S10: Critique & Contemplation

[ReganX]

Yep, and Jack's his daddy

No way does Mitchell swim in the same gene pool as Jack. He's TPTB's mistake, not Jack's.

[Mandysg1]

No way does Mitchell swim in the same gene pool as Jack. He's TPTB's mistake, not Jack's.

Announcer: Next on the Maury Povich show, special guest Lt. Col. Cameron Mitchell.....WHO'S YOUR DADDY?

[ReganX]

Announcer: Next on the Maury Povich show, special guest Lt. Col. Cameron Mitchell.....WHO'S YOUR DADDY?

My money's on Landry. Or General Magwitch.

[Kull_Warrior9876]

I have a Minor "Huh???" Question from The Quest, Part 1, and this seemed the most appropriate thread to post in.

Spoiler Warning if you haven't seen it yet.

Spoiler:

.
.
.
.
SG-1 and two 'associates' go up against the Guardian Creature of the Sangrall. Its called a "Dragon" at least 3 times during the episode. I'm aware that I'm nitpicking here, but the creature has two legs, a tail and two wings.

That classifies it, in mythology, as a Wyvern. Which, in comparison to Dragons, is like expecting a Lion, and getting a domesticated house cat.

A dragon has an additional pair of forelegs, as well as the rear legs, wings and tail.

Every other dragon-movie i can think of has got this right. Why can't Stargate?

[esoap524]

LOL, I dunno if that's unfortunate or not, though I'm starting to picture BB when he DOES go grey, and I don't think it'll be unfortunate then either.

"Unfortunate" was used purely in the spirit of snark

That's one fine looking man!

[RealmOfX]

<snip>
Frankly, I did see signs of a more sobre Mitchell at the end of Season 9.
<snip>

Really? Quite frankly it is the back half of S9 that I have the most trouble with Mitchell. There were a couple of eps in the first half of the season where he did things that I considered were inappropriate for a military man let alone the leader of the flagship SGC team and the second half of the season just went downhill from there.

I'm not impressed with S10 Mitchell either, to me there is still no logical reason why he is there and quite frankly most of the story lines wouldn't have suffered (any more) if the character was removed completely. To me the character is so superficial that I wouldn't notice if he was gone. Actually scratch that, I would notice the less irritation and be happy he was gone.

The really sad part is that there is no reason for the character to be like that, a little planning and some forethought into who the character is and a ligitimate reason to be at the SGC with a credible backstory and an real attempt to mesh the character into the existing Stargate universe whilst moving into new areas. Damn - I guess I was expecting TPTB to be professional in their approach to "the new direction".

[Mandysg1]

I have a Minor "Huh???" Question from The Quest, Part 1, and this seemed the most appropriate thread to post in.

Spoiler Warning if you haven't seen it yet.

Spoiler:

.
.
.
.
SG-1 and two 'associates' go up against the Guardian Creature of the Sangrall. Its called a "Dragon" at least 3 times during the episode. I'm aware that I'm nitpicking here, but the creature has two legs, a tail and two wings.

That classifies it, in mythology, as a Wyvern. Which, in comparison to Dragons, is like expecting a Lion, and getting a domesticated house cat.

A dragon has an additional pair of forelegs, as well as the rear legs, wings and tail.

Every other dragon-movie i can think of has got this right. Why can't Stargate?

Stargate hasn't gotten a lot of things right for a while, including the Arthurian legend, they don't seem to care about the details anymore (and have thrown 8 years of cannon out the window) So why would they care about getting that right.

[Nolamom]

Details don't count. Established characters don't count. Canon doesn't count. Everything is New! Improved!

Are we happy yet?

[Mandysg1]

Details don't count. Established characters don't count. Canon doesn't count. Everything is New! Improved!

Are we happy yet?

That sounds like a great post for the Rage thread too

[LaCroix]

Details don't count. Established characters don't count. Canon doesn't count. Everything is New! Improved!

Are we happy yet?

I was going to do something on the order of a Collective Soul song called Better Now. But I wont, you've said what was needed.

[pittsburghgirl]

Stargate hasn't gotten a lot of things right for a while, including the Arthurian legend, they don't seem to care about the details anymore (and have thrown 8 years of cannon out the window) So why would they care about getting that right.

from what i read, they said that they researched the arthurian legends-didn't they mention using Mallory?

[Mandysg1]

I particularly love it when I read things like mitchell and vala were "seamlessly integrated" into the show -- haven't laughed that hard in a long time (I just have to be honest regardless of who is making such unbelievable statements and I find it incredibly hard to swallow such a statement after seeing the mess that is S9 and S10 and the messes that are mitchell and vala). Statements such as this, as well as a lot of the other bunk they all spew, just reinforces for me that these people never watch the as aired episodes let alone the final product in any form and I get the distinct impression most of the statements they make are based on how filming goes - sure they have fun on the set and they all get along and that is what they translate and project into statements such as these and it begs the question - for me anyway - well what the he11 happened between the filming of it and the version that was aired cuz I sure as he11 do not see anything that even approaches "seamless integration" when it comes to mitchell and vala.

I couldn't quite make that out when I was reading it, was it said by the interviewer? If so then you know they don't watch the show, they are given a synopses from TPTB and believe what they read.

[Mandysg1]

from what i read, they said that they researched the arthurian legends-didn't they mention using Mallory?

Sorry, I didn't pay much attention to S9 I'm going by what I've heard by other posters who know more about the subject

[the dancer of spaz]

I couldn't quite make that out when I was reading it, was it said by the interviewer? If so then you know they don't watch the show, they are given a synopses from TPTB and believe what they read.

Well, the interviewer does watch the show. If I'm thinking of the same interview as Sal, I think it was the one who did the article on AT in the recent Stargate Mag.

Now, no offense to the journalists for the Official Stargate Magazine, because I so wish I worked for them... But I see the magazine as a promotional item, so I don't expect them to be anything but positive. And that's cool. That's their job. Whatevs.

[pittsburghgirl]

Sorry, I didn't pay much attention to S9 I'm going by what I've heard by other posters who know more about the subject

you are probably correct-there has been a bit of discussion when all of this came out last season. but if they researched the legends the way they have utilized the Air Force Advisor-I don't know why they bothered or even bothered telling us. It sure seems like they did what they felt like and then tried to justify it.