Save Daniel Jackson | Different Strokes

After months of interviews and comments from both 'sides', the truth has gradually emerged. Michael Shanks did choose to leave Stargate, but his choice was in a way made for him, because the refusal of the producers to write Daniel equally with the other characters made his position untenable. Effectively, Dr. Daniel Jackson, the man who opened the Stargate, got dumped. Written out before our eyes, beginning in Season Four, and blindingly obvious in Season Five, the season of revisionist 'who was that guy with the glasses?' history.

Well, according to Executive Producer Brad Wright, Daniel's 'arc' was over. (He said this. It's in print. In his interview "Star Fate" with Thomasina Gibson in SciFi Magazine. He actually says, "However, Daniel’s arc was over." Mr. Brad Wright, Executive Producer of Stargate SG-1, not to be confused with an ordinary fan or a member of the SDJ campaign. Pretty sure that Thomasina Gibson checked.)

More than that, we're to believe that it was Sam Carter who made the Stargate program viable (48 Hours, Season Five). Yeahsureyoubetcha. Anyone who saw the original movie will disagree with that. In fact, anyone who saw the pilot will disagree with that. Daniel found the cartouche of gate addresses that made many of the stories possible and figured out that astrophysics stuff about Doppler Shift that had eluded the astrophyicist for a year. Sam then ran with Daniel's theory and concluded she needed to take into account the expanding universe model.

You tell us that the show needed a character to bring freshness and wonder to it. You insult us. One of Daniel Jackson's most enduring and admired qualities was his awe and wonder at the universe, his passion and occasional childlike excitement. It was a wonder you robbed him of, because you stopped the peaceful exploration, the discovery of new worlds and cultures. Don't tell us the show and the team have lost what you in fact took from us.

Why ignore what we know to be true? Why the attempts to show that Jack and Daniel weren't friends, that at best Jack 'came to admire' Daniel, that he was pragmatic to the point of brutality about shrugging off Daniel's death and moving on? The friendship we knew passed the stage of 'admiration' in the Stargate movie when Daniel selflessly gave his life for Jack. Suddenly, this shared history, one of the truly unique and original parts of Stargate, meant nothing and was erased as if it never existed.

Why was the understanding and compromise the two men were able to reach and which fueled much of the drama now beyond them? Where did that line about Jack disagreeing with most of the things Daniel said but he tried to resist the urge to shove Daniel through the wall come from? The Jack we always knew admired all (was in fact amazed by) Daniel's talents (Brief Candle, Season One) and believed simply that Daniel was always right (A Hundred Days, Season Three). What happened to Jack's faith in Daniel?

What happened to the whole friendship thing Jack and Daniel were working on? It wasn't just a figment of five years of series' history and our imaginations, no matter how you wrote in denial of it. There are encouraging signs that in "Abyss" some of this will be addressed, but if the friendship had been written as it should have been, with the depth and complexity we've loved for years, there would have been no justification for Daniel to ascend.

Why was Daniel dumped? Why? His popularity is truly phenomenal, he's not just liked, he's loved, admired...he engages the audience, connects us to the show and the adventures of the team. Daniel was your and our everyman, our hero. We weren't done with Daniel. Why were you?

Why, exactly, were you all in such a damned hurry to be rid of Daniel Jackson and actor Michael Shanks? Michael Shanks said in a radio interview that SciFi Channel wanted a fresh perspective, though no one had reported this interview anywhere. SciFi Channel went to extraordinary lengths, issuing a statement denying responsibility for cast changes. Brad Wright then said in interview that he was supplying the fresh new perspective for his new broadcaster, SciFi Channel. Corin Nemec said his casting was down to Hank Cohen at MGM, that the producers were later brought on board.

Why? Why trade in Michael Shanks, the one actor whose popularity almost equals that of the other three ensemble cast members together, surely a concern when you're looking to build a franchise? Why reward five years of commitment and extraordinary ratings-winning performances by Michael Shanks with a refusal to address his concerns about no longer being written equally with the other characters? Especially after two years of increasing focus on Sam Carter? Why show Michael Shanks the door as a response to his unhappiness?

It shouldn't have been news. He hasn't been reported saying anything your audience hasn't been telling you loudly for two years, anything the thousands and thousands of fans writing and calling now are telling you. Why ignore Michael Shanks' concerns and those of your audience in favour of the Exec Producer's creative vision, which has consistently shed viewers, over one quarter bailing within the first seven episodes of Season Four airing on Showtime? Why continue to do what you're doing wrong, harder?

What is so terrific about Jonas Quinn he's worth losing Daniel Jackson for? Worth making a series regular and a member of SG-1 when his initial impact on the audience was widespread dislike and ridicule? Why is Jonas worthy of billing over Sam and Teal'c at the MGM Official Stargate website? And in TV Guide, over Jack? What have we traded our beloved archaeologist and linguist for? Our peaceful explorer, whose instinct is to communicate, whose empathy, passion and compassion have enthralled us? His loyalty and heroism made our own more possible and real to us, and even this connection between audience and character was publicly attacked by a writer on the show.

First impressions last, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Wright and Ms. Hammer. The instinctive actions of a man count. You insult your audience be replacing Daniel Jackson with the man who cowered abjectly while Daniel gave his life, who did nothing to help Daniel, whose whole character is the antithesis of Daniel, no matter which of Daniel's characteristics you try to graft onto him because you need Daniel and the role he fulfilled. An alien cannot be our everyman, our connection. You can't replace compassion and courage with cowardice? Seeking after truth with convenient lies. The study and passion of half a life with metahuman super-powers. Sloppy, cliched characterisation is not a replacement for dimensionality. You can't replace an ethical man with an ethicist, whose conduct is not ethical.

You can't re-write Jonas Quinn's character and history to make him more palatable to your audience. Like Dr. Daniel Jackson, like Col. Jack O'Neill, like Capt. Sam Carter and Teal'c, Jonas had his chance to make an impression. You cannot undo that. Jonas had his chance like our team members and it was you who blew it, not actor Corin Nemec. "Meridian" writer Robert C. Cooper did one hell of a job making this character unlikeable and untenable as any kind of series regular, let alone pin a franchise on. He wrote Jonas as the very antithesis of Daniel. You will lose viewers, who might otherwise have stayed with the show without Daniel, because of your insistence on including Jonas.

Why this determined effort to make a patently unwilling audience accept Jonas Quinn in place of Daniel Jackson? Why risk the viability of the franchise? You can't sell a product your consumers won't buy.

"I felt a lot of the time the character was becoming a bit of an anchor dragging behind the show and - ah - was holding it up a little bit. Another character could probably serve it in the direction that it was going. If you haven't seen the fifth season then you probably don't know what I'm talking about, but there is a certain - ah - 'military element' - um - that is taking hold of the show, meaning that we're going off in a pseudo X-Filesy kind of direction some of the time that was explored in the fourth season. And I think the best way to put it is the character wasn't being - as well as it - it wasn't comfortable for him, he was not being allowed to slip into that groove comfortably. And I felt that - if that effort wasn't going to be made then it was time for me to move on."

"They do have a character that is stepping in to replace me, um...They've got a guy when I - the episode that I finished, they had a fellow stepping in who - um - he was a very nice guy and I knew he had a tough job ahead of him so I wished him luck. He's only there on trial basis right now, so I don't know what's going to happen with 'that' particular character, or if they're gonna keep him..." -- Michael Shanks, Best of Both Worlds Convention, Sep. 01.

"I think you can have that problem of writing a character into a corner, but at the same time you have the ability to bust him out of that corner. After all, with the character of Carter they managed to cross the 'mythical boundaries' with complete frivolity, saying 'We'll make her an astrophysicist, we'll make her a Captain and eventually a Major in the US air force. We'll make her a kick arse martial artist and an ace shot, and a field medic and an expert in technologies - not just knowing the basic principles of science, but understanding the technologies as well - and then she gets penetrated by a Goa'uld so now she has their inherited abilities! It's like 'Wow, she should have her own series!'"

"They seemed to do that pretty freely with that character, so I really didn't see how it would be too much of a stretch to find some justification for giving Daniel some added aspects. It would only be a matter of putting thought to idea and then pen to paper. But it just wasn't important enough to the writers. That wasn't for lack of me speaking out, saying 'Hey, I'm not doing nothing, I'm not active in this script.' Sometimes efforts were made, but more often than not they weren't and so after a while I knew that no matter how much jumping up and down I did it wasn't going to happen." -- Michael Shanks, Starburst #286, May 02

"It seems strange to me that a company which is so interested in forming a franchise, with a spin-off show and a film to come, could fail to satisfy one of it's main characters, and hold the door for him to re-appear. Is that good business sense? I don't think so. It's not that I'm desperate to come back, but their response was, 'You want to go? Oh, well, there's the door, don't forget to close it on your way out.' That doesn't seem very smart business sense to me. I could understand if it was just the last year of the show, end of discussion, but they're talking about a feature film and a spin-off franchise after that so to alienate their audience? It shows their complete disrespect to the character of Daniel Jackson and to me as an actor, it show that they don't seem to think he was that important to the show. But that was something which was already reflected in the writing, so there was nothing shocking to me about that."

"But it's again a reflection of the corporation's attitudes towards the characters. 'Well, we'll just get another guy who's six feet tall and of fair appearance to play this sort of character.'" -- Michael Shanks, Starburst #286, May 02

"I thought there would be a nice symmetry," Wright says, "if we would introduce the character that would ultimately replace Daniel Jackson on the SG-1 team in the episode that Daniel departed from. And it's not just because it was one in the door, one out the door, but because, in fact, Jonas has something to prove."

"He feels slightly responsible for Daniel's ascension, and feels he should do something to continue Daniel's work. There's symmetry in that sense as well." -- Brad Wright, Zap2It, 22 Feb 02

“It’s not an easy thing to just say goodbye to a character that in many ways was the heart and soul of your series. Rick (Dean Anderson} is the name above the title, but Michael Shanks’ character of Daniel carried the morality of Stargate, and that is something we will simply struggle to replace. However, Daniel’s arc was over."

"The new character is introduced in the episode entitled ‘Meridian’,” he begins. “I thought it would be a nice symmetry if we met the new character in the same episode in which Daniel leaves.” The executive producer did confess re the actor replacing Michael Shanks, Corin Nemec, “He is a big name. People are going to recognize him straightaway. He is very funny. He is very good and I really like him. The one thing he is going to bring to the screen is an enthusiasm and an ‘I’ve never seen this before and this is all new to me’ feel which I think is important for a lot of reasons.”

"First and foremost, Wright suggests. `The Sci Fi Channel is our new broadcaster, and we'll have a whole lot of new viewers, so our new guy is going to provide an enthusiasm and a newness to the team that the new viewers deserve. Nobody wants to tune in to a show for the first time and see a bunch of characters going through the Stargate where every one of them is in `been there, seen that' mode. I understand and respect our regular actors' decisions to act that way because it makes sense. This is their job and they have been doing it for five years. However, the new guy will give a freshness. He will deliver a fresh approach to how we look at every situation.' " -- Brad Wright, SciFi Magazine, April 02.

Brad Wright:
We're halfway through production of the first two part episode. I think Corin Nemic as Jonas is going to be great as SG-1's newest team member. I know for many fans he won't replace Michael, but as I said before, we're doing our best, he's doing his best, and I know it will be entertaining."

annwortham:
Brad, have you seen some of the reaction to Jonas from fans who have seen Meridian? He isn't very well liked.

khek1:
I think you're in for a rude awakening. What will you do if "Michael's fans" are proven to be right?

Brad Wright:
That may be so! But I doubt it. Our ratings in season 4 in syndication have been as high as they have ever been.

stargate_heart_soul:
Mr. Wright, have you even looked around? No one has to be 'devoted' to Michael to not like the idea of a coward, liar and thief suddenly merrily romping along with the friends of a man who he allowed to die without trying to aid in any way.

Brad Wright:
You must be one of the people who won't be watching the show anymore. And it's a shame you won't find out what a great character Jonas is becoming.
-- Brad Wright, Lycos Chat, 28 Feb 02.

Joe Mallozzi:
His name is Jonas and, with five episodes in the works, he's in all of them... Well, he'll be introduced in Meridian which, I understand, will be aired next week in the UK. I'll probably discuss him more in detail then, but I will reveal that "he isn't from around here". I find him to be a very charismatic leader, someone you can't help liking. -- SJHW Chat with Joe Mallozzi, 26 Jan 02.

From Cynthia Morgan:
1. How important will the role of Jonas be, and will the character also have an important place in any future Stargate movie?

Joe Mallozzi:
Yes, Jonas will play a very important role in the show and the movie. Just how important remains to be seen.

3. How will the new character, Jonas Quinn, expand the storylines that will be shown in season six? Will we be seeing any episodes after season five's "Meridian" that will explore his background and placement on SG-1?

Joe Mallozzi:
As of matter of fact – yes. Paul and I are presently writing "Shadow Play" which will deal with Jonas's return to his home planet. Speaking of Jonas...

A lot of criticism has been leveled against the character and, although many of the fans doing the criticizing claim they're reacting to "the character", I think a lot of it stems from resentment over Daniel's departure. They argue Jonas is a) a coward, b) a traitor, c) a thief, and d) a liar. Well, for starters, no he didn't grab Daniel's gun, blow out the window, jump in and sacrifice himself in Meridian but I would hardly call "not sacrificing yourself" a cowardly act. Daniel performed an incredibly courageous act, but Jonas's reaction was very human given the circumstances. He froze. He didn't have the benefit of the many years of experience in life or death situations that Daniel possessed. I wonder how many of Jonas's critics would have reacted differently if they were in his shoes? Secondly – a traitor? He left the life he knew because he was disillusioned with his superiors, realizing he could do more good for his newfound friends AND his home world, by joining the SGC. Sound familiar? Yes, technically, Jonas is a traitor, just like Teal'c, the //shol'va.//. Jonas is a traitor to an oppressive government in the same way Teal'c is a traitor to the oppressive goa'uld. Thirdly, Jonas is considered a thief (for taking some of the naquadria through the gate with him and delivering it to the SGC). Yes, he delivered the naquadria to the SGC – with the understanding that whatever advancements resulted would be shared with his home nation. He also ensured that the naquadria would be used for a better cause – the defense technology that may one day save Earth from a Goa'uld attack. Fourthly – yes, he participated in the cover-up because, sizing up the situation, he believed that the success of the Naquadria Project and the millions of lives it could save outweighed the consequences of his actions. However, it was after talking to O'Neill that he reconsidered his actions and went to the government – where he realized his mistake.

Bottom line: A coward? No. A traitor, a thief, and a liar – technically, yes – but he was motivated by concern for his people and the belief that he was doing the right thing. Compare this with Teal'c who slaughtered countless innocents while in Apophis' service. The critics have no problem dismissing Teal'c's past transgressions but are unwilling to give Jonas a chance even though his offenses pale in comparison. Sounds like a bit of double-standard to me.
-- Q&A with Joe Mallozzi by SamandJack, DanielFreeZone and GateWorld, 24 Mar 02.

The Star-Spanning Adventure Series Comes to SCI FI
Friday, June 7, at 9PM ET/PT

STARGATE SG-1, the popular series based on the hit film Stargate, joins SCI FI's all-original Friday-night lineup for its sixth and most ambitious season.

Richard Dean Anderson stars as Air Force Colonel Jack O'Neill, the tough, sharp-witted leader of a team of explorers who venture through the Stargate, an ancient portal allowing instantaneous travel across the galaxy. With second-in-command Major Samantha Carter (Amanda Tapping), wise alien warrior Teal'c (Christopher Judge) and alien dignitary Jonas Quinn (new cast-member Corin Nemec) — a scholar-adventurer with an encyclopedic mind — O'Neill explores the universe, continually searching for ways to keep Earth safe now that the Stargate has made it part of an interstellar community.

Don S. Davis returns as Air Force General George Hammond, Commander of the Stargate initiative, with Teryl Rothery as Major Janet Fraiser, M.D.

Richard Dean Anderson — Col. Jonathan "Jack" O'Neill
Corin Nemec — as Jonas Quinn
Amanda Tapping — as Maj. Samantha Carter
Christopher Judge — as Teal'c
Don S. Davis — as Gen. George Hammond
Teryl Rothery — as Dr. Janet Fraiser

After losing his son to a tragic accident, O'Neill loses his will to live. Only when his former commander puts him in charge of SG-1 does he regain his passion for life. Heck, he doesn't even mind saving the world anymore.

The hottest astro-physics genius on television, Carter is a lethal combination of scientific knowledge and military training. Think of her as a female Rambo who knows the square root of pi.

Member of an lien species, Teal'c joined SG-1 to defeat the Goa'uld, an evil alien race. If you cross his path, be sure to ask nicely.

A leader from another planet, Quinn finds himself at the center of the action while visiting Earth and is quickly made a part of SG-1. And he wouldn't have it any other way.

The commander of the SGC and all SG units, he is a hardened military leader and a brave and wise man who is willing to do whatever is necessary to defend the interests of his country and all humanity. Think George S. Patton, only tougher.

Following a five-year run on Showtime, the science-fiction-adventure series relocates to the Sci Fi Channel for its sixth season, with Corin Nemec's Jonas Quinn now a regular. Based on the 1994 film "Stargate," Stargate SG-1 chronicles the exploits of a covert squad that uses an ancient portal to explore various universes. In the inventive first installment of a two-part tale, Col. O'Neill (Richard Dean Anderson) has a vacancy in his ranks that the alien Quinn is determined to fill. Also, Jaffa warrior Teal'c (Christopher Judge) copes with a personal tragedy, and Maj. Carter (Amanda Tapping) works to counter an unknown force | destabilizing the portal.

Conclusion. O'Neill and his team concoct a desperate plan to thwart an alien scheme to turn the Stargate into a doomsday weapon. Quinn: Corin Nemec. O'Neill: Richard Dean Anderson. Carter: Amanda Tapping. Teal'c: Christopher Judge. Gen. Hammond: Don S. Davis.

"Thank you very much for your email. My name is Clifford (Cliff) Woods and I am Corin Nemec's Assistant. I respond to communication from his web site for him in exact accordance with his wishes. He has asked me to I reply to you as he is flat out on the set of Stargate SG1 in Canada at the moment. He is playing the new romantic lead in the upcoming seasons." -- Corin Nemec's Assistant, 13 May 02

Corin Nemec will play Jonas Quinn, a former ethical advisor to the High Minister on Callonia. Corin took time out to share his lunch break with me and chat about his character, the show and himself.

Corin Nemec: "I didn't. I did a couple of big projects last year and did a lot of auditions for MGM movies, so they knew me well. They mentioned to me the possibility of the role of a new character they were creating. My manager and Hank Cohen had a conversation on the West Coast office and thought it would be a good idea if I took on the role. A couple more phone conversations happened later. Then the producers came and looked up some tape on me on projects I have done. That's pretty painless." -- Corin Nemec, Chat with Miwa Hirai, May 02.

The planets seemed to be in alignment when Nemec was first introduced to the idea of joining SG-1. "Last year, I had worked done several projects with SCI FI, MGM and all that jazz. I was on the MGM lot for a meeting on a film. Casting for SciFi and MGM had been walking by and saw me waiting to go in to this meeting; I was early and had been sitting in the courtyard. We started talking for a little bit and they kind of loosely mentioned Stargate to me. When I got done with my meeting I called my manager and he had already been talking to them. So by the end of the day we had an idea that this was a possibility, and everyone down there already knew who I was and everything. Then it was just a matter of getting everyone up in Canada on board, and that didn't take long either." -- Corin Nemec, SciFi Magazine, Jun 02.

"I found last two years of the show to be a winding down lack of the character's usefulness and the lack of desire of the producers to incorporate that character and use him properly was at times very frustrating for me. There were certainly moments when that came to the fore. It just seemed that there was a painting into a corner of the character which was done early in the Fourth Season. There was a gradual decline, in the sense that there wasn’t a big effort to include him in the big scene."

"I really didn't see how it would be too much of a stretch to find some justification for giving Daniel some added aspects. It would only be a matter of putting thought to idea and then pen to paper. But it just wasn't important enough to the writers. That wasn't for lack of me speaking out, saying 'Hey, I'm not doing nothing, I'm not active in this script.' Sometimes efforts were made, but more often than not they weren't and so after a while I knew that no matter how much jumping up and down I did it wasn't going to happen."

'You want to go? Oh, well, there's the door, don't forget to close it on your way out.'"

Actually if you ask Brad Wright, he'll let slip a few extra character traits. (on Jonas) "He is an open book. His curiosity is very much like the early Daniel Jackson; he's quite hungry for knowledge and new experiences. In the early episodes he is quite excited about the new ride he's on and he's very courageous, sometimes jumping in before he's ready. He's a work in progress.."

"Going on to outline what would have made him happy to continue portraying Daniel Jackson, Shanks describes how it would have made a difference if the writers had been more enthusiastic on behalf of the character. “It didn’t really seem to be important, if that character didn’t fit in [to a particular scene], to give him a reason to fit in, to make a point of saying that he has this conditional skill that is required, something like that. But again, the more I seemed to be vocal about it, the less I saw happening, and the more my frustration built up. So that led to the eventual decision.”

"First off, you have to let the writers do their thing and once they've had a chance to reflect on what I bring to the table when bringing their words to life, then Jonas will start really taking form. He'll be forged between how I perform him and how they write him. From that standpoint, as far as the character's sense of humour goes, it's definitely a thing being developed and it's a most crucial aspect."

Jonas Quinn was introduced on a trial basis, presumably to test audience reaction to him. Audience reaction has been unequivocal and near universal. Jonas Quinn is a coward, liar, traitor and thief who cowered round a corner while Daniel Jackson selflessly gave his life for Jonas and his people, and no amount of desperate 'creative' re-writing of his character - especially with clichéd superpowers to get you over the fact you actually still need the character whose arc was 'over' - to make him more palatable to the audience will erase his origins.

Jonas Quinn is widely disliked. Why then the red carpet treatment for this character when series' favourite Daniel Jackson has been written out before our eyes in Season Five? Are you seriously trying to build a franchise on the foundation of a character who figures largely as the reason Daniel Jackson died and ascended?

The popularity of Daniel Jackson is such that he was the credible choice to be the main character in the Atlantis spin-off, and yet, you chose to ignore this phemonenal popularity outright and disposed of the touchstone figure for Stargate, our hero, our everyman, our connection to the team and the one who gave voice to the feelings and beliefs of so many of us.

It's very clear from what Corin Nemec said that this change came from MGM, that the producers, led by Brad Wright, had to be "brought on board". He was in fact hired by Hank Cohen.

Why was actor Corin Nemec ushered in without so much as an audition when Michael Shanks was told "'You want to go? Oh, well, there's the door, don't forget to close it on your way out.'" Oh, and this too: "'Well, we'll just get another guy who's six feet tall and of fair appearance to play this sort of character.'"

Why is Corin Nemec being credited at the MGM site above series regulars Amanda Tapping and Christopher Judge at the MGM website? Why are character and actor credited above lead Richard Dean Anderson and character Jack O'Neill in TV Guide?

Michael Shanks wanted to return to the writing values we so enjoyed under Jonathan Glassner's aegis. The key to that was equality. Team episodes where everyone contributed, showcase episodes for each of the characters, consistent character development.

"I'm just saying I think Daniel has been slightly limited this year in his actual interaction with the team. Again, stories where he has been the focus have been wonderful, but they sort of wind up excluding the rest of SG-1. So, if anything, my wish for next season would be for my character to be worked a little more into the group dynamic." -- Michael Shanks, TV Zone, Jan 01.

Why couldn't this eminently reasonable and fair request be met? After all, Season Two, the ultimate season of Stargate, the ultimate season of the team as family, expressed those values perfectly and enjoyed the highest ratings ever for the show.

And Daniel Jackson is a beloved, phenomenally popular character, our favourite along with Jack, whose presence is vital to the success of the show for far more people than you can afford to lose. Michael Shanks wasn't asking for anything but a return to the equal treatment with the other characters that he - and we - once enjoyed.

I truly don't understand why more wasn't done for Michael Shanks, who asked so little and deserved so much, if for no other reason than pragmatism, because the success of the show has been so dependent on Jack and Daniel, the two characters, their friendship, and the unmatched chemistry of the two actors who portrayed them. We see the value you place on loyalty, your 'reward' for Mr. Shanks' loyalty and for ours.

If anyone can make sense of senselessness, we'd love to hear from you, because it's beyond us, the many, many thousands of people around the world making our voices heard through this site, through adverts, letters, phone calls, faxes, flyers, posters and emails, the tiny visible tip of the iceberg of devoted long time fans who can't watch the show without Daniel Jackson and the whole team, and who are now switching off. In droves.

Mr. Cohen, Mr. Wright and Ms. Hammer, whatever it was that prompted you to destroy something very beautiful, very human and very precious to very, very many people, those of us left in the dust have to sincerely hope it was worth it. I doubt anything could be worth the human cost of these decisions you've made, not to the fine and committed actor you treated like crap and certainly not to us in the audience.

At this point in time, it looks as if it will never be worth the financial cost to MGM and SciFi because you decided to discard the one actor and character who appear to be the key to the viability of your franchise. Is your franchise not worth the reinstatement of one phenomenally popular actor and the beloved character he portrays?

This obduracy about replacing Daniel Jackson with Jonas Quinn against our express wishes, which have been communicated to you so clearly by so many...Mr. Cohen, Ms. Hammer - are you really so determined to lose your audience and your franchise?

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.