PDA

View Full Version : SGU - inject a bit more dramatic intensity like BSG - Sci FI's Dave Howe



Madwelshboy
August 23rd, 2008, 10:56 AM
Sci Fi also is losing space opera Battlestar Galactica after the current season and wants to keep that genre an important part of the network, Sci Fi Channel president Dave Howe said.

“The intention here is to make this one skew young and give it a contemporary vibe,” Howe told Multichannel News Friday.

He said the new series presents a chance to take some new creative turns with the franchise. “As a network, obviously we look at Battlestar Galactica, that’s set the standard in terms of tense character drama. Stargate does not have the intensity of a Battlestar Galactica. But it may well be somewhere in between. Brad and Robert are very eager to keep the action and adventure and the sense of humor [in Stargate Universe]. But I think there’s an opportunity to maybe inject a bit more dramatic intensity into the series. But that’s obviously a conversation for them as they start to script and move into development.”


The plan is to start shooting early next year, so casting and scripting will start soon, Howe said.

As has been described, Stargate Universe involves the discovery of an ancient vessel — reached by the space-travel portal called the stargate — that was intended to explore different galaxies where stargates have been placed and see how civilizations there have progressed.

“What’s unique about this chapter is it’s going to be set entirely in space,” Howe said. “They’re on a ship, the Destiny. That’s also an opportunity for us because as Battlestar Galactica reaches a conclusion it’s nice for us to have within the mix of programming a space opera that serves the audience that’s really into in space operas.”

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=talkbackCommentsFull&talk_back_header_id=6551039&articleid=CA6589541

Pitry
August 23rd, 2008, 12:03 PM
So the "made for a younger audience" was a code name for BSG-esque? And I thought I was being overly cynical.

Sigh.

I shall repeat my earlier sentiment. If Stargate has lost its identity so thoroughly they have to copy some other science fiction show, I'd rather it be Doctor Who.

Jill_Ion
August 23rd, 2008, 12:28 PM
But if I wanted to watch something BSGesque, I would watch BSG. Which I don't. I might someday via DVD. I've seen three episodes and...it's OK.

I'd rather watch SG-1 or SGA. Which I do. A Lot.

Plus, the only space soap I wanna watch would be Starcrossed.

P-90_177
August 23rd, 2008, 12:30 PM
Oh thank god! If SGU is made darker towards the BSG-esque this may actually turn out to be ok afterall.

Col.Foley
August 23rd, 2008, 12:35 PM
*head desk*
Why Why Why Producers! Why?
:thoranime01:
This might be the end of Stargate as we know it...which is not a good thing.

Infinite-Possibilities
August 23rd, 2008, 12:47 PM
I'm confused. BSG doesn't seem like it is aimed at a younger audience than SGA.

Flyboy
August 23rd, 2008, 12:49 PM
It's a toughie aint it?

Basically I read it as being as character driven as BSG, but no where near as intelligent or dark.

gwendell
August 23rd, 2008, 12:56 PM
Oh, for crying out loud. If I wanted something more like BSG, I'd watch BSG. I guess if the Stargate future lies in that direction, I won't be following it.

Here's hoping they come to their senses before then.

Col.Foley
August 23rd, 2008, 12:57 PM
I'm confused. BSG doesn't seem like it is aimed at a younger audience than SGA.
It does depend...from the content one would not think that it would be, however, that is what younger people seem to be in for these days. Some of us any way.

It's a toughie aint it?

Basically I read it as being as character driven as BSG, but no where near as intelligent or dark.
I never found BSG to be super intelligent.

Flyboy
August 23rd, 2008, 01:01 PM
Not "super" intelligent, but you know....

jenks
August 23rd, 2008, 01:02 PM
As usual, people are jumping to conclusions. All that's been said is that they want to make it more dramatic, they also make it clear that they want to keep the action/adventure and humour in the show, so I wouldn't go into doom and gloom mode just yet.

Col.Foley
August 23rd, 2008, 01:03 PM
Not "super" intelligent, but you know....I have always found both the gates to be generally more intelligent then Galactica. Especially during the arcs that you see in Gate.
If it wants to take some inspiration on a show to make it good, intelligent, and epic, it might want to try it from Babylon 5, or Deep Space Nine.
Andromeda would be a better choice then inspiration for an intelligent series even. As long as it is minus season 5 that is.

Col.Foley
August 23rd, 2008, 01:04 PM
As usual, people are jumping to conclusions. All that's been said is that they want to make it more dramatic, they also make it clear that they want to keep the action/adventure and humour in the show, so I wouldn't go into doom and gloom mode just yet.
I'm not really...but the 'space opera' bit has me the most concerned, considering people call BSG one, now that could simple be a misunderstanding.
Never mind.

ferrari20092
August 23rd, 2008, 01:06 PM
AWESOME.. People you need to understand what they are saying and stop speculating it may not be terrible. They are trying to bring in newer audience, they aren't going to make it all soap operay, It will be the same ole stargate just with some darker themes which is really great! So stop saying it's going to be bad, I bet it will be a very entertaining show, just wait and see, at least wait until they have the actors and the script written.

Col.Foley
August 23rd, 2008, 01:09 PM
AWESOME.. People you need to understand what they are saying and stop speculating it may not be terrible. They are trying to bring in newer audience, they aren't going to make it all soap operay, It will be the same ole stargate just with some darker themes which is really great! So stop saying it's going to be bad, I bet it will be a very entertaining show, just wait and see, at least wait until they have the actors and the script written.Yeah...but when I hear words like Glactica, and Gate, inspiration, same sentence, I want to find a small dark hole in the ground. However, I of course will give it its chance, and you are probably right, I hope you are any way. And this is the most likely any way.

Naonak
August 23rd, 2008, 01:53 PM
As usual, people are jumping to conclusions. All that's been said is that they want to make it more dramatic, they also make it clear that they want to keep the action/adventure and humour in the show, so I wouldn't go into doom and gloom mode just yet.
:indeed:

Personally, I think that "somewhere in between" could be excellent.

They aren't about to turn it into BSG, I don't think that Brad and Rob and anyone else who comes over would really want to, but having a bit more drama and character development is nothing to complain about. Hell, the lack of it is the main complaint of most people when it comes to SGA.

Col.Foley
August 23rd, 2008, 01:54 PM
:indeed:

Personally, I think that "somewhere in between" could be excellent.Depends on which part of it they give the priority.

GusF
August 23rd, 2008, 02:00 PM
Ah! I despise Battlestar Galactica. Stargate is nothing like BSG and shouldn't try to be. Part of the reason why I adore Stargate (particularly SG-1) as much as I do is that it doesn't take itself too seriously and there are plenty of lighthearted moments.

Don't get me wrong, I like the heavy dramatic stuff in Stargate and other programmes as well but, you know, it is less of a hook for me quite frankly. BSG is so dark and depressing that it actually makes me question my faith in humanity. The relatively few times that I've watched it, it's usually left me in a bad mood. I mean, I couldn't imagine BSG coming out with comedic episodes like Window of Opportunity, 200 or Duet in a billion years. I know that humanity is on the verge of extinction or whatever but, c'mon, the odd joke wouldn't hurt! To occasionally boost another character's morale, if nothing else.

Anyway, rant over. Back to Universe. As long as it is nowhere near as dark as BSG, it should be good. I wouldn't mind if it was somewhat darker than SG-1 and Atlantis as long as there are still healthy doses of humour and sarcasm along the way. I honestly believe that its humour is one of Stargate's greatest assets. Hopefully, every now and then, Universe will produce comedies like those mentioned above, all of which I regard as being classics of Stargate itself and sci-fi television in general.

Pitry
August 23rd, 2008, 02:10 PM
I'm confused. BSG doesn't seem like it is aimed at a younger audience than SGA.

It's the "Ho! The Angst!", I would imagine, in general, younger people seem to be more impressed by it than older people.

Don't get me wrong. I love good angst. When it's done wel and is injected with humour. The new DW franchise is very angsty. But it's not as "HO!" as BSG is. and I do have a feelign that's what they mean.

Christopher
August 23rd, 2008, 02:26 PM
At first I was intrigued, then I was worried... But then I sat back and realised: when Atlantis first started, I wasn't sure at all if I'd like it. I didn't give it a chance, and I missed most of the first season. When I realised what I was missing out on, I went back and marathonned the first series and I've been an addict ever since - love it as much as SG1 (but SG1 always has first place in my heart :D).

I'm not worried about SGU. They'll do the right thing, nobody wants to see their creation go skew-wiff, and I think they have a powerful enough franchise to be able to leverage their own takes on how it should pan out to result in a very watchable, and enjoyable series.

Thunderbird 2
August 23rd, 2008, 02:50 PM
In some ways this makes sense. - Galactica has re-written the book on Space Opera sci fi. The last series to do that was Star Trek Deep Space Nine in its character develpment.

It's also very shrewd from a marketing standpoint. If Universe sticks to its guns and is truely independant from SG1 and Atlantis, it can set itself in a different style and format, while trying to retain winning aspects from both of its predacessors. If it works, it can set its own new "niche audience." If it fails, it won't have had any impact on the other two formats, which can carry on their merry way.

Part of me suspects the producers were humming and hawing when they introduced the Daedelus and later the Midway station into Atlantis, connecting the series back to Earth. Perhaps using that experience as a writing template, they felt ready to pitch a concept that doesn't have that safety net. Even if that is not the case, I'd hate to have to come up with a tv concept on a scale this is implying!

I have said this in other threads. - Its taking a risk, as the writing will have to be exceptional right from the start, and maintain a standard.

Col.Foley
August 23rd, 2008, 02:55 PM
In some ways this makes sense. - Galactica has re-written the book on Space Opera sci fi. The last series to do that was Star Trek Deep Space Nine in its character develpment.

It's also very shrewd from a marketing standpoint. If Universe sticks to its guns and is truely independant from SG1 and Atlantis, it can set itself in a different style and format, while trying to retain winning aspects from both of its predacessors. If it works, it can set its own new "niche audience." If it fails, it won't have had any impact on the other two formats, which can carry on their merry way.

Part of me suspects the producers were humming and hawing when they introduced the Daedelus and later the Midway station into Atlantis, connecting the series back to Earth. Perhaps using that experience as a writing template, they felt ready to pitch a concept that doesn't have that safety net. Even if that is not the case, I'd hate to have to come up with a tv concept on a scale this is implying!

I have said this in other threads. - Its taking a risk, as the writing will have to be exceptional right from the start, and maintain a standard.Have you ever seen Babylon 5?

ciannwn
August 23rd, 2008, 03:01 PM
But I think there’s an opportunity to maybe inject a bit more dramatic intensity into the series.

It all depends what they mean here. A lot of fans were annoyed when, after the main characters had been in tears at the end of 'Sunday' nobody mentioned Beckett again until 'First Strike'. If the format had been a little different there would have been room for a couple of lines about how they were all missing Beckett in 'Submersion' before the action started. I don't mind indications that someone who went through a traumatic experience in one episode hasn't forgotten about it by the next but I honestly can't see BSG dramatic intensity working if we're only getting a very small group of characters. The good thing about BSG is that we don't see every single character every single week. This meant that anyone who got a bit fed up with Starbuck and Apollo, for example, could have a break because another episode would focus on someone else.

Oma Yksilo
August 23rd, 2008, 03:48 PM
Charming - so this means we are going to get a show with a bunch of depressing characters, which total about ten that we get bounced around from been the focal of one episode to a 30 second cameo in the second.. and plenty of sex, with anything the movies.

Wonderful...

jenks
August 23rd, 2008, 05:11 PM
Charming - so this means we are going to get a show with a bunch of depressing characters, which total about ten that we get bounced around from been the focal of one episode to a 30 second cameo in the second.. and plenty of sex, with anything the movies.

Wonderful...

Uh, no.

Chricton
August 23rd, 2008, 09:34 PM
The idea is to get more attention on the channel. BSG gave the channel far more attention than they ever could have achieved with the SG franchise because of the "style", despite the relatively similar ratings.

kufan76
August 23rd, 2008, 10:23 PM
Here's the issue I have. The remake of BSG was set two, three decades after the original series. That's why it worked, for most people it was a brand new show. If they try to change stargate into a similar fashion, it won't work. I do believe that if they can find a balance between the drama, and the humor, it'll be good. I liked atlantis because to me atlantis is the final theme for sg-1. See to me, atlantis and all it represents, are sprinkled throughout the entire 10 year run of sg-1. It was all hints of a powerful race that could help us, "Torment of Tantulus" I believe in season one episode nine, is our first glimpse...and it just keeps going from there. So to me, Atlantis is the logical step from Sg-1. SGU..eh, not so much. They are trying to use the whole ancient thing again, but unless they set it up or give clues about it the rest of season five, and how it will fit in to the entire story, it will have a hard time.

What would have been best is if they had been dropping hints and small things about the ship destiny or other items concerning the ninth chevron since they made it to atlantis, it could have been built up a little bit. sg-1 started hinting about the lost city back in the end of season 5 I believe, and Jonas quinn, continued his work in season 6 to find the lost city, and season 7 was about that as well. The point is, is that there was elements built into the stories, which lead to atlantis....there's nothing leading to sgu: except the ninth chevron, which as far as I can remember has never been discussed on either sg1 or sga.

_Famrir_
August 23rd, 2008, 10:40 PM
i despise bsg it was sooooo depressing and monotonous with with the same plot, running from the bots.

Stargate on the other hand is a happy show and puts the government in good light, such as saving species and killing snakes instead of killing a colony to save your own ass...

Though sgu could use some darker elements but should have humour and intelligence sg1 and sga provided.

plus i never cared for softcore starship porn...

Col.Foley
August 23rd, 2008, 10:43 PM
i despise bsg it was sooooo depressing and has on some occasions questions civilization if we would just be destroyed in the end.
Stargate on the other hand is a happy show and buts the government in good light, such as saving species and killing snakes instead of killing a colony to save your own ass...

Though sgu could use some darker elements but should have humour and intelligence sg1 and sga provided.

plus i never cared for softcore starship porn...Actually there have been time when they have portrayed gov in a bad light, the NID, Kinsey, and such. And the government itself did actually not kill snakes and stuff. SG-1 did that, although they did have gov funding. however you are right. BSG portrays us as being a very dark species, while SG-1 portrays the good,and bad, but ultimatly the good aspects.

Thunderbird 2
August 24th, 2008, 01:47 AM
Have you ever seen Babylon 5?

I knew I was forgetting something! I am a big fan of B5 as well, and its writing shows strength other series have lacked. I should have mentioned Farscape as well for its characterisation triumphing over pops and bangs. I was too busy trying to think of examples with more than one spin off. :beckettanime09:

They along with Galactica's recent sucess reinforce the point though. UNiverse's writing will have to be exceptional.

As a side note, has anything further been said about more stories from B5 The Lost Tales?

g.o.d
August 24th, 2008, 02:01 AM
I love BSG and I hope we'll something similar in SGU(drunk depressed people under constant pressure, throwing people out of the airlock, etc.)

Jeff O'Connor
August 24th, 2008, 02:04 AM
I almost can't tell if you're being serious or not...

g.o.d
August 24th, 2008, 02:07 AM
I almost can't tell if you're being serious or not...

I'm serious..I love dark shows

Jeff O'Connor
August 24th, 2008, 02:09 AM
I'm serious..I love dark shows

Okay, cool, me too, usually. I love BSG, at least. It's just that the way you worded that almost sounded too intentionally nihilistic. :cool:

Gate-builder
August 24th, 2008, 02:15 AM
If Universe is going to be even remotely like BSG then it will be a huge backwards step for the Stargate franchise

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 02:16 AM
The idea is to get more attention on the channel. BSG gave the channel far more attention than they ever could have achieved with the SG franchise because of the "style", despite the relatively similar ratings.

So who are they hoping to attract with all this BSG talk? BSG fans who never bothered with Stargate because they think it's tame and superficial in comparison? If so, these potential new viewers aren't going to stay around for very long if SGU doesn't deliver what they think was promised.

Another aspect of BSG is that there are some human female characters who are scarier and tougher than the male characters. SGA gave us Larrin who got 'toned down' by being presented as a 'fun character' instead of a genuinely ruthless leader. BSG would have presented her as a female Kolya but Stargate only allows females to be tough and ruthless if they are aliens like Wraith Queens and Goa'uld.

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 04:41 AM
Everyone here is reading their comments about BSG to be that SGU will have a darker tone and more complex storylines and so forth.

I thought it was painfully obvious that the element of BSG that they are attempting to mirror is nothing more than the fact that the damn show is set entirely in space. It's the new space faring drama replacing Enterprise and BSG on Sci Fi. It's not a new Gate show.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 04:46 AM
Everyone here is reading their comments about BSG to be that SGU will have a darker tone and more complex storylines and so forth.

I thought it was painfully obvious that the element of BSG that they are attempting to mirror is nothing more than the fact that the damn show is set entirely in space. It's the new space faring drama replacing Enterprise and BSG on Sci Fi. It's not a new Gate show.

I got the feeling it's not just the "set in space" - but definitely the elements of more explicit violence, sex and swearing that make people convinced BSG is "dark", the networks' holy grail of "how to attract yougner viewers".

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 04:53 AM
Hmm.

I'm just hoping they don't act like university students out there... Seeing a bunch of what are basicaly immature students saving the world is just as bad as shows where a bunch of 12 year olds save the world if you ask me.

IF, and I stress IF, they do pull it off and it doesn't feel all young and studentish then it may work, but then we fall back on the other problem. It's identity has NOTHING to do with Stargate as we know it. It will be a space faring rip off and not a Stargate continuation.

Sorry, negative, I know. Hey I'll watch, but even if I enjoy it, I doubt it will be as a Stargate show.

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 04:53 AM
I thought it was painfully obvious that the element of BSG that they are attempting to mirror is nothing more than the fact that the damn show is set entirely in space. It's the new space faring drama replacing Enterprise and BSG on Sci Fi. It's not a new Gate show.

And before Enterprise and BSG we had Voyager and, decades ago, Lost In Space. If people are lured in by the thought of a BSG content type show they'll be very disappointed if they're presented with something like Voyager. They'll be even more disappointed if they get something like Lost In Space. :)


I got the feeling it's not just the "set in space" - but definitely the elements of more explicit violence, sex and swearing that make people convinced BSG is "dark", the networks' holy grail of "how to attract yougner viewers".

Seeing as the characters are from contemporary Earth they won't be able to use made-up swear words. The only way around this would be to have them all from Britain because British characters are allowed to say "bloody" on American TV.

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 05:12 AM
And before Enterprise and BSG we had Voyager and, decades ago, Lost In Space. If people are lured in by the thought of a BSG content type show they'll be very disappointed if they're presented with something like Voyager. They'll be even more disappointed if they get something like Lost In Space. :)



Seeing as the characters are from contemporary Earth they won't be able to use made-up swear words. The only way around this would be to have them all from Britain because British characters are allowed to say "bloody" on American TV.
Ooo! Ooo!

And ******!

For some crazy reason it's ok for a Brit to say that on US TV aswell...


EDIT: Aaaaaaaaaand evidentally I can't say that word here.

Ah well, it's danker, but with a W instead of a D.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 05:40 AM
Do they also get to say "********"? I know it's not really in use in the US so they might get away with it as well....

EDIT: [email protected] the filter. it's the one starting with a b.

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 05:43 AM
I recall O'Neill calling Maybourne a "rat dastard!" (remove D insert B).

So yes.

So unless we get into the obscene and have every character F-ing and Blinding then I cannot see "increased swearing" doing anything for the show. The occasional "sh-t" actually enhances the moment, a particular moment in Continuum springs to mind... but I fear any worse and we'll have Torchwood Series 1.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 05:52 AM
That wasn't the word I meant... it has double l. :)

Re: "the worst" as Torchwood series 1 - yes, some of it was excessive, but as you said, there were plenty of opportunities it was appropriate. The problem is using swearing/sex/violence for the sake of it or to make the show look "edgy" or "darl" cos everyone knows dark adn edgy shows have swearing and sex and violence, rather than using it when it's appropriate - a good example would be probably Torchwood's second series, where it was done with taste.

Anubis69
August 24th, 2008, 05:53 AM
Ooo! Ooo!

And ******!

For some crazy reason it's ok for a Brit to say that on US TV aswell...


EDIT: Aaaaaaaaaand evidentally I can't say that word here.

Ah well, it's danker, but with a W instead of a D.
Huh. Weird that you can say wank but not ******.
...
I just hope I didn't get that word struck from the list of useable words.

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 05:59 AM
That wasn't the word I meant... it has double l. :)

Re: "the worst" as Torchwood series 1 - yes, some of it was excessive, but as you said, there were plenty of opportunities it was appropriate. The problem is using swearing/sex/violence for the sake of it or to make the show look "edgy" or "darl" cos everyone knows dark adn edgy shows have swearing and sex and violence, rather than using it when it's appropriate - a good example would be probably Torchwood's second series, where it was done with taste.
Exactly.

Blackadder, a VERY tame show, used the B with the two L's in it on one occasion as a punch line.

Observe:


Baldrick: The thing is: The way I see it, these days there's a war on, right? and, ages ago, there wasn't a war on, right? So, there must have been a moment when there not being a war on went away, right? and there being a war on came along. So, what I want to know is: How did we get from the one case of affairs to the other case of affairs?



Edmund: Do you mean "Why did the war start?"


Baldrick: Yeah.


George: The war started because of the vile Hun and his villainous empire-building.


Edmund: George, the British Empire at present covers a quarter of the globe, while the German Empire consists of a small sausage factory in Tanganyika. I hardly think that we can be entirely absolved of blame on the imperialistic front.


George: Oh, no, sir, absolutely not. [aside, to Baldick] Mad as a bicycle!


Baldrick: I heard that it started when a bloke called Archie Duke shot an ostrich 'cause he was hungry.


Edmund: I think you mean it started when the Archduke of Austro-Hungary got shot.


Baldrick: Nah, there was definitely an ostrich involved, sir.


Edmund: Well, possibly. But the real reason for the whole thing was that it was too much effort not to have a war.


George: By Golly, this is interesting; I always loved history...


Edmund: You see, Baldrick, in order to prevent war in Europe, two superblocs developed: us, the French and the Russians on one side, and the Germans and Austro-Hungary on the other. The idea was to have two vast opposing armies, each acting as the other's deterrent. That way there could never be a war.


Baldrick: But this is a sort of a war, isn't it, sir?


Edmund: Yes, that's right. You see, there was a tiny flaw in the plan.


George: What was that, sir?


Edmund: It was ********.



Torchwood S1 just liked to throw F words out willy-nilly, and had an overuse of gore in the first episode and a collosal amount of unneeded sex. Thankfully they calmed down for S2. I doubt SGU will go THAT bad, but I still am convinced we're going to see a Stargate version of Spooks: Code 9 - "For America, For Earth, For Kicks"

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 06:05 AM
I'm guessing that US TV will allow characters to say anything that Spike did in 'Buffy The Vampire Slayer'. The last two pages in the following essay give some interesting examples although I'm not sure if the forum filter will allow most of them. Maybe I'd better add -

WARNING - don't read these two pages if you were offended by anything Spike said in the Buffy show.

http://www.cercles.com/n8/pateman.pdf

Lilli
August 24th, 2008, 06:09 AM
I've tried to watch BSG and could NOT get into it. And I love most sci-fi/fantasy that's been made. One of the problems was that I couldn't bring myself to LIKE any of the characters. Why should I care about these people if I don't even like them? the other problem is that it had to be the most depressing show I've ever seen in my life



I got the feeling it's not just the "set in space" - but definitely the elements of more explicit violence, sex and swearing that make people convinced BSG is "dark", the networks' holy grail of "how to attract yougner viewers".
My fear as well. When I hear "appealing to a younger audience" I think about all the garbage out there- for some reason writers and directors seem to think Shock is what people want. I have all sorts of horrors go through my mind. Today edgey and "hip" seem to mean human beings as their most base, selfish and vulgar. Bed hopping. Situation ethics. Angry. F-bomb once or twice in every sentence.

You know - something to shock people, especially the older generation who "really need to get over it anyway" :rolleyes:

;)

Some call it realistic. Thanks but I have enough "reality" in my everyday life and the whole point is to escape that for a little while. :weiranime20:

Hmm.

I'm just hoping they don't act like university students out there... Seeing a bunch of what are basicaly immature students saving the world is just as bad as shows where a bunch of 12 year olds save the world if you ask me.

IF, and I stress IF, they do pull it off and it doesn't feel all young and studentish then it may work, but then we fall back on the other problem. It's identity has NOTHING to do with Stargate as we know it. It will be a space faring rip off and not a Stargate continuation.

Sorry, negative, I know. Hey I'll watch, but even if I enjoy it, I doubt it will be as a Stargate show.
:D (I have 4 guys ages 12 to 24 of my own so speak with some experience)

I have this horrifying image of a an older person saddled with a bunch of kids (hormone raging teens) trapped in space on a ship and the writers are going to force us to ride along every week. (And we parents gripe about long car trips!) :weiranime33:

And considering some the past decisions - I'd say - never say never :(

I'm feeling pretty negative as well :o Ah well, we'll see :weiranime42:

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 06:13 AM
F-bomb once or twice in every sentence.

Discussing the show on here could get a bit confusing if the filters didn't allow us to quote a lot of what the characters said. :)

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 06:14 AM
Interesting Essay there, I jsut skimmed it, but I shall have to read it in its entirety.

Getting back to BSG for a minute here, I came across this picture, and it's everything I hope Stargate won't be... (well not everything, I hope it won't be spacey and futuristic, but I'm not getting out of that one):

http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7115/bsg2op8.th.jpg (http://img404.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bsg2op8.jpg)

Basically the image conjurs up a soap opera. All the characters involved in their own little lives, sleeping with this person or that person, hating this person or that person. I don't know about the rest of you, but if that promo is anything to go by, I don't want SGU like BSG.

ToasterOnFire
August 24th, 2008, 06:21 AM
The last supper is a soap opera? O_O

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 06:26 AM
The last supper is a soap opera? O_O
Not a BSG fan. Enjoyed the mini series immensely, borrowed S1 but the first episode bored me and then began to freeze and I couldn't get past it, so I gave up on it.

I just said it looks soapy.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 06:29 AM
I'm guessing that US TV will allow characters to say anything that Spike did in 'Buffy The Vampire Slayer'. The last two pages in the following essay give some interesting examples although I'm not sure if the forum filter will allow most of them. Maybe I'd better add -

WARNING - don't read these two pages if you were offended by anything Spike said in the Buffy show.

http://www.cercles.com/n8/pateman.pdf

Slightly off topic, but this article and the whole discussion reminded me of a friend of mine participating in the theatre play Arcadia, that has a lot fo swearing. Now, playing this to mianly a religiuos crowd - and at that, mainly American - they cut away all the f-word bits but left "sod" in. I was highly entertained.
...although, not as entertained as the person with the "Sod off" instances further showing his being an American and getting the intonation all wrong.

|But yes - most of the "dark and edgy" today seems to be ni fact just shock value.
To go back to Torchwood - their best episodes are the ones they don't try and go for shock value or being "adult" - abnd these usually are their most dark and edgy.

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 06:50 AM
Basically the image conjurs up a soap opera. All the characters involved in their own little lives, sleeping with this person or that person, hating this person or that person. I don't know about the rest of you, but if that promo is anything to go by, I don't want SGU like BSG.

The BSG characters are wrapped up in their own little lives along with being wrapped up in major events effecting the futures of the human and Cylon races. Humans tend to be like that, though. I think it works for BSG because there's a fleet full of thousands of humans so there's no shortage of guest characters or even regulars. We can get a break from X's and Y's relationship problems because X or Y can go off to be involved in a secondary plot somewhere else. There's also the central theme of how different are Cylons and humans, really.

A BSG type of show could have worked set in the Pegasus galaxy. I really don't see how it can work with a small number of people on a ship which never stops in one place for very long, though. After all, there are only so many soap situations you can get between a small number of people. What kind of long term threat will there be to our heroes? Finding more food, water, clothing and shampoo because their supplies are running out? If it comes down to "We have X hours to do such and such on this planet" and crew members are forever making it back with seconds to spare it will get very dull. If all the aliens they meet are 'primitives', any threat will last just as long as the story because they'll be left behind. The only alternative would be some kind of space faring race which decides to follow the ship around because our heroes have annoyed them for some reason. It won't lead to any exciting, tactical stories, however, if our heroes can't control their ship and try to outwit the enemy.

Grinspoon
August 24th, 2008, 06:58 AM
I'm all for a more serialised show, but there's something i do like about being able to flick on the tv and its a random episode of stargate and i can sit down and watch it and have a nice self contained story.

Personally i think stargate is perfect viewing for the whole family, they could easily turn off viewers trying for something too serious, or aiming too young.


Not that i know how it'd go, I'd rather they approached the new show closer to Lost, than BSG.

Grinspoon
August 24th, 2008, 07:07 AM
Is BSG a more successful show than Atlantis anyways? sure it's more critically acclaimed, but is it significantly higher rating than atlantis?

MediaSavant
August 24th, 2008, 08:23 AM
I'm confused. BSG doesn't seem like it is aimed at a younger audience than SGA.

...but it gets a younger audience than SGA. SGA is very "old school" in its storytelling. BSG is in an entirely new style and, thus, attracts a younger audience. For the record, that doesn't mean teenagers. I means people under 45.

Stargate has a lot of viewers over 50 and it's pretty obvious why.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 08:31 AM
Hardly "new style". Different, yes. New? Erm, nope.

Shan Bruce Lee
August 24th, 2008, 08:59 AM
So the "made for a younger audience" was a code name for BSG-esque? And I thought I was being overly cynical.

Sigh.

I shall repeat my earlier sentiment. If Stargate has lost its identity so thoroughly they have to copy some other science fiction show, I'd rather it be Doctor Who.

From reading the Howe statement it sounds to me like BW & RCC want to keep the action/adventure nature of the franchise but the SciFi Network wants them to be more like BSG.

Shan Bruce Lee
August 24th, 2008, 09:01 AM
But if I wanted to watch something BSGesque, I would watch BSG. Which I don't. I might someday via DVD. I've seen three episodes and...it's OK.

I'd rather watch SG-1 or SGA. Which I do. A Lot.

Plus, the only space soap I wanna watch would be Starcrossed.

Yeah I don't want to see it turn out too much like BSG either. A little darker wouldn't be bad (actually pretty good) but trying to make it as dramatic as BSG would be aweful.

I doubt BW & RCC will let it happen the way SciFi wants it though.

Shan Bruce Lee
August 24th, 2008, 09:02 AM
I'm confused. BSG doesn't seem like it is aimed at a younger audience than SGA.

BSG is aimed at a high school to early 20s audience.

Shan Bruce Lee
August 24th, 2008, 09:06 AM
Interesting Essay there, I jsut skimmed it, but I shall have to read it in its entirety.

Getting back to BSG for a minute here, I came across this picture, and it's everything I hope Stargate won't be... (well not everything, I hope it won't be spacey and futuristic, but I'm not getting out of that one):

http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7115/bsg2op8.th.jpg (http://img404.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bsg2op8.jpg)

Basically the image conjurs up a soap opera. All the characters involved in their own little lives, sleeping with this person or that person, hating this person or that person. I don't know about the rest of you, but if that promo is anything to go by, I don't want SGU like BSG.

Jesus Christ that's an arrogant promo pic. Not to mention the fact they're missing a deciple... and wasn't Baltar the one with the Messiah complex? He's sitting in Mary Magdalen's seat

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 09:09 AM
...but it gets a younger audience than SGA. SGA is very "old school" in its storytelling. BSG is in an entirely new style and, thus, attracts a younger audience. For the record, that doesn't mean teenagers. I means people under 45.

Stargate has a lot of viewers over 50 and it's pretty obvious why.

I'm 59 and my husband is 64. We both watch SGA but prefer BSG because we've always found SGA very "old school" in its storytelling. If the format of SGA had been gradually changed to make it more like BSG we'd have welcomed it. By this I mean long running story arcs, stories within stories, the Wraith developed on the lines of the Cylons so we could see things from their point of view through a number of fully developed characters, a community of Pegasus natives so we could see how things affect them on occasion etc. etc. The other thing is that BSG doesn't focus on the same small group of characters every single week.

I'm all for injecting a bit of dramatic intensity into SGU but am not too keen on what we've been told about it so far. If the ship is forever moving on we'll never get any alien races developed as far as culture or history goes and guest characters will never be able to return. How are the writers planning on having complex story arcs, stories within stories etc. if the show is all about a small group of people on a ship which never stops anywhere for very long? I'm not saying it's impossible but it would be nice to hear a bit more about how they're planning on bringing in a kind of BSG feel under the circumstances. All that most of us can think of right now is lots of intense, agsty relationships between characters who smoke, drink and swear a lot.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 09:10 AM
Yeah I don't want to see it turn out too much like BSG either. A little darker wouldn't be bad (actually pretty good) but trying to make it as dramatic as BSG would be aweful.

I doubt BW & RCC will let it happen the way SciFi wants it though.

THey wouldn't necessarily have a choice. As a part of their job they receive notes from the network and have to accomodate them to some degree. If SciFi said "we would air Universe but only if it's inspired by BSG on a,b,c , then this is the way it's gonna be.

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 09:30 AM
I'm 59 and my husband is 64. We both watch SGA but prefer BSG because we've always found SGA very "old school" in its storytelling. If the format of SGA had been gradually changed to make it more like BSG we'd have welcomed it. By this I mean long running story arcs, stories within stories, the Wraith developed on the lines of the Cylons so we could see things from their point of view through a number of fully developed characters, a community of Pegasus natives so we could see how things affect them on occasion etc. etc. The other thing is that BSG doesn't focus on the same small group of characters every single week.

I'm all for injecting a bit of dramatic intensity into SGU but am not too keen on what we've been told about it so far. If the ship is forever moving on we'll never get any alien races developed as far as culture or history goes and guest characters will never be able to return. How are the writers planning on having complex story arcs, stories within stories etc. if the show is all about a small group of people on a ship which never stops anywhere for very long? I'm not saying it's impossible but it would be nice to hear a bit more about how they're planning on bringing in a kind of BSG feel under the circumstances. All that most of us can think of right now is lots of intense, agsty relationships between characters who smoke, drink and swear a lot.
Could you please define "old school" in this context? Thanks.

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 10:05 AM
Could you please define "old school" in this context? Thanks.

In pre-Babylon 5 days all TV shows which weren't soap operas consisted of stand alone episodes (with the occasional two parter). Whatever happened in one story was never referred to again and, no matter how sad or traumatic events were, the effects only lasted until the end of the episode. If Fred got shot one week he was up and about again with no ill effects the following week. If Bert fell in love and his sweetheart expired in his arms he was over it the next time we saw him and ready to fall in love again.

SGA has never been that bad. Even so, it wouldn't have mattered if someone watched Submersion before Sunday because Submersion was written in such a way that the characters didn't refer to someone they cared about having been killed very recently.

Flyboy
August 24th, 2008, 10:19 AM
Right. Thanks...

Hmm...

*tries to decide whether or not other shows are 20th or 21st century...*


I dunno, SG1 or SGA don't seem to be that bad at all, a lot of them seem to rely on previous things, I mean, Carter referred to her mistakes with Replicarter and such and Daniel's "death" in S5 was referenced both in Revelations and the start of S6...

jenks
August 24th, 2008, 10:22 AM
I'm serious..I love dark shows

Dark and depressing are two different things though, the show doesn't need to be depressing to be dark, something that seemed to escape the writers of BSG, as they took it to the level of absurdity.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 10:25 AM
In pre-Babylon 5 days all TV shows which weren't soap operas consisted of stand alone episodes (with the occasional two parter). Whatever happened in one story was never referred to again and, no matter how sad or traumatic events were, the effects only lasted until the end of the episode. If Fred got shot one week he was up and about again with no ill effects the following week. If Bert fell in love and his sweetheart expired in his arms he was over it the next time we saw him and ready to fall in love again.

SGA has never been that bad. Even so, it wouldn't have mattered if someone watched Submersion before Sunday because Submersion was written in such a way that the characters didn't refer to someone they cared about having been killed very recently.

Mmm. I seem to recall Doctor Who having story arcs in the spirit of what you describe before Babylon 5 - or Deep Space Nine, BTW, that did quite the same.

I see what you mean though. And I agree this is a problem with SGA - in fact it's one of the things I dislike the most about it, as you mentinoed the whole fiasco of the episodes right after Sunday was infuriating.
But you see, cosnidering, as you said, SGA was never that bad - and SG1 was much much better at these - I don't think this is what they mean when they talk of making it "more BSG". If this was their problem, then a few notes towards the production team and this would have been SGA's nature, it's a lot easier to do and you don't need to "reinvent the franchise" in order to do it - as I said, SG1 did these things. On a regular basis. Before the quite huge arc of season 8 or seasons 9-10. As FOB mentioned, Meridian was definitely an arc, through all of season 6 and afterwards. And that was before BSG even existed.

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 11:25 AM
Mmm. I seem to recall Doctor Who having story arcs in the spirit of what you describe before Babylon 5 - or Deep Space Nine, BTW, that did quite the same.

Favourite villains turned up regularly but the only thing approaching a story arc from the classic era was the Key To Time season where each story involved getting hold of a different bit of the key. Even so, it was still basically the same format of Doctor and companion landing on a planet to have a four part adventure before going on to the next location.


But you see, cosnidering, as you said, SGA was never that bad - and SG1 was much much better at these - I don't think this is what they mean when they talk of making it "more BSG". If this was their problem, then a few notes towards the production team and this would have been SGA's nature, it's a lot easier to do and you don't need to "reinvent the franchise" in order to do it

I think this is why a lot of people are a bit worried. SGA could have been adjusted so it had the story telling format of BSG, Lost and Heroes. What they couldn't really do was have all the characters suddenly start swearing, drinking heavily, take up smoking and enter into steamy relationships. The franchise really will have to be reinvented in order for that kind of aspect to be introduced into the show. :(

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 11:59 AM
Favourite villains turned up regularly but the only thing approaching a story arc from the classic era was the Key To Time season where each story involved getting hold of a different bit of the key. Even so, it was still basically the same format of Doctor and companion landing on a planet to have a four part adventure before going on to the next location.


Yes and no... there were mentions and "bigger arcs" - Pertwee's period, for example, that definitely had the character continuity with the Doctor's misery being stuck on Earth, Tom Baker's early days with Sarah Jane had some moments. I agree it's nowhere near Babylon 5, DS9 or even Spin City in its first season, but it's something. ;)



I think this is why a lot of people are a bit worried. SGA could have been adjusted so it had the story telling format of BSG, Lost and Heroes. What they couldn't really do was have all the characters suddenly start swearing, drinking heavily, take up smoking and enter into steamy relationships. The franchise really will have to be reinvented in order for that kind of aspect to be introduced into the show. :(

And I'm amongst these people ;) Because working on storyarcs wouldn't be reinventing the franchise - SGA did it back in season 1, they backed down from it! SG1 did it for its three last seasons, for season 6, in season 3... it's just as natural to Stargate as not mentioning Carson or Janet after they died. So this whole "reinvention to be more like BSG" tells me it's more likely to involve unnecessary sex, violence and swearing than focus on characters and their development, or one big arc story like B5 or DS9.

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 12:55 PM
Pertwee's period, for example, that definitely had the character continuity with the Doctor's misery being stuck on Earth,

You have a point there but it wasn't a modern type story arc any more than Tegan wanting to get back to Earth and saying "This isn't Heathrow" whenever the TARDIS landed anywhere.


And I'm amongst these people ;) Because working on storyarcs wouldn't be reinventing the franchise - SGA did it back in season 1, they backed down from it! SG1 did it for its three last seasons, for season 6, in season 3... it's just as natural to Stargate as not mentioning Carson or Janet after they died. So this whole "reinvention to be more like BSG" tells me it's more likely to involve unnecessary sex, violence and swearing than focus on characters and their development, or one big arc story like B5 or DS9.

Maybe one of the problems with the current style Stargate is -

1: Tau'ri meet formidable enemy.

2: Taur'ri aquire bigger guns to fight formidable enemy.

3: Original formidable enemy no longer so formidable so they bring in a new enemy with even bigger guns.

4: Repeat.

In some ways they painted themselves into a corner with SGA. The Taur'ri had to keep blowing Wraith up in order to look heroic and once the Wraith were no longer a major threat they had to blow up the Asurans in order to look heroic. The big enemy now is Michael but how long can the writers keep that threat going? Get rid of Michael and all that's left is a lot less Wraith. Where are the Taur'ri going to find more enemies with really big guns in the Pegasus galaxy?

I don't mind reinvention taking Stargate characters out of the getting ever bigger guns cycle so they have to make do with what they've got or can invent themselves. I'd just like more information on how all this dramatic intensity is going to be introduced when there's just a small number of people on an ever moving ship so we're unlikely to get recurring guest characters. Even Voyager ended up with bringing in the Borg so there was a recurring enemy to fight.

Lilli
August 24th, 2008, 12:58 PM
Howe's comments.

:o (sorry another vent coming from me) I keep in mind these decisions are from the same channel that dedicates a whole weekend to horror and put ECW on Tuesday Nights. Horror? We already have Chiller channel for that. And Ghost Hunters? Not sure what heading that falls under. But they even created a spin-off of that one to boot.

When I think about it there isn't a whole lot of Sci-fi on the channel (other than Eureka, Stargate and Star Trek re-runs and mabe some Twilight Zone) That it really doesn't deserve that name anymore. (I think today is dedicated to Leprechaun last I checked)

I'm in my 40's and have seen many, many Sci-Fi movies over the years (both good and bad) And there would be plenty of stuff to use as filler

I would like to see another channel start up that is actually dedicated itself to Science Fiction and fantasy. That way we'd have 2 channels for horror and finally have one for Sci-fi.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 01:12 PM
You have a point there but it wasn't a modern type story arc any more than Tegan wanting to get back to Earth and saying "This isn't Heathrow" whenever the TARDIS landed anywhere.



Maybe one of the problems with the current style Stargate is -

1: Tau'ri meet formidable enemy.

2: Taur'ri aquire bigger guns to fight formidable enemy.

3: Original formidable enemy no longer so formidable so they bring in a new enemy with even bigger guns.

4: Repeat.

In some ways they painted themselves into a corner with SGA. The Taur'ri had to keep blowing Wraith up in order to look heroic and once the Wraith were no longer a major threat they had to blow up the Asurans in order to look heroic. The big enemy now is Michael but how long can the writers keep that threat going? Get rid of Michael and all that's left is a lot less Wraith. Where are the Taur'ri going to find more enemies with really big guns in the Pegasus galaxy?

I don't mind reinvention taking Stargate characters out of the getting ever bigger guns cycle so they have to make do with what they've got or can invent themselves. I'd just like more information on how all this dramatic intensity is going to be introduced when there's just a small number of people on an ever moving ship so we're unlikely to get recurring guest characters. Even Voyager ended up with bringing in the Borg so that there was a recurring enemy to fight.

I don't know that a recurring enemy is necessarily needed. Dramatic intensity can be achieved withouta recurring enemy - and tBH, as you mentinoed yourself, in sGA I think the recurring enemy did more harm than good - IMO, the whole Michael storyline is just one bad joke after the other, with the exception of the original Michael episode which was quite interesting and thought provoking. Even with SG1, teh Goa'uld became a bit of a joke in later years, the more SG1 killed and the more sarcastic Jack became about them it was harder to take them seriously, even though Anubis was supposed to be superscary etc. (I actually thought they finally hit the right track with the Orii before Adria showed up - an idea, I felt, is a lot mroe troubling and uneasy than a flesh and blood badguy).

The problem is, as you said, that from the sound of it right now it's gonna be a small group of people stuck on a ship. That sounds like its begging to go the "who slept with whom" and "who cheated on whom" route, which frankly becomes tiresome very, very fast as, once again, it's a very small number of characters. And a lot fo explosions and CGI I can live without.

Ikaros
August 24th, 2008, 01:40 PM
Sci Fi also is losing space opera Battlestar Galactica after the current season and wants to keep that genre an important part of the network, Sci Fi Channel president Dave Howe said.

“The intention here is to make this one skew young and give it a contemporary vibe,” Howe told Multichannel News Friday.

He said the new series presents a chance to take some new creative turns with the franchise. “As a network, obviously we look at Battlestar Galactica, that’s set the standard in terms of tense character drama. Stargate does not have the intensity of a Battlestar Galactica. But it may well be somewhere in between. Brad and Robert are very eager to keep the action and adventure and the sense of humor [in Stargate Universe]. But I think there’s an opportunity to maybe inject a bit more dramatic intensity into the series. But that’s obviously a conversation for them as they start to script and move into development.”


The plan is to start shooting early next year, so casting and scripting will start soon, Howe said.

As has been described, Stargate Universe involves the discovery of an ancient vessel — reached by the space-travel portal called the stargate — that was intended to explore different galaxies where stargates have been placed and see how civilizations there have progressed.

“What’s unique about this chapter is it’s going to be set entirely in space,” Howe said. “They’re on a ship, the Destiny. That’s also an opportunity for us because as Battlestar Galactica reaches a conclusion it’s nice for us to have within the mix of programming a space opera that serves the audience that’s really into in space operas.”

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=talkbackCommentsFull&talk_back_header_id=6551039&articleid=CA6589541

The bold and the beautifull in space. NO THNK YOU

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 01:45 PM
I don't know that a recurring enemy is necessarily needed. Dramatic intensity can be achieved withouta recurring enemy - and tBH, as you mentinoed yourself, in sGA I think the recurring enemy did more harm than good -

Even with SG1, teh Goa'uld became a bit of a joke in later years, the more SG1 killed and the more sarcastic Jack became about them it was harder to take them seriously, even though Anubis was supposed to be superscary etc.

The recurring enemy becoming a joke is a result of the Taur'ri characters being amazing heroes who are forever saving the galaxy from one threat after another. If the SGU characters can't keep getting hold of ever bigger guns a recurring enemy could remain a threat. The question, of course, is why this recurring enemy would become an enemy in the first place. It would require a convincing reason and insight into the enemy's point of view otherwise we'd just have baddies for the sake of having baddies.


The problem is, as you said, that from the sound of it right now it's gonna be a small group of people stuck on a ship. That sounds like its begging to go the "who slept with whom" and "who cheated on whom" route, which frankly becomes tiresome very, very fast as, once again, it's a very small number of characters.

This could be the reason why Voyager ended up with the Borg. If there hadn't been an outside threat turning up every so often there wouldn't have been a break from the 'human interest' stories. Not that I loathed the 'human interest' kind of stories when they involved Seven Of Nine and the Doctor because they are two of my favourite ST characters.

Pitry
August 24th, 2008, 02:01 PM
The recurring enemy becoming a joke is a result of the Taur'ri characters being amazing heroes who are forever saving the galaxy from one threat after another. If the SGU characters can't keep getting hold of ever bigger guns a recurring enemy could remain a threat. The question, of course, is why this recurring enemy would become an enemy in the first place. It would require a convincing reason and insight into the enemy's point of view otherwise we'd just have baddies for the sake of having baddies.


It does have something to do with the nature of the badguys though. The Goa'uld were hard to take seriously not just because they were defeated again and again, but because of their theatrical, cliche "badguy-ness". Y'know, "nothing can stop me now, mwa ha ha." Likewise, the wraith were very underdeveloped - and still are, I feel, I mean I love Todd but he's the only wraith i enjoy watching, usually I just roll my eyes.
On the other hand, when you look at B5, for example, yes, you had the Shadows and later the Vorlons, but so many of the conflicts came from the species that weren't necessarily bad guys - the left overs of the Earth-Minbari war, the Centauri vs the Narn, etc. Same with DS9 - yes, yuo had the dominion, but a long time before that you had the Bajorans vs the Cardassians, with special effort given to not make the Cardassians "just" bad guys - there were good Cardassians, they were a developed society... and it worked. A lot better than the Wraith, I thought.



This could be the reason why Voyager ended up with the Borg. If there hadn't been an outside threat turning up every so often there wouldn't have been a break from the 'human interest' stories. Not that I loathed the 'human interest' kind of stories when they involved Seven Of Nine and the Doctor because they are two of my favourite ST characters.

Obviously you need your action stories, just like you need your comedy stories or the queit drama "human itnerest" ones. Looking at The Shrine, it wouldn't've been half as interesting and engaging had we got it every week - I would have been tired to death from it. But - especially on a show that takes place on a ship or through a stargate, you don't have to have recurring bad guys, and indeed most of these shows have more "planet of the week" episodes than ones with the declared badguys.

Oka
August 24th, 2008, 02:27 PM
I'm a big BSG fan too but I don't understand why Stargate has to be like BSG to succeed. The humor and campyness of Stargate is what has made me attracted to it. Especially when Star Trek went off the air it was great to have a replacement in Stargate. Not to say that Star Trek is in any way better than Stargate but I was a Star Trek fan before I was a Stargate fan.

BSG is BSG and Stargate is Stargate. Besides, they're not going to be able to pull it off. At least BSG had a reason why it was so depressing, i.e. 99.99% of humanity had been destroyed and Galactica and its fleet was all that was left, and they were being chased all the time... I don't get how they're going to imitate that in SGU?

SGU sounds more like ST Voyager for me with a dash of Heroes. I'm guessing it's not going to be as serialized as SG-1 and SGA. I guess we'll just have to see. I'm not going to judge it before I see the pilot.

jenks
August 24th, 2008, 02:39 PM
I'm a big BSG fan too but I don't understand why Stargate has to be like BSG to succeed. The humor and campyness of Stargate is what has made me attracted to it. Especially when Star Trek went off the air it was great to have a replacement in Stargate. Not to say that Star Trek is in any way better than Stargate but I was a Star Trek fan before I was a Stargate fan.

BSG is BSG and Stargate is Stargate. Besides, they're not going to be able to pull it off. At least BSG had a reason why it was so depressing, i.e. 99.99% of humanity had been destroyed and Galactica and its fleet was all that was left, and they were being chased all the time... I don't get how they're going to imitate that in SGU?

SGU sounds more like ST Voyager for me with a dash of Heroes. I'm guessing it's not going to be as serialized as SG-1 and SGA. I guess we'll just have to see. I'm not going to judge it before I see the pilot.

They never said they want to remove the humour, they never said they want to make it more depressing, everyone is just jumping to conclusions. All they've said is that they want more drama, like BSG. Now all that means is that they're going to add more character drama, it doesn't mean they're going to make the show more like BSG all of a sudden except in that one respect. It's still going to be Stargate, it's just that the stories will be told in a more modern way.

Oka
August 24th, 2008, 02:48 PM
They never said they want to remove the humour, they never said they want to make it more depressing, everyone is just jumping to conclusions. All they've said is that they want more drama, like BSG. Now all that means is that they're going to add more character drama, it doesn't mean they're going to make the show more like BSG all of a sudden except in that one respect. It's still going to be Stargate, it's just that the stories will be told in a more modern way.
I suppose they are. I don't understand why everyone is so worried then. People on these boards seem to love character relationships and what not. Looks like SGU is going to have that in droves.

For me, if they make it more serious in terms of relationships between characters, that takes a way some of the campyness for me. It's like they're trying to make the show more serious. No thanks, I don't want that in Stargate.

Cryowolf
August 24th, 2008, 02:52 PM
Honestly it sounds more to me like a suit talking out of his behind than anything else. He has no idea what they have in mind, and when he says space-opera I'm sure he simply means a sci-fi show set in space rather than on a planet. He has opera mixed with tv-show, or something like that.
They called FarScape a space-opera, and it was one of the best series I've ever seen. On the other hand, they also call BSG a space-opera, and I can't stand it.

If by a younger vibe they simply mean rejuvenating it with more action, interaction and such; perhaps having relationships between characters (it took them 5 seasons to start to subtly develop one for McKay in SGA, and it was always underlying in SG1 for Jack and Carter.) Then I won't mind it, as long as the story is good and there IS a story and not just a bunch of romance, triangles, conflict and popularity contests.

I don't want 'Dawson's Geek', so I'm really hoping for a strong series that has a memory. Stargate Atlantis often forgets continuity, and doesn't seem to follow its own specific formula. Because it's entertaining though I can forgive it for that.

So I really just think that the suits have no idea what is really going on, they are just spouting stuff and we're picking it up all wrong.

ciannwn
August 24th, 2008, 03:21 PM
It does have something to do with the nature of the badguys though. The Goa'uld were hard to take seriously not just because they were defeated again and again, but because of their theatrical, cliche "badguy-ness". Y'know, "nothing can stop me now, mwa ha ha."

But they did it with such style and flair. Ba'al is one of my favourite Stargate characters.


Likewise, the wraith were very underdeveloped - and still are, I feel, I mean I love Todd but he's the only wraith i enjoy watching, usually I just roll my eyes.

I'm more of a "Wow, he's hot. Drat. He's dead" viewer when it comes to Wraith. :)


On the other hand, when you look at B5, for example, yes, you had the Shadows and later the Vorlons, but so many of the conflicts came from the species that weren't necessarily bad guys - the left overs of the Earth-Minbari war, the Centauri vs the Narn, etc. Same with DS9 - yes, yuo had the dominion, but a long time before that you had the Bajorans vs the Cardassians, with special effort given to not make the Cardassians "just" bad guys - there were good Cardassians, they were a developed society... and it worked. A lot better than the Wraith, I thought.

I'd have preferred it if a lot of the Pegasus societies had been hostile towards the Atlantis expedition because they'd woken the Wraith up early. I liked the conflict with the Genii but this fizzled out. I also found the Genii rather thought provoking because their society suggested that Pegasus without the Wraith would have ended up as the Genii military empire. As for the Wraith, they could have been properly developed as an interesting alien species in their own right instead of being little more than black clad cannon fodder.


But - especially on a show that takes place on a ship or through a stargate, you don't have to have recurring bad guys, and indeed most of these shows have more "planet of the week" episodes than ones with the declared badguys.

A show where people travel around a galaxy via Stargates has the option for recuring bad guys as well as planet of the week stories. A show where the characters travel round a galaxy in a ship would also have this option. From what we've been told about SGU so far there won't be this option unless some bad guys with starships start following them around for some reason.


They never said they want to remove the humour, they never said they want to make it more depressing, everyone is just jumping to conclusions. All they've said is that they want more drama, like BSG.

They also said they want to aim it at a younger audience which has left the younger members of this forum feeling somewhat confused.

Jonzey
August 25th, 2008, 03:15 AM
God, I hope it's not like BSG. I hate BSG. I don't know why they'd want to make it more like BSG. It's not like BSG is actually a big hit for the network. Sure, it has a dedicated fanbase (just like Stargate) and critical acclaim, but its ratings are pretty low (same as Stargate).

I don't see what they'd plan to achieve. Slightly darker might be nice, and slightly more serialised (though I don't know how they'd do this), but pleeeease don't make it a bunch of angsty people arguing and mistrusting and sleeping with each other.

lord groovy
August 25th, 2008, 05:27 AM
I'd also like to hav some ambiguous character like Six in BSG or Maybourne in SG1. Always smiling/courtuous/attractive, with his (really) dark moment and his own agenda. And I'd like it to be in the team since the beginning.

A human or an alien? I don't really care. In SGA, I hoped Michael to be like this but well, you know how he ended...

Concerning the recurring races, maybe there would be :
- some with spaceships so we will encounter them often;
- others with more knowledge about the SG that may be able to dial a new gate (and probably chase us); or we will dial back each time using the 9th chevron thing or whatever?
- and a third group that will be stranded in the ship and won't/can't leave.

Admiral Mappalazarou
August 25th, 2008, 05:40 AM
Oh thank god! If SGU is made darker towards the BSG-esque this may actually turn out to be ok afterall.

*High five* :cameron:

Vespasianus
August 25th, 2008, 11:12 AM
God, I hope it's not like BSG. I hate BSG. I don't know why they'd want to make it more like BSG. It's not like BSG is actually a big hit for the network. Sure, it has a dedicated fanbase (just like Stargate) and critical acclaim, but its ratings are pretty low (same as Stargate).From the article I gathered that only the "character drama" element will be injected to SGU, the humor and adventures remain with Stargate, so I don't expect brooding. I think there is nothing wrong with that notion, look at last week's The Shrine.

_Famrir_
August 25th, 2008, 01:40 PM
but its ratings are pretty low (same as Stargate).


what are the ratings of stargate atlantis?