Do you prefer Michael Shanks or James Spader as Daniel?

[Stu]

Yes, I done a search and found mainly RDA vs Russell debates, so I thought I'd throw this one in the mix.

It's a tricky one, as they both play the character well IMO. But if I have to think about who I would like to watch over a ten season period, then I would have to go with Michael Shanks.
Oh, and RDA for the win regards Jack O'Neill

Just so this thread is not a total waste - what does everyone think regarding the planned movies continuing off from were the first Stargate movie ended?

Personally I'm not sure I would be that interested. Alot of time has passed since then and so much has been achieved with the TV series, I just think it would confuse the heck out of everyone.
From what I understand, it would take place ten years after the events in the first movie. That would be a good start, but they will have to take a fresh approach going in to ensure a renewed interest. While the time frame suits the recasting of Spader and Russell perfectly, would you still use the original actors?

[DigiFluid]

Shanks, for sure. Even though Action Jackson is bloody boring, Shanks has brought a lot to the table for the character.

Besides, Spader's gotten fat

Just so this thread is not a total waste - what does everyone think regarding the planned movies continuing off from were the first Stargate movie ended?

It'll never happen, and I don't mind.

[Rac80]

Oh shanks big time., I actually prefer "action jackson" as some call him, because he did a great job showing how the character grew and matured. No comment digi...but you're right about spader

[SoulReaver]

the two could be siblings

[Supreme Commander Sil]

Is this even a question ? SHANKS !!!

Spader... errrrrrmm... is... well... .... he wasn't that great... he also made Daniel look like a bit of a poof
So, yeah, DEFINITELY Shanks ! (Plus you can make jokes involving lamb shanks ! Tastes like chicken )

[Stu]

Spader... errrrrrmm... is... well... .... he wasn't that great... he also made Daniel look like a bit of a poof

Good point Shanks all the way

[General Jumper One]

Shanks 100%

[amconway]

I really like both. One did a wonderful job in the movie, the other took that character and consistantly developed him over a twelve year period. Both deserve their props, one for creating such a memorable and likable character, the other for taking that character and running with it, making him perhaps the most non-static character in television history. Kudos to both.

[Confessor Rahl]

Hah hah... errr.. Shanks, no debate possible!

[Coronach]

Michael Shanks

[Bareassedmunky]

no debate possible!

I beg to differ!



But seriously, I have never seen two different actors play the same character with such continuity - I'd say Rocky III style freezeframe ending

[wkw427]

Seeing as how Spader looked ALOT like Shanks in season 1, I can't say either. We've seen Shanks grow over ten years, from looking like Spader.

[Confessor Rahl]

Seeing as how Spader looked ALOT like Shanks in season 1, I can't say either. We've seen Shanks grow over ten years, from looking like Spader.

I remember reading some time ago that the reason they casted Shanks was because his audition was so much like Spader that it was creepy. I think even in season 1 he had his own style, but the comparison was remarkable. I watched Children of the Gods recently and was amused at what taking off ten years of character development can do.

[Selena]

Shanks all the way.

Spader was okay in the movie but Shanks was the penultimate Daniel Jackson

[amconway]

Spader was okay in the movie but Shanks was the penultimate Daniel Jackson

It's not really a fair comparison, one movie vs over ten years of developing the character.