The Cam and Vala discussion thread

[leaper]

I wonder how many viewers Jack's departure really lost, how many people were watching the show solely for Jack/RDA's presence and who didn't watch after Season Eight because they knew he wouldn't be there and how many viewers gave the show and the new characters a chance in the beginning of Season Nine but found that they didn't like the changes.

I've spoken to several people who used to watch the show but do so no longer and none of them said that they're not watching because Jack left, their reason was that they didn't like "that new guy".

Ratings-wise, the first ten episodes of Season Nine scored an average of 1.96, less than a tenth of a ratings point behind Season Eight's average. The second half averaged 1.73 ratings points per episode and Season Ten, so far, has an average ratings score of 1.51. That would suggest to me that a lot of people gave Season Nine a chance in the beginning, but that it, in some cases, it didn't hold their interest.

However, even if all of those who stopped watching stopped because they no longer liked the show, I don't think that all of the blame can be laid and Mitchell and Vala's door. For one thing, they are not the only major change to the show - it's possible that the Ori storyline has lost viewers, or that some people have taken a dislike to Landry.

Interesting...and yet, I know a lot of people who still like the show because they still like the whole "concept" of the show...as they see it, characters come and go, the main theme is what interests them....

Agree with you that TWO characters weren't responsible for sinking the show though...

[Crow T. Robot]

I've spoken to several people who used to watch the show but do so no longer and none of them said that they're not watching because Jack left, their reason was that they didn't like "that new guy".

I know quite a few Jack fans and S/J shippers that held on through about half way season 9 nine hoping for TPTB to deliver on what they promised.

Mainly: Jack would NOT be forgotten and we’d see scenes every once in a while like Jack and Landry joking around on the phone. Maybe Sam saying she got an e-mail from him, ect. When TPTB didn’t deliver I know a lot of people that really resented the boys on the bridge yanking their chains like that and walked. All they wanted was a little acknowledge that the character they’d grown to love over eights years was happy. Frankly taking in account they’d been loyal fans for 8 years, and TPTB promised them it in writing I don’t think it was too much to ask. Writing Mitchell as the big hero of the battle of Antarctica sure didn’t help either.

Part of me wonders if Mitchell is really unfairly getting the blunt of those fans ire.

For me?

It wasn’t so much about not accepting change. I understood and respected that RDA wanted to leave and after 8 years I couldn’t blame him. It was more in the fact that Mitchell really didn’t live up to the PR and build-up for me. The PTB really pumped him up about how the war with the snakes was over and how Mitchell being the complete opposite of O’Neill, ect.

I was pretty open-minded about the potential. I figured they were going realistic and we’d see the SGC change over from a more first-strike tactical operation to a peace keeping force. We’d see SG-1 roll from a tactical front-line unit to more a peace keeping role. (If you don’t think that type of work is dangerous read a little history about the mop up battles of WWII or go take a good look at Iraq.)

Which would have fit Mitchell being to paraphrase so many articles I’d read ‘the opposite of O’Neill’ I was picturing Mitchell being more by the book, more patient and more of a people person, ect. MASH would be a good example: SG-1 was doing their own from Henry Blake to Colonel Potter in my mind. I was actually looking forward to how SG-1 would interact with someone who was the very opposite of Jack. LOL! Remembering how SG-1 interacted with Makepeace I was thinking ‘fireworks’ gleefully.

I didn’t get any of that.

Mitchell just didn’t live up to the hype. He was inconstantly written to the point I couldn’t understand how he made Major much less Lt. Colonel. He was written WAY to close Jack O’Neill so you couldn’t help the comparisons. There was no conflict on the team despite the fact Sam essentially demoted, or the fact Daniel hasn’t followed an order without question in his life. Landry adored him and never chewed him.

The plot holes and the continuity mistakes didn’t help their case either.

So it wasn’t about not accepting change for me. I just really disliked the changes.

[Ezrael]

Cameron Mitchell killed Stargate, he's a complete moron on his own and going from Richard Dean Anderson to him was just urgh, would have preferred a 3 person SG1 untill RDA wanted to come back tbh.

Cameron Mitchell pretty much makes everyone I know and myself cringe whenever he opens his mouth.

[Deejay435]

Yikes! I wonder who would volunteer to beta Rob's work? I can just see it now. "Ummm...Mr. Cooper...this part here...well it...umm...see the thing is...I know you sign my paycheck and all but..."

I've come to the conclusion that betaing RC's work was Gekko's job.

Now you see that's a fallacy, it's not that fan's can't accept change, it's that they didn't like the changes, which is different. I believe the ratings for the beginning of S9 were good, which means the fans were willing to give it a chance, being disappointed in what was done is not being unwilling to accept change, maybe they expected the changes to be handled well, with good writing and good characterizations, unlike what we got in S9. IMO

I agree Mandy, and I always found this the most irritating of tptb's defenses against the criticisms of the show. Easier, isn't it, to lump people into the "oh they just can't accept change" cateogory, than to look at their product.

As an example-I have loved Dr. Who since the Jon Pertwee years. The third Doctor. We're now on the 10th (or will be, as soon as I actually get to see this seasons' episodes) and I still love the show. That's eight doctors, and countless companions, a heck of a lot of change for one show, and I still love it, and the show is still going strong. Or, actually, going strong again.

[ParadoxRealities]

Interesting...and yet, I know a lot of people who still like the show because they still like the whole "concept" of the show...as they see it, characters come and go, the main theme is what interests them....

Agree with you that TWO characters weren't responsible for sinking the show though...

that's interesting, because i know a lot of people who quit because they thought the concept/theme/mood/attitude/etc changed too much (for the worse). weird.

I know many Farscape fans who started watching simply for Ben & Claudia and got hooked. I'm not going to say the switch is better...but from what I hear, the show was starting the get tired after 8 seasons (which is to be expected) and a new cast change-up was a good idea.

it's not that cut and dry. some people thought season 8 (and maybe 7, maybe 6) were declining. most of them whom i know, at least (casual viewers included) didn't stop watching. season 9, they stopped watching. yeah, season 9 brought farscape fans in. how many, no one knows. but they didn't necessarily prolong the inevitable, in fact, they MAY have hastened it.

[AGateFan]

I actually like the addition of the two new characters. They got me interested in the show for the first time in the ten years it's been on. Part of that is due to Ben Browder and Claudia Black (who I loved on Farscape) but I also think that they make things more fun. I remember liking Vala in the commercials and thought she was funny so I decided to give the show a try. I don't necassarily LOVE Cam but he's likeable and I think fits well. Because of my new interest in the show, I have just gone back and started watching SG-1 from the beginning through DVDs. Although, I like the chemsitry between the original cast I do miss some of the sheer energy that Cam & Vala bring. So say what you will about them but they are the only reason why I watch SG-1...and the only reason I've gone back to watch older seasons (to see what's led up to now). I don't know how many other people feel this way but when you're waging a battle for ratings, something like this should not be ignored. I know many Farscape fans who started watching simply for Ben & Claudia and got hooked. I'm not going to say the switch is better...but from what I hear, the show was starting the get tired after 8 seasons (which is to be expected) and a new cast change-up was a good idea.

-Stef

IMHO the show was absolutly not getting tired. I loved SG-1 and it was going strong, highest ratings of all time in S8. Show could have gone on a long time. But TPTB decided to change it. A change wich IMHO was for the worst and ended up killing the show.

[binkpmmc]

I put this on another thread but after reading some of the entries here thought to put it here as well.

Did cam and vala kill the show - IMO, they certainly contributed but they did not do it alone. They did, primarily mitchell and the weak, contrived, illogical, implausibleness of his character, finally kill it in for me though.

I have believed strongly since mid-season 7, and still do believe it, that coopers being show runner drastically damaged the show. It started mid-season 7, continued through S8 and in S9-10 the damage he was doing really kicked-in full gear because his "vision" was becoming the focus of the show after he had destroyed most of what the show, and the characters, had been about for so many years. To listen to him the characters of mitchy and vala are his creations (ergo I include them as part of the death of the show notwithstanding the fact that I think neither character belongs on SG-1 -- mitchell as a major likely would have worked with his immature, gee-whiz this is sooo cool attitude followed closely by the "I had a bad day so I am entitled to act like an idiot and get my teammates in trouble because they have to save my sorry butt" attitude and there to learn from the best but vala - never ever is she believable as part of SG-1, IMO).

At one time in S9 cooper was proud to take credit for the so-called "rejuvenation" of the show - hope he is as readily able to take credit, at least partial credit he deserves, IMO, for the cancellation since his "vison" didn't exactly enthrall 30% of the viewers who had watched.

I truly believe that his show running has been a major cause of the demise of a show which I believe could have gone on for at least a few more seasons and you can bet your bippy that if this show had pulled in the 2.0s and 2.3s and 2.4s it was getting very consistently in Season 8 (15 of 20 eps got 2.0 and higher) it would have been renewed - skiffy may be stupid but they are NOT THAT stupid. The writing was on the wall in S9 when this new and shiny vision with their new and shiny stars did not pull in the numbers right from the get go. Talk about an influx of advertising - they pimped BB to the heavens and it was everywhere and still the numbers weren't there. Worse yet they could not even sustain their 2.1s from the first two episodes of S9 and all through the season the numbers gradually fell and low-and-behold coopers fancy, shiny new show could not even draw the 2.1s from the premiere of S9 into the finale as all they got to come back for that was 1.9 (meanwhile S8 premiere and finale both drew 2.4s). I agree this appears to say, at least to some, that people did indeed give it a chance in S9 but when they realized what they were getting they cut their losses and started to leave in S9 and then really cut their losses by not coming back at all for S10, they knew what was in store for S10 based on what had been shoveled in S9 - ergo a loss of 30% in the ratings.

I would be shocked if they had not been expecting numbers equal to or better than S8 by pulling in the FS fans and when they saw 2.1s they thought maybe it would be okay (trouble is though that premieres are usually the highlight in the ratings) and when it gradually kept falling-off the rest of S9 and ended on a low note of not matching or exceeding the premiere they knew the jig was up and S10 (which skiffy would have given them even if the ratings had be 0.9s so they could have the title of longest running whatever) would be the end. I bet their egos went flush so fast when they saw the premiere number of 1.4 and then a 1.6 and 1.5 followed by the stellar 1.3 -- well then again it's cooper and the b@b so likely they still think they are God's gift to mankind and it is all the fault of the "fans who won't accept change" -- arrogant sons . . . To me the numbers for S10 just indicate that S9 was as bad as people think it was and almost 30% of the people that decided to give S9 a chance decided it was crap and didn't bother coming back - IMO, it had nothing to do with advertising it had everything to do with the caliber of show people were being fed, IMO, of course. Sure 200 got a 1.9 and it was advertised however I believe it got a 1.9 because RDA was back and many of the several hundred thousand people who left the show wanted to see RDA and see if the show would get its magic back - the fact it plummeted to a 1.5 immediately following 200 indicates to me that people knew where to find Stargate SG-1 they just didn't want to -- they watched 200 for the history and the milestone and then knowing what awaited them from a regular S10 show said no thanks and went to where they came from.

I believe that TPTKTS could have kept the kind of numbers they got in S8 going but they chose the arrogant way to go and refused to acknowledge mistakes and bad decisions and poorly conceived, immensely contrived characters and lazy writing and a boring enemy and, IMO, a really dumb Arthur/Merlin path conjuring up scenes of Monty Python and other spoofs, making SG-1 into a joke, thus leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of fans.

I see all this stuff about lack of advertising but I think back to the years of seasons 5, 6, 7 and even 8 (but 8 did get a bit more than previous seasons but not as much as 9 or 10) when I would scour the TV Guide or other mags (excepting the sci-fi focus mags where the show was always written up - TVZone, Cult Times, and others, always have it written up and on the cover and they have special editions dedicated to just Stargate and have for years, etc.) for even a bare mention of the show. TVGuide never made it a hot pick or pick of the week, I never saw it mentioned in the weekly picks for my local TV section - Until S9 and S10. Matt Roush NEVER mentioned it before S8 nor did many other, if any, mainstream mags. In S9 and 10 Roush was giddy with it and mentioned it a lot, TV Guide wrote it up several times with main stories, had pictures in various forms on the cover of several editions and wrote it up on the Friday lists almost every week, EW mentioned it, the new AOL stuff which never existed before now, etc. I saw a great deal more advertising (and I consider all of that advertising because it gets the show out there) for the show then in previous years and even with that the numbers kept falling. They got tons of play for the 10th year milestone with pub all over the place and still the numbers for S10 stink. The show never got that kind of play before S10 but managed to do okay (if you count 2.0s and 2.2s and 2.4s as okay).

In 10 years I have NEVER seen or heard of Stargate SG-1 being advertised on a network channel or beyond the Showtime and skiffy channels (if someone has please feel free to correct me) - that has not changed so I am not sure why that would stand as a viable excuse for lack of advertising - the show got 2.3s and 2.4s in Season 8 and it didn't have one commercial on any other channel besides skiffy. I see more about the show and mentions of the show then ever before - commercials not withstanding because there were never any of those except on skiffy.

I also see this stuff about a bad/weak lead-in show --- in 8 years SG-1 was able to stand on it's own, garner it's highest ratings ever in S8 with no "strong lead-in" IT WAS the lead-in. The time slot - for every year it has been on skiffy it was on in the summer June/July start and September end. Every year, except two, it was at 9:00 p.m. They moved it to 8:00 p.m. when they added BSG - it has always been there at 8 or 9 on Friday on skiffy - fans knew where it was for years -- all of a sudden in S10 these fans "forgot" where it was?

Now bad show running, bad and lazy writing, contrived and weak characters, arrogance, ignoring history, disrespecting the Big3 main characters, and their immense fan bases, that got the show where it was, etc. - those reasons I do not need explained - those are clear as day.

[Mandysg1]

Well done bink, I salute you

[scarimor]

Well done bink, I salute you

Yes, the "they didn't advertise" and "they didn't give it a strong lead-in" and "they moved it" arguments are hollow. The history of the show's broadcast and profile just doesn't back them up.

Stargate fell because the product declined, and plenty of people could see it happening and said so as it happened - not with the benefit of hindsight. They have been proved right. Despite the fact that it's picked up in season 10, it's not enough to get the viewers back.

[KatG]

Well done bink, I salute you

Bink brought up some really good points. It's always been the "little show that could" despite lack of advertisement and lead in. Now I see more about it than ever and it's become the "little show that can't".

[Skydiver]

I've come to the conclusion that betaing RC's work was Gekko's job.

same here. I think everyone underestimated just how much creative control rda and greenburg had over the show, and how much quality control they had. I think they reined in some of coop's silliness and did htier part to keep the show classy. (which does make sense if you also consider the 'it's so much fun now that the old man is gone' attitude we've had from various members of the cast and crew after rda left)

I agree Mandy, and I always found this the most irritating of tptb's defenses against the criticisms of the show. Easier, isn't it, to lump people into the "oh they just can't accept change" cateogory, than to look at their product.

yeah. its very arrogant. do i expect tptb to listen to everything and honor every quirk of some of the fans? heck no. but when you have whole boards and threads with hundreds of posts with people remarking on how silly Cambo is acting or taking issue with vala the vamp...that just might clue you in that something is a bit off with those characters and maybe a looksee is in order. and i do think that some of the changes we've seen in the past 7 eps is the result of folks cluing into what's been bugging some.

but i do know that the over all 'you just can't accept change' attitude is very rude and disrespectful.

for many it's not that we can't accept it, it's that it's not necessarily a change for the better

[Skydiver]

they're not responsible.

theyu're not the 'gun' that shot the show....they're just two of the bullets that did it in.

the show overall could have survived few shots.

just cam
just vala
just the ori
just the crappy writing
just the plot holes
just the emphasis on sfx

but when ALL these bits and pieces come together, they're like the elements of the 'perfect storm' or the chian of events that sank the titanic, any little change could have prevented what happened, but everything fell into place to kill the show

[Farscapefan]

they're not responsible.

theyu're not the 'gun' that shot the show....they're just two of the bullets that did it in.

the show overall could have survived few shots.

just cam
just vala
just the ori
just the crappy writing
just the plot holes
just the emphasis on sfx

but when ALL these bits and pieces come together, they're like the elements of the 'perfect storm' or the chian of events that sank the titanic, any little change could have prevented what happened, but everything fell into place to kill the show

What the frell are you talking about? Think of season 9 and 10 as the first two seasons of the new show, just like it was supposed to be. This is still the work in progress. And nothing of you said above is true in this case.

[Mandysg1]

What the frell are you talking about? Think of season 9 and 10 as the first two seasons of the new show, just like it was supposed to be. This is still the work in progress. And nothing of you said above is true in this case.

First 2 seasons of a new show...but it's called Stargate SG1, that denotes the old show...SG1, that's what people expected to see from the title SG1 with some new additions, unfortuneately the additions have put off a large group of fans and thus it is no longer a work in progress it is cancelled.

[AGateFan]

they're not responsible.

theyu're not the 'gun' that shot the show....they're just two of the bullets that did it in.

the show overall could have survived few shots.

just cam
just vala
just the ori
just the crappy writing
just the plot holes
just the emphasis on sfx

but when ALL these bits and pieces come together, they're like the elements of the 'perfect storm' or the chian of events that sank the titanic, any little change could have prevented what happened, but everything fell into place to kill the show

You are correct. If it had only been a terribly written Cam, maybe they could have survived. If it had only been a terribly written Vala, maybe they could have survived. If only it had been the useless Ori storyline but everything else was as good as previous seasons, then maybe they could have survived. Crpy writting is so broad that I dont know how it could have survived that, unless it was only one or two shows. Plot holes, magical rescues, sfx in place of actual story... all could have been survived if all of these bad things did not happen at once.