Sam Carter/Amanda Tapping Discussion/Appreciation

[L.A. Doyle]

Think about what almost happened to Amanda last year. You guys did a great job (sorry I wasn't here yet) letting the PTB know that SG1 without Sam would not be tolerated, and we still have our Sam. I don't think Amanda was trying to play us against them. I think it was an innocent comment that sparked last year's big debate, but it may have been an intentional move by BW and RCC this time around. (If so, good job BW and RCC!) MGM needs to know that we want an SG1 movie or we won't get it. Let's make sure our opinions are well known!
Of course, this is pure speculation.

I wish I had been here for that. Thanks to all of you for sticking up for AT and letting TPTB know what you thought!

[ForeverSg1]

I am not sure whether this was already posted here, but if you want to show your opinion about these proposed movies outside of GW, go to http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/. They have a poll up right now about this very issue and one of the choices to the question whether you like this idea is "No! No Col. Carter? No Teal'c?"

The people at Sci-Fi really need to get some researchers who know what the hell they are doing.

Kurt Russell did not play Col. Jack O'Neill. He played Col. Jack O'Neil with only 1 L!!

Personally I'm glad there would be no Sam and no Teal'c because that means their lives won't be altered even in an AU version of Stargate. It's obvious that should the movies by Devlin transpire that the lives that Daniel and Jack have lived over the past decade would be completely different. In Devlin's world, Daniel Jackson still lives on Abydos. That alone changes everything within our SG-1 universe. So the two movies would be completely different stories. I really don't see them being similiar in any way other than having Stargate in their title and two characters with similiar names.

[Bucky]

*headdesk*

Film Spoilers

Spoiler:

As the creaters have REPEATEDLY said, not that ANYONE seems to be listening (not personal Bucky, there seem to be a lot of people jumping on the bandwagon without reading the news first), the sequels were meant to be set TWELVE years on anyway. It's just coincidence that it IS now twelve years on. They intended to age Kurt and James with make up.

Ouch. But thanks for the (painful) heads up. Well, a girl could hope....

So, if that's the case, then I am even more puzzled.

Bucky

[ForeverSg1]

^^ Re: the talk of new sequels to the original "Stargate" movie:

Besides, aren't both Kurt Russell and James Spader getting a bit long in the tooth? Maybe Kurt Russell could pass a grizzled, older Jack O'Neill, but James Spader just doesn't look a the fresh-faced, wide-eyed innocent. The character of Daniel Jackson would have to be completely re-written to account for, oh, the passing of 12 years. He looks 12 years older.

And what about the passing of Viveca Linfors, the original Catherine Langford,--Oh, and let's not forget that Alex Cruz, who played Skaara, is clearly no longer a boy.

Anyhoo...If the writers have to compensate for Spader and Russell--and the others--then why not rewrite the scripts up to the present day and incorporate the events in the series?

I like Sci/Fi. I am usually happy with sequels--but the dismal, boring effort that came out of "Superman Returns" reminds me that "ripeness is all." The sequels would have been great eight, nine, ten years ago. But now? It'd be like "Star Trek: Nemesis"--been there, done that, Riker and Troy old news.

I can't say that I won't go see a sequel if Sam and Teal'c are not a part of it, but it'll take a major mental disjunct to separate MovieLand from TVLand.

Bucky

Actually according to Devlin the second episode of his Stargate Triology was suppose to take place twelve years after Daniel Jackson was left on Abydos. They were originally going to age the actors to look twelve years older, but if it's done now they won't have to because the actors would have aged normally. In Devlin's reality Daniel never came back to Earth after his wife was kidnapped by the Gou'ald. Nothing about the SG-1 series would have taken place, therefore, there would be no reason for Amanda or Sam to be a part of the movie, just as there would be no reason for Michael Shanks to be a part of it because the Daniel in the movie is not the same Daniel we have come to know and love in the series.

[AGateFan]

The thing is, I actually LIKE the idea of the original films. And at the moment, I feel like I'm being a "bad" Sam fan for liking the idea. But I loved the feel of the original film and I really want to see how the original trilogy played out. The series is a totally separate entity and has a completely different feel.

If you would have asked me two years ago I would have been 100% against movies based on the original films as I would not want to see the show without the great characters we have come to know in SG-1 or to ruin SG-1s continuity. But now TPTB already did that, so I say bring the movies on.

Hey maybe AT can play a female lead part in the show... they surely will want a female in there somewhere (besides sha're).

[deepspace]

wow, RE your computer... it really was 'fried'... folks make that comment all the time when their computers go 'belly up', but they usually just mean that their computer hardware has failed and had to be replaced...but yours... really was 'fried'... complete with real burning smell and all!

Yeah, it's actually surprising how instantly the computer technicians recognised the smell. And boy did the smell linger for hours . If I remember what they said correctly some of the main circuits on the motherboard melted.

Thankyou everyone for the warm welcome back to Samanda. I'm sorry if I worried people as to where I was for the last few months , but I truly have come back at the first possible opportunity.

It's good to return to see both some familiar faces, including a couple who were absent when I was last here (good to have you back Astrogeologist, Coley), and some new faces who I hope to get to know well from now on.

[stargate barbie]

the writers' idea of a strong woman seems to be someone that can carry three bags of groceries all by herself

THREE bags? no. way!

that's what we need to find big strong men for.

[Tracy Jane]

Now, if we can just get our ickle hewo to carry the bags, then Sam would be free to do other stuff *cough*Lead*cough*

[tsaxlady]

Greetings one and all - well I'm back from Comic Con - finally got some sleep last night. I will start posting some pictures later today for those interested.

As for the Stargate panels - well at least they had the sense to have a decent moderator this year. They had Gary Jones do the moderating - much better than the dude from TV Guide last year that asked all kinds of crazy questions. The SG-1 and SGA panels were combined this year and just over an hour long so it did not leave time for many fan questions.

The biggest SG news came when I was told by a SciFi Exec that the second half of S10/S3 would not start airing on SciFi until March.

The thing about TIVO being talked about during the panel on Saturday - TIVO is starting to be figured into the ratings but it counts most when watched live - there is also a measurement for same day but watched later, viewed a second time and watched within 7 days. However if you pause of fastword your TIVO then viewing is no longer tracked and does not count for ratings. The ratings are still driven for advertisers - if you pause of fastforward then they figure it is to miss the ads - what company wants to spend money advertising on a show when people don't watch the ads. Advertisment is another piece of the puzzle for funding a show. Low ratings means loss of ad sponsorship - which then means cancelation. Because both SG-1 and SGA are in the top 20 for TIVO Season pass numbers - they are aware that show is being watched - in fact last week SG-1 and SGA were both in the top 5 for TIVOed shows. But again bottom line is advertisers want people watching the show live to see their product ads.

I will be posting a full report on the panel in the next few days - they did talk some about the 200th but there was not really anything new in what they said.

The room was packed with around 5,000 people and as they were getting set up for the panel announcements were made that no one could save a seat for anyone else because there were so many people standing outside the room waiting in line to get into see the panel. Some friends and I had arrived before the Simpson's Movie panel to get and get seats (the crowd for that panel was not full) - after that panel we were able to move a little closer for the legends of SciFi panel that was just before the SG panels. I must say my favorite panel of the weekend was the one just before the SG panel - Ray Bradbury was so funny and enjoyable on the panel "Bradbury, Harryhausen and Ackerman— Three legends"

[deepspace]

I think I would have to say I would be against a set of movies returning to the original cast and style. Admittedly while I liked the movie, I liked it back before the series came along, and after that the movie began to pale in comparison.

I know when the series first started I was disappointed that they'd changed the actors for what were the two main characters at the time, however by the end of season 1 I knew that Richard Dean Anderson and Michael Shanks brought something to the characters of Jack and Daniel that was never in the movie characters. And personally I don't believe that the series could have lasted nine seasons with the movie cast. That's not to say they are not good actors, only that I don't think they suit a long running tv show.

I guess I just had hopes that if there was going to be a movie it would be set around the time period of the beginning of season 8. Originally I had heard that the script for the season 7 episodes "The Lost City" part 1&2 was meant for a movie, but it never came about, so they made ordinary episodes instead. If they are to make movies though I really wanted them to be with our main team of SG-1, Jack, Sam, Teal'c and Daniel, and with the actors that we've grown to know as the characters throughout eight seasons of Stargate.

[stargate barbie]

i voted for no! no carter? no teal'c?

personally, while i did love the original film, its time has passed, and BW & JG and co. have done a pretty great job with the tv show to the point that its mythology and universe is accepted as a follow on from the film, and a damn good one at that. yes there are a few differences, but that happens.

devlin is very bitter about the very existence of the tv show and has abosolute no respect for it at all. he even goes so far as to mock it and insult it in his commentary for the original film. now i do understand why he's bitter about it, but as far as i'm concerned he's really just jumping on the bandwagon of the show's success, and that of sci fi revivals and sequels in general. (superman and star trek for example).

i like devlin and emmerich films on a mostly shallow "ooh look shiny" kind of way, and i do think that stargate was the best of them, but i really don't think his version of the film would be respectful to the show, nor IMO would it be anymore succesful than an sg-1 feature. the only big draw and advantage that he would have is james spader.

again just my own opinion.

and also, i'd be a tad irked that mgm would go ahead with a version that did not include carter and teal'c. even if they weren't the same actors from the same universe of our sg-1, (which it wouldn't be because mgm is a business they took stargate from devlin, if they thought it would make them money they would do the same to the sg-1 guys) sacrificing such brilliant characters would really suck.

hopefully they recognise what talents they have and would try to make those talents much more recognisable. amanda in particular with the right marketing could still have a huge career, and might even show some loyalty to mgm (a company in trouble) were they to show some to her.

again, my opinion. don't listen to it, cos i'm an idiot. (except the part about not making stargate 2 & 3, i'm right about that! )

[stargate barbie]

Greetings one and all - well I'm back from Comic Con - finally got some sleep last night. I will start posting some pictures later today for those interested.

As for the Stargate panels - well at least they had the sense to have a decent moderator this year. They had Gary Jones do the moderating - much better than the dude from TV Guide last year that asked all kinds of crazy questions. The SG-1 and SGA panels were combined this year and just over an hour long so it did not leave time for many fan questions.

The biggest SG news came when I was told by a SciFi Exec that the second half of S10/S3 would not start airing on SciFi until March.

The thing about TIVO being talked about during the panel on Saturday - TIVO is starting to be figured into the ratings but it counts most when watched live - there is also a measurement for same day but watched later, viewed a second time and watched within 7 days. However if you pause of fastword your TIVO then viewing is no longer tracked and does not count for ratings. The ratings are still driven for advitisors - if you pause of fastforward then they figure it is to miss the ads - what company wants to spend money advertising on a show when people don't watch the ads. Adveristment is another piece of the puzzle for funding a show. Low ratings means loss of ad sponsorship - which then means cancelation. Because both SG-1 and SGA are in the top 20 for TIVO Season pass numbers - they are aware that show is being watched - in fact last week SG-1 and SGA were both in the top 5 for TIVOed shows. But again bottom line is advitisors want people watching the show live to see their product ads.

I will be posting a full report on the panel in the next few days - they did talk some about the 200th but there was not really anything new in what they said.

The room was packed with around 5,000 people and as they were getting set up for the panel announcements were made that no one could save a seat for anyone else because there were so many people standing outside the room waiting in line to get into see the panel. Some friends and I had arrived before the Simpson's Movie panel to get and get seats (the crowd for that panel was not full) - after that panel we were able to move a little closer for the legends of SciFi panel that was just before the SG panels. I must say my favorite panel of the weekend was the one just before the SG panel - Ray Bradbury was so funny and enjoyable on the panel "Bradbury, Harryhausen and Ackerman— Three legends"

so am i to assume that the big "L" issue was not queried at the con?

[tsaxlady]

so am i to assume that the big "L" issue was not queried at the con?

No it was not asked - there were people in line wanted to ask about it but the panel ended before they had the chance.

[stargate barbie]

No it was not asked - there were people in line wanted to ask about it but the panel ended before they had the chance.

ggrrr.

*does marvin the martian impression*

"oooh, this makes me very angry"

thanks for the info. i was hoping that JM or any other producers/writers that may have been there would have been made aware of some of the fans feelings over this. ah well.

[tsaxlady]

Here is post that explains TIVO rating much better than I did -

Link

(Plus the spell better than I did in my last post)