Emmerich to reopen the Stargate

[KEK]

When was the last time he made a blockbuster? His movies tend to more often be the butt of jokes.

[ESESEL]

And what does this reboot mean exactly? Is he doing continuation for his first movie, just recasted (probably with younger actors - like in ep. 200), or he would redo even his first movie? Because the second possibility is total waste of time. But even if he wanted to go just with the continuation, I would be against it because what's the point in having huge universe, if you have to start from the very beginning every few years. Yes, I would watch. It was even established in Stargate that there are infinite alternative realities - this would just be one of them. But why the hell would anyone ignore all the awesome stuff we have established and did that all over again, when he can continue with more awesomeness?

[AgentTaft]

First off, when it comes to Stargate in general I’m always grinning. I love this show. I’ve loved it since I was a kid and I always will. Seeing Stargate gone from television is a good and a bad thing. Good because it is no longer being torn to shreds and bad because it was such an amazing show. SG-1 and Atlantis were a homerun. I didn’t find myself complaining about either show like I do about other sci-fi TV shows. This may be bias, I don’t know. On the negative side, which you will find there is a lot of with me, is SGU and the “Cop Outs” that drenched this show in a dark gooey muck of fail. Then there is the mismanagement of MGM Studios to boot.


However, in spite of it all, Emmerich is trying to keep Stargate alive. My hat is off to him and Devlin for even thinking about the endeavor. What I don’t want to see from this thought pattern is an alternate universe or a reboot. I think we’ve all had enough of that crap from JJ Abrams. The FANS want a show or movie and this universe of greatness back in their lives. A remake will only bring on added junk and changes that would corrupt what we already cherish. If we can’t avoid the bad elements of Hollywood then I definitely do not want this movie.


Oh dread. Changes and add-ons, phooey! Updating characters for societal differences over time, or cannon alterations, are done in effort to bring in new fans. While slight changes in characters and overall attitude may be needed I think fundamentally major changes are unnecessary. I whole heartedly believe that other things can be done to incorporate a new fan base. Putting the TV show in theaters leading up to the release of a film is an excellent idea. Getting the Stargate cast back into the conventions would be another good idea. Webisodes, Comic Books, Talk Shows, Board Games, Toys, Memorabilia, the list goes on. The best and greatest aid is always going to be by word of mouth from the fans. All of this should be greatly considered before a cannon change ever takes place. Plus I hate my universes having hipsters added because it’s the “ In Thing.”


With SG Cannon changes being under a microscope the second thing to worry about is production changes. I’m not sure about you guys but I absolutely hated the “Greys-Anatomy” endings on SGU. Ending every episode with some blah blah heart felt song annoyed the absolute snot out of me. I couldn’t finish an episode of SGU after they jumped onto this bandwagon. Almost EVERY television show currently airing does this to some degree. Then there is the “nerd gets the hot girl” scenario. This was annoying too but this isn’t an old concept. It’s just over used. Some shows I can understand needing these features but not a sci-fi show. Stargate has been purely instrumental and mostly science/pseudo-science. So it should remain that way.


There were some pluses with SGU. I did thoroughly enjoy seeing the show grow up. I liked the new character interaction and the filming style and complex shots. Yes, I even liked the add-on of the “shaky cam.” I know most people hated this but it didn’t seem that out of place. I even have a friend who says that shaky cam makes him woozy but oh well. These type of changes are what I believe are necessary to make a new TV series/Movie a success. The writing and current cannon, minus SGU, are excellent. But absolutely, make it edgier and more hard edged. Raise the tension level. Create more character conflicts. Blow up more stuff! It works for the Mythbusters after all. Make me WANT to see the next episode. Don’t make me mute the television and go walk the dog for the third time in 30 minutes, or just flat out change the channel.


If us fans get the quality movie or tv show we deserve with closure being first and foremost then it will only mean more money for MGM in the future. Or whatever they’re called now. Then focus can be brought to the changes that will inevitably make people, probably just me, displeased with the show. I know things can’t always stay the same and change is sometimes good. Just don’t pull a JJ Abrams and ignore the good and baser quality of what you’re working with. Not every move-goer and couch potato is a gullible goon.

[Flyboy]

And what does this reboot mean exactly? Is he doing continuation for his first movie, just recasted (probably with younger actors - like in ep. 200), or he would redo even his first movie? Because the second possibility is total waste of time. But even if he wanted to go just with the continuation, I would be against it because what's the point in having huge universe, if you have to start from the very beginning every few years. Yes, I would watch. It was even established in Stargate that there are infinite alternative realities - this would just be one of them. But why the hell would anyone ignore all the awesome stuff we have established and did that all over again, when he can continue with more awesomeness?

Because he has a different story idea for Stargate.

And new viewers don't like jumping on mid-story.

From a purely pragmatic perspective, ask yourself why so many franchises get reboots - The Amazing Spiderman came after three relatively successful Spiderman movies. The Incredible Hulk came right after the (not so) successful Hulk. X-Men First Class was essentially a reboot in many ways. Star Trek was, effectively, rebooted.

Reboots or standalone movies are safe. The ONLY reason the original X-Files movie did as well as it did was the timing of its big screen debut.

My father is a casual film watcher - and is therefore the CORE audience that films are aimed at. He really likes the movie Star Gate, and thinks the series is alright (he's not a major fan of watching a TV series religiously)... I bought him a copy of SG Continuum to watch. He enjoyed it well enough, but needed a lot explained to him - not simply who certain characters were, but who the hell Ba'al was and so on so forth. It's much easier for casual film fans to engage with something new or a direct sequel than something that builds on 14 years worth of TV Sci-Fi.

We do not pay TPTB salaries - Joe Public does. And most of them haven't a clue what a Jaffa is. Or a Tok'Ra.

This would not be a betrayal, it just marks a different direction for a franchise and is (imo) the only way to rejuvinate the concept of Stargate - even if it meant establishing a new universe. And frankly, given how far the Stargate universe has diverged from our own - I think it's for the best. The beauty of SG is that it happens in OUR world, not a Star Trek miracle universe. Except when you look at S10 of Sg1 and S5 of SGA, that's not so much the case any more... Maybe going back to basics, for a purer version of Stargate, is needed.

[Peterking72]

Wow.... someone has put Stargate on a pedestal haven't they? "Entitled"? Seriously? As Quizziard says, it's all a business. Stargate isn't some holy icon that is only allowed to be produced by certain individuals, and given the quality of some elements of SG1 and SG1 that certainly isn't the case.

I haven't said that the film/movie series/tv show etc. only allowed to be produced by Malozzi, Glassner, Mullie and co. I only said that if it ever gets done, it better not be those two (DD&RE) who get to do it.
What you said about Star Trek reboot is absulutely incorrect. You still need to know who the hell the Klingons are to understand the show, plus the new Into Darkness features Khan, one of the very first villains of the movie series. So you see why previous knowledge is necessary even in reboots.

Thanks for reading. Peter out.

[Flyboy]

I haven't said that the film/movie series/tv show etc. only allowed to be produced by Malozzi, Glassner, Mullie and co. I only said that if it ever gets done, it better not be those two (DD&RE) who get to do it.
What you said about Star Trek reboot is absulutely incorrect. You still need to know who the hell the Klingons are to understand the show, plus the new Into Darkness features Khan, one of the very first villains of the movie series. So you see why previous knowledge is necessary even in reboots.

Thanks for reading. Peter out.

I'm sorry, I absolutely disagree. Many of my colleagues who are adamantly "not geeks", and think Star Trek is "silly" actually love the new movies. They wouldn't have been able to tell you the difference between a Klingon and a Ferengi. They certainly don't know who Khan is. The new movies do *not* rely on a previous working knowledge of Star Trek.

[Peterking72]

It still doesn't hurt to know who they were in the original. It might give them more insight, plus there was the moment young Spock asked old Spock who Khan is and how they defeated him. So you see my point now?
Plus they can compare the new with the old.

I never implied that anyone was a geek, nerd or any of those terms. I am neither of those, I consider myself simply a fan.

[Flyboy]

But that's a nicety to the existing fans - it is not the same as a continuing on the universe in the same manner.

And hey, I'm a geek and proud. Truth be told, the majority of people here are if they're honest with themselves.

[Quizziard]

I think in the new movies, knowledge of the old ones is more of an inside "joke" or secret code between old friends. It doesn't stop you getting the new movie, but for those in the know, it adds another layer.

[Peterking72]

I think in the new movies, knowledge of the old ones is more of an inside "joke" or secret code between old friends. It doesn't stop you getting the new movie, but for those in the know, it adds another layer.

Very true, very true indeed. Exactly what I've been talking about.

[majorsal]

True, but a Stargate blockbuster movie on the Emmerich scale could revitalize the franchise and lay down the commercial/financial foundation for a new Stargate sci-fi TV series.

but it would be an emmerich based stargate show, and not one based on the tv version characters and storylines the many, many fans love.

[poundpuppy29]

You can not in any way, shape or form think that what happened with Star Trek can happen with Stargate. As much as I love SG it is not even in the same ballpark as ST at all. ST has been around since 1963 and became part of mainstream pop culture TOS characters are the most famous yes TNG was popular with the Trek fandom and but is not as well known outside scifi circles IMHO. It will be interesting to see what happens when I think the 3rd NuST movie comes out what happens with ST franchise no one knows what is going to happen some hope they make a new series with new characters I know I hope they do but you never know.

This is my opinion both DD & RE both want tell their story and I think they both think now there is no SG tv series on that they can now tell their story well I think they are being very stubborn about accepting that their short sighted movie in a very small universe wasn't as popular as the tv shows. I am not saying they didn't create the characters of Jack & Daniel but those 2 characters did not capture the imagination of the main stream and become icons like the TOS ST did so a reboot is a very bad idea IMHO with both or either one of them at the helm their chance to have their SG trilogy passed as soon as SG-1 started they need to let it go.

[majorsal]

i think, IF the rebooted movie did well, it could lead to more movies and/or a new tv series. some tv franchise fans will watch and love it, and some new fans will be brought into the stargate fold. but...

i can't help thinking that a *lot* of the tv franchise fans will be left by the wayside.

and when you consider that there's still a way of bringing in new *and* older fans, and that rebooting stargate with the emmerich/devlin guys is NOT the only way to revive the franchise...

maybe mgm has lost confidence in brad/rob/producers? i've lost confidence in mgm personally... if mgm wants someone else to create another stargate show, at least have brad as a creative consultant! but don't disregard over a decade of history and mythology and wonderful characters...

many of the fans LOVE these characters, and would watch them even in another series! i feel that's the number one thing going against an emmerich stargate reboot.

personally, i've come up with about 5 series ideas myself , so if i can do it, so can a professional writer/producer.

i'm for a brad wright and/or joe mallozzi and/or jonathan glassner and/or carl binder and/or michael greenberg helmed new series!

[Gatefan1976]

I think in the new movies, knowledge of the old ones is more of an inside "joke" or secret code between old friends. It doesn't stop you getting the new movie, but for those in the know, it adds another layer.

You mean like having R2-D2 in Star Trek??

[Gatefan1976]

But that's a nicety to the existing fans - it is not the same as a continuing on the universe in the same manner.

And hey, I'm a geek and proud. Truth be told, the majority of people here are if they're honest with themselves.

<------------
*puts on his geek shirt and sits next to Flyboy