Irresponsible (313)

[psychofilly]

It wasn't an "explanation." It was just my opinion. We all have them. What I see as a great script, others might not.

I'd like to reply to this, if I may. And I'd also like to say that you are very brave to wade in here with us fans.

As for the idea of rape...just to be clear (again, this is only how I see it...right or wrong) Lucious wasn't drugging these woman -- he was taking a phermone that made him come across as sexy. Are we doing any less when we slap on cologne for a night out (well...I don't wear cologne, but...) or put on make up (Don't do that either) to make ourselves as desirable as possible? Lucious found a way to kick it up to 11 -- and which one of you could say you wouldn't do the same thing if you had that ability. Giving someone else a drug is one thing -- but altering the way others see you is another.

For the sake of argument, if rohipnol was a drug that you took to cloud the judgement of other people and then slept with them, would it then not be a rape? Lucius, did not just take something to make him appear sexy to to other people. It seriously compromised the judgement of those people. They could have easily given away the position of Atlantis-- Carson did, actually. He Teyla and Ronon also went on a dangerous raid to secure more of the herb. And while the image of Ronon standing at the gate clutching a bag of "herb" was priceless, the underlying thing being done to him was not.

Ronon also physically threatened Rodney. Weir was talking about marriage (because Lucius is "honerable" that way, I guess). Thank god Lucius didn't practice sex before marriage because damn, in Weir's (or Teyla's or Cadman's or Miko's or Heightmeiyer's) diminished capacity, that would have been rape. The village wives Lucius took were raped. There honestly is no way to justify or talk around that in my opinion, and to be honest, it showed a lack of sensitivity to the audience, a percentage of which have been raped or molested at some point in their lives. (and I'm not speaking for all people, but it damn sure made me uncomfortable in places)

ETA: I must not have read far enough into the thread to see some of your other responses, but I really have a hard time with the idea that the drug "just made Lucius seem like a sexy guy" argument because as mentioned several people did dangerous and stupid things because Lucius told them to. That plays as diminished capacity to me.

(I'm not saying it is acceptable..I'm just saying this is his justification.) The other thing here is that Lucious is not a good guy...he's essentially a villain. But our team has no jurisdiction to punish him. At the end of Irrisistable they turn him over to the mercy of his fellow villagers (who are no longer under the influence)...to be punished. He is then exiled as punishment. The idea here is to have a guy who comes across as likable and harmless -- but show that he has a dark side as well. If he doesn't get what he wants...he will take it. He is actually very smart and conniving. (He took time to read much of Atlantis' database - when he could have been partying it up)

I understand that, but his justifications were never the point. It was the lighthearted way the issue was handled. Lucius is a small man that found a way to live big. His absolute power corrupted him and made him do some pretty damned awful things. That should have been given the weight it deserved in both Irresistable and Irresponsible. In my mind, Lucius is just as bad of a villian as Kolya, just wrapped in a much more inoccuous package, and a mourn the fact that this wasn't exploited in this episode.

That said, I didn't mind the ending of Irreisistable so much, even though I thought it was pretty boneheaded to let Lucius go anywhere but the brig. (We are keeping Atlantis a secret still, right? Lucius now knows way too much about us for our comfort, but lets send him back anyway!) Emotionally, it was satisfying, because it's implied that the villagers where he did the most damage will decide his punsihment. At the time, I could totally live with that.

Now he is trying to start over - But he is still Lucious so he can't do that without having something that makes him special. He can't function without being the centre of attention. So he finds a way to be a hero to his people. he was inspired by Sheppard to be a real hero -- but unlike Sheppard he doesn't know what it means to be a hero. Yes, he is cheating...because he's scared to death of being lost in the crowd. Does that make him unlikable? Sure...why not. He's doing more harm than good to his people... but he's not trying to hurt them (he really thinks he is their protector) he's just terrified of going back to being a normal shlub who had no friends.

This reminds me of the rehabilitation of Mayborne. He was one slick, nasty, smart villian, and in his case, I honestly liked him better as a villian. There were moments in Irrisistable that touched on the evil inside of Lucius. When he threatened John, it was a seriously creepy moment. I felt like, in that scene, Lucius was capable of anything. I honestly didn't want an easy or happy ending. I wanted to see the show push that edge. I wanted some consequences, and acknowledgement that the people of Atlantis had dodged a bullet. NOT everyone just shaking it off and John making light while Rodney gives him a bit of comuppance. I wanted the show to go darker. And while I'm not looking for the angst fest of a show like BSG, which I also love, an intelligent exploration of the issue under all the comedy, would have been great.

Again...this is just how I see it.

I totally respect your opinion, and I understand the difficulties of bringing a script to the screen. It's always sounded like movie and TV making is mostly a series of comprimises and things get lost in translation.

There were a lot of good small moments in both episodes. I loved many of the character moments. I just can't get excited about Lucius, and the tech issues did bug. I simply thought that Lucius was turning his sheild off to eat, but John defintiely should not have been able to wear it, or Lucius for that matter if someone else initialized it. The lynchpin of one episode, really shouldn't be hand waved away in another without explanation and since an entire episode was done about the personal sheild and its limits... it did kind of seem like poor continuity. Of course the Stargates are not the only show that does this, and I really do wonder why there isn't a continuity handbook or something made for sci-techy TV shows.

Anyway, that's my two cents. SGA is a show I enjoy immensely despite any flaws. And we really wouldn't pick at it so much if we didn't love it to death.

*rolls eyes at whole rape debate*

Why is it that no one had a problem with villains who tortured people, murdered people, overthrew governments in violent coups...but this one villain whose crime happened to be taking advantage of women sets off a firestorm?

If someone wants to be mad, maybe they should be mad at the viewers who didn't see past the "funny" layer to the real evil within, not the writers who simply tried to write a different kind of villain for a change (which I personally appreciate -- haven't we complained in other threads about two many episodes being the same all the time?)

WB

The issue for me is not whether Lucius is a villian or not, nor even the type of villian. It's the fact that his villiany was hand waved away at the end and the gravity of the fact that he's really a pretty darn evil dude was played for a laugh. My problem is that it felt like the writers were not looking past the funny and seeing the real evil within.

[Luz]

Can we call "do over" for this ep?

I would be happy to pretend it didn't happen, and if they brought Kolya back for a real episode I would readily accept this one as a crack induced hallucination.

[SGAFan]

Not sure who this is directed at...but Ill assume me.

I think everyone should have an opinion -- positive or negative -- it's all good. However, when you try to convince others that your opinion is the right one, that is where it gets dicey. You didn't like it. You made that clear. And I respect that.

(There was a lot I didn't like about the final product as well, truth be told)

Ken

*looks around for co-workers then keeps typing*

Careful, Ken, this place is addicting.

and as a side note, no one wants to be near me if I don't get my coffee....

[NowIWillDestroyAbydos]

I just finished watching the episode, it was pretty good, better than "Irresistible." I'm sad Kolya got killed off, however, I also happy Kolya got killed off because Shep was going to get him eventually. I give it a ***

I really hope Richard Kind returns next season, Lucius Lavin is a very interesting character.

Compared to the front 10 of Season 3, the back 10 aren't as good, but I have hope that the back 10 will be as good as the front 10.

[Stef]

So, being in the minority of fans who actually LIKED "Irresistable" I went into this episode with at least some positive feelings (altough I in no way felt the need to bring back the Lucius character). I think the episode was ok but unmemorable. For me, there are no SGA episodes that I really hate, just ones I'd never really feel the need to watch again...this is one of those episodes.

Like many of you have pointed out, the whole Kolya thing seemed out of place. The story would have been okay enough if it had just been the Genii mercanaries coming back for revenge and the team having to fight them off. The showdown between Sheppard and Kolya should have been epic....but this seemed as if it was just any old one-episode villain rather than a 3-season nemesis. It was disappointing to see Kolya go in the way he did, and rather anti-climactic.

Unlike "Irresistable," there weren't a whole lot of laughs here for me...although I did love Rodney's defense of Batman This was definitely one of the worst episodes in probably the best season yet for the show...but it was not the most disappointing (afterall, my expectations were minimal). I'd probably give it a 6/10.

-Stef

[WannaBeAWhumper]

The village wives Lucius took were raped. There honestly is no way to justify or talk around that in my opinion, and to be honest, it showed a lack of sensitivity to the audience, a percentage of which have been raped or molested at some point in their lives.

Given your screen name, I'd say that was a well thought out and reasoned reply. I appreciate that! And ditto what you said about Ken C. being brave to wade into the fray.

One counterpoint I'd like to make to your argument above...even if everyone was convinced and believed that what Lucius did was rape...there are also people around the world who've been viciously beaten, who've had loved ones murdered, who've been tortured by corrupt governments, who've been life-sucked by green aliens (just kidding)...

Does this mean that we can't have any of these in the show either, because it would be insensitive to those people's suffering? That would mean we could never have a villain, because it would offend someone, somewhere in the world.

I go back to my earlier post...what Lucius did was evil...but villains are supposed to be evil. Give the writers credit for at least trying to create an original villain, who hides beneath a veneer of comedy.

They took a risk trying to do something a little different. Maybe it worked, maybe it didn't. But at least they tried. And as a result of the viewer feedback, maybe we'll get lucky and they won't try that particular approach again. Please.

WB

[Alipeeps]

I'm BACK! (Can you tell I don't feel like doing my work today?)

Welcome to the world of procrastination that is GateWorld!

When Joseph wrote this episode -- he was in the office across from me -- I overheard him asking the actors who THEY thought their in-show heroes should be. It was Joe Flannigan himself who chose Evil Knievel. And Joseph worked it into the script. afterwords.

Ken

Yes and the picture on the side table in Sheps bedroom in conversion is little Joe Flanigan and Evil Knievel which proves it was Joe's true hero when he was a young boy!!!

Yeah, I remembered this also as soon as Sheppard mentioned Evil Knieval - I think it was in the commentary for Conversion that Joe said that the photo in Sheppard's room was of himself as a child with Evil Knieval and that's he'd been Joe's childhood hero. I thought it was cool that the ep pulled that through into Sheppard's character.

Just as a random aside, Ken, is being a masochist a requirement for being on the Stargate staff? Between you and Joe and Martin G and some of the others, you all seem like gluttons for punishment when it comes to dealing with the fans.

Can I ask, in all seriousness, why you say that? What has Joe or Martin done that makes you think they are a glutton for punishment when dealing with fans?

I enjoy Mel Brooks in Spaceballs (30+ times and counting) and I certainly don't condone dictatorship, genicide, and environmental destruction.

Heh. I love it.

If you don't like the comedy episodes of Stargate, hey, that's cool -- I won't try to change your mind -- but why try to ruin the fun for those that do, by over-analysing the character and trying to apply "real-world" concetes to classic sci-fi story devices (such as the Love potion).

And that's one to grow on.

Ken

Yeah, that's pretty much my feeling too. It's one thing to discuss your opinion of the ep but this post - and the Irresistable one - seems to sometimes waver across that line into suggesting that one opinion is the only right one and that anyone who disagrees is.. well..

P.S. Hey Ken, you realise you've gone from like 7 posts to 25 in the space of about 30 hours? That's it.. you're a GW addict now... kiss your productivity goodbye and accept that you will henceforth waste most of your working hours in deep philisophical discussion on here!

[PG15]

That's it.. you're a GW addict now... kiss your productivity goodbye and accept that you will henceforth waste most of your working hours in deep philisophical discussion on here!

NOT that there is anything wrong with that.

[Alipeeps]

NOT that there is anything wrong with that.

Nononooooo... perfectly normal, acceptable behaviour..... Though it would be something of a shame for the world if we didn't get to enjoy any more of Mr Cuperus' very fine writing because he's spending all day mucking about on GW like the rest of us!

[caty]

See, what I am getting here is that those fans who dislike the episode are of the mind that no one should enjoy it, because to do so would be to condone rape. Yet, I enjoy Mel Brooks in Spaceballs (30+ times and counting) and I certainly don't condone dictatorship, genicide, and environmental destruction.

If you don't like the comedy episodes of Stargate, hey, that's cool -- I won't try to change your mind -- but why try to ruin the fun for those that do, by over-analysing the character and trying to apply "real-world" concetes to classic sci-fi story devices (such as the Love potion).

And that's one to grow on.

Ken

Thanks for that, Ken...
Over-analyzers is the word to describe many people, especially here at Gateworld (now before I get yelled at, I am not hinted at anybody or any group in particular and I'm not even saying it's a bad thing. I over-analyzie things sometimes, too..
My point is that over-analyzing the episodes takes away the entertainment part and that's what it's supposed to be - entertainment.
Anyway, I have said this a million times and I am aware of the fact that others may have a different opinion on it, so that's fine

I have to say that I was among the people who didn't even remotely think that Irresistable hinted at any kind of rape and still I got the impression that some people who did see rape in this ep were implying we were close-minded or even doing something worse. That attitude really shocked me back then and I don't go to the episode-threads anymore ever since (now being an exception, obviously).. It is just too much negativity and over-analyzing with most of the eps for me..

BTW: I quite liked Irresponsible. Could certainly have been better, but there were some great moments and great acting!
Kolya should have been dealt with in another ep, though.

It's good to hear that the actors are involved with their characters. However, my point was not that the heroes chosen were out of character and not what the actors would have chosen for their character, but more that they were so in character that it felt stereotyped.

Something that just came to me: I think stereotype is OK if it involves childhood heroes. People have to be stereotypical sometimes, otherwise there wouldn't be a stereotype...
But remember Sheppard quoting something from 'The Princess Bride' in "Return Part I"? Pretty anti-stereotypical

[SGAFan]

P.S. Hey Ken, you realise you've gone from like 7 posts to 25 in the space of about 30 hours? That's it.. you're a GW addict now... kiss your productivity goodbye and accept that you will henceforth waste most of your working hours in deep philisophical discussion on here!

*whistles innocently* What? *G*

Thats it Ken. you're addicted. *G*

and can I just compltely agree with the sentiment that everyone is entitled to their opinions? As long as it's done in a relatively friendly manner

*hates flame wars..*

[Trialia]

I'd like to reply to this, if I may. And I'd also like to say that you are very brave to wade in here with us fans.

For the sake of argument, if rohipnol was a drug that you took to cloud the judgement of other people and then slept with them, would it then not be a rape? Lucius, did not just take something to make him appear sexy to to other people. It seriously compromised the judgement of those people. They could have easily given away the position of Atlantis-- Carson did, actually. He Teyla and Ronon also went on a dangerous raid to secure more of the herb. And while the image of Ronon standing at the gate clutching a bag of "herb" was priceless, the underlying thing being done to him was not.

Ronon also physically threatened Rodney. Weir was talking about marriage (because Lucius is "honerable" that way, I guess). Thank god Lucius didn't practice sex before marriage because damn, in Weir's (or Teyla's or Cadman's or Miko's or Heightmeiyer's) diminished capacity, that would have been rape. The village wives Lucius took were raped. There honestly is no way to justify or talk around that in my opinion, and to be honest, it showed a lack of sensitivity to the audience, a percentage of which have been raped or molested at some point in their lives. (and I'm not speaking for all people, but it damn sure made me uncomfortable in places)

ETA: I must not have read far enough into the thread to see some of your other responses, but I really have a hard time with the idea that the drug "just made Lucius seem like a sexy guy" argument because as mentioned several people did dangerous and stupid things because Lucius told them to. That plays as diminished capacity to me.

I understand that, but his justifications were never the point. It was the lighthearted way the issue was handled. Lucius is a small man that found a way to live big. His absolute power corrupted him and made him do some pretty damned awful things. That should have been given the weight it deserved in both Irresistable and Irresponsible. In my mind, Lucius is just as bad of a villian as Kolya, just wrapped in a much more inoccuous package, and a mourn the fact that this wasn't exploited in this episode.

This reminds me of the rehabilitation of Mayborne. He was one slick, nasty, smart villian, and in his case, I honestly liked him better as a villian. There were moments in Irrisistable that touched on the evil inside of Lucius. When he threatened John, it was a seriously creepy moment. I felt like, in that scene, Lucius was capable of anything. I honestly didn't want an easy or happy ending. I wanted to see the show push that edge. I wanted some consequences, and acknowledgement that the people of Atlantis had dodged a bullet. NOT everyone just shaking it off and John making light while Rodney gives him a bit of comuppance. I wanted the show to go darker. And while I'm not looking for the angst fest of a show like BSG, which I also love, an intelligent exploration of the issue under all the comedy, would have been great.

I totally respect your opinion, and I understand the difficulties of bringing a script to the screen. It's always sounded like movie and TV making is mostly a series of comprimises and things get lost in translation.

There were a lot of good small moments in both episodes. I loved many of the character moments. I just can't get excited about Lucius, and the tech issues did bug. I simply thought that Lucius was turning his sheild off to eat, but John defintiely should not have been able to wear it, or Lucius for that matter if someone else initialized it. The lynchpin of one episode, really shouldn't be hand waved away in another without explanation and since an entire episode was done about the personal sheild and its limits... it did kind of seem like poor continuity. Of course the Stargates are not the only show that does this, and I really do wonder why there isn't a continuity handbook or something made for sci-techy TV shows.

Anyway, that's my two cents. SGA is a show I enjoy immensely despite any flaws. And we really wouldn't pick at it so much if we didn't love it to death.

The issue for me is not whether Lucius is a villian or not, nor even the type of villian. It's the fact that his villiany was hand waved away at the end and the gravity of the fact that he's really a pretty darn evil dude was played for a laugh. My problem is that it felt like the writers were not looking past the funny and seeing the real evil within.

I just have to say, thank you Psychofilly. As one of the people negatively affected by "Irresistible" and the issues described above having been handled so abysmally, I completely agree with most of what you have said here, bar the ending feeling satisfying as it really wasn't enough for me.

I was molested as a minor, and I'll outline my personal reaction to "Irresistible" again for anyone who didn't read it in that episode thread: I barely made it through one viewing before throwing up for the first of several occasions over the next three weeks as it gave me major flashbacks, nightmares and migraines in addition to the nausea. I'll tell you something, Ken, I am a regular viewer of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, and I handle the sexual assaults that happen on that show without personal difficulty. It was being blindsided by the issue and its being treated so carelessly and in a comedic fashion on what was my favourite show that made me react so badly to Irresistible, and I said as much to Joe and N John Smith in the Stargate talk at Collectormania, and I'm not afraid to speak out in public about how awfully that issue was handled.

It's not "cologne". Cologne makes people smell better. It doesn't cause the people around them to have diminished capacity and come under the wearer's control, and I find it seriously offensive that you would even suggest such a thing.


As for the continuity with the personal shield in this particular ep, 3x13... yeah, that just bugged the hell out of me as Hide and Seek is a favourite episode of mine. Honestly, I think not checking canon is kinda lazy, and I'm not blaming you personally for that, I have read all these technical issues and such brought up in the thread, but seriously. Most fanfiction writers check their facts first. I'm sick of the Big Red Reset Button being pressed on this show. First the entropic cascade failure that should have been referred to in McKay and Mrs Miller when Rod was talking about staying in Rodney's Atlantis is completely ignored, now this? Getting very tired of it.

TBH, all of the above, the return of the character of Lucius and the severe lack of Elizabeth make me highly disinclined to ever watch this episode in full, even if it does have one of my favourite villains in it - and I'm talking about Kolya, not Lavin.

[gravelgerdie]

I think the big problem for me on this episode is that the slow motion logic. It doesn't have logic because of the Hide and Seek episode. Rodney dumped coffee on himself and it didn't get him wet what so ever.. So in theory, Lucious(sp??) should not of gotten wet as well...

[HyperCaz]

geez I go away for a few hours and the thread explodes with rape discussion.

There weren't any suggestions of rape in Irresponsible - Lucius' reputation was apparently enough to attract women to him. Thinking about it more...I wonder how many mini-Lucius spawn there are...and also I thought in Irresistible the writers were pretty careful not to mention anyone on Atlantis having sex with Lucius, although there were mentions of marriage.

I like Irresistible, the problem with Irresponsible is that without any funny behaviour from characters it just didn't amuse me. Lucius and the respones of the SGA characters were a, mind the quote, "packaged deal". Without the respones, the character didn't hold up.

[Luz]

I think the big problem for me on this episode is that the slow motion logic. It doesn't have logic because of the Hide and Seek episode. Rodney dumped coffee on himself and it didn't get him wet what so ever.. So in theory, Lucious(sp??) should not of gotten wet as well...

Nothing about the shield had any logic, it's like they just disregarded everything we learned from Hide and Seek, do they even remember that episode?, or they thought none of us would remember.
Must be the reset button at work, no memories, no consequences.