( continues...) place where he belongs.)

I think what it comes down to, for me, is that, from Sam's perspective, there was enough ambiguity about his whole situation (was he crazy in 2006? crazy in 1973? in a coma? a time-traveller? an amnesiac DI from Hyde? who could see the future?) that I could see him not being sure anymore which reality was *most* real, and in the end, he had to go where he was going to be happiest. My own take on it is similar to ita's: that he was really in a coma in 2006, but by the time he got out of the coma, he'd been in there too long and was either brain-damaged, or crazy, or simply too attached to the world he'd created -- at any rate, he was no longer fit to go back to his old life. But I also agree with Dana, who said, "The creators claim that they never intended it to be ambiguous about whether he was actually mad, in a coma, or back in time, but I think the show itself never really answered that question, and I much prefer it that way." Because by the end, *from Sam's POV*, I think it was definitely unclear what the real explanation was, which is what allowed him to make the choice that he did.

Wow, I had a lot to say about that.

Being the slacker that I am, I just watched this past weekend's SG-1 and Atlantis. Unfortunately I had been spoiled for the latter by an idiot ficcer who put the info in their summary. Grr.

Unfortunately I had been spoiled for the latter by an idiot ficcer who put the info in their summary.

I'm astonished that anyone managed to remain unspoiled this long. I spoiled myself back when I saw a headline that said "SGA Cast Member Leaving Show!", because I had to know, but I would have been spoiled a million times over in addition to that.

People are idiots.

Oh, I knew about the casting changes, but didn't know how they would do things in-story.(I also know about the big casting spoiler for season 4 thanks to TVSquad)

I can't remember how I got spoiled, but I don't think I knew who it would be... but there were only so many choices, really. Then once the ep started, well, it was obvious.

Kate - re: LoM series finale: I made up my own interpretation for the end of LoM, (and, I think, in the process, dumbfounded Jon B with the extent of my la-la-la-la I can't hear you, living out here on the Nile - so pretty here!)

I agree that, narratively, it would have been hard to sell his ending up back in 2006 permanently, and I was happy that he ended up with his 70s peeps, too .

Did anyone else wonder where the doves were for Carson's big finish? I broke out laughing when I saw that patented power-walk-against-blooming-explosion background.

Hee, JenP! I saw your posts about your take on the finale, and, you know, I could totally buy that. Especially with that look that Dr. Morgan gives Sam as he's walking out of his room -- that's a very knowing look!

Exactly!

LoM:

Kate write about what I wrote, "But would the ending have been satisfying, from a narrative perspective, if it showed Sam waking up in 2006, recovering from his injuries, getting some therapy, having a few brief interactions with characters we've never seen before, and deciding to stay there -- all in the span of about 10 minutes?"

That's a bit of a straw man argument, Kate. Those are hardly the only two options. If they were going to go that route the writers could have taken a lot more time with it. Also, I want to reiterate that I did think the ending was satifying from a narrative PoV. But it was also fucked up.

Ailleann, thanks for the link! That was indeed the essay I was thinking of--not only that, it was the one that linked the Winchesters and the YED in a circular pattern of fatal flaw. I'd been trying to find that one--and had forgotten they are the same essay.