• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Casting announced for Stargate Origins

Christopher said:
Most of the trailer seems consistent with that, but there's a shot where the leads are staring around in wonder at a bare desert, whereas the other desert scenes apparently in Egypt are more full of people and stuff around the dig site. It certainly suggests they're on Abydos, although that seems hard to reconcile.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the trailer does make it look like Catherine and her friend travel to Abydos. If true, then this web series is definitely doing its own continuity different from SG-1. I think we should treat this web series as a reboot.

David cgc said:
The more I see of that 'gate prop, the less I like it. Giving it that plain finish just makes it look plasticy. I guess they're trying to make it seem more anachronistically technological compared to the other artifacts, but the movie and TV versions looked more like aged stone that had been sitting around (or buried) for uncounted thousands of years.
Click to expand...

Not sure what to make of this. On one hand, the stargate is very advanced technology, composed of a non-earth material. So it makes sense for it to look anachronistically technological as you put it so well. But the stargate was also created a long time and buried under sand for thousands of years. There should be wear and tear. It should look aged.
 
O_Kav said:
I'm not very concerned about this retconning canon either. Stargate Origins can't possibly contradict SG-1 more than the original Movie ever did. Abydos being in another Galaxy, the Asgard-esque previous Ra host... Stargate never was a shining example of decent continuity in the first place.
Click to expand...

Well, that's not at all fair, since it's actually quite normal for TV adaptations of movies to be in slightly different continuities than their source material, because they have to change things to make them work better for the series format. The series based on the Jeff Bridges/Karen Allen movie Starman retconned the events of the movie from the '80s to the '70s so that the title character could have a teenage son in the present day. Alien Nation simplified the alien makeup from the movie (the movie aliens had prosthetics altering their body shape, but the TV aliens just had head prosthetics) and ignored a key story point from the film. The Buffy the Vampire Slayer series made Buffy younger than she was in the movie, changed the portrayal her parents and her mentor Merrick, changed the vampires' appearance and powers, etc. The '70s Planet of the Apes TV series implied that events similar to the original two fims had happened in the past, but used an earlier calendar date than those films and featured humans who were still verbal and civilized rather than the mute animals of the films. The animated Men in Black: The Series entirely ignored K's retirement at the end of the movie. The Real Ghostbusters retconned the movie into an in-universe work of fiction based on their real adventures. And so on. TV series based on movies usually have to be treated as alternate continuities to the movies themselves. Indeed, SG-1 made this implicit, because they established that the series takes place in a multiverse with numerous alternate-reality versions of themselves out there. So if you're going to judge the continuity of a TV series based on a movie, it's generally best if you don't count the original movie as part of it, because it usually isn't, at least not in the exact same form.

And the Stargate TV franchise, disregarding the vastly inferior movie, actually had a much tighter and more internally consistent continuity than a lot of other SFTV franchises, including Star Trek. It was very good at picking up threads from former episodes and following through on their consequences or expanding them into bigger stories. One of my favorite things about it was how effectively it created the sense of taking place in a rich, complex, and consistent universe. Of course it had a few inconsistencies and dropped threads along the way, as any long-running series inevitably will, but it had fewer than Trek, Doctor Who, or other expansive franchises.
 
I watched the first two. It's was...not great. Like you said a page back, it looks and feels like a high-budget fanfilm.

That said, there's something compelling there. "Nazi occultists figure out how to travel to other planets via an alien artifact" is one hell of a hook.

The downsides are that it looks inexpensive, there only being two or three sets so far (one of which is obvious greenscreen), and much of the dialog is very bad – the way they establish Catherine's character is by having her dad sit her down three minutes in and deliver exposition at her about what a rebel she is. Boo.

I think I'm going to wait for the entire series to hit before I watch any more.
 
Just thought I'd pop back here to see what people thought, but looks like no one bothered. lol
It really does look cheap, to the point where they didn't bother making a new Stargate warp effect, but I assume they just wanted to have something to sell the streaming service but didn't want to invest big bucks like CBS did with Discovery.

Also, yeah, canon be damned at this point.
 
The TV shows weren't strictly in continuity with the movie anyway (and the animated Stargate Infinity was in its own alternate continuity), so I never really expected this reboot to be in continuity with the TV shows. This isn't like Star Trek where nearly everything pretends to be consistent even when it isn't.
 
"Stargate: SG1" was like "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" -- it was connected to the movie, but yet it wasn't. The movies were mainly jumping off points.
 
tharpdevenport said:
"Stargate: SG1" was like "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" -- it was connected to the movie, but yet it wasn't. The movies were mainly jumping off points.
Click to expand...

As I said in post #82, TV series altering the continuity of the movies they're based on is historically the rule, not the exception. The exceptions are the TV shows that can fit smoothly with the original movies, like Minority Report or the animated Godzilla: The Series. Or the ones that can be presumed to fit if you squint a little, like War of the Worlds: The Series (which reinterprets the aliens quite a bit but doesn't directly contradict anything except the opening narration of the film, at least until the awful series finale) or RoboCop: The Series (which substitutes new characters for most of the movie characters, but in a way that allows reconciling the two sets of characters). Then there's something like Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, which was entirely consistent with the first two movies but ignored the later sequels.

Then there are examples like animated series that are nominally in-continuity sequels to movies but are then ignored/contradicted by the movies' sequels, like the MTV Spider-Man CGI series and the Bill & Ted cartoon.
 
tharpdevenport said:
"Stargate: SG1" was like "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" -- it was connected to the movie, but yet it wasn't. The movies were mainly jumping off points.
Click to expand...
They actually did a Buffy comic that presented the a version of the movie's events that was consistent with the show. I haven't read it though, so I don't really know anything beyond that.
 
JD said:
They actually did a Buffy comic that presented the a version of the movie's events that was consistent with the show. I haven't read it though, so I don't really know anything beyond that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have that. It's called The Origin, and it's basically consistent with the show, aside from the vampires being more monstrous-looking (green skin, red eyes, pointy ears -- and some even look like Man-Bat without the wings) and having powers they didn't have on the show, like levitation. And its version of Merrick looks like Richard Riehle from the show. I gather Joss Whedon considers it more or less the canonical version of those events in the show's continuity.
 
Dracula could fly, but he turned into a bat. I think Spike said some vampire could do that, but there was some mumbo jumbo reason most don't.
 
tharpdevenport said:
Dracula could fly, but he turned into a bat. I think Spike said some vampire could do that, but there was some mumbo jumbo reason most don't.
Click to expand...

Spike said the only difference between Dracula and other vampires was 'showy gypsy stuff'. That's as far as any explanation went on the show - so basically, Dracula is just a vampire with cool magical skills.
 
Just watched the first three webisodes. Meh. Not awful, but not really good either. Just meh. It is kind of interesting, this seems largely connected to just the original movie and not really connected to SG-1 or the TV shows at all. Indeed, if you just look at it as a tie-in to the movie itself, it kind of works from a continuity perspective. About the only thing they have taken from the show right now is the DHD, which to be fair the absence of any kind of dialling device always was a bit of a plot hole in the movie.
 
Last edited:
There are 'mission reports' on the website for each episode that give some in-universe backstory for the events.

The Goa'uld in episode 3 hasn't appeared in any episodes of the TV series.
Here is her Bio from the Website

Aset is a powerful Goa’uld who administrates the Naquadah-rich planet of Abydos on behalf of the Supreme System Lord, Ra. Unlike many other Goa’uld, Aset has a nurturing approach to her subjects, often bestowing them with gifts that improve their health and therefore increases their ability to productively mine the mineral that serves as the lifeblood to Goa’uld dominance across the galaxy.

Despite holding a coveted position of power, Aset is very much an outlier in her views. This very un-Goa’uld approach might be a result of the traumatic events that once put her directly in the crosshairs of the all-powerful Ra and his famously short temper. Luckily, her skills as a scientist and engineer have helped Aset regain favor with the Supreme System Lord who is so preoccupied with fending off multiple suitors for his position, he has given Aset relative autonomy on Abydos.

With Ra’s attention having been focused on more pressing matters for so long, Aset’s rebellious approach has risen to foolhardy levels. Much to the disgust of her personal guard, Serqet, Aset finds herself in direct violation of countless Goa’uld rules. That appears to be of no concern to her, though, as she secretly harbors ambitions of one day rising to seize ultimate power for herself.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
^If they're calling them Goa'uld, that's also from the show. I'm pretty sure the name wasn't used in the movie.
 
Someone on reddit was saying that Aset is also the Goa'uld Isis, but I have no idea where they pulled that idea from, it isn't mentioned anywhere I can find.

Plus Isis right now is in a Canopic jar.
 
Tuskin38 said:
Someone on reddit was saying that Aset is also the Goa'uld Isis, but I have no idea where they pulled that idea from, it isn't mentioned anywhere I can find.
Click to expand...

They got it from real life. Aset is the original Egyptian name of the goddess whose name was rendered in Greek as Isis.
 
Tuskin38 said:
There are 'mission reports' on the website for each episode that give some in-universe backstory for the events.

The Goa'uld in episode 3 hasn't appeared in any episodes of the TV series.
Here is her Bio from the Website
Click to expand...

Missions reports are subscriber only - do they say anything worthwhile.

dJE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top