S10: Critique & Contemplation

[Mandysg1]

Thanks, I've never heard it before. It kind of sounds derogatory, though. Definitely not an accurate depiction of Mitchell at that time since he obviously wasn't on probation. I'm not sure what to make of the term.

It just means he's the 'new guy' on the team, who has a bit to learn.

[Hubble]

Thanks, I've never heard it before. It kind of sounds derogatory, though. Definitely not an accurate depiction of Mitchell at that time since he obviously wasn't on probation. I'm not sure what to make of the term.

I read it as using the term to mean "newbie" as opposed to someone who is on probation. Simply that the person would rather have seen Mitchell as the new member of SG-1, struggling to learn the ropes, prove himself, etc., as opposed to coming in, never having been a member of any SG team (as far as we know) and taking command. In that sense, I didn't see the term as derogatory at all.

[Mandysg1]

I read it as using the term to mean "newbie" as opposed to someone who is on probation. Simply that the person would rather have seen Mitchell as the new member of SG-1, struggling to learn the ropes, prove himself, etc., as opposed to coming in, never having been a member of any SG team (as far as we know) and taking command. In that sense, I didn't see the term as derogatory at all.

This has to be assumed as true, since the opening scene with Mitchell has him seeing the Gate for the first time...so the term 'probie' or 'newbie' does fit and not in a derogatory way.

[KatG]

Eeep! Yes, yes, yes. The term "probie" was used as in place of "newbie". Sorry, didn't mean to cause any confusion or come across as derogatory.

As Hubble said - I felt that Mitchell was a "newbie" as far as gate travel was concerned. Yes, he had been in the AF for many years, but he had never once been through the Stargate and to give him command of the premier team, just seemed a bit much. After all, Jack wouldn't allow the Russian Colonel to even be a member of SG-1 because he had never been through the gate.

[jckfan55]

TThough nothing could have prepared me for the canon/history that was ignored to place the Farscape duo front and center - in the most offensive way possible - by making one the star in name and the other star in deed. (Nothing against Ben and Claudia, but years later it *still* feels that way.)

suse

Rather than bringing them in to *enhance* the original cast, the way they were used was at the *expense of* the original characters, especially Sam and Teal'c.

I did like the comfortable relationship between Sam and Cam, but I wish we had gotten more background on that and a smoother transition in the first place.

[Khentkawes]

Hmm, this post isn't really about season 10.. Oh well. In seasons 8,9 & 10 I can't really remember the team having a leader so much everything pretty much done done by commitee. I can't remember Cam ever laying down the law with them and saying "do X, now!"

Actually, I thought that was a good thing. It makes very little sense to me to have a strict military command structure on SG-1 when two members of the team aren't US military and three of them have 8+ years of experience on the front lines. So seeing Sam develop into a strong military commander would have seemed strange to me. And I never saw Mitchell as a commander either, just an addition member to the team. IMO, they didn't need a formal commander, and that's why they made decisions by committee, or by consensus in most cases.

I also felt a lot happier with the characterisation in S9 and S10. They lost me in, I think it was S7, when they had Jack act dumb about using a telescope. OK even if he was just fooling around, it was a silly thing to choose because this is the one 'scientific' area where Jack has some experience, and more than most other team members.

Agreed. Jack's dumb act was problematic. And in general, I did like the characterizations in S9 and S10. Yes, it would have been nice to see more of Sam. And sometimes Vala's characterization was a bit erratic. Those are the two that could have been better, IMHO. But I feel like Teal'c was given a pretty good arc with the Jaffa's response to the Ori. It was more than we've seen from Teal'c in other seasons, really.

I could see why fans would be irritated by the changes in Daniel's character, but it does make sense to me as character development. I didn't feel like the change was as sudden as some people seem to think, more like a gradual process starting in season 3. So when I analyze his character, it makes sense to me (even if I do occasionally miss his early innocence).

As for Mitchell's introduction... yeah, I expected a bit more conflict and more of an adjustment period. It felt a little awkward for the first few episodes. But considering the writers had lost both RDA and AT for the beginning of the season, it was destined to be a little (or a LOT) different. And by The Fourth Horseman, I felt like Mitchell was well incorporated into the team. He definitely interacted more as an equal or even a "kid brother" at times, but that's natural. He's not Jack, so he can't be that kind of authority figure. And I'm glad they didn't force him to be.

[AGateFan]

Thanks, I've never heard it before. It kind of sounds derogatory, though. Definitely not an accurate depiction of Mitchell at that time since he obviously wasn't on probation. I'm not sure what to make of the term.

Well this term has been used on Stargate SG-1 before. In a season six episode and was clearly used in that episode to refer to newbie fireman Jonas. When Jonas was brought in in S6 he was clearly treated like a newbie and I thought ultimatly it worked a lot better.

The Ori storyline was poorly thought out and poorly executed. It became a big treasure hunt with an ultimate enemy that they could use to destroy cannon in the universe and reform the stargate universe so that it is more in line with the standard scifi fare. By the end of stargate SG-1 there was nothing special about it to me. It was just like all the other scifi shows.

I just finished S5 of Atlantis. I thought they did a much better job in their last season and its clear they were better at writing Woosely then they were either Weir or Carter. Which makes me think they do have issues writing women. They could only write Keller as an item for Rodney and since they didnt have a ship for Teyla she was not nearly as involved in the season as she should have been. Still though at least they didnt just give into over the top sex-joke cliche scifi the way SG-1 did. They maintained some respectablity. The final episode was Meh mostly due to overdoing the dramatics. The Ronan thing kind of worked but its hard to get scared for Shep on a

Spoiler:

suicide mission. Especially considering they joked about that a few epsiodes earlier. It was also a waste of time trying to make us think Atlantis was destroyed at the end... it was just an uncomfortable and laughable moment that could have just as well been filled with a comercial

.

Anyway, had they renamed the show it would have been better for me too. I would not have had expectations and I would not have been nearly as dissappointed. Also if they had a whole new show they could have went with new characters and not done so much damage to the old ones. However they probably would still have done damage to the Universe itself if they insisted on keeping the Ori and Asgard storylines.

I am not at all sad that that AU version of SG-1 was cancelled. I am sad it took away the good name/reputation of classic SG-1 before it died. I am also sad that Stargate Atlantis was cancelled. I have little hope in SGU and am not really even planning on watching it....but we will see.

[suse]

Well this term has been used on Stargate SG-1 before. In a season six episode and was clearly used in that episode to refer to newbie fireman Jonas. When Jonas was brought in in S6 he was clearly treated like a newbie and I thought ultimatly it worked a lot better.

The new fireman *was* a probie (on probation) to see how he worked out. Nothing derogatory. But.... it has and can be used that way. I'm sure it wasn't meant badly here.

I'd have prefered Mitchell being a probie - and getting smacked down for doing things "because I'm having a bad day." or being impatient in intelligence gathering

Jonas wasn't brought on as "the star". But I prefered him too.

[Callista]

Well this term has been used on Stargate SG-1 before. In a season six episode and was clearly used in that episode to refer to newbie fireman Jonas. When Jonas was brought in in S6 he was clearly treated like a newbie and I thought ultimatly it worked a lot better.

"Probie" is also one of the ranks here on GateWorld now. (I think it's the first rank, but I haven't really been paying that much attention.)

I actually really like Mitchell in season 10. I did find him to be kind of dull and flat in season 9, but I thought he got much more likeable in 10. The thing I don't like about him is that he seems to always be the guy in the hand-to-hand fights. And the reason I don't like that is because I don't like hand-to-hand fights. I don't care who's doing it. I don't like Teal'c when he's having bloody fights either. I think my least liked episode of season 10 was Talion because of that (plus, I thought Teal'c came off very badly in that episode).

My main problem with Vala is in part actually a problem I have with the team in regards to her. I think it's pretty rotten that she can openly sexually harrass Daniel left and right and no one ever says anything to her about it. Maybe she and Mitchell don't know his past, but would Sam and Teal'c really stand back and let her do that to him, especially knowing what he's gone through in the "relationship" department? (Wife kidnapped, tortured and killed; raped by a Goa'uld; fell for the Destroyer of Worlds, etc.)

I can also understand people finding Daniel's treatment of Vala to be distasteful until I think of the same issue. She's blatantly harrassing him sexually. Can you imagine if Jonas had taken it into his head to treat Sam that way? (I'm just using Jonas as an example because he wasn't an Air Force Officer...I know his character would never ever act that way. I was going to use Cam as an example, but he would have been court-martialled immediately!) But seriously, if a man were to have "attached" himself to Sam and then shown up in her bed in just his underwear and followed her everywhere and suggested they should go make some babies and then constantly make sexual innuendos and tell everyone that they were dating and none of her friends stood up for her and then he finally came into her room and started kissing her and taking off his clothing and unbuttoning hers, would any viewer have been upset if she had yelled at him a little bit? When I think of it that way, I don't think him being snotty with her for a year and then finally telling her off is so bad. If anything, I think he comes off a little badly that he didn't stick up for himself more forcefully. I guess he just was torn over wanting to help her be a better person and wanting to protect himself from her horrible behavior and so he came off as just plain irritated all the time.

All that being said, I actually like Vala in that I found her very entertaining in episodes like "Bad Guys". I just wish she would have been less self-absorbed and that if she did have to like Daniel that she could have gone about it differently.

Season 10 is one of my favorite seasons for episodes that I just plain find entertaining to watch. If I'm in the mood for something a little more thought-provoking I go to season 3 or 4.

[leiasky]

The name change would ahve prepared those of us who where not 'in the know' that there were major changes in store. Though nothing could have prepared me for the canon/history that was ignored to place the Farscape duo front and center - in the most offensive way possible - by making one the star in name and the other star in deed. (Nothing against Ben and Claudia, but years later it *still* feels that way.)

There were eps I liked, more in S10 than in S9, but the show went from me liking all but a few eps to me *dis*liking all but a few eps.


ETA: It's very likely I'd have liked the SGC seasons (The (B)Ori weren't in it *all* the time) if BB/CB had been *integrated* instead of shoehorned into an established/working dynamic.



suse

Wow. You feel exactly like I do but you put it far better than I could! I couldn't agree more.

But I do really believe that the change in Executive Producers really contributed to the decline in the believability and likability of the show.

[GateGipsy]

My main problem with Vala is in part actually a problem I have with the team in regards to her. I think it's pretty rotten that she can openly sexually harrass Daniel left and right and no one ever says anything to her about it.

I've only snipped a little bit of your post, for brevity (there's a link in there to your post) but I am replying to all of it. I can see where you're coming from with regard to behaviour, and I am not in the least defending Vala's behaviour. However, she is never at any point threatening towards Daniel. She might be in his bed semi naked, but there's no sense of her having more power over him, or of her abusing her own power (such as a physical power, as men who abuse do with women) to force Daniel into an action he didn't want. That's the difference. Sexual harrassment is about the abuse of power - and it is usually just confined to men because in our society it is usually men who have the power either in a physical sense (because they're stronger) or in a control sense (they control the woman's money/job/security).

So I do disagree totally with your assessment of the sexual harrassment. But I do agree that her behaviour is out of order, and definitely explains Daniel's own behaviour, especially when he is a bit short with her and when he lacks patience with her. You'd have to be a saint not to have to take that sort of teasing every day and not react in some way. However, he never lets it interfere professionally, and he does, many times, treat Vala with compassion and sympathy, because he can see that there is a good person buried deep deep down in there.

[Gregorius]

@GateGipsy: From the definition of sexual harassment everything Vala does to Daniel does constitute sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment, n.

The making of unwanted and offensive sexual advances or of sexually offensive remarks or acts, especially by one in a superior or supervisory position or when acquiescence to such behavior is a condition of continued employment, promotion, or satisfactory evaluation.

Source: http://www.answers.com/Sexual+harassment?nafid=3

Notice how from the definition the "holding power over" isn't required.

Varied circumstances

Sexual harassment can occur in a variety of circumstances. Often, but not always, the harasser is in a position of power or authority over the victim (due to differences in age, or social, political, educational or employment relationships). Forms of harassment relationships include:
The harasser can be anyone, such as a client, a co-worker, a teacher or professor, a student, a friend, or a stranger.
The victim does not have to be the person directly harassed but can be anyone who finds the behavior offensive and is affected by it.
While adverse effects on the victim are common, this does not have to be the case for the behavior to be unlawful.
The victim can be male or female. The harasser can be male or female.
The harasser does not have to be of the opposite sex.
The harasser may be completely unaware that his or her behavior is offensive or constitutes sexual harassment or may be completely unaware that his or her actions could be unlawful.

(Adapted from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission)

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_..._circumstances

I emphasised the most important part and underlined the parts I think apply to Vala.

As you can see, and was stated before by others and myself, what Vala does does constitute sexual harassment as it's unwanted behavior of a sexual nature. And even if it's not sexual harassment it's close to, if not, stalking. Then again, there does exist something, like Callista noticed, as double standard as to these situations (Well that, and Daniel's always the buttmonkey in these cases, see the episode Hathor where he was basically raped).

Anyway, I disgress from the topic, so I'll head back to S10: My problem with Vala, besides her behavior, is that they made her superficial and paired way too much with Daniel. She's an ex-host, a renowned thief, she took over Prommie, and apparantly is smart, but the moment she gets into the vicinity of Action!Jackson (Or the downed Anubis as character wise he's nothing like S1-6 Daniel) she degrades into the creepy schoolgirl with a crush who can't think for herself. Had they removed or at least toned down the creepy schoogirl part and paired her less with Daniel she might've been a nice character instead of the annoying one, especially with the background they've given her.

[madaboutdanny]

Anyway, I disgress from the topic, so I'll head back to S10: My problem with Vala, besides her behavior, is that they made her superficial and paired way too much with Daniel. She's an ex-host, a renowned thief, she took over Prommie, and apparantly is smart, but the moment she gets into the vicinity of Action!Jackson (Or the downed Anubis as character wise he's nothing like S1-6 Daniel) she degrades into the creepy schoolgirl with a crush who can't think for herself. Had they removed or at least toned down the creepy schoogirl part and paired her less with Daniel she might've been a nice character instead of the annoying one, especially with the background they've given her.

That's not true, it was so, maybe, in season 9 not 10. In season ten I found Vala really annoying just in one episode, Bounty, because they wrote her in that way again, and she wasn't paired with Daniel...
And about Action Jackson, I have no problem with him because to me he was AJ since the movie and early season...I never saw him as the naive or pacifist one...Look at The Movie or Broca Divide when the Touched were raping Melosha and he suggested to do nothing, or Bloodline, or Serpent Song, or the no consequences suggestion to Jack and Teal'c in WoO, The Beast Of Burden where he armed the Unas...I think I saw Daniel to do his job in season 9 and 10 more than in the previous seasons...

[GateGipsy]

There was also Blood Ties - that was a crucial episode, and a rather shocking scene in a lot of ways, for Daniel's character, where he shoots the tank full of larval goa'uld. Sam wasn't going to, but Daniel didn't hesitate. All he saw were more hosts like Sha're, not a tankful of defenceless young.

I don't mind that people might have a criticism of the character of Daniel they wish to express, but I do mind that he's given a derogatory nickname and I don't believe that is in the spirt of the VS. I will, however, leave this to the other mods to decide on as I am not impartial in this.

[amconway]

I have to agree with the previous poster who noted that an abuse of power is not part of the definition of sexual harrassment. If one worker of equal position in a company is harrassing another, it's still harrassment. They don't have a different name for it when one person is not the boss.

I never had a problem with Cam. He didn't take Sam's position, the rest of SG-1 had already left and then agreed to return to what was essentially Cam's team. His leadership style was logical, given the experience of the rest of the team.

I saw the characterization of Daniel as part of a long progression. He knows more, he presents himself to the world in a different way, but again, that was a long progression. He's not intrinsically different. He's a lot more confident about his choices now, and he has the experience to back it up. Daniel has always been someone who jumps into a hard situation and does whatever he thinks is necessary.