S10: Critique & Contemplation

[sramir2]

I just want to say that Season 10 was OK(but compare to the rest of the seasons it was below average) I didn't like that Vala was made into a main character, she just seem like she was thrown into the series and it was like here like her and deal with it. In season 9 she was very good cause it was only three main characters, because Sam was 'restation'(maternity leave)to Area 51, for the first six episodes, but in season ten I didn't like that they had 5 main characters(not including the Gen.) it was just to many characters for not enough show. The show seemed saturated after that.

[scifithinker]

I've heard a lot of people say that because Mitchell's leadership was a technicality and that Sam was basically co-leader, there would have been no issue because neither of them actually commanded the other. The teammates thing seems to get glossed over unless it's being used against Sam/Jack, with Daniel/Vala, Sam/Teal'c, or Sam/Cam it never seems to be an issue.

It's an issue of degrees, I suppose, with a healthy dash of personal opinion, because though I tell myself it was a joint command to make myself feel better about it, when watching the show there is absolutely no question who is calling the shots. And it ain't Sam.

A relationship isn't forbidden because people are members of the same team. It's forbidden when one is above the chain of command than the other.

As for joint command, there is no such thing in the military. There has to be a clear decision maker, and Mitchell had command of SG-1. The joint command idea was backpedaling after people cried sexism over Carter's lost command. It was a comment made by one of the PTBs (Coop, right?) and never actually appeared on the show. Despite the conversation where Mitchell tells Landry that he really doesn't command anyone, he's still in charge. Period.

[mapsc]

A relationship isn't forbidden because people are members of the same team. It's forbidden when one is above the chain of command than the other.

As for joint command, there is no such thing in the military. There has to be a clear decision maker, and Mitchell had command of SG-1. The joint command idea was backpedaling after people cried sexism over Carter's lost command. It was a comment made by one of the PTBs (Coop, right?) and never actually appeared on the show. Despite the conversation where Mitchell tells Landry that he really doesn't command anyone, he's still in charge. Period.

Actually, it was JM who mentioned co-command on his blog. He also said that both Sam and Mitchell reported to Landry. Of course, that was never stated on the show either. I think Joe was just trying to appease irate Sam fans. It didn't work with me.

Mike

[VSS]

Actually, it was JM who mentioned co-command on his blog. He also said that both Sam and Mitchell reported to Landry. Of course, that was never stated on the show either. I think Joe was just trying to appease irate Sam fans. It didn't work with me.

Mike

It didn't work with me, either, because it's not possible for a combat unit. Sam should have been in charge, but if they thought they couldn't do that then Mitchell should clearly have been in command as a full colonel. And acted like one. At least then they'd only have made one big mistake instead of two.

[Ashizuri]

A relationship isn't forbidden because people are members of the same team. It's forbidden when one is above the chain of command than the other.

I was under the impression that while it wasn't forbidden it was certainly frowned upon, particularly when they served in a combat unit. Partiality could definately come into play.

As for joint command, there is no such thing in the military. There has to be a clear decision maker, and Mitchell had command of SG-1. The joint command idea was backpedaling after people cried sexism over Carter's lost command. It was a comment made by one of the PTBs (Coop, right?) and never actually appeared on the show. Despite the conversation where Mitchell tells Landry that he really doesn't command anyone, he's still in charge. Period.

Indeed. So while they may be of the same rank, Mitchell still commands and excerts power over her, QED, a relationship between Sam and Mitchell is just as off limits as Sam and Jack. Like we've all said before, proper military protocal was thrown out the window in seasons 9 and 10.

Honestly, the only time I see fraternazation rules come it to play is when it is being used to discuss why Sam and Jack shouldn't be together, but other than those two specific characters it never gets brought up.

[leiasky]

a relationship between Sam and Mitchell is just as off limits as Sam and Jack. Like we've all said before, proper military protocal was thrown out the window in seasons 9 and 10.

Yup. Conveniently ignored.

Wonder how much involvement the AF had with seasons 9 and 10? Anyone know?

Honestly, the only time I see fraternazation rules come it to play is when it is being used to discuss why Sam and Jack shouldn't be together, but other than those two specific characters it never gets brought up.

Yup. There was a level of continuity and believability while RDA and MG were exec producing. Then it all flew out the window when they left. Was saddening.

[silly sally]

I was under the impression that while it wasn't forbidden it was certainly frowned upon, particularly when they served in a combat unit. Partiality could definately come into play.



Indeed. So while they may be of the same rank, Mitchell still commands and excerts power over her, QED, a relationship between Sam and Mitchell is just as off limits as Sam and Jack. Like we've all said before, proper military protocal was thrown out the window in seasons 9 and 10.

Honestly, the only time I see fraternazation rules come it to play is when it is being used to discuss why Sam and Jack shouldn't be together, but other than those two specific characters it never gets brought up.

That's right chain of command can be more important than rank sometimes; my dad was only a LtCol in the Army but was the head of his unit which included several full-birds...

[jckfan55]

Yup. Conveniently ignored.

Wonder how much involvement the AF had with seasons 9 and 10? Anyone know?

They claim the AF remained involved, but I maintain that the AF advisor was locked in a utility closet during shooting.

[Ashizuri]

They claim the AF remained involved, but I maintain that the AF advisor was locked in a utility closet during shooting.

I wonder what the AF has to say about that. They were always fairly vocal about their involvement and support of the show, but I didn't hear a peep out of them in the final seasons.

[hedwig]

I wonder what the AF has to say about that. They were always fairly vocal about their involvement and support of the show, but I didn't hear a peep out of them in the final seasons.

I think the AF being involved had more to do with RDA being involved in the production, and him wanting to adhere to the rules and regulations set by the Air Force. When he left, the AF may still have been involved in some ways, but apparently their input wasn't given as much consideration after RDA left. Plus, when Brad Wright moved over to production of Atlantis (with far less attention to SG1) and others took over the production of SG1, things changed considerably. (Strictly my impression from all the articles/interviews/comments/etc. I've read about the subject.)

[VSS]

Honestly, the only time I see fraternazation rules come it to play is when it is being used to discuss why Sam and Jack shouldn't be together, but other than those two specific characters it never gets brought up.

Yeah, and after all these years of not applying it to anyone else AND ignoring a number of other rules, if they dredge that up again and somehow try to apply it in the future it'll be ridiculous. Not to mention a little infuriating if you're a S/J shipper.

[slurredspeech]

Yeah, and after all these years of not applying it to anyone else AND ignoring a number of other rules, if they dredge that up again and somehow try to apply it in the future it'll be ridiculous. Not to mention a little infuriating if you're a S/J shipper.

I have to say, I have my concernes about how they're gonna handle it. Going by their writing of characters in recent years, whther they decide to resolve it for the better or for worse, there are so many ways in which they could go oh so horribly wrong. (We're not allowed to use sc*** up, y/n? I'm never sure.)

I love them two but, again, with some of my issues with the characterization in those last years, I almost wish they'd leave it alone.

[Ashizuri]

Yeah, and after all these years of not applying it to anyone else AND ignoring a number of other rules, if they dredge that up again and somehow try to apply it in the future it'll be ridiculous. Not to mention a little infuriating if you're a S/J shipper.

I'm not a J/S shipper but the hypocrisy and double standards infuriate me.

But I see no way they can drag rules and regulations into it anymore. Sam isn't in Jack's direct chain of command anymore.

[leiasky]

Yeah, and after all these years of not applying it to anyone else AND ignoring a number of other rules, if they dredge that up again and somehow try to apply it in the future it'll be ridiculous. Not to mention a little infuriating if you're a S/J shipper.

Agreed.

Manipulating rules (in this case, those upheld by the Air Force) just to fit your characters and draw out drama annoys me.

[Allie_Kreek]

Top 5 Worst Stargate Characters:

2. General Landry. I was very excited when I heard Beau Bridges was coming to SG. I love his work and thought he would be a great general. He wasn't. The only time Landry worked for me was Continuum.

1. Vala Mal Doran. For me, Vala was the worst character addition and the nail in the "Stargate is now cliche and no longer worth an hour of my time" coffin. I rarely found her funny, often found her insulting, and hated her effect on one of my most loved characters.

Landry - I was excited to hear Bridges was going to be playing the new general but I soon realised how bad that character was. The character lacked the ability to discipline people and then made some of the most brain melting mistakes. The character was a major let down after Hammond and O'Neill (Hammond was still the best).

Vala - *rips hair out* I've ranted so much about Vala I think I'll go mad if I start again... oh well here goes... most of the time she was insulting and just not funny but when a bit of effort was put in she was a good character and CB was amazing. I still don't think she should have been a regular and I think as a re-occuring character she would have had a lot more appeal. I still rate her above Mitchell (if you are desperate to know what I think of Mitchell check back on this thread)

Lam... omg... i would have paid the Ori to shoot her.

Top 5 Worst Stargate Characters:
According to WishIwasJoes.

2. Pete. Not only did I not care if Sam had a life. I did not care for her taste in men. He was so nosey and clingly!

You know I was going to post a question to the people posting about Pete: Do you hate Pete as a character or just the "Carter's love life" sub-plot ? Because I can't remember Pete being all that objectionable.

Pete was just horrible. The way he was introduced: he was Mark's friend. Oh please. Then he stalked her and did a background check on her... freak! I was annoyed because I understood Sam was supposed to be insecure when it came to romantic relationships but there is no way she would have put up with him sticking his nose into her business especially when it could have messed up her life's work!

^for me the earlier seasons all had a few episodes I didn't particularly like, but they had good points. The meh ones were the exception. For me in S9/10 the *good* ones were the exception.

I totally agree and I greened you!

Plus, the Sam/Cam thing would have just been sooooo wrong!

*shudders*