Out of the sack #77, Feb 02

Brenda55
E-mail
Thank you so very much for mentioning how upsetting Michael Shanks’s departure is to us fans. I just wanted to clarify anything that I might have said in a past e-mail that gave you the impression that I and other fans are on a mission to ‘make’ Michael Shanks return for another season. Michael Shanks has very good reasons for leaving the show. His character, like Christopher Judge’s, is being ignored. When the writing staff changed in early Season Four, the whole show’s formula changed for the worse. The show no longer became about a team and the situations they were in. It became about military action, special effects with no heart. The heart and soul of the team, Jack and Daniel’s friendship, character development were all replaced by a cheesy, colonel/major romance, a Mallozzi/ Mullie comedy show, and X-Files conspiracy plots. I respect Michael Shanks’s decision. I only want him to come back if the show recovers from its current path of destruction.

Cx: Once again we’ve been deluged with mail on this subject. Hopefully the intreview with Michael Shanks on page 30 has soothed some troubled brows.

Out of the sack #76, Jan 02

Kay Winspear
Can it be true?  Stargate SG-1 without Daniel Jackson?  I look forward to buying my Cult Times; it's packed full of information about my favourite TV programmes and stars, but the November issue brought bad news.  Michael Shanks is leaving Stargate SG-1.

Is it  only me that's confused?  As in your interview with Richard Dean Anderson, he said that Daniel Jackson is dying, and yet your interview with Brad Wright hinted that he may return.  I know we can rely on Cult Times to keep us posted in future issues as to Daniel's actual fate.

His character has been so important to the success of the show and will be greatly missed.  As much as I love Stargate SG-1 and everyone else in it, things will never be the same.

Needless to say, I do wish Michael Shanks every success in future projects, possibly the star of his own show, but hopefully he will return as Daniel Jackson and keep his fans happy.

Jeanne McClure
I would like to ask you to consider doing some articles on Stargate SG-1 and especially on Michael Shanks, who portrays Dr. Daniel Jackson. Mr. Shanks has a huge fan following that is very upset that he is not going to be a part of Season Six and we would love to know what his future career plans include.  There is also a lot of interest in the proposed SG-1 movie, which Mr. Shanks is supposed to be involved in as well as the other wonderful actors: Richard Dean Anderson, Amanda Tapping and Christopher Judge.  I appreciate your taking the time to listen.

Editorial Comment:
These are two of a flood of 'Bring Back Michael Shanks' letters, some of which were less threatening than others.  Thanks for all of them; but some were over 1,000 words in length and would have taken up a couple of pages of the magazine...

| top: go |

Letters #91, Mar 02

The Gate Opens
Why is it that to get a good episode of Stargate —the Stargate that has been sorely missed these last two seasons — we have to watch one of our favourite characters die?

Meridian [Michael Shanks’ departure episode] was one of the best written episodes that has come out of SC-i since season three. The team was there, we got to see them interacting and reacting to each other like the team they are, the plot was well thought out and executed but we had to watch Daniel die to have it.

I can’t help but think that if the past two seasons had been anything like this, it wouldn’t have been necessary for Michael Shanks to leave. We wouldn’t have lost Daniel, and the third of fans that are leaving the fandom — thus taking not only their talent, but their humour, passion and fire with them — wouldn’t be leaving.

I hope whoever thought it was necessary to change the formula of the show into something that most of us can’t stomach is giving themselves a big pat on the back.
S. Burkovich, via email.

More from the 'Gate
Thank you for the article in your recent edition of dreamwatch on Michael Shanks and his departure from Stargate SG-1 [dreamwatch #88]. I rely on magazine material to keep me in touch as I do not have access to the internet or a computer With that in mind, I wonder if you can advise me of a fan address so that I can follow the care. Michael Shanks?
Mrs. K. R. Price, Shelfleld, Walsall.

Probably the best place to keep up with Michael Shanks’ career is the www.savedanieljackson.com site which was set up recently following Shanks’ departure from the show.

[SDJ: The Save Daniel Jackson Campaign is managed and financed by fans of the character Daniel Jackson and the show "Stargate SG-1".  It is not in any way affiliated to or supported by the actor Michael Shanks.]

Letters #90, Feb 02

Following our exclusive interview with Michael Shanks in dreamwatch #88, our postbag has been packed with your responses, so you’ll find this subject dominating the Letters pages this month. Here are just a few of the letters we have received.

Angst!
Thanks for your wonderful interview with Michael Shanks. I don’t know how plugged in you guys are to the Stargate fandom, online or off, but we cannot get to grips with this at all.

There are many fans dissatisfied with much of season four, as you probably know, and the news that Michael Shanks was to leave during season five was a bombshell. Daniel Jackson has had very little to do in this season and the online fandom was getting restive. Michael Shanks’ comment that his character wasn’t considered important enough to warrant an upgrade is extraordinary: Daniel Jackson, the man who figured out the Stargate in two weeks where the best scientific minds (allegedly including Sam) had failed. Daniel also figured out the impact of stellar drift on the network of Stargates, something which eluded the astrophysicist. Anyone who hadnt seen the movie would be forgiven for thinking that Daniel was a minor character rather than the guy who saved the day and O’Neill. I was outraged...

The online fans are pissed off to start with because we launched into a full scale campaign to ensure Stargate got their damned sixth season. I can assure you that the vast majority of online fans who wrote, emailed and beseiged MGM. Showtime and the SciFi Channel are Daniel fans. We fought tooth and claw to be heard, but at no time was it mentioned we were fighting for a sixth season without our favourite character. How would that make you feel?

Why are ‘The Powers That Be’ closing the Stargate Daniel Jackson opened in favour of a pale imitation of The X-Files? The gate and the team was what made Stargate unique. They don’t seem to want that. We do. But we’re only the people who pay to see the show. The fans. It doesn’t seem like we count at all.
Alison Butler, via email.

Outrage!
Just received this issue thanks to a UK friend (do wish they were more readily available over here. we have nothing to compare to it). Wanted to say thank you for this insightful look into what seems to be a shameful situation on the part of MGM and/or the Stargate production staff. I do hope, should the worst happen. that you will keep giving us interviews and updates on Mr. Shanks. Can’t say I give a fig whether you carry on with Stargate articles or not if Mr. Shanks doesn’t return. It simply won’t be the show I love without him.

Again, thank you...
Judy A. Mason, USA.

Glad to hear that you’re receiving copies of dreamwatch, and we are looking into making it more easily available throughout the USA, so keep watching this space. As for Mr. Shanks, we’ll certainly keep in touch with him to check out what he’s doing over the coming months.

Shock!
I just wanted to thank you so much for doing this interview. It’s almost as though there’s a media blackout where SC-i is concerned here in the States, so I’m glad someone is paying attention to what the fans want/need to know.

Online fans are working on a campaign about the situation. but there are so many without access that can only find out about such happenings in the ‘biz’ through the entertainment media and I’m so glad you allowed fans to see this from Michael’s side.
Also, I've only heard about the interview from an online friend and was wondering if there was a way I could order a copy?
Joy McQueen. Greensburg, USA.

Thanks, Joy. You should be able to pick up your regular copies of dreamwatch from the following US stores: Barnes & Noble, B Dalton and Borders, as well as the specialist comic stores. Any problems, just drop us a line at dreamwetch @titanemail.com

| top: go |

Sci-File #253 @ Scifi.Com, online home of The Sci-Fi Channel, 26 Feb 02

Stargate SG-1 Fans Favor Shanks
Salon wrote an interesting article on Stargate SG-1. I had found this past fall's episodes very disappointing. I thought the characters had become caricatures of themselves, so I stopped watching. These obviously were the initial episodes written for the young male audience, but before the series killed off Daniel Jackson (the actor, Michael Shanks, who left the series in frustration over MGM's new direction for the series).

The SCI FI Channel really got ripped off. I agree with the fan who said that SCI FI should ask for its money back. They are not getting the demographic audience or the series premise of the original series (unless, of course, [Bonnie] Hammer at SCI FI was the one requesting they change the demographic audience).

If Hammer did agree with this new mediocre premise and boy-toy replacement of Michael Shanks, I am very disappointed in SCI FI. It's amazing how a studio's tinkering with a successful series can destroy a valuable product in the blink of an eye.

I am one of the women (with a lot of purchasing power) who watched and enjoyed every earlier episode of Stargate SG-1 as well as a lot of SCI-FI programming (other than the "live" psychic crap and those awful psychic commercials). Unless Stargate SG-1 returns to its original premise of visiting other worlds and brings back Michael Shanks as Daniel Jackson, the new episodes will not be watched by me and a lot of previously solid fans of the show. Send me some good news!
Chris Percival

Sci-File #252 @ Scifi.Com, online home of The Sci-Fi Channel, 19 Feb 02

Michael Shanks Must Be Saved
I have been sorely tempted to write this since seeing "Meridian" two weeks ago. However, since that message would have been unfit for view by the civilized I've waited until calming down.

It may not take much to guess the subject, as you have probably been receiving many similar contacts. This is in regards to the removal of Daniel from Stargate: SG-1. I am not misinformed and have read interviews with Michael Shanks, therefore I know that he didn't wish to leave and would be happy to return. I encourage you to exert whatever pressure you may to make this happen.

The simple fact is that SG-1 will not be half the show it is without [him]. I watch all the episodes and buy the merchandise and so consider myself to have a right to express my concerns over the matter. The unfortunate removal of Daniel Jackson from the show leaves me no doubt that I will no longer watch the show unless this decision is reversed.

If you would care to direct your attention to www.savedanieljackson.com you will see a list of messages relating the same idea. The level of uproar at this decision is considerable and unless someone comes to their senses Season Six of SG-1 will be a ratings disaster (there is no doubt it will be a story/character disaster without Danny anyway).

I hope the decision to remove Daniel will be reversed so that I may continue to watch one of my favorite shows.
Stephen Boyd

Sci-File #247 @ Scifi.Com, online home of The Sci-Fi Channel, 14 Jan 02

Michael Shanks' departure [from Stargate SG-1] is very upsetting news to fans. I am not on a mission to "make" Michael Shanks return for another season, but I would be lying if I said I didn't want him back. Michael Shanks has very good reasons for leaving the show. His character, like Christopher Judge's, is being ignored. When the writing staff changed in early Season 4, the whole show's formula changed for the worse. The show no longer became about a "team" and the situations they were in. It became about military action, special effects with "no heart." The heart and soul of the team, Jack and Daniel's friendship, mentally challenging story plots, team interaction, character development were all replaced by a cheesy, colonel/major romance, a Mallozzi/Mullie comedy show, dominating guest stars, and X-File(ish) conspiracy plots.

I respect Michael Shanks' decision. He is the most amazing and talented actor. He made Daniel Jackson such an incredible and likeable character. However, in all honesty and as hard as it is to say, I only want Michael Shanks to come back if the show recovers from its current path of lifelessness and destruction.
Cassandra Mahoney

Sci-File #246 @ Scifi.Com, online home of The Sci-Fi Channel, 07 Jan 02

Well, you said we could air a gripe about something going on in the world of scif-fi. This has to do with the recent departure of Michael Shanks from Stargate SG-1 as Dr. Daniel Jackson. In interviews, Mr. Shanks has stated he left because his character was not being utilized and that writers weren't listening to him about the direction of the character. I agree.

This is not to say I think the writers aren't talented people and I know that there are many people behind the scenes who want to have a say and have their fingers in the pot so to speak about how each storyline should be presented. However, I think that this does bring to light how the series itself has gone downhill over the past seasons and that their seems to be less stories written to appeal to the loyal since day one audience they already have and more being written in an attempt to woo certain other demographics (male 18-30).

It might be an excellent opportunity for us the fans to say get a clue about how much you are annoying and angering the very viewers who were the ones that put the show in the top spot to begin with and made it a success story ... and a big part of that success story was generated by Michael Shanks incredible performance as Dr. Daniel Jackson. The character is integral to the continuation of what the series Stargate SG-1 is all about, which is the team that was introduced to us and that we believed in as a viewer.

So, yes, I am disturbed by this recent turn of events and I ask those in charge of bringing the character back to do so ... but more than that, to restore the whole premise of Stargate SG-1 to its original creative and entertaining status like it was in the beginning.
Marla

Sci-File #245 @ Scifi.Com, online home of The Sci-Fi Channel, 03 Jan 02

Hopefully the amount of email and post coming to you, and the number of discussions starting up on message boards all over the Internet—MGM and the SCI FI Channel to name a couple—you now know how deep the feelings run regarding the loss of Michael Shanks from Stargate SG-1.

To split up the very team we watch for, to take Daniel from that team and think that we'll go on watching is frankly short-sighted. What makes Stargate so good, so fun, so watchable, is the dynamic between the four of them. Daniel can't be replaced.

We understand why Michael Shanks chose to leave. We stand by him, respect him for making this stance against the direction in which the series has been going; toward the political and away from the humanity and exploration it started off as. We, as intelligent fans, don't need some hidden political agenda or secret story arc to keep us. We ask only for the series we love to be kept in tact.

The possibilities of travelling to new planets, finding new aliens, new friends and enemies, new rituals and religions, new character direction are endless to an active imagination. Please don't let Stargate SG-1 turn into The X-Files all over again!

We've seen all that, and we might have enjoyed it then, but it's not why we watch Stargate, not why we love it.

If all Michael asked for was a redirection of the stories—a place on screen for his character—why wasn't this possible? Why isn't the most wonderful character, the character who has been there from that start and who captured our imaginations and hearts, worth a change of direction when it's a change that the fans—those who watch every week—also want?

And to think he can be replaced ... in the same episode ... by a character being introduced as Daniel passes over. ... That's an insult not only to the character of Daniel, to the team SG-1, but to Michael Shanks who portrayed Daniel so beautifully and to us. The fans.

This is a heartfelt plea that I know I'm not alone in sharing with you. Please, please take some notice of us. A wonderful, unique show is being lost here.

Thank you, and a very merry Christmas.
Maddy

| top: go |

Letters from #284, Mar 02

The SG-backlash
I have to respond to your jibe aimed at those fans of Stargate SG-1 protesting the loss of the character of Daniel Jackson from the show.  We are not 14-year-old fanboys watching Voyager because we think 'the borg chick's so hot' in her lycra suit.  Some of us, male and female, watch SF for more than just eye candy.  We like realistic characters, interesting plots and moral dilemmas.  MGM dismissed the importance of Daniel to Stargate SG-1, hoping to placate those of who love the character by promising us a 'handsom hunk' as a replacement.  How could you hope to replace a complex, three-dimensional and so very human character with just another pretty face?
Paula Sullivan via email

Thank you for publishing in issue #283 so many articulate and insightful letters commenting on the departure of Michael Shanks from Stargate SG1. What a disappointment then that you felt the need to add an outrageously sexist comment, dismissing fans' views as based merely on 'fancying' the actor.

It is clear from these and other letters, and from the show itself, that the viewers' attraction for Daniel Jackson goes beyond mere physical appeal, but is based on the intelligence and emotional complexity of the character, superbly portrayed by Michael Shanks. This, and Daniel's role as 'heart and soul' of the SGC, is what many fans will miss; they are not simply bemoaning the loss of a 'pretty face'. To suggest that this shallowness is all that female fans want, and consequently all Michael Shanks offers in the role, is insulting both to the fans and to the actor.
Carole Gordon
London

Editorial
We attempted to contact Gary Gillatt at his safehouse in Putney (oops, what a giveaway) for a comment but couldn't get through.  So in his absence, we can promise all you Michael Shanks fans a talk with the man himself sometime in the next few issues.

Letters from #283, Feb 02

Changing Stargate
You comments about change in Sci Fi shows (Starburst 282) were interesting and I find myself in broad agreement with them. However, your comparison between Stargate SG-1 and Star Trek misses the point. Yes, the Star Trek franchise has largely achieved its longevity and success through constant reinvention of itself, but the successful reinventions have always been radical ones, rather than piecemeal replacements and total changes of the premise. Star Trek was always based in space, after all!

This is the first element to the howls of protest amongst fans of SG-1: with the predominance of the conspiracy thread, the original premise of the show is being completely disregarded. I’m not one of those who hates this thread as a thread— in fact, I always felt that the glimpses of the political infighting behind the Stargate Programme was interesting and added an extra dimension to the events we saw on the screen. However, if I want to watch a show that is exclusively about politics and factional infighting, I can think of several things I would rather watch and which more to the point, do it much better. If I’m watching a show which vaunts itself as an intergalactic adventure, that’s precisely what I want to see for the majority of its airtime.

Also, one of the main attractions of all the Star Trek incarnations has been the team dynamic. I think there’s a lesson to be learned from the way the Original Series began to slump in terms of plots, ratings and characterisations when the original ensemble premise became the “big three’, and bombed when it finally became the “big me”.

The same holds true of Stargate SG-1: at its best, the chemistry between the members of SO-I was a joy to behold, and it’s very hard for me, as a fan, to see how this will be replicated with any other set of characters. What sort of character do you replace Daniel Jackson with? Another military type? Ho hum, Stargate has just become The Guns of Navarone. Another specialist in ancient cultures? If the writers can write for a new archaeologist, why didn’t they write for the one they had? A scientist? Got one of them already — and the current level of technobabble is just about at saturation point anyway if it’s not to hobble the plots.

No, I’m sorry, I can’t accept your apparent endorsement of change for change’s sake there is a big difference between wanting to “pickle it at the moment ot its perceived perfection” and not being willing to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Elaine Brown, by email

Missing the point
I think the editor has gotten the wrong idea as to the protest over Michael Shanks leaving Stargate SG-1. Change. I will agree, is a good thing. The problem is that the changes have not been changes for the better in my estimation.

From the beginning, SG-I has been a show about a group of individuals who came together despite their differences to form a strong bond in pursuit of their common goals. We admired them for doing it so well and becoming friends in the process. If one watches Sci-Fi for the special effects, action, et at then the characters are simply vehicles, a means to an end. But for others it us the journey is far more important than the goal and we follow the characters as much as the journey itself.

A key element to the success of the SO-I team was the way in which each strength and weakness was counterbalanced by the others. This balance was achieved and held for three seasons. And then from the start of Season Four the balance slipped. The things that had made the team so strong were undermined and, with some notable exceptions, were never fully retrieved. There was just four people on the screen who bore the faces and names of people we knew, as it they’d replaced with pod people, evil clones, or look-alikes from Holly-weird between seasons, Those weren’t the people we knew. In some very important ways this is no longer the show I knew and loved. Whatever the problem is, something changed, and in the words of Daniel Jackson, I’m not so sure we can ‘get it back’.
Judy A. Mason, USA

In your answer to worried Stargate fans you implied change was good for a show and compared this to Picard becoming Locutus in Star Trek: TNG’s The Best of Both Worlds. I’m sorry but I beg to differ. As far as I am aware after The Best of Both Worlds the seven major stars of TNG continued with the exploration of the universe. The changes on Stargate were as it the Enterprise were grounded for the majority of the episodes and the show became about 24th century Earth politics, with a doomed romance for Dr Crusher in every episode, until Brent Spiner became sick of having nothing to do and left the show. The naive, curious Daniel Jackson is a fan favourite in much in the same way as Data, and I hope they bring him back for as many guest slots as possible, as without him the show loses all that sets it apart from the crowd.
Sarah Greenhalgh, by email

Mindless attacks?
I’m writing this, as a member of the “subgenus” of fans (one whose letter you printed after your mindless attack on us) of Stargate SG-1.

Quoted from Starburst 282: ‘Its difficult to live one’s life as a dedicated fan of a TV series. Such is your love of the programme, you almost want to pickle it at the moment of it’s perceived perfection.” That isn’t what we want at all. That you’ve missed the point of the emails you’ve received amazes me What we want is for the show to be given the chance to grow with the characters we’ve spent five years getting to know and love.

You compared this to Doctor Who, but we’re not talking about anything like that here! We’re talking about the Powers That Be letting a main characterleave simply because they don’t deem him important enough to make a change to the direction of the show based around his character and that of the man whose life he saved in the original film.

We’re not fighting to kill anything. We’re fighting to save a series we know and love. Not ‘pickle’ it for presentation, not hold it back or end its run. We’re campaigning to raise awareness of Daniel being lost to a short sighted production team who, although they won’t admit it, do know what they’re risking by letting their most popular character go.

Finally, thank you for printing the letters you have done, and for raising awareness of our plight.
Maddy Hughes, Bristol

I really haven’t been comfortable with the new direction that Stargate SG-1 has been taking. Although I am saddened beyond words at the departure ct Michael Shanks, I can’t say l am overly surprised, as Stargate SG-1 has basically turned into a show about two people, Jack O’Neill and Samantha Carter. Although I adore Jack O’Neill and can’t get enough of him, I think Samantha Carter, the only female has been overdone and the character herself has become unrealistic. I really preferred the show when it was all about team work. Every member of Stargate SG-1I should have something to do. This has become a show without a heart and soul, and I think that bringing in this new “replacement” for Daniel Jackson is even making the upsetting situation worse. It is like they’re pouring salt on an open wound.
Anonymous, Missouri

I would like to see a sixth season of Stargate SG-1 to be about the team, with each member used and used wisely. I think it is a betrayal of the fans and Michael Shanks to even consider a ‘replacement’. They had a winning, working team, why are they destroying it?
Lizzie Ballard, Indiana

Now, everyone. All this fuss about Michael Shanks.., Are you sure it’s not just because you fancy him?

Letters from #282, Jan 02

Gary Gillat, editor of Starburst: editorial: When fans attack!
On these Feedback pages this month you'll see spot some charged missives from a certain sub-genus of Stargate fans, maddened by the departure of actor Michael Shanks from the wormhole-wandering show, and a new focus on Earth-based plots.

These are a sample from the dozen-or-so letters we've received seemingly as part of a concerted campaign to raise awareness of, and avert, these changes.

It's difficult to live one's life as a fan of a dedicated fan of a TV series. Such is your love of your programme, you almost want to pickle it at the moment of its perceived perfection. There are thousands who would say Star Trek: The Next Generation went downhill after The Best of Both Worlds, or claim that Buffy has never been nearly so good since she graduated from school. But what was so exciting about both those Season Three climaxes was their ability to shake the cosy predictability of the series, I  respectively throwing Picard to the Borg or flattening Sunnydale High with 100 tons of puff adder. It's the confidence felt by both shows to surprise, to shock, to change that made them so popular with so many; but once that fanbase solidifies, that same freedom to change becomes the most feared thing of all.

It's no coincidence that the longest-running Sci-Fi shows are those that embrace
change with the greatest alacrity. It was the life-blood of Doctor Who, and even though each new generation of fans would throw up their hands in alarm at each new lead actor or each tectonic shift from comedy to straight-faced drama and back again, there would be as many new enthusiasts flocking to the programme just because of those changes.

Only when Doctor Who stayed the same for any period of time, in what would be its final seasons, did it suffer. Similarly Star Trek survives by re-casting itself very few years. When it rested on its laurels with Voyager, audiences scarpered.

So before you campaign for Stargate, or any series, not to change, perhaps stop and think for a moment. You may actually be fighting to kill that which you love the most.

Gary Gillatt, editor

Stargate's loss
I would like to ask that you consider doing some articles on Stargate SG-1 and especially on Michael Shanks who portrays Dr Daniel Jackson. Mr Shanks has a huge fan following that is very upset that he is not going to be a part of season six and we would love to know what his future career plans include. There is also a lot of interest in the proposed SG-1 movie, which Mr Shanks is supposed to be involved in as well as the other wonderful actors.
Jeanne McClure, by email

A little Christmas wish, in verse, concerning Michael Shanks' departure from Stargate SG-1.

"All I want for Christmas is a big, round ring. A big round ring with some symbols in.
"All I want for Christmas is our Daniel back. Our Daniel back, with his character intact.
"All I want for Christmas is some writers who know what to do with the show they grew.
"All I want for Christmas is a plotline where the team remain altogether out there.
"All I want for Christmas is O'Neill to say Danny saved our butts, we need him come what may.
"All I want for Christmas is our SG 1 back.... So they can save us when the Goa'uld attack!"

- All or nothing - Stargate won't be the same without the team, Jack, Sam, Teal'c and most importantly, Daniel Jackson. He's their moral conscience. He's their friend and comrade. They need him. And so do we, the fans.
Maddy Hughes, Bristol

Starburst asks: "Is the loss of Michael Shanks really the death knell for Stargate SG-1?"

| top: go |

Letters #022, Mar 02

A truly unique character
I completely agree with Alison Butler.  My favourite episodes are also the ones which Daniel Jackson takes centre stage, such as Holiday, Legacy, Crystal Skull, The First Ones, The Curse, Absolute Power and especially Forever In A Day.  I may very well not watch Season Six or buy the DVD (I have all the ones released so far).  Michael Shanks adds so much to the show.  I'm sure that he will go on and achieve much in his career and Stargate Sg-1 will be duller without his star quality.  His character seems to be unique in SF/fantasy, in questioning the morality and meaning of what the other characters do.  I think the production team will be short-sighted not to get Michael shanks back on board as soon as possible.
Jennifer Robinson
Herts

The heart and soul
Alison put it far more eloquently than I ever could, about how I feel as a fan of Stargate Sg-1, with regard to the departure of Michael Shanks.  Daniel Jackson is the "Heart and soul" (quote from Brad Wright executive producer) of SG-1, both as a single character and as part of the team.  Without him, as we've seen in far too many recent episodes in which his role has been diminished, Stargate looks like any other TV programme.  It loses, for me at least, that magical spark that makes you look forward to each episode.  When he leaves, so will I.
S A Greenhaigh
Notts.

Daniel IS Stargate
Stargate Sg-1 without Daniel Jackson is just not on.  How can the producers be so naive as to think that the fianl series will be acceptable to true fans with a new character.  Daniel is Stargate.  It was he that opened the gate, and it was he and Jack who led the first mission through it.  Since the death of his wife and a steering away from the mythical side of the storylines, there has been little for Daniel to do.  However with the introduction of Osiris and a new system lord, Anubis, there is plenty of scope for Daniel to resume his rightful place centrestage.  In season four and five, Daniel has been sidelined and underused, which is a mistake.  Episodes in which he has not appeared always have the feeling that something is missing.  The relationship between Jack and Daniel still has many
unresolved issues and many fans would like to see how the friendship which is developing between them grows.  Jack once described Daniel as the voice and conscience of SG-1, but now the producers and writers want us to believe that the team will carry on "Business as usual" without him.  A new team member at this stage is not a good move.  The final series of this excellent show MUST be with the original team intact.  To tell us that the door is open for Daniel to make guest appearances or be in a spin-off movie demonstrates that  perhaps someone has realised that what a mistake it would be to let him go.

I do admire Michael Shanks' decision to quit ather than compromise Daniel's integrity.  The production team must, however, have a rethink and find a way to satisfy Michael Shanks' very realconcerns with the direction the show has taken and the impact it has had on Daniel's character.  Every effort must be made to retain the fine actor in the show.  We want no substitutes.  We want Daniel Jackson back in the family where he belongs.  I just hope that the powers that be will show some sense and that Stargate SG-1 goes out
with a bang rather than a whimper.
Lunar,
Croydon.

STARGAZER!
'Letter of the month' #022, Jan 02
I wanted to say how much we fans admire Michael Shanks.  I know it must have been a terribly difficult decision for him to leave Stargate SG-1 in its last year.  I  hope you realise how much support there is for Michael among the fans of Stargate SG-1.

Like you, I believed that Stargate was about Jack and Daniel, and that their friendship was the heart of the show.  I find it inconceivable that after five years of deepening friendship, intimacy, trust and respect the production team (TPTB) would have us believe that the Jack who was ready to retire over Daniel's supposed death in 'Fire and Water' feels so little for Daniel that he would go on as if nothing had happened.  Michael Shanks had to fight for the emotional impact of Daniel's loss to be recognised at all.  Many of the fans feel betrayed because we fought so hard and so long to secure Season Six.  The vast majority of those fans value Michael Shanks and Daniel Jackson. We discuss the show endlessly, analyse episodes, characterisation and characters arcs, drama, plotting, science...  everything.  We truly love the character of Daniel Jackson.

We are angered by the way that Michael Shanks and Daniel Jackson have been treated, and we have lost confidence in TPTB.  We would not have fought for renewal if we knew the truth, and we feel manipulated and betrayed, particularly in the way that Brad Wright sought to appease fans by hinting that Daniel would return in Season Six for guest appearances.  He and Richard Dean Anderson have embarked on damage control, knowing full well that Daniel Jackson is THE most popular character.

Michael Shanks left because of his integrity and his belief that the show was being driven in the wrong direction.  It is not what he and the fans want.  He is entirely correct about that.  Only a few hundred fans out of the entire online community are looking forward to Season Six.  A lot of fans will leave the show with Michael Shanks.  Shanks alone understands what we fans want from the show, and sadly he has been driven out because the production team will not listen.

There is no Stargate without Daniel.  It is he who brings magic to the show, and life to the interactions of the team.  Episodes without him are dull, lifeless and empty.  The family loses cohesion and we lose interest.  Daniel is the only character who can carry a solo episode and without him, the other three characters cannot carry an episode between them.

Michael Shanks brought the magic to Stargate.  His talent and honesty in the role he plays are truly inspiring.  His portrayal challenges us intellectually and ethically, engages us emotionally, and we can only thank him for what he has given us.  It is inadequate.  He makes it so right and so real to identify with and love Daniel.
Alison Butler

Editorial comment:
Well, Alison, you can't argue with that.  Or can you?  What do other readers think?

| top: go |

Letters from #148, Feb 02

Header Why did he have to go?
S. Burkovich - email
Why is it, that to get a good episode of Stargate, the Stargate that has been sorely missed these last two seasons, we have to watch one of our favourite characters die? I just don't understand.

Meridian was one of the best written SG-1 since Season Three. The team was there; we got to see them interacting with each other like the team they are, the plot was well thought out and executed... But we had to watch Daniel die to have it.

I can't help but think that if the past two seasons had been anything like this, it wouldn't have been necessary for Michael Shanks to leave. We wouldn't have lost Daniel, and the fans that are leaving the fandom wouldn't be leaving.

I hope whoever thought it was necessary to change the formula of the show into something that most of us can't stomach is giving themselves a big pat on the back.

Letters from #147, Jan 02

The Shanks Fan Club
Jeanne McClure
I would like to thank you for your articles on Stargate SG-1 and especially on Michael Shanks who portrays Dr. Daniel Jackson.  Mr. Shanks has a huge fan following that is very upset that he is not going to be a part of Season Six and we would love to know what his future career plans include.

Rachel Beckfield
I have to say I was very pleased with your interview with Michael Shanks in the last issue of TV Zone.  However, unlike many Stargate SG-1 fans, I am not particularly upset that he is leaving the series, as I think it will be a good opportunity to give the other characters more attention.  Besides, it's always best to move on when your fans are clamouring for more.

Ann-Marie Miller
After reading Shanks' comments in TV Zone issue #146 about Stargate SG-1 I have felt compelled to write in to defend the show.  While I did enjoy Devlin and Emmrich's film I have to say I enjoy the show more.  The producers have created a wonderful ensemble and told good Science Fiction stories some of which are still true to the original premise.  As an avid fan of the show I am saddened to hear of Michael Shanks' departure..  I want to wish him luck and I look forward to meeting him at the SG-4 convention in February.

| top: go |

Xpose #65, Feb 02

SG-1: Caught in the crossfire

Phoenix Emrys
By email
I’m taking a moment to respond to the question you posed in your recent editorial comments about the departure of Michael Shanks from Stargate SG-1. How do the ‘mass’ of Stargate fans feel about it?

You raised some interesting speculation in the editorial — are the ‘dozens’ of letters you’ve already received (a lot of which you stated were duplicates — so what you’re also saying is the same ten people wrote an awful lot of letters?) really the way the majority of the fandom feels, or just this handful of vocal and prolific people?

I can’t speak for anyone but me, but how do I feel? I’m pretty broken up about the departure of Daniel Jackson but I’m even more upset about the reason why Michael Shanks took the drastic step of deciding not to participate in the sixth season of the show he loved.

You see, he’s not just an actor doing a job, but he’s a ‘fan’ of the show too. That much was obvious to people who’ve been fortunate to meet the man in person and were extremely impressed not only with his enthusiasm and fondness for the show — but his knowledge of it as well. He knew before any of us what we were going to be seeing in season five, and that’s what he based his decision to leave on — an entire season of episodes which departed so far from the spirit of the show’s original premise that it was no longer the show he signed on for.

As the final batch of new episodes for the fifth season began to air with Last Stand we are finally getting to see exactly why he left, and he was absolutely right. What’s onscreen right now is not the show we signed on for either.  What should this show be all about, you ask?

I don’t know, what has it always been about? What was it about in the first three seasons, when it attracted a huge following of enthusiastic fans? It was about four unique and fascinating people who were the members of a closely knit, deeply interpersonally loyal ‘family’ team of explorers who went where no Tau’ri has gone before. Using a Stargate instead of a starship, perhaps, but that same magical spirit of optimism, excitement and adventure which first captured our imaginations over thirty years ago.

I’m old enough to have watched Star Trek in its original run on NBC, and I’ve watched everything — and I mean everything — sci-fi since. And of all the movies and series I’ve watched during that interval since an 11-year old girl first saw Kirk and Spock standing on the bridge of the Enterprise, nothing has ever moved me quite as profoundly.

That is, until I sat in my living room in 1995 watching a movie called Stargate. The series worked for exactly the same reason as Star Trek. The ‘family’ chemistry
between the ensemble cast.  Peaceful exploring, the team taking us with them on inspiring and incredible adventures that always aimed at the higher, better ‘meaning of life’ stuff. That’s what this show used to be about. Before the fourth season and all the ‘changes’ changed all of that. Not for the better.

Upset
Amanda Thorpe
Kent, UK
After reading the letters about Stargate in the last Xpose, I felt I had to add my voice to the issue as well. I was really upset when I found out that Michael Shanks was leaving the show — although he isn’t my favourite character (Jack is!!!), the show will still never be the same. The point everyone was making about how a lot of people watch the show because of the team and their reactions with each other is true. It’s the team dynamic that makes Stargate so great.

The episodes about the NID are okay once in a while to get a broader look at what the Stargate program may actually be like, but that is not what the show is about. Have the writers really run out of new worlds they can send the team to, in which Daniel could actually be involved? The main thing the show should look at is going to different worlds and exploring different civilisations.

I understand that actors leave, and Michael Shanks has the right to move on, but everybody protesting is just highlighting how unhappy the fans are becoming with

Stargate SG-1 and its characters are the property of Stargate (II) Productions, SCI FI Channel, Showtime/Viacom, MGM/UA, Double Secret Productions, and Gekko Productions. All blog entries represent the opinion of the poster. All editorials represent the opinion of the author. All linked content represents the opinion of the linked site's webmaster. Copyright on all articles/editorials/blog entries belongs to the original author. Offer void where prohibited. Please remain seated while the aircraft is in motion. Warning: Coffee will be hot. A moose once bit my sister.