is Stargate dead for good?

[Temis the Vorta]

Dark is "mature" and mature is "fluff," so the current wisdom holds,

Who the heck is saying that? That makes no sense!

Have you ever visited TrekBBS?

Occasionally, but for the most part it makes some kind of sense. TNZ is another matter entirely.

Your definitions are so narrow, inflexible and so often divorced from reality that there's no point in even discussing it.

Yeah, what's he doing here? He'd fit in perfectly in TNZ!

Stargate was only truly good when it was about how humans reacted discovering all this stuff for the first time.

But even the brain-worms aren't original - it's just Body Snatchers, warmed-over - so if the only way for the stories to be interesting if things are fresh and new, then there's no way to make it work. What has Stargate ever done that was original? The Jaffa are Klingons, Replicators are killer robots/Borg, Ori are another iteration of the fanatical-enemy bogeyman, Wraith are vampires in space. It's all stale and tired.

Instead, I think the way to go is to accept the unoriginality of the material and make it interesting by developing the characters and stories in fresh ways. The details can be fresh, even if the broad strokes are not.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The only question, then, is which of the two leads is female this time around - Jackson or O'Neil? If it's O'Neil, they want Jolie. Jackson...maybe Cameron Diaz?

Hay, make it an all female cast; and call it Stargate: Womanverse. Then sell it to Lifetime or the new Oprah Channel

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

Whoah. Don't quit your day job.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Whatever. I shouldn't even have brought it up, as I have no interest in arguing the issue with you yet again. Your definitions are so narrow, inflexible and so often divorced from reality that there's no point in even discussing it.

Okay, but I don't understand why you get like this. I only talk about predominant cultural trends that pretty much everyone is aware of.

Occasionally, but for the most part it makes some kind of sense. TNZ is another matter entirely.

Sense? TrekBBS? Now I know I'm being punk'd.

Instead, I think the way to go is to accept the unoriginality of the material and make it interesting by developing the characters and stories in fresh ways. The details can be fresh, even if the broad strokes are not.

That's exactly it. Pretty much everything has been done before. It's all in the execution.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

TrekBBS makes a lot more sense when you're not here, which is probably why you never see it.

 

[TiberiusMaximus]

^Well, we're all here, but none of us are all there...

You make a good point. The core concepts are nothing new. It's what you do with them that makes it interesting. It's all in the execution - as in, execute the bad writers. Or assimilate them. Or something.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Unless somebody thinks its worthwhile to pony up for a TV movie - always a possibility, I'd guess, since SyFy does run their "Originals" - there's not much likelihood of a wrap-up. They're not going to do that theatrically.

 

[The Wormhole]

I'd like them to wrap up the current storylines (Lucian Alliance, Wraith, CMBGR) before they reboot it, and if they ever reboot it I pray it is like nuTrek. IE keeping the original universe canonically intact. Maybe something to do with the Quantum Mirror or a Reality Drive.

The Lucian Alliance are nothing more than cliche supervillains and I wouldn't mind forgetting them. The Wraith story line is wrapped as far as I'm concerned, I don't care what was in the cards for the Atlantis DVD movie. What the hell if CMBGR?

Anyway, if Stargate were to undergo a reboot, I don't want them to go the Trek XI route and actually tell us this is an alternate reality. The fans who care enough will just assume it's an alternate reality, while new fans need not care about such things.

Unless, they were mocking the reboot concept. Back in its day, SG-1 had a grand ol-time mocking several sci-fi cliches. Continuity reboots are becoming a cliche, and mocking on would be a unique way of starting over and continuing the Stargate tradition.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Unless, they were mocking the reboot concept. Back in its day, SG-1 had a grand ol-time mocking several sci-fi cliches. Continuity reboots are becoming a cliche, and mocking on would be a unique way of starting over and continuing the Stargate tradition.

Indeed, SG-1 could have gotten at least a good one-liner out of this.

 

[DWF]

Unless, they were mocking the reboot concept. Back in its day, SG-1 had a grand ol-time mocking several sci-fi cliches. Continuity reboots are becoming a cliche, and mocking on would be a unique way of starting over and continuing the Stargate tradition.

Indeed, SG-1 could have gotten at least a good one-liner out of this.

That was I thought the result of RDA going off script even Atlantis had a different kind of humor from SG1 usually revolving around Rodney, but then he stole the show most of the time anyway.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Anderson was one of the great reasons for watching SG-1. I rarely enjoyed it after his part was minimized.

 

[Mr Awe]

I suspect that Stargate is dead for at least a good long while. The franchise started out smaller than Star Trek and followed the Star Trek Franchise Syndrom pattern to a T. Lower ratings as the seasons go by, each succesive series lower than the previous. Until finally it cannot sustain itself. The difference is that SG started out lower than ST, so it burned out more quickly and never produced theatrical movies.

With SGU, the SG franchise is basically at the point that ST was at after NEM, with one major difference. ST had the mainstream name recognition that SG lacks. The popular familiarity is what helped revive it, with a lot of help from JJ, to both bring it back and make it a box office hit. I doubt a JJ type will want to try to revive SG, at least not until it has a good long rest.

I really enjoyed SG1 and Atlantis, and even saw some sparks in SGU, but alas, that time has come for a good long rest. Maybe revived in a decade, longer, or possibly not at all.

Mr Awe

 

[The Wormhole]

The difference is that SG started out lower than ST, so it burned out more quickly and never produced theatrical movies.

Except for that one that started it all, of course.

 

[Mr Awe]

^ You mean the movie? That made $72 million domestically in 1994, that was good but not great. Even ST:TMP made $83 million and that was 15 years earlier when money was worth more.

I'm not knocking the SG franchise at all. I enjoyed a lot of it greatly. I'm just talking mainstream knowledge.

Mr Awe

 

[Temis the Vorta]

With SGU, the SG franchise is basically at the point that ST was at after ST, with one major difference. ST had the mainstream name recognition that SG lacks.

Star Trek also has a far better developed and more inherently fascinating cosmos than Stargate has ever had, plus far more enduring and iconic characters. No Kirk or Spock (or even Data, Garak or Worf) has ever emerged from Stargate.

O'Neill is probably still their most successful character and he was heavily dependent on RDA's performance. I can't imagine him being successfully recast, perhaps because he is a recasting of the character, and completely different (and better) than Kurt Russell's version.

That's why, if Stargate is revived, it will be more a BSG than a Star Trek situation: there won't be a lot worth bringing over, except for the very basic elements (the Stargate network, the connection with ancient cultures, probably will keep the military angle, maybe bring over the basic idea of the Goa'uld). O'Neill will be a woman this time around.

 

[JarodRussell]

Gotta love self-adulation.

 

[SG-17]

With SGU, the SG franchise is basically at the point that ST was at after ST, with one major difference. ST had the mainstream name recognition that SG lacks.

Star Trek also has a far better developed and more inherently fascinating cosmos than Stargate has ever had, plus far more enduring and iconic characters. No Kirk or Spock (or even Data, Garak or Worf) has ever emerged from Stargate.

O'Neill is probably still their most successful character and he was heavily dependent on RDA's performance. I can't imagine him being successfully recast, perhaps because he is a recasting of the character, and completely different (and better) than Kurt Russell's version.

That's why, if Stargate is revived, it will be more a BSG than a Star Trek situation: there won't be a lot worth bringing over, except for the very basic elements (the Stargate network, the connection with ancient cultures, probably will keep the military angle, maybe bring over the basic idea of the Goa'uld). O'Neill will be a woman this time around.

What happened to that actor who played the Teen-aged Jack-Clone? Has he done anything outside of that one episode?

 

[Mr Awe]

With SGU, the SG franchise is basically at the point that ST was at after NEM, with one major difference. ST had the mainstream name recognition that SG lacks.

Star Trek also has a far better developed and more inherently fascinating cosmos than Stargate has ever had, plus far more enduring and iconic characters. No Kirk or Spock (or even Data, Garak or Worf) has ever emerged from Stargate.

O'Neill is probably still their most successful character and he was heavily dependent on RDA's performance. I can't imagine him being successfully recast, perhaps because he is a recasting of the character, and completely different (and better) than Kurt Russell's version.

That's why, if Stargate is revived, it will be more a BSG than a Star Trek situation: there won't be a lot worth bringing over, except for the very basic elements (the Stargate network, the connection with ancient cultures, probably will keep the military angle, maybe bring over the basic idea of the Goa'uld). O'Neill will be a woman this time around.

I agree with the general gist of what you're saying. ST definitely developed it's universe and characters better. Although, in terms of entertainment value, it depends what you're looking for. SG at its best, particularly SG1, was good escapism fun.

I don't think there will be any great push to redo SG. I guess there wasn't for BSG either but that happened anyway. So, who knows.

Mr Awe

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

O'Neil could be easily recast for a remake of the original film - the point of recasting the TV series characters for a revived SG-1 television series would be hard to see, though.

It's true that the closest thing to mainstream recognition Stargate had was the theatrical film, which is why remaking it seems the most likely approach to reviving the franchise.

 

[The Wormhole]

^ You mean the movie? That made $72 million domestically in 1994, that was good but not great. Even ST:TMP made $83 million and that was 15 years earlier when money was worth more.

I'm not knocking the SG franchise at all. I enjoyed a lot of it greatly. I'm just talking mainstream knowledge.

Mr Awe

You said Stargate "never produced theatrical movies." I'm being a smartass by pointing out that there was indeed one. That's all.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

SG at its best, particularly SG1, was good escapism fun.

Anything could be escapist fun; you don't need an existing franchise for that, for anything but bare name recognition. Everything else could be changed.

What happened to that actor who played the Teen-aged Jack-Clone? Has he done anything outside of that one episode?

He's in the Twilight movies! (So much for his street cred around here. )