S10: Critique & Contemplation

[keshou]

Just to comment on the comments....

Ratings for "200": I think they'll be up but not in the 2.0 range - probably more like 1.7-1.8. And they will hopefully show a fabulous "next on Stargate" at the end if they want those ratings to carry any momentum to the next week. ( btw: I'm open to "200" - I think it's either going to be a hoot or cringeworthy but either way I'm not planning on missing it

Future of SG-1: I think it's likely SG-1 will be cancelled, with the promise of a mini-series in the future (probably featuring RDA). They've been fighting budget issues and with the decline in the ratings - well it may depend on how much either of the parties (Scifi / MGM) are willing to renegotiate. But just a guess - I don't know much about that sort of stuff.

But if SG-1 does continue in some form it could possibly take some time off and then be retooled as a new show - maybe "Stargate Command". Perhaps with Mitchell, Vala, Landry and a whole new cast of characters. IF Ben and Claudia want to stay on. I think the only reason they'd ask MS to stick around is if they plan on continuing the Ori storyline and because of Daniel's connection to Vala. But I think it's doubtful - they'll be cutting costs and need some cheaper actors. And MS sounds itchy to move on anyway.

They've had a great run. Whatever problems I've had with the show in the last several years it's given me a lot of enjoyment for a long time. Very few shows end on top of the ratings or at their peak creatively. Heck I can't remember the last time I watched a show all the way to its final episode/cancellation. Oh wait, I can.....Farscape......but that's only because I had just discovered and fallen in love with it. Because otherwise I might have quit watching in the dismal first half of S4. Although I was glad I stuck around because I enjoyed the last half of S4.


ETA: Oh I forgot.....my other big prediction. If SG-1 is retooled into Stargate Command - there could be a different showrunner and probably some news writers..

I'm hardly ever right so you can pretty much count on everything I just said being wrong.

[MediaSavant]

Oh, yes - there's an excellent way to recover your missing 25% of fans!

Given the spectucular lack of logic/commonsense at all levels recently displayed by the BAB though, I wouldn't put it past them to think this is the obvious solution. Makes as much sense as anything else they've thrown at us since Avalon.

Well, there is the example of the final season of the Practice for them to look to. ABC said they would cancel the show due to sagging ratings and increased costs (sound familiar?).

To keep the show on air and to lower costs, David E. Kelley fired most of the actors, including the star Dylan McDermitt. They brought in James Spader and, later, William Shatner. The ratings went up. They won Emmy's. The next year, they remade it as "Boston Legal" and that show is still on.

Sometimes, extreme makeovers can work.

[ReganX]

Sometimes, extreme makeovers can work.

Wouldn't the changes made for Seasons Nine and Ten qualify as an extreme makeover?

[ReganX]

But if SG-1 does continue in some form it will take some time off and then be retooled as a new show - maybe "Stargate Command". Perhaps with Mitchell, Vala, Landry and a whole new cast of characters. IF Ben and Claudia want to stay on. I think the only reason they'd ask MS to stick around is if they plan on continuing the Ori storyline and because of Daniel's connection to Vala. But I think it's doubtful - they'll be cutting costs bigtime and need some cheaper actors. And MS sounds itchy to move on anyway.

I wonder if they will keep them around. If they believe that the characters have been well-received it's one thing but if they think that they haven't, it could be very risky to base a new show around them.

If there was to be a second spin-off, I like the idea of giving Sam command of a ship. She could take Teal'c with her if CJ wanted to stick around and they could bring in new actors to play the rest of the crew.

[Rogue]

I wonder if they will keep them around. If they believe that the characters have been well-received it's one thing but if they think that they haven't, it could be very risky to base a new show around them.

If there was to be a second spin-off, I like the idea of giving Sam command of a ship. She could take Teal'c with her if CJ wanted to stick around and they could bring in new actors to play the rest of the crew.

I like that idea. I liked seeing Sam in command of the SGC. It suits her.

[Albion]

Well, there is the example of the final season of the Practice for them to look to. ABC said they would cancel the show due to sagging ratings and increased costs (sound familiar?).

To keep the show on air and to lower costs, David E. Kelley fired most of the actors, including the star Dylan McDermitt. They brought in James Spader and, later, William Shatner. The ratings went up. They won Emmy's. The next year, they remade it as "Boston Legal" and that show is still on.

Sometimes, extreme makeovers can work.

I've never disputed the fact that sometimes change in a show can work. And work well. However, it has to be logical and fit into the history of the show. If it's done correctly, it can sometimes be the boost a show needs, just as above.

Where the BAB failed was that they shoehorned in ludicrious changes that made no logical sense, had no connection to the military accuracy and continuity which they had previously been so proud to make a part of SG1 and reduced the quality to the point where the show is a parody of itself and just one more bog-standard SF show of the week - doing what every other SF show is doing (and often less well).

Had the BAB shown some integrity and told us that S8 was the last of SG1, Moebius II was the show's very last episode and that they were beginning a spin off called Stargate Command with Avalon being their S1 premiere - I'd have less complaints about them today than I do. As it turned out, 'Stargate Command' wasn't to my taste and I gave up watching. But at the very least I would have respected that they'd had enough respect for me to admit it wasn't SG1, but a completely new show.

David E. Kelley, you note, had the good sense not to try and pretend that Boston Legal was still The Practice. He was honest and repackaged the premise as an entirely new show. If only the BAB had had the same commonsense.

Albion

[keshou]

*snip*
Had the BAB shown some integrity and told us that S8 was the last of SG1, Moebius II was the show's very last episode and that they were beginning a spin off called Stargate Command with Avalon being their S1 premiere - I'd have less complaints about them today than I do. As it turned out, 'Stargate Command' wasn't to my taste and I gave up watching. But at the very least I would have respected that they'd had enough respect for me to admit it wasn't SG1, but a completely new show.

David E. Kelley, you note, had the good sense not to try and pretend that Boston Legal was still The Practice. He was honest and repackaged the premise as an entirely new show. If only the BAB had had the same commonsense.

Albion

I agree that a whole new show packaged with a new name might have made more sense. And in their defense it sounds like they were moving that direction until Scifi decided they wanted to keep the "SG-1" brand for their "record breaking" 9th and 10th seasons. They could have gotten rid of most of the old-timers (Daniel, Teal'c and Sam) so there would have been no comparisons at all.

I think I'm probably ambivalent about watching any new spin-offs at this point - whether it features the old crew or not. Sam and Teal'c running around on the galaxy on a spaceship doesn't excite me much. It's the relationships and family feel of the original four that I miss. And honestly - I think all the original actors may well be ready to move on. AT sounds like she already has something lined up so I'd tell her to go for it! How long does she want to play Sam anyway? And CJ sounds like he's ready to take a break from those daily workouts he has to endure to play Teal'c.

I think one of the main problems of the franchise right now is that neither Brad Wright or Robert Cooper - as much as I respect their contributions to the Stargate franchise - have been able to create a new mythology that replaces the Goa'uld.

The wraith are okay and Brad Wright is putting together a pretty good 3rd season for Atlantis (after a rather spotty 2nd season) - but I'm still not invested in the wraith as villains. Of course they seem to recognize that and are introducing other foes.

The Ori are even worse at this point being rather ponderously dull when they appear onscreen. I think they're trying to fix that (with the introduction of Adria) but it's probably too late.

Whatever happens it's going to be interesting to watch. We should get an indication in the next few weeks as the spoilers start leaking for the final episodes of S10. I think you're going to be able to see that they're trying to bring SG-1 to a logical stopping point with they assumption they're not coming back for S11.

[Skydiver]

Had the BAB shown some integrity and told us that S8 was the last of SG1, Moebius II was the show's very last episode and that they were beginning a spin off called Stargate Command with Avalon being their S1 premiere - I'd have less complaints about them today than I do. As it turned out, 'Stargate Command' wasn't to my taste and I gave up watching. But at the very least I would have respected that they'd had enough respect for me to admit it wasn't SG1, but a completely new show.


Albion

to the best of my knowledge, they wanted to. but the greedy buzzards at scifi couldn't see anything but airing the 'record breakign show' so they wouldn't let them rename it.

brad said himself that had they 'rebranded' it (changed its name) it'd have more life to it than it does now.

but scifi - at the end of the day - doesn't give a fig about the fans. they just wanted thier bragging rights and don't care if they destroy the show (or have destroyed frankly)

I said way back in s8 that, once we got 9, season 10 was a 'sure thing' but that the show would get canned after s10 - probably citing rising costs, inflation, etc. because, once they have the record, there's no need to keep throwing money away when they can cancel it, rebrand it now, make it cheaper and still reap the rewards

[smurf]

You are confusing Viewers with households. They are NOT the same thing. If you go to this site, which is written for planners and buyers in the advertising industry, you will see that Eureka delivered 2,761,000 households, not 4 million. 2,761,000 divided into a household universe of 86 million gets you that 3.2 rating.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/art...ticle_6214.asp

I know it's not the same thing, unfortunately it doesn't help when the media itself insists on using inaccurate wording. (I have also seen it referred as "viewer households" - which I assume just means households).
I'll start referring to 1,340,000 & 1,250,000 viewers if it helps you, because changing my numbers to refer to 869,940 forum wide is going to cause a number of people to point fingers and say we're moving the goalposts.

To be honest, we both know that the actual numbers behind the Neilsens are not as important as the rating point produced.
1.6 is 1.6 what ever season, and 1.3 is flipping awful.

[MediaSavant]

To be honest, we both know that the actual numbers behind the Neilsens are not as important as the rating point produced.
1.6 is 1.6 what ever season, and 1.3 is flipping awful.

It depends on who you are talking to. Technically speaking, ad agency buyers cut their deals with the network based on "cost per thousand", which is based on the actual numbers behind the "rating". In addition, the deals are usually cut on a demographic target such as "Adults 25-54" or "Adults 18-49", not households.

Note that the website I posted doesn't even show the rating as a percentage but the absolute numbers for households, Adults 18-34, Adults 18-49, and Adults 25-54.

We're stuck with only looking at the coverage household rating because that's all that's published for us consistently. But, that doesn't mean it's what's important in the business transaction between network and ad buyer.

Still, as an indication of what's going on, a 1.3 is not good as an indicator of what is probably happening to the demographic numbers that really matter.

[Zoser]

I'd say Daniel has the best chance of being kept around because, as you say, he has been roped into being half of Daniel&Vala, much to the detriment of his character - whether he will remain half of Daniel&Vala before it mutates into Cam&Vala with Daniel as wallpaper is another question.

Much as the thought pains me, Sam could probably be the first character on the chopping block; the leadership question will remain an issue as long as she's there, TPTB have been complaining that they don't know what to do with the character and, by the sounds of things, they want Vala to be the leading lady.

If Sam goes, I stop watching. It's as simple as that. If TPTB and/or the Sci-Fi execs realise that getting rid of Sam means losing viewers, they might decide against it.

By the way, is it true that there are certain requirements the show has to meet to get some kind of concessions or something in Canada? I remember somebody - can't for the life of me remember who or where - saying that both Amanda Tapping and Michael Shanks had to retain their positions in the credits to meet requirements for Canadian actors, something about either the lead spot in the credits or the next two spots - second and at the end with an "and" - had to be filled with Canadian actors.

With this cr@ppy writing and no RDA I'm hanging on by a shred - if Sam leaves I'm sooo gone.

[MediaSavant]

David E. Kelley, you note, had the good sense not to try and pretend that Boston Legal was still The Practice. He was honest and repackaged the premise as an entirely new show. If only the BAB had had the same commonsense.

Albion

That's not exactly what I took away from it. While Alan Shore (James Spader) worked at the same law firm that The Practice was based on and they tackled the same types of cases, it was still "The Practice." It was when they moved it to a totally different law firm in name and style and worked on different kinds of cases, it became a different show.

IMO, SG-1 hasn't changed quite that much.

[Zoser]

I wonder if they will bother with another spin-off at all. Ratings-wise, the show has lost a lot of viewers since Season Eight and the end of old SG-1. While TPTB may give a list of reasons as long as your arm for why the ratings fell, amongst themselves they may decide that the new direction, or at least some of the elements of it, simply were not well received and if that is the case, they may feel that making a spin-off for the new direction would be a waste of money.

I have an idea for a spin-off. Sam and Jack tired of the lack of privacy since the Stargate went public, wander the galaxy (and here's the best part) through a round spinny thing that flushes side ways. Often they are accompanied by their old buddies Teal'c and Daniel Jackson and sometimes we get glimpses of their lives. They eventually retire on Maybourne's planet and live happily ever after living off residuals.

[ReganX]

With this cr@ppy writing and no RDA I'm hanging on by a shred - if Sam leaves I'm sooo gone.

You may not be the only one to leave. Then again, there may not be an eleventh season or a spin-off at all so maybe Sam will stay until the end.

[BPC]

I just read the interview with BBrowder in Eclipse and my biggest question(and complaint) is why the heck won't anyone, not here at GW or apparently anywhere else, directly ask BB and CB and the guys in charge about the negative reactions to the new characters an the show in general - why does it seem to be taboo? That Eclispe chick just beat around the bush and the viewer comments she used were all skewed to the positive with a teeny hint of negative. It is a huge issue with many, many fans and it has been stated by many that the Mitchell character has ruined their enjoyment of the show, has made them stop watching or they watch but skip the Mitchell parts by using fast forward buttons, etc. I think as viewers we deserve to also hear the actors talk about these aspects of the show and the problems especially when the show is raking in such rotten numbers like 1.3 and 1.4.

The fact they ignore a huge story such as the negative reactions to the new characters and the huge (25-30%) ratings drops does an injustice to the fans, especially the ones like me, who think the show now stinks partly because of the new characters and partly because of the Ori and the other boring aspects plus the convenient beam technology that now gets them out of trouble instead of having to use their heads.

I know it was about 200 and the success of the show but it seems contrived in light of the fact that Season 10 could very well be the last one if things keep going the way they are. It gives a false impression, and again ignores a huge portion of the fan base, to go merrily along as if there is nothing wrong.