Alaina Huffman (l), Ming Na (Rear), Elyse Levesque (r)
Stargate Universe is one of the most well received new shows so far this season. Anything that is compared to legends like LOST and Battlestar Galactica from the get-go can be considered an instant success, and the full potential of the series is becoming clear as it shifts away from the hype of premiere day into its episodic template. TVOvermind had the pleasure of sitting down with some of the Universe cast this week, and those interviews will be published over the next couple of days.
Universe deviates from its predecessors in the Stargate franchise, as well as its early comparisons, by remaining a purely character motivated show. There is no Cylon horde, or smoke monster, there are instead ever mounting tests of the Destiny survivors’ wills as they struggle against apparently hopeless situations, and a seething struggle for control that could boil over any moment. Universe is intense.
Surprisingly though, detractors of the show have managed to level some criticisms that, regardless of their validity, have begun to resonate through the blogosphere. Most prominently is the view that Stargate Universe suffers from sexism where its female characters are concerned. According to some people, Stargate Universe has a shortage of interesting characters, particularly of the female gender.
I don’t know what aspect of this criticism bothers me more, the fact that it is pretty baseless, Stargate’s ladies are some tough cookies in my book, or the fact that the criticism has arisen from the kvetching on forums like TWOP and been flipped into the public consciousness by entertainment columnists whose own negative opinions on Stargate Universe have turned out to be sorely outnumbered.
My opinion is that this assault on the show is the result of playground politicking; scrounging boards for unfriendly remarks, and packaging them into a loosely bound ‘I told you so.’ That not everyone is going to like Stargate Universe is a given, to promote the notion that those who don't like it represent the most rational criticism, though, is quite weak. Regardless of how it got started, it was enlightening to get to talk to the Stargate Universe cast about this manufactured controversy and get their ground-zero take on it.
“You know, I heard that – being on Twitter you tend to get a lot of ‘stuff’ – and it really, honestly upset me, and there is not a lot that I read that upsets me.” David Blue, who plays Eli on Stargate Universe, told me when I asked him what he thought of the criticism du jour. Blue is accustomed to telling fans frustrated with the emerging plot to just “… wait another week …”, but the actor sees the criticism against his female co-stars as even more premature. “Every female character on this is a strong, intelligent woman. We’ve only shown you four episodes, but those four episodes have only been one day in the life of these characters.”
Alaina Huffman as T.J. on Stargate Universe
And even though we are only four episodes in, Stargate Universe’s women have already proven to be free-thinking, fast acting, intelligent characters painted from the whole-human pallet. Alaina Huffman’s T.J., for instance. On the surface, she is the “I wasn’t supposed to be here” fish out of water – a medical officer who was days away from leaving the program, with skills that are not exactly up to what the moment calls for. Having withdrawn from medical school, T.J. now has to become a trauma autodidact.
When I asked Alaina about the criticism, her initial response was not surprising. “I think as an actor sometimes you read things about yourself that are unpleasant, and you have an innate desire to defend yourself and your character. I think T.J. is a very strong and independent woman. She’s a great character and she’s very well rounded.” As she went on, Alaina intelligently reminded me that the true representation of a strong character has multiple facets. “She’s not one-dimensional. She’s not just going to be this strong and immaculate person; she’s got flaws and has her own demons to work out. That is really the point of this show, to show people in extreme circumstances.”
Strong characters are not, in other words, an archetype – they are the sum of the big actions, and the more subtle. David Blue also makes the point that many of Universe’s writers have already proven themselves when it comes to crafting strong female leads. “Not only do you have people like Ming Na, who is a brilliant actress who wouldn’t sign on to play a role that is useless and boring, on top of that you have writers who have written strong women, like Carter on SG1, and are really good at speaking in those voices.”
Elyse Levesque as Chloe Armstrong
When I asked Elyse Levesque, who plays Chloe, for her opinion on the criticism she echoed Alaina on the more subtle requirements for ‘strong’ character. “What’s different is that these woman are a lot more expressive of their fears. In life, people aren’t perfect and nobody can be strong all the time. I think if you are going to create an interesting drama, we need to see multidimensional characters. We need to see people lose themselves a bit, we need to see them find themselves again. I don’t think it is fair to label them as completely strong or completely vulnerable, I think they are a combination of those things, which to me makes for far more interesting characters.”
By most literary definitions, good characters are defined by how they behave on a morally challenging journey. In his quest to define the makeup of a hero, mythologist Joseph Campbell famously outlined the trials that forge a hero as “The Heroes’ Journey”, not “The Heroes’ Debut”. Campbell sussed out through thousands of comparative studies on myths from around the globe that heroes are the result of an extensive process.
Good characters are defined along the way, not as static beings – and furthermore, first impressions mean absolutely nothing; the best characters are the ones that through the course of their journey blossom into radiant contrasts to the person we met at the beginning. Good characters, in other words, are crafted over time and toned by change. Reserving judgment, then, isn’t just a courtesy – it’s the price of admission.
Yet, it’s not so surprising that in today’s ‘instant gratification’ economy some fans might expect fully realized demigods from day one, but that is not how stories work. If you want to buy-in to a rewarding story, you need to cut up your credit cards and shut down your lines of credit; in a real story, everything is pay as you go.
Watch for our full interviews with Stargate Universe’s David Blue, Alaina Huffman, and Elyse Levesque coming tomorrow. Subscribe to our RSS Feed, follow us on twitter, or friend me on FaceBook.
Check Out the Great Deals on Full Series DVD and Blu-Ray at EBay!
I've watched all four episodes and I was unaware of any sexism. There were a couple shots of women in tight tank-tops but an equal number of men in tight t-shirt shots. Fair's fair. There hasn't been enough time to make character judgements; the only ones we've really had time to get to know are Rush and Eli; Chloe and TJ barely have established who they are. I have every confidence that strong, competent personalities are to follow.
I think you are right that the complaints are coming from a couple malcontented sources rather than opinions on the show as a whole.
Have faith, SG fans. They haven't let us down yet.
Good point. There is general sexiness, but it doesn't cheapen anybody. No more than say… Apollo's introduction as beef-cake jock in BSG. I thought I would despise him, but he grew on me.
The point is, both actors and actresses give themselves up to some amount of objectification. It's part of the game. Sensualism/sexuality IS part of life, regardless of what the prudes want us to believe.
I’ve watched all four episodes and I was unaware of any sexism. There were a couple shots of women in tight tank-tops but an equal number of men in tight t-shirt shots. Fair’s fair. There hasn’t been enough time to make character judgements; the only ones we’ve really had time to get to know are Rush and Eli; Chloe and TJ barely have established who they are. I have every confidence that strong, competent personalities are to follow.
I think you are right that the complaints are coming from a couple malcontented sources rather than opinions on the show as a whole.
Have faith, SG fans. They haven’t let us down yet.
Good point. There is general sexiness, but it doesn’t cheapen anybody. No more than say… Apollo’s introduction as beef-cake jock in BSG. I thought I would despise him, but he grew on me.
The point is, both actors and actresses give themselves up to some amount of objectification. It’s part of the game. Sensualism/sexuality IS part of life, regardless of what the prudes want us to believe.
Disclaimer – I made a decision not to watch SGU a while ago for a number of reasons – including hating the way Atlantis ended and just general frustration with the producers. So I haven't seen a single epode – however I am following two people on twitter who have watched and were disappointed with the show for a number of reasons. In addition I've read a few of the complaints and it sounds as though many don't like the way that the female characters are in the background while the male characters have more dialogue and screen time. Don't know if that's true or not but those are the complaints I'm seeing.
That said while I agree that the actors may have some good points I can't help but feel that they have to say positive things about the show because their jobs are on the line. If they complain they could get fired… (perhaps it's not as big of a risk as I think, but from what I know of the producers I wouldn't put it past them – there's a lot of history there)
The one comment I don't agree at all about is the comments about it only being 4 weeks in. People are going to decide rather quickly if they want to watch a show and there are plenty of reasons for them to decide. If there is something bothersome about the episodes in question than there is something bothersome about the episodes and it really doesn't matter what happens later on. If there are stereotypes present in an episode than future episodes can't change that. If people feel that the portrayals of the female characters are sexist in the first few episodes I think something is wrong with the show, not with the complainers.
There are a lot of stereotypes that are perpetuated again and again by TV shows and many people are fed up with it. It doesn't help that both Atlantis and SG1 had similar stereotypes – similar problems that have apparently been continued on SGU. Fans know what the writers have done in the past and perhaps there's a bit of "I told you so!" going on but I can't say that I blame them when it seems that nothing has changed when it comes to how the writers write their characters.
I know what you mean about the 4 weeks, Jen. I've written off shows in less than that. But if I decide to give a show a chance, I think that it's understood that I have to be patient enough to let it develop. If I'm still watching a show I decided I don't like 4 episodes later, it's my own damn fault.
Many of the characters are still in the background. That is where my 4 weeks comment was coming from. Is it coincidence that the first couple character-centric episodes were male? Considering the lead is Dr. Rush, he should get first dibs. But we have caught glimpses of them all.
Stereotypes? Oh, they are there on Universe. In spades. To an extent, they are even useful at the start to help the audience differentiate between characters. The problem is when the writers don't move beyond them to develop fully rounded personalities. But sexism? I'd have to say no.
I meant David Blue's comments about there only being four episodes, and he's also the one that said "wait another week". How many times do we need to wait another week?
Having not seen any of the episodes I can't speak to the sexism, however I do know what the writers have done in the past and you admit there are stereotypes. I don't think it's necessary to have those stereotypes in the show, especially not from these writers.
Thanks Jen. There are certainly plenty of rational reasons to not like the show, or even be disinterested. I haven't watched any of the other Stargate shows, they never interested me.
Disclaimer – I made a decision not to watch SGU a while ago for a number of reasons – including hating the way Atlantis ended and just general frustration with the producers. So I haven’t seen a single epode – however I am following two people on twitter who have watched and were disappointed with the show for a number of reasons. In addition I’ve read a few of the complaints and it sounds as though many don’t like the way that the female characters are in the background while the male characters have more dialogue and screen time. Don’t know if that’s true or not but those are the complaints I’m seeing.
That said while I agree that the actors may have some good points I can’t help but feel that they have to say positive things about the show because their jobs are on the line. If they complain they could get fired… (perhaps it’s not as big of a risk as I think, but from what I know of the producers I wouldn’t put it past them – there’s a lot of history there)
The one comment I don’t agree at all about is the comments about it only being 4 weeks in. People are going to decide rather quickly if they want to watch a show and there are plenty of reasons for them to decide. If there is something bothersome about the episodes in question than there is something bothersome about the episodes and it really doesn’t matter what happens later on. If there are stereotypes present in an episode than future episodes can’t change that. If people feel that the portrayals of the female characters are sexist in the first few episodes I think something is wrong with the show, not with the complainers.
There are a lot of stereotypes that are perpetuated again and again by TV shows and many people are fed up with it. It doesn’t help that both Atlantis and SG1 had similar stereotypes – similar problems that have apparently been continued on SGU. Fans know what the writers have done in the past and perhaps there’s a bit of “I told you so!” going on but I can’t say that I blame them when it seems that nothing has changed when it comes to how the writers write their characters.
I know what you mean about the 4 weeks, Jen. I’ve written off shows in less than that. But if I decide to give a show a chance, I think that it’s understood that I have to be patient enough to let it develop. If I’m still watching a show I decided I don’t like 4 episodes later, it’s my own damn fault.
Many of the characters are still in the background. That is where my 4 weeks comment was coming from. Is it coincidence that the first couple character-centric episodes were male? Considering the lead is Dr. Rush, he should get first dibs. But we have caught glimpses of them all.
Stereotypes? Oh, they are there on Universe. In spades. To an extent, they are even useful at the start to help the audience differentiate between characters. The problem is when the writers don’t move beyond them to develop fully rounded personalities. But sexism? I’d have to say no.
I meant David Blue’s comments about there only being four episodes, and he’s also the one that said “wait another week”. How many times do we need to wait another week?
Having not seen any of the episodes I can’t speak to the sexism, however I do know what the writers have done in the past and you admit there are stereotypes. I don’t think it’s necessary to have those stereotypes in the show, especially not from these writers.
Thanks Jen. There are certainly plenty of rational reasons to not like the show, or even be disinterested. I haven’t watched any of the other Stargate shows, they never interested me.
"My opinion is that this assault on the show is the result of playground politicking; scrounging boards for unfriendly remarks, and packaging them into a loosely bound ‘I told you so.’ That not everyone is going to like Stargate Universe is a given, to promote the notion that those who don't like it represent the most rational criticism, though, is quite weak."
And to promote the notion that detractors consist only of disgruntled ex-fans with no real argument is weak as well. And that the actors disagree is also no support for the opposing argument – as Jen commented above.
I haven't seen the show, so I don't know if it's sexist. However, looking at the majority of tv programming that the western world puts out, would it really be that much of a surprise if it was?
Well, y'know – that really wasn't the intent. In fact, as that paragraph says… not everybody is going to like the show. That's a fact of life. People have different tastes. To scoop up comments from a few people who clearly hate the show and say they represent the prevailing attitude towards the show… that's a bit silly.
“My opinion is that this assault on the show is the result of playground politicking; scrounging boards for unfriendly remarks, and packaging them into a loosely bound ‘I told you so.’ That not everyone is going to like Stargate Universe is a given, to promote the notion that those who don’t like it represent the most rational criticism, though, is quite weak.”
And to promote the notion that detractors consist only of disgruntled ex-fans with no real argument is weak as well. And that the actors disagree is also no support for the opposing argument – as Jen commented above.
I haven’t seen the show, so I don’t know if it’s sexist. However, looking at the majority of tv programming that the western world puts out, would it really be that much of a surprise if it was?
Well, y’know – that really wasn’t the intent. In fact, as that paragraph says… not everybody is going to like the show. That’s a fact of life. People have different tastes. To scoop up comments from a few people who clearly hate the show and say they represent the prevailing attitude towards the show… that’s a bit silly.
Whether SGU is brilliant, or boring, is in the eye of the beholder. As with all other reviews I have read of the show, I take this one with a grain of salt. Well, perhaps a shaker in this case, as denigrating other forums (TWOP) and other columnists (whoever) to make your case doesn't really bolster your case, and quite frankly, comes across as defensive.
Fans will love the show, or hate it, or just watch it, for their own reasons. The writers have always had problems with writing female characters, with the exception of Carter in SG1. Don't know why, but I suspect the pattern may continue. I'll check it out on Friday.
I like the actors in the show, but at the end of the episode, if the writing has been boring, or a plot reused, that's what will count in the end. No amount of great acting can salvage a problem like that, and it's kudos to the actors for whom many fans will return each week, hoping for a better script.
Hmmm… I would say the opposite is true. Let me be clear on this: everybody is entitled to their opinion, and the opinion here isn't a response to any one person's opinion. At the same time, let it be noted that I did not cherry pick forum posts to bolster my position – something like that should be taken with an ocean's worth of salt.
Still stand by what I said…
Whether SGU is brilliant, or boring, is in the eye of the beholder. As with all other reviews I have read of the show, I take this one with a grain of salt. Well, perhaps a shaker in this case, as denigrating other forums (TWOP) and other columnists (whoever) to make your case doesn’t really bolster your case, and quite frankly, comes across as defensive.
Fans will love the show, or hate it, or just watch it, for their own reasons. The writers have always had problems with writing female characters, with the exception of Carter in SG1. Don’t know why, but I suspect the pattern may continue. I’ll check it out on Friday.
I like the actors in the show, but at the end of the episode, if the writing has been boring, or a plot reused, that’s what will count in the end. No amount of great acting can salvage a problem like that, and it’s kudos to the actors for whom many fans will return each week, hoping for a better script.
Hmmm… I would say the opposite is true. Let me be clear on this: everybody is entitled to their opinion, and the opinion here isn’t a response to any one person’s opinion. At the same time, let it be noted that I did not cherry pick forum posts to bolster my position – something like that should be taken with an ocean’s worth of salt.
Still stand by what I said…
I am not a disgruntled SGA fan. I'm a Stargate fan who is tired of being disappointed in the stupid choices TPTB make regarding female characters. I don’t require that they create a strong infallible “Wonder Woman” who has no weaknesses or vulnerabilities. However, I do draw the line when the vulnerabilities of a character are primarily illustrated with extended shower scenes and full-frame close-ups of her breasts. I also get irritated when the majority of female characters on a show are so completely defined by their romantic and sexual relationships with the male characters. From what I can tell, the story arcs for Chloe, TJ, and James so far focus on who they have slept with in the past and/or who they are going to sleep with in the future – when they’re not taking showers and running around in their underwear that is.
The only reason Carter turned out so well is primarily due to Amanda Tapping. If the writers and studio had carried out their original plans for the character, Carter would have been a blond bimbo whose primary function on the show would have been to wear tight tank tops and make out with the male characters while spouting technobabble. Tapping told the writers right from the beginning that if they wanted that kind of character that she was not the right person for the role. At the time, she thought she would probably be fired for standing up for herself and the character. Fortunately, TPTB realized she was right and they decided to write her character as a capable, professional soldier and scientist whose value came from her knowledge and skills – not her breasts. Best decision they ever made. Makes me wish someone had the nerve to stand up to them now.
Exactly. With the exception of Elizabeth Weir on Atlantis and Sam Carter in SG-1's early seasons, TPTB have always made it perfectly clear that their primary purpose female characters is either: a) eye candy, or b) love interest. Or both. Just look at the descriptions for the SGU characters: the very first word used to describe Tamara Johansen is "beautiful." Chloe Armstrong? "Stunning and sexy." Contrast this with the male characters, who are described with phrases like "utter genius" (Eli), "explosive temper" (Greer), "green and rough around the edges" (Scott), etc. NOTHING about what *they* look like. That's because it's clear that when it comes to female characters, TPTB only care about whether they're hot enough to draw in the coveted drooling male teenage demographic. This is also why the female characters are relegated to the background while the males get the lion's share of screentime and character development. The women are only there to be objectified and sexed up, so why bother actually giving them anything substantial to do? Heck, Chloe's role in the latest episode of "taking a shower and being ogled by Eli" was *totally* not sexist at all, right?
And I agree with what others have said about the absurdity of asking the cast whether or not the show is sexist. Well, yeah, what are they going to do? Come right out and say, "yeah, I'm totally okay with being treated like a piece of meat." They're *actors.* Their job is to sell this product for all they're worth, regardless of what they truly think.
I am not a disgruntled SGA fan. I’m a Stargate fan who is tired of being disappointed in the stupid choices TPTB make regarding female characters. I don’t require that they create a strong infallible “Wonder Woman” who has no weaknesses or vulnerabilities. However, I do draw the line when the vulnerabilities of a character are primarily illustrated with extended shower scenes and full-frame close-ups of her breasts. I also get irritated when the majority of female characters on a show are so completely defined by their romantic and sexual relationships with the male characters. From what I can tell, the story arcs for Chloe, TJ, and James so far focus on who they have slept with in the past and/or who they are going to sleep with in the future – when they’re not taking showers and running around in their underwear that is.
The only reason Carter turned out so well is primarily due to Amanda Tapping. If the writers and studio had carried out their original plans for the character, Carter would have been a blond bimbo whose primary function on the show would have been to wear tight tank tops and make out with the male characters while spouting technobabble. Tapping told the writers right from the beginning that if they wanted that kind of character that she was not the right person for the role. At the time, she thought she would probably be fired for standing up for herself and the character. Fortunately, TPTB realized she was right and they decided to write her character as a capable, professional soldier and scientist whose value came from her knowledge and skills – not her breasts. Best decision they ever made. Makes me wish someone had the nerve to stand up to them now.
Exactly. With the exception of Elizabeth Weir on Atlantis and Sam Carter in SG-1′s early seasons, TPTB have always made it perfectly clear that their primary purpose female characters is either: a) eye candy, or b) love interest. Or both. Just look at the descriptions for the SGU characters: the very first word used to describe Tamara Johansen is “beautiful.” Chloe Armstrong? “Stunning and sexy.” Contrast this with the male characters, who are described with phrases like “utter genius” (Eli), “explosive temper” (Greer), “green and rough around the edges” (Scott), etc. NOTHING about what *they* look like. That’s because it’s clear that when it comes to female characters, TPTB only care about whether they’re hot enough to draw in the coveted drooling male teenage demographic. This is also why the female characters are relegated to the background while the males get the lion’s share of screentime and character development. The women are only there to be objectified and sexed up, so why bother actually giving them anything substantial to do? Heck, Chloe’s role in the latest episode of “taking a shower and being ogled by Eli” was *totally* not sexist at all, right?
And I agree with what others have said about the absurdity of asking the cast whether or not the show is sexist. Well, yeah, what are they going to do? Come right out and say, “yeah, I’m totally okay with being treated like a piece of meat.” They’re *actors.* Their job is to sell this product for all they’re worth, regardless of what they truly think.
Well what did you expect, that the female cast members would say, 'oh of course the show is horribly sexist, but you know, I just love having the camera focused on my chest so much I had to do it?' Of course, they're also aware of backstory, and possibly plotlines, that are sadly lacking in what the audience is seeing.
I don't blame the female cast for the fact that they're underwritten (or having lines cut in post-production so they appear underrepresented). However, I do think there's this huge disconnect between the story they think they're telling and the story that the audience is seeing week after week. I've seen this 'just give it a chance' mentality around the reviews and it seems very telling instead of being able to single out positives, the proponents have to resort to telling the audience to just hang in there, as if they're waiting for a root canal to be over. I don't want an instant demigod(we have enough of them, they're called Mary Sues), in fact I don't want a demigod at all, but I do want a nicely flawed character, just ONE, that appeals to me on a human level rather than a superficial, oh she's pretty. The sheer amount of screen time (or lack thereof), the lack of female characters engaging in any kind of leadership, and the fact that they are all cast in traditionally female roles (nurse, administrator, unemployed party girl) who immediately defer to the male characters, well seems to me that it's hard to argue against the sexism.
I do think there's this huge disconnect between the story they think they're telling and the story that the audience is seeing week after week.
This. Exactly this. And it's the writers as well as the actors. They've already filmed (or are close to finishing) the entire season, they're probably thinking about it on the whole rather than individual episodes. On the other hand the audience has to deal with viewing the individual episodes one at a time with an entire week in between. Of course viewers are going to be analyzing them a lot more than the writers/actors want to think about it.
See this is the problem, Jen… you are validating the criticism, but above you admit you never even watched it. SGU is brilliant. Great characters and a great story, and it is doing very well for SyFy. People who haven't watched it should just shut up.
This. A thousand times this.
It amazes me that so many of these people are coming on here critisizing a show they've never even seen one episode of in order to be able to form their own personal opinions. As for the TPTB haters out there, well let's face it, you guys have been hating Stargate since season 6 of SG-1 and you've loudly spoken out about it on Gateworld.net so to be honest, to the rest of us, it's all "same ol, same ol" coming from you guys that would make topics about how much you hated Dr. Weir on Atlantis.
From someone that's watched the show, I've seen no sexism on this series whatsoever. In fact, this series has more female characters at the front than all the other Stargate series has has in the past.
SG-1: Carter & Dr. Fraiser -> (Fraiser dies) -> Dr. LAndry + Vala Mal Doran
Atlantis: Dr. Weir & Tela Ammagon -> Dr. Keller later in the series
SGU: T.J., Chloe, Ms. Wray (the IOA agent) & even though she's not a main-main character, Vanessa James (thet female soldier that we've seen enough for her to count in my book)
That's more than the previous series has had in one time and like it's just been said, it's only been 4 episodes. You can't really expect everything to be laid out for you at the very very beginning. It's gonna take time and if you don't have the patience, then don't watch the show. If you've never even seen the show and are only arguing based on hearsay, don't even comment cause your arguments aren't even based on your watching the show. IF you're the "standard TPTB sucks" viewer…well….you guys are like the sound of a river: a sound that we've heard for so long it doesn't even register anymore. lol.
This. I didn't even know this was an issue til this article.
Universe is not brilliant, the characters are boring, and the story is as exciting as watching paint dry. Oh, and I watched all four episodes so you can put that in your little fanboy pipe and smoke it.
Well what did you expect, that the female cast members would say, ‘oh of course the show is horribly sexist, but you know, I just love having the camera focused on my chest so much I had to do it?’ Of course, they’re also aware of backstory, and possibly plotlines, that are sadly lacking in what the audience is seeing.
I don’t blame the female cast for the fact that they’re underwritten (or having lines cut in post-production so they appear underrepresented). However, I do think there’s this huge disconnect between the story they think they’re telling and the story that the audience is seeing week after week. I’ve seen this ‘just give it a chance’ mentality around the reviews and it seems very telling instead of being able to single out positives, the proponents have to resort to telling the audience to just hang in there, as if they’re waiting for a root canal to be over. I don’t want an instant demigod(we have enough of them, they’re called Mary Sues), in fact I don’t want a demigod at all, but I do want a nicely flawed character, just ONE, that appeals to me on a human level rather than a superficial, oh she’s pretty. The sheer amount of screen time (or lack thereof), the lack of female characters engaging in any kind of leadership, and the fact that they are all cast in traditionally female roles (nurse, administrator, unemployed party girl) who immediately defer to the male characters, well seems to me that it’s hard to argue against the sexism.
I do think there’s this huge disconnect between the story they think they’re telling and the story that the audience is seeing week after week.
This. Exactly this. And it’s the writers as well as the actors. They’ve already filmed (or are close to finishing) the entire season, they’re probably thinking about it on the whole rather than individual episodes. On the other hand the audience has to deal with viewing the individual episodes one at a time with an entire week in between. Of course viewers are going to be analyzing them a lot more than the writers/actors want to think about it.
See this is the problem, Jen… you are validating the criticism, but above you admit you never even watched it. SGU is brilliant. Great characters and a great story, and it is doing very well for SyFy. People who haven’t watched it should just shut up.
This. A thousand times this.
It amazes me that so many of these people are coming on here critisizing a show they’ve never even seen one episode of in order to be able to form their own personal opinions. As for the TPTB haters out there, well let’s face it, you guys have been hating Stargate since season 6 of SG-1 and you’ve loudly spoken out about it on Gateworld.net so to be honest, to the rest of us, it’s all “same ol, same ol” coming from you guys that would make topics about how much you hated Dr. Weir on Atlantis.
From someone that’s watched the show, I’ve seen no sexism on this series whatsoever. In fact, this series has more female characters at the front than all the other Stargate series has has in the past.
SG-1: Carter & Dr. Fraiser -> (Fraiser dies) -> Dr. LAndry + Vala Mal Doran
Atlantis: Dr. Weir & Tela Ammagon -> Dr. Keller later in the series
SGU: T.J., Chloe, Ms. Wray (the IOA agent) & even though she’s not a main-main character, Vanessa James (thet female soldier that we’ve seen enough for her to count in my book)
That’s more than the previous series has had in one time and like it’s just been said, it’s only been 4 episodes. You can’t really expect everything to be laid out for you at the very very beginning. It’s gonna take time and if you don’t have the patience, then don’t watch the show. If you’ve never even seen the show and are only arguing based on hearsay, don’t even comment cause your arguments aren’t even based on your watching the show. IF you’re the “standard TPTB sucks” viewer…well….you guys are like the sound of a river: a sound that we’ve heard for so long it doesn’t even register anymore. lol.
This. I didn’t even know this was an issue til this article.
Universe is not brilliant, the characters are boring, and the story is as exciting as watching paint dry. Oh, and I watched all four episodes so you can put that in your little fanboy pipe and smoke it.
Having watched all of the eps of SG:U to date I can say that the series has so far spent a lot of time around the male characters and not so much around the female characters. I cannot categorically say that the series is "sexist" as we have only seen a fraction of the episodes so far. But I can say that so far it does appear to be the case that character building and progression has been concentrated more on the male members of the ensemble. With the female characters being relegated to a more background, subordinate, support roles rather than being at the front forward roles.
I do have my fingers crossed that in following episodes the female members of the cast will have an equal ammount of screen time, character development and plot progression. Allowing them to become more rounded and believable as people.
Having watched all of the eps of SG:U to date I can say that the series has so far spent a lot of time around the male characters and not so much around the female characters. I cannot categorically say that the series is “sexist” as we have only seen a fraction of the episodes so far. But I can say that so far it does appear to be the case that character building and progression has been concentrated more on the male members of the ensemble. With the female characters being relegated to a more background, subordinate, support roles rather than being at the front forward roles.
I do have my fingers crossed that in following episodes the female members of the cast will have an equal ammount of screen time, character development and plot progression. Allowing them to become more rounded and believable as people.
SGU is not brilliant…(IMHO)as SGURox says. I've watched every epp and find it too dark and boring. Not one bit of humor in it & what is with the lead characters of the military & scientific community being so disliked by the audience. I say that because of my 12 friends who try to watch this show SGU is boring with little to recommend it to anyone else. There goes our Fri. nite SG parties. The show leaves alot to be desired by SG fans. Sorry!
SGU is not brilliant…(IMHO)as SGURox says. I’ve watched every epp and find it too dark and boring. Not one bit of humor in it & what is with the lead characters of the military & scientific community being so disliked by the audience. I say that because of my 12 friends who try to watch this show SGU is boring with little to recommend it to anyone else. There goes our Fri. nite SG parties. The show leaves alot to be desired by SG fans. Sorry!
Just to add on what I said before, I think people are expecting that famous scene from SG-1 between Carter & Jack:
Sam Carter: I'm an Air Force officer just like you are, Colonel. And just because my reproductive organs are on the inside instead of the outside doesn't mean I can't handle whatever you can handle.
Jack O'Neill: Oh, this has nothing to do with you being a woman. I like women. I've just got a little problem with scientists.
Sam Carter: Oh, Colonel, I logged over 100 hours in enemy airspace during the Gulf War. Is that tough enough for you… or are we gonna have to arm wrestle?
Just to add on what I said before, I think people are expecting that famous scene from SG-1 between Carter & Jack:
Sam Carter: I’m an Air Force officer just like you are, Colonel. And just because my reproductive organs are on the inside instead of the outside doesn’t mean I can’t handle whatever you can handle.
Jack O’Neill: Oh, this has nothing to do with you being a woman. I like women. I’ve just got a little problem with scientists.
Sam Carter: Oh, Colonel, I logged over 100 hours in enemy airspace during the Gulf War. Is that tough enough for you… or are we gonna have to arm wrestle?
Kneejerk response from the defenders before the show started:
Don't judge it until you see it. Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.Don't judge it until you see it.
Kneejerk response from the defenders ever since:
Be patient, things will get better. Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.
lol.
Kneejerk response from the defenders before the show started:
Don’t judge it until you see it. Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.Don’t judge it until you see it.
Kneejerk response from the defenders ever since:
Be patient, things will get better. Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.Be patient, things will get better.
lol.
I think you have that backwards. The kneejerk was the pre-haters. There is noone saying that it will get better, just that it will continue to be increasingly awesome. The pragmatists just wait it out. Like the author said, good characters aren't created overnight. In the BSG mini, apollo was beefcake eye candy for the ladies. A brainless sexed up jock. who could have predicted he'd be president…
Yeah, no. Hardly anyone has said that Universe has been awesome so far. Most of the defenders spend their time lecturing about patience and maturity and how it's too early to say anything bad about the show. They spend more time whining about people giving up on the show and hardly any time talking about how awesome it is. That's not a ringing endorsement by any stretch.
Just want to say I think Universe has been awesome so far. No, really.
I think you have that backwards. The kneejerk was the pre-haters. There is noone saying that it will get better, just that it will continue to be increasingly awesome. The pragmatists just wait it out. Like the author said, good characters aren’t created overnight. In the BSG mini, apollo was beefcake eye candy for the ladies. A brainless sexed up jock. who could have predicted he’d be president…
Yeah, no. Hardly anyone has said that Universe has been awesome so far. Most of the defenders spend their time lecturing about patience and maturity and how it’s too early to say anything bad about the show. They spend more time whining about people giving up on the show and hardly any time talking about how awesome it is. That’s not a ringing endorsement by any stretch.
Just want to say I think Universe has been awesome so far. No, really.
"Stargate Universe is one of the most well received new shows so far this season."
According to whom?
"Anything that is compared to legends like LOST and Battlestar Galactica from the get-go can be considered an instant success"
Not if most of the comparisons have Universe coming up short.
"Anything that is compared to legends like LOST and Battlestar Galactica from the get-go can be considered an instant success"
How about a legend like, oh, the Stargate franchise?
BSG was good, but a little too "As the Battlestar Turns" at times.
“Stargate Universe is one of the most well received new shows so far this season.”
According to whom?
“Anything that is compared to legends like LOST and Battlestar Galactica from the get-go can be considered an instant success”
Not if most of the comparisons have Universe coming up short.
“Anything that is compared to legends like LOST and Battlestar Galactica from the get-go can be considered an instant success”
How about a legend like, oh, the Stargate franchise?
BSG was good, but a little too “As the Battlestar Turns” at times.
Why is it that so many of the people who like Universe come across as overly defensive and desperate? If the show is great it should stand on its own. Quit throwing around agendas and complaining about other fans.
Why is it that so many of the people who like Universe come across as overly defensive and desperate? If the show is great it should stand on its own. Quit throwing around agendas and complaining about other fans.
I personally have enjoyed SGU from episode 1 and like every other show out there, there will be episodes that I dont like as much as ones that I do. I have read a lot of reviews from fans and from other areas that repeatedly compare SGU to the previous Stargate shows and in their opinions SGU doesnt compare. If you read and or watch the interviews with the writers and directors their concept was to make something unique in the Stargate world. My husband does not like SGU, his reasoning is that it is more dramatic and less action. There may not be something for everyone with SGU however for me it is wonderful. I like character driven shows that give you the chance to know the characters instead of waiting to see what alien planet they will go to, what aliens they will meet, and what they can blow up. Keep up the good work to all of the cast, crew, writers and directors. The HUMAN element makes it worth watching to me.
I personally have enjoyed SGU from episode 1 and like every other show out there, there will be episodes that I dont like as much as ones that I do. I have read a lot of reviews from fans and from other areas that repeatedly compare SGU to the previous Stargate shows and in their opinions SGU doesnt compare. If you read and or watch the interviews with the writers and directors their concept was to make something unique in the Stargate world. My husband does not like SGU, his reasoning is that it is more dramatic and less action. There may not be something for everyone with SGU however for me it is wonderful. I like character driven shows that give you the chance to know the characters instead of waiting to see what alien planet they will go to, what aliens they will meet, and what they can blow up. Keep up the good work to all of the cast, crew, writers and directors. The HUMAN element makes it worth watching to me.
So, there is no Affirmative Action for women in space!!!
Other than that, I liked Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis. It looks like Stargate Universe.
In the last SGU show, Darkness, Destiny flew into a gas giant, so does anyone know what color blue or the color blue-green on or in a gas giant indicates?
Or women in space don't need affirmative action.
I'm not sure but I think that blue means the gas giant had beans for supper and green means it had cabbage. :)
So, there is no Affirmative Action for women in space!!!
Other than that, I liked Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis. It looks like Stargate Universe.
In the last SGU show, Darkness, Destiny flew into a gas giant, so does anyone know what color blue or the color blue-green on or in a gas giant indicates?
Or women in space don’t need affirmative action.
I’m not sure but I think that blue means the gas giant had beans for supper and green means it had cabbage. :)
I am a SG1 and SGA lover – did not want to watch SGU because of their treatment of SGA but hey it was free on itunes and I love scifi. So I am a self-confessed pre-hater of SGU. So what do I see. I loved the already-a-hero aspect of the previous stargate series and I am not so excited about everyone going on a journey to become more heroic. So I appreciate Scott and Young and TJ the medic stepping up and being heroic and I am willing to go along with the other people who will be working on their journey. I think the character of Eli was a good idea in concept – the everyman point of view but I think he is poorly written as someone who is used to make long-term stargate scientists look bumbling. Eli could have been the joyful resourceful geek without becoming the obnoxious deus-ex-machina for the show. I think that stargate has always had problems with character development unless the actor elevates it. Tapping, RDA and Shanks did it for SG1 but Tealc was stuck in I am a grunting warrior hell for 10
years. Hewlett really saved SGA, I don't think Flanigan has the chops that RDA did and certainly it was hard for Ronin and Teyla to really develop. So yes I think that stargate is poor in a lot of characterization – esp women – and it needs a strong actor to bring a stale character to life. So far the medic TJ is doing that for me. Chloe boobgirl, and Ming Na not so much.
That I think is a main problem is the writers are not good enough to be subtle hence the kinos for exposition and character development and the use of tropes and stereotypes. I have fewer problems with the writers before SGU because stargate was a kind of light, cheesy, alien technology romp. So far I don't think they have the chops to do dark and brooding well. Since it is 40 minutes out of my week I will give them time to see where it is going. But if the ship heads to the sun for recharging after a lotto death match then I will be validated in my opinion of the writer's skill.
I am a SG1 and SGA lover – did not want to watch SGU because of their treatment of SGA but hey it was free on itunes and I love scifi. So I am a self-confessed pre-hater of SGU. So what do I see. I loved the already-a-hero aspect of the previous stargate series and I am not so excited about everyone going on a journey to become more heroic. So I appreciate Scott and Young and TJ the medic stepping up and being heroic and I am willing to go along with the other people who will be working on their journey. I think the character of Eli was a good idea in concept – the everyman point of view but I think he is poorly written as someone who is used to make long-term stargate scientists look bumbling. Eli could have been the joyful resourceful geek without becoming the obnoxious deus-ex-machina for the show. I think that stargate has always had problems with character development unless the actor elevates it. Tapping, RDA and Shanks did it for SG1 but Tealc was stuck in I am a grunting warrior hell for 10
years. Hewlett really saved SGA, I don’t think Flanigan has the chops that RDA did and certainly it was hard for Ronin and Teyla to really develop. So yes I think that stargate is poor in a lot of characterization – esp women – and it needs a strong actor to bring a stale character to life. So far the medic TJ is doing that for me. Chloe boobgirl, and Ming Na not so much.
That I think is a main problem is the writers are not good enough to be subtle hence the kinos for exposition and character development and the use of tropes and stereotypes. I have fewer problems with the writers before SGU because stargate was a kind of light, cheesy, alien technology romp. So far I don’t think they have the chops to do dark and brooding well. Since it is 40 minutes out of my week I will give them time to see where it is going. But if the ship heads to the sun for recharging after a lotto death match then I will be validated in my opinion of the writer’s skill.
SGU??? How about plotless, repetivie nonsenses!!….The only reason anyone would bring up the subject of sexist is because the storylines is so weak, viewers have to find something to talk about in reference to this loser.
That uses a word like "nonsenses",
That whines about grammar while ignoring the statement.
SGU??? How about plotless, repetivie nonsenses!!….The only reason anyone would bring up the subject of sexist is because the storylines is so weak, viewers have to find something to talk about in reference to this loser.
That uses a word like “nonsenses”,
That whines about grammar while ignoring the statement.
[...] despite some vociferous defenses of the show from places like TV Overmind, I think that there’s a bit of truth to the criticisms, though I think the reasons behind [...]
Stargate Universe makes me ask, ‘What has happened to sci-fi?’.
As a boy I turned to sci-fi, (mainly books), to get away from the more traditional stories which contained boring things, (particularly to a young boy), like love, romance, relationships, etc.
Stargate Universe must be the worst example of how sci-fi has changed.
It seems that many of us are now asking, ‘When will it start?’
The story has been dragged out by repeated ‘ET phone home’ video sequences, sexual encounters, and similar dross: A potentially good story, wasted by bad storytelling.
Is it worth watching?
Not if it carries on like this. Although Robert Carlyle does make it more bearable.
Most people watching will be long time Stargate fans: Stargate Universe should test their loyalty.
Stargate Universe makes me ask, ‘What has happened to sci-fi?’.
As a boy I turned to sci-fi, (mainly books), to get away from the more traditional stories which contained boring things, (particularly to a young boy), like love, romance, relationships, etc.
Stargate Universe must be the worst example of how sci-fi has changed.
It seems that many of us are now asking, ‘When will it start?’
The story has been dragged out by repeated ‘ET phone home’ video sequences, sexual encounters, and similar dross: A potentially good story, wasted by bad storytelling.
Is it worth watching?
Not if it carries on like this. Although Robert Carlyle does make it more bearable.
Most people watching will be long time Stargate fans: Stargate Universe should test their loyalty.
This show has brought Stargate to such a low I actually though Eli was going to use that 'keno' recording flying ball thing to spy on Chloe and that pilot having sex (willing to bet it is a deleted scene).
Also why are they spending so much time recording dumb messages for posterity hoping someone will someday find it, when they have a communication device (or six) to talk directly to people back to Earth? Did I miss something?
This show has brought Stargate to such a low I actually though Eli was going to use that ‘keno’ recording flying ball thing to spy on Chloe and that pilot having sex (willing to bet it is a deleted scene).
Also why are they spending so much time recording dumb messages for posterity hoping someone will someday find it, when they have a communication device (or six) to talk directly to people back to Earth? Did I miss something?
Frankly if the show upsets the snarky, elitist posters of TWOP who always seem overly fixated on the quality of roles of females and homosexuals, if it ticks off the braindead Stargate nerds who think Stargate Atlantis represented great television, if it angers the pathetic fanboys who favor cool explosions and pointless action over character development (the kind of folks that made Transformers 2 a smash) then SFU must be doing something right. The series has its flaws but I am enjoying it more each week.
That's your definition of a show doing something right? Upsetting people on the internet? Wow, just slap a TROLL sticker on your forehead and be done with it.
I didn't realize that SFU was so crappy that even its fanboys have to troll the internet in a desperate attempt to be entertained. lol.
Frankly if the show upsets the snarky, elitist posters of TWOP who always seem overly fixated on the quality of roles of females and homosexuals, if it ticks off the braindead Stargate nerds who think Stargate Atlantis represented great television, if it angers the pathetic fanboys who favor cool explosions and pointless action over character development (the kind of folks that made Transformers 2 a smash) then SFU must be doing something right. The series has its flaws but I am enjoying it more each week.
That’s your definition of a show doing something right? Upsetting people on the internet? Wow, just slap a TROLL sticker on your forehead and be done with it.
I didn’t realize that SFU was so crappy that even its fanboys have to troll the internet in a desperate attempt to be entertained. lol.
[...] show also suffers from claims of sexism against the female characters (recent interview with several members of the SGU cast). We have to admit that the all the female characters are kept in the [...]
This show is SG-U meets whiny soap opera. Boring as heck. So far I havent seen anything sexist about this show. But then I wont be watching it anymore any way. I felt the scene where they were having sex in the closet really wasnt necessary except to increase male viewers.
This show is SG-U meets whiny soap opera. Boring as heck. So far I havent seen anything sexist about this show. But then I wont be watching it anymore any way. I felt the scene where they were having sex in the closet really wasnt necessary except to increase male viewers.