Very interesting question. I’ve often wondered how much direction and restriction commentators are given by whoever’s distributing the DVD. Perhaps none, but it wouldn’t shock me, given how film actors sign contracts stating they can’t badmouth the film and must in fact find something positive to say about it in press junkets. It’s possible some casts/crews are under restrictions and others not?

Or maybe this is just a lot more incendiary than, say, the controversy of Jack/Sam ship in SG-1, which got debated a bit in commentaries but never really *argued*. I say it’s more incendiary because if it weren’t for the military regulations, there’s nothing offensive about the idea of Sam being interested in Jack or vice versa – they’re both good people. But if someone has romantic feelings for someone like RH’s Guy, knowing he’s the sort of man who abandons his own newborn baby in the woods to die as an ad hoc form of birth control, you have to wonder if her brain’s okay.

Does he have a vested interest in Guy being uber-sexy or something?

The man needs his love triangle, I guess. Maybe he’s disquieted at too many people liking Marian for Marian. Or given that Marian was forced into the “femme fatale” role a lot of the time, maybe he had an issue with a woman in that role showing both clarity and heroism.

I can’t help wondering what this series would have been like if the cast had also been the producers; there seems to be an unusually large disconnection between what the two ensembles thought of the central characters (is it unusually large, or is it just unusually apparent?).

OMG, that needs to become available through Netflix immediately. ROFL!

I think so, actually. The actor had a huge following, and I think the BBC was just beginning to realize that. DVD commentaries being a form of marketing, after all.

It sounds like maybe Minghella forgot that other people would be hearing it, or couldn’t conceive of anyone disagreeing with his perspective.

Very possibly he forgot. But dude, it’s being recorded. You work in media. You don’t have the luxury of “oops”. Think, then speak.

As you mentioned, the SG-1 directors are pretty equal opportunity in their recognition of the cast’s physical attributes,

No, I said “Peter DeLouise”, not SG-1 directors in general. Aside from Delouise, who pointed out Shanks’ looks and Anderson’s butt a lot (he does have a nice butt, seriously), it was “awww, doe eyes!” all the time.

Furthermore, I even started to add into the post how badly Martin Wood creeped me out with his paternal “there there” soothing routine when Amanda Tapping gently but assertively pointed out that it didn’t seem necessary the way her breasts were carefully backlit and framed in one scene.

I seem to have gone off on a bit of a tangent, but I hope it’s reminded you that Minghella is the exception, not the rule.

I dunno. I haven’t watched any of the others you mentioned, so you may be right. I hope so. But still, an “exception” like that in most industries could definitely earn you a nice long chat with Human Resources about what sexual harassment is.

It is fairly standard for filmmakers — both male and female — to comment on the attractiveness of their stars. As you mentioned, the SG-1 directors are pretty equal opportunity in their recognition of the cast’s physical attributes, as are Joss Whedon, Tim Minear, Matt Nix, Bryan Fuller… Maybe I just watch shows with better execs? And yes, it is still more “acceptable” to acknowledge an actress’s beauty before her talent than it is for actors (stupid double standard).

I seem to have gone off on a bit of a tangent, but I hope it’s reminded you that Minghella is the exception, not the rule.