PDA

View Full Version : No news about Devlin's sequel?



Mister Oragahn
August 11th, 2007, 04:52 PM
Just asking.
Last time we heard something about it, it seemed to be a pretty solid project, moving forward, and MGM was interested in it.

Thus far, Dean Devlin is involved in Isobar, scheduled for 2007.

-PITBULL-
August 11th, 2007, 05:09 PM
At this time i think MGM is more interested in make there two movies for the TV Series first , and after that they might have bigger plans later on .

If Devlin really wants to get he's story out there , i feel he needs t do more then to show up at a Comic-Con event and say i want to do this and that . He should be out there talking with the fans them self's , Come to the message boards and tell us he side of the story . Seeing how he said this was suppose to be a trilogy of his , you would think he would have the last two stories written of something put together for MGM to read and for the fans to look over to get there input of what we think of them becoming movies .

Instead he say's he we are in the talks with MGM about finishing are project of STARGATE movies , and that MGM is interested in them as well ( Witch no one at MGM has ever said anything ) and then he goes back in hiding and never hear from him about the movies again .

I would be one of the STARGATE fans that would love to see MGM let Devlin finish his side of the story , but with out him getting a script out there and seeing how he's not rushing to do this project of his , he will end up loosing support from alot of fans that would love to see his side of the story .

If he really wants to get this going , he will have to have a script out soon to show off and would have to start filming right away , before fans forget all about him and his story ....

Ganthet Jr.
August 11th, 2007, 05:10 PM
Eh, I always had the impression that he was just talking so that it would garner some sort of attention. People have done stuff like that so that studios would notice and start thinking "Hey... hmm, that's not a bad idea!". I never took it seriously, and luckily, it looks like our dear Stargate franchise will remain, for the most part, unfractured (*cough* Stargate Infinity*).

:daniel:

the fifth man
August 11th, 2007, 07:44 PM
Right now, I'm too focused on these SG-1 movies to care much about Devlin's possible sequel.

jenks
August 12th, 2007, 02:25 AM
Just asking.
Last time we heard something about it, it seemed to be a pretty solid project, moving forward, and MGM was interested in it.

Thus far, Dean Devlin is involved in Isobar, scheduled for 2007.

To be fair, I think he was talking out of his arse.

Battera
August 12th, 2007, 02:55 PM
How would a sequel work exactly? I'm guessing that it wouldn't follow the continuity set by the show? Personally, I doubt that it would ever happen.

Daniel Jackson
August 12th, 2007, 03:01 PM
I think MGM's SG-1 movies says there won't be sequels to the original movie. Imagine trying to explain this to someone who didn't want the TV show...

Movie Guy, "So, how many movies are there?"
SG-1 Guy, "There's five. The original movie, two sequels, and two SG-1 movies."
Movie Guy, "SG-1? What's that?"
SG-1 Guy, "It's the TV show that picked up where the movie left off."
Movie Guy, "...but the movie has two sequels that do that."
SG-1 Guy, "Yeah, but the TV show was made first, then they made an alternate continuation."
Movie Guy, "Wouldn't it have been easier to just make two sequels to begin with? These SG-1 movies have nothing to do with the original movies?"
SG-1 Guy, "Well, the creators of the movie didn't like SG-1 and wanted to complete their trilogy. The SG-1 movies follow SG-1 which follows the original movie. They're not in the same continuity as Stargate 2 & 3."
Movie Guy, "Oh my... there's two Stargate 2s and two two Stargate 3s?"
SG-1 Guy, "Yeah, something like that..."
Movie Guy, "Oh, forget it, this is too confusing, I'll just stick with the trilogy."
SG-1 Guy, "...but the SG-1 movies are better, they wrap up SG-1!"
Movie Guy, "...I don't care..."

Yeah, that's going to go over well. lol

SaberBlade
August 13th, 2007, 10:06 AM
Right now, I'm too focused on these SG-1 movies to care much about Devlin's possible sequel.

I have to agree.

Right now I am more interested and concerned about the movies we know for a fact are happening. As much as I would love to see Devgate, it's just unfeasible right now for MGM or Devlin to do it when 14 million is being spent on something that could potentially fail or just fail to reach expectations.

Although I do believe and hope the SG1 movies will succeed, I do think that such movies could be a better investment rather than a $100 million which could fail even harder with the diehard SG1 fans out to boycott it because they believe it's removing SG1 from continuity.

Promethius30
August 13th, 2007, 11:16 AM
Just asking.
Last time we heard something about it, it seemed to be a pretty solid project, moving forward, and MGM was interested in it.

Thus far, Dean Devlin is involved in Isobar, scheduled for 2007.

I see this as good sign
with no news its hopefully less likely for the trilogy to happen and Daniel Jackson( forum member ) said it would be to confusing and there would less likely hood of new fans joining the SG1 and Atlantis fold

DigiFluid
August 13th, 2007, 11:36 AM
Eh, I always had the impression that he was just talking so that it would garner some sort of attention. People have done stuff like that so that studios would notice and start thinking "Hey... hmm, that's not a bad idea!". I never took it seriously, and luckily, it looks like our dear Stargate franchise will remain, for the most part, unfractured (*cough* Stargate Infinity*).

:daniel:


To be fair, I think he was talking out of his arse.

I think you're both right.

morjana
August 13th, 2007, 12:52 PM
Just asking.
Last time we heard something about it, it seemed to be a pretty solid project, moving forward, and MGM was interested in it.

Thus far, Dean Devlin is involved in Isobar, scheduled for 2007.



Devlin has made that claim several times over the years since Stargate the Movie.

From an article published in 2003:

From IGNFilmForce.com:

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/431/431087p1.html?fromint=1


MGM Plans Second Stargate Series and Film And SG-1 continues for an eighth season.

July 29, 2003 - Last week, fans of Stargate SG-1 were buoyed by the
news that the sci-fi spin-off series would continue for an eighth
season...
**snippage**

...MGM intends to end SG-1 at the close of season eight, and to use it
as a lead-in for a second Stargate film, based on SG-1. Movie fans
who prefer the original film to the television series may be
disheartened; Stargate is possibly one of the best science fiction
films made since Star Wars, and director Dean Devlin has said on
occasion that he'd love to do a sequel along the same lines as the
first, if only MGM would let him.
-- Paul Davidson


From a Brad Wright Chat transcript June 2002:

<Moderator> <mcfrey>: Can you tell us something about Dean Devlin project? Casn coexist the 2 projects? (yours and devlin)
<Moderator> <johnson-sg3>: With propsals submitted for an SG-1 movie and with the very recent news that Dean Devlin, producer of the original movie is also interested in pursuing his own sequels, are you both competing to gain MGM's green light? And are the differences between the two camps still there or have they been resolved?
<Brad> Two things. First, the Devlin and Emmerich wanted to do a sequal to their film, forgetting the series ever happened.
<Brad> I think that's ludicrous.
Brad> The feature Robert and I have written is exactly that, a bridge between SG-1 and Atlantis.
<Brad> There won't be a Devlin and Emmerich sequal as far as I know, but MGM may not want to make our script either.


From an article at SciFi.com from Aug 27, 2001:

Stargate SG-1's cast and crew blow out the candles on its 100th birthday

By Melissa J. Perenson

n 1994, MGM's Stargate became the sleeper hit of the fall raking in around
$70 million. Not too shabby for a film from the pre-Independence Day
production team of Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin. While the duo talked
big "an envisioned trilogy of Stargate films" ultimately, the project went no
further.


********

Personally, I don't think he's serious about it -- he just keeps mentioning it for old times sake.

Morjana

Oreo
August 13th, 2007, 01:31 PM
They will never be made. That simple.

He is a liar, MGM doesn't give a damn about his ideas, they rather continue doing cheap SG-1 movies.

Flyboy
August 13th, 2007, 02:26 PM
I think MGM's SG-1 movies says there won't be sequels to the original movie. Imagine trying to explain this to someone who didn't want the TV show...

Movie Guy, "So, how many movies are there?"
SG-1 Guy, "There's five. The original movie, two sequels, and two SG-1 movies."
Movie Guy, "SG-1? What's that?"
SG-1 Guy, "It's the TV show that picked up where the movie left off."
Movie Guy, "...but the movie has two sequels that do that."
SG-1 Guy, "Yeah, but the TV show was made first, then they made an alternate continuation."
Movie Guy, "Wouldn't it have been easier to just make two sequels to begin with? These SG-1 movies have nothing to do with the original movies?"
SG-1 Guy, "Well, the creators of the movie didn't like SG-1 and wanted to complete their trilogy. The SG-1 movies follow SG-1 which follows the original movie. They're not in the same continuity as Stargate 2 & 3."
Movie Guy, "Oh my... there's two Stargate 2s and two two Stargate 3s?"
SG-1 Guy, "Yeah, something like that..."
Movie Guy, "Oh, forget it, this is too confusing, I'll just stick with the trilogy."
SG-1 Guy, "...but the SG-1 movies are better, they wrap up SG-1!"
Movie Guy, "...I don't care..."

Yeah, that's going to go over well. lol
Interesting and valid points. As a supporter of Devlin's movies however, I'd like to alter the last few lines of your argument:

SG1 Guy, "Oh, forget it, this is too confusing, I'll just stick with the trilogy."
Movie Guy, "...but the Devlin movies are better!
SG1 Guy, "...I don't care..."

Something I see happening here too...

shelsfc
August 13th, 2007, 03:19 PM
I really couldn't care less about Devlin's films....to be honest I didn't really think much of the first film! But it could get quite confusing...I thought he sold the rights to the franchise anyway.

jenks
August 14th, 2007, 03:53 AM
How would a sequel work exactly? I'm guessing that it wouldn't follow the continuity set by the show? Personally, I doubt that it would ever happen.

Nope, they'd ignore it completely.

Mister Oragahn
August 14th, 2007, 08:32 AM
I think MGM's SG-1 movies says there won't be sequels to the original movie. Imagine trying to explain this to someone who didn't want the TV show...

Movie Guy, "So, how many movies are there?"
SG-1 Guy, "There's five. The original movie, two sequels, and two SG-1 movies."
Movie Guy, "SG-1? What's that?"
SG-1 Guy, "It's the TV show that picked up where the movie left off."
Movie Guy, "...but the movie has two sequels that do that."
SG-1 Guy, "Yeah, but the TV show was made first, then they made an alternate continuation."
Movie Guy, "Wouldn't it have been easier to just make two sequels to begin with? These SG-1 movies have nothing to do with the original movies?"
SG-1 Guy, "Well, the creators of the movie didn't like SG-1 and wanted to complete their trilogy. The SG-1 movies follow SG-1 which follows the original movie. They're not in the same continuity as Stargate 2 & 3."
Movie Guy, "Oh my... there's two Stargate 2s and two two Stargate 3s?"
SG-1 Guy, "Yeah, something like that..."
Movie Guy, "Oh, forget it, this is too confusing, I'll just stick with the trilogy."
SG-1 Guy, "...but the SG-1 movies are better, they wrap up SG-1!"
Movie Guy, "...I don't care..."

Yeah, that's going to go over well. lol

Just funny how fans of the show come with all sorts of excuses, and make up all sorts of problems, to supposedly prove that making direct sequels to the original movie, without following SG-1, would be problematic.

This couldn't be farther from the truth.
Especially since it's likely that a large portion of the theater audiance will not know or watch SG-1.

And even if they do, you just have to make it simple: it's two continuities.

Different takes on the same original idea.

People aren't that dumb you know. They can understand, just like they understand that many films are adaptations of books, or midly inspired by them, and that as such, there are differences.

I also love how people consider the original movie so badly. It has all the strong bases that were needed to create a show.
Even more, it has the epic and the proper respect of alien cultural barrier that makes the situation even more credible.
Finally, it's still simply a beautiful adventure film.

People give episodes like Reckoning or Camelot high fives. I'd find it particularily hypocrit from these same people to bash the movie.

Mister Oragahn
August 14th, 2007, 08:38 AM
Besides, there were two news from 07 2006, which Gateworld provided.
Now, they removed the articles.

Here are the original links though:

http://www.gateworld.net/news/2006/07/devlinwantsmgmtocompletemo.shtml
http://www.gateworld.net/news/2006/07/devlinoptimisticaboutstarg.shtml

Fortunately, I quoted the text elsewhere, so here it is:


Twelve years after the original "Stargate" movie was a hit in theaters, writer and producer Dean Devlin still hopes to complete the trilogy he originally conceived. And he's in talks with MGM to do just that, he told fans gathered at the San Diego Comic Con today.

"'Stargate' was a film a lot like [Devlin's new film] 'Flyboys' because it's a film no one wanted to do or fund and we had to get our funds ourselves. I thought one time about what it would be like if I didn't do this. It's like being a dream ... and now the it's like the dream has walked out of my mind, across the street, married someone, etc."

While Devlin and "Stargate" director Roland Emmerich never raced to support the television series produced by MGM without their involvement, the producer said that he is proud of the success of his brain child.

"You can't help but be proud of that, especially when no one believed in that," he said. "There was a day we went back to the editorial suite and no one was there -- everyone was gone.

"The interesting irony is that now that Flyboys is independent, we've made a deal with MGM to release it. And suddenly now I'm in a position where I could suddenly do those sequels. We're in talks with MGM to do 'Stargate' sequels."

MGM originally acquired full rights to the "Stargate" franchise when it signed on to distribute the film in 1994, after it had been produced by Emmerich's Centropolis Films. Though Devlin hoped that the movie's box office success would make a second and third feature film happen, MGM instead tapped veteran television producers Jonathan Glassner and Brad Wright to create Stargate SG-1 for Showtime.

In light of SG-1's small screen success, MGM has for years expressed a desire to see Stargate return to the big screen, even penning a deal with Wright and SG-1 executive producer Robert C. Cooper to create an SG-1-based film.

Whether hope remains for Devlin's original "Stargate" concept -- and whether there is room for two different versions of the "Stargate" mythos -- remains in MGM's hands.

Read more about Devlin's Comic Con comments at FirstShowing.net and ComingSoon.net. "Flyboys," the story of a group of World War I fighter pilots, is in theaters September 29.


Dean Devlin, writer and producer of the original "Stargate" movie, isn't just wishing on a star when it comes to revisiting the trilogy he originally envisioned. Yesterday Devlin told fans on stage at San Diego Comic Con that he has signed a production deal with Stargate franchise owner MGM, and is in negotiations to create "Stargate 2" and "Stargate 3" independent of the successful, decade-old television franchise (story).

Now, in a new interview with SciFi Wire, Devlin reveals that he believes MGM's current executives will be receptive to the idea, as will director Roland Emmerich and original stars Kurt Russell ("Jack O'Neil") and James Spader ("Daniel Jackson").

When MGM found itself with a box office hit in 1994, the timing was off for a sequel film. "MGM had made a big commitment to doing the [SG-1] series," Devlin told the site, "and they were worried that the movie could interfere with the series. Well, now that the series has run so successfully for so long and spawned a second series, and there's a whole new regime at MGM, they're not really worried about, the series is running great on its own. And they think there is an audience out there who would like to see what parts two and parts three were intended to be. Because there was a larger story arc that we had in mind, and we never got to explore it so I think it will be very exciting to actually get to go do parts two and three."

Though fans have often assumed that Devlin's untold story eventually made its way into his film "Independence Day" (about an alien invasion of Earth thwarted by a brash pilot and a geeky scientist) or Bill McCay's series of five "Stargate" novels, the second film would in fact pick up 12 years after the original. The films would continue the story where it left off, when Jack O'Neil left Daniel Jackson on the planet Abydos.

"[Russell and Spader have] always said they wanted to do it," Devlin said. "... The irony is actually because it was 12 years ago that we made 'Stargate,' [and] part two was actually supposed to take place about 12 years later. We were just going to kind of age them up as actors. So it actually works out really nicely."

Devlin also believes that his original mythology can coexist with the hit TV series, the events of which picked up one year after the end of the film. "I think the series could still live at the end of the third sequel," he said. "So we're going to try to not tread on their stories."

Daniel Jackson
August 14th, 2007, 10:08 AM
Just funny how fans of the show come with all sorts of excuses, and make up all sorts of problems, to supposedly prove that making direct sequels to the original movie, without following SG-1, would be problematic. This couldn't be farther from the truth. Especially since it's likely that a large portion of the theater audiance will not know or watch SG-1. And even if they do, you just have to make it simple: it's two continuities. Different takes on the same original idea. People aren't that dumb you know. They can understand, just like they understand that many films are adaptations of books, or midly inspired by them, and that as such, there are differences. I also love how people consider the original movie so badly. It has all the strong bases that were needed to create a show. Even more, it has the epic and the proper respect of alien cultural barrier that makes the situation even more credible. Finally, it's still simply a beautiful adventure film. People give episodes like Reckoning or Camelot high fives. I'd find it particularily hypocrit from these same people to bash the movie.
All I'm saying is that if you make sequels to the original movie, it will hurt SG-1 movie sales.

Flyboy
August 14th, 2007, 10:29 AM
I doubt it, the Sg1 movies wont be bought by anyone not familiar with SG1 already. And people already familiar with SG1 will buy them whatever. In fact, new movies on the big screen from Devlin MIGHT inspire some new fans to look up that old Sg1 series theyd heard about and investigate it. After the first episode they'd kinda realise its a different continuity, but they'd go "meh, what the heck. Batman has different continuities..." and they'd watch SG1 and THEN buy the SG1 films.

-PITBULL-
August 14th, 2007, 01:37 PM
All I'm saying is that if you make sequels to the original movie, it will hurt SG-1 movie sales.

How is it going to hurt SG-1 Sales ...

1. The sales of SG-1 MOVIES are going to be based on the fans , not the everyday joe that watches movies for fun . They would be lost in the first place .

It would be like if they make a movie based off of some TV Series that has been out for 4 or 5 years and they make a movie based on that , your going to be lost if you didn't watch the TV series first and went straight to the movie . Yeah it might be a good movie , but will you be able to caught up to what's going on .

2. Devlin's Trilogy could help out , Re-release the STARGATE movie to theaters a week before the second movie comes out so newer people could see what its about ( and yes they can do this , they have done it in the past with STAR WARS ) and have the rest of the TRILOGY come out right after that .

They could even do a Direct to DVD Movies as well , Promoting them as a Trilogy of the 1st Movie . All this could do is get newer fans interested in see what STARGATE is about , and could even see a rise in sales of DVD Series and SG-1 Movies too see what the other side of the story is about .

The one thing you have to remember is that alot of the people that are going to buy the STARGATE SG-1 Based Movies are going to be the fans that have watched STARGATE for the past 10 or so years the people that know what is going on in the story of everything ( Seeing how the first movie is going to be the real ending of the series in the first place ) and yes i do know tha they are going to add in a section for those that haven't had the chance to watch the show to see what has happened in the last 10 years , but is that anuff to get people caught up like they should be ?

Steve_the_Wraith
August 14th, 2007, 01:52 PM
Talking with the studio is a long long way from making a film

most films that get talked about never go into production

-PITBULL-
August 14th, 2007, 02:00 PM
Talking with the studio is a long long way from making a film

most films that get talked about never go into production

at this point in time im going to agree with you on that one , seeing how Devlin hasn't said one things sense comic con of 2006 . Unless he's been doing this project with out anyone know what is going on ( and that has happened before )

morjana
August 14th, 2007, 04:18 PM
I also love how people consider the original movie so badly. It has all the strong bases that were needed to create a show.


I LOVE the original movie.

I also LOVE Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis.

I just happen to think that Devlin is talking out of his hat EVERY TIME he mentions making a sequel to Stargate.

He's had 13 years.

Morjana

Mister Oragahn
August 14th, 2007, 09:24 PM
Well, apparently he said he had signed a production deal. MGM didn't debunk this claim, as far as I know.

prion
August 15th, 2007, 05:12 AM
I LOVE the original movie.

I also LOVE Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis.

I just happen to think that Devlin is talking out of his hat EVERY TIME he mentions making a sequel to Stargate.

He's had 13 years.

Morjana

He might have problems with MGM with rights, but face it, without Devlin, none of us would be here discussing the tv show. He made the original Stargate. And in Hollywood, lots of movies take a long time to get off the ground.

g.o.d
August 15th, 2007, 05:57 AM
who the heck is Devlin? And what sequel are you talking about?:confused::confused:

jenks
August 15th, 2007, 06:07 AM
He wrote the original movie.

Flyboy
August 15th, 2007, 06:25 AM
who the heck is Devlin? And what sequel are you talking about?:confused::confused:
Devlin, as Jenks said, wrote the original movie. And has, of late discussed intentions of creating "Star Gate" 2 and 3 to complete his originally envisioned trilogy. This has caused controversy amongst the fandom, as "Star Gate" 2 and 3 would ignore S.G-1 continuity. Most believe that accepting that there are two different continuities is a trick that is well beyond the intellectual level of general gaters.

dec55
August 15th, 2007, 07:25 AM
Well since the series has been canceled, I think anything done by Devlin will
be great. His Librarian series with Noah Wylie has done great. It would be
great to see the movie cast reassembled. The Stargate movie was a big success back
when it came out...hitting number 1 in it's first week.

I definitely would like to see Devlin in the mix.

suse
August 15th, 2007, 07:49 AM
I LOVE the original movie.

I also LOVE Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis.

I just happen to think that Devlin is talking out of his hat EVERY TIME he mentions making a sequel to Stargate.

He's had 13 years.

Morjana

I was thinking he was blowing smoke out of his.. (Ori)fice. :eek:

I'd be shocked if MGM ever greenlights it. Not after all the money it's made off SG-1.

suse

-PITBULL-
August 15th, 2007, 08:19 AM
I was thinking he was blowing smoke out of his.. (Ori)fice. :eek:

I'd be shocked if MGM ever greenlights it. Not after all the money it's made off SG-1.

suse
Yeah but the money they could make off other movies that are STARGATE related is still a great thing for all of us .

I think if 007 , BATMAN and other movies like that could do different takes on them with still keeping the THEME of the show Myths going is a great idea .

Also who knows , Devlin's veiw of it could get new fans to the STARGATE shows . I will say if he does get the GREEN LIGHT on these movies , they should be a Direct to DVD MOVIES ONLY .

partly cloudy skies
August 15th, 2007, 08:55 AM
I'd be interested in seeing what his ideas were because I was a fan of the movie back in 94 way before I'd even heard of the series (being an antenna-only sort of family). I read the Bill McKay novels as well and that went in an interesting direction as well.

I was kind of saddened that SG-1 took pains to completely dump a lot of what was established in the films, like effectively writing out Sha'uri and eventually Abydos as well. I liked Feretti and Kawalsky too, and they were dump quite quick

l. I feel a lot of it was done so they could establish their own characters within the mythology. And although I do like Sam and Teal'c and Hammond and think they are cool additions, I kind of had to roll my eyes about how Sam and Katherine knew each other well enough and long enough to hug enthusiastically on ToT.

So it'd be cool to see what direction Devlin wanted to take. But I am very attached to the creation of the Goa'uld and Jaffa and now the Ori as well, so I don't look as a films as a correction; rather just as an AU like many comic-verse or classic hero storylines.

prion
August 15th, 2007, 09:35 AM
For those not in the know, Dean Devlin has done a lot:

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0002041/


Devlin, as Jenks said, wrote the original movie. And has, of late discussed intentions of creating "Star Gate" 2 and 3 to complete his originally envisioned trilogy. This has caused controversy amongst the fandom, as "Star Gate" 2 and 3 would ignore S.G-1 continuity. Most believe that accepting that there are two different continuities is a trick that is well beyond the intellectual level of general gaters.

There are die-hard fans who think that Stargate SG-1 IS the tv series, and nothing else and won't look outside the box, so to speak. However, it never would have come about without the movie. The novelizations based off the movie were far more interesting and complex than those that came off the series (due in part to constraints no doubt imposed by MGM).



Well since the series has been canceled, I think anything done by Devlin will
be great. His Librarian series with Noah Wylie has done great. It would be
great to see the movie cast reassembled. The Stargate movie was a big success back
when it came out...hitting number 1 in it's first week.

I definitely would like to see Devlin in the mix.


I'd be interested in seeing what his ideas were because I was a fan of the movie back in 94 way before I'd even heard of the series (being an antenna-only sort of family). I read the Bill McKay novels as well and that went in an interesting direction as well.

I was kind of saddened that SG-1 took pains to completely dump a lot of what was established in the films, like effectively writing out Sha'uri and eventually Abydos as well. I liked Feretti and Kawalsky too, and they were dump quite quick

l. I feel a lot of it was done so they could establish their own characters within the mythology. And although I do like Sam and Teal'c and Hammond and think they are cool additions, I kind of had to roll my eyes about how Sam and Katherine knew each other well enough and long enough to hug enthusiastically on ToT.

So it'd be cool to see what direction Devlin wanted to take. But I am very attached to the creation of the Goa'uld and Jaffa and now the Ori as well, so I don't look as a films as a correction; rather just as an AU like many comic-verse or classic hero storylines.

I think an Stargate movie could be done, without SG1 but following along the lines of the movie. Heck, they've done a ton of movies off TV shows. Plus if you got name actors in it (sorry, but alas, nobody in the tv series are 'name' draws, per se).

Yeah, Devlin's LIBRARIAN flicks were highly entertaining, and who can forget INDEPENDENCE DAY?

ReganX
August 15th, 2007, 09:46 AM
I was thinking he was blowing smoke out of his.. (Ori)fice. :eek:

I'd be shocked if MGM ever greenlights it. Not after all the money it's made off SG-1.

suse

I think that you may be right there; it's not just SG-1, they have Atlantis and possibly a third series. I don't see them greenlighting a movie that's basically going to be ignoring everything the shows have done as long as they're still producing anything Stargate related.

jenks
August 15th, 2007, 10:06 AM
I doubt they would do anything that might hurt the series, a film would be a risk, whereas as the universe SG-1 spawned is a guaranteed money spinner...

-PITBULL-
August 15th, 2007, 11:42 AM
I doubt they would do anything that might hurt the series, a film would be a risk, whereas as the universe SG-1 spawned is a guaranteed money spinner...

How would making a STARGATE TRILOGY based off the FIRST STARGATE MOVIE hurt the SG-1 Series or new series that comes out for STARGATE .

1. A Trilogy based off the first movie would get new fans to see what SG-1 was about .

2. any new series that comes out for STARGATE SG-1 would be something for the thousands and millions of already SG-1 and ATLANTIS fans . Yeah they will get new fans , but not the numbers that everyone thinks .

3. SG-1 has been out for the last 10 great years on TV and still the biggest actor to come out of it is R.D.A , Not saying that none of the others aren't known , its just if you was to go to a MOVIE fan that never watched the so or into SciFi , they wouldn't know who they where . But if you ask them if they know MacGyver they would say hey i loved that show . LOL sorry but a true fact , most of the SG-1 main cast members have only done SciFi shows .

Im not saying that Devlin should make a demand on making the STARGATE movies , or that the fans should start up and tell MGM they want to see Devlin's Trilogy . Im say that MGM should look at it as something that could make it interesting to bring new fans to the STARGATE Name .

Also if Devlin is really going to go ahead and make his TRILOGY of STARGATE , he needs to do it know . Get the script out there and let the fans have a look at it as well , let the fans help decide if his MOIVES should be made as well , but after they have read part of his script or plot for the movies . ( Yeah this takes away from the creative part of knowing what is going on before hand , but lets the fans get a taste of what could have happened ) ..

jenks
August 15th, 2007, 11:57 AM
How would making a STARGATE TRILOGY based off the FIRST STARGATE MOVIE hurt the SG-1 Series or new series that comes out for STARGATE .

Confuse newcomers and piss off the fan base. It's not as easy to make money from films as it used to be, a lot of films only break even through DVD sales, I doubt MGM would risk it when they know a lot of fans are against them, not when the SG-1 movies chances of making money are virtually 100%.

ReganX
August 15th, 2007, 12:34 PM
I doubt they would do anything that might hurt the series, a film would be a risk, whereas as the universe SG-1 spawned is a guaranteed money spinner...

Maybe later on, when they're finished with the SG-1 movies, Atlantis and their new series. Until then, I doubt it.

Flyboy
August 15th, 2007, 01:07 PM
Confuse newcomers and piss off the fan base. It's not as easy to make money from films as it used to be, a lot of films only break even through DVD sales, I doubt MGM would risk it when they know a lot of fans are against them, not when the SG-1 movies chances of making money are virtually 100%.
I'd say a lot of fans are for it as well...

partly cloudy skies
August 15th, 2007, 01:24 PM
Especially if they retain the original cast. Right now, even though opinions are diverse about him, Spader is an award darling for the media. And Kurt Russell is ...um... Kurt Russell. What do you say about a guy who's been acting since he left the womb?

poundpuppy29
August 15th, 2007, 04:37 PM
I think that ship has sailed and he should let it go. I only saw the movie once on tv and the series is much better

Mister Oragahn
August 16th, 2007, 01:23 AM
Confuse newcomers and piss off the fan base. It's not as easy to make money from films as it used to be, a lot of films only break even through DVD sales, I doubt MGM would risk it when they know a lot of fans are against them, not when the SG-1 movies chances of making money are virtually 100%.

Nope, only piss off a portion of the fan base.

The film got issues because of critics slamming it.
The film gained strong momentum since then. It's SF, you can't do much about it.
Fraking Phantom Menace is found to get better scores than Stargate.
Really, at some point, there's an amount of bias you can't avoid.

Flyboy
August 16th, 2007, 01:42 AM
Nope, only piss off a portion of the fan base.

The film got issues because of critics slamming it.
The film gained strong momentum since then. It's SF, you can't do much about it.
Fraking Phantom Menace is found to get better scores than Stargate.
Really, at some point, there's an amount of bias you can't avoid.
And frankly, what about Stargate DOESN'T piss off a portion of the fanbase?

Let's make a really clever plot decision and ascend Daniel! - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Daniel back. - fans pissed off.
Let's put Carter in charge of SG-1. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Carter from command of SG-1 and put Mitchell in charge. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Vala. - fans pissed off.
Let's have a new General. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce a new enemy - fans pissed off.
Let's end this new enemy quickly. - fans pissed off.
Let's make season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's cancel season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Doctor Frasier. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Ford - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Beckett. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Beckett back. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring O'Neill to Atlantis for a two parter. - fans pissed off.
Let's replace Weir with Carter. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Ronan. - fans pissed off.
Let's give Ronan no development. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring the replicators back. - fans pissed off.

What ISN'T a portion of the fanbase pissed off about?

Mister Oragahn
August 16th, 2007, 02:10 AM
And frankly, what about Stargate DOESN'T piss off a portion of the fanbase?

Let's make a really clever plot decision and ascend Daniel! - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Daniel back. - fans pissed off.
Let's put Carter in charge of SG-1. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Carter from command of SG-1 and put Mitchell in charge. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Vala. - fans pissed off.
Let's have a new General. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce a new enemy - fans pissed off.
Let's end this new enemy quickly. - fans pissed off.
Let's make season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's cancel season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Doctor Frasier. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Ford - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Beckett. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Beckett back. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring O'Neill to Atlantis for a two parter. - fans pissed off.
Let's replace Weir with Carter. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Ronan. - fans pissed off.
Let's give Ronan no development. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring the replicators back. - fans pissed off.

What ISN'T a portion of the fanbase pissed off about?

Damn right.

-PITBULL-
August 16th, 2007, 12:14 PM
And frankly, what about Stargate DOESN'T piss off a portion of the fanbase?

Let's make a really clever plot decision and ascend Daniel! - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Daniel back. - fans pissed off.
Let's put Carter in charge of SG-1. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Carter from command of SG-1 and put Mitchell in charge. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Vala. - fans pissed off.
Let's have a new General. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce a new enemy - fans pissed off.
Let's end this new enemy quickly. - fans pissed off.
Let's make season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's cancel season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Doctor Frasier. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Ford - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Beckett. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Beckett back. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring O'Neill to Atlantis for a two parter. - fans pissed off.
Let's replace Weir with Carter. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Ronan. - fans pissed off.
Let's give Ronan no development. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring the replicators back. - fans pissed off.

What ISN'T a portion of the fanbase pissed off about?

thats the thing , SciFi fans will never be happy with everything about there favorite SciFi show . Yeah they could take out this person and bring him back later , but they are going to have to deal with the fans that don't like that decision . Then you have the fans that beg for some of these things and they might be happy for a short period of time , but then you have a new eps that kills it all .

So what if say 50% of the STARGATE fans don't want Devlin to make his Trilogy , there is still a % out there that would like to see it . There is STARGATE fans that don't or never like the series , but like the movie that might want to see his Trilogy as well .

How SciFi works , Devlin could make his Trilogy and the Series would never die or loose there fans . Could even bring new fans to both sides , Devlin might get a better fan base out of his trilogy , as well as SG-1 could get a few fans out of his trilogy .

jenks
August 17th, 2007, 05:47 AM
I'm talking about a big portion, when Devlin was spouting his crap, there was uproar, the majority of fans seemed firmly against them.

Flyboy
August 17th, 2007, 06:07 AM
No, that's because the angry fans shout louder than the happy fans.

Randy_Watson
August 17th, 2007, 02:06 PM
I'm for the movies. FOB is right, something always pisses off some of the fans and we all notice the most vocal. This is especially true here on the internet, where fandom is skewed.

Besides, I don't have any numbers to back it up, but I personally know a lot more people who liked the movie than have even seen, or care to see, the series.

Mister Oragahn
August 18th, 2007, 08:19 AM
No, that's because the angry fans shout louder than the happy fans.

Yep, and also because most fans here have been fed with SG-1, or/and jumped in the train late, and probably didn't even go to the cinema in '94.

ReganX
August 18th, 2007, 02:18 PM
I'm talking about a big portion, when Devlin was spouting his crap, there was uproar, the majority of fans seemed firmly against them.

I'm not surprised, honestly. The movie was only a couple of hours long. We've probably had about 150 hours of the TV series over the years, more if you count Atlantis towards that tally.

For a lot of people, the TV show has been been "Stargate" for a good decade. Devlin's movies would not include characters, events or concepts introduced on the show. It would essentially be writing a new canon, one that did not include many of the elements fans love from the show and, since these movies would be sequels to the original, I could see why some might interpret that as a move to say that the movie trilogy was the "real" canon and be upset by that.

I don't see the movies being made any time soon, though. As I understand it, the rights to the storyline and characters, including Jack and Daniel, belong to MGM and they are perfectly within their rights to refuse to allow Devlin to use them.

-PITBULL-
August 18th, 2007, 02:32 PM
I'm not surprised, honestly. The movie was only a couple of hours long. We've probably had about 150 hours of the TV series over the years, more if you count Atlantis towards that tally.

For a lot of people, the TV show has been been "Stargate" for a good decade. Devlin's movies would not include characters, events or concepts introduced on the show. It would essentially be writing a new canon, one that did not include many of the elements fans love from the show and, since these movies would be sequels to the original, I could see why some might interpret that as a move to say that the movie trilogy was the "real" canon and be upset by that.

I don't see the movies being made any time soon, though. As I understand it, the rights to the storyline and characters, including Jack and Daniel, belong to MGM and they are perfectly within their rights to refuse to allow Devlin to use them.
Yeah but what about the fan base that does want to see him make his TRILOGY , yeah not everyone wants to see it , and your right he wouldn't have the same story line or characters like SG-1 has , or have anything to do with those characters ( at least Danny boy and Jack would be there , Not the same actors but it would be with them ) . I would love to see where he wanted STARGATE to go , yeah MGM Could say no . But its SciFi , so there is always room for a different view of the show .

ReganX
August 18th, 2007, 02:58 PM
Yeah but what about the fan base that does want to see him make his TRILOGY , yeah not everyone wants to see it , and your right he wouldn't have the same story line or characters like SG-1 has , or have anything to do with those characters ( at least Danny boy and Jack would be there , Not the same actors but it would be with them ) . I would love to see where he wanted STARGATE to go , yeah MGM Could say no . But its SciFi , so there is always room for a different view of the show .

I'm sure that there are fans that would like to see the movie trilogy completed but twelve years is a long time between movies, and for most of those twelve years, people have been watching the TV series. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of those people were more interested in the SG-1 storyline and characters - look at this forum, for example. What would you say we talk about more; the movie or the TV series?

It may be very difficult to go back, after all this time. The Stargate story has moved on from the movie. We've watched SG-1 and its characters evolve over ten seasons. We saw what happened to Jack, to Daniel, to Sha're, to Skaara, even to Abydos itself. We've learned the history of the gate builders, we've seen the defeat of Ra's race. I can't speak for everybody, of course, but personally I would find it both strange and unsatisfying to see the clock reset and to be told "actually, this is what really happened to Jack, Daniel, etc."

As far as both the Devlin movies and the SG-1 movies+any future projects being able to coexist, I don't see why MGM would want to risk even the possibility that the Devlin movies could hurt the prospects of the SG-1 movies, Atlantis or any future series, not when they have done quite well out of the Stargate franchise so far.

Why take a chance if they're already making their money out of SG-1, Atlantis and the merchandise for both shows?

Ganthet Jr.
August 18th, 2007, 05:00 PM
Some fans want to see Devlin's sequels, some don't. Whatever decision is made, part of the fanbase will be pissed off. I'd rather not have Devlin's sequels, thus pissing off the fanbase but still keeping the continuity whole than pissing off the other portion and fracturing the continuity.

ReganX
August 18th, 2007, 05:20 PM
Some fans want to see Devlin's sequels, some don't. Whatever decision is made, part of the fanbase will be pissed off. I'd rather not have Devlin's sequels, thus pissing off the fanbase but still keeping the continuity whole than pissing off the other portion and fracturing the continuity.

I wonder if a movie that never existed would really bother many people.

Realistically, most of the people who watched and enjoyed the movie may not even be aware that Devlin wants to make the sequels in the first place. If that is the case, they are hardly going to be upset that a movie they didn't know was even being considered is not going to be made.

I would say that there is more of a risk of upsetting people by making the movie than by not making it.

Mister Oragahn
August 19th, 2007, 05:24 AM
I'm not surprised, honestly. The movie was only a couple of hours long. We've probably had about 150 hours of the TV series over the years, more if you count Atlantis towards that tally.

For a lot of people, the TV show has been been "Stargate" for a good decade. Devlin's movies would not include characters, events or concepts introduced on the show. It would essentially be writing a new canon, one that did not include many of the elements fans love from the show and, since these movies would be sequels to the original, I could see why some might interpret that as a move to say that the movie trilogy was the "real" canon and be upset by that.

I don't see the movies being made any time soon, though. As I understand it, the rights to the storyline and characters, including Jack and Daniel, belong to MGM and they are perfectly within their rights to refuse to allow Devlin to use them.

Point is, the films can make lots of money, can put the Stargate on the big screen, which SG-1 fails to do, and apparently there's still lots of people who loved the first film and would like to see sequel, not counting the non-fans who might just end liking the new films because they'd be cool, plain and simple.

If they're made, you'll be able to complain as much as you want, but you'll, in fact, appear as the troublesome people, against those who liked the films.

Yes, you'll be, once more, seen as the annoying fans.

Randy_Watson
August 19th, 2007, 09:50 AM
I would say that there is more of a risk of upsetting people by making the movie than by not making it.

People may get upset at new Devlin movies and refuse to watch them, but I don't really see how that would affect MGM's bottom line. I can't imagine a lot of people would think "I hate MGM for doing this, therefore I will no longer watch any SG-1, Atlantis, Universe, programming because MGM is evil, and my mind is blown by there being conflicting story lines."

Daniel Jackson
August 19th, 2007, 10:15 AM
MGM considers the TV series STARGATE SG-1 to be the official continuation to the movie STARGATE, I think that, more than anything, will be the main reason why sequels to the original movie won't be made. MGM has made it quite clear that they'd rather make SG-1 movies.

ReganX
August 19th, 2007, 12:19 PM
MGM considers the TV series STARGATE SG-1 to be the official continuation to the movie STARGATE, I think that, more than anything, will be the main reason why sequels to the original movie won't be made. MGM has made it quite clear that they'd rather make SG-1 movies.

I can't fault them for that; after putting ten years into SG-1, it's completely understandable that they'd want to continue with that storyline rather than with a conflicting one.

Mister Oragahn
August 20th, 2007, 09:59 AM
People may get upset at new Devlin movies and refuse to watch them, but I don't really see how that would affect MGM's bottom line. I can't imagine a lot of people would think "I hate MGM for doing this, therefore I will no longer watch any SG-1, Atlantis, Universe, programming because MGM is evil, and my mind is blown by there being conflicting story lines."

When you think about is, such a stance would require much more self convincing, self imposed restriction, so much efforts, than actually simply understanding the existence of two continuities.

dec55
August 21st, 2007, 11:53 PM
The Original Stargate movie made close to $200 million world wide....

in 1994 $dollars.

Dean himself has the credit on this movie as producer/writer/creator....

As much as I love the series....it was the movie that got me hooked.

I also suspect a greater percentage of fans would support Dean's effort.

full.infinity
August 22nd, 2007, 09:54 PM
And frankly, what about Stargate DOESN'T piss off a portion of the fanbase?

Let's make a really clever plot decision and ascend Daniel! - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Daniel back. - fans pissed off.
Let's put Carter in charge of SG-1. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Carter from command of SG-1 and put Mitchell in charge. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Vala. - fans pissed off.
Let's have a new General. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce a new enemy - fans pissed off.
Let's end this new enemy quickly. - fans pissed off.
Let's make season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's cancel season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Doctor Frasier. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Ford - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Beckett. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Beckett back. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring O'Neill to Atlantis for a two parter. - fans pissed off.
Let's replace Weir with Carter. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Ronan. - fans pissed off.
Let's give Ronan no development. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring the replicators back. - fans pissed off.

What ISN'T a portion of the fanbase pissed off about?
That Teal'c isn't dead?

Mister Oragahn
November 24th, 2007, 05:04 PM
Bump.

Because the search function is hidden.

Nitegate
November 26th, 2007, 08:55 AM
it's NOT Devlin's sequel, it would be ROLAND EMMERICH's sequel.

Emmerich wrote the concept of Stargate when he was in college in the early 70s, and presented it to collegue and friend Dean Devlin, he liked it, so they co-wrote the Stargate that was made in 94.

Roland Emmerich directed & co-wrote it, Devlin just co-wrote. everyone gives all the credit to Devlin and none to Emmerich

DanJack
November 26th, 2007, 10:17 AM
I'm sure that there are fans that would like to see the movie trilogy completed but twelve years is a long time between movies, and for most of those twelve years, people have been watching the TV series. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of those people were more interested in the SG-1 storyline and characters - look at this forum, for example. What would you say we talk about more; the movie or the TV series?

It may be very difficult to go back, after all this time. The Stargate story has moved on from the movie. We've watched SG-1 and its characters evolve over ten seasons. We saw what happened to Jack, to Daniel, to Sha're, to Skaara, even to Abydos itself. We've learned the history of the gate builders, we've seen the defeat of Ra's race. I can't speak for everybody, of course, but personally I would find it both strange and unsatisfying to see the clock reset and to be told "actually, this is what really happened to Jack, Daniel, etc."

As far as both the Devlin movies and the SG-1 movies+any future projects being able to coexist, I don't see why MGM would want to risk even the possibility that the Devlin movies could hurt the prospects of the SG-1 movies, Atlantis or any future series, not when they have done quite well out of the Stargate franchise so far.

Why take a chance if they're already making their money out of SG-1, Atlantis and the merchandise for both shows?

I complete agree with you ReganX. Also, an MGM exec recently said in an interview that MGM considers the SG shows their most important franchise, and is to Television what their James Bond franchise is to films. I agree with you on the continuity as well. One of the great things about Stargate SG-1 and SGA is the great continuity. To willingly mess up the canon is silly. I personally don't want to see Stargate become the next Highlander (multiple continuities, none really making any sense). IMHO, the SG movie was good (I saw it in the Theatre and bought the VHS and DVD), but SG-1 has gone worlds beyond what the movie ever achieved. The stories are better and the characters richer. No offense to the movie, but there is a reason why SG-1 is one of the most popular Sci-Fi franchises worldwide.

Aryk Celestis
November 27th, 2007, 01:07 PM
And frankly, what about Stargate DOESN'T piss off a portion of the fanbase?

Let's make a really clever plot decision and ascend Daniel! - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Daniel back. - fans pissed off.
Let's put Carter in charge of SG-1. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Carter from command of SG-1 and put Mitchell in charge. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Vala. - fans pissed off.
Let's have a new General. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce a new enemy - fans pissed off.
Let's end this new enemy quickly. - fans pissed off.
Let's make season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's cancel season 9 & 10. - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Doctor Frasier. - fans pissed off.
Let's remove Ford - fans pissed off.
Let's kill Beckett. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring Beckett back. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring O'Neill to Atlantis for a two parter. - fans pissed off.
Let's replace Weir with Carter. - fans pissed off.
Let's introduce Ronan. - fans pissed off.
Let's give Ronan no development. - fans pissed off.
Let's bring the replicators back. - fans pissed off.

What ISN'T a portion of the fanbase pissed off about?

I know it's an old post and aside from the fact that you forgot about Jonas, I gotta say, you hit the nail on the head. No matter what happens, one half of the fans will always complain about an issue and the other half on the other side of the issue.

Anyway, I agree all the way with ReganX and DanJack. In the past, when I just saw the original movie and before SG-1 started, I would've loved to see them make a 'true sequel' in the same spirit, but now... Because of the enormous success of SG-1 and Atlantis, the franchise has gone past the point of no return. It would indeed be very strange to suddenly 're-boot' the franchise and confuse tons of fans.

Mister Oragahn
December 2nd, 2007, 03:52 PM
it's NOT Devlin's sequel, it would be ROLAND EMMERICH's sequel.

Emmerich wrote the concept of Stargate when he was in college in the early 70s, and presented it to collegue and friend Dean Devlin, he liked it, so they co-wrote the Stargate that was made in 94.

Roland Emmerich directed & co-wrote it, Devlin just co-wrote. everyone gives all the credit to Devlin and none to Emmerich

No, but for those who follow, only Devlin manifested the wish to make the sequels thus far, so it's Devlin's sequels, until further notice.