Okay, I'm going to preface this by saying I'm a BB fan (loved Farscape, and *gasp* thought it was a better show than Stargate, although I like both). I also like Mitchell. Just saying this hoping I don't come off as a bitter BB/Mitchell hater. (And, this may be long so feel free to skim or just skip by blathering
)
Okay, saying that, I did find the credits to be a bit more Mitchell heavy than I had expected. I would have thought as far as credits go, the beginning sequences would have a variety of images of everyone, and then, Mitchell first in the individual shots since he's the lead actor. My assumption that it would be like that are for 2 reasons. First, PDL's interview saying that one change would be that it wasn't "The Ben Browder Show" (I'm guessing that was meant as opposed to being "The Richard Dean Anderson Show" meaning that while there has to be a lead actor, it should be thought mostly as an ensemble show, so I expected any aspect of the credits not dealing with the actors in credit order with their names would show all the actors. And, I hope I didn't just confuse everyone with that long winded aside). The second reason I thought that there would be more group shots prior to BB's actual credit is because I thought there would be a change after RDA left. Stargate was a star vehicle for RDA, all commercials on the Scifi channel emphasized that it was RDA in Stargate. Heck, he stayed on the show because they thought they needed his star power. Now, I know BB has a huge scifi fanbase, but to me scifi is a niche base. I think overall, RDA's starpower is bigger. He's known to people in the mainstream as well as scifi. Macgyver is a pretty well known figure, even for people who never watched the show. Add to that the extra fame of being the star of Stargate. So, my thought was, once tptb felt that the show could go on without RDA's starpower, that the credits wouldn't seem to emphasize one actor because the dynamic was changed.
I don't watch Atlantis, but from PDL's comment, I know Joe Flanigan is the lead actor on the show. Are the credits similar, lots of shots of him before they actually get to where they show individual shots?
Now, while I think the credits are surprising, because like I mentioned I expected more of an ensemble feel in the credits, I don't think they're that bad. The scenes at the beginning go pretty fast. So, yes, I do think they're Mitchell heavy but the manner that they're shown doesn't seem to make the other actors seem unimportant. Ugh, I can't explain it. Second, I know that credits don't always show exactly how the actual show will go. BB is the lead, but I agree that he hasn't been written as a lead. And, I don't necessarily mean he has to drive every story or be the star of every episode. I've watched some wonderful shows that are truly ensemble. On the other hand, I don't think there needs to be the other extreme where BB is basically just tagging along. Also, I've watched shows where the actor's role diminished so that they were treated like unspecial guest stars, even though they were still the lead. And, to my complete dismay, in one show, everytime I thought a character got an upgrade in status because of their new placement in the credits, they actually got less screentime and character assassination. So, that's my way of saying that just because the credits show more clips of BB, it doesn't automatically mean that the episodes will come off as "Mitchell and those other what their faces acting with him" I'm hoping that the second half will utilize his character more, because he has been underused in my opinion, while still keeping the other characters just as important and vital. I think it can be done. There's a middle ground between Mitchell lagging behind everyone and Mitchell taking over at the expense of everyone.
(huh. Not as long as I thought. But I did decide not to post on some other comments, because i thought that would make it too long)
)Okay, saying that, I did find the credits to be a bit more Mitchell heavy than I had expected. I would have thought as far as credits go, the beginning sequences would have a variety of images of everyone, and then, Mitchell first in the individual shots since he's the lead actor. My assumption that it would be like that are for 2 reasons. First, PDL's interview saying that one change would be that it wasn't "The Ben Browder Show" (I'm guessing that was meant as opposed to being "The Richard Dean Anderson Show" meaning that while there has to be a lead actor, it should be thought mostly as an ensemble show, so I expected any aspect of the credits not dealing with the actors in credit order with their names would show all the actors. And, I hope I didn't just confuse everyone with that long winded aside). The second reason I thought that there would be more group shots prior to BB's actual credit is because I thought there would be a change after RDA left. Stargate was a star vehicle for RDA, all commercials on the Scifi channel emphasized that it was RDA in Stargate. Heck, he stayed on the show because they thought they needed his star power. Now, I know BB has a huge scifi fanbase, but to me scifi is a niche base. I think overall, RDA's starpower is bigger. He's known to people in the mainstream as well as scifi. Macgyver is a pretty well known figure, even for people who never watched the show. Add to that the extra fame of being the star of Stargate. So, my thought was, once tptb felt that the show could go on without RDA's starpower, that the credits wouldn't seem to emphasize one actor because the dynamic was changed.
I don't watch Atlantis, but from PDL's comment, I know Joe Flanigan is the lead actor on the show. Are the credits similar, lots of shots of him before they actually get to where they show individual shots?
Now, while I think the credits are surprising, because like I mentioned I expected more of an ensemble feel in the credits, I don't think they're that bad. The scenes at the beginning go pretty fast. So, yes, I do think they're Mitchell heavy but the manner that they're shown doesn't seem to make the other actors seem unimportant. Ugh, I can't explain it. Second, I know that credits don't always show exactly how the actual show will go. BB is the lead, but I agree that he hasn't been written as a lead. And, I don't necessarily mean he has to drive every story or be the star of every episode. I've watched some wonderful shows that are truly ensemble. On the other hand, I don't think there needs to be the other extreme where BB is basically just tagging along. Also, I've watched shows where the actor's role diminished so that they were treated like unspecial guest stars, even though they were still the lead. And, to my complete dismay, in one show, everytime I thought a character got an upgrade in status because of their new placement in the credits, they actually got less screentime and character assassination. So, that's my way of saying that just because the credits show more clips of BB, it doesn't automatically mean that the episodes will come off as "Mitchell and those other what their faces acting with him" I'm hoping that the second half will utilize his character more, because he has been underused in my opinion, while still keeping the other characters just as important and vital. I think it can be done. There's a middle ground between Mitchell lagging behind everyone and Mitchell taking over at the expense of everyone.
(huh. Not as long as I thought. But I did decide not to post on some other comments, because i thought that would make it too long)
Also, I believe the poor guy is a little nervous...remember that interview where he said as much just before the upcoming Comic Con? Perhaps, he really wants to be secure in how his character is being received?
If someone thinks there are too many shots of Mitchell, if they think that spells the coming of "The Ben Browder Show" well, fine. Whether I agree or not, that's how they feel. But, to say that the credits are due to BB's ego, when there's no proof whatsoever was uncalled for.
Comment