Whispers & Stargate Fandom / Unusual Reception

[Klinjon]

I think that you are correct in your comment that the genre needs to be taken into account. I wasn't really thinking about that. Good point. Still, I think they could have dialed it back just a tad and still hit the 'horror' style. That is very subjective, though, and I can easily see others feeling differently.

If an actress less skilled and charming than De Boer had been in that role, I suspect the character would have come off in the same unreal way as the Sergeant...

Agreed. Much like Robert Picardo, she can't "do" bad acting.

[Klinjon]

Answer: A large part of fandom will want one thing, and the next part of fandom will want something completly different. It took me a while to get used to it, but I did.

That should be the norm (see my argument above concerning what is and isn't the nature of fandom for further context). However, it seems that for a lot of members of the Gateworld forum, an episode is either perfection or a bitter disappointment. Hence the need for separate threads covering "Compliments and Praise" and "Complaints and Misgivings", for fear that mixing the two opposing views would present a clash of interest. And yet at the same time, each episode has it's own "General Discussion" thread... an unusual contradiction of methodology there...

I refer back to a quote from Lt. Ford's earlier post:

"Either way, I like episodes that can be considered standalone. I don't care if the episode doesn't advance the overall story line by bounds. I sit down to be entertained. No one is ever happy it seems. Unless an episode fits their ideas of perfection, the entire thing is crap... There may be a few episodes that people really like, and they get praise. Then there are the majority of episodes that are pretty good, but if they are too different, or don't contribute to enough story, they suck and only get knitpicked".

Pretty much sums up my opinion.

[Col.Foley]

That should be the norm (see my argument above concerning what is and isn't the nature of fandom for further context). However, it seems that for a lot of members of the gateworld forum, it's either perfection or it's a bitter disappointment. And I refer back to Lt. Ford's earlier post:

"Either way, I like episodes that can be considered standalone. I don't care if the episode doesn't advance the overall story line by bounds. I sit down to be entertained. No one is ever happy it seems. Unless an episode fits their ideas of perfection, the entire thing is crap... There may be a few episodes that people really like, and they get praise. Then there are the majority of episodes that are pretty good, but if they are too different, or don't contribute to enough story, they suck and only get knitpicked".

Pretty much sums up my opinion.

Yeah. And that is the way it seems for the moment with GW. It probably boils down to the argument Mitchell made in 200. Although I do agree with Lt. Ford. All I do is watch these shows to be entertained. Which I am greatly entertained in the Gate universe. I do my 'nitpicking' after I get done with the episodes. And the little things that do annoy me, or do not like, I do not blame that for destroying an episode. I do watch it all, and look at it all. And the little things that annoy me, usually are quite small. And in the end are trivial, and I can just go on watching.

[Jumper31]

The vast, gigantic, rather large, GAPING argument, is not whether "Whispers" advances the overall story arc of Atlantis or not. It is not whether "Whispers" is a "mythology" episode or a "bottle" show. "The Seed" was a good example of a bottle show.

The argument is that "Whispers", in general, was just plain BAD writing. Not only was it bad writing, it was full of horror cliches...and what after all, is Stargate: Atlantis? Horror, or Sci-Fi? Sci-Fi Horror like "Aliens?"

I think not.

The biggest reason they are going the horror route is because some idiot in charge thinks they have to appeal to the younger, more hip, audience...people who are not normally fans of the Sci-Fi (or of the SG1 or SGA) franchises.

Indeed, the entire Sci-Fi channel is going in that direction. Why not take Atlantis there as well? The series is canceled so who cares right? Maybe they'll get some of those teenage dollars from the teens buying whatever advertisers are advertising while crap shows like "Whispers" are playing.

However, it's not even that the horror genre playing out on SGA with all the horror cliches possible is the main issue here. The writing concerning the all-female team was extremely bad too.

There are definitely good reasons to complain here.

Whether or not "Whispers" was a bottle show or a mythology episode, is not one of them.

[Klinjon]

Yeah. And that is the way it seems for the moment with GW. It probably boils down to the argument Mitchell made in 200. Although I do agree with Lt. Ford. All I do is watch these shows to be entertained. Which I am greatly entertained in the Gate universe. I do my 'nitpicking' after I get done with the episodes. And the little things that do annoy me, or do not like, I do not blame that for destroying an episode. I do watch it all, and look at it all. And the little things that annoy me, usually are quite small. And in the end are trivial, and I can just go on watching.

Exactly! I completely agree.

[Klinjon]

Agreed. I've been taking a break from the forum in the last couple of weeks because I was finding the general tone so unpleasant. I have also found that adding four or five people to my ignore list has improved things. It's difficult to have reasoned debated when there are people who just want to create animosity chiming in.

Yeah you're right. Unpleasent is one way to describe it...

[Col.Foley]

Exactly! I completely agree.

Saying all of this, I do now have a least favorite episode of Stargate.

[Klinjon]

Saying all of this, I do now have a least favorite episode of Stargate.

[dasNdanger]

I can't pretend to be a regular on these forums (as my post count clearly reflects) but having spent plenty of time reading the kinds of opinions and topics bouncing around these boards, I find myself really, really perplexed by the attitude of some fans. Never before have I encountered a show where the fans seem to want it both ways. I shall attempt to explain before I run the risk of getting "flamed" (not sure if that's the correct use of the term but I'll throw it out there regardless).

The timing of this post comes after reading the initial reaction to Whispers. Phrases like "standalone", "bottle show", and "contributed nothing" seem to be flying around a fair bit. Now, the fact that I disagree is one thing, but for me, this is symptomatic of a larger issue, one that I'm sure others have touched upon (my argument here isn't admittedly very original you see, but I present it anyway because I feel very passionately about this).

I don't really know what qualifies as an "arc" or "major story" episode these days, but it seems as though no episode is “decent” or "worth watching" if it doesn't advance the Atlantis story in leaps and bounds. I guess it comes down to the fact that I have no problem with episodes like "The Seed" and "Whispers" just because they don't necessarily deal with or advance all the major story threads being dangled. I really don't think there's anything wrong with the Atlantis producers and writers pacing the season and padding them out by telling different kinds of stories.

It just amazes me that an episode like "Broken Ties" receives a generally average reception from fans when the parts of it that, in my mind, are crucial to making episodic television successful, regardless of the genre (quality of writing, pacing, and most importantly, the acting) were fantastic. Surely this cannot be disputed in the case of “Broken Ties”? What’s wrong with just being entertained by an episode of the show when it features these elements in obvious abundance?

Other standalone episodes, like “Whispers”, were tightly written (some nice exchanges between Carson and Porter, Dusty was pleasantly irreverent), well paced (nice gradual introduction of the bad guys, and in terms of canon, were not just random angry zombies prancing around for the sake of throwing them into a story, but instead, an earlier form of Michael’s hybrids.. “canon” I believe is the correct phrase), and well acted (good bunch of actresses making up the squad, Nicole De Boer was awesome as always, and Carson and Sheppard were a nice double act). Writing, pacing, and good acting. I ask the question again: What’s wrong with just being entertained by an episode of the show when it features these elements in obvious abundance?

And to be perfectly honest, I've never understood this generalisation with "standalone" episodes that they are never as good as the so called "arc" episodes. A criticism of them that leaves me the most confused is when people say things like "contributed nothing to the overall story". In the case of both "The Seed" and "Whispers", not only did the stories both involve the Wraith in a big way (the series' primary bad guy, or have I not been paying attention since The Pilot?), but provided useful information that has significantly broadened our knowledge and understanding of them. In the case of the former, that they use human hosts to grow Hive ships. In the case of the latter, that even Michael couldn't control the earliest forms of his hybrid experiments.

Now, you present that kind of information within the framework of episodes that are either visually distinctive (“Whispers” certainly hits the mark here), contain high drama and difficult choices (Woolsey in “The Seed” without a doubt), are well paced (“The Shrine” was fantastic in this regard), cleverly written (“Ghost in the Machine” managed to believably present the Weir character without the need for Torri to be involved) and impressive and believable acting (“Jason Momoa” in Broken Ties surely?!) and you've got, in my mind, a successful episode, "standalone" or not, of Stargate Atlantis, or (if you want to view this in the broader context), episodic television.

Or am I completely alone in these views and share nothing with the critical consensus of Stargate fandom?

Brilliantly stated. I couldn't agree more - with every single word.

This is a problem with the fandom. It's one thing to be disappointed with a particular turn (death of a character, for instance), and another to say that an entire episode is pure crap because it's stand-alone, or - like this one - because it tries something new. The amount of talent and work that goes into one episode is tremendous, so when the fandom jumps on the entire production, it is a negative criticism of everyone involved and the effort put into the show - including, but not limited to, the writers, directors, actors, and behind the scenes folks, like the FX folks and stunt crew, such as Bam Bam. Again, I'm not talking about having a complaint about one particular aspect of an episode, but the tendency to totally bash the entire thing because folks wanted it to be something different, instead of accepting it for what it is.

I'm sure no one would get up in Bam Bam's face, or any of the actresses in this episode, or the director, or even Mallozzi, and say, "Your work sucks!" But, O how the anonymity of the internet brings out the nasty critic in everyone.

I see this fandom shooting itself in the foot - ratings - a BIG increase in ratings - could just save the show for another season. But with such negativity in the fandom, and threats to stop watching because of a dislike for stand-alones, then there is no hope in saving anything. Either you want the show on the air for what it is, or you don't. Simple as that.

Klinjon - I just really, REALLY enjoyed your input. Very well stated, and very much appreciated.


das

[Jumper31]

Brilliantly stated. I couldn't agree more - with every single word.

I'm sure no one would get up in Bam Bam's face, or any of the actresses in this episode, or the director, or even Mallozzi, and say, "Your work sucks!" But, O how the anonymity of the internet brings out the nasty critic in everyone.

das

Oh, on the contrary. I would have no problem, whatsoever in getting in Joseph Mallozie's face and telling him his work sucks. Because it does.

[Klinjon]

Brilliantly stated. I couldn't agree more - with every single word.

This is a problem with the fandom. It's one thing to be disappointed with a particular turn (death of a character, for instance), and another to say that an entire episode is pure crap because it's stand-alone, or - like this one - because it tries something new. The amount of talent and work that goes into one episode is tremendous, so when the fandom jumps on the entire production, it is a negative criticism of everyone involved and the effort put into the show - including, but not limited to, the writers, directors, actors, and behind the scenes folks, like the FX folks and stunt crew, such as Bam Bam. Again, I'm not talking about having a complaint about one particular aspect of an episode, but the tendency to totally bash the entire thing because folks wanted it to be something different, instead of accepting it for what it is.

I'm sure no one would get up in Bam Bam's face, or any of the actresses in this episode, or the director, or even Mallozzi, and say, "Your work sucks!" But, O how the anonymity of the internet brings out the nasty critic in everyone.

I see this fandom shooting itself in the foot - ratings - a BIG increase in ratings - could just save the show for another season. But with such negativity in the fandom, and threats to stop watching because of a dislike for stand-alones, then there is no hope in saving anything. Either you want the show on the air for what it is, or you don't. Simple as that.

Klinjon - I just really, REALLY enjoyed your input. Very well stated, and very much appreciated.


das

Cheers, very kind of you to say! And yeah, we're definitely on the same page here. Couldn't agree more.

[ToasterOnFire]

I see this fandom shooting itself in the foot - ratings - a BIG increase in ratings - could just save the show for another season. But with such negativity in the fandom, and threats to stop watching because of a dislike for stand-alones, then there is no hope in saving anything.

I'm sorry, but no. TPTB, MGM, and skiffy are already planning the next step in the Stargate franchise and no change in SGA's ratings will save the show now. I dislike your insinuation that those with concerns should zip it in the false hope that the show can be saved. It can't.

[Klinjon]

I'm sorry, but no. TPTB, MGM, and skiffy are already planning the next step in the Stargate franchise and no change in SGA's ratings will save the show now. I dislike your insinuation that those with concerns should zip it in the false hope that the show can be saved. It can't.

Although it is most unlikely that Atlantis will be brought back from cancellation and renewed for a sixth season (I for one am just happy that, much like SG1, the show is continuing in the direct to dvd format) I offer this excerpt from Joeseph Malozzi's blog:

Alfredo De La Fe writes: “I wanted to ask- at this point is there any point to fans “protesting” the cancellation of SGA? Could the jack be stuffed back in the box at this point? Is there even a remote possibility of them reversing their decision?”

Answer: I seriously doubt it. The decision has been made and, while I empathize with the fans, I think it’s unlikely that their protests will change anyone’s mind. A significant and sustained ratings spike, on the other hand, would certainly raise a few eyebrows.

Although I agree with both Joe Malozzi and yourself [ToasterOnFire], in that the show cannot be saved in its current television format, I don't think dasNdanger's comment was totally out of turn. The dominant negativity of the fandom right now is not pleasent, and I think he was addressing this issue, using the chances [or lack thereof] of saving Atlantis as an example.

[Col.Foley]

Although it is most unlikely that Atlantis will be brought back from cancellation and renewed for a sixth season (I for one am just happy that, much like SG1, the show is continuing in the direct to dvd format) I offer this excerpt from Joeseph Malozzi's blog:

Alfredo De La Fe writes: “I wanted to ask- at this point is there any point to fans “protesting” the cancellation of SGA? Could the jack be stuffed back in the box at this point? Is there even a remote possibility of them reversing their decision?”

Answer: I seriously doubt it. The decision has been made and, while I empathize with the fans, I think it’s unlikely that their protests will change anyone’s mind. A significant and sustained ratings spike, on the other hand, would certainly raise a few eyebrows.

Although I agree with both Joe Malozzi and yourself [ToasterOnFire], in that the show cannot be saved in its current television format, I don't think dasNdanger's comment was totally out of turn. The dominant negativity of the fandom right now is not pleasent, and I think he was addressing this issue, using the chances [or lack thereof] of saving Atlantis as an example.

There certainly is a lot of negative energies circulating through this fandom, for a long time in fact. maybe one of the reasons that I hid in off topic as long as I did.

[Klinjon]

The vast, gigantic, rather large, GAPING argument, is not whether "Whispers" advances the overall story arc of Atlantis or not. It is not whether "Whispers" is a "mythology" episode or a "bottle" show. "The Seed" was a good example of a bottle show.

The argument is that "Whispers", in general, was just plain BAD writing. Not only was it bad writing, it was full of horror cliches...and what after all, is Stargate: Atlantis? Horror, or Sci-Fi? Sci-Fi Horror like "Aliens?"

I think not.

The biggest reason they are going the horror route is because some idiot in charge thinks they have to appeal to the younger, more hip, audience...people who are not normally fans of the Sci-Fi (or of the SG1 or SGA) franchises.

Indeed, the entire Sci-Fi channel is going in that direction. Why not take Atlantis there as well? The series is canceled so who cares right? Maybe they'll get some of those teenage dollars from the teens buying whatever advertisers are advertising while crap shows like "Whispers" are playing.

However, it's not even that the horror genre playing out on SGA with all the horror cliches possible is the main issue here. The writing concerning the all-female team was extremely bad too.

"There are definitely good reasons to complain here.

Whether or not "Whispers" was a bottle show or a mythology episode, is not one of them.

I think you've missed the point here. I wrote the first post in this thread not in response to criticism of "Whispers" alone, but in the manner in which critical argument is presented in these forums with such a consistently unrelenting negative tone.

I don't think this is a reasonable comment at all:

"There are definitely good reasons to complain here.
Whether or not "Whispers" was a bottle show or a mythology episode, is not one of them."

Who are you to state what is and isn't a good reason to complain, praise, or comment on something? And if you'd bothered to read what many passionate fans have been discussing here you would soon see that the argument of whether or not "Whispers" was a bottle show or a mythology episode was very much a part of what we are talking about. This is an ironic yet brilliant example of how the attitude of the fandom is on a downward spiral. Surely dictating what is and isn't more suitable for discussion in a thread you did not create is contradictory of everything the Gateworld moderators have tried to build and maintain?

Yes, there is plenty of room for criticism of "Whispers". This is a point I do not dispute. But the objective of my mad ramblings (and the like minded responses of numerous members who feel the same way as myself) is to get people to analyse these episodes and present a balanced argument without resorting to the numerous cliched responses I've previously listed.

To state something is "terrible", for example, is (in the words of Das) to condemn every aspect of an episodes production (as he explains in greater detail in his previous post). And in the case of your own message, to state that the following:

"The biggest reason they are going the horror route is because some idiot in charge thinks they have to appeal to the younger, more hip, audience...people who are not normally fans of the Sci-Fi (or of the SG1 or SGA) franchises."

in the context that you know this to be absolute fact is borderline arrogance, and a perfect example of the prefalance of negativity swarming this forum.

The fact that Joseph Malozzi himself (executive producer of Atlantis and writer of "Whispers") has stated in his own public blog that he wrote the episode because he was inspired by the horror novels he was reading as part of his Book Club project, and was interested in doing something stylistically different with one of his assigned Season 5 episodes, would seem to contradict your stated fact that "some idiot" is trying to appeal to a new audience and is lowering the quality of Atlantis episodes as a result. Have a browse through his archive if you don't believe me!

http://josephmallozzi.wordpress.com/