Sunday (317)

[Daniel Jackson]

I disagree. I think a no-name is what we needed, since otherwise it would be obvious that whoever it is would survive (given that we didn't hear rumors that say otherwise).

It didn't work for me, because I didn't care if he lived or died since we haven't seen him before and will likely never see him again.

Besides, showing Carson saving a "random" guy just shows that he's willing to risk his life for anyone, like a good doctor should.

It would have been more effective if the patient Carson cared so much about was someone the audience also cared about.

[Lauriel]

I disagree. I think a no-name is what we needed, since otherwise it would be obvious that whoever it is would survive (given that we didn't hear rumors that say otherwise).

Besides, showing Carson saving a "random" guy just shows that he's willing to risk his life for anyone, like a good doctor should.

Just my 2 cents.

I agree with this. Even though we know Carson would risk his life for anyone, it was much more moving actually seeing it.

It didn't work for me, because I didn't care if he lived or died since we haven't seen him before and will likely never see him again.


It would have been more effective if the patient Carson cared so much about was someone the audience also cared about.

I don't think it would have been more effective. We are invested in Carson's character, and we care about Carson. Think about it- would his death have been as emotionally impacting if you also shared the relief that "Thank God Teyla/John/Rodney was saved?" Patient whatever allowed us to focus on Carson and our emotional reaction was solely to Carson's actions and death.

[nonniemous]

I don't think it would have been more effective. We are invested in Carson's character, and we care about Carson. Think about it- would his death have been as emotionally impacting if you also shared the relief that "Thank God Teyla/John/Rodney was saved?" Patient whatever allowed us to focus on Carson and our emotional reaction was solely to Carson's actions and death.

I don't agree AT all. For me, it just made his death that much more random and pointless, that it was to save what was a redshirt, a character that we had never seen before and will likely never see again. It reduced Carson's death to a stunt, plain and simple. It would have been much more meaningful in terms of story arc and the show in general if it had been for a character we were invested in--even someone such as Kolya or Sora. Anyone but random "yellow shirt" #4.

Besides, this episode wasn't focused on Carson, at all, and it wasn't about his death. That was simply the vehicle they used to write about the way the rest of the characters handled their day off--and then, OH, NOES! BAD THINGS! WOES! And again, it's not about Carson, it's about how everyone reacts to his deaht--and how Rodney deals with his guilt. This was never, EVER an episode "about" Carson, not like Rodney got "Tao" and M&MM and GUP, or Sheppard got Epiphany and CG, or Weir RW. If the most recent interview with McGiillion didn't make it plain enough, this episode was nothing but a cheap ratings gimmick through and through.

[Daniel Jackson]

I don't think it would have been more effective. We are invested in Carson's character, and we care about Carson. Think about it- would his death have been as emotionally impacting if you also shared the relief that "Thank God Teyla/John/Rodney was saved?" Patient whatever allowed us to focus on Carson and our emotional reaction was solely to Carson's actions and death.

Carson isn't real, he's a fictional TV character, so his death doesn't impact me if he dies saving someone we haven't seen before nor will see again. It leaves me feeling meh. They botched Beckett's death like they did Doc. Frasier's death on SG-1 where she died off screen! I don't count the video recording, because it was shown after the event occured.

If they can kill off Dr. Beckett, then they could also have killed off a different main character. While Teyla is a great character, she is not necessary for the show to continue. Playing with the audience by asking, "Will Teyla die, will Beckett die, or will they both die," would have been far better than the story we got.

[Lauriel]

I don't agree AT all. For me, it just made his death that much more random and pointless, that it was to save what was a redshirt, a character that we had never seen before and will likely never see again. It reduced Carson's death to a stunt, plain and simple. It would have been much more meaningful in terms of story arc and the show in general if it had been for a character we were invested in--even someone such as Kolya or Sora. Anyone but random "yellow shirt" #4.

Besides, this episode wasn't focused on Carson, at all, and it wasn't about his death. That was simply the vehicle they used to write about the way the rest of the characters handled their day off--and then, OH, NOES! BAD THINGS! WOES! And again, it's not about Carson, it's about how everyone reacts to his deaht--and how Rodney deals with his guilt. This was never, EVER an episode "about" Carson, not like Rodney got "Tao" and M&MM and GUP, or Sheppard got Epiphany and CG, or Weir RW. If the most recent interview with McGiillion didn't make it plain enough, this episode was nothing but a cheap ratings gimmick through and through.

I agree with you - I think it would have been much better to have Carson go as a part of a major story arc. Personally I would have liked, instead of Sunday and Irresponsible, to have a double ep where both Carson and Kolya died. I think Sunday was contrived merely to kill off Carson. I did enjoy the 'day off' aspect of the show though.

My point was within the confines of the show that we did get. They set up Sunday this way, and the way they presented Carson's death within this ep, I think it was more effective with the redshirt for the reasons I stated above.

[Lauriel]

Carson isn't real, he's a fictional TV character, so his death doesn't impact me if he dies saving someone we haven't seen before nor will see again. It leaves me feeling meh. They botched Beckett's death like they did Doc. Frasier's death on SG-1 where she died off screen! I don't count the video recording, because it was shown after the event occured.

You may not get emotionally invested in the characters, but you would be in a minority. Many of the threads on this forum are about characters and the emotional attatchment fans have to them.

And resorting to the "this isn't real - it's a tv show" is the weakest form of argument. We know. We are discussing the tv show. We haven't flipped our lids. We chose to discuss based on what is presented to us, what we may like to see that isn't presented to us, and how we feel about it. It doesn't have to be reality in order for us to discuss it, nor does it have to be reality for us to develop an emotional bond with the characters - good storytelling will develop an attatchment to the characters. Please don't insult us with that tired line.

[Daniel Jackson]

You may not get emotionally invested in the characters, but you would be in a minority. Many of the threads on this forum are about characters and the emotional attatchment fans have to them.

I get emotionally attached to characters with one or more episodes. I don't get attached to extras.

And resorting to the "this isn't real - it's a tv show" is the weakest form of argument. We know. We are discussing the tv show. We haven't flipped our lids. We chose to discuss based on what is presented to us, what we may like to see that isn't presented to us, and how we feel about it. It doesn't have to be reality in order for us to discuss it, nor does it have to be reality for us to develop an emotional bond with the characters - good storytelling will develop an attatchment to the characters. Please don't insult us with that tired line.

"This isn't real, it's a TV show," was not my argument at all. I was simply trying to communicate that I don't care if an extra lives or dies, because he's not real. I only care about the regulars and guest stars.

[Laeren]

All I can say is Stargate needs to stop killing off its doctors. Otherwise there won't be anyone to perform miracles on them off-screen so that in the next episode they're all back to normal with no ill effects from the previous.

I will miss Carson. I wish they hadn't done this.

[Daniel Jackson]

Killing off the doctors? They've only done it twice, once on each show. Doc. Frasier was only killed off, because they thought they were ending the final season. Why Doc. Beckett was killed off is beyond me. I guess they were going for dramatic effect. Too bad people complain instead of just taking in whut happened.

[Celsius]

I don't agree AT all. For me, it just made his death that much more random and pointless

I think that was the episode's point; death IS random and pointless, but it still happens, even to people you don't expect to die, and care about. Having said that, I think "Heroes" made this point much more effectively, and I'm not entirely sure it was necessary to do such a similar thing again (despite the fact I loved the writing and set-up of the episode).

[nonniemous]

I think that was the episode's point; death IS random and pointless, but it still happens, even to people you don't expect to die, and care about. Having said that, I think "Heroes" made this point much more effectively, and I'm not entirely sure it was necessary to do such a similar thing again (despite the fact I loved the writing and set-up of the episode).

And my point is and will always be that I do not need SGA to educate me on the fact that death is pointless and random. I have had that rubbed in well enough in my own life. If I forget, I can watch the evening news or BSG. SGA set itself up as something very different than that, and "s*** happens and then you die" with a main character is not a workable plot device within the universe they themselves created and sold to us.

"Heroes" worked as well as it did because it had a purpose in the overall story arc, it made a point. (Not that I was happy about Janet's demise, but it was handled far better than Carson's.) Carson's death did not serve the story, overall or episodic, in any fashion whatsoever, and that leads us right back to poor writing and poor production. I don't care if the episode itself was stellar. (It wasn't.) All "Sunday" did was simply dispose of a character TPTB wanted to get rid of for whatever inane reasons they had. It was nothing but a pointless ratings stunt, as the recent interview with PM proves.

[Lauriel]

And my point is and will always be that I do not need SGA to educate me on the fact that death is pointless and random. I have had that rubbed in well enough in my own life. If I forget, I can watch the evening news or BSG. SGA set itself up as something very different than that, and "s*** happens and then you die" with a main character is not a workable plot device within the universe they themselves created and sold to us.
.

To be fair, that is your image of SGA, not necessarily one shared by TPTB. Grodin died in s1 purely to highlight the danger they were in and to underscore the fact that people can and will die.

[nonniemous]

To be fair, that is your image of SGA, not necessarily one shared by TPTB. Grodin died in s1 purely to highlight the danger they were in and to underscore the fact that people can and will die.

And it served the both the episodic and the larger story arc for that season, as well as the general set up of the universe they created. I was sorry to see him go, but it made sense storywise. I couldn't argue with how it was done or why. Beckett's death, on the other hand, was none of these things.

[Lt. Colonel Ryu Gaia]

Am I the only one who thinks that this should have been 3.19 instead of 3.17?The fans would have complained less if "Vengeance" had aired as 3.17, "Submersion" as 3.18, "Sunday" as 3.19, and then "First Strike." That way Carson would have been mentioned in the subsequent episode. It would have felt... more right.

[Night Spring]

Am I the only one who thinks that this should have been 3.19 instead of 3.17?The fans would have complained less if "Vengeance" had aired as 3.17, "Submersion" as 3.18, "Sunday" as 3.19, and then "First Strike." That way Carson would have been mentioned in the subsequent episode. It would have felt... more right.

Hmmm, a death of a major character immediately followed by an "Atlantis in dire straits" episode might feel like dramatic overkill, though.

I tend to agree that they should have aired Vengeance before Sunday, *and* had Carson in it. In fact, aside from the fact that they had to air episodes with Carson in them before Sunday, it could have been placed anywhere in the lineup -- it was a totally stand alone episode, nothing in it related to any other episode whatsoever.