Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Opinion: Six Reasons SGU Was Cancelled

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by Darren View Post
    In next week's podcast discussion of the cancellation I make the point that, with two hours of WWE and a successful Sanctuary now occupying Friday nights for the foreseeable future, Syfy didn't have any viable place to move SGU back to (at least not that would have been any better than the competitive Tuesday time slot).

    Diana Botsford made the very insightful observation that they could have tried SGU on Wednesdays, when scripted dramatic fare is more sparse on the networks, and moved the reality shows currently on Wednesdays over to Tuesdays -- when there is nothing else really like them on the networks. That sounds like smart counter-programming.

    At the end of the day, I have to think that SGU and Caprica were the sacrificial lambs in Syfy's attempt to break into a new night of the week (in the fall season).
    Yet W13 and Eureka have ran multiple eps in those timeslots and have had around or over 2 Million viewers. I mean a week before SGU's premiere, W13 had 2.4 Million viewers and went against premiere week of the major networks, the next week SGU rides in with only 1.1 Million viewers. Then SGU finished the first half with under 1.1 Million viewers, the next week with similar competition Eureka strolls in with 1.9 Million viewers, and W13 with 2.0 Million viewers.

    Sorry, but it is not the timeslot or dayslot, it was the show itself. It did not have a strong appeal to the average casual viewer.

    Syfy wanted to move SGU and Caprica so they could hopefully feed off those W13 and Eureka viewers. But people just did not get into the show, not because of competition or the weather or X-mas shopping, but because they are two different shows.
    sigpic

    Comment


      #17
      it's like expecting Castle's audience to follow to Detroit 187 just cause they're both crime solving shows.

      WH13 and Eureka are quirky and don't take themselves too seriously. while caprica and SGU are heavy, one could argue heavy handed and serious.
      Where in the World is George Hammond?


      sigpic

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Skydiver View Post
        it's like expecting Castle's audience to follow to Detroit 187 just cause they're both crime solving shows.

        WH13 and Eureka are quirky and don't take themselves too seriously. while caprica and SGU are heavy, one could argue heavy handed and serious.
        Well that's what I mean it is the kind of show, not the timeslot or day of the week. Heck, not saying SGU was horrible or amazing, that has nothing to do with it. It just did not capture the casual viewer, and the same went for Caprica.

        I also mentioned in the ratings thread. The economy is bad, people are out of work. They don't want to see something dark and depressing after their long day.
        sigpic

        Comment


          #19
          Lovely article, Darren, with lots of food for thought. Thanks for giving us your perspective.
          sigpic
          Goodbye and Good Travels, Destiny!

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by Briangate78 View Post
            Yet W13 and Eureka have ran multiple eps in those timeslots and have had around or over 2 Million viewers. I mean a week before SGU's premiere, W13 had 2.4 Million viewers and went against premiere week of the major networks, the next week SGU rides in with only 1.1 Million viewers. Then SGU finished the first half with under 1.1 Million viewers, the next week with similar competition Eureka strolls in with 1.9 Million viewers, and W13 with 2.0 Million viewers.

            Sorry, but it is not the timeslot or dayslot, it was the show itself. It did not have a strong appeal to the average casual viewer.
            The argument is not that Syfy doesn't have any business trying to program Tuesday nights in the fall season, but that SGU (and Caprica) was the wrong show to try it with. Warehouse 13 and Eureka are clearly more accessible to casual viewers, and so it should surprise no one that they fared better in the same time slots -- even against fall competition.
            GateWorld Podcast - Info - iTunes - Google
            The Stargate Omnipedia - www.StargateOmnipedia.com
            Stargate Image Gallery - www.StargateGallery.com

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by Wayston View Post
              link doesn't work for me... why not just post it here
              works for me
              https://twitter.com/#!/Solar_wind84

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by Darren View Post
                The argument is not that Syfy doesn't have any business trying to program Tuesday nights in the fall season, but that SGU (and Caprica) was the wrong show to try it with. Warehouse 13 and Eureka are clearly more accessible to casual viewers, and so it should surprise no one that they fared better in the same time slots -- even against fall competition.
                ^This. Great article BTW
                SGU and Caprica were highly serialized while W13 and Eureka are episodic and therefore more viewer friendly; its easier for that type of show(episodic) to get casual viewers because they(the viewer) won't be totally lost if they just jump right in during the middle of a season or whatever. Serialized shows pretty much require a viewer to tune in every week or risk being lost wondering why certain characters are behaving in certain ways, ect. Putting a highly serialized show in a new timeslot against major network competition (NCIS:LA, which is very episodic and veiwer friendly, and DWTS which is the reality stuff that everyone and their mother watches) is a bad idea, as both Caprica and SGU proved. Their failure isn't really a matter of their quality(which is subjective), but a matter of the type of show (serialized, that it's space sci-fi doesn't help either) and the fact that they were put up against very viewer friendly and episodic major network competition (probably 2 of the highest rated shows on TV ).
                I personally never liked the idea of a Tuesday move because I was already watching NCIS and NCIS: LA. I feel the move to Tues was a factor in SGU's demise and I don't think it can simply be discounted just because a different type of show did better in the same timeslot (during the summer, a season finale and a holiday special).
                sigpic

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by Darren View Post
                  The argument is not that Syfy doesn't have any business trying to program Tuesday nights in the fall season, but that SGU (and Caprica) was the wrong show to try it with. Warehouse 13 and Eureka are clearly more accessible to casual viewers, and so it should surprise no one that they fared better in the same time slots -- even against fall competition.

                  Maybe when SGU dipped below 1.5 Million back in the 2nd half of S1 was when they already made their decision, and gave it a do or die for Tuesday.

                  Clearly if SGU was not having issues to them, they would of kept it on Friday night instead of having Sanctuary on there.

                  Anyway, you posted a great article, but I think too much blame is put on the competition. SGU never even saw a decent uptick, like SGA used to. Atlantis back in S5 for episode 510 to 511 upticked by nearly 700,000 viewers. That to me is a sign of competition. SGU sank and never really recovered. They basically were down to their core audience, and I think that was the final nail in the coffin to SGU's fate.

                  I also think SGU ran at the wrong time, and that was also a factor, imo. People now seem to want action and adventure, and comic relief, rather than slower-paced drama, and melodrama.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by Briangate78 View Post
                    SGU sank and never really recovered. They basically were down to their core audience, and I think that was the final nail in the coffin to SGU's fate.
                    True enough. I think that the justification (or compensation) that was given to Syfy in exchange for them doing a more expensive show this time around was that SGU was supposed to bring in new viewers and reset the franchise's viewership a bit higher again.

                    The Stargate franchise as a whole has been suffering from a steady ratings erosion for years -- ever since the departure of RDA and the premiere of Season Nine of SG-1 and Season Two of SGA. (I am aware of the comparison of SGA S5 to S4, which shows it improving a little.) Remember, SG-1 was also canceled because it didn't live up to the network's ratings expectations at the time.

                    SGU was intended to halt and even reverse that erosion, and unfortunately it just didn't. IMHO, this was evident by about episode #111 or 112.
                    GateWorld Podcast - Info - iTunes - Google
                    The Stargate Omnipedia - www.StargateOmnipedia.com
                    Stargate Image Gallery - www.StargateGallery.com

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by Darren View Post
                      True enough. I think that the justification (or compensation) that was given to Syfy in exchange for them doing a more expensive show this time around was that SGU was supposed to bring in new viewers and reset the franchise's viewership a bit higher again.

                      The Stargate franchise as a whole has been suffering from a steady ratings erosion for years -- ever since the departure of RDA and the premiere of Season Nine of SG-1 and Season Two of SGA. (I am aware of the comparison of SGA S5 to S4, which shows it improving a little.) Remember, SG-1 was also canceled because it didn't live up to the network's ratings expectations at the time.

                      SGU was intended to halt and even reverse that erosion, and unfortunately it just didn't. IMHO, this was evident by about episode #111 or 112.
                      When SGU first premiered, it did it's job. Was getting more viewers than Atlantis. You and I know that Syfy would of most likely renewed SGA on 1.7 Million live viewers which was what their average was around in Season 4.5 and Season 5.5. SGA was not at that point like SG-1 being overly expensive. SGU pulling in 1.9 Million for the first half was exactly what the network wanted. Then what happened? SGU did a 180, and fell below SGA's numbers.

                      In all reality, SGA was really the only Stargate not canceled by Syfy. Look at all 3 press releases, and you can see SGU's is similar to SG-1's but totally different than SGA. I think the most bitterness that has come from the fandom was how there was a movie announced and the end of SGA was tagged on the bottom of the press release. We never saw "Syfy cancels SGA" because they did not, they wanted another season and MGM and them came with a mutual agreement to do a movie. Well, then MGM's financial crisis began which is another story. Since we are still waiting for a movie.

                      My bitterness has returned a little bit, because SGU was suppose to go longer than SGA could of gone and create a sense of longevity for the franchise. BW said in an interview it could of gone to a 6th or 7th season, and ending SGA now while it was popular was the best time to move it into the movie market. SGU has failed to preserve the franchise and may have just killed it. I think with SGA going to a 6th season, you would at least have that establish fan base, and plenty of syndication and reruns to create more revenue. I think SGU was greenlighted at the wrong time, and the ratings in the beginning showed that people did give the show a fair chance.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                        #26
                        In hindsight I think that the timing was bad in ending Atlantis -- but, at the time, the timing looked very good. The two SG-1 movies had just come out on DVD and done quite well. Atlantis's viewership was strong, but all shows lose viewers the longer they run (in addition to becoming steadily more expensive).

                        I can tell you, from sitting in Brad's office and hearing him talk about the future of the franchise as a whole, he was thrilled with the prospect of having Stargate standing solidly on "four legs." SG-1 and SGA would continue with a regular series of DVD/TV movies, SGU could take up the mantle for television, and SG Worlds would hugely expand things in an on-going, canonical gaming universe. It comes out in the audio interview we did that spring, and after the recorder was shut off. He was stoked.

                        Then the direct-to-DVD market collapsed, and MGM wavered on sending the two movies into production.

                        Then MGM itself collapsed (in slow motion).

                        Then SG Worlds collapsed and the studios involved in its development are having a bloodbath in court right now, and have lost the license.

                        Then SGU's ratings slipped below where SGA left off, and was moved to Tuesday, and fared even worse.

                        Instead of four legs, we now have zero. Now I don't think that's going to be the case for very long. MGM will be out of bankruptcy in a matter of weeks, more than likely, and ready to get something with the Stargate name on it into production.

                        But my point is that it was bad timing on all fronts, but it wasn't anything anyone could have seen coming.
                        GateWorld Podcast - Info - iTunes - Google
                        The Stargate Omnipedia - www.StargateOmnipedia.com
                        Stargate Image Gallery - www.StargateGallery.com

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by Darren View Post
                          In hindsight I think that the timing was bad in ending Atlantis -- but, at the time, the timing looked very good. The two SG-1 movies had just come out on DVD and done quite well. Atlantis's viewership was strong, but all shows lose viewers the longer they run (in addition to becoming steadily more expensive).

                          I can tell you, from sitting in Brad's office and hearing him talk about the future of the franchise as a whole, he was thrilled with the prospect of having Stargate standing solidly on "four legs." SG-1 and SGA would continue with a regular series of DVD/TV movies, SGU could take up the mantle for television, and SG Worlds would hugely expand things in an on-going, canonical gaming universe. It comes out in the audio interview we did that spring, and after the recorder was shut off. He was stoked.

                          Then the direct-to-DVD market collapsed, and MGM wavered on sending the two movies into production.

                          Then MGM itself collapsed (in slow motion).

                          Then SG Worlds collapsed and the studios involved in its development are having a bloodbath in court right now, and have lost the license.

                          Then SGU's ratings slipped below where SGA left off, and was moved to Tuesday, and fared even worse.

                          Instead of four legs, we now have zero. Now I don't think that's going to be the case for very long. MGM will be out of bankruptcy in a matter of weeks, more than likely, and ready to get something with the Stargate name on it into production.

                          But my point is that it was bad timing on all fronts, but it wasn't anything anyone could have seen coming.
                          I know, and it is unfortunate. I think SGU has been getting better with age, and now won't have the chance to fully blossom.

                          I really hope you are right and we still see these movies. I know you talk to Brad all the time, but do you think he would be done with Stargate or just take a break? I really would like to see a 4th series in a few years, but after we get some movies.

                          I know I said maybe new producers might be good for a change, but I've for the most part enjoyed Brad's work and the rest of the producers and it would be sad to see him leave the franchise.
                          Last edited by Briangate78; 18 December 2010, 10:02 PM.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                            #28
                            I hope that Brad sticks around. (I have no insight as to what he's thinking about his future career right now.) As much good as the "house-cleaning" approach has done for Trek, I am 100% in Brad's corner as the guy who has the pulse of this franchise and the creativity to move it forward while remaining true to its heritage.

                            I hope he gets some of that new MGM money and focuses on SGU, SGA, and SG-1 movies in 2011-12, and by the time they are wrapped has an awesome idea for Series 4 percolating.
                            GateWorld Podcast - Info - iTunes - Google
                            The Stargate Omnipedia - www.StargateOmnipedia.com
                            Stargate Image Gallery - www.StargateGallery.com

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by Darren View Post
                              I hope that Brad sticks around. (I have no insight as to what he's thinking about his future career right now.) As much good as the "house-cleaning" approach has done for Trek, I am 100% in Brad's corner as the guy who has the pulse of this franchise and the creativity to move it forward while remaining true to its heritage.

                              I hope he gets some of that new MGM money and focuses on SGU, SGA, and SG-1 movies in 2011-12, and by the time they are wrapped has an awesome idea for Series 4 percolating.
                              In the end, it's a business, and it has to be done sometimes. I am hoping Brad is going to make a statement that this is not the end, and he is going to keep pushing for the movies. If he leaves, I think the franchise won't be dead, but it will end up on a long hiatus.
                              sigpic

                              Comment


                                #30
                                I have yet to read the article (page is down for me) but in skimming this thread, yeah, the move really killed SGU.
                                sigpic


                                SGU-RELATED FANART | IN YOUNG WE TRUST | FANDUMB

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X