FoxRiverResort

SWCMS001 wrote:After what Matt Olmstead said!....I'm blaming her!! HER!!
They even offered to come up [to Canada] before she gave birth and film at her house
And she said NO!!.....No!!....
sorry guys but I'm totally blaming her right now

I understand your anger. But I don't blame SWC by any means. Just try to look at the entire issue from Sarah's point of view.

She was always very attached to her role and tried to make everything possible to make her an interesting character. When the writers asked her to cut her hair for a stupid cliffhanger ,she immediatly agreed (some people say that her husband was not happy). And you should also remember that she wanted to jumb herself from the window on the "Disconnect" episode. Then came her pregnancy, where the writers gave her the strong impression that Sara will have a big role in S3. She promoted the show in many interviews during April and May. She even gone to Spain at a time where she was highly pregnant. So I call this a dedicated actress.

Then probably on Summer where she is waiting to have her baby, there is the big change of mind of the writers. They decide to give Sara a completely useless plot as a hostage and then to kill her off. This is obviously very disappointing, because Sarah had obviously completely different hopes for her character. I think that they told her this when she was highly pregnant and I absolutely understand if she was pissed at them. Why should she in her difficult situation be ready to make some stressing last scenes for her character if she probably has the opinion that her plot toally sucks?

No matter if the writers gave her good conditions to make it possible for her making some scenes. It is absolutely tasteless to ask to a highly pregnant woman or a young motter to make some stressing scenes, just to make it more belivable for the audience that her character dies. So I think that it was well done from Sarah that she just told to Fox and the writers to screw themselves. She simply didn't deserves a ending like that.

You're right you can't only blame SWC, she did a lot for us and I'm grateful she did that.. but I just didn't want to end it like THIS

In my opinion all sides are to blame, swc aswell as the writers as the tbtb.
as grown ups they should have come to a solution that was best for the show and for the fans aswell. The fans are the ones that watch the show if we didn't watch what would the show be?? and i know there are also a lot of fans that aren't misa shippers but a huge part is and they shouldn't left us out like that.

I don't blame SWC...we haven't really heard her side of things. I think what Speedy said above is right on. I think she planned to come back and then they changed the story on her causing her to make this decision to not come back...which would've been easy for her to do since she was about to start a family.

Personally, I think if I were her husband, I would not have wanted her to go back either. Maybe all this talk about how great MiSa/WeSah looked together was one reason why SWC decided to stay away. Constant talk like that is not good for a marriage.

I think it is just ridiculous to think that the writers had to kill off Sara for creative reasons. If the writers wanted to find a motivation for Michael then they could surely do it without needing to kill her off. They already proved in the cases of T-Bag, Bellick and Sucre that they are ready to create the most ridiculous plotlines just to keep them on the show. Why were they not able to do the same in Sara's case? And she had much more plot reasons in having an important role in this season, then this three characters that I mentioned. There is the fact that she was forced to kill a man, which fits completely into the redemption theme of this season. And there is also the fact that Michael sacrificed himself for her, which would consequently lead to very emotional scenes between that couple if it is very good written. I simply don't believe the creative reasons nonsense from Olmstead.

I think it is just ridiculous to think that the writers had to kill off Sara for creative reasons. If the writers wanted to find a motivation for Michael then they could surely do it without needing to kill her off.

I read somewhere that Fox wanted to have Sara killed as a motivation for Mike and that it wasn't exactly the writers' idea. Does anyone know more about this?
Nonetheless I kinda agree that killing Sara for that reason is a bit uncreative, especially with all the other stuff the writers have come up with so far. (And BTW I know that many plot turns and storylines border on the ridiculous but for some reason I still enjoy them and I'm kinda curious with what kind of unrealistic and contreived storylines they will come up next. )

lila wrote:

I think it is just ridiculous to think that the writers had to kill off Sara for creative reasons. If the writers wanted to find a motivation for Michael then they could surely do it without needing to kill her off.

I read somewhere that Fox wanted to have Sara killed as a motivation for Mike and that it wasn't exactly the writers' idea. Does anyone know more about this?

No. The writers created a first pitch of the S3 where Sara would play an important role like everyone expected. But this pitch was denied and the writers had the idea for a new one. But they thought that to make it work, the only realistic way would be to kill off Sara in the middle of the season. Fox liked the second pitch but asked the writers if it would not be possible in letting Sara alive. The writers said no and in the end it was accepted. But since SWC refused to come back for her reason, they had to kill her off sooner.

lila wrote:

I read somewhere that Fox wanted to have Sara killed as a motivation for Mike and that it wasn't exactly the writers' idea. Does anyone know more about this?

I read it too somewhere, but not that it wasnt the writers idea..