Sam Carter/Jack O'Neill Ship Discussion Thread

[Nynaeve506]

XF & Sanctuary

Spoiler:

XF and Sanctuary aren't even in the same category. As in, Sanctuary is way, way better IMO. And I watched XF when it was on air. It was definitely a pioneering show, but Sanctuary has more humor, less eerie feel. If I were going to compare XF to something, I would compare it to Fringe. I really love Fringe

I didn't dislike Nightwalkers...but I did find it a pleasant "filler" episode - but I'm a huge Jonas Quinn fan (I prefer him to Daniel, I know, I know, gasp and heresy).

And I think 9&10 have a lot of ship if you know where to look

[Zoser]

I didn't like Nightwalkers but found Resurrection a bit more interesting. It didn't seem like a Stargate episode but like one of another series, dark and creepy series, that had a window into the Stargate universe.
And, too, with no Jack there is no Joy.

[Kate1013]

XF & Sanctuary

Spoiler:

XF and Sanctuary aren't even in the same category. As in, Sanctuary is way, way better IMO. And I watched XF when it was on air. It was definitely a pioneering show, but Sanctuary has more humor, less eerie feel. If I were going to compare XF to something, I would compare it to Fringe. I really love Fringe

I didn't dislike Nightwalkers...but I did find it a pleasant "filler" episode - but I'm a huge Jonas Quinn fan (I prefer him to Daniel, I know, I know, gasp and heresy).

And I think 9&10 have a lot of ship if you know where to look

Spoiler:

Agree that you can't compare XF and Sanctuary, but for altogether different reasons! For me XF has a lot more depth, is more intense and is generally creepier. Sanctuary is a lot more lighthearted for me - but that's what I like about it.

[Nefer]

I promise this'll be my last comment on this inappropriate topic:

Spoiler:

It was definitely a pioneering show, but Sanctuary has more humor, less eerie feel.

For me XF has a lot more depth, is more intense and is generally creepier. Sanctuary is a lot more lighthearted for me - but that's what I like about it.

Ay, there's the rub! I just like intense, creepy and eerie better I guess . And I didn't mean to criticize Sanctuary. I can't really, since I have only seen like 6 or 7 episodes. It just didn't hold my interest in the same way that for example XF did. And I recognized many mutual themes, therefor my judgement of it being a 'rip-off'. And I would put all XF, Sanctuary and Fringe-like stuff into the same category

But you can't really say that XF had no humour in it, can you?

And I think 9&10 have a lot of ship if you know where to look

*rubs hands* Bring it on! I'm really looking forward to your ideas and observations.

[Akamaimom]

<snip>
And I think 9&10 have a lot of ship if you know where to look

Yeah, like the Prometheus, and the Daedalus, and the Korolev, and all those Lucien Alliance spacecraft. . .

That kind of ship?

[Nynaeve506]

Yeah, like the Prometheus, and the Daedalus, and the Korolev, and all those Lucien Alliance spacecraft. . .

That kind of ship?

Akamai - yes, EXACTLY, you read my mind

[hedwig]

Yeah, like the Prometheus, and the Daedalus, and the Korolev, and all those Lucien Alliance spacecraft. . .

That kind of ship?

The Odyssey, The Apollo, The Sun Tsu ...

[hlndncr]

By Josiane

Summary
It’s the President’s first day on the job, and his plate is already quite full when the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs shows up for a special closed door briefing in the Oval Office. That’s when the bomb is dropped. The President learns that the Air Force has been sending teams to explore other planets and fighting off alien invasion for nearly seven years. At first he thinks he’s being punked, but it turns out this is no joke and his running mate all knew about it.

Newly minted Vice President Kinsey wastes no timing trying to convince the President to give him control over the Stargate program. But the President isn’t so easily manipulated. He sits down with Kinsey, General Maynard, and Mr. Woolsey – who has been conducting an investigation of the SGC since the death of Dr. Fraiser – and asks for detailed evidence of what’s really been going on under Cheyenne Mountain.

While the President is sympathetic to Hammond and SG-1 and is reluctant to take Kinsey’s side in the matter, because he has his own suspicions about the VP’s motivations and dealings, he knows he’s facing a political powder keg that could easily blow up in his face. He recognizes that he’s going to have to do something to assert control and put his stamp on the project.

When Woolsey discovers that the VP doesn’t plan to accept defeat, no matter what that may require, he begins to consider he may have gotten in bed with the wrong kind of people. Although he hasn’t changed his mind about the shortcomings in the Stargate program or its current leadership, he realizes he needs to do something to keep Kinsey and his shadowy associates in check. He goes to Hammond and gets the goods on Kinsey, which he turns over to the President hoping he’s done the right thing.

Favorite Scenes and Lines
Lighthearted:
President Hayes finds the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs waiting for him in the Oval Office.
“He knows it’s my first day, right?”
General Maynard tells the President about the Stargate and he thinks this is a joke to break the ice.
“Ha ha. That's funny. That's very funny. My first day. This is a joke, right? I have a great sense of humor. I didn't know that you had one, but this is good, because we're finding out about each other.”

Darker and a little more profound:
After Woolsey gives the President the evidence against Kinsey and hopes it’s not too little too late.
“I also hope history one day shows that I tried to do the right thing.”
The President replies, “Whose version of history, Mr. Woolsey?”

Generally
OK, this is a clip show and a continuation of the rather odd line up before the big season 7 finale. First we have the “documentary style” Heroes. Then the X-File-ish Resurrection, and now Stargate does The West Wing. Sure seems like a long time since we’ve seen SG-1 save the world doesn’t? But if you take the oddly placed Resurrection out of the mix there’s a nice through line on the story with the set up of the investigation in Heroes to the many of the events in Lost City. And while I’m not saying this is Stargate’s finest hour (43 minutes without commercials), I do think it’s a good and well-executed story.

Mallozzi and Mullie set out to write a clip show with as few clips as possible. They are able to pull this off I think because of the interesting characters brought to life through really excellent performances by an incredibly talented guest cast. There’s a lot about this story that harkens back to Disclosure. It’s a briefing on the Stargate program and Kinsey’s trying to take over. But it doesn’t feel nearly as flat as Disclosure did for me. The setting certainly helps. A grey room in the Pentagon can’t compare with the Oval Office. But I really think the quality of the characters and the acting give this episode a richness and depth Disclosure just doesn’t have. I’m strongly tempted to rank this one as my favorite of all the clip shows.

OT White House:

Spoiler:

I just have to laugh at how shows are always doing these walkie-talkie hallway scenes in the White House, especially since The West Wing. And the director was upset that their hallway set was too short (only about 30 feet) to do the whole opening scene in one shot – until William Devane decided to slow down and talk to the statues. Well I’ve been in the west wing of the White House and it’s not as grandiose as you would think (except the Oval Office, which is very impressive). It’s actually quite small and cramped, especially by modern standards. For example, it’s really only a few dozen steps between the Oval Office, the Cabinet Room and the Roosevelt Room. That hallway set was palatial compared to the real thing. Nobody does walkie-talkie briefings in the White House halls, they’d fall all over each other.

President Hayes
This is a great introduction for a character that I would really liked to have seen more. He is very affable but with a strong inner core. You can believe he has the charm and charisma to win the Presidency and the shrewdness and self-confidence to maintain power and control. I can really see him and Jack getting along, and not just because he has no problem sticking it to Kinsey. I think that’s important because it makes Jack promotions and eventual move to Washington so much more plausible for me, and it’s a shame we never got to see RDA and WD in a scene together.

The one thing that seems a little off to me in this episode is that it seems like Hayes has never heard of Hammond before, but in Lost City we learn that they knew each other at least superficially as Lieutenants in the Air Force. And Woolsey also mentions to Hammond that he knows Hammond has connections to the White House such that he’s aware of what’s been going on. Now maybe Woolsey was referring to General Maynard, but I have a different theory. The staffer briefing the President at the beginning (Stan) is the same guy who played Winslow in Touchstone. Now wouldn’t it be delicious if this mysterious political contact that was never explained or mentioned again just happens to be the new White House Chief of Staff. Well, he is in my world.

Woolsey
For me this is the beginning of the rehabilitation of Woolsey’s character. Not that there was that much to his character in Heroes; he was just your generic bureaucratic bad guy. But here, he actually gets to be the hero (ironic isn’t it?) And we learn that he doesn’t really have a personal agenda. He really is just a committed public servant who believes he’s doing an important job maintaining standards of accountability in the government.

There is a brief suggestion in Heroes that he may be corrupt (he made money on some kind of insider deal and was fired from his job as a congressional staffer) and that’s how he came into the NID. But I think what we see here is that he is more likely to have a little tunnel vision and it leads him into some potentially compromising situations and relationships. I work on the Hill and I’ve definitely seen this before where well-meaning staffers who want to change the world don’t look closely enough at the motivations of people who seem to have the same ostensibly worthy goals they do. (And before you ask, I have received gifts from lobbyists. I once accepted a chocolate bar. What can I say? Money and power is not my weakness, but I may sell out my country for good chocolate. ) So I have to say I’ve always been somewhat sympathetic to Woolsey as a character, and I think this episode shows that he doesn’t always make the best choices but he is a decent person with honorable intentions.

And he shows that in the one bit of shippiness we get in this episode . . .

Sam and Jack
Kinsey accuses Sam and Jack of having an inappropriate relationship that goes well beyond “respect and friendship.” His proof? A report from Dr. Lee about how upset and erratic Sam’s behavior was when Jack went missing in Paradise Lost. This makes me wonder what Hammond left out of the reports on the Za’tarc incident or the Entity incident. It just seems like there had to be a few more potentially embarrassing reports out there, but I just have to assume Hammond had their backs.

In terms of reaction to Kinsey’s accusation, it’s clear that Woolsey wasn’t going there. And Hayes even said they had a right to their feelings. I’m not quite sure what that means because actually, as Air Force officers serving in the same chain of command they don’t have a right to certain kinds of feelings. That’s the whole point isn’t it? But it gives me solace that when the time comes, he would be sympathetic to helping Sam and Jack keep their careers and still be together.

My reaction to Kinsey's accusation is to feel sort of uncomfortable because as a shipper of course I can read between the lines and see more than respect and friendship between them! This would be a much shorter thread if I didn't. But that means I'm siding with Kinsey!

[Nynaeve506]

Highland Dancer - great review. And you work on the Hill?! I'm sorry. LOL - although now I'm curious what you do

As I mentioned in Heroes, I have a difficult time not watching Woolsey with the full breadth of his character in my head. Additionally, I tend to be biased when characters are played by actors I like. They could be the most evil villain in the world and I would be gushing about how amazing they are. It's pathetic really.

You bring up an excellent point as to Kinsey's evidence - a report by a secondary character - meaning that many, many pieces of Sam and Jack have been purposefully left out of reports. Granted, I doubt they're as detailed as we tend to scour, but the za'tarc incident is HUGE. Given Kinsey's access to classified materials and his resources, I can't believe he wouldn't have picked up on this. Lives were at stake - S/J not withstanding.

While it seems easy enough to forgive (hiding the non-relationship of two officers), it again points out the necessity of *good* characters, like Woolsey, who are genuinely committed to the public. What else could be left out of reports? Funds being misappropriated? People dying? Threats to the very existence of humanity? It may not be in the best interest of the public to KNOW these things (as despair.com says: never underestimate the power of stupidity in large groups) - we need people who can watch out for us.

I love SG-1 and I suspend disbelief, of course, for most of it. Still, I stop and contemplate sometimes what kind of danger the SGC put people in because they didn't stick to protocol. If it happened with S/J, surely it happened elsewhere in the SGC. My dad worked black ops (as a pilot) for the USAF. When I talked about joining up and working intelligence he told me that there were things in this world I was better off not knowing about. I have to admit, I wonder what those things are.

Anyway, my point is, Kinsey's evidence was flimsy (I don't even think Woolsey bought it entirely), yet there was much, much more that could have been used. Food for thought.

As for Hayes not knowing Hammond, I mentally explain it like anything else - it's hard to remember people. Seriously, I've spent months with people, cried with them, and if you asked me to pick them out of a line up now, I can't even tell you what they looked like or their names - too many people in and out of my life and that was less than ten years ago. Hayes is what, forty-something, maybe fifty or more? It's been forever. Then later, he's reading the profiles and he goes "OH YEAH, he was that one guy that I had a beer with!"

[Akamaimom]

As for Hayes not knowing Hammond, I mentally explain it like anything else - it's hard to remember people. Seriously, I've spent months with people, cried with them, and if you asked me to pick them out of a line up now, I can't even tell you what they looked like or their names - too many people in and out of my life and that was less than ten years ago. Hayes is what, forty-something, maybe fifty or more? It's been forever. Then later, he's reading the profiles and he goes "OH YEAH, he was that one guy that I had a beer with!"

Maybe they hooked back up on Facebook?

[Lucycat]

Great comments on Politics!!

[hedwig]

As for Hayes not knowing Hammond, I mentally explain it like anything else - it's hard to remember people. Seriously, I've spent months with people, cried with them, and if you asked me to pick them out of a line up now, I can't even tell you what they looked like or their names - too many people in and out of my life and that was less than ten years ago. Hayes is what, forty-something, maybe fifty or more? It's been forever. Then later, he's reading the profiles and he goes "OH YEAH, he was that one guy that I had a beer with!"

I would say that both Hayes and Hammond are somewhere in their 50's.

[Nynaeve506]

Maybe they hooked back up on Facebook?

That sounds like a scandal worthy of page one

I would say that both Hayes and Hammond are somewhere in their 50's.

Thus solidifying my position that they've got a lot of years to forget

[hlndncr]

Highland Dancer - great review. And you work on the Hill?! I'm sorry. LOL - although now I'm curious what you do

Let me reassure you; I'm very, very unimportant.

You bring up an excellent point as to Kinsey's evidence - a report by a secondary character - meaning that many, many pieces of Sam and Jack have been purposefully left out of reports. Granted, I doubt they're as detailed as we tend to scour, but the za'tarc incident is HUGE. Given Kinsey's access to classified materials and his resources, I can't believe he wouldn't have picked up on this. Lives were at stake - S/J not withstanding.

While it seems easy enough to forgive (hiding the non-relationship of two officers), it again points out the necessity of *good* characters, like Woolsey, who are genuinely committed to the public. What else could be left out of reports? Funds being misappropriated? People dying? Threats to the very existence of humanity? It may not be in the best interest of the public to KNOW these things (as despair.com says: never underestimate the power of stupidity in large groups) - we need people who can watch out for us.

From my very limited experience with state secrets all I can say is I think we over estimate the ability of our government to keep secrets and get away with it (although the military is better at it than the general bureacracy). We have an amazingly open government. When I first came to DC I was stunned with how much access I was granted so rapidly and so easily.

And you have to be very careful about basically good people who are motivated by their own view of the public good. Those are the kind who often do the most damage because like Woolsey they become committed to a personal ideal (often dogmatically so) that can either be misused or they loose sight of necessary practicalities that must inform real decision-making.

But as you say, I'm willing to suspend my disbelief with SG-1 because I love it! And I love Sam and Jack and believe they truly did act honorably (I really dislike "screw the regs" fics); so I'm willing to cut them a lot of slack. As I think you and probably others have said before, in real life the team would never have been allowed to serve together that long or become that close.

As for Hayes not knowing Hammond, I mentally explain it like anything else - it's hard to remember people. Seriously, I've spent months with people, cried with them, and if you asked me to pick them out of a line up now, I can't even tell you what they looked like or their names - too many people in and out of my life and that was less than ten years ago. Hayes is what, forty-something, maybe fifty or more? It's been forever. Then later, he's reading the profiles and he goes "OH YEAH, he was that one guy that I had a beer with!"

You make a good point. But I will note that successful politicians, as Hayes must be, have an almost abnormal ability to remember people and personal details based on the most insignificant contact. Seriously, it's almost freaky!

[Aveo_amacus]

As for Hayes not knowing Hammond, I mentally explain it like anything else - it's hard to remember people. Seriously, I've spent months with people, cried with them, and if you asked me to pick them out of a line up now, I can't even tell you what they looked like or their names - too many people in and out of my life and that was less than ten years ago. Hayes is what, forty-something, maybe fifty or more? It's been forever. Then later, he's reading the profiles and he goes "OH YEAH, he was that one guy that I had a beer with!"

I could be really geeky here and go on about the structure of brain memory, but basically it's believed that we only retain the faces and intentities of a few hundred people at any one time - although like everything this is subject to individual variation as hlndncr pointed out - if Hayes has just won an election there would have been a *lot* of people he would have been dealing with at that time.


This episodes does sort of parallel Woolsey's role in Heroes with the discussion of military oversight/what is reported. Lots of fine lines and shades of grey to cross or not...