Stargate: Universe - possible spoilers

[Geekyfanboy]

Stargate Take 3

Stargate executive producer Robert C. Cooper has announced that he is currently developing a third series with the working title “Stargate Universe.”

It isn’t yet clear on whether the series, now behind tightly-closed doors, will ever actually see the light of day, and if so, will it go to SCI FI or some other network.

“It’s being developed,” Cooper said. “Not a lot to say at the moment, other than it’s not the characters from ‘SG-1? or ‘Atlantis.’ It’s a completely third entity. The third series is born [out] of the mythology that’s been established.”

We can tell you that the timeline for this third entry will be present day. “One thing that we think contributes to the success of the series’ and the concept behind the series’ is that it takes place in the here and now,” Cooper added. “It’s about us and our age of people dealing with fantastic things, like Stargates and wormholes and aliens. And then there’s an identifiable quality to the people in the show. It’s not like an antiseptic version of humanity sometime 500 years in the future. [For instance,] Jack O’Neill (Richard Dean Anderson of SG-1) was a guy who everybody could relate to, and his reactions to the more fantastic elements of the series were the reactions the average Joe on the street might have.”

So, exactly what do the show runners have in mind for “Universe?” “It’s all top secret,” stated another of the show’s executive producers, Paul Mullie. “Either that, added fellow executive producer Joseph Mallozzi, or “it just hasn’t been written yet. I’m not sure which.”

We will be keeping a close eye on this project and keep you informed of its developments over the coming months. Meanwhile, Season Ten of “Stargate SG-1? is about to come to its final close, while shooting for the two straight-to-DVD films is ongoing. “Stargate: Atlantis” is winding down it’s third season and preparing for some major changes for the cast and Atlantis Base in Season Four.

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard]

It's too soon for a 3rd series, Atlantis needs to stand on it's own for a bit.  Fortunately, it will do just that during it's fourth season. :)

[Ktrek]

It's too soon for a 3rd series, Atlantis needs to stand on it's own for a bit.  Fortunately, it will do just that during it's fourth season. :)

I'm not sure I buy that "needs to stand on it's own" bit. Did CSI Miami need to stand on it's own or CSI NY or what about the different Law and Order shows. If the concept is good and it has a decent budget then it will garner viewers. Atlantis acquired a lot of fans that never even watched SG-1. I suspect the new show will develop it's own fan base as well. I say bring it on!

Kevin

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard]

I'm not sure I buy that "needs to stand on it's own" bit. Did CSI Miami need to stand on it's own or CSI NY or what about the different Law and Order shows.

That's a different situation.  Right now, lawyer shows are extremely popular, so people are excited to see the spin-offs.  Science-fiction, on the other hand, isn't as popular.  The average joe is only going to set aside time to watch one or the other.  Look at what happened to Star Trek, the average joe glossed over DS9 and moved from TNG to VOY.  I'm afraid that'll happen to Atlantis. :(

If the concept is good and it has a decent budget then it will garner viewers.

Not if the franchise is oversaturated.

Atlantis acquired a lot of fans that never even watched SG-1.

This is quite true.  I sincerely hope the show will get a 5th season. :biggrin

I suspect the new show will develop it's own fan base as well. I say bring it on!

I have mixed feelings on this.  Make too much Stargate and people will be sick of it instead of looking forward to it.  Afterall, oversaturation is what killed Star Trek. :taz

[Ktrek]

I have mixed feelings on this.  Make too much Stargate and people will be sick of it instead of looking forward to it.  Afterall, oversaturation is what killed Star Trek. :taz

OK...now this I do not agree with. Oversaturation may have played a role but I believe a small role. The real problems with Star Trek were with the story writing. Star Trek had gotten into a rut and became too formulaic and was no longer taking chances and pushing the boundaries that the fans wanted to see. Instead they tried to appeal to man's lower appetites to bring in young people. Now granted Trek like any other thing out there needs to find a way to recruit younger watchers or they will disappear. The problem lies with the producers not understanding the Trek audience and what makes them want and like Trek. I thought Jeri Ryan and Jolene Blaylock are fine looking women but I did not watch Trek so I could see how little clothes the writers could get them into and I'm sure that most women did not tune in just to see if Scott Bakula would take his shirt off again. I think Trek fans are above the T&A approach, or at least I hope they are! Anyway, I really believe that if ENT had shown the same quality of writing of it's 4th season in the 1st season then I think the show would have lasted seven seasons. Gunsmoke was on for 20 years and people still wanted more when it finally ended.

Kevin

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard]

OK...now this I do not agree with. Oversaturation may have played a role but I believe a small role. The real problems with Star Trek were with the story writing. Star Trek had gotten into a rut and became too formulaic and was no longer taking chances and pushing the boundaries that the fans wanted to see.

That happened because of the oversaturation.  We got quantity over quallity.

Instead they tried to appeal to man's lower appetites to bring in young people.

We can thank UPN for that.

Now granted Trek like any other thing out there needs to find a way to recruit younger watchers or they will disappear. The problem lies with the producers not understanding the Trek audience and what makes them want and like Trek. I thought Jeri Ryan and Jolene Blaylock are fine looking women but I did not watch Trek so I could see how little clothes the writers could get them into and I'm sure that most women did not tune in just to see if Scott Bakula would take his shirt off again. I think Trek fans are above the T&A approach, or at least I hope they are!

The sex factor had very little to do with the producers and writers.  It was a demand from UPN.  Notice how TOS, TNG, nor DS9 never went that far?  The first show was on NBC which was against that, and the other two were in syndication where the producers had total freedom.  Let's keep the blame where blame belongs, on UPN.  Keep in mind that all of their programming was sexed up. ::)

Anyway, I really believe that if ENT had shown the same quality of writing of it's 4th season in the 1st season then I think the show would have lasted seven seasons.

I don't, by 2001, people had lost interest except for the sci-fi geeks.  They should have let Star Trek end on a high note with Voyager's triumphant return to Earth.  Wait five or so years, then launch the next series.

Gunsmoke was on for 20 years and people still wanted more when it finally ended.

That was a different era with few TV channels and thus fewer TV shows.  Today, a TV show is lucky to last 5 seasons. :-\

[Geekyfanboy]

New Series 'Stargate: Universe' Waiting In The Wings

By MICHAEL HINMAN
Source: The Hollywood Reporter
Aug-22-2008

Although "Stargate: Atlantis" fans are still licking their wounds over the sudden cancellation of their show on SciFi Channel, it seems that the people who brought you "Atlantis" are ready to dive right back in to the next Stargate television product.

SciFi Channel could announce the green light to its third series in the franchise, the long-in-development "Stargate: Universe" as early as Friday, according to trade publication The Hollywood Reporter.

The news isn't too much of a surprise since executive producer Brad Wright told fans at Comic-Con International in San Diego last month that it seemed almost a certainty that "Universe" was moving forward. At the same time, Darren Sumner from GateWorld told SyFy Radio Wednesday night -- literally less than an hour after the "Atlantis" cancellation was announced -- that pre-production work had already begun at Bridge Studios in Vancouver, B.C., where the other two Stargate series were filmed.

When SciFi Channel makes the announcement, it will apparently say that there will be a two-hour movie filmed first, and aired in early 2009, and then the series will start its run by next summer.

Wright along with Robert Cooper will serve as executive producers of this new series.

"Universe" is said to be more space-based than previous shows, with some reports talking about an interstellar ship used by the Ancients being the key vehicle in this new series.

Of course, none of this has been confirmed by SciFi Channel as of yet, so treat it as you would any other rumor.

[iceman]

Very cool

[ElfManDan]

I'm excited for Universe, but I don't want to see the end of Atlantis yet.

[moyer777]

well that's good news.

[Feathers]

I read today that Universe has been snapped up by Sky over here in the UK.

For me, at least, that means it's another series I probably won't get to see on TV :(

I guess I may resort to other means of getting hold of it, as I had to with Atlantis, unless it pops up on iTunes in more-or-less real-time.

Channel 4 used to pull in all the Stargate stuff - they built their Sunday afternoon schedule round it to a degree but something changed a few years ago and they lost the lot. Presumably, it's simply another case of Sky waving its fat wallet about at MGM.

(Sky is effectively subscription funded while Channel 4 is advertising funded although the State must have a stake since the channel has a public service mandate of some sort)

[Rico]

You know, the thing is we don't get these shows for free either over here.  Stargate airs on the Sci-Fi channel - which is pay cable only.  Eventually they show up years later as reruns on local, "free" channels, but just like Galactica, in order to see these as they first air we have to pay extra for it too.

[Feathers]

Ah - OK. That's something I didn't know, I thought most channels were Ad funded in the States with only a few exceptions.

For years over here, all TV was free. Satellite introduced the concept of paid for TV but I think a lot of people still operate on the 'old' mentality. I certainly do.

Logically, I know it's foolish. If I pay the network, they can pay the production company who can spend more to make the series.

[Rico]

Since cable really took off here years ago, very little is "FREE" anymore.  Yes, there are the basic broadcast channels and a few local stations but that's it.  To get the extra stuff you have to get cable or satellite.  And it's fairly expensive, even for some basic packages.  Oh, and the kicker is there are even commercials on the cable channels like Sci-Fi.  Which is why I love my TIVO DVR - I zip right through them!

[Feathers]

I think what I dislike about Sky is that it's the satellite company's own the channel so if you want to see it you have to go to them. From what I remember, they fell out with Virgin so their channels are no longer available on cable.

Cable took a long time to get going here and it only really sorted itself out once Virgin bought up and merged all the cable companies onto one.

That's just my views though.