Slashdot Mirror


Third Stargate TV Series Named

GateWorld has a story about the new Stargate series. "The working title of the third 'Stargate' television series is 'Stargate Universe', executive producer Robert C. Cooper told GateWorld. The show currently exists in the form of a one-page treatment of the story and characters. Cooper and executive producer Brad Wright will start writing the pilot after shooting on the two 'Stargate SG-1' movies finishes in June. Meanwhile, new episodes of 'SG-1' and 'Atlantis' start airing April 13 in the U.S., on The SCI FI Channel. "

45 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. Re:may by SCPRedMage · · Score: 2, Funny

    No you may not.

    --
    My sig can beat up your sig.
  2. Indeed by Asztal_ · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hallowed are our new intergalactic overlords.

  3. Moo by Chacham · · Score: 5, Funny

    And, in this *completely new* series, SG-1 finds that they can dial yet another number and travel the multi-verse. To power it, they need to turn the Earth into a giant powersource, but Macgyver figures out how to do it with duct tape and chewing gum.

    On arrival they find an empty room where the 42 original member of the Multiversal Council met to populate the universe, but they won't talk to them because they don't know enough yet. They get ticked off and start blowing things up, and are sent back to their home universe which is now set to be destroyed.

    The series focuses on how the erstwhile enemies must get together and fight the coomon enemy, all before Macgyver dies of old age.

  4. Re:Why? by linguizic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I agree completely. One of the things that made the show so good was that it was almost like watching an RPG, the characters would collect different bits of technology and information helping to move the overall plot of the series. Part of the reason for watching the show was to find out what kind of new technology or factoid about the SG-1 universe would get revealed, or who would be the next system lord to get blown up or blasted by robot Teal'c. Since season 8, there haven't been any new major revelations, no new technology (they seem to be bringing techs from older episodes to fill in that place), no system lords to kill (the writers don't want to kill off Baal b/c they like to use him as the occasional Goa'uld bad guy when they don't want to bother advancing the Ori plot). Speaking of the Ori, they aren't a new interesting bad guy like the replicators, just a slightly modified form of the Goa'uld. For example: the Goa'ulds are parasites who pretend to be gods, the Ori are ascendant beings that pretend to be gods through memetic parasitism. Cameron Mitchel sucks, they should have just added Vala to the team and not worried about replacing O'Neall. They developed O'Neall's character so well, and made all of the personalities of SG-1 fit together so well that just sticking Ben Browder (who is an awful actor) in there messes up the dynamics. And with the exception of one episode in the last two seasons, the show has taken itself way to seriously.

    That being said, I'm looking forward to the movies.

    --
    Does this sig remind you of Agatha Christie?
  5. There must be more SG than ST by now..... by ip_freely_2000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...it seems like SG-SG1 has been on forever. Then there's that Atlantis show that's been on a while.

    For such a successful series SG seems to have very little of the cultural impact or generate the extreme opinion that ST had. It's like SG has always been 'okay', but ST was 'great' but then simply wore out it's welcome.

    1. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by C+A+S+S+I+E+L · · Score: 2, Funny
      Well, that's because it's apparently a "franchise."

      Meanwhile, I lost a bet. My money was on either Stargate:Miami or Stargate:NY.

    2. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by vidarh · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Star Trek is more than 40 years old. People have grown up with it, either the original run of TOS or reruns, the movies or TNG. It's had time to establish a far wider fan base. It's also much more accessible than SG1.

      Star Trek is essentially morality plays set in space. Its only half-assed departure from the one episode morality play formula was Deep Space 9, and even that was full of short morality plays intermingled with the longer story arks. The advantage of that formula is that you don't need the audience to know what's happened, or care about/for this or that species or character - each episode largely establishes it's own little moral problem and the characters use the different species to establish arketypes for the characters so you don't really need to know all that much about any one character to be familiar with what's going to happen (Ferengi's will generally be greedy, Klingon's will generally be agressive etc., just like you know someone with a magnifying glass and an exaggerated British accent is likely to be a private detective), and you know you'll likely see a clear resolution at the end.

      People like morality plays. They're simple and easy to relate to, and they also give people something to think about and talk about without requiring too much mental activity to just enjoy what's going on.

      While SG also largely has finished episodes, it doesn't have anything of the morality play aspect. The series has also kept moving forward, making seeing episodes out of order or jumping in for the occasional episode a lot less satisfying. And while there is some closure at the end of the episodes, there's no "answer". Personally I prefer the more lasting story arks and the movement forward, and that's also the reason why my favorite Star Trek series was DS9.

      Star Trek "wears out" when a specific setting for the morality plays gets overused. You can only set so many morality plays in the same setting before it starts seeming repetitive and everyone knows the exact formulas. It also depends on relevant problems in contemporary life to feed off, and again you can only do so many stories on the same problems before it gets old. Star Trek will return when society has moved on and issues we face are different enough that they can come up with a series that seems "new"

    3. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by vjmurphy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Though all of them can be consolidated under one name: Stargate: Hey, All the Planets We Visit Look Like British Columbia. Same for Battlestar Galactica, too.

      --
      Vincent J. Murphy
      Spandex Justice
    4. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Even stranger, all those BC planets in various galaxies have the same pseudo-medieval village.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    5. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not all men. As we push out into the universe, we discover that even small communities that have been isolated (and more than a tad inbred) for thousands of years have a balanced population of visible minorities.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    6. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by mdwh2 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Star Trek: 5 series, 704 episodes, 10 films, spanning several decades.
      Stargate: 2 series, 274 episodes, 1 film, spanning just over one decade.

      (From Wikipedia)

      So to be fair, they don't anywhere near compare on numbers, or how long they've been around.

      And I think the other posters are right about there being more competition - look how the mainstream/cultural impact of Star Trek seems to be significantly less with later series.

    7. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by pinkocommie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I beg to differ. One of the primary reasons I like SG1 (and dislike Atlantis) is about the strong underlying themes about theology and religious exploitation. About people doing acts of lunacy (The Season 1 ep Politics) based on faith. How blind faith wreaks havoc and how easily people are manipulated. One of my favorite lines from the show

      TEAL'C: I thought it fitting that on this day when we must sacrifice our short lived freedom that we do so here...at the site of the Battle of salsacksor...where you're father gave his life for this very cause...he began to doubt the Goa'uld long before this rebellion took shape Gerak. It was your father's death at their hands that led you to question what god is so deserving of my worship.
      GERAK: you were not one who was chosen...you did not witness the wonders I beheld.
      TEAL'C: did that erase the dead...heal the sick and wounded? Destroy their enemy with but a wave of their hand.
      GERAK: the Goa'uld deceived us...the Ori's powers are pure.
      TEAL'C: then what is the measure of a God Gerak... is it the scope of their power or how they choose to wield that power? Would a god who is prepared to lead us on the path of enlightenment so contradict this divine benevolence by destroying all those who refuse to believe in him?
      GERAK: Those who refuse to believe... must die
      (from http://www.twiztv.com/scripts/stargate/season9/sta rgate-911.htm)

    8. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by mrbooze · · Score: 3, Interesting

      According to my wife, who has at times been involved in some SG-1 fan groups/lists/boards/etc, a seemingly shockingly large contingent of Stargate fans are military folk, either active military themselves or military spouses. I've always been curious about this, and wondered if there is similar military fanbases of other major sci-fi shows, or if SG-1 attracts more of them for some reason. Perhaps the military premise and involvement with the show?

    9. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by Bj�rn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And even stranger, everyone seems to speak English.

      --
      Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think. --Niels Bohr
    10. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by Pharmboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From my experience, military people are more likely to be SciFi fans in general. I'm ex USAF myself and was raised in a military family (although my father was more into reading and watching tons of western novels and shows). I think the same could be said about reading books. Military people tend to drag books around, because you know you will have to "hurry up and wait" or just have downtime, often in places with nothing else to do. Or perhaps SciFi is just a nice escape from an otherwise stressful job. I'm sure the military aspects of the show help as well, as you point out.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    11. Re:There must be more SG than ST by now..... by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Funny

      Deep Space 9...was full of short morality plays intermingled with the longer story arks.

      Look, if God tells you to build a longer story ark, you build it.

      -Space Noah

  6. 'Our' military? by teh+kurisu · · Score: 2, Informative

    "One of the things that we love about Stargate is that is us -- it's our military, it's our scientists, it's our people -- and we're going out into the galaxy and the universe to discover all the wonders that are out there, and dealing with our own limitations versus things that are far more advanced than us." - Robert C. Cooper

    I take it Cooper's talking in relative terms, given that he's Canadian (along with most of the cast and crew) and the US Air Force, well, isn't.

    1. Re:'Our' military? by Pyrion · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They offset that rise in technology by creating enemies wherein they literally were back to square one. Great, so they had battlecruisers. So what? They had battlecruisers arrayed against two new enemies (the Ori and the Wraith) that both had their means of practically negating the advantages the Daedalus-class maintained against the Goa'uld. The Daedalus-class came too late to do much of anything against the Goa'uld and couldn't do much of anything against the Ori or the Wraith, the latter being a case of violating treaty to beam armed nukes aboard Wraith hive ships until they conveniently nixed that sole advantage in record time for a species that still can't seem to prevent their own hyperdrives from overheating.

      Yeah, the technology advances ruined the notion of this being contemporary Earth military forces against the overwhelming technological superiority of the bad guy aliens, but I'm of the mindset that even that premise would've gotten old after a while. It's actually somewhat refreshing to see contemporary Earth military forces utilizing technology they barely understand in a slightly less-than-vain attempt to ward off numerically and technologically-superior foes. But even that'll get old too, sooner or later.

      --
      "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
  7. Learn from Star Trek by Ambitwistor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    After the success of ST:TNG, the whole franchise got run into the ground. Arguably the later Star Trek series weren't as good, but I think they just oversaturated the market with spinoff after spinoff. Too much of a good thing and people will just get tired of it, and Stargate on television has been going on in one form or another for 10 years already. Maybe it's better to focus on just one series at a time, and end each series gracefully before it jumps the shark.

    1. Re:Learn from Star Trek by FroBugg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's kind of a silly statement. Voyager and Enterprise sure took it down the tubes, but DS9, especially the last half of its run, was as good as TNG ever was, if not better.

    2. Re:Learn from Star Trek by MurphyZero · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Voyager at times could be alright, but in general I agree with your assessment. DS9 definitely started off slowly, but once they had several plot lines going through all the episodes, it really took off. In fact, I preferred the later episodes of DS9 to most of TNG.

      --
      Our founding fathers removed the guys in charge. Be American. Vote incumbents out.
    3. Re:Learn from Star Trek by SplasPood · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I totally agree. While I've always liked next gen, and voyager had its good episodes, DS9 was by far the most interesting cohesive story... Of course next gen barely bothered with that at all.

  8. Long path from treatment to series. by Dock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A treatment is akin to an inventor writing down an idea on a cocktail napkin. Before they even get to the pilot script, it'll have to be expanded by another nine pages or so, and if it exists as part a development deal rather than something done on spec, it'll most likely go back and forth between the exec and the studio a half dozen times before just that ten page treatment is given the OK.

    The pilot script will probably go through at least that amount of haggling, and would need to be followed up with or maybe even proceeded by an entire series treatment which will probably take weeks if not months to do, before the studio would even consider shooting the pilot.

    Not trying to rain on the parade or anything, I just want to put into perspective what this means, which isn't a whole lot right now. This is step one out of tens of dozens. Long way to go here.

    --
    http://about.me/paultenny
  9. Re:Moo by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 2, Informative

    4) Whoever did the summary doesn't realize SG-1 has been canceled as a TV series.

  10. Re:Moo by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny

    Actually, the Multiversal Council figures that we owe on the Asgard's bar tab. (Those little guys drink like crazy and it wasn't cloning gone wrong that killed them--it was a million years of time-shifted hangovers sent to the future that were finally catching up with them.)

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  11. SG-1 movie -vs- Farscape movie by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 4, Interesting


    shooting on the two 'Stargate SG-1' movies finishes in June

    Given the constraints of the budget, I thought the SciFi channel did a darned good job with the movie that ended the Farscape series - they took the concept about as far as it could be taken [I mean, seriously, it's hard to top an out-of-control wormhole that threatens to swallow up the entirety of space-time as we know it], and tied up most of the loose ends [boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy regains girl plus newborn baby].

    I hope they take these Stargate movies at least as seriously - the SG-1 franchise deserves to go out with a bang.

    I'd like to see all the species in our galaxy [The Asgard, the Nox, the Oannes, Ba'al & his gang, etc etc etc], teaming up a la Justice League of America, or Avengers/Defenders, and going head to head with the Origin armies, in a four-hour epic maelstrom of a battle, with blood and guts and iron and ash and fire and brimstone, and finally wiping those rat bastard Ori off the map forever.

    And speaking of going out with a bang, after they've dealt with the Ori once and for all, the male leads could then turn to fighting over who gets to bang Inara Serra.

    And it would be really neat if they could convince Kurt Russell & James Spader to come back and play some roles - maybe president & vice president of the USA?

    Or perhaps they could be in the cast of "Wormhole X-Treme!".

    [And if you wanna get really cynical, it could be revealed that the entire Stargate franchise was merely the fantasy of a writer for "Wormhole X-Treme!" - kinda like how Bobby Ewing just reappeared in the shower one morning.]

    1. Re:SG-1 movie -vs- Farscape movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Asgard as dead fool. The Tau'ri are the Fifth Race now! Humans have phasers not puny railguns and missiles now. Where have you been?

    2. Re:SG-1 movie -vs- Farscape movie by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'd like to see all the species in our galaxy [The Asgard, the Nox, the Oannes...
      Don't forget the furlings!
      --
      "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
    3. Re:SG-1 movie -vs- Farscape movie by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 5, Informative

      I thought the SciFi channel did a darned good job with the movie that ended the Farscape series

      SciFi had nothing to do with shooting the Farscape movie. I wish people would stop giving this channel credit for things like this. The show was canceled with no indication that anything would follow. Then the producers decided they wanted to tie it up and started shooting the mini-series. When they started shooting, they had no idea who would buy it or where it would be shown. SciFi picked it up.

      SciFi has hardly any responsibility for the quality, or more often the lack of quality, in their shows. They are produced by other corporations and the shows are sold to SciFi. For instance, remember Stargate: SG1 was on Showtime for the first 5 years of the show. There's even one line in the last episode of the first season that referenced Showtime. When they see the transmitter and Teal'c tells them what it is, O'Neil said, "Does it get Showtime?" Later, in reruns on SciFi, the line was redubbed to remove a reference to Showtime. While SciFi claims the show as an original, it was created elsewhere.

      Galactica is a slightly different story, since it involves the parent company of SciFi. Still, it is NOT SciFi that produces these shows.

    4. Re:SG-1 movie -vs- Farscape movie by Geno+Z+Heinlein · · Score: 5, Interesting

      SciFi had nothing to do with shooting the Farscape movie. I wish people would stop giving this channel credit for things like this. The show was canceled with no indication that anything would follow.

      And Farscape was cancelled after SFC had already renewed it for two seasons, both 4 and 5. SFC pulled the rug from under Farscape after the cliffhanger ending of season 4 was completed. The same thing happened to Forever Knight on USA: USA funded one-third of FK's third and final season, and then pulled the funding at the last minute, leading to the bottle episodes at the end of that show.

      As near as I can figure, the common element is someone named Bonnie Hammer, who ran the channels in question at the right times and seems not to like genre shows, based on the Scare Tactics and John Edwards garbage that was the staple of SFC's line-up the last time I subscribed to it.

  12. "Third"? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The working title of the third 'Stargate' television series is 'Stargate Universe'
    Actually, that would be the fourth series:
    1. Stargate SG-1 (1997)
    2. Stargate Infinity (2002)
    3. Stargate Atlantis (2004)
    4. Stargate Universe
    They always forget/suppress the animated series, just like Star Trek (1973).
    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  13. Re:uhm, hasnt SG1 finished already?! by Gryle · · Score: 2, Informative

    The series has already finished in Canada and the UK. For some incredibly stupid reason the US broadcaster, Sci-Fi, decided to take a 6 month break half-way into the season and the last 10 episodes won't be aired until sometime in April.

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  14. Re:Moo by malsdavis · · Score: 2, Informative

    It depends where he lives.

    Here in the U.K. Season 10 has already completely run and finished (although episode 20 left many doors open so to speak) and there are indeed no new episodes planned to be aired. The Stargate SG-1 show is for all intents and purposes "cancelled". I sure hope they change their minds but I do think the grand-poster is correct in stating that the show has been "cancelled", even if the showbiz lingo is to claim a new series just "hasn't been commissioned" which is really saying the exact same thing just put in words that are designed to falsely raise hopes of fans.

    Lets just hope that Stargate Universe can in some-way match the awesomeness that is/was Stargate SG-1.

  15. Re:Why? by Belial6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My primary theory is that SG-1 is getting canceled because of the Christian theme. SG-1 had a few poor seasons. The new bad guys and cast changes have dramatically improved the show. Yes, you will always have people who complain when you have major changes, as they won't like the direction that was chosen, but over all, SG-1 has been much better than it has been in a long time.

    The problem that causes it to get canceled? They picked the wrong religion to pick on. SG-1 has always made a mockery of religion. When it was ancient egyption religion, that was fine, but when you start making the Catholics the universes supervillian, and by relation basically all Christian sects, you better watch out.

  16. Re:Why? by westyx · · Score: 2

    It's getting cancelled because it's gone on for 10 seasons and is getting stale. I have yet to see anyone complain about the morality of the show.

  17. Re:Please, Stop. by mpe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let it go. You've milked this cow long enough. Let Stargate die in peace. Atlantis too. And BSG too [if it doesn't stop sucking ass with filler episodes].

    SG-1 has run for 10 years. This is a long time for any series, especially one where you can't easily change the location and/or cast.
    Maybe they'd do better to try something new instead of more Stargate. e.g. give Joss Whedon a call and then give his ideas full backing.

  18. SG-1's already available online by Asmor · · Score: 4, Informative

    SkyOne aired the second part of season 10 of Stargate SG-1 several months before Sci-Fi did. In fact, they showed the last episode a few weeks ago. They're all available online.

    Not that I'm advocating piracy (hell, I own the first 9 seasons on DVD and will get the 10th whenever it comes out), but it's Sci-Fi's fault for dragging their ass and waiting so long to show it. In a globalized world, you don't get to screw people over just so you can get an extra half of a rating point.

    I leave it as an exercise for the reader to discover where to get them.

  19. Non-canonical by John+Guilt · · Score: 2, Funny

    (I thought of this a decade ago; the similar reference somewhere in this discussion is coincidental, though more likely because the whole thing is so geeky the feathers are stuck in my teeth.)

    Q.: What's the deal with the "Star Trek" animated series.

    A.: One morning, Yeoman Rand (or Spock, if you really must) looked groggily up from the bed; Kirk stepped out of the sonic shower and said, "I just had the strangest dream."

  20. Wrong series by kabdib · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Enough wasting money already. Bring back Firefly.

    (I loved the first few years of SG1, but then it got pretty random and bad, reminding me more and more of the "Forehead of the Week" clubhouse show: STtNG).

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is insufficiently documented.
  21. I like the 9th and 10th season by setrops · · Score: 2

    I thought the show was going good. New threat. I like Ben Browder and Claudia Black from Farscape. The show still has some good humour. And most of all, it has a lot of Baal's.

  22. Re:Different fan perspectives by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not to say I wouldn't get Infinity on DVD myself just to rip and remix for ridicule.

    Hey, you're not giving them very good incentive to make good videos - if they're great you'll buy them, if they're steaming crap you'll buy them. :)

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  23. Re:Moo by Dance_Dance_Karnov · · Score: 2, Informative

    and thanks to SkyHD(and others) we here in the US got to see all the eps before they aired here.

  24. Long path, but they started years ago by Nymz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't want to spoil anything, but the current (or recent) series incorporated a number of significant universe changes based upon where they want to go in the future. And not just for the spin-off series that starts humans off from scratch, but for the planned MMORPG where certain races would be too powerful or disruptive. Kind of explains the resurgance of the Goa'uld as they can be a very balanced opponent race to humans.

  25. Re:Moo by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 2, Informative

    According to Gateworld, they will start filming in April.

  26. Re:Why? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Actually, the Ori map pretty much to the Catholics and nobody else.

    Traits of the Ori:

    1) Central authority structure based on "distance" from deities.
    2) Single holy book that only the noted authority can interpret.
    3) Waging wars of evangelism.

    You find #3 in some strains of Islam and Protestantism, but #1 and #2 are just about exclusive to Catholicism. Jews, Protestants and Muslims have very localized authorities and holy books that any idiot (moreso in Protestantism) can interpret for himself. And of course, no Jew has ever been forcibly converted.

    They're pretty much just hating on the Catholics here.