Eh. I don't like Gero that much. He writes Rodney well, but that's about it.
Actually, the reason I like him isn't really that he writes Rodney well, although he does. I like him because I think the way he envisions the show is a much closer match to the way I would like to see it than any of the other producers' is. I enjoy interviews and commentaries with Gero because he talks really seriously about trying to get at the core of the characters and figure out what they would and wouldn't do, and he's really interested in how you create change and growth in a character over time. I think it's *incredibly* telling that he tried again and again to get an "everybody's day off on Atlantis" story aired, while the rest of the production staff thought nobody would like that because it wasn't suspenseful enough. I think to Gero, just figuring out who these people really are is inherently interesting; his commentary on "Sunday" is unbelievably interesting, particularly the way he talks about trying to gently shove Hewlett into playing the relationship with Katie more "like grown-ups," and the grudge he clearly still harbors about having the laughable "exploding tumor" plot device foisted on what he clearly viewed as a script about relationships and the little moments where you don't realize things are changing all around you. I'm not always in love with what Gero ends up doing with a script ("Duet" is likeable in many ways, but it relies on both Carson and Cadman behaving like no human being would ever behave, which feels like a cheap way to score laughs, and I'm on record as having hated every single moment of "Coup d'Etat"), but I always feel like he's a real writer who really gives a shit about the human elements of the show. Particularly given that this is a show where the producers told Flanigan that the reason he doesn't get to have character arcs or moral struggles is that's not what people expect from the hero on a science fiction show, I like Gero's desire to make the show a story moved forward by people, even when I hrrrm about the way he ends up doing it. (And actually, I often like Ronon in Gero's episodes: I think he comes off much more pragmatic than dumb in eps like "No Man's Land" and in this episode and even, much as I hate to give it credit for anything, in "Coup d'Etat" where he was the one trying to get Weir to quit selling off the whole city for a trade Cowan would never make -- I also think he's never been more likeable than he is in "Conversion" and "Return 1" and "Sunday," but that may be because Gero appears to view Ronon as almost as much in love with Sheppard as I like to believe he is *g*).
In re: Wallace, I certainly think you're right that Rodney didn't owe Wallace anything. But I think you see situations in life -- not on as dramatic a scale, usually, of course *g* -- but situations where thinking about what you could do for someone rather than what you *have* to do for someone goes a long, long way toward making everyone's life easier in the end. I think Jeannie's empathy with Henry and Sharon's suffering and her willingness to take a risk for them is hugely admirable, and it's believable but frustrating to see Rodney deride her as stupid for it. I'm not trying to exculpate Wallace; he's clearly the one at fault, in practical and moral terms. But I think Rodney and Jeannie both had instincts about how to proceed, and Rodney's were both more selfish and less useful than Jeannie's in this case. Of course, it's a tv show, so you can say that it would never work that way in reality and that truthfully, Rodney's approach *was* the reasonable one with the best chance of success, and you might be right. But on a show where the most problematic elements are usually the moral questions, I thought it was kind of nice to see one where the subtext was "Sometimes taking a chance in order to help someone is a good idea."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-12-03 10:02 pm (UTC)From:Actually, the reason I like him isn't really that he writes Rodney well, although he does. I like him because I think the way he envisions the show is a much closer match to the way I would like to see it than any of the other producers' is. I enjoy interviews and commentaries with Gero because he talks really seriously about trying to get at the core of the characters and figure out what they would and wouldn't do, and he's really interested in how you create change and growth in a character over time. I think it's *incredibly* telling that he tried again and again to get an "everybody's day off on Atlantis" story aired, while the rest of the production staff thought nobody would like that because it wasn't suspenseful enough. I think to Gero, just figuring out who these people really are is inherently interesting; his commentary on "Sunday" is unbelievably interesting, particularly the way he talks about trying to gently shove Hewlett into playing the relationship with Katie more "like grown-ups," and the grudge he clearly still harbors about having the laughable "exploding tumor" plot device foisted on what he clearly viewed as a script about relationships and the little moments where you don't realize things are changing all around you. I'm not always in love with what Gero ends up doing with a script ("Duet" is likeable in many ways, but it relies on both Carson and Cadman behaving like no human being would ever behave, which feels like a cheap way to score laughs, and I'm on record as having hated every single moment of "Coup d'Etat"), but I always feel like he's a real writer who really gives a shit about the human elements of the show. Particularly given that this is a show where the producers told Flanigan that the reason he doesn't get to have character arcs or moral struggles is that's not what people expect from the hero on a science fiction show, I like Gero's desire to make the show a story moved forward by people, even when I hrrrm about the way he ends up doing it. (And actually, I often like Ronon in Gero's episodes: I think he comes off much more pragmatic than dumb in eps like "No Man's Land" and in this episode and even, much as I hate to give it credit for anything, in "Coup d'Etat" where he was the one trying to get Weir to quit selling off the whole city for a trade Cowan would never make -- I also think he's never been more likeable than he is in "Conversion" and "Return 1" and "Sunday," but that may be because Gero appears to view Ronon as almost as much in love with Sheppard as I like to believe he is *g*).
In re: Wallace, I certainly think you're right that Rodney didn't owe Wallace anything. But I think you see situations in life -- not on as dramatic a scale, usually, of course *g* -- but situations where thinking about what you could do for someone rather than what you *have* to do for someone goes a long, long way toward making everyone's life easier in the end. I think Jeannie's empathy with Henry and Sharon's suffering and her willingness to take a risk for them is hugely admirable, and it's believable but frustrating to see Rodney deride her as stupid for it. I'm not trying to exculpate Wallace; he's clearly the one at fault, in practical and moral terms. But I think Rodney and Jeannie both had instincts about how to proceed, and Rodney's were both more selfish and less useful than Jeannie's in this case. Of course, it's a tv show, so you can say that it would never work that way in reality and that truthfully, Rodney's approach *was* the reasonable one with the best chance of success, and you might be right. But on a show where the most problematic elements are usually the moral questions, I thought it was kind of nice to see one where the subtext was "Sometimes taking a chance in order to help someone is a good idea."