The Reason for Division; its long so please bear with me

[hercthx]

hercthx, unfortunately the world conspired to prevent me from posting anything at all today, so I'll be back later - hopefully tomorrow. My apologies.

LOL no problem lookingforward to reading still. yeah the mods were just working their magic to save the day!

[hercthx]

Then I as well have misread the intent of the thread, I honestly thought you were trying to work out why the fanbase is divided over SGU, not what "you" (the collective you) like about different styles of scifi.
Seeya mate.

no problem, That is exactly what this thread is for, how about you, what do you like about the sci fi shows you enjoy?

[Naonak]

Spencer was stranded but otherwise in good health...completely different.

He was on some kind of medication, which had run out.


Everything else has been debated elsewhere, and I don't have time to right now, but that's just inaccurate.

[Petra]

It's only perceived as worse because this time, every one seems to take every critical word personally and it doesn't just stop with fandom, imho.

So we meet again, huh? I apologise in advance for the length of my replies. I can’t do pithy no matter how hard I try

I’m going to disagree with you here. IMO the only thing that might make things appear to be worse this time around is cyber-bullying. From my experience (10 years in this fandom) critical words have always been taken personally, so there’s nothing new here. The only difference is that earlier one side was calling names the other side in general, and now we have people who gang up and pick on individual posters. That’s a sad proof of lack of class of certain individuals, but given how few they are, I don’t think it’s okay to say that fandom in general has changed for the worse. Generally, for every bully out there someone awesome appears, so the balance is kept.

TPTB really get into the fray this time (see various more or less scathing/patronizing articles during the last year), as well as some actors reacting more to fan criticism. I'm not going to call names, but I guess the pressure Darren (and by extension the mods here) are under to keep this forum SGU-positive... or at least not overly SGU critical is very apparent. Also, I can't remember the actors of Daniel or Jonas ever publicly telling the fans to shut up and be nice in sometimes relatively plain terms, but that might be lack of information, feel free to educate me (everyone, not just Petra ).

See, I strongly disagree with everything in this statement. TPTB’s involvement and poorly thought-out comments are nothing new. Believe me, there was enough of mud flying around between TPTB, MS and MS fans during Daniel wars. And as someone who was on the receiving end of TPTB’s scathing remarks during season 9&10 (I was, and still am, decidedly anti-the last 2 seasons) of SG-1 I can’t help but at fans whining that TPTB defend SGU perhaps a bit too strongly. They were always like that. Funny how I didn’t see those who complain now making a fuss when TPTB picked on fans who didn’t like the changes in previous series. IMO ignoring it when you happen to agree with TPTB and then suddenly crying foul when they do the same thing but for once you are the recipient borderlines on hypocrisy.

As for the actors, do you have links and exact quotes? I admit I’m tired of that BS how allegedly some SGU actors insulted SG-1/SGA fans but no one seems to know what exactly was said, when, where or why.

Finally, GW. Please remember that it’s a fan site. Which means, it’s for fans, not haters – especially not for haters who take pleasure in spoiling fun for fans. And again it’s nothing new…there was pressure to keep things positive when SG-1 was on air and when SGA was on air, yet somehow people weren’t crying censorship then.

I'm gonna call you on the bolded above. You want SGU treated fairly so please extend the courtesy to SGA. That the light hearted story telling of SGA often times distracted from character flaws (by glossing over, joking about it or ignoring them in favour of the next adventure) does not mean there weren't any.

The thing is, IMO there really weren’t any. But perhaps we differ on definition of “flaw”? I don’t deny that SGA tried to get darker at times but for me one morally questionable deed that is completely forgotten 5 minutes later isn’t really dark. Same with the flaws. I never saw consequences of the characters’ flaws, so for me they simply weren’t there.

McKay and the exploding 2/3rds of a solar system, the man with the irascible personality and the disdain for everyone but himself and later on his team, who also killed off thousands of humans by reprogramming the Asuran nanites, flawless?

But was McKay ever portrayed (on SGA) as that unlikeable guy your logic tells you he must have been? No. He easily made friends who stood by him no matter what. Even when he screwed up we would hear how brilliant he and his mistakes were. We never saw any consequences of his actions…

Beckett, the doctor who created Michael, experimented on the genetics of unasked and unwilling sentient beings (ok, wraith, but still) and who killed thousands by that Hoffan virus thing, flawless?

I like Beckett. He’s by far my favourite SGA character. But one thing that always frustrated me was that he’d do all these things you list and never bat an eye. Never consider his actions. Never show remorse. Nothing. The whole ethical side was IMO swept under the carpet.

Sheppard, the suicidal guy (ok, since Jack goes as suicidal too, maybe we should remove suicidal as bad quality ) who talks some earth civillian into feeding himself to a wraith because the kidnapper seemed more expendable than McKay, perfect hero? Keller, the doc who doesn't even take a medikit with her when they are sure McKay will succumb to an illness on a faraway planet so she has to open his skull with a power drill, flawless?

I’ll refrain from commenting on Sheppard since he’s my least favourite SGA character and I doubt I could say anything nice. As for Keller, she seemed to be suffering from the Vala/Cam/Landry syndrome. She’d screw up all the time but nobody would notice or even worse, praise her for her shortcomings, because isn’t she awesome?

Seriously, every time anyone calls the SGA characters "square jawed heroes" or "flawless" or something along that line I always think to myself "McKay?" and snicker. Sorry .

That’s ok. Every time someone starts with “SG-1/SGC had only the best and the brightest working for them” I always think of Vala or Landry or Cam (in season 9) and snicker too. Not only for me these 3 make the whole “best of the best” argument invalid.

Regardless of how we got here the division persists because fans have created this idea that your either in the 'Stargate Atlantis/SG1' camp or the 'Stargate Universe' camp. No doubt the majority of people are in neither and are actually in fact in the Stargate camp, with preferences on what they want to see just like anything in life. People who like to think they are in the majority and have the 'support' of the majority (on either sides of the coin) are just being naive.

the idea that SGA had no serious or touching character moments is just as laughable as the idea that SGU is the 'worst sci-fi show ever made'. Come on guys are we really that intolerant and ignorant?

I believe the argument is that SGA had poorly developed and one-dimensional characters, not that there were no serious or touching moments between them. Obviously there were, just not enough IMO.

The real reason for sgu fans/haters division imo is that SGU is not campy steriotypical sci-fi, which is realyl what the US market likes, the masses want to see stuff like Herculese, Zena, Atlantis, Warehouse 13, Buffy, Angel and so on. the masses want "sci-fi" shows with characters that are quirky, with funny manurisms, and tag lines. for the masses real sci-fi is too dull and dramatic, where the campy stereotyped stuff is entertaining.

Ok hercthx, here I come

Generally I think you are right about some people, but generalizing is a mistake. I agree that it would appear that the masses prefer quirky characters with tag lines, but such characters aren’t limited purely to campy sci-fi. Nor is every lighthearted sci-fi show campy, you can have intelligent humour without camp. Also, I wouldn’t call Hercules, Xena, Buffy and Angel sci-fi shows

I think what we have here with the change in format is a crossing of the 2 types of sci-fi fans, the serious ones, and the fun loving ones, both correct in their viewpoints yet opposite ends of the spectrum. as each group tends for the most part to not really dig the other. the fun loving group find serious scifi dramatic, soapy, dull, boring, sheakspearian (sound familiar?) where the serious sci fi fans find the fun loving goofy, zany, tounge in cheek.

IMO your theory is a stretch. I’m sure it’s true for the extremists on both sides, but majority of people likes both serious and lighthearted sci-fi. It’s like saying that just because in general I prefer independent, emotionally “heavy” movies I don’t like comedies. The thing is, I do like them, and whether I watch “Precious” or “Love Actually” depends on my mood at given moment and nothing else.

I’d say though that a lot depends on the type of humour and drama in your sci-fi. There are folks who don’t like SGU but who loved BSG, or folks who didn’t like SGA but dug Spaceballs. What we find funny and/or dramatic is so subjective and different that IMO you can’t put people in neat little boxes labeled “fan of comedy/camp scifi”, “fan of drama/ serious sci-fi” etc.

so far we have viewed each other as SG fans nothing more, but did not take into account what type of fans we really are, as sg1/sga was on the campy fun loving side (please dont confuse campy as an insult camp kicks butt, ie Evil Dead anyone!!!! classic!) the bulk of the audience was that type. but when SGU came along with it serious style ala bsg, the serious fan started watching and latched on, where the fun loving fans felt slapped in the face.

Not everyone agrees with your descriptions, you know. Untill season 9 I never considered SG-1 to be campy or humorous, as for me the show had plenty of dark stuff in it and bar comedy episodes, was pretty serious. It got progressively lighter with each new season, but its roots were quite dramatic, which is why I never felt that SGU was that different. For me it feels like coming home. *shrug*

now i know it sounds like i am a camp lover wich to some extent i am, but i am not, i love serious sci-fi bsg, sgu, yes even caprica. but once i realized that not all scifi fans are like me and looked at the popular shows i realized that the camp fans ARE numerous. so as an sgu fan i have to say to the "haters" (but not really haters) i understand now your viewpoint, from the viewpoint of a camp fan yes SGU accualy would suck.

I don’t think we should equal “masses” – all those casual viewers of sci-fi – with sci-fi fans. They are completely different animals

Personally I think you have a good idea here, trying to bridge the divide between pro- and anti-SGU fans, but I’m not sure it’s doable. At least not yet. Some people mellow over time, but some don’t. And above it all there needs to be a good will and willingness to discuss the show civilly and to respect each other, and that often seems to be lacking atm.

[Gatefan1976]

Cut some good stuff because its not what I want to adress here

Personally I think you have a good idea here, trying to bridge the divide between pro- and anti-SGU fans, but I’m not sure it’s doable. At least not yet. Some people mellow over time, but some don’t. And above it all there needs to be a good will and willingness to discuss the show civilly and to respect each other, and that often seems to be lacking atm.

As long as people are willing to discuss it, it's do-able.

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

ok it was against the thread because the thread was not about who had what problem with which show IE win/fail conversation, rather this thread was intended to be about what we LIKE about sci-fi weather it be serious or camp, and give others who may enjoy a different set a chance to see that even though we like differents styles we are all sci fi fans. myself as an example i am more of the serious set i do like the darker side of scifi but in this thread some who are fans of camp have help me to realise that even the lighterside of scifi is enjoyable just for different reasons. there are tons of other threads to showcase your displeasure, however here is a chance to showcase some things you like weather it be SG or something else. what is it you like about the scifi shows you enjoy?

Oh right, it’s just the thread title seems to imply that this thread has something to do with division in the fandom. Seeing as how divisions are caused by people liking some stuff, and crucially, disliking other stuff, some mention of what people don’t like is bound to come up.

Even if it is against the topic of the thread it doesn’t require someone to be lectured or corrected over a personnel opinion.

[Kelara]

So we meet again, huh? I apologise in advance for the length of my replies. I can’t do pithy no matter how hard I try

No worries, debating with you is always fun .

About fandom and TPTB interaction: I wasn't fandom active back then, so I'm going to take your words and experiences for facts. That's why I asked to be educated, I simply have no reference for "back then" .

Funny how I didn’t see those who complain now making a fuss when TPTB picked on fans who didn’t like the changes in previous series. IMO ignoring it when you happen to agree with TPTB and then suddenly crying foul when they do the same thing but for once you are the recipient borderlines on hypocrisy.

Well, true for those who were active in fandom then and now. Impossible to argue anything as far back as SG1 though for people like me, who simply got on board later. Same goes for GW, of course.

As for the actors, do you have links and exact quotes? I admit I’m tired of that BS how allegedly some SGU actors insulted SG-1/SGA fans but no one seems to know what exactly was said, when, where or why.

Still no name calling from me, it would be frowned upon anyway . I can pm you, if you're interested, but I'm going to warn you that stuff like that always comes along with the kindergarten argument of "s/he insulted me first", which I personally am not too interested in having.

The thing is, IMO there really weren’t any. But perhaps we differ on definition of “flaw”? I don’t deny that SGA tried to get darker at times but for me one morally questionable deed that is completely forgotten 5 minutes later isn’t really dark. Same with the flaws. I never saw consequences of the characters’ flaws, so for me they simply weren’t there.

But was McKay ever portrayed (on SGA) as that unlikeable guy your logic tells you he must have been? No. He easily made friends who stood by him no matter what. Even when he screwed up we would hear how brilliant he and his mistakes were. We never saw any consequences of his actions…

I like Beckett. He’s by far my favourite SGA character. But one thing that always frustrated me was that he’d do all these things you list and never bat an eye. Never consider his actions. Never show remorse. Nothing. The whole ethical side was IMO swept under the carpet.

I’ll refrain from commenting on Sheppard since he’s my least favourite SGA character and I doubt I could say anything nice. As for Keller, she seemed to be suffering from the Vala/Cam/Landry syndrome. She’d screw up all the time but nobody would notice or even worse, praise her for her shortcomings, because isn’t she awesome?

It seems we are differing on the definition of flaw, mainly it seems on the point of those flaws been followed though on (which wasn't exactly the forte of SGA, agreed ). Like I said, the flaws get ignored, negated, glossed over all the time in SGA. This is especially apparent in your analysis of McKay, he shouldn't have made friends that fast, because he was that self important jerk in the beginning. But people deciding to befriend him against all logic doesn't mean the character flaw disappears. It's just ignored, again (actually, I agree with you on the point of McKay being some writer avatar and therefore favourite).
Or like Beckett and "morality, which morality, I loose no sleep over a few thousand deaths". I count that as pretty big character flaw and it would actually make him less flawed in my view, if he had displayed more regret over those experiments gone wrong.

That’s ok. Every time someone starts with “SG-1/SGC had only the best and the brightest working for them” I always think of Vala or Landry or Cam (in season 9) and snicker too. Not only for me these 3 make the whole “best of the best” argument invalid.

Well, if "best of the best" only starts failing in S9 of anything, that's something . I still stand by my earlier argument (other thread) that the flagship teams always are "best of the best of the current personnel pool" with that pool being the USA (and therefore pretty big, compared to let's say "people who found themselves on Destiny") at the start of SG1. Agreed on that there's always going to be the (odd) screw- up character in the show, more or less featured.

[hercthx]

@petra very insightfull and full of great points, i gotta run to work but i'll respond later tonight.

[Petra]

As long as people are willing to discuss it, it's do-able.

Yeah... but then, people willing to talk usually aren't the extremists who cause the most trouble. Some time ago I told someone that I don't think this division over SGU will ever be completely bridged, because I can't imagine people welcoming back bashers (bashers of other fans, not the show) with open arms. Too many bridges have been burnt. Of course that's nothing new either, the same happened after Daniel wars (the most rabid fans had to leave or change their online id's because there was too much bad blood in fandom because of them), but that division was never completely bridged either.

No worries, debating with you is always fun .

Back at'ya

Well, true for those who were active in fandom then and now. Impossible to argue anything as far back as SG1 though for people like me, who simply got on board later. Same goes for GW, of course.

That's fair.

I may be way off base here, but it seems to me that the majority of the most "passionate" fans is pretty new and therefore unaware of the fandom's history. I just wish they took the time to educate themselves a little before starting to throw around accusations. Then again, a few of the most vocal SGU/fans bashers were around during season 9&10 and they sided with TPTB back then... As you can imagine, it makes me pretty cynical and jaded. Oh well.

Still no name calling from me, it would be frowned upon anyway . I can pm you, if you're interested, but I'm going to warn you that stuff like that always comes along with the kindergarten argument of "s/he insulted me first", which I personally am not too interested in having.

PM would be great. I'd love to know what exactly has people so worked up and I promise not to argue about it

It seems we are differing on the definition of flaw, mainly it seems on the point of those flaws been followed though on (which wasn't exactly the forte of SGA, agreed ).

Agree to disagree then?

Or like Beckett and "morality, which morality, I loose no sleep over a few thousand deaths". I count that as pretty big character flaw and it would actually make him less flawed in my view, if he had displayed more regret over those experiments gone wrong.

Hmm, I can see your point but I'm not sure whether I'm ready to agree. If he didn't care at all wouldn't it make him a sociopath? I'll think about it some more.

Anyway, IMO the characters' writing in later years left a lot to be desired; to be fair not only in SGA, but in the last seasons of SG-1 too. The characters were screwing up constantly, they were doing things that were wrong, not to mentioned that the writers seemed to overidentify themselves with some of them (Jackson, McKay) but due to lack of consequences, nobody in-verse calling them on what they did and them being sucessful against all odds they were still coming off as those, proverbial now, spotless square-jawed heroes. SGU characters otoh don't make such big mistakes as their predecessors but since they are called on them and have to suffer the consequences they come off as being total screw-ups. All of which is my personal opinion and a very long-winded way of saying that IMO it's not the characters that changed but our perception of them, due to different style of the show.

Well, if "best of the best" only starts failing in S9 of anything, that's something . I still stand by my earlier argument (other thread) that the flagship teams always are "best of the best of the current personnel pool" with that pool being the USA (and therefore pretty big, compared to let's say "people who found themselves on Destiny") at the start of SG1. Agreed on that there's always going to be the (odd) screw- up character in the show, more or less featured.

Among main characters, definitely. As for the secondary and episodic characters I also stand by my earlier arguments from the other thread. Guess we need to agree to disagree again.

[Gatefan1976]

Yeah... but then, people willing to talk usually aren't the extremists who cause the most trouble. Some time ago I told someone that I don't think this division over SGU will ever be completely bridged, because I can't imagine people welcoming back bashers (bashers of other fans, not the show) with open arms. Too many bridges have been burnt. Of course that's nothing new either, the same happened after Daniel wars (the most rabid fans had to leave or change their online id's because there was too much bad blood in fandom because of them), but that division was never completely bridged either.

You're right, all the bridges may have been burnt and a full accord may never be reached, but if you never start trying, it will never happen.

[hercthx]

Ok hercthx, here I come

Generally I think you are right about some people, but generalizing is a mistake. I agree that it would appear that the masses prefer quirky characters with tag lines, but such characters aren’t limited purely to campy sci-fi. Nor is every lighthearted sci-fi show campy, you can have intelligent humour without camp. Also, I wouldn’t call Hercules, Xena, Buffy and Angel sci-fi shows

ok i kinda screwed this up i do not know how to make each point go into sperated bubbles yet but here goes.

true those shows are more fantasy but i was just pointing them out for what they were popular for. and to camp is not limited to the camp set, there are show that do offer a mix like firefly.

[/QUOTE]IMO your theory is a stretch. I’m sure it’s true for the extremists on both sides, but majority of people likes both serious and lighthearted sci-fi. It’s like saying that just because in general I prefer independent, emotionally “heavy” movies I don’t like comedies. The thing is, I do like them, and whether I watch “Precious” or “Love Actually” depends on my mood at given moment and nothing else. [/QUOTE]

your absolutly right,however I was not trying to put people into one of the two catagories, moreover i was just noticing that there were alot of comments all over from people who enjoy more lighthearted "camp" stuff showing distain for "serious" stuff, and vise versa, and I am atemting to point out that boith types are equaly good for different reasons and letting people voice what they liked about the different sets in order for those from other sets to take a peak at the other side so to speak.


[/QUOTE]I’d say though that a lot depends on the type of humour and drama in your sci-fi. There are folks who don’t like SGU but who loved BSG, or folks who didn’t like SGA but dug Spaceballs. What we find funny and/or dramatic is so subjective and different that IMO you can’t put people in neat little boxes labeled “fan of comedy/camp scifi”, “fan of drama/ serious sci-fi” etc.[/QUOTE]

first part I whole heartedly agree see aforementioned responce above. as to the boxes trues scifi is so vast and miriad with flavours it would have taken a website of its own to cover but for the sake of keeping it to within the confinds of a thread i boiled it down to just the overtones. which to me seemed to be the bulk of fighting i.e that show it too dramatic or that show is too goofy. well instead of saying i hate a show because i just wanted to read about i love a show because, hope this makes sense.




[/QUOTE]Not everyone agrees with your descriptions, you know. Untill season 9 I never considered SG-1 to be campy or humorous, as for me the show had plenty of dark stuff in it and bar comedy episodes, was pretty serious. It got progressively lighter with each new season, but its roots were quite dramatic, which is why I never felt that SGU was that different. For me it feels like coming home. *shrug*[/QUOTE]
again i am not attempting to label shows here there are other threads for that i was only using shows as subjective examples. this description is bang on what i was looking for here you listed a show and why you liked it perfect!



[/QUOTE]I don’t think we should equal “masses” – all those casual viewers of sci-fi – with sci-fi fans. They are completely different animals [/QUOTE]
by masses i mean an encompasment of the veiwer majorty weather it be hardcor fan or joe viewer. yes hardcore fans come back week after week, and joe viewer finds the episode interesting enough to put the remote down for the episode. in both cases they both tuned in, for a reason. something peaked their interest.

[/QUOTE]Personally I think you have a good idea here, trying to bridge the divide between pro- and anti-SGU fans, but I’m not sure it’s doable. At least not yet. Some people mellow over time, but some don’t. And above it all there needs to be a good will and willingness to discuss the show civilly and to respect each other, and that often seems to be lacking atm. [/QUOTE]

this is not about bridging pro/anti sgu although that as a result would be very interesting. I find it fascinating that the topic had turned to that(Isee it as a microcosm of the scope if the topicwhich is cool) moreover mabey finding a middle ground for all lovers of scifi to take a moment from the fight and see why we love scifi or eveb genre in general so much.

[Tanith0709]

ok i kinda screwed this up i do not know how to make each point go into sperated bubbles yet but here goes.

Take out the / in front of the word "Quote" at the start of the quoted text. Or just highlight what you wish to be quoted and click on this:

[Derocalypse]

If SGU does get a season 3 renewal I imagine the division can get wider or nastier than before. Not to say it will but with SGU's numbers in the ratings department and how SGA was cancelled with high numbers could lead to a bigger division. SGU is pulling in some of the lowest numbers of the franchise plus its a real expensive show to. Of course we know SGA went out with higher numbers but you can't help but remember Brad Wrights quote of if SGA was pulling in better numbers it would still be on the air. Now we have also heard that SGA was cancelled because it was a creative decision by either MGM or the producers. Either way an SGU 3rd season pickup could get really ugly. I don't know maybe Im wrong.

[hercthx]

Take out the / in front of the word "Quote" at the start of the quoted text. Or just highlight what you wish to be quoted and click on this:

cool thanks

[YoshiKart64]

If SGU does get a season 3 renewal I imagine the division can get wider or nastier than before. Not to say it will but with SGU's numbers in the ratings department and how SGA was cancelled with high numbers could lead to a bigger division. SGU is pulling in some of the lowest numbers of the franchise plus its a real expensive show to. Of course we know SGA went out with higher numbers but you can't help but remember Brad Wrights quote of if SGA was pulling in better numbers it would still be on the air. Now we have also heard that SGA was cancelled because it was a creative decision by either MGM or the producers. Either way an SGU 3rd season pickup could get really ugly. I don't know maybe Im wrong.

I don't think it will matter. If it doesn't we all loose out, if it does those who don't like it still don't like it.