The Cam and Vala discussion thread

[pittsburghgirl]

i guess it would depend. and yeah, following regs isn't thier strong suit.

now, to another matter, what do you guys think of changing the title of this thread to include 'did hte writing of cam & vala kill the show' since...i think the general concensus of posts htat i've read are more along that line

to actually pin down exactly what to title this thread-it would be so long that people would go blind by the end of its description.

valid point-yeah the writing of Cam and Vala really did in the whole concept of introducing them. as for killing the show-i believe it was greed more than anything else-Scifi and MGM and any other big wig corporation involved with it.

what killed Cam and Vala was the poor introduction, writing, planning, presentation...aud nauseum.

[pittsburghgirl]

I never did understand what they were thinking (if they were) when they wrote Cam. It isn't as if they hadn't a clue as to what they wanted and how they wanted his character to be played or represented. But for whatever insane reason they wrote his character to be so confused and contradictory that you could easily get whiplash tyring to keep up.
Makes no sense to me-made no sense to me. And we have issues?

[ParadoxRealities]

I never did understand what they were thinking (if they were) when they wrote Cam. It isn't as if they hadn't a clue as to what they wanted and how they wanted his character to be played or represented. But for whatever insane reason they wrote his character to be so confused and contradictory that you could easily get whiplash tyring to keep up.
Makes no sense to me-made no sense to me. And we have issues?

exactly. it should have been relatively easy. bring in a full colonel from another team...or another scientist or changed SG-1s role so that a three-person team with a specialized CO made more sense...or add a newer major from another team...or a puppet of the IOA, Trust, NID, etc...or a international/planetary/galactic spy or...so many choices. and they pick mitchell. what possessed them to pull a stunt like that? all these creative options filled with potential and plots, and they pick a pilot who's never seen the gate. who has no clue what he's doing. who resembles a marty-stu more closely than some of the stuff on ff.net. why? why?

[Margaret]

I never did understand what they were thinking (if they were) when they wrote Cam. It isn't as if they hadn't a clue as to what they wanted and how they wanted his character to be played or represented. But for whatever insane reason they wrote his character to be so confused and contradictory that you could easily get whiplash tyring to keep up.
Makes no sense to me-made no sense to me. And we have issues?

That's what I thought until I learned that Cam was supposed to be "Percival." Then it made a lot more sense.

And Browder's performance in Quest 2 was breathtaking.

[Hubble]

hi! couple points:
1. if you think season 8 was so bad, how do you account for the best ratings in the history of the series?

Because the poster likes different things than those who loved S8? I think S3 was much much better than S8, but apparently S8 got better ratings.

Many of the reality shows get super high ratings; I still think they're crap. High ratings, as you well know, are not necessarily indicative of a general consensus of quality.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Because the poster likes different things than those who loved S8? I think S3 was much much better than S8, but apparently S8 got better ratings.

Many of the reality shows get super high ratings; I still think they're crap. High ratings, as you well know, are not necessarily indicative of a general consensus of quality.

I can see your point Reality shows are rubbish. and they still get stupily high ratings. why is that?

[Skydiver]

because they appeal to the lowest common denominator...and often there's nothing else on TO watch

[343_Guilty_Spark]

depends on who you get your TV from though if it a digital satalite service there is usulaly something to watch

[SG1Guy]

Many of the reality shows get super high ratings; I still think they're crap. High ratings, as you well know, are not necessarily indicative of a general consensus of quality.

But they do perpetuate mediocrity.

[Skydiver]

the human race, as a general rule, is greedy and lazy

and if minimal effort will generate a maximum response - ie poorly thought out and manipulative 'reality' = stellar ratings/high ad rates - then that's what we'll get

[SG1Guy]

the human race, as a general rule, is greedy and lazy

and if minimal effort will generate a maximum response - ie poorly thought out and manipulative 'reality' = stellar ratings/high ad rates - then that's what we'll get

I disagree, the human race IMO is far from lazy, it is likely greedy though, but that's a topic for another thread.

Intellectually though most of us do not want to be challenged when we seek out entertainment, we just want to be entertained. So American Idol is a fantastic success, I Love Lucy stays on air for a zillion years and so on ad nauseum.

And maybe because SG1 and SGA are a bit challenging (and be honest they are only a little bit challenging) thier ratings are perpetually low and they forever hang on the edge of extinction.

[ParadoxRealities]

Because the poster likes different things than those who loved S8? I think S3 was much much better than S8, but apparently S8 got better ratings.

Many of the reality shows get super high ratings; I still think they're crap. High ratings, as you well know, are not necessarily indicative of a general consensus of quality.

whoa, with this i have no issue. please read what the poster actually said.

Well, now for my first post here.

I think it was a combination of a lot of things that lead to it's demise. For one I think season 8 was a joke. It was the most boring season I remember; and I think that season lead to the ultimate demise. If they had added in the new characters in season 8 instead of resting on their laurels I think it would still be in production now. I am one who actually liked both the old and new, but the transition was too slow and should have started sooner. If Cam and Vala had been introduced in season 8 so they could have hit the ground running with season 9 and would not have had to waste so many episodes on character building. Either way though I felt season 9 and 10 really got the show going again and I was quite shocked when I heard it was canceled after this year. Season 10 really got me excited about SG-1 again; in fact during season 10 I was feeling like I liked it better than Atlantis. Anyway, that's my thoughts on it.

that is not a subjective statement; it's not about what the poser likes. it says that if not for the way s8 was done, the show would still be in production. thus, i asked how a season so bad for the show got the highest ratings in the show's history. valid question, i thought. at least, that's how i read it. please correct me if i'm wrong, leland.

And maybe because SG1 and SGA are a bit challenging (and be honest they are only a little bit challenging) thier ratings are perpetually low and they forever hang on the edge of extinction.

low by what standard? stargate's ratings climbed for many years, scifi's money-maker. season 8's ratings, especially, are wonderful for one such as scifi. it wasn't until s9/10 that this happened. (ratings graph)

[SG1Guy]

low by what standard? stargate's ratings climbed for many years, scifi's money-maker. season 8's ratings, especially, are wonderful for one such as scifi.

By commercial televison standards, the number of people watching SG1 and SGA are pretty small compared to network television audiences. I doubt SGA and SG1 have ever come close to the audience levels for network Sci Fi shows like the various Star Trek series.

In a telling moment I remember watching RDA on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno about 2 years ago. Leno referred to RDA's McGiver days but even after 8 years on SG1 Leno knew nothing of the show

[ParadoxRealities]

By commercial televison standards, the number of people watching SG1 and SGA are pretty small compared to network television audiences. I doubt SGA and SG1 have ever come close to the audience levels for network Sci Fi shows like the various Star Trek series.

exactly. network TV. scifi doesn't work like that, it's ratings are coverage area.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

its all about money that why they fiished SG1, and films tend to make a lot more money