Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sam Carter/Amanda Tapping Discussion/Appreciation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Lord_Minister
    I have a question. Why are there so many female Sam fans? I thought most of sams fans were guys and they liked her because shes hot.
    It's simple for me. Sam's everything I'd like to be. Smart, strong, funny, beautiful, and SO much more. She's a role model.

    Comment


      Originally posted by Osiris-RA
      That's true. When one has such a cool family like that for so many years, it doesn't really matter where the show goes, really, as long as you get to hang out with them. And I'm sure on a level, it's still great fun for them to make the show - even if it's a painful show to watch.

      I guess I'll have to suck it up and be optimistic too, huh?
      i do agree with that. AT doesn't see hwo they're treating SAM per se, she's seeing the guys that she's spent weekends with, friends whose babies she's held, friends that gave her gifts for her baby's birth, friends that she's seen get married, etc, etc, etc.

      AMANDA is surrounded by friends and even as some of those friends treat SAM like crud, AMANDA is still fine with where she is, so at the end of the day that's what matters
      Where in the World is George Hammond?


      sigpic

      Comment


        Happy Birthday, Tracy!!!!!
        Sam and Jack... Still the best romance on TV in years!


        My fanfic http://www.fanfiction.net/~drawntotherhythm

        Comment


          Originally posted by L.A. Doyle
          It's simple for me. Sam's everything I'd like to be. Smart, strong, funny, beautiful, and SO much more. She's a role model.
          Count me in on that too! I don't really know all that much about Amanda but from what little I have seen of her personality I have to say that I admire and look up to Amanda just as much as the character she plays.
          Sam and Jack... Still the best romance on TV in years!


          My fanfic http://www.fanfiction.net/~drawntotherhythm

          Comment


            I totally understand what you mean there, golfbooy. That's why I mentioned a small paper that had nothing to "lose," because I definitely understand the need to remain neutral - especially if it could cost you many interviews in the future. The Stargate franchise, as you said, is very profitable for many magazines around the world. As a smaller publication, going against the grain right now, with the baby series still tugging along, would be a bad move on any editor's part.

            ETA: And, no offense to Titan, because I love the official mag dearly, but that's clearly never, ever going to go against the party line.

            But still, we keep seeing these random little snippets from Jim Bob Journalist in North Carolina and Nancy Lee Arts&Sciences in Tennessee. Their publications aren't ever reliant on making or breaking a Stargate story, nor do they have anything to lose by editorializing - especially if that's their job. I wouldn't be surprised if they merely needed some subject to talk about, and happened to remember SG-1's milestone at the last minute.

            And TV Guide... I don't know why they're suddenly kissing up to the Stargate franchise these days (It all started with Roush, when he did that little stint on the behind-the-scenes special last year - talk about a 180. They've been showcasing SG-1 ever since... Is there an affiliation between the mag and NBCUniversal we don't know about, or something?), but they definitely don't have anything to lose by making such observations. Half of the "news" they've mentioned has been floating around the online niche for months anyway. And it's not like the suits would ever turn down TV Guide coverage, grudge or not.

            ETA2: Also, if Roush (can you tell I like this guy?) wasn't so enamored with the ex-Scape patriots, he probably would've called the franchise on it long ago. But, seeing as how he evidently believes Stargate has been saved by the new players, I'm not surprised that he was happier than a pig in doodoo to see Crichton take over SG-1.

            I guess I just expect more. Really, like astro said, it just seems like people don't care enough to say anything. They're hopping on the media bandwagon. But, beyond that, there doesn't seem to be a journalist who is willing (or able) to point out their issues with the series these days.
            Last edited by the dancer of spaz; 02 August 2006, 04:22 PM.

            Comment


              Originally posted by ForeverSg1
              When Michael left the show in S6, we were giving an explanation as to what happened to Daniel. An entire episode revolved around his injury, his death, his ascension, and his teammates loss. We continued to see him throughout season six and when Michael returned they spent several episodes explaining what had happened to his character. When Corin left the show, they again wrote several episodes explaining what happened to Jonas.

              However for Sam, even though she was gone for nearly two months, all we were given were a couple of lines of dialogue. No grand story. No worry or concern. No fallout. Just a couple of little lines in the first episode to explain where Sam had gone and then an "Oh hi Sam", when she finally returned in Beachhead. I understand you feel that by putting a voice to what happened on the show that it shows that Sam was not worthy of command, but in my opinion by not giving some sort of explanation they are basically saying Sam was not worthy period. Forget the leadership issue. We all know it will never be changed. Whether it was sexist or not. Whether we agree with it or not, I seriously doubt the writers will ever remove Mitchell from his position as leader and why would they?

              They've managed to totally ignore the fact that Sam was gone for nearly two months and they even managed to take an episode that should have celebrated the return of Sam and turned it into one that glorified Vala. They completely ignored the fact that she was once the leader of SG-1 or refused to even hint that Daniel and Teal'c still respected and supported her. In fact, Sam's been written to show absolutely no interest or concern for her old position at all. So why on earth would the writers even attempt to make Sam leader of SG-1 again?

              In the meantime, the writers will continue to rewrite Sam's life in order to make her appear even more unworthy of the position she once had on SG-1. They will continue to dumb her down and put her in situations where instead of saving the day, she will be the one in need of saving and they will continue to ignore all the important things that made Sam such a great character. Because in my mind, they just don't consider her worthy of their time any longer. They really don't know what to do with her character anymore.
              see, and with stuff like this, folks wonder why i still feel that someone was very sincerely hoping that AT would just not come baby from baby leave.

              IMHO, the writers treat sam like crud. She is NOT that hard to write (i say this from a person that finds sam incredibly easy to write, in fact it's daniel's civilianness that i can't get a handle on). but they don't seem to want to even try to write her.

              if they can't force her into a cliched mode, they just ignore her.

              these writers are pro's. i would imagine that after all these years they're getting paid very, very, very well for the jobs that they can do. and with all due respect to personal preferences, dude, for what you're no doubt getting paid you can LEARN how to write sam. writing a character is your job, your vocation. how you pay the bills. and foisting it off onto a cliche with the lame excuse of 'we jsut can't get a handle on her' is not a behavior of a professional, it's the excuses you see from a college kid, strugling through his first semester of film school

              stop making excuses and start thinking and start doing your job. Because one would think, the wonderful, fantastic, super funny an spectacular writers you are you could crank something out for one character.

              Unless, of course, your egos have outstripped your skills.
              Where in the World is George Hammond?


              sigpic

              Comment


                Originally posted by Rachel500
                Spoiler:

                I absolutely agree Area 51 was an incredibly poor plot device and that Cassie doesn't work as the reason (and you put forth a great argument why it doesn't) but I can accept that the character of Sam might have decided on a change of direction for personal reasons given the tumult that had happened in her personal life at the end of S8 (breaking her engagement, dealing with her feelings for Jack, and most significantly her father's death) and given that her 'team' looked as though they were headed in all new directions - Jack to Washington, Teal'c back to Dakara, Daniel to Atlantis - why it might have prompted her to decide on a 'fresh start' too; why a command position leading Area 51 R&D (where she presumably led more people than her previous position in charge of SG1) would be a good move for her. I think I would happily accept any of these things as being her reasons for the move and therefore it being her own decision.

                Conversely though because I could accept this as a reason for her to leave, I then demand a better explanation for why she would return and leave said 'new start' for effectively taking a step backwards (regardless of the Ori threat). Because of this, I think the theory of 'she was transferred, didn't have a choice and is trying to put a brave face on what happened' fits better with her return than her departure.


                <snip>
                But should we be surprised at the lack of back story or explanations for Sam compared to the other characters? It’s been happening since the very beginning. I looked back at the first two seasons, and it wasn’t until the ninth episode of season two before we learned as much about Sam as the rest. We knew a lot about Jack and Daniel’s stories from the movie, and looking through the first season and a half, consider all the shows that referred to their past. For Jack – Children of the Gods, Enemy Within, Cold Lazarus, Solitudes, Within the Serpent’s Grasp, Serpent’s Lair, and Gamekeeper. For Daniel – Children of the Gods, Within Serpent’s Grasp, Serpent’s Lair, and Gamekeeper.

                Even Teal’c was given more history than Sam. Children of the Gods, Family, Bloodlines, and Cor-ai.

                In those same episodes, what did we learn about Sam? In COTG, all we got was that she was a brilliant scientist who had worked on the original Stargate project, she had experience in flying, and that she was apparently a raging feminist. We all know that Amanda talked TPTB down off that last ledge. In Emancipation- we got just the tidbit that she had been through hand-to-hand training, and wasn’t afraid of the dark. Real revealing stuff, that. Then in First Commandment, they gave us the standard situation for a female character in virtually every show in history – a confrontation with the former fiancé. In Enigma, oh, look, she has a cat! It wasn’t until almost halfway through the second season, in Secrets, that we learned anything more substantial about Sam.

                I’m not claiming that Sam didn’t have some truly great episodes in the first season and a half – Singularity, Solitudes, In the Line of Duty, etc. What I am saying is that they really didn’t tell us much about her. It’s a huge tribute to AT that she made the character as appealing and believable as she did, given how little background we were told about her. She could very easily have been just the talking head, and it would have been very easy to not care about her at all.

                So, I guess I’m not too surprised that we were bombarded with Cam’s history last season, with the excuse that we already knew everything about the other characters, and we needed to catch up with his background. Omitting any explanation about Sam’s actions is nothing new, unfortunately.


                NC

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Skydiver
                  <snip>

                  Unless, of course, your egos have outstripped your skills.
                  Egos, preferences and politics, yes.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by the dancer of spaz
                    I totally understand what you mean there, golfbooy. That's why I mentioned a small paper that had nothing to "lose," because I definitely understand the need to remain neutral - especially if it could cost you many interviews in the future. The Stargate franchise, as you said, is very profitable for many magazines around the world. As a smaller publication, going against the grain right now, with the baby series still tugging along, would be a bad move on any editor's part.

                    ETA: And, no offense to Titan, because I love the official mag dearly, but that's clearly never, ever going to go against the party line.

                    But still, we keep seeing these random little snippets from Jim Bob Journalist in North Carolina and Nancy Lee Arts&Sciences in Tennessee. Their publications aren't ever reliant on making or breaking a Stargate story, nor do they have anything to lose by editorializing - especially if that's their job. I wouldn't be surprised if they merely needed some subject to talk about, and happened to remember SG-1's milestone at the last minute.

                    And TV Guide... I don't know why they're suddenly kissing up to the Stargate franchise these days (It all started with Roush, when he did that little stint on the behind-the-scenes special last year - talk about a 180. They've been showcasing SG-1 ever since... Is there an affiliation between the mag and NBCUniversal we don't know about, or something?), but they definitely don't have anything to lose by making such observations. Half of the "news" they've mentioned has been floating around the online niche for months anyway. And it's not like the suits would ever turn down TV Guide coverage, grudge or not.

                    ETA2: Also, if Roush (can you tell I like this guy?) wasn't so enamored with the ex-Scape patriots, he probably would've called the franchise on it long ago. But, seeing as how he evidently believes Stargate has been saved, I'm not surprised that he was happier than a pig in doodoo to see Crichton take over SG-1.

                    I guess I just expect more. Really, like astro said, it just seems like people don't care enough to say anything. They're hopping on the media bandwagon. But, beyond that, there doesn't seem to be a journalist who is willing (or able) to point out their issues with the series these days.
                    IMO, you're right, Roush's turnaround was based on his love of Farscape and the addition of CB and BB. But you know, these guys are the people that sing the praises of Battlestar Galactica for being so dark and at the same time love Prometheus Unbound for being such a light-hearted romp. They claimed that SG-1 was too compilicated, but BSG is complex and layered, therefore good. I don't get it.

                    NC

                    Comment



                      NC

                      Comment


                        Happy Birthday Tracy Jane! Hope you have a super day.

                        ...deepspace is a PROUD MEMBER of the Sam's A Great Character Thread...

                        HIC COMITAS REGIT!

                        Comment


                          I've been browsing the thread. You all have great thoughts about this sad situation. Too bad we can't take Bridge by storm!

                          Space Race came on tonight. It was so nice to see Sam excited and having fun! Plus I want her cool leather jacket.

                          Comment


                            Happy Birthday Tracy Jane.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by ÜberSG-1Fan
                              I hope we see more. It was great to see her smiling/laughing more. I love the way she glows even when the camera's not on her.

                              It's one of the special things about her. She's always "on." I think this is what caught the eye of TPTB early on and why they focused on her for close out shots. She was their "go-to girl" because they knew she was the one who could really delivered the goods. I think Michael Shanks said something about that in the past.

                              Anyway, some of the spoilers have me excited as a Carter fan and I hope they don't disappoint...and I also hope we see much more of this side of Carter much more often.

                              Yes, you can always count on AT. As for the rest of season 10, the lowered expectations thing is working for me. As long as an episode's not a complete train wreck, I'll probably find it ok. Which is not to say that I won't find fault with certain characters ( CM & VM) & there will likely never be enough Sam for me. I'm not even going to mention a certain inordinately handsome silver haired gent that I miss so much.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by the dancer of spaz
                                I totally understand what you mean there, golfbooy. That's why I mentioned a small paper that had nothing to "lose," because I definitely understand the need to remain neutral - especially if it could cost you many interviews in the future. The Stargate franchise, as you said, is very profitable for many magazines around the world. As a smaller publication, going against the grain right now, with the baby series still tugging along, would be a bad move on any editor's part.

                                -snip-
                                No, no, I get what you're saying. I think that a small newspaper or such could print something. Sadly, it seems that the vast majority of those newspaper articles are written by folks who know (and only care to know) Stargate solely as "the show that MacGyver is on". I don't believe that the Farscapers have garnered SG-1 any more attention in most quarters than it's gotten throughout its run. TV Guide seems to be the expception in that regard. As far as most publications go, Richard Dean Anderson is still the face of Stargate. I think that that was made painfully obvious during the 200th episode festivities. So, unless it's going to be a news snippet about him, I don't see anyone else getting serious newspaper coverage at this point.

                                As an aside, I think that this is one of those instances where certain media are well behind the public at large. I think that Stargate is a big deal worldwide, and I think that in the past three or four years Stargate has become more of a big deal here in the states. Given Scifi, syndication, and almost constant reruns, I think most people are well aware of the show and that the actors, while not "famous", are very recognizable. I mean, come on, at one point SG-1 was on like 15 times a week or something. As far as American media go, Stargate is probably always doomed to be "the little show that could".
                                Last edited by golfbooy; 02 August 2006, 04:52 PM. Reason: MacGyver gets a capital "G"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X