Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Seeking "Threads" spoilers...

Yeah, you read that right. I *want* spoilers. And because my discussion of it will contain spoilers, I'll put it

I haven't seen a lot of folks on my flist talking about this ep yet, but for any who have seen it -- like Destina yesterday, I'm looking to be spoiled in a kind of specific way for the episode "Threads". (Otherwise, I want to stay pretty unspoiled for it; although I have already been inadvertantly spoiled for something major that happens in it, that I wish I hadn't been, but it wasn't really anybody's fault; I thought I knew in general what there was to be spoiled about for the ep, and boy was I wrong, so I didn't realize how carefully I should avoid reading others' reactions.)

What I want to be spoiled about: Jack's relationship with the OFC.

This was something that worried me from the moment I first heard about this, and what worried me was, basically, the question of how this affair looks, professionally, for Jack. The earliest outlines I heard really disturbed me in that regard. I'm wondering if that's addressed at all, and if so, how. Or, if it's not addressed, what information about the OFC was given, and how folks who've seen the ep read it, and think it looks.

Everything else... I'm getting inklings here and there, and that's probably enough for me to go on. (I'm mostly trying to stay unspoiled for later stuff just so that I can be surprised; but things that I anticipate might be unpleasant surprises to me, I *do* try to get spoiled for, so that I have time to process them.)


( 3 comments — Leave a comment )
Feb. 9th, 2005 09:38 am (UTC)
I was okay with it. I know the initial spoilers had the OFC as a Congresswoman on their oversight committee; she's now a CIA agent working to investigate the fallout from Full Alert (this Friday's episode) and I didn't get the vibe that she was either a) in any way under Jack's supervision or b) investigating him or the SGC.

She does have a line at one point about them having promised that their relationship "wouldn't affect the job," but based on my one viewing it felt more like "this won't make it awkward to work together, will it?" rather than "OMG if people find out we're screwed!"
Feb. 9th, 2005 09:51 am (UTC)
Okay. Cool. I remember people wondering, as RDA said in the Behind the Gate thing that she was CIA, and folks wondered if that was RDA misremembering or what. Am glad to hear that it was an actual change from what we'd heard about the original concept. It sounds like what they've done circumvents many of the problems I was fearing (although -- not yet having seen "Full Alert" -- I'd be interested to know *what* they're investigating in relation to it, and how much Jack or any of his people are under investigation, because *that* could be a little questionable, but it depends on a lot of other details.)

So mostly, it sounds like the problem with her is that dumping her on us in the same ep in which she becomes a convenient plot problem is kind of cheesy and obvious. And underdeveloped, even by the show's track-record. But, whatever.
(Deleted comment)
Feb. 9th, 2005 09:52 am (UTC)
Okay, cool. Honestly, I wasn't *expecting* it to be addressed that much, because the show is often maddening, like that. But from the bare outline, it sounds like they redesigned her in ways that mitigated some of my earlier fears.
( 3 comments — Leave a comment )