PDA

View Full Version : If Atlantis was an epic.



Athosian Death facilitator
September 10th, 2008, 07:33 PM
If Stargate Atlantis which we all hold dear was having it's last movie... it's last adventure. And it was a two- two and half hour epic movie... who would be your choice to make the movie. 100+million budget.

Personally I would have:
Director= Roland Emmerich, and Martin Wood.

Roland has a unique/rare capability to transform a movie from just-a-movie, in to a masterpiece, an epic movie. A movie that pushes the cinema, that pushes the crew, and the cast. ie) 10,000 BC, Day After Tomorrow, Independence Day and the original Stargate movie. Roland really challenges those around him, and us the audience.

Writer = Brad Wright, and Robert Cooper, would have to both write the last ATLANTIS movie. Although I would think that there would be a place to invite other writers such as Joseph Mallozzi, Martin Gero and Paul Mullie, to have a creative input on what is what with the movie. These five people are the soul most important writers of the Stargate Franchise ever.

Although I would also stress that another writer such as: James Cameron, Joss Whedon, Dean Devlin who are emmensly significant writers in the science fiction movie world to help shape the movie in to an EPIC. I fear that even though BW/RCC and the others are great writers, they've been writing for tv so long, if an "epic specialist" didn't come in to view it would form in to a great great great story. It would be a slightly better than an episode flop.

And the worlds most leading visual fx team that has worked on 10,000 BC, and the Day After Tomorrow would HAVE TO!! be involved. not the inhouse team. THeyre great... but I think even without experience a team that has had experience creating bigger things would be better.
IT WOULDN"T BE EPIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Frontastic
September 11th, 2008, 12:01 PM
Director/Writer : Chris Nolan
With a bit of help from Peter Jackson and Martin Wood(Just for the commentary!) and he would have some of the best knowlage of the franchise too.

wkw427
September 11th, 2008, 12:45 PM
Jole Goldberd, stargete music writer, I can't spell his name, will need to have all the music preformed in a live orchestra and it needs to be as epic as POTC3's soundtrack was

Jumper_One
September 11th, 2008, 03:02 PM
Jole Goldberd, stargete music writer, I can't spell his name, will need to have all the music preformed in a live orchestra and it needs to be as epic as POTC3's soundtrack was

Joel Goldsmith ;)

Daniel Jackson
September 13th, 2008, 10:08 AM
I'll be happy with a TV movie. However, if SciFi dictates that it must be 84 minutes long (18 minutes of commercials per hour), then I hope the DVD will contain a director's cut.

Ltcolshepjumper
September 13th, 2008, 10:18 AM
For a movie to do well, it would have to go beyond the TV Movie stereotype. TV movie = slightly bigger two-parter. AoT and Continuum showed this. Unfortunately, I don't think the current tptb has what it takes to make a good movie. Yes, people like Chris Nolan, or any others who could make it better would be helpful. The reason I point out Chris Nolan is because he did an excellent job reviving and giving depth to the Batman franchise- something SGA was missing. The Dark Knight was exceptional, and had great character development. And so much happened. SGA fails on all of these points- no character development, no depth of plot or enemies, no suspense, no climax, just the exposition and then the resolution, and no plot.

Daniel Jackson
September 13th, 2008, 10:40 AM
no character development
You'll see more of this in movies than in television. In TV, character development tends to stagnate to keep the status quo for the next episode.


no depth of plot or enemies
Depth is a problem with television. There's only 42 minutes to tell the story. Occasionally, there will be deep episodes. However, since this is an adventure show, depth takes a back seat.


no suspense
Check out episodes like "Whispers." ;)


no climax, just the exposition and then the resolution
You have to have a climax in order to get to the resolution. ;) As for exposition, we get this all the time.


no plot.
Right. :rolleyes:

Ltcolshepjumper
September 13th, 2008, 12:47 PM
You'll see more of this in movies than in television. In TV, character development tends to stagnate to keep the status quo for the next episode.


Depth is a problem with television. There's only 42 minutes to tell the story. Occasionally, there will be deep episodes. However, since this is an adventure show, depth takes a back seat.


Check out episodes like "Whispers." ;)


You have to have a climax in order to get to the resolution. ;) As for exposition, we get this all the time.


Right. :rolleyes:

Well, there really wasn't that much depth or character development in AoT or Continuum. And my point exactly is that you have to have a climax to have a resolution, and the episodes tend to go from exposition to resolution, skipping any sort of climax hence, no real plot. Like Whispers- what was the climax? Usually plots build up to the climax. SGA's eps don't.

I'll use The Dark Knight as an example, since it was superbly done. The beginning dealt with a simple bank robbery, setting up the primary villian and plot. The exposition involved the state of affairs since the first movie. The characters were set up in a believable way, without dragging the plot. When the plot gets going, trying to stop the Joker from killing all of Gotham's notable individuals, then the suspense kicks in, as you don't know if the Joker will succeed in his plan. Then, the surprise kidnapping of two very important people- and you don't know who will live. Then, the movie throws a wrench- someone important does die a tragic death. But it isn't over. The movie reaches the climax, which involves a long ordeal in order to get to the top of the building to face the Joker. But, that isn't the only thing going on. The resolution involves the madness of the other important individual, and the result of the past events.

One of the major points is that the plot was not one-sided and simple. It was complex, and added the right amount of supsense, action, and character development. Did I mention plot development? It was a sequence of events that occurred, and it led right up to the climax. And, the ending wasn't rushed or horribly tacked on. Everything didn't come out picture-perfect, but actually dealt with the repercussions of the events. The movie was perfectly balanced, with well-developed characters, an excellent script, and a well-paced, complex, yet believable plot. While an SGA movie couldn't possibly match up to it in budget or available resources, it could learn a thing or two from it.

Daniel Jackson
September 13th, 2008, 01:02 PM
I don't think you're ever going to see that kind of complexity from Stargate. :S That's not a bash against the production team, it's just... you don't get that complexity in space adventure. ;)

Col.Foley
September 13th, 2008, 01:25 PM
Martin Wood.
By far and away the only one I would ever trust with a Stargate epic master piece.

Ltcolshepjumper
September 13th, 2008, 01:25 PM
I don't think you're ever going to see that kind of complexity from Stargate. :S That's not a bash against the production team, it's just... you don't get that complexity in space adventure. ;)

Anything more complex than the current plots would be good. I know time restraints wouldn't allow it to work for an episode. But for a movie, yeah, they could at least attempt it. Because they see movie level quality as bigger set, more Vfx, and live-orchestra music. I think complexity of plot should be a priority. Other non-scifi dramas do it. And yeah, if it was less of an adventure type show, then it would work.

I think a director is important, but I think they need better script writers as well.

Dr.Mckay
September 15th, 2008, 03:42 AM
10000 bc suckedd.... -_-
anyways, for the GREATEST sg movie ever
you'll need
chris nolan as a director

Devid
September 16th, 2008, 11:40 PM
I am Exited to watch the nxt movie..................................................................
There wasn't really that much depth or character development in AoT or Continuum.

DigiFluid
September 17th, 2008, 05:37 PM
Roland has a unique/rare capability to transform a movie from just-a-movie, in to a masterpiece, an epic movie. A movie that pushes the cinema, that pushes the crew, and the cast. ie) 10,000 BC, Day After Tomorrow, Independence Day and the original Stargate movie. Roland really challenges those around him, and us the audience.

Are we talking about reality or Bizarro World?

ori soldier
September 20th, 2008, 09:01 AM
[QUOTE=
Roland has a unique/rare capability to transform a movie from just-a-movie, in to a masterpiece, an epic movie. A movie that pushes the cinema, that pushes the crew, and the cast. ie) 10,000 BC, Day After Tomorrow, Independence Day and the original Stargate movie. Roland really challenges those around him, and us the audience.

[/QUOTE]

are we forgetting a certain godzilla?

Ltcolshepjumper
September 20th, 2008, 11:04 AM
Well, Roland Emmerich did Stargate already, so he'd probably make it like he did the original. That, and I doubt he'd agree to do it. Chris Nolan was able to transform a B-rate franchise into a complex engaging film (Batman)

DigiFluid
September 20th, 2008, 11:46 AM
Well, Roland Emmerich did Stargate already, so he'd probably make it like he did the original. That, and I doubt he'd agree to do it. Chris Nolan was able to transform a B-rate franchise into a complex engaging film (Batman)

Whoa--WHOA, back the eff up. Batman has been around since 1939, has certainly had its highs and lows, but to characterize it as a whole as B-rate franchise is just staggeringly and embarassingly wrong.

Ltcolshepjumper
September 20th, 2008, 03:35 PM
Whoa--WHOA, back the eff up. Batman has been around since 1939, has certainly had its highs and lows, but to characterize it as a whole as B-rate franchise is just staggeringly and embarassingly wrong.

Oh, I wasn't referring to ALL of them. I was referring to the 90's Batman films, specifically the last 2 (with Kilmer and Clooney), the ones I grew up with.

ablevins425
September 22nd, 2008, 04:04 AM
I don't think you're ever going to see that kind of complexity from Stargate. :S That's not a bash against the production team, it's just... you don't get that complexity in space adventure. ;)

Have u seen Star Wars?

huntress
September 22nd, 2008, 04:22 AM
Have u seen Star Wars?

Star Wars is a fairy tale in space. It is anything but complex unless you read the novelization of the third episode.

If you want complex scifi you have to turn to "Battlestar Galactica", "Babylon 5" and the likes. There are highly complex scifi movies but none that I would label "Space Opera"movies. On the big screeen "Space Opera" and complexity do not really go together.

Daniel Jackson
September 22nd, 2008, 06:08 AM
Have u seen Star Wars?
I'd hardly call that complex. It is fantasy in space, pure adventure. They are awesome movies, but there certainly not deep stories. If you want a deep science-fiction movie, watch Star Trek: The Motion Picture. It's one of the few science-fiction movies I've seen that actually has some depth to it. :jack:

Ripple in Space
September 26th, 2008, 05:47 PM
The Dark Knight was exceptional, and had great character development. And so much happened. SGA fails on all of these points- no character development, no depth of plot or enemies, no suspense, no climax, just the exposition and then the resolution, and no plot.

I love Atlantis and the actors on there, but do you seriously think they could pull off that level of acting? I'm really asking, because I don't know. The only actors who I've seen give those level of performances are David Hewlett & Robert Picardo. I have no idea if the others are capable...

SG-1 on the other hand has given all 5 of the originals the chance to showcase the fact that they can pull that kind of acting off. Though, I hated their attempts at overt comedy, the sarcasm was great, but the real comedy type stuff, I thought was poorly pulled off.

mrtwidlywinks
October 1st, 2008, 06:50 PM
Umm, well they've had 10 seasons of character development...you could feel the emotion when Daniel told Sam and Cam to leave him in Continuum with no build up.

Ltcolshepjumper
October 3rd, 2008, 12:58 PM
I love Atlantis and the actors on there, but do you seriously think they could pull off that level of acting? I'm really asking, because I don't know. The only actors who I've seen give those level of performances are David Hewlett & Robert Picardo. I have no idea if the others are capable...

SG-1 on the other hand has given all 5 of the originals the chance to showcase the fact that they can pull that kind of acting off. Though, I hated their attempts at overt comedy, the sarcasm was great, but the real comedy type stuff, I thought was poorly pulled off.

There's that. But, not touching acting ability, tptb could at least attempt to write a complex yet engaging plot that would be worht our time and money.