less, unless the two actors have no chemistry with eachother. I was pretty young when i watched hart to hart but i remember liking it. Someone mentioned Lois and Clark, they are supposed to be a couple and people expect them to get together, dragging it out so long was lame. A lot of times whether a couple works or not depends on the type of shows and how well the couples are developed individually and in context to the overall story and with each other. Introducing love triangles or having hints of romantic interest (previous or current) with multiple characters on the show usually hurt a pairing especially in the eyes of some fans. I'm generally a non-shipper, but there are certain pairings I like and dont mind if they happen. I could see John and Elizabeth as a couple from season 4 on if they had actually done something with elizabeth besides dangle her around occasionally. They had great chemistry together in the first 3 seasons but i generally dont like the dating the boss dynamic, so i didnt want to see John and Elizabeth together in canon before Elizabeth left. Some mentioned tony and Ziva on NCIS; I usually don't like teammate couples, but I think those two characters are great together, both characters are very developed, and can stand on their own and wouldn't be seen as an extentsion of the other. The actors have great chemistry together IMO. I wouldn't mind if they did get together during the show, if it was subtle, i hate getting bashed over the head with a ship lol. I also wouldnt mind if they got together at the end of the show like Harm and Mac on JAG.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by VampyreWraith View Post
                    I think that usually if the show starts out with two people as being an established couple it usually works more or less, unless the two actors have no chemistry with eachother. I was pretty young when i watched hart to hart but i remember liking it. Someone mentioned Lois and Clark, they are supposed to be a couple and people expect them to get together, dragging it out so long was lame. A lot of times whether a couple works or not depends on the type of shows and how well the couples are developed individually and in context to the overall story and with each other. Introducing love triangles or having hints of romantic interest (previous or current) with multiple characters on the show usually hurt a pairing especially in the eyes of some fans. I'm generally a non-shipper, but there are certain pairings I like and dont mind if they happen. I could see John and Elizabeth as a couple from season 4 on if they had actually done something with elizabeth besides dangle her around occasionally. They had great chemistry together in the first 3 seasons but i generally dont like the dating the boss dynamic, so i didnt want to see John and Elizabeth together in canon before Elizabeth left. Some mentioned tony and Ziva on NCIS; I usually don't like teammate couples, but I think those two characters are great together, both characters are very developed, and can stand on their own and wouldn't be seen as an extentsion of the other. The actors have great chemistry together IMO. I wouldn't mind if they did get together during the show, if it was subtle, i hate getting bashed over the head with a ship lol. I also wouldnt mind if they got together at the end of the show like Harm and Mac on JAG.
                    So basically we are all over the place in what we like and don't like. I think it simply all boils down to chemistry.

                    For example, why does everyone love Castle so much? It's been pretty in your face the whole time. Why aren't we complaining about "Castle anvils"? Chemisty. They haz it.

                    Why do so many fans (sorry nephtys) dislike McKeller so much? No chemistry of the romantic sort. I won't mention any other SGA ship. But chemistry is also in the eye of the beholder sometimes.

                    And most of all, why didn't the writers go with Sparky? Surely they saw the chemistry. I know they knew about the huge number of fans because it was pointed out to JM and I believe he said he didn't care if 10 times more people liked Sparky, they were not going to let it influence their creative decisions. All righty then. So hoards of Sparky fans stopped watching. It's all a big crap shoot and they crapped out.
                    sigpic

                    Visit us at SGA Rising for our version of season six.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by VampyreWraith;11708295I
                      was pretty young when i watched hart to hart but i remember liking it.
                      I hate Hart to Hart, but only because my parents had to name me after it. I don't like my name.

                      Harm and Mac was long overdue, too. I actually think if they had Jack and Sam together and one point, as in resolution, and then not focussed on it, there would have been less Sam Jack haters. There was more focus on it because they were not together. If that makes sense.

                      Sparky Shipper. Genetically predisposed to being stubborn... really pesky.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Fionnait View Post
                        I hate Hart to Hart, but only because my parents had to name me after it. I don't like my name.

                        Harm and Mac was long overdue, too. I actually think if they had Jack and Sam together and one point, as in resolution, and then not focussed on it, there would have been less Sam Jack haters. There was more focus on it because they were not together. If that makes sense.
                        It makes perfect sense. Why not just get them together already and have an occasional mention? It would have made perfect sense and was what I think the majority of casual viewers expected. I think they just didn't understand that we shippers don't need sex scenes or tender love scenes or handholding or any of that on a regular basis. With Sparky, I would have been happy with one of those balcony scenes becoming a confession of feelings followed episodes later by a kiss and then continue with the occasional intimate word or look or touch. That would have told us all we needed to know and we would have squeed happily every time. I didn't want or need to see them in those storage closets *glares at SGU*. I remember expressing a similar idea early in the show and someone called me a "teenage girl". I am still chuckling over that one. Maybe at heart.
                        sigpic

                        Visit us at SGA Rising for our version of season six.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Southern Red View Post
                          So basically we are all over the place in what we like and don't like. I think it simply all boils down to chemistry.

                          For example, why does everyone love Castle so much? It's been pretty in your face the whole time. Why aren't we complaining about "Castle anvils"? Chemisty. They haz it.

                          Why do so many fans (sorry nephtys) dislike McKeller so much? No chemistry of the romantic sort. I won't mention any other SGA ship. But chemistry is also in the eye of the beholder sometimes.

                          And most of all, why didn't the writers go with Sparky? Surely they saw the chemistry. I know they knew about the huge number of fans because it was pointed out to JM and I believe he said he didn't care if 10 times more people liked Sparky, they were not going to let it influence their creative decisions. All righty then. So hoards of Sparky fans stopped watching. It's all a big crap shoot and they crapped out.
                          Hmm, I could make a joke about porta-potties, but I probably shouldn't.

                          Originally posted by Fionnait View Post
                          I hate Hart to Hart, but only because my parents had to name me after it. I don't like my name.

                          Harm and Mac was long overdue, too. I actually think if they had Jack and Sam together and one point, as in resolution, and then not focussed on it, there would have been less Sam Jack haters. There was more focus on it because they were not together. If that makes sense.
                          Makes perfect sense to me. There'd probably be far fewer ship haters among Atlantis fans if they'd just bitten the bullet and resolved Sheppard's relationship status one way or the other. Of course, they did that with McKay and Keller, and that didn't go over so well, so... *shrugs* Who knows?
                          (This is legal notice that any attempt to censor or delete, for the purpose of oppressing fair and open discussion, any statement made by me will be considered a violation of my right to free speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and will be dealt with in accordance with federal law.)
                          Sparky is on screen. Therefore, it is canon. Elizabeth is still out there. And John WILL bring her home.

                          Comment


                            I believe writers generally think that "a man and a woman working good together shouldn't BE together", because if they do ... they won't be able to work good anymore.
                            I'm not a fan of this line of thinking, but I can understand it.
                            When feelings are involved, it is difficult sometimes to think straight.
                            Especially when there is a chain of command and the leader might be forced to send his/her soulmate in a deadly mission.

                            My question is: why do they go on toying with that? Would Stargate SG1 be less successful without Jack/Sam, for example?
                            I would have watched it anyway, I'm a Science Fiction Fan.

                            In real life, would a man or a woman stay in love for years and years without getting a life, just because it is against the rules being together but on the other hand they don't want to be with anyone else?

                            Spoiler:
                            Taking Bones as example: would really a man wait almost 5 years to say: "ok you don't want me, I will move on because I need to be loved"? I don't think so.
                            Better Angela and Hodgins, in this aspect. At least they made a decision.


                            I hate the endless game "will they-won't they" ... works for some time, then I'm done.
                            When I was young I met a boy who behaved like that with me ... it was intriguing for some time, then I was tired. I told him "ok, yes or no? I'm not the kind of girl who stays on the waiting list forever" and -because he still couldn't decide if he liked me enough to give it a try- I sent him away.

                            Message for writers: take it or leave it, but stop toying!

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Southern Red View Post
                              It makes perfect sense. Why not just get them together already and have an occasional mention? It would have made perfect sense and was what I think the majority of casual viewers expected. I think they just didn't understand that we shippers don't need sex scenes or tender love scenes or handholding or any of that on a regular basis. With Sparky, I would have been happy with one of those balcony scenes becoming a confession of feelings followed episodes later by a kiss and then continue with the occasional intimate word or look or touch. That would have told us all we needed to know and we would have squeed happily every time. I didn't want or need to see them in those storage closets *glares at SGU*. I remember expressing a similar idea early in the show and someone called me a "teenage girl". I am still chuckling over that one. Maybe at heart.
                              Heck, slide in a line about them having dinner... just the two of them. They could even make it a little funny by having McKay whining about not being invited. That would've been perfect for me.
                              (This is legal notice that any attempt to censor or delete, for the purpose of oppressing fair and open discussion, any statement made by me will be considered a violation of my right to free speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and will be dealt with in accordance with federal law.)
                              Sparky is on screen. Therefore, it is canon. Elizabeth is still out there. And John WILL bring her home.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Scary Kitty View Post
                                Of course, they did that with McKay and Keller, and that didn't go over so well, so... *shrugs* Who knows?
                                Now I'm curious, what was wrong -in your opinion- with McKay and Keller?
                                Just to have a different point of view

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X