StarGateWars Forums

Jack wrote:

Tetrismonkey wrote:I wonder what time frame they will choose to pursue. Perhaps the Ancients and there struggles would be something worth while?

They are complete reboots going all the way back to the original movie. Kiss the Stargate you know and love goodbye because the **Filtered** directing the new movies absolutely hated the show. The show went in a very different direction than he wanted to take the original trilogy. Yes, the original movie was intended to be a trilogy, but was made into a TV series instead.

The second film was to feature the Goa'uld attacking Earth Independence Day style.

Well then the movies are going to suck. To deviate from what is known so much is just silly. Then again, they could always use the alternate timeline thing that is becoming the norm to justify reboots of many scifi franchises (Star Trek, Star Wars)

They are just going to pretend the tv shows never existed. From their perspective, while SG-1, Atlantis and Universe had varying levels of popularity, they still only averaged a couple million viewers per episode. It is rare for tv shows to make the jump to the big screen, let alone cable scifi shows with only decent ratings (for a cable network). There probably isn't a big enough fan base for the tv shows to inspire confidence in making something big, whereas the movie at least did relatively big business for its time.

It will likely suck because of this, at least for us as tv show fans who are fortunate to have over 300 hours of storyline to build upon (as opposed to a two hour movie), but there still is a lot of potential to make an interesting trilogy. At least if it was directed by someone other than Rolland 2012 Emmerich...sadly we aren't that lucky.

Mathlord wrote:They are just going to pretend the tv shows never existed. From their perspective, while SG-1, Atlantis and Universe had varying levels of popularity, they still only averaged a couple million viewers per episode. It is rare for tv shows to make the jump to the big screen, let alone cable scifi shows with only decent ratings (for a cable network). There probably isn't a big enough fan base for the tv shows to inspire confidence in making something big, whereas the movie at least did relatively big business for its time.

It will likely suck because of this, at least for us as tv show fans who are fortunate to have over 300 hours of storyline to build upon (as opposed to a two hour movie), but there still is a lot of potential to make an interesting trilogy. At least if it was directed by someone other than Rolland 2012 Emmerich...sadly we aren't that lucky.

i think you nailed it there math

The concept of a stargate is rather well-defined, both inside the SG-lore and in general mythology.

Of course, as Math said, the entirety of SG-lore would be likely to be re-written, if this is indeed a complete reboot of the franchise as opposed to a simple trilogy. Given the limited scope (a trilogy is a small thing compared to a series and merchandise) however, it doesn't strike me as entirely impossible that they re-use existing material.

I think the consequences of a limited 'reboot' trilogy vs a full franchise reboot make a full franchise reboot preferable (to existing Stargate fans) over a small one, since a full franchise reboot would in fact be more of a completely 'new thing' instead of some perversion of what we know and love about Stargate. (You can see the same thing with Transformers - full franchise reboot - and Star Trek - limited reboot. Find me the die hard Trekkie who can accept 'Red Matter' as anything but an immediate plot device required to make the films have some momentum.)

Besides, 'our' Stargate 'ended' only a couple of years ago.. way too recent for either a remake or a reboot. Imo.


Overall, I am undividedly positive.. "It's Stargate!"

Juliette wrote: Overall, I am undividedly positive.. "It's Stargate!"

This is what I read. Success means little to me. As a fan, the stargate bit is important.

kinda funny really, people **Filtered** about it not following sg1 style when in reality sg1 was the SECOND continuation of the original movie

Stargate movie---> 1994
Then the first of the stargate continuation series by bill mcCay came out in 1995 called Stargate: Rebellion, there were a total of 5 books in this series that came out after the movie, so movie, then the 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999.
then
Stargate SG-1 ---> 1997

so as you can see SG-1 was actually the 2nd continuation, and i actually liked the book series by Bill McCay. So dont just jump straight to OH IT'S GOING TO SUCK JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FOLLOW SG-1'S ROUTE THAT SET THE STARGATE PATH AFTER THE MOVIE crap, lol

personally I'm really looking forward to it, and i recommend anybody that can find the books order it, granted its way out of print so you will probably need to go online to find them

You can hardly blame anyone for thinking of SG-1 as the 'Stargate' when compared to an obscure mini-series of books (possibly of better depth and quality than even SG-1, but that is beside the point). Popular association between the Stargate film and the series SG-1 is strong enough to require a full remake of the original film as well if the intention is disconnecting the franchise from SG-1 (or the books). Though with MGM also having produced SG-1, I suppose if they want to keep an eye on their budget, they could re-use old SG-1 blueprints to base their sets on to create the complete mind-**Filtered** that a hybrid between old and new would be.
We have seen worse in other franchises, right?

And after all.. it is the 'Sci-fi' genre.. still the scapegoat and redheaded stepchild of television.
This thread now reminds me of the many ways they re-imagined Stargate in the 200th episode.

SG-1 had Amanda Tapping. End of discussion!

There is plenty of good material to make good movies in any stargate-related universe. I'm more fearful that Rolland Emmerich is doing it than the fact it is a reboot. He's just so hit or miss in the quality of the movies he makes. At least it should get a big budget if he does it...

Mathlord wrote:SG-1 had Amanda Tapping. End of discussion!

There is plenty of good material to make good movies in any stargate-related universe. I'm more fearful that Rolland Emmerich is doing it than the fact it is a reboot. He's just so hit or miss in the quality of the movies he makes. At least it should get a big budget if he does it...

big bang has penny, your Amanda is irrelivant

teesdale wrote:

Mathlord wrote:SG-1 had Amanda Tapping. End of discussion!

There is plenty of good material to make good movies in any stargate-related universe. I'm more fearful that Rolland Emmerich is doing it than the fact it is a reboot. He's just so hit or miss in the quality of the movies he makes. At least it should get a big budget if he does it...

big bang has penny, your Amanda is irrelivant

Well if we're just naming the best actresses, Penny Dreadful has Eva Green...end of discussion

Mathlord wrote:

teesdale wrote:

Mathlord wrote:SG-1 had Amanda Tapping. End of discussion!

There is plenty of good material to make good movies in any stargate-related universe. I'm more fearful that Rolland Emmerich is doing it than the fact it is a reboot. He's just so hit or miss in the quality of the movies he makes. At least it should get a big budget if he does it...

big bang has penny, your Amanda is irrelivant

Well if we're just naming the best actresses, Penny Dreadful has Eva Green...end of discussion

weird series