How SyFy killed SGU

[LtColCarter]

It could have been because of bad acting. It could have been because they switched hours and days. It could have been because the plot was boring, or displeasing, or whatever. It could have been a whole multitude of issues, or just one. You cannot blame SGU's cancellation on what you feel was the problem. The fact is, we don't know why people stopped watching. We can speculate until the end of time, but that is all it is. Speculation.

Personally...I think its a combination of all of these things. However, I must say that as SGU got closer to its end...it got better. Gotta hate when shows do that!

[thekillman]

The show's cancellation was obvious. A lack of viewership due to it's departure from the SG-1/Atlantis formula lead to cancellation. Simple, really. A lot of people will fight me on this, but everyone I know who loves Stargate didn't bother with Universe. Obviously, people here (the fans) liked the show, but how many casual viewers (the bulk of the audience) can you name who watched the show?

this is hardly a good way of measure. i can't name ANYONE who likes the show, the show being SG1, SGA or SGU.



anyway, there are merely a handful of rocksolid facts:

-SGU's beginning was controversial. the press conference regarding SGA's cancellation and SGU's greenlit began the whole "SGA cancelled for SGU" show and undoubtly caused a bias towards SGU.

-the first season half was not as spectacular as previous incarnations, so it definitely cost some people there. i don't think more action would've been needed, it definitely had action. i think the magic word "Aliens" would've solved a lot of it.

-the controversy surrounding scott's sex and Perry's quadruthingey definitely did not help either. which is weird considering Perry had no sex and Scott barely had any. introducing a character while having sex however, well it caused me to frown. any good writer should know that the show opener is usually taken as the average episode. so including sex in it would make everyone thing it's gonna be a diary of scott's sex life. and weirdest of all: he didn't even have that much of it. it can be traced down to about 3 or 4 scenes. a 500% increase from SG1 and SGA combined, but those were pretty much sexless aside from insinuation.



i might've forgotten a point. many other things are derived from this. the hate campaign, the comparisons to other shows like 90210 and star trek etc are all factors that can be traced to dissatisfaction.


ah yes now i remember: although i understand that as a network, you have to take action when a show has a drop in viewership, i very much doubt messing around with the timeslot helps.


i understand that many things are hindsight and hindsight is always better. but i think nobody can truly think it had a fair chance. the very press conference, In my Observation, was what started the whole crap and i think a LOT could've been gained there.

[Sp!der]

It was surely not only SyFys fault more a combination of many reasons... sadly!

[QuantumIguana]

There are those who blame SG1 and SGA fans for "boycotting" the show. This is nonsense, people aren't obligated to watch the show, it is the job of producers to attract viewers. If people don't watch, it's the fault of the producers. There was an attempt to distance the show from the previous Stargate shows. This lost some of the core audience, but failed to make up for it with additional viewers new to the franchise.

[HathorKree!]

The reason Stargate Universe failed as a show was because it was not Stargate in nature. To try and blame this on SyFy or to claim that the real reason is unknowable is preposterous.

There are two examples of successful Stargate concept shows to compare it to. Had SGU truly been Stargate in nature it would have enjoyed the same success as the other two shows, even at their lowest ratings points.

There's a HUGE Stargate fanbase that isn't about to walk away from a genuine Stargate premised show, which SGU was not. To deny this is to deny reality. It had squat to do with the network it was on.

[Calluna]

When season 1 rolled out they did advertise it, but not too much. They had a promo Ad here and there, but not too many. Season 1 started playing on Friday night at 9:00pm (Eastern Time) on October 2, 2009 and went in to its season break on December 9, 2009 with an average of 2 million viewers. The show came back on April 22, 2010 and finished up season 1 with an average of 1.8 million viewers

This is just not true. I was in both NYC and London before the premiere of the show in Oct 2009 and saw many ads in print and on TV in both countries. Sky1 in particular was promoing the thing every 5 minutes and it did start very high and gradually declined inm a similar pattern to what happened in the US.

The first half of season 1 had set the story up; the search for food, water, power and supplies. It also set the crews’ back-stories. This is the same for any starting out TV show. It would have been to the 2nd half of season 1 when the action starts.

This is a YMMV thing. I liked the idea of a initial search for survival but the eps themselves disappointed me, "Light" was coo, especially due to the swan dive into the Star SFX, but "Water" was nothing more than a fairly boring rerun of BSG's own "Water" and SG1/SGA eps like "Hide and Seek" and "Prodigy" without characters I liked. And then the writers suffered from severe "we're telling, not showing" with the Stones storylines which dominated the first 10 eps and IMHO were one of the bigger reasons for people tuning out. SGU spent more time on Earth in S1 than SG-1 did, and that show was based on Earth.

The show lost 1 Million viewers over the first 10 episodes when there was no 4 month break or change of day. In fact a few more people tuned in to watch "Space" than they did "Justice".

The 2nd half of the 1st season had some better eps overall but still didn't really grab me in terms of characters.

-the controversy surrounding scott's sex and Perry's quadruthingey definitely did not help either. which is weird considering Perry had no sex and Scott barely had any. introducing a character while having sex however, well it caused me to frown. any good writer should know that the show opener is usually taken as the average episode. so including sex in it would make everyone thing it's gonna be a diary of scott's sex life. and weirdest of all: he didn't even have that much of it. it can be traced down to about 3 or 4 scenes. a 500% increase from SG1 and SGA combined, but those were pretty much sexless aside from insinuation.

Whilst I'm not a fan of the character especially since she was only ever there as a one episode plot device, I think the scene with Jack and the FBI lady in S8 waking up was one of the most mature personal scenes in Stargate. They're adults who are fond of one another who aren;t either excessively romantic or awkward in the bedroom and who manage to part on amicable terms later on.

I'd take a matter of fact love scene like that over Chloe/Scott's Love Making leads to True Love after 5 mins of knowing each other any day. I don't necessarily have a problem with Scott/James except their first scene was such a lame attempt to prove they were "different Stargate" it was very amusing. But it would have been nice if Scott had ever acknowledged that James was upset after he shut her out after Air, if they had to have her pining at all.

[Deevil]

There are those who blame SG1 and SGA fans for "boycotting" the show. This is nonsense, people aren't obligated to watch the show, it is the job of producers to attract viewers. If people don't watch, it's the fault of the producers. There was an attempt to distance the show from the previous Stargate shows. This lost some of the core audience, but failed to make up for it with additional viewers new to the franchise.

With every spin-off you loose some of the audience from the previous one. Not everyone who watched SG1 moved onto Atlantis, and same again. The truth is, as you said it, it failed to get an audience. It happens even with the best of shows, which SGU was not.

The reason Stargate Universe failed as a show was because it was not Stargate in nature. To try and blame this on SyFy or to claim that the real reason is unknowable is preposterous.

There are two examples of successful Stargate concept shows to compare it to. Had SGU truly been Stargate in nature it would have enjoyed the same success as the other two shows, even at their lowest ratings points.

There's a HUGE Stargate fanbase that isn't about to walk away from a genuine Stargate premised show, which SGU was not. To deny this is to deny reality. It had squat to do with the network it was on.

While it's quite an understandable conclusion to make it reads like fanboying/fangirling, and it fails on so many levels.

There is a very recent example of one of the most successful franchises in television history having its latest spin-off fail. Law and Order: LA didn't make it beyond the first season. It had the exact same formula as the shows it spawned from, hell it ended up even inheriting a DA from it - but it just didn't work for the audience.

Successful shows in a franchise does not mean the next cab in the rank is going to ride just as well. In the end shows live and die on their own merit, not on the merit of the shows the spawned it. SGU died because SGU didn't get an audience. There is no guarantee that a show that was more 'stargatey' (which is a heavily debated topic of what makes a Stargate show, no 2 people have the exact same idea) that it would have been successful. To suggest this as fact is either ignorant (meaning not knowing/no understanding) of trending and other concerns, or just being disingenuous.

[thekillman]

The reason Stargate Universe failed as a show was because it was not Stargate in nature. To try and blame this on SyFy or to claim that the real reason is unknowable is preposterous.

There are two examples of successful Stargate concept shows to compare it to. Had SGU truly been Stargate in nature it would have enjoyed the same success as the other two shows, even at their lowest ratings points.

There's a HUGE Stargate fanbase that isn't about to walk away from a genuine Stargate premised show, which SGU was not. To deny this is to deny reality. It had squat to do with the network it was on.

this is plainly not true and you know it.

to quote a commonly heard phrase on the radio:

"results of the past are no guarantee for the future"

i find it highly amusing and highly disturbing that the nr1 argument seems to be "it's not like stargate"

well it has been HAMMERED ON from the very beginning, from the very first word we got on it, that it was going to be different. it always was going to be. if it was not, it was not SGU it was "SG1 somewhere else". it's called "milking it dry"


and yet strangely, SGU was more stargate than SG1 itself was in it's late run. i understand this can cause some confusion as Stargate = SG1, but unless you're blind and deaf, or have no memory, SG1 changed considerably across it's run.

SGU is much more like SG1's initial run. the might of the universe versus a small group, little resources, a lot of make-do, no friends. in SG1, the team frequently clashed. it did not go as far as SGU, but SGU puts the focus differently. it by no means is darker or grittier. SGU simply puts no sugarcoat of hope or moral on it. does not turn the camera away from the evil going on.


yes, SG1 did some evil of it's own. the best example has GOT to be "the other side" where O'neill simply kills a man. and you can try and make it right by saying "he's a space hitler" but he's also a man raised with this mind poison and thus had no way to escape it. he was a victim. and that moment where you see jack look at the iris, and have this mixed feeling of "this was the right thing" and "oh my god what did i do", that essence is what SGU does too. and both SGA and later SG1 miss that. not a surprise considering that SGA is basically "SG1 continued". not that it's not fun, don't get me wrong.

[Gatefan1976]

Shh

The unicorns are asleep

Seriously though, is this a topic that needs rehashing again?? (I mean, obviously it sorta does as the thread got posted, but still.....)

Up for round 10 million KEK old son?

[Hyndara71]

this is plainly not true and you know it.

to quote a commonly heard phrase on the radio:

"results of the past are no guarantee for the future"

i find it highly amusing and highly disturbing that the nr1 argument seems to be "it's not like stargate"

well it has been HAMMERED ON from the very beginning, from the very first word we got on it, that it was going to be different. it always was going to be. if it was not, it was not SGU it was "SG1 somewhere else". it's called "milking it dry"


and yet strangely, SGU was more stargate than SG1 itself was in it's late run. i understand this can cause some confusion as Stargate = SG1, but unless you're blind and deaf, or have no memory, SG1 changed considerably across it's run.

SGU is much more like SG1's initial run. the might of the universe versus a small group, little resources, a lot of make-do, no friends. in SG1, the team frequently clashed. it did not go as far as SGU, but SGU puts the focus differently. it by no means is darker or grittier. SGU simply puts no sugarcoat of hope or moral on it. does not turn the camera away from the evil going on.


yes, SG1 did some evil of it's own. the best example has GOT to be "the other side" where O'neill simply kills a man. and you can try and make it right by saying "he's a space hitler" but he's also a man raised with this mind poison and thus had no way to escape it. he was a victim. and that moment where you see jack look at the iris, and have this mixed feeling of "this was the right thing" and "oh my god what did i do", that essence is what SGU does too. and both SGA and later SG1 miss that. not a surprise considering that SGA is basically "SG1 continued". not that it's not fun, don't get me wrong.

Oookay, what is that stuff you used while you were watching SGU? I want it too .

Seriously, SG1 had its dark themes and moments but (besides a few not soo entertaining eps) it was watchable and a show I liked with characters I liked/loved, storylines I was addicted to and some milestones for the entire SF-genre.

About SGU ... there was nothing original, like- or loveable, nothing about this show with made me turn it on the next week. Well, there was more and more the growing need in me to turn off the TV and read a good book (and in some very dark dreams I wished I could get a script and blow the Destiny up and kill the complete whiny bunch onboard). Sorry, NO similaties between this shows.

[jelgate]

[morrismike]

Some little things like proper lighting on the sets would have been nice.

[thekillman]

Some little things like proper lighting on the sets would have been nice.

that joke is way too old. and not funny.

there is plenty of light on the set. it's just played with differently. Destiny itself is quite dark by nature, and plenty of times will you see the camera facing a light, causing a dark effect.

About SGU ... there was nothing original, like- or loveable, nothing about this show with made me turn it on the next week. Well, there was more and more the growing need in me to turn off the TV and read a good book (and in some very dark dreams I wished I could get a script and blow the Destiny up and kill the complete whiny bunch onboard). Sorry, NO similaties between this shows.

yes you have your opinion and i have mine. i am interested to learn those milestones since i really see no other, other than the 10 year run. for example, on the TV tropes site, Stargate has pretty much every trope in the Sci Fi segment. and the vast majority are played straight, only a handful played with.

Seriously, SG1 had its dark themes and moments but (besides a few not soo entertaining eps) it was watchable and a show I liked with characters I liked/loved, storylines I was addicted to and some milestones for the entire SF-genre.

secondly, characters as likeable or not is something i won't start about because it's purely personal. i quite liked Rush, Young not so much initially but once the thing with his wife was dropped i liked him a lot more.

thirdly, there is NOTHING original about SG1, NOTHING original about Atlantis. in the modern era, so much has been written that every conceivable thing is conceived of. it's a matter of how you use it. how you use those things and make them work. because that is something that will never exhaust. SG1 did it in a great way. well i have to say initially.


for the first 6 or so years SG1 did a masterful season scheme where the darkest of plots were backed by lighthearted episodes. every utterly evil goauld deed was balanced by a fun episode. BSG for example does not do this and the air of the show is much, much darker. well, it appears much darker as SG1 and the SGA team did enough evil to get shot on sight.

it is a family show, and it made it fun. but the fun was not forced. it was a natural flow. little things, like a look, a face. Jack trying Tealc's ice and the reaction. Jack mocking a goauld (In the days that they were super-powerful overlords commanding vast armies and fleets). you know. and then the reactions.

SGU does not do this. kind of like BSG. but not too many comparisons, as i can disassemble any show and make it seem like every bit of it is stolen from another show.


yes it was different. and my main point is that everyone was told that it would be different and nobody seemed to remember that vital point. turning on the TV expecting SG1 under another name. it was not. it was a source of disappointment for many. i liked it. i can't say i liked every bit of it. it was clear that this was unfamiliar territory for the writers, and crew. some things worked out great, others did not.


i can say that, just as SG1 in season 10 is quite different from SG1 season 1, so is SGU season 2 quite different from Season 1. and i think that if S2 SGU had been the tone and way of the entire show, things would have been different.



in the end, SGU was an experiment. for everyone.

[morrismike]

It seems pretty dark to me. I own a calibrated series 8 samsung LED and it is too darn dark. Naval Vessels and the brightest lit place you'll ever be on. TPTW may have thought that was cool but it wasn't. I hate to think of how many screwed up their calibration trying to watch the series. The whole sucking thing didn't help either. Fear of cancellation promted TPTW to try and correct the issues but by that time too many SG faithful had been alienated. BTW the last few episodes were very good.

[KEK]

If you can't see what's happening, you need a new TV. The lighting was far better than anything we've seen from Stargate when digital cameras have been used. Season 8 of SG-1 was especially awful in that regard.

Oookay, what is that stuff you used while you were watching SGU? I want it too .

Seriously, SG1 had its dark themes and moments but (besides a few not soo entertaining eps) it was watchable and a show I liked with characters I liked/loved, storylines I was addicted to and some milestones for the entire SF-genre.

About SGU ... there was nothing original, like- or loveable, nothing about this show with made me turn it on the next week. Well, there was more and more the growing need in me to turn off the TV and read a good book (and in some very dark dreams I wished I could get a script and blow the Destiny up and kill the complete whiny bunch onboard). Sorry, NO similaties between this shows.

You do realise that you not finding anything likeable about the show doesn't mean there isn't anything that is, right?