GateWorld Podcast Feedback!

[DigiFluid]

Try downloading again? The length should be 49:23

[timmciglobal]

Good episode, outside of a "what didn't work in SGU re: the story" which darren says may come in future, I think they hit most of the key problems that doomed SGU.

I criticized SGU a lot but was still watching and hoping it would get better and think things like Tuesdays and split season was a huge issue for SGU.

RE: This weeks guest speaker, I read the four dragons book recently and couldn't help but wonder if she thinks the book, much like sgu, had a good story but maybe took too long to "reveal" it and thus negatively impacted the story. I liked the book but felt like the payoff of the story came too late in the book without enough followup "digging" into the answer that hopefully will come in a later book of hers.

Tim

P.S. I'd love to see Diane Turnshek come back from the science of SGU podcast to talk about the destinys mission, where it might of went, how they might of woven it into SG science and how they could of made the "sci" more accurate/believable in SGU.

[Kliggins]

Thanks David, Diana and Darren. I really enjoyed this podcast. I agreed with a lot of the points made, especially about the move to Tuesday. I didn't agree with everything, but found all the points interesting and am looking for somebody at 4:18 am to talk to about the podcast. I got behind in watching episodes and am hoping SyFy will still show a marathon of the first ten episodes before showing episode 11 whenever it is coming back.

Thank you for another year of keeping the lights on at Gateworld. I hope you and everybody else "working" for GW have a wonderful Christmas and a fun New Year.

[Kelara]

Interesting discussion, you three. I especially liked the budding topic of how much network and creative team have to take each other into account to make a show work (re: long mid season breaks vs. longer storyarcs).

I expect that after the show finishes its run in June-ish, we'll have an "SGU Deconstructed" podcast discussion, as we did with Atlantis. From my seat, that will be the time to talk about what we thought worked and didn't work with the series as a whole, and why it seems not to have resonated with some viewers. But, for now, that feels a little premature to me. We do have fully one-quarter of the show's run yet to watch.

Hmm, I disagree on that. Because deconstructing the show's content and going looking for things that didn't work is monday morning quarterbacking as it is. Yet, the decision about the cancellation is made with only the episodes aired up to now in mind (I don't suppose the program directors at Syfy watched the entire S 2.5 and beforehand and based their decision on that). Same with the viewers, they have only S 1, S 1.5 and S 2.0 to work with on their decision to tune in or not and many obviously favour other shows for live watching. So, if Universe suddenly gets really popular due to a great S 2.5 (which would be terrific) it'll only skew the perception of if anything content related led to the cancellation or not. Not that I'd mind if S2.5 blew my mind, though .

Oh edit: It'd be very interesting to have someone on for that podcast who actually felt that the show didn't resonate with them for you to discuss with ´(even though you're trying to be as fair as you can, all three of you). I mean, someone still fair and able to express themselves... not like some of those half crazy types that called in on the airlock alpha liveshow .

[Ramses818]

Two points of discussion

1. I think that there is a parallel with Stargate franchise and the Star Trek franchise.
Next Generation--On highly successful
DS9--Starts in middle of Next Generation, similar format
Voyager--Starts in Middle of DS9, similar format
Take a break for a bit and try do something different
Enterprise--prequal because we don't want to do the same thing anymore, fails
Down and out and needed a reboot
We'll get a few movies and then maybe a new TV show


SG1--highly successful
SGA--Similar format
SGU--Switch gears, fails
Down and out and I think needs a reboot.

2. We have been wondering what powers Destiny. We know it powers itself via the stars. I was watching Andromeda and on there they say that the ship is powered by hydrogen and it needs to sit in a gas giant or get hydrogen from a star. Maybe that is how Destiny powers itself too. It collects hydrogen from the star and uses it as propulsion and maybe it must use stars because of the high density of hydrogen

[hlndncr]

I have to agree with you. We got various reasons for the cancellation except the idea that people didn't watch because they didn't like the show. Why wasn't this discussed too?

Actually, we do discuss those issues when we discuss what a fourth show should be like: a return to comraderie, humor, etc.

Well, if you've listened to the show you'll know that the three of us rather liked SGU. I suppose that's the reason we didn't end up connecting the cancellation to its perceived quality a whole lot. This convo was less about "the way the world sees it" and more about "the way we see it."

There will be plenty of time for the latter, and I'm happy for someone to call in and make that point in a voicemail. I expect that after the show finishes its run in June-ish, we'll have an "SGU Deconstructed" podcast discussion, as we did with Atlantis. From my seat, that will be the time to talk about what we thought worked and didn't work with the series as a whole, and why it seems not to have resonated with some viewers. But, for now, that feels a little premature to me. We do have fully one-quarter of the show's run yet to watch.

Hmm, I disagree on that. Because deconstructing the show's content and going looking for things that didn't work is monday morning quarterbacking as it is. Yet, the decision about the cancellation is made with only the episodes aired up to now in mind (I don't suppose the program directors at Syfy watched the entire S 2.5 and beforehand and based their decision on that). Same with the viewers, they have only S 1, S 1.5 and S 2.0 to work with on their decision to tune in or not and many obviously favour other shows for live watching. So, if Universe suddenly gets really popular due to a great S 2.5 (which would be terrific) it'll only skew the perception of if anything content related led to the cancellation or not. Not that I'd mind if S2.5 blew my mind, though .

Oh edit: It'd be very interesting to have someone on for that podcast who actually felt that the show didn't resonate with them for you to discuss with ´(even though you're trying to be as fair as you can, all three of you). I mean, someone still fair and able to express themselves... not like some of those half crazy types that called in on the airlock alpha liveshow .

I agree that the actual short comings of SGU in terms of content were not adequately discussed and I think they can and should be even before the second half of season 2 is aired. But whether you do it sooner or later I believe it should definitely be a topic of a podcast in and of itself. It is a very salient issue and one that deserves more than a mention in a "what did you think overall?" or "what would you like to see next?" discussion.

I think the fact that all three of you (Darren, David, and Diana) do tend to think alike is something of a shortcoming in your podcasts. It is more challenging to discuss these things with someone who disagrees with you, and often it's hard to find someone among our own circle with radically different views. (As Jack would say, "It's about flocking and togetherness.") But surely you know someone who is knowledgeable and articulate (having watched the show despite disliking it) who could cogently and respectfully discuss the perceived strengths and weaknesses of SGU with you point by point. I believe that would be a very entertaining podcast for you and the listeners alike.

Finally, I would like to compliment you on one point raised during the podcast (I can't remember by whom) about the gravity of the show not resonating with viewers because real life is somewhat bleak for many right now and so we are more likely to seek out and enjoy ligher entertainment. I had not considered that issue, but I think it is an interesting and valid point. I would be interested to know whether there is a marked shift of entertainment preferences in hard economic times toward an increased appetite for buoyant espacism. I'm not sure that SGU's dark tone and slow pace could have survived even in the best econimic climate, but it may have helped it's chances.

[Darren]

P.S. I'd love to see Diane Turnshek come back from the science of SGU podcast to talk about the destinys mission, where it might of went, how they might of woven it into SG science and how they could of made the "sci" more accurate/believable in SGU.

Yep! We haven't confirmed with Diane yet, but this is exactly the plan for one of our January shows. Stay tuned.

[JRDTECH]

Hi I never listen to fan site's podcast because they are usually boring with bunch of 'likes' and 'umm's' taking up 90% but this podcast is top notch. Just watched the cancellation podcast and I'll probably go back and listen to the podcasts that correspond to each episode when I re-watch the series. Great work.

Although there is one thing you mentioned that I sort of disagree with, that the Stargate franchise is important to Syfy. Just look how they treated it, cancelling SG-1 right after 200th episode and forcing producers to wrap up the series in ten episodes (I clearly remember reading here that SG-1 had several more seasons planned out) but Stargte producers did do a good job ending the series and then wrapping the Ori story up with Ark of Truth so in essence SG-1 felted "ended" rather then cancelled which took the sting away a bit.

Next, Atlantis, not sure how much time they had to scramble to end the series when it was announced it wasn't going to be renewed but judging by the finale...not much time!! They tried to cram so much into that hour, it felt so rushed, if Syfy cared at all they would of at least allow Atlantis an extra hour for the finale.

Now they are cancelling SGU without giving producers anytime at all to attempt to wrap it up and from the sounds of it there wasn't even any negotiating, according to Mallozzi Wright was on an aircraft carrier and Cooper was "some place tropical" when this announcement was made and everyone found out via twitter including the actors.

The blame is being placed on ratings but looking at the ratings in the episode guide here on Gateworld taking away the 2.4m rating for Air I'm seeing between 1.3 - 1.8 ratings and doing a quick visual comparison I had to go back to season 3 of Atlantis and season 9 of SG-1 to see similar ratings. The current ratings for season 2 thus far too fairly similar to Atlantis season 4 which had the majority of it's rating from 0.9 to 1.1. And Atlantis did get renewed. Then there's the Tuesday issue you touched on, IMO that cost SGU around half a million viewers a week, give or take a 100,000. Would a 1.3 - 1.6 rating average been enough to save SGU? Who knows, but if this franchise was important to Syfy they would of said "Hey, maybe we shouldn't of gone up against the networks top shows on Tuesday night, lets give SGU another chance on a less competitive night" but they didn't do that so to say Syfy is a friend to the Stargate franchise...I don't agree with that assessment.

Look forward to the next podcast.

[kusanagi]

Yep! We haven't confirmed with Diane yet, but this is exactly the plan for one of our January shows. Stay tuned.

Nice

[Sami_]

Not sure what the person who mentioned the Battlestar finale ratings was talking about - the finale had 2.4 million viewers, thats a solid number of viewers for any Syfy show.

[Diana Botsford]

I apologize if what I said was misconstrued but I was referring to the 1.4 million MEN for the coveted Adults 18-49 household rating. I'm pretty sure I said as much. Of course, that's not viewers overall. And yes, I think the demographics are a poor representation of the SF viewer population.

[Sami_]

I apologize if what I said was misconstrued but I was referring to the 1.4 million MEN for the coveted Adults 18-49 household rating. I'm pretty sure I said as much. Of course, that's not viewers overall. And yes, I think the demographics are a poor representation of the SF viewer population.

Ah okay, I loved Rascals by the way, great episode!

Did you ever read Ronald D. Moore's comments about the episode, did you know he felt that way at the time and what was you and your fathers reactions to it?

This is the quote just incase you never read it:

<<Do I remember reading once that you were not happy with the TNG episode
"Rascals"? Why not? I thought it was a great story with some great acting
by the children. In fact, it is one of my favorite TNG episodes.>>

When Michael bought the premise I thought he was completely insane: An Away
Team rematerializes on the transporter as child -- with adult minds! I tried
again and again to bury this idea, which of course meant that I would get
saddled with the inevitable rewrite when the script came in. I just thought
it was a ludicrous idea and wanted nothing to do with it. That said, once I
got the assignment, the professional writer in me had to commit to the
material and do the best with it that I could, so I tried very hard to bring
humor and humanity to the proceedings, chiefly through the Guinan/Ro story
that I did end up liking in the end. I still cringe when I think of the
episode (the Ferengi capture the Enteprise in a couple of broken down Bird of
Preys???) but many people have told me how much they like it.

[Diana Botsford]

Hi Sami,

Funny thing about that RDM quote -- the original script my Dad and I wrote did NOT have a transporter accident. We had a metamorph alien as the cause for changing the adults into kids (and vice versa). I confronted Ron about his misquote and he claimed he didn't remember ever making the above statement.

Gotta love the intertubes.

[Sami_]

Hi Sami,

Funny thing about that RDM quote -- the original script my Dad and I wrote did NOT have a transporter accident. We had a metamorph alien as the cause for changing the adults into kids (and vice versa). I confronted Ron about his misquote and he claimed he didn't remember ever making the above statement.

Gotta love the intertubes.

Interesting, I think the transcript is accurate though - its from one of the many aol chats he and other members of the staff such as Piller, Behr and Braga had with fans over the years. It seems unlikely (at least to me) that these chats weren't legit.

The chats aside though, did he have misgivings about an episode turning members of the crew into children?

Obviously it turned out great but I find it a very interesting insight into the creative process particularly between the creative staff - the transcript gives me an office politics feeling where a more established writer within the series is trying to crush a story by the newcomer but in some ways its good to know its a tough process to get ideas by even other writers.

I get the impression that in SGU the relationship between the creative staff is too close that criticism of each others ideas may not be as easy, perhaps to the detriment of the series in some cases.

[timmciglobal]

Have you guys considered doing a special series of Star Trek related season reviews? Some of my fav episodes of podcast are the "season in review" ones.

Would love to hear Darren & David (& guests as needed) for star trek seasons.


Tim