S10: Critique & Contemplation

[Gregorius]

It's true of politicians, too. It's utterly appalling how many of them are brain dead.

I didn't want to get into that topic, but now that you mention it: You're right. Most politicians are idiots with only shortterm vision, if they have any at all, and who don't know what they're talking about. And after seeing some of the senate hearings and political debates, if you can call them that, in the US, I have to say that it's even worse in the US than it's here.

Senate hearings about baseball? And what's even more amazing was that the senators in those hearings were asking tougher questions and were tougher than the senators at the hearings about more important topics like Iraq...

I also find it amusing, and very sad in a way, that a lot of politicians think they know more about a topic than people who studied it (The same goes for most of the celebrities as well).

Saying an interesting concept is no more helpful than saying interesting characters when asking for ways to appeal to (badly delineated) groups of people. What is an interesting concept which appeals to men, and women? Old and young?

The question is: "Does that matter?" as you can't predict it all. Usually the best show, I find, have an interesting concept that's being targeted at one group and as a side-effect it somehow appeals to a far broader demographic than it was intended for. Stargate and Doctor Who are examples of this.

[quote[An interesting concept to me is not always an interesting concept to other people, and vice versa. Otherwise there would be no rhyme nor reason for the existence of "Sex and the City".[/quote]

That's true and you already answered my question in the quoted part below:

Which is why most films and tv shows which have been heavily audience researched before release are not very good.

If you have an interesting concept, if you can make someone broadcasted it, and if you keep true to the four things named earlier, maybe you can have a next hit show on your hands.

Or in other words: The best shows tend to have been risks on part of the networks, because they aren't the same old shows with re-used concepts but because they're shows with new, daring and interesting concepts which suck the audience in (Firefly is an example, as is Stargate, Heroes, Lost, Doctor Who, Torchwood, etc...).

Of course that said, when looking at a much narrower sample like the sci-fi community it would do a company good to do a little bit of research. You can make more money by not ignorantly putting off a large portion of your possible clientèle.

I'd say the SciFi community is harder to research than the "normal" community as the interests of the people are much narrower in some ways and a lot excludes one another.

Anyway, the Shep & McKay comedy duo. They're becoming annoying due to being overused as I've heard their banter a thousand times. The same goes for the Shep or Shep & McKay on a (solo) mission (He's their CMO, why is he allowed to go on those missions, he should stay in Atlantis and coordinate things...). Been there, done that.

The episodes that I found were interesting last season on Atlantis were the ones where things were different from what they normally are (Missing, Quarantine, Trio).

[Skydiver]

just a little reminder for the new folks. this is an 'anti' thread, a safe place to vent an issues people have with season 10. And they are free to do this without challenge. Just as folks in the pro thread are free to enthuse without fear of being taken to task for their opinions

[Skydiver]

It's true of politicians, too. It's utterly appalling how many of them are brain dead.



I had an allergic reaction to Vector Prime, but valiantly listened to my inner Star Wars nerd and trudged ahead. By the time I got about halfway through Star by Star, I had sworn off of Star Wars books. "Darker, edgier, nastier" is not better.

i gave them up yaers and years ago when they started cranking out 2-3 a month and they were all template crud obviously tossed together to milk the franchise

I think the only 'decent' trek books out there were written by peter david. His excaliber series could have been a 'better' voyager

it's kinda reminiscent of the rumors about the third series (drags this thread screamiong back on topic)

all the spoilers i've read about universe is that its' just stargate or atlantis under a different name. More of the same. I'm even predicting the casting:

roguish young male leader
science geek
tough muscles
alien turncoat/refugee

Just like trek had the predictible casting....rather similar to stargate's to tell the truth. Cept, especially with Enterprise, they massively sexed it up with t'pol's boobs needing a dressing room of their own

When the characters are boring, the whole interest in the series depends on the writing. and if the writing is 'crank it out template', why watch? People get bored and turn the channel

[Silverwings]

Most politicians are idiots with only shortterm vision, if they have any at all...

Aye, it's the short term thinking that is the trouble. I really think that's the mentality behind the "shake things up" that made S9/S10 and

Spoiler:

Beckett's death over on Atlantis

so stupid for me. I didn't like the two parter "Heroes" for the same reason. If I want a churn and burn show, I'll watch Lost.

[Skydiver]

one of the biggest issues people have had is short sightedness.

Like vala..for the short term the flirty chick was perfect, for a one shot or 2-3 episodes...but over the course of a full season? not sustainable.

cameron, again his back story worked for a short term, but over the course of two years, they had to switch gears quickly to make him salvagable

[jckfan55]

Why would AT say anything? She's invested in the show (emotionally, not financially), and she supports it, regardless of how much or little she cares for the storylines. She also has a reputation for being a team player and a positive person to work with, and she obviously values her reputation as it is. It may be a feminine point of view, but I think in the long run, it's more effective than being abrasive.

I thought it was very telling that AT said little in public about the show once RDA left, especially in season nine.

Have you noticed she speaks of "Continuum" with more enthusiasm than "Ark of Truth?" I don't think she does it simply because of filming in the Arctic. I think she does it because she feels the story is a better one. Classic SG-1 if you will.

i agree

i think, PERSONLLY, she enjoyed one more than the other, y et she did her duty to both.

which is why, still my opinion, she's wanted in several projects and rather popular.

once she commits to something, she follows through. and she doesn't piddle in the sandbox she plays in.

she's a pro

I agree with you both. I also think she talked less about the show in S9 & less enthusiastically about AOT because really what WAS there for her to say? Not much about her role as she didn't have a heck of a lot to do.

[Jackie]

It's ironic how short sighted tptb are in regards to characters and situation when in fact they write script for the season in advance. Yet, they never seem to forecast the viewers reaction nor how the character will effect long term story arcs.

Carson Beckett is the perfect example of short sightedness. A character written out for a ratings ploy, to shake things up, but also written out prematurely for there was a main story arc that should have centered around him.

Vala is a whole other ball of wax. This is a character that never should have been in more than 2 eps. In order to bring her in full time they had to drastically change her and it didn't really make her any better. Instead of having a hardened criminal coming to terms with her past, her years as a host, the motivation for her crimes...we got Dorothy from another Oz!

Instead of a realistic character with layers of issues we got a "hip and fun" grown adult with child like pig tails.

If they wanted hip and fun, tptb should have just intro-ed every fan fic's side kick...Sam's little kid sister or some crap like that. (Oh wait, they did...Mitchell. never mind)

[suse]

one of the biggest issues people have had is short sightedness.

Like vala..for the short term the flirty chick was perfect, for a one shot or 2-3 episodes...but over the course of a full season? not sustainable.
cameron, again his back story worked for a short term, but over the course of two years, they had to switch gears quickly to make him salvagable

What drives me reallyreallyreally nuts is apparently Coop *knew* he wanted CB back and asked her to keep 'next year' open. So even though they knew they'd likely have the character back in S10 they *still* decided to go the 'unsustainable as a long term character' route. I assume <<--- always dangerous because "sexy" and "fun" trumps a well thought out story. One of TPTB (was it Joe M?) said before S10 started filming that the character would be toned down a lot, because she needed to be as a full-time character. Dude, the time for that was Avalon, not Crusade.

Apparently SciFi didn't want both BB & CB added at the same time - the whole 2 stars from another show thing, but decided it was okay when they saw how early S9 did. Never taking into consideration that fans knew Vala was short-term because #1 CB wasn't in the credits, #2, AT was and #3 surely when Sam was back she'd lead over someone who'd never even *seen* the stargate as she had 8 years experience going thru - seven as a 2IC and one at SG-1 commander. But, perhaps not after all. Grrrrrr.

suse

[smurf]

The question is: "Does that matter?" as you can't predict it all. Usually the best show, I find, have an interesting concept that's being targeted at one group and as a side-effect it somehow appeals to a far broader demographic than it was intended for. Stargate and Doctor Who are examples of this.

If someone is saying that X producer should make a show which contain things which appeals to everyone, then it does.
If I'm making a point that you cannot know what appeals to everyone when you are only using a highly generic set of ideals, then it doesn't.

Someone sells me a sci-fi show. It sounds great, and I've been assured it has good writers which means it should cover the other four basics pretty well. Wonderful, I'm interested and all set to sit myself in front of the television, but then the cast picture is released. The cast picture displays a couple of average guys probably 35+, and a couple of young women carrying large bazookas (and I don't mean the weapon). Suddenly I'm a considerably less interested, because, from this one photograph, TPTB have now given me a whole lot more information about the show than the fascinating two line synopsis did.

Generic ideals are great to help make a successful show (although it is no guarantee), but the devil is in the detail, and you can turn people on and off a show by these added extras.

I'd say the SciFi community is harder to research than the "normal" community as the interests of the people are much narrower in some ways and a lot excludes one another.

I wouldn't say so, if you take my "people lie to conform to stereotype" into account. Most sci-fi fans seem to revel in being different, so honesty in their interests should be more forthcoming.
Of course, that wouldn't stop them from lying in order to make themselves more interesting, because they're, like, totally random and out there!

Is that code for lowest common denominator crap? A successful show isn't necessarily a good one, just look at all the reality TV out there...

'reality' shows have no appeal beyond 'these are cheap to make and dude, idiots tune them in'

Although we can look down down our noses at reality television the inherent truth of these shows are that they are the purest form of the storytelling ideals discussed above.

Interesting concept - watch average Joe as he reaches for success, and you can be part of his journey!
Interesting storyline - well, the reach for success storyline is pretty popular.
Interesting characters - if you made these people up they would be declared unrealistic.
Continuity, and consistent characterisation - pretty much goes without saying since life doesn't come with a "back" button.

The success of these shows lie in the fact that they are so unutterably generic that anyone can watch and understand what is happening, and what is supposed to appeal to you (whether it does, or not). It is story-telling pared down to the bone.
Just because they are not fiction does not mean they automatically have less worth. Would people be glorying in the idea if somebody had imagined it all?


Going back to Stargate.
We want it to appeal to more people, we just don't want it to appeal to everyone.

[suse]

It's ironic how short sighted tptb are in regards to characters and situation when in fact they write script for the season in advance. Yet, they never seem to forecast the viewers reaction nor how the character will effect long term story arcs.

Not that far in advance. perhaps a few months. They might plot an major arch but the beats are nowhere near written until the individual ep is written.

Vala is a whole other ball of wax. This is a character that never should have been in more than 2 eps. In order to bring her in full time they had to drastically change her and it didn't really make her any better. Instead of having a hardened criminal coming to terms with her past, her years as a host, the motivation for her crimes...we got Dorothy from another Oz!

Instead of a realistic character with layers of issues we got a "hip and fun" grown adult with child like pig tails.

And this after S&M Vala from S9. I kept feeling like she was playacting and was rather disappointed she didn't turn on them all. Their trust (they even added her to the team FCOL!) was given entirely too easily.

If they wanted hip and fun, tptb should have just intro-ed every fan fic's side kick...Sam's little kid sister or some crap like that. (Oh wait, they did...Mitchell. never mind)

He needed a good chewing out by Sam or Landry. And we needed to witness it. Or get *really* thumped by Teal'c. I'd have preferred the chewing out followed by removal from team lead though.

suse

[scifithinker]

<<Iz shockt>>

Scifithinker! (Who almost never uses that language!)

I've given up on the Stargate books too. Almost none are to my liking. I keep trying but rarely get past Ch3. Actually on one, I got to page two. Then our LMAH was was referred to as 'leader' or something similar. I got hives.

I think I'll be making some returns soon, on the ones I haven't read. Sorry authors.

suse

Literally?

[scifithinker]

Although we can look down down our noses at reality television the inherent truth of these shows are that they are the purest form of the storytelling ideals discussed above.

Interesting concept - watch average Joe as he reaches for success, and you can be part of his journey!
Interesting storyline - well, the reach for success storyline is pretty popular.
Interesting characters - if you made these people up they would be declared unrealistic.
Continuity, and consistent characterisation - pretty much goes without saying since life doesn't come with a "back" button.

The success of these shows lie in the fact that they are so unutterably generic that anyone can watch and understand what is happening, and what is supposed to appeal to you (whether it does, or not). It is story-telling pared down to the bone.
Just because they are not fiction does not mean they automatically have less worth. Would people be glorying in the idea if somebody had imagined it all?


Going back to Stargate.
We want it to appeal to more people, we just don't want it to appeal to everyone.

Are these shows really that popular? I mean the ones like Wife Swap or The Swan as opposed to American Idol. Or is it just that they're so cheap to make that they're profitable despite lower ratings? I mean, I really don't know many people who watch them. Most of the folks I know avoid them like the plague.

Or is it a commentary on the people I know as opposed to the shows?

[smurf]

Are these shows really that popular? I mean the ones like Wife Swap or The Swan as opposed to American Idol. Or is it just that they're so cheap to make that they're profitable despite lower ratings? I mean, I really don't know many people who watch them. Most of the folks I know avoid them like the plague.

Or is it a commentary on the people I know as opposed to the shows?

Well, if nobody watched they wouldn't be made. It still costs money.

I know a lot of people who watch reality shows, which is an interesting commentary on the people I know.
And thinking about it, they tend to watch the less mainstream ones.

[suse]

Literally?

No, but if I'd have kept reading it would have ended up as a pre-ulcerous condition. I've been known to throw books across the room though.

Made my point though, didn't I?

suse

[AGateFan]

i gave them up yaers and years ago when they started cranking out 2-3 a month and they were all template crud obviously tossed together to milk the franchise

I think the only 'decent' trek books out there were written by peter david. His excaliber series could have been a 'better' voyager

it's kinda reminiscent of the rumors about the third series (drags this thread screamiong back on topic)

all the spoilers i've read about universe is that its' just stargate or atlantis under a different name. More of the same. I'm even predicting the casting:

roguish young male leader
science geek
tough muscles
alien turncoat/refugee

Just like trek had the predictible casting....rather similar to stargate's to tell the truth. Cept, especially with Enterprise, they massively sexed it up with t'pol's boobs needing a dressing room of their own

When the characters are boring, the whole interest in the series depends on the writing. and if the writing is 'crank it out template', why watch? People get bored and turn the channel

I stopped reading when William Shatner wrote some books and had Captin Kirk beating the crp out of Klingons with his bare hands....yeah, no Mary Sue there eh Bill? Anyway I seem to remember the book ending in a cliffhanger with some alternate evil Jean Luc Picard (or maybe that was another book) and never got the sequel....... Q squared was funny though..... oh and of course the classic X-men\Startrek Crossovers. :0....

You know, I would read any of them again before I would watch S9-S10 of Stargate SG-1. Nothing has ever dissappointed me so much. I have never read a stargate book, for some reason it occurred to me it would be harder for the authors to get the "voices" right (harder then Star Trek or Star Wars or Aliens vs Predator..which was better then the movie BTW)... I dont know why I think this since there is some really good fanfic out there, but I do and now that the authors have S9-S10 crp on their minds, there is really no reason to read anything Stargate related.

Too bad about Universe....that it exist at all I mean. The worst thing for the Stargate franchise is another series at this point. They need to back off, give it a few years and let someone who actually likes the show (unlike RCC... well I guess he likes his "new" version) take the reigns. IMHO.