My thoughts about Sam and Jack in the third movie (spec and spoilers)

[hedwig]

Honestly, I'm impressed/surprised there was even a mention of Cassie. She was always more of a plot device than an actual character to me anyway.

Though, I think I need to rewatch Heroes because I don't remember Sam and Teal'c hugging either. . .but if Sam and Teal'c shared a moment of obvious mourning for Janet then I have no problem with Sam also taking a moment with Jack, who she cares about just as much and did almost die.

Teal'c came into Sam's lab while she was working on what to say in her memorial speech, and found her crying. He said he'd been working on what he would say if he had the chance. He gave his "speech" to Sam to use, because he felt she could say it better than he - if I remember correctly. Sam read what Teal'c had written and thought it was very good, and I'm pretty sure the two wound up hugging each other.

[Rac80]

The above can pertain to anything from that timeframe. Not just Sam and Jack. The old team has gone their separate ways. All of them. Getting them back together believably shouldn't be too difficult. But, what one person thinks is believable, another may think is imature and poor writing.

Yep, i am not sure about how this may work out.... we shall see if tptb can carry it off IF the film ever gets made.

[Frostfox]

I only mentioned it because above you made a point of saying the Sam and Jack hug was a slap in the face to Sam's friendship with Janet when Sam did have a moment with Teal'c that illustrated her sadness over Janet's death.

You just didn't like the poignant, in-your-face moment Sam had with Jack. Which is fine. But saying that that moment should have instead dealt with her friendship with Janet is unrealistic because she already had that moment with Teal'c.

Boy, was it in your face.
So if her closest female friend dies and and she shares mourning with one friend, she wouldn't also share it with another? Does sharing it with Teal'c absolve Sam from continuing to grieve? Poof, it's all right now, now I can focus on how much I love Sir, all my grief for Janet/Cassie is gone? This is the whole problem with how TPTB wrote S/J. They seem to see the two characters in isolation when they are show 'feeling feelings' together, no one else in the universe is allowed to exist. It's ludicrous, unrealistic and unhealthy. Showing sadness with Teal'c for losing Janet doesn't preclude Sam from grieving when she's with Jack; the two are not mutually exclusive, she doesn't grieve with Teal'c or Jack. She should grieve with both of them.

And yet again comparing the 'tough kid' comment in season one, to this moment in season seven is also not exactly fair as the characters have grown. But, you're welcome to make the comparisons so long as I'm welcome to point out how unrealistic they may be

I don't consider going from being willing to die with Cassie in season one, to dismissing her in such a cavalier manner in season seven, to be a positive character growth for Sam.
I think it's reprehensible writing of the character.

Your version of 'reality' and what you enjoy in an action/adventure show is going to be different than someone elses

I personally, enjoy my own version of reality, as, obviously, do you

All I'm looking for is 45 minutes of diverting television now and then, if I want something more challenging or intellectual, I'll read a book, go to the theatre, go to a con or even just phone a mate, etc, etc (or watch Life on Mars - Gene Hunt + Live & Let Die + Camberwick Green, what's not to love?). YMMV.

FF

[Ashizuri]

Boy, was it in your face.
So if her closest female friend dies and and she shares mourning with one friend, she wouldn't also share it with another? Does sharing it with Teal'c absolve Sam from continuing to grieve? Poof, it's all right now, now I can focus on how much I love Sir, all my grief for Janet/Cassie is gone?

Should her grief for Janet mean she can't take a moment to appreciate that Jack is alive? And does that one moment really take away from her very obvious grief during the rest of the episode? You're right in saying that it shouldn't have to be one or the other, but It seems like this one (admittedly unsubtle) moment of Sam focusing on Jack means she's done mourning Janet when the rest of the episode clearly shows us she's not. She's mourning janet, she's just also (understandably) incredibly happy that Jack is alive. I don't think that moment takes anthing away from her grief over Janet.

I imagine things like this are so very different when you're not too bothered my the relationship (like me) vs. Hating it (like you). It makes me wish there was a way I could experience the other side, just to try and get a better understanding of where you're coming from.

@ Hedwig: thanks for the remider. I actually put the episode in and rewatched it and the moment when Sam's voice breaks is about when I start tearing up. The grief for Janet is palpable.

[Aragon101]

Should her grief for Janet mean she can't take a moment to appreciate that Jack is alive? And does that one moment really take away from her very obvious grief during the rest of the episode? You're right in saying that it shouldn't have to be one or the other, but It seems like this one (admittedly unsubtle) moment of Sam focusing on Jack means she's done mourning Janet when the rest of the episode clearly shows us she's not. She's mourning janet, she's just also (understandably) incredibly happy that Jack is alive. I don't think that moment takes anthing away from her grief over Janet.

I imagine things like this are so very different when you're not too bothered my the relationship (like me) vs. Hating it (like you). It makes me wish there was a way I could experience the other side, just to try and get a better understanding of where you're coming from.

@ Hedwig: thanks for the remider. I actually put the episode in and rewatched it and the moment when Sam's voice breaks is about when I start tearing up. The grief for Janet is palpable.

If you take the moment she has with jack out of context, then yes, it does make sense that she's grieving and still happy that Jack's alive.

But when you consider that Sam abandoned the lines in order to go to her jack....

The whole is not equal to the sum of it's parts. if that part hadn't been shot the way it was, obviously intending to be a soft almost angsty romantic bit, then really it was fine. IMO it's not that Sam's grieving, it's the inability for her character to have a moment with Jack that doesn't have some 'undertone" to it despite extreme circumstances.

I see the same in this potential third movie, any little thing is being construed as shippy and to be frank, i would rather a flat out "Yes they're dating" slap in the face than all this teasing BS that A: goes nowhere, and B: makes teh characters look like incompetent High School crushes.

[slurredspeech]

Should her grief for Janet mean she can't take a moment to appreciate that Jack is alive? And does that one moment really take away from her very obvious grief during the rest of the episode? You're right in saying that it shouldn't have to be one or the other, but It seems like this one (admittedly unsubtle) moment of Sam focusing on Jack means she's done mourning Janet when the rest of the episode clearly shows us she's not. She's mourning janet, she's just also (understandably) incredibly happy that Jack is alive. I don't think that moment takes anthing away from her grief over Janet.

THIS. YOU. THIS.

Kudos, my friend.

[Ashizuri]

If you take the moment she has with jack out of context, then yes, it does make sense that she's grieving and still happy that Jack's alive.

But when you consider that Sam abandoned the lines in order to go to her jack....

The whole is not equal to the sum of it's parts. if that part hadn't been shot the way it was, obviously intending to be a soft almost angsty romantic bit, then really it was fine. IMO it's not that Sam's grieving, it's the inability for her character to have a moment with Jack that doesn't have some 'undertone" to it despite extreme circumstances.

Sam abandoning her post was horrible (HORRIBLE), but the only correlation I see between that scene and the hug is that Sam thought Jack could die and then was mighty glad he didn't. It doesn't take anything away from Janet (for me) and it (the hug) being romantic doesn't bother me. *shrugs* I'm incredibly zen about sam/jack I guess.

[majorsal]

They are too late to make it convincing, if they ever could have. Credulity is stretched beyond reason.
Jack left for Washington years ago, Sam's career is soaring (literally!), Sam and Jack: The Neverending Romance is an old, old plotline, SG1 has moved on, the characters have moved on, the fans have moved on.

the *fans* of this storyline have not moved on.

as a fan, i'm still waiting for the question to be answered.


~for ppl that are interested in the question, it was 'did they hook up or not?'. i'd like unequivocal proof, one way or the other. of course, being a *fan* of the storyline, i'd love 'they hooked up!' ~

[majorsal]

guys, can we stick with talking about 'sam/jack the 3rd movie', not a going down memory lane of likes and dislikes of the ship? there's already threads for that debating.

[Frostfox]

If you take the moment she has with jack out of context, then yes, it does make sense that she's grieving and still happy that Jack's alive.

But when you consider that Sam abandoned the lines in order to go to her jack....

The whole is not equal to the sum of it's parts. if that part hadn't been shot the way it was, obviously intending to be a soft almost angsty romantic bit, then really it was fine. IMO it's not that Sam's grieving, it's the inability for her character to have a moment with Jack that doesn't have some 'undertone" to it despite extreme circumstances.

I see the same in this potential third movie, any little thing is being construed as shippy and to be frank, i would rather a flat out "Yes they're dating" slap in the face than all this teasing BS that A: goes nowhere, and B: makes teh characters look like incompetent High School crushes.

Bingo. Aragon101 nails it for me. As I said, YMMV.

Sam abandoning her post was horrible (HORRIBLE), but the only correlation I see between that scene and the hug is that Sam thought Jack could die and then was mighty glad he didn't. It doesn't take anything away from Janet (for me) and it (the hug) being romantic doesn't bother me. *shrugs* I'm incredibly zen about sam/jack I guess.

Abandoning her post was yet another example of TPTB's poor writing. I very much doubt that they intended to show Sam abandoning her post to run to her beloved Sir while under fire, but that's what they committed to film. Shoddy, very shoddy.
Incidentally, I never noticed Sam breaking regs in that scene, I only saw it when fans with a modicum of military knowledge pointed it out.

Just like the hug is Heroes could have been a lovely thing, saying something about camaraderie and bonding instead it's tainted with need and self centred desires.

the *fans* of this storyline have not moved on.

as a fan, i'm still waiting for the question to be answered.


~for ppl that are interested in the question, it was 'did they hook up or not?'. i'd like unequivocal proof, one way or the other. of course, being a *fan* of the storyline, i'd love 'they hooked up!' ~

Citation?
I'd be very surprised if fans hadn't moved on. Every other fandom for a TV show goes through phases, building up then dying off once the show ends. Are you saying that the J/S portion of fandom hasn't?
Slash fandom is following the usual curve, though I would expect a surge when (if) the film comes out.

FF

[Rac80]

I'm with majorsal... this "fan" has not moved on yet, and I admit it isn't helped by all of the hints and teasers we have been tossed over the years. BW saying the third movie will have a shippy moment...just makes me look at the third movie through shippers eyes...IF it ever gets made....which at this point I doubt strongly will happen.

[hedwig]

I agree with Majorsal and Rac80 about not moving on yet. And I assume pretty much anything the next movie is about will reference old issues of some kind (people, races, issues, whatever), whatever they may be, and perhaps present them in some kind of current manner. In fact, I'd be very surprised if there's even anything "new" the writers can come up with at this point.

[Skydiver]

TPTB have committed a lot of events to tape that have not shown the characters in a good light. For example, Coop's insistence that sam MUST kiss pete on the scene of that stakeout, despite it being in appropriate for her light of her position.

Vala's behavior with Daniel or especially that scene with the senator. Funny? Sure. some think it so. But it did show the character in a way many find in appropriate. Daniel and Vala on the Odyssey, they thought it was great for daniel to verbally abuse her, then for her to fall into his arms without so much as an apology.

Teal'c going on a murderous rampage to revenge the death of a woman that meant so much for him she was mentioned once in ten years.

My point being, ALL of the characters have been 'assassinated' to make a plot work, to make a story work, to satisfy some image that the director of the day wants to put forth.

Largely because, in my opinion, these writers seem more devoted to keeping their musts happy than they are to respecting the characters in their care.

[madaboutdanny]

TPTB have committed a lot of events to tape that have not shown the characters in a good light. For example, Coop's insistence that sam MUST kiss pete on the scene of that stakeout, despite it being in appropriate for her light of her position.

Vala's behavior with Daniel or especially that scene with the senator. Funny? Sure. some think it so. But it did show the character in a way many find in appropriate. Daniel and Vala on the Odyssey, they thought it was great for daniel to verbally abuse her, then for her to fall into his arms without so much as an apology.

Teal'c going on a murderous rampage to revenge the death of a woman that meant so much for him she was mentioned once in ten years.

My point being, ALL of the characters have been 'assassinated' to make a plot work, to make a story work, to satisfy some image that the director of the day wants to put forth.

Largely because, in my opinion, these writers seem more devoted to keeping their musts happy than they are to respecting the characters in their care.

I love that scene, nothing wrong with it, Vala deserved that rant, she "harrassed" him.

[Skydiver]

And I personally found daniel verbally abusive to her and that Vala was very submissive in the 'thank you for telling me how horrible i am' attitude.

I won't deny that she harassed him and bothered him, but the waay it was portrayed, to me, turned vala into a person that was supposed to be so grateful that he deigned to accept her that he had the right to treat her that way.

I've found much of their 'romantic' writing, especially in the last couple of seaons, to be very immaure and very bias'd towards the 'geeky male' perspective. (the attitude that, it's only sexual harassment if the ugly chick is hitting on me' kind of attitude.)

I found it an extension of the 'action jackson, manly = mean and snarky and i'm so wonderful that women throw themselves at me and i can treat them however i like' change that happened to daniel in the later seasons.

this is why i have reservations about ANY ship they choose to write for the movie. Because this bunch of writers seem to approach every relationship with the maturity of a 14 year old