So now we're back to random deaths of secondary/tertiary characters?

[ciannwn]

The death of anyone but a redshirt is never going to occur without some negative response, but that's the point! It has to have all kinds of responses to be anywhere near meaningful.

Does that include the response of the person who made this topic? Or my husband's cynical idea that Riley had to go because TPTB don't want secondary characters to be too popular?

I thought Riley was a wonderful character and am going to miss him terribly, but the impact of his death will be to make me more sensitive to the danger that everyone is in. And I think that's precisely what TPTB were aiming for.

It's unlikely that TPTB were aiming for my own response of "So they're back to killing off a popular secondary character while the main ones get a reset button in 'Time'." Maybe my age has something to do with it - I'm 61 so have seen a lot of TV shows and movies over the years. Killing off a secondary character to imply danger to the main characters no longer works on me - I won't believe that any of the main characters are in danger until one of them is killed off.

[thekillman]

Only problem with this death was that there was no attachment to the character. He wasn't developed enough to make us really care

speak for yourself. i cried. i loved it. it had a big impact.


because you know, kill off someone and there's always gonna be a group that responds "he's the only reason i watch the show". kill off young and you upset Young Fans, kill off Rush and you upset Rush Fans, ad infinitum.

kill Chloe and it would have a very different effect. people would go complaint it wasn't painfull enough or that it took up too much time. i think most Chloe hates would prefer a quick bullet to her head and then never mentioning her again.

[ciannwn]

kill Chloe and it would have a very different effect. people would go complaint it wasn't painfull enough or that it took up too much time. i think most Chloe hates would prefer a quick bullet to her head and then never mentioning her again.

And a lot of people would be upset if they killed Chloe off because she's got fans too although I'm not one of them.

[Lahela]

Does that include the response of the person who made this topic? Or my husband's cynical idea that Riley had to go because TPTB don't want secondary characters to be too popular?

Of course it does - but that doesn't negate the opinions like mine.

It's unlikely that TPTB were aiming for my own response of "So they're back to killing off a popular secondary character while the main ones get a reset button in 'Time'." Maybe my age has something to do with it - I'm 61 so have seen a lot of TV shows and movies over the years. Killing off a secondary character to imply danger to the main characters no longer works on me - I won't believe that any of the main characters are in danger until one of them is killed off.

Well, you're not quite old enough to be my mother, so I'd say my TV history isn't too far short of yours I just accept that in the overwhelming majority of TV shows, the main characters have plot shields. Firstly, the actors who play them are worth too much to the studio to let them go. Secondly, the fickleness of the overwhelming majority of TV audiences won't allow them to take the risk. Can you imagine what would have happened if they had killed Sheppard? Or Jack? They tried to kill Daniel but chickened out and ascended him instead, and look at the backlash that brought. Main characters very rarely die for in-show reasons. That's why secondary characters are there - to show the stuff that the main characters can't actually experience.

[ciannwn]

Of course it does - but that doesn't negate the opinions like mine.

I didn't mean to imply that it did negate opinions like yours.

Main characters very rarely die for in-show reasons. That's why secondary characters are there - to show the stuff that the main characters can't actually experience.

It depends on the show as The Mighty 6 platoon points out.

While I agree with you, I hope they do kill off some of the main cast and I shall be critical if they don't. There are plenty of shows that have had the guts to kill off main cast members suddenly and without warning.

Anyway, back to my own opinion. I thought that 'Time' was a very good story which was cleverly written. Riley being killed off makes me think "Oh, no not again", though, because the 'kill them so they aren't dead' scenarios have turned up so often in SG-1 and SGA. I wouldn't have thought "Oh, no not again" if one of the SGU main characters had been killed off for 'drama death' - it would have made me feel that just because a main character got a reset button in one story doesn't necessarily mean they'll get one every time.

[Lahela]

Anyway, back to my own opinion. I thought that 'Time' was a very good story which was cleverly written. Riley being killed off makes me think "Oh, no not again", though, because the 'kill them so they aren't dead' scenarios have turned up so often in SG-1 and SGA. I wouldn't have thought "Oh, no not again" if one of the SGU main characters had been killed off for 'drama death' - it would have made me feel that just because a main character got a reset button in one story doesn't necessarily mean they'll get one every time.

I totally agree on the reset button, and I think it's a corner the writers have back themselves into over the years. I guess I just look at SGU with the attitude that they're going to treat death differently this time around... or maybe that's just blind optimism

[garhkal]

Does that include the response of the person who made this topic? Or my husband's cynical idea that Riley had to go because TPTB don't want secondary characters to be too popular?
.

Cynical.. maybe. BUT it might be on the ball...

[ciannwn]

I totally agree on the reset button, and I think it's a corner the writers have back themselves into over the years. I guess I just look at SGU with the attitude that they're going to treat death differently this time around... or maybe that's just blind optimism

I carried on looking round the internet and came across this article.

http://billiedoux.blogspot.com/2010/...aftermath.html

Sad as I am to see Riley go, it was high time the writers killed off a semi-regular the audience had become invested in. The death of T.J.’s baby certainly conveyed the seriousness of the threat presented by the Destiny crew’s circumstances, but I think the stakes needed to be raised further and Riley’s death accomplished that. I don’t expect the writers will start offing regular cast members any time soon, but the jeopardy suddenly seems much more real for the secondary characters at least.

A life threatening situation for the crew in general will mean viewers biting their nails over the fate of the secondary characters - will they all survive? A life threatening situation for a main character, however, will provide entertainment in trying to guess how they'll get out of it.

A comment on this page relates to one of the hottest topics generated by the episode.

http://cliqueclack.com/tv/2010/10/05...fh-of-destiny/

While I understand the mercy killing in principal, I had a couple of questions. After the gate was fixed, why, with all the manpower from Destiny available, couldn’t they figure a way to get Riley out of there. And, was there was no morphine at hand to give him to over-dose on (People were nursed at various times before on Destiny, including last week)?

Many people on the internet have been asking why TJ and co didn't make much attempt to save Riley. There have been heated arguments which included studying screencaps to figure out exactly which bit of him was trapped. Some are still convinced it was below the knee and they could have tried amputating his leg. They provided links to articles about how a few humans have escaped being trapped in the wilds etc. by sawing bits off themselves with penknives and they didn't die of infection.

Why didn't everyone accept what they were supposed to believe concerning why Riley couldn't be saved? Perhaps this comment at the bottom of the same page has something to do with it.

In SGU, Riley is the equivalent of a red shirt. If it were Eli or Greer or Scott stuck in the shuttle and dying, you can bet on them finding a way to cheat death, thanks to some kind of deus ex machina technology

Maybe somewhere at the back of their minds is the thought that the only reason why Riley couldn't be saved is because he was a secondary character.

I'll finish off with a comment from this page -

http://forums.spacebattles.com/showthread.php?p=5228525

And I have to applaud the SGU writers killing someone we actually know off. Next time, make it a main character who is not Rush, since all the B cast members are far more interesting than 80% of the A cast.

This person isn't the only one thinking along these lines - see point 2 in an earlier post of mine.

http://forum.gateworld.net/threads/7...1#post11970298

One has to wonder why many people found him more interesting than most or all of the main characters. Could it be because he was the 'ordinary guy' that many 'ordinary viewers' could relate to? What would be the average person's concerns if they were stuck on the Destiny? Would it be discovering the secrets of the Ancients or not being there for weddings and walking the dog etc.?

Did the 'drama death' discussion really go something like the following?

A: Who's going to snuff it, then?

B: What about Riley? He's likely to be the only character some of the viewers can relate to.

A:. Great idea. They'll be really hooked on the show after he's shuffled off his mortal coil, joined the choir invisible and become an ex Riley.

[garhkal]

Slightly OT. I wonder if he was named Riley after "radar" o'riley from MASH..

[ciannwn]

Riley's popularity isn't unique. The TV Tropes website has him listed here -

Stargate Universe

Ensemble Darkhorse: Greer in the main cast, Riley in the supporting players

Generally, it's used to describe a side character making up part of the Ensemble, either a non-lead secondary character or a mere Flat Character, who can sometimes become unexpectedly popular with the fandom (sometimes, even more than the lead characters) depending on who and where the fandom is.

Riley has two more entries on this website although there might be others I didn't find.

Killed Off For Real

You have to click the open/close all folders to see the entry for him.

He's also mentioned in this topic - click the open/close all folders for the entry.

Big Breasts Big Deal

R.I.P. Riley - you'll always be remembered for your tropes.

PS: I didn't look far enough down the Stargate Universe page. Riley also qualifies for -

Heroic Sacrifice

Mercy Kill

Power Perversion Potential

Tear Jerker

He got a lot of tropes for a character who was only in a few TV/kino episodes.

[VJC]

I think this episode, and especially Riley's death really signifies that SGU really isn't Stargate anymore. It's Battlestar Galactica through and through.

No. See my previous post on the issue:
http://forum.gateworld.net/threads/7...5#post11068855

Now back to Riley.
I liked his character and was sad to see him die but thats the point, isnt it? To makes us feel something when we watch the show. His death shows so much.
Young's burden of command, Rush's careless for anyone else but himself, the dangers of Destiny, not everything will turn out alright everytime.

Why didnt anyone complaing this much when Franklin died? And i believe he is dead and will not came back in any shape or from.

Moments like this make the characters more real. Take Ronon in 4 years we was shot, stabbed and chased more than any other caracter in SGA but not once was he at death's door.

So to the TPTB i say keep it up.

Bingo! We have a winner - you, sir, win the thread.
Seriously, these are simple points, I have no idea why some people find them so hard to grasp.

Glad to see that they aren't afraid to kill of characters on the show. Only problem with this death was that there was no attachment to the character. He wasn't developed enough to make us really care. I mean sure its supposed to be emotional when a character gets killed off, but it really diminishes the effect when its a supporting character.

I see what they were trying to do but it didn't work out. Either choose a supporting character and develop them for a few episodes or choose a main character to do this to.

Riley's character was actually quite well developed through the kinosodes, whilst I appreciate that not everyone will have bothered to watch them, they certainly left me with quite an attachment to him, and his death certainly didn't feel like that of some random supporting character.

[ciannwn]

Bingo! We have a winner - you, sir, win the thread.
Seriously, these are simple points, I have no idea why some people find them so hard to grasp.

Going back to points raised in the post you were replying to.

I liked his character and was sad to see him die but thats the point, isnt it? To makes us feel something when we watch the show.

People are going to react in different ways. Here are two reviews for a Riley fix-it fanfic story. I'm going to quote the first one.

http://www.fanfiction.net/r/6380298/

Ah I wish...Riley was my favourite character and although the whole episode and death scene was wonderfully done I feel I'm probably not going to be watching Universe quite as avidly as I did..

I can't see the ratings taking a major nosedive just because Riley was killed off but SGU might lose a few Riley fans in the future if the show doesn't provide them with a 'compensation interest' for the loss of their favourite character.

His death shows so much. Young's burden of command, Rush's careless for anyone else but himself,

This is fine for people who care about Young and his burden or Rush's carelessness/ motives etc. A number of people, however, have said that they find the secondary characters more interesting than most, if not all the main characters. It's just the way it goes because viewers are individuals. One person's favourite main character can make another person wish that he/she would have a fatal accident with an airlock.

the dangers of Destiny

A number of people have said it only proves that Destiny is dangerous for secondary characters. Killing off secondary characters to suggest danger is a convention that's been around for a very long time - perhaps it's starting to wear a bit thin with a proportion of viewers because they've seen other shows which do kill off main characters. It's likely to wear even thinner for them when main character deaths are given a reset button.

PS: To VJC - Another person you replied to said they didn't feel much when Riley died because they had no attachment to the character. Which just goes to show that one person's favourite can be another person's 'who was he anyway?'

[Control_Chair]

Riley was my favourite character and I am sad to see him go. As long as there is some major fallout from his death when the rest o the crew finds out what Rush has been up to on the Bridge then I think killing him off will be worth it, however if like Fraser and Beckets deaths it is swept under the carpet after a few episodes and barely mentioned then it will have been a waste of a great secondary character.

[ciannwn]

Riley was my favourite character and I am sad to see him go. As long as there is some major fallout from his death when the rest o the crew finds out what Rush has been up to on the Bridge then I think killing him off will be worth it, however if like Fraser and Beckets deaths it is swept under the carpet after a few episodes and barely mentioned then it will have been a waste of a great secondary character.

Have to admit that my first thought on hearing about it was "They/ve done a Beckett on him". I'm now wondering if he'll ever be mentioned again. As SGU is supposed to be realistic, his death should make Eli feel a bit miserable because he was one of Eli's friends.

[Control_Chair]

Have to admit that my first thought on hearing about it was "They/ve done a Beckett on him". I'm now wondering if he'll ever be mentioned again. As SGU is supposed to be realistic, his death should make Eli feel a bit miserable because he was one of Eli's friends.

I want a bit more,

Spoiler:

we know that it all hits the fan in the Greater Good when it comes out that Rush has been on the bridge and caused Destiny to stop at that planet, at which point I am hoping for a repeat of Justice with young losing it all over again (nothing less than him attempting to airlock Rush will do).