Who should lead SG1?(Spoilers)

[Dani347]

Well, I have no idea how the scene will play out, but I don't think it will be whimpering or stroking ego. I think it will be expressing some self doubt (not a bad thing) and asking for advice and giving encouragement. Of course, that's just my interpretation of how the future scene might play out.

[binkpmmc]

I doubt it.



I have yet to hear an even halfway convincing reason why Mitchell would deserve the award ahead of any of the other pilots involved in the battle over Antarctica.



Half of those stationed at the SGC would have a CMOH, in some cases a drawerful of them if something like being one of many flying an F-302 and getting shot down qualifies Mitchell, or anybody else for a CMOH.

I think it would have been a bit of a stretch to give the CMOH to Jack for his actions in Antartcica. Giving it to Mitchell was absurd.



I agree.

Just musing here as something here clicked - if mitchell (a fictional character) deseved it than Janet deserved it - talk about over and above the call of duty - she was a doctor - not a field officer - she rarely left the SGC - she went out into battle to assist men down and was killed in the process - CMoH material - if mitchell was than Janet far and above deserved it posthumously. I am sure that over the course of 8 years there are dozens of instances wherein SGC personnel, most especially Jack and Sam (and Daniel and Teal'c if they were eligible) would have received the CMoH using the criteria they used for mitchell's. This is the kind of thing that makes a mockery of what they did with mitchell- their only motivation for doing it was their misguided need to portray him as a "hewo" marty-sue so that the lemmings would accept such an unbelievably less-than-qualified GUY as co-leader of an elite SG team that already had a more-than-qualified leader with a wealth of experience compared to his dearth of experience.

[the dancer of spaz]

With any luck, the entire scene will be deleted out of existence.

Because any scene that separates Michell from the rest of SG-1 for the sole purpose of establishing his leadership THIS late in the game, is an obvious and deliberate attempt to backpedal on an issue they created a year ago.

Essentially, because they didn't have the nuggets to address the issue in S9, they're going to be forced to do one of two things in this instance:

1.) Fall all over themselves to make it seem like Landry trusts Cameron (despite his track record - surely the man has read the mission reports?) implicitly with SG-1's welfare. And then, of course, Cameron will suddenly exude an inordinate amount of competence during Act Three, just in time to save SG-1 from some horrible threat. He may even throw in a few "Jackisms" to really hit it home that he's in charge.

- or -

2) Dance around the issue a couple of more times, so that Cameron (or the audience) is left with this nebulous, yet oh-so-satisfying, feeling in his gut about leading the team. And then, of course, things will go back to the way they were in S9.


But here's the problem. The time to tackle Cameron's insecurities has come and gone. Striking while the iron's hot is no longer an option. The best time to have taken care of this "issue" was some time between Collateral Damage and Arthur's Mantle. But because this season was full of half-baked standalones, all filling the void until Claudia Black/Vala's return, it's clear that they didn't find it necessary. Whatever. It's their show, after all.

But here's the problem with addressing it in Season Ten. First of all, SG-1 has had its first real cliffhanger (though the caliber of Camelot's suspense is a matter of opinion) in four years. They're clearly going to jump headlong into Teh Sprog eps, leaving a choice few episodes before the first half is over to address the issue.

SG-1 has a track record of using the first three or four eps as a way to establish the issues for the season; two or three eps in the middle for standalone eps; and another two or three eps to bring everyone into the mid-season cliffhanger. They've been using this formula since Season Seven, I think.

That'll leave some random point in time between when we last see Adria and when we see Adria again.

Why am I rambling on about this? Because the timing will be ridiculous - it'll be another opportunity to fill in space for their brand, new arc, and the perfect opportunity to "address" the command issue. Not only is it too late to be having this little heart-to-heart, but it's clearly one of those issues that they didn't really THINK was an issue until fans started making a ruckus last fall.

Ten bucks says they would NOT have written some lame Landry/Cameron scene into a Season Ten episode, if it hadn't been for all of the hassling of Joe M., and the incessant debates on forums like this one.

Why? Because they seemed to think it's sooo obvious that Cameron's the leader, yet they've made no effort to have Sam, Teal'c or Daniel show him respect. They've bent over backwards to put Cameron in the limelight, yet they have NOT consistently written the other three characters as displaying any true desire to follow Cameron's lead.

All in all, based on the way they've handled issues in S9, I would not be surprised if Cameron and Hank have an almost paternal exchange about Cameron's leadership abilities, before he saves the day. It would certainly cement the mentality that Cameron IS Sam, Daniel and Teal'c's superior - if not in experience or training, then at least in his relationship with Landry.

And if they hope to make THAT Cameron's "in" in terms of the command structure, they're even more delusional than we could've ever imagined.

[Dani347]

Well, I'm personally looking forward to the scene. I'd like to hear Mitchell's thoughts on the matter.

[the dancer of spaz]

Well, I'm personally looking forward to the scene. I'd like to hear Mitchell's thoughts on the matter.

OK. To be fair, I don't want to rule it out completely. It just seems like the writers/producers have established a new standard of handling issues.

It's entirely possible that Mitchell will express his concerns without sounding like he's tattling or whining. I think they could pull it off, really I do. But it has to make sense. It has to seem like it's not so... blatantly... favoring Mitchell.

For instance, the venue of the discussion. I've tried to understand why

Spoiler:

Mitchell will be at the cabin while SG-1 is offworld, and the spoilers are just to hazy for me. Now, if Mitchell finds himself at Landry's HOUSE, that would make sense. But it still won't explain why the rest of SG-1 is offworld, when the whole point of this discussion will most likely be to show that SG-1 simply can't function without Cameron on the team.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[warmbeachbrat]

It sounds to me that there is nothing TPTB can do to correct perceived problems with Mitchell. Granted, it's just a couple of you on the thread, but I am curious if that is indeed the situation. If not, then what do you think they can do to rehabilitate the character? I guess I'm aiming this question at Dancer, Bink (and perhaps Uber) as they are the most vocal in their disgust and displeasure (at least, most recently in the thread). Sorry for the name abreviation--I'm extraordinarily lazy this evening.

I don't really want to hear rants about his utter unsuitability or incompetence (you're already aware that I disagree about that)--I really would like to know if you feel it's useless or if the situation in your eyes can be salvaged, and how.

[binkpmmc]

It sounds to me that there is nothing TPTB can do to correct perceived problems with Mitchell. Granted, it's just a couple of you on the thread, but I am curious if that is indeed the situation. If not, then what do you think they can do to rehabilitate the character? I guess I'm aiming this question at Dancer, Bink (and perhaps Uber) as they are the most vocal in their disgust and displeasure (at least, most recently in the thread). Sorry for the name abreviation--I'm extraordinarily lazy this evening.

I don't really want to hear rants about his utter unsuitability or incompetence (you're already aware that I disagree about that)--I really would like to know if you feel it's useless or if the situation in your eyes can be salvaged.

Right off the bat and personally speaking my answer is no - I may change my mind after putting some thought into how they might pull it off (right now my confidence in the people ruining this show is so low, almost to non-existent, I do not think they can pull it off anyway) but from where I sit it right now the time to have made mitchell a believable, logical, plausible co-leader of the elite team has long since passed - they missed their chance. Right now to see any real change in the character into a believable, credible co-leader would take such a massive change in the character that it would be too contrived and too extreme, IMO - it would be like the introduction of a new character with the same name. If they had introd him as a a major and made him the way he is and there to "learn from the best", like he said he was, and to serve under Carter, like he thought he was, than a change like the one I think is necessary, to make him believable in the role they have given him would not be such a stretch, his changes could be structured in such a way to show him, the less experienced, growing and learning and maturing into a believable, credible, co-leader - but coming from where and how they introd him and where I think he needs to go it would be too much of a stretch and too contrived to believe, it would be even less credible and logical and believable than it is now. Hope this makes sense.

[Uber]

It sounds to me that there is nothing TPTB can do to correct perceived problems with Mitchell. Granted, it's just a couple of you on the thread, but I am curious if that is indeed the situation. If not, then what do you think they can do to rehabilitate the character? I guess I'm aiming this question at Dancer, Bink (and perhaps Uber) as they are the most vocal in their disgust and displeasure (at least, most recently in the thread). Sorry for the name abreviation--I'm extraordinarily lazy this evening.

I don't really want to hear rants about his utter unsuitability or incompetence (you're already aware that I disagree about that)--I really would like to know if you feel it's useless or if the situation in your eyes can be salvaged, and how.

I'm really not sure anymore, warmbeachbrat (I love that name btw).

I know I wanted to like him a lot but the combination of the writing choices/acting choices etc. have painted a picture of a character that just rubs me the wrong way.

I think the time for the kind of character course correction has passed and whatever they do now might seem too much like an after thought.

I hope I'm wrong. I love Ben and I want to like him on my favorite show. I guess only time will tell.

[sg-1fanintn]

I'm really not sure anymore, warmbeachbrat (I love that name btw).

I know I wanted to like him a lot but the combination of the writing choices/acting choices etc. have painted a picture of a character that just rubs me the wrong way.

I think the time for the kind of character course correction has passed and whatever they do now might seem too much like an after thought.

I hope I'm wrong. I love Ben and I want to like him on my favorite show. I guess only time will tell.

Great thoughts! I agree completely.

[Deevil]

It sounds to me that there is nothing TPTB can do to correct perceived problems with Mitchell. Granted, it's just a couple of you on the thread, but I am curious if that is indeed the situation. If not, then what do you think they can do to rehabilitate the character?

What I find interesting is this notion that somehow the character is wrong. No, the character is Mitchell and this is the personality he has been given. The only problem I see is the role he has been put into, he is not cut out for command of a SG unit yet - not even a co-command, and the fact that there is not clean cut idea of who has command.

You see, this how I see it right now with the fans of the show it's:

How you want it to be vs the Story they want to tell
and
How one percieves it vs how another does

Now, we don't know what their long range plan is for Mitchell. Sure I would rather him be a bit more consistant and sure I have my issues with him. But in the last couple of years I have had my issues with Daniel and reconcile them because he has changed since his assension. I just don't have that safety net for Mitchell because essentially I still don't know him

And for the above reasons I don't think it is inconcievable that some issues of Mitchell's can be dealt with. It's just a question of can they be dealt with enough to please all those with larger issues.

And as for the spoilers on how ht command issue is going to be dealt with. Well this is one of the problems of the Gosbel according to spoilers - it never gives you enough information to form any sort of cohesive picture... Just enough to tell you what is likely to happen.

[Dani347]

For myself, there isn't any window of time that improvement can be made on a character before it's too late. I've been trying to think of a character that I've disliked from the beginning, but I can't. However, I can think of a few that I liked or was indifferent to at the start (this is tv in general, not just Stargate) and then they were written in a way that turned my feelings into dislike or even hate. But, when they were written better, I started to like them again. It didn't matter how late it started. It's the act of it happening itself that matters to me, not the timing. If I had a serious problem with Mitchell (and this is just saying how I would react based on other, somewhat different experiences) and the perfect opportunity to remedy it passed, i wouldn't feel that all opportunities had passed. My attitude is better late than never.

[Lightsabre]

In my opinion, anyone who says it shouldn't be same is clearly not a true stargate fan and a sexist, sam all the way end of discussion lol

Wow, I'm sexist? Why? cuase I don't like the same character you do?
IF you want to make this charge, at least have the guts to back it up.
If you want to call me or anyone else sexist, you'd better have some bloody good evidence to back it.

As to a being a true stargate fan, if you are representive of them, then I don't think I'd want to be one.

Mitchell has shown he can effectively lead the team. He was given the job by Jack and Landry.

[Uber]

Mitchell has shown he can effectively lead the team.

In your opinion. I and many others strongly disagree...which we've repeated ad nauseum.

He was given the job by Jack and Landry.

Yup. After Sam conveniently left a week ago. They were in peace time and people had moved on. We know. Things have changed since then. The parameters for the job have shifted radically and now require someone with experience, the instinct, the discipline and the poise to lead the team...and that would be Samantha Carter.

As for the sexism charge, I think it's fair to suggest that TPTB have either intentionally or not created an atmosphere where many people feel it was a deciding factor. Maybe it's not true...but the perception is still there in spades and they need to address it.

[Deevil]

Actually I am thinking. Jack offered him any position he wanted. He wanted to serve on SG-1 under Col. Sam Carter. Jack gave him this chance. Landry gave him command of a non-existant team. But Jack didn't, Jack just had him assigned at the SGC.

So, only Landry put him in that position as the head of the non-existant SG-1, not Jack. Hmmm.

Mitchell has shown he can effectively lead the team.

If I were masochistic I would say in no way have I seen Mitchell as a leader of SG-1, let alone an effective and capable leader.

But since I'm not I'll just say...

Round and round the stargate
Like a Goa'uldy bear
One step, two step
Do we have to go back there?

btw: I think that post was ignored by most because it was so needlessly inflamatory and insulting. The 'true fan' syndrome is as amusing as it is ridiculas. Just ignore it, it ain't worth your time.

[Uber]

Actually I am thinking. Jack offered him any position he wanted. He wanted to serve on SG-1 under Col. Sam Carter. Jack gave him this chance. Landry gave him command of a non-existant team. But Jack didn't, Jack just had him assigned at the SGC.

So, only Landry put him in that position as the head of the non-existant SG-1, not Jack. Hmmm.



If I were masochistic I would say in no way have I seen Mitchell as a leader of SG-1, let alone an effective and capable leader.

But since I'm not I'll just say...

Round and round the garden
Like a teady Bear
One step, two step
Do we have to go back there?

btw: I think that post was ignored by most because it was so needlessly inflamatory and insulting. The 'true fan' syndrome is as amusing as it is ridiculas. Just ignore it, it ain't worth your time.

I think it was intentionally so.

I took it to be intentionally over the top as to attempt to elicit a chuckle from the reader. Thus the LOL.