Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open the Iris: Stargate SG1 Confirms Season 7

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the celebrate-good-times dept.

Nefrayu writes "After false rumors having been posted on the /. forum lately about the 7th season of SG-1, Gateworld.net and the SciFi Channel have now confirmed that the show will be carried on SciFi through the 7th season. Along with this announcement is the "surprise" that Dr. Daniel Jackson (portrayed by Michael Shanks) will be returning full time for the said 7th season. Excerpts from an online chat with supervising producer Joseph Mallozzi at SG1Fans can be found here. "

93 comments

  1. Please insert... by farfisa69 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...fondest Macgyver memory or joke here.

    --
    Meat is murder, I eat chicken.
    1. Re:Please insert... by zenst · · Score: 2, Funny

      indeed the comparrision to Mcgyver moments/last 5 mins of any startrek involving engineering is high but that is paramount to any humour/good scifi. Suppose my current fav would be the eps in season 6 were the 2 geeks try to save sg-1 - realy funny eps but lacking in reconfiguring a starf weapon as a teleport - perhaps season 7 will see that happen.

  2. It's been on TV every day for the past year by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

    tis getting a bit old

    the kids are fed up of it

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  3. Re:What is this? TV Guide? by Assassin17 · · Score: 1

    extrapolation is good, if i'm remembering the weak character development of the movie right...

  4. That's good by acehole · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's good that Daniel Jackson is to return to Stargate, but what happens to Jonas (the one who replaced him for season 6)?

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
    1. Re:That's good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Desk job.

    2. Re:That's good by dvk · · Score: 5, Interesting

      According to the interview, he is "certain" to sign on, if he does, will also be SG1 member. How they plan to expand SG1 to 5 people, i'm not sure. But watchng the interplay between him and Jackson, if written as well as other interaction between team members, would be fun.
      -DVK

      --
      "The right to figure things out for yourself is the only true freedom everyone shares. Go use it"-R.A.Heinlein
    3. Re:That's good by guybarr · · Score: 3, Funny


      It's good that Daniel Jackson is to return to Stargate ?

      The producer wants to kick him out, he ascends to godhood, the crowds want him back in, he descends back to mortality.

      Will they frigin decide what is his theological rank ? All these phase transitions are tiring.

      --
      Working for necessity's mother.
    4. Re:That's good by The+Original+Yama · · Score: 2

      I hope they fight. Everyone's gotten all friendly and cosy over the years that things are getting boring. Even Jonas (an alien) is being accepted now. I put ten bucks on Jonas to kick Daniel's butt. Not only is he "a quick study" (damn I hate it when he says that), he also has raging pectorals (which the makers like to remind us of by always giving him tight t-shirts). He should win, assuming that Daniel hasn't acquired any eery powers from beyond the grave.

      --
      OLPC Australia
  5. Season 14 outline by zenst · · Score: 0, Troll

    After Mr Jackson became a god-liek creature in Season 6 and florished in season 7 the rest of the cast became jelous. As time went on many of the cast also gained super-human powers and now with the onset of season 14 producers are wondering if they should rename the series 'Fantastic four' but are curretnly seek approval *grin*. In tonights episode the guest stand up comic is Fraiser playing Teac's long lost son of season 6 fame.

    1. Re:Season 14 outline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL

  6. Re:What is this? TV Guide? by TobyWong · · Score: 1, Troll

    Are you insinuating there is strong character development on that B quality soap-opera of a junk TV series?

    Please.

    --
    - Toby
  7. New plot line for season 7 by Angry+White+Guy · · Score: 4, Funny

    They travel to a world where they are attacked, the scientists screw up dramatically and the military has to go in and save the day, all the while the alien companions know absolutely nothing about the world, have nothing of value to input, and in general get underfoot throughout the entire episode.

    We can call this season: Journey to the not-so-parallel universe.

    --
    You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
  8. I loved the movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A great action movie, with fantastic special effects. I always felt that the series was a bit of a let down though. I mean the characters totally changed, and the series was set primarily on Earth. It just wasn't the same. Why did they have so few space battles? Why couldn't they have had another actor play Luke Skywalker?

  9. Dr Daniel is returning? You mean to say he left? by Xpilot · · Score: 4, Funny

    Aaaah.... I've been Lone Gunmenned.

    In the country where I live, SG1 hasn't gone that far yet :)

    --
    "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
  10. Re:Dr Daniel is returning? You mean to say he left by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 4, Funny

    whats even worse is 9/10 people who read your post will understand it...

    --
    I live in a giant bucket.
  11. In defense of SG-1 by rde · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I liked the movie, but the series is the only one I watch at the moment, with the exception of the surprisingly excellent Odyssey 5. Both of the above, IMO, are up there with the greats (B5, Farscape, Misfits of Science, early McGyver, etc).

    And what does 'extrapolates too far' mean, anyway? It's a science fiction series. If they didn't extrapolate as much as they did, it'd be a shit series. Everyone'd spend every week staring at the iris, wondering what those occasional 'thuds' were.

  12. who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by visualight · · Score: 0, Redundant

    People watch sg-1 only because it's on every goddamned day. They say the ratings are up, well no shit the ratings are up. And they've cancelled farscape? The ratings for farscape are down because it's shown only on Friday night's at 10:00 when everyone is either asleep or out getting they're "drink on". I wish I had a billion dollars to buy out the sci/fi channel and fire these people.

    --
    Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
    1. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      How come this guy gets labelled as flamebait? Did you actually read his comment - it's entirely valid.

      SG-1 now is weak and anaemic compared to how it first began, and farscape was just getting good. As for the screening time dictating audience figures, his comment is right on the ball.

      I just hope someone metamoderates your ass to the junkpile.

      -Nano.

    2. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by Monopolist · · Score: 1

      Seriously!

      SG-1 is fine for filler and did its job keeping me awake until Farscape aired, but there's not enough there to keep me tuning every episode. I just don't understand how shows like "Farscape" and the "Invisible Man" can get cancelled in their prime, while SG-1 and worse (i.e. "Crossing Over") seem to thrive.

      Sci-Fi shouldn't let itself be run totally by ratings, otherwise we'll end up with Sci-Fi meets Jerry Springer!

    3. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by tchapin · · Score: 1
      That's b/c Invisible Man and Farscape were total crap! Lexx is crap! The new Twilight Zone is crap! Any other "SF originals" that I forgot? Oh yeah, Saint-Sinner is crap! Taken is crap!

      Stargate came to the Sci-Fi channel w/ a large "installed base" of viewers. That number was probably some significant percentage of SF's total viewship (I have no idea how large, but let's say 20%?) They want to keep that group of people happy and not lose them. Any original show that the SF channel has tried out hasn't worked out in the long run.

      If a television network doesn't go by ratings, then they'll have no one watching what you think of as "quality" television. They need to attract advertisers somehow, and if their own creations aren't cutting it, then they get the boot.

      It's too bad we can't start our own cable network....can you imagine the /. channel? What would you (yeah you! the one reading this right now!) put on it.

      Todd

      --
      -- !todd erases a red dot! I steal music on the internet.
    4. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by erpbridge · · Score: 3, Interesting

      New Twilight Zone is UPN, not SciFi. Maybe you're thinking of the new Outer Limits... which originally was made by Showtime, then after about 4 years Sci-Fi bought it.

      SG-1 was also oiginally made by Showtime... and bought by Sci-Fi after about 5 years.

      I think Lexx was originally an HBO series, bought by Sci-Fi.

      I never watched Lexx, but I watched Outer Limits and SG-1 before and after Sci-Fi. Anyone notice that after Sci-Fi buys something that's still in production (not something in reruns like Lost in Space or Forever Knight), the quality of the show decreases dramatically?

      Another example: Sliders. Was orignally a FOX show. It was a good show in it's 1st season, then Fox's execs demanded it be turned to crap, which of course got it cancelled. Sci-Fi bought it, and REALLY screwed it up.

      I think the quality of Sci-Fi's writers also hinges on the fact that:

      1) they're not a premium network. They make money off commercials and a few product placements, not off monthly subscriptions and product placements.
      2) they're owned by USA, which is also known for tons of crap.

      I think it's about 70% number 2, 20% number 1, and the rest just general faults of these shows (certain premises last longer than others, and you can only do so many plots on the same general building blocks.)

    5. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by erpbridge · · Score: 2

      Obligatory:

      3)?????
      4)Profit!!!

      (which goes right in line with what I just wrote...)

    6. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by Bobulusman · · Score: 4, Interesting
      That's b/c Invisible Man and Farscape were total crap! Lexx is crap! The new Twilight Zone is crap! Any other "SF originals" that I forgot? Oh yeah, Saint-Sinner is crap! Taken is crap!
      I would agree with you on Lexx and that crappy new Outer Limits (I think that's what you ment) and Good vs Evil (again, I watch too much tv), but I liked the other two.

      Farscape was really good, at least for the first couple seasons. This last one was kinda crap. I know I'll be flamed for that, but, seriously, it seemed like the characters could not keep the same personality from episode to episode.

      The invisible man gave me some good chuckles, again, mainly in the first couple seasons. When they brought in that person from Black Scorpion and actually started getting serious about the plot, they lost focus. It was a comedy, not a drama! Ugh.

      It's too bad we can't start our own cable network....can you imagine the /. channel? What would you (yeah you! the one reading this right now!) put on it.
      A /. channel? Hmm.... MST3K, a little anime, a GOOD scifi movie on Saturday nights (like Tron), Red Dwarf, Futurama. In the morning, say, 8-11 am, you could show the cartoons from our childhoods. Who doesn't like to watch those when they are sick? :)
      --
      Cogito ergo sum in Slashdot.
    7. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by Dionysus · · Score: 1

      Doesn't really matter what the /. crowd wants. The channel would run out of money in a year anyway.

      --
      Je ne parle pas francais.
    8. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by Bobulusman · · Score: 2

      But look how many of us there are. Plus, I doubt most software companies would normally consider selling ads. If they believe a group of 400000+ nerds were watching it, they might just consider it a viable market.

      --
      Cogito ergo sum in Slashdot.
    9. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by BigAl_nz · · Score: 2

      Another example: Sliders. Was orignally a FOX show. It was a good show in it's 1st season, then Fox's execs demanded it be turned to crap, which of course got it cancelled. Sci-Fi bought it, and REALLY screwed it up.

      Why I'm holding fears for Firefly at the moment. It's *so* good (IMO of course) that I'm scared that the network is going to have to dumb it down, or cancel it outright.

      Please leave it as it is !! :)

      --
      --- There isn't any problem that can't be solved by a small, low yield nuclear device, is there??
    10. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by wilsonjo · · Score: 1

      just for the record, SG-1 is not on every day. X-Files is on ALOT now, and between SCIFi, TNT, and FX that show may actually be on every day. SCIfi airs SG-1 re-runs on Mondays with 4 1-hour episodes. It airs the new 1 hour episodes twice on Friday. But that is only when they are not playing stupid B-Movies like Route 666.

      I personally love SG-1 and I was never able to watch it because it was sydicated on a channel that ran it at 2am every other Saturday or something like that.

      So now with all the re-runs I can catch up on what I missed. Even though you get a similar plot for every episode, I still enjoy the different content. Anyways, when you look at any TV show, is the plot extremely different from week to week? Not usually.

    11. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about other areas, but in Illinois SG-1 is on Fox at 3PM and 12AM every Saturday (I guess 12AM would be Sunday).

    12. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by Felinoid · · Score: 1

      I think the problem is SI FI trys to run things as is and expects the shows momentum to keep it good while they learn what makes it good.
      The flaw is I've noticed when a show switches networks the show is losing or lost momentum and needs some work to stay alive. Additionally the last few epps on the old network are ment to hurt the show on the new network.
      Example when UPN took over Buffy from WB the last thing WB did was kill the main character.
      Had UPN just let momentum carry it the UPN Buffy would suck.
      I don't think it has the same appeal but UPN did a good job using the death of Buffy like a dramatic plot twist.
      But Sifi is an old show warehouse when they need to repair them.
      Thats why IMAO Sifi shows don't work.
      Saint Sinner... I want to see that. Originally a Marval Comic if I remember correctly.

      --
      I don't actually exist.
    13. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by tchapin · · Score: 1

      I tried watching Firefly, but just couldn't get into it. Perhaps it's the cowboy stuff. But, in general, it seems that on shows that are like the following, "a bunch of people flying around on a space ship, but it's not like Star Trek, because the characters DON'T GET ALONG!", the not getting along part seems way too forced, and totally lacks subtlety. That was my main beef with Andromeda and Farscape. Firefly seems to take that tack as well.

      I don't necessarily pine for shows where everyone gets along, but it if there was that much friction between shipmates, is it that likely they'd stay together and not kill each other? (or something like that...)

      Todd

      --
      -- !todd erases a red dot! I steal music on the internet.
    14. Re:who's running the sci/fi channel anyway? by -=Zak=- · · Score: 1

      Just a quick correction. SG-1 re-runs air on Monday (4 1-hour episodes back-to-back) and then each of those four episodes are shown again throughout the week. One on Tuesday, one on Wednesday, one on Thursday, and one on Friday. Then, the Season 6 re-runs are also on Friday (at least until January when we're supposed to get to see the rest of Season 6).

      Anyone know when Season 7 will start? Please don't tell me they plan to show the last half of Season 6 and then re-run the whole thing AGAIN (they've already been through the first half of Season 6 at least twice).

  13. No, it actually was cancelled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But MacGeyver breaks into the Sci-Fi channel's broadcasting to broadcast this season's episodes using a banana peel and a rubber band.

  14. SO WHAT? by jackb_guppy · · Score: 1

    I gave up on the SciFi Channel with the cancelation first of the I-Man then FarScape.
    We use to spend at least two nights watching it. Now maybe an hour per month and that is for a 2 AM old TLZone.

    Why you ask? They can not place a single show of quiality on.

    Their sister channel USA, was movies and first run of MONK. So they are spending money. But not on the SciFi but should be renamed the B-Movie Horrir Channel.

  15. I Can't Believe! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That they cancelled Farscape and kept this, granted last season wasn't great but still...

    1. Re:I Can't Believe! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly Farscape was a very very niceshow about 3 or 4 seasons ago. This last season was so disappointing and so confusing. Granted it didnt help withthe fact that they only air it once a week however still i was really disappointed with it. To the Point where when I lost cable and Satellite i didnt bother jumping on board for 30 bucks a month and 3 free receivers and between Babylon 5 (which allare reruns cause i've seen every single episode except for the movies), Farscape (which would probably be nice to see reruns though i get the feeling they would manage to show every single one i have seen) , and Stargate (which while I never sawit run every night - i have a feelling thats the kind of show that could not stand being reran like the way ST NG is rerun) those are about he only semi-decent shows that were worth watching

    2. Re:I Can't Believe! by NormAtHome · · Score: 1

      Sure I'll agree that this last season was disjointed and disappointing but I have (or had) a feeling that the writters were setting up for something big for the next season.

  16. Re:What is this? TV Guide? by dacarr · · Score: 3, Funny

    No, no, no, you got it all wrong! It gives Richard Dean Anderson a career beyond MacGuyver!

    --
    This sig no verb.
  17. Re:What is this? TV Guide? by The+Original+Yama · · Score: 2
    It gives Richard Dean Anderson a career beyond MacGuyver!
    And Corin Nemec a career beyond Parker Lewis Can't Lose!
    --
    OLPC Australia
  18. Anyone ? by JohnHegarty · · Score: 2

    Brad Wright will take the year off to develop the hopeful spin-off series Stargate Atlantis, though he will still write for SG-1.

    Anyone know what this is about ?

    --
    Cruise TT
    1. Re:Anyone ? by neur0maniak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      About as much as I know, there's going to be another movie, called Atlantis. It'll be about the Ancients (Y'know, the guys who supposedly built the stargate system). They were said to have moved on from "our region of space", I think it was in Series 2: Episode 15 (The Fifth Race).

      The legend of atlantis, being an advanced civilisation sinking under sea, and with the stargate event horizon looking like water, it's easy to join the two together.

      I think the series will be a spin-off from that, about an off-world SGC, based in the region of space where the Ancients are.

      I'm not really sure on this though, and don't have any sources to hand. But I must be remembering it from somewhere!

  19. Re:Dr Daniel is returning? You mean to say he left by Reziac · · Score: 2

    I'm not sure where the heck we are locally (Los Angeles, broadcast only -- no cable here); we just got an episode about a pyramid, I mean ziggurat [g] followed by one that was unmemorably Star Trekish in plot. What season is this anyway?? I've only been able to get a channel that carries SG-1 for a few months, so it's *all* new to me.

    Daniel Jackson is the character who hooked me in the first place, and is still my favourite. So I'll be sorry to see him go, and glad to get him back!

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  20. I really hope it's not all a dream! by Flamesplash · · Score: 2

    I really really hope that they don't pull the whole, Season 6 was just a dream thing. It kind of soured the entire Bob Newhart show when they did that.

    What I'd like to know is how much the new season will be like the original story line was supposed to. While not having every detail planned out I'm sure the writters have the story hashed out for the most part, and I wonder how much the viewers loose/gain by the hiatus of one of the pivotal characters.

    --
    "Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
    1. Re:I really hope it's not all a dream! by ClosedSource · · Score: 2

      Actually, it wasn't the "Bob Newhart" show that was a dream. The show called "Newhart" was just a dream of Newhart's character in the older "Bob Newhart" show. It was a parody of the 1986-1987 season of Dallas. Very funny.

  21. Hold on... by esthanya · · Score: 1

    Did I miss somethink, or didn't Daniel DIE?(or move on to a better place, or whatever) Last time I checked, he was gone, and resurecting him would have been too much for anyone...

    Esth

    1. Re:Hold on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the Episode where he helped the Colonel onboard the Alien ship when he had the "symbiote" put in him, Dr Jackson made very obvious hints that he was coming back.

    2. Re:Hold on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, they brought Spock back on Star Trek... :-)

  22. Re:What is this? TV Guide? by DAldredge · · Score: 2

    You are mistaken e are talking about SG1 not Farscape (aka muppets in space!)

  23. Teryl Rothery is HOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anybody else massively turned on by her? Just seems so ... HOT.

  24. False rumors? by dmanny · · Score: 1

    I don't watch this but wasn't the previous /. entry a rumor that it was being continued? And now it is being further confirmed? Where's the false rumor?

    --
    All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
  25. Now John Edwards they can cancel by infonography · · Score: 1
    Of course the ghost of your aunt Sophie's Budgee will tell his this ahead of time.

    Seriously I wonder if Shanks/Jackson will be doing a ghost routine. After all he's sort of dead. He showed up once in season 6 as a 'spirit guide'. Did anyone else get serious vibes that the plot was spinning out of control?

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  26. That's great...hey... by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...has anyone heard who shot JR? I missed that episode.

  27. Daniel Jackson Back!? by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 1

    I didn't mind him gone. I never really liked his character that much, especially throughout season 6. He was dead weight as far as I'm concerned.

    My big concern is how they will bring him back without making the plot totally absurd!

    --

    ----
    Go canucks, habs, and sens!
    1. Re:Daniel Jackson Back!? by The+Rizz · · Score: 3, Informative
      My big concern is how they will bring him back without making the plot totally absurd!

      They actually set that up near the beginning of season 5 (in episode 3, "Ascension"), long before Jackson left the show. It is aparrently easy for any ascended being to become mortal again - it's ascending again that's difficult.

      --The Rizz

      "The only 'ism' that has justified itself is 'pessimism'." --George Orwell

    2. Re:Daniel Jackson Back!? by Temsi · · Score: 2, Informative

      I didn't mind him gone. I never really liked his character that much, especially throughout season 6. He was dead weight as far as I'm concerned.

      Eh... he wasn't in season 6. What show are you watching?
      In any case, I'm thrilled he's returning. As far as I'm concerned his character is what held the show together (he offered the only non-military non-alien input), and without him it just hasn't been the same.
      Season 6 has been rather disappointing so far, but with the confirmation of season 7 and Daniel's return, I hope the second half of season 6 will improve. At least 7 will be better with Daniel back.

      --
      -- This sig for rent.
    3. Re:Daniel Jackson Back!? by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 1

      Well i meant season 5 then :P

      --

      ----
      Go canucks, habs, and sens!
  28. Your wife would just like to say that by SHEENmaster · · Score: 1

    She is in a mutch better place.

    Wait, she is holding up an oscar... Something about acting? faking?

    But didn't she love me?

    Ok, now she is holding up two oscars.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  29. We want his girlfriend instead! by Snaller · · Score: 2

    I mean, I like that Shanks will return as Dr. Daniel Jackson, but what we really need is for this girlfriend Lexa Doig to come on board, she is waste on that other crappy show :o)

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    1. Re:We want his girlfriend instead! by runenfool · · Score: 0

      Well, the first season of Andromeda was excellent ... so I don't know if you can say it was crappy. It didn't start sucking until Hercules - err Kevin Sorbo - decided he didn't want it to be so 'ensemble' and started focusing it more on his character, Dylan Hunt. Probably more importantly, they canned Robert Hewitt Wolfe - who was the actual creator of most of the show. Gene Roddenberry has his name on it, but he created verry little of the show way back when.

      I'll give it another season before I give up on it I suppose, but its just not the same quality IMO.

      Still, I second the motion .. Lexa Doig on SG1! One of the hottest ladies in SF. Nice FHM shots there ... yummy.

  30. Oh, who gives #$*!&$ ... by zangdesign · · Score: 2

    the important thing is ... WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO RELEASE THE NEXT FERSHLUGGINER BOXED SET?!??!!!?

    AARRGGHH!!

    (I don't EVEN want to hear about how they're already out in the UK. I KNOW they're out in the UK. I want them out in AMERICA!)

    --
    To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    1. Re:Oh, who gives #$*!&$ ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DITTO!!!!!!!! got through the 2nd box set in like a week, now it will be another 1 year cliff hanger :(

  31. There is no god. by Doktor+Memory · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Farscape is cancelled, but SG-1 gets another season? Were we all really bad in a past life or something?

    --

    News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.

    1. Re:There is no god. by BigBir3d · · Score: 1

      Ratings.

      Money.

      Number of viewers.

      A small contingent of hardcore fans a series does not make.

    2. Re:There is no god. by Doktor+Memory · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sadly I agree. Still annoying to see a show that was occasionally excellent killed off in favor of one that was consistantly awful.

      --

      News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.

    3. Re:There is no god. by anonymous+cupboard · · Score: 2
      You forgot the other factors:
      • Moving the time so much that fans lose track of where it is
      • Splitting the series in two
      Somebody up high wanted the series nuked and they were successful. It seems that the Sci-Fi channel is afraid of Sci-Fi unless it is star-drek related.
    4. Re:There is no god. by robobor · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't believe Sci-Fi's PR spin -

      Farscape still got the SECOND highest ratings of anything on Sci-Fi, behind SG1. Even with the unfavorable 10pm time slot and lack of promotion, the average ratings for the first half of season 4 were down only a tenth or two from season 3. If you compare the episodes of season 3 broadcast during the summer (when overall TV viewership is down) and the first eleven of season 4, also broadcast in the summer, the ratings are unchanged.

      Sci-Fi made the decision to buy seasons 4 and 5 after season 3, so if the numbers from season 3 convinced them they could afford 4 and 5, and the ratings were nearly the same, then that can not be used as an excuse for the cancellation of the show.

      SG-1 gets over 2 million viewers for the episodes in syndication. Obviosuly SG-1 has a larger fanbase than Farscape, so it will do better in the ratings. The decision to replace Farscape with SG-1 was made by the beancounters. SG-1 costs about the same to make, and gets slightly higher ratings.

      What doesn't make any sense is why they couldn't do both. Farscape was still their second highest rated show. Why not try to build another night of good programing? Say, with SG-1 anchoring Friday night, Farscape anchoring some other night. That's how real networks build schedules and audiences. Not by killing their best shows. Imagine NBC cancelling Frasier because it finished second to Friends in the ratings.

    5. Re:There is no god. by BigBir3d · · Score: 2

      You are forgetting about average cost per episode. Rating points per dollar were not as good. SciFi does not have the money NBC has to keep marginal shows with good ratings, and high prices.

    6. Re:There is no god. by robobor · · Score: 1

      But if they couldn't afford it, it would not have been renewed for seasons 4 and 5. The ratings from seasons 3 to 4 are unchanged, therefore they can still afford it - well, unless the weak economy and advertising market has depressed ad rates. SG-1 does have better ratings than Farscape on Sci-Fi, but it may not be cheaper - and the ratings per $ may not be much better. Farscape costs $1.5M per episode, of which Sci-Fi pays half. SG-1 did cost $1.3M, the next season will be higher. I don't know what portion Sci-Fi pays. The new Spielberg show "Taken" cost $40M for 20 hours of programming - $2M. I believe Sci-Fi is paying most of this, if not all. This doesn't strike me as network strapped for cash. Vivendi may be struggling, but the US entertainment division headed by Barry Diller is doing just fine.

      The new people who assumed control of Sci-Fi in the last year or two are conciously moving the network away from "space and alien" shows, in favor of crap like John Edward and paranormal and conspiracy themed shows. They saw the chance to pick up SG-1 for their allotment of "space and alien". When they saw that it got better ratings for less money, they axed Farscape.

      Instead of trying to build the network with good programming, they are taking the low road and filling their schedule with paranormal shows and B-grade horror schlock. So perhaps instead of doing good shows and having, perhaps, a 10% margin, they're spewing out crap and making a %20 margin. It makes sense in the short-term for some network exec who only looks at the bottom line, but all their shows are crap and it will, I hope, bite them in the ass someday.

  32. This Show Sucks by NSupremo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    What a waste. Makes me want to puke when a show like this can be on for so long.

    It's extremely low quality.

    And if you want more reason to be angry with Stargate and recognize its inferiority I have one word for you: Farscape.

    --
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._Election_co ntroversies_and_irregularities
  33. Re:Dr Daniel is returning? You mean to say he left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That sounds like a season 5 episode. The new ones (second half of season 6) start up again on the scifi channel in January I think.

    You can get a good summary of the episodes and show news here:
    http://www.sg1archive.com
    They also have links and info about buying the DVDs.

  34. False rumors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they were false rumors, but they were true? How does that work?

  35. I really don't see it working by Valen+Faerlwynd · · Score: 1

    How are they going to bring Daniel Jackson's character back? I mean, he fscking died/ascended! Do they have reoccur as a sort of extra-dimensional guide to the SG-1 nyuknyuks? Have him "descend" or "un-ascend"?

    Although, you know what would be interesting. The scifi/soap opera solution: Daniel's dead, but they just happen to find his long lost twin brother, a reknowed neurosurgeon raised by temporally displaced landsharks.

    Sniff...I miss Farscape...

    Love and Peace,
    -Valen

    --
    "The best compliment a girl ever gave me was 'Your hair smells nice.' I hate being the platonic friend." -Valen
  36. Apology by Valen+Faerlwynd · · Score: 1

    Sorry for the poor typing. I was eating while typing (multi-tasking sure would be easier with more hands). And due to an misplaced overconfidence in my literary skills, I didn't hit the preview button like I should have. It should read: ...Do they have him reoccur...

    Gomen ne.
    Voice inside my head: You're not japanese! *kick*
    Me: Hai!
    German-speaking Shark swimming through my head: Yes?
    Everyone: Doh!

    Love and Peace,
    Valen

    --
    "The best compliment a girl ever gave me was 'Your hair smells nice.' I hate being the platonic friend." -Valen
  37. Gory, Story, Allegory, Montessori by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But what about Corey Nemec?

    They can't do this to us Nemec fans. He's our hero....Parker Lewis CAN'T Lose!

  38. Higher Plane Extradimensional Canoodling by meehawl · · Score: 2

    Shanks left the series at the end of season five, and his character gave up human life and ascended to a higher plane of existence.

    Well you know I find it suspicious that the Cordelia character in Angel has also just returned from some higher plane of something-or-other. Maybe her and Daniel Jackson (ascended) were getting it on in some weird posthuman sense?

    --

    Da Blog
    1. Re:Higher Plane Extradimensional Canoodling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thanks for the spoiler meehaw meehaw.
      not everyone has seen the 'new' angel series meehaw.
      i sound like a donkey meehaw meehaw.

  39. A guy on the effects team (SG-1) by riven1128 · · Score: 1

    Who's a friend of mine, confirmed that they would be doing another series a couple of weeks ago.. but he said that sci-fi wasn't really that anxious to do it, they would rather just drop it.

    I don't see there being a season after this one unless they have a change of heart, he never went into why.. but he said that it was the same thing with sci-fi and what happened with farscape.. which, I have never seen.. (don't attack me)

    Anyway, it's good to see that SG1 will be around for another season!

  40. Is this series going the way of Ed Wood? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should just let this plot line die. SG was a great movie and for a few years some hard core fans got caught up in the show but after 7 years it's time to let it go. The special effects are just getting worse and the acting was never good. I wish these guys could hold onto their dignity and just let this one die.

  41. Daniel Jackson? What about Michael Shanks? by fuzza · · Score: 1

    OK, Daniel coming back I guess I sorta understand. I mean they'll find some way to write him back in without too much trouble.

    But Michael Shanks coming back? What's with that? I thought he left because he didn't like the X-Files'ish direction the show was going, with all the government conspiracies.

    So what happened? Did he change his mind?

    --
    Can't find examples of evolution? No matter, neither could Dawkins
    1. Re:Daniel Jackson? What about Michael Shanks? by penguintv · · Score: 1

      It depends on who you talk to. As usual, some (mind you, this is just some) of the fans have their own conspiracy theories.

      One is that MGM caved into MS so he's back. Or, that MS caved into MGM, which makes no sense either. It all boils down to money and ratings. SciFi attained good ratings with season six, but their highest ratings to date for the entire network (according to their own press release) came from repeats of season one.

      Now, some ship (Jack/Sam) fans are all upset because they think Daniel coming back will come in between Jack and Sam, although where, who knows, as I didn't see much if any ship in season six. And then there are some Jonas fans who are all in a state because they think Jonas will get the heave-ho or get relegated to a position where all he does is stand around and smile. ;)

      There there are some fans who think that the Daniel fans will sway the producers to make it the Daniel Jackson hour, which contradicts their other view that the Daniel fans had nothing to do with bringing MS back to the show.

      And there are the fans who say that only the true l/ loyal / real [please select one] fans are the ones responsible for the show coming back.

      Some fans are calling for reconciliation of the fandom, but as long as you've got fans who say 'oh yes, it's a good idea, now we can get past all the death threats and hate mail and i hope those people apologize' crud, it will continue to be the little soap opera on the net ;)

  42. how they will bring jackson back by zephc · · Score: 3, Funny

    scene: outside

    Daniel Jackson appears wearing a white robe, surrounded by a glowing light: "I come to you now in your hour need."

    --
    "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
    1. Re:how they will bring jackson back by mpe · · Score: 2

      Daniel Jackson appears wearing a white robe, surrounded by a glowing light: "I come to you now in your hour need."

      Followed by "who are you, for that matter who am I?"

  43. Re: hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i think the reason why 9/10 fans like stargate is because it more plausible then say flying a ship into a wormhole and ending up on the other side of a universe... wait a minute...

  44. Re:hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i saw daniel jackson on one of the outer limits episodes. i thought he wanted to move away from the sci-fi type casting. i guess like fox mulder he didnt leave the series soon enough and will find it hard to get into a real movie.

  45. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    THE LESSER-KNOWN PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES #18: FIFTH

    FIFTH is a precision mathematical language in which the data types
    refer to quantity. The data types range from CC, OUNCE, SHOT, and
    JIGGER to FIFTH (hence the name of the language), LITER, MAGNUM and
    BLOTTO. Commands refer to ingredients such as CHABLIS, CHARDONNAY,
    CABERNET, GIN, VERMOUTH, VODKA, SCOTCH, and WHATEVERSAROUND.

    The many versions of the FIFTH language reflect the sophistication and
    financial status of its users. Commands in the ELITE dialect include
    VSOP and LAFITE, while commands in the GUTTER dialect include HOOTCH
    and RIPPLE. The latter is a favorite of frustrated FORTH programmers
    who end up using this language.

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...