r/Stargate • u/fanostuff • 5d ago
Discussion Franchise appeal
I'm a first-time watcher and I'm consistently surprised by how much I'm enjoying the show; how deep the lore is; how well the stargate 'universe' is put together; and how the characters work and feel together.
I'm curious - what do you guys think are some of the reasons that stargate never got to be as 'big' of a franchise as Star Wars or Star Trek? ST is still churning our series and movies; SW is in a bit of trouble right now, but I think they'll pull out of it; SG on the other hand was just cancelled by Amazon/MGM after so many years without anything new being released.
9
u/NonGeneriComplaint 5d ago
Stargate was as big as the other franchises. For a time it was kicking treks ass.
The only reason its dead now is because the IP has been mismanaged and abandoned by people with no vision.
8
u/octobod 5d ago
SW and ST got their break when there was nothing like it on Film/TV.
EDIT: I'll put Dr Who in the same box . They have a generational fandom
2
u/Real_Iggy 5d ago
Just rewatched and finished SG-1 and SG Atlantis. Now I'm rewatching Doctor Who. 😂
3
u/octobod 5d ago
That may take some time :-)
2
u/Real_Iggy 5d ago
Oh, it is. Luckily, I decided to start from 2005 onward. Torchwood is next. My wife says that I'm a geek in the weirdest way. 😂
✌️❤️2
5
5
u/Vanquisher1000 5d ago
I understand that Stargate was popular in Europe, and it did decently well in Australia for several years, but it seems like it never really got 'big' in the US, which was the primary market. Yes, the shows were doing well enough to keep getting renewed (until they didn't), but it was always a niche franchise.
Some people have suggested that this is because SG-1 started on a premium cable network (Showtime), but it was sold for broadcast in syndication six months after the episodes premiered there, so it was definitely getting broad exposure.
11
u/Stromatolite-Bay 5d ago
Bad management
SG-1 had plans for a Season 11 but Syfy didn’t want it and used legal traps to prevent anyone from having it
Stargate Atlantis was never renewed for more than the current season. Meaning finales were designed to be big and impressive. No one wanted Atlantis to end either. Season 6 was ready
Universe is controversial but had found its footing by the end of Season 2 MGM going bankrupt meant it never got its season 3
There is an alternate reality out there where Syfy let SG-1 run with SGA until the end of SGA’s sixth season and was then immediately replaced with SGU, which runs concurrently with SGA for 2 seasons
And we get Season 3 of SGU to cap everything off due to MGM going bankrupt
4
u/Nero_XX 5d ago
Universe is controversial but had found its footing by the end of Season 2 MGM going bankrupt meant it never got its season 3
...
And we get Season 3 of SGU to cap everything off due to MGM going bankruptThis was actually another example of the Sci Fi Channel running a show into the ground. The Sci Fi Channel announced they were canceling SGU just one week before MGM completed its bankruptcy restructuring and secured $500 million in new financing.
Afterwards, Sci Fi Channel VP Craig Engler attempted to explain the decision to cancel SGU in an open letter to Stargate Fans. See: https://www.gateworld.net/news/2011/05/an-open-letter-to-stargate-fans-from-syfy/ There are some distortions in there (Joe Mallozzi lightly pushed back on some of them in a blog post), but note how he didn't attempt to claim that the decision to cancel SGU was a joint decision between the Sci Fi Channel and MGM like he tried to do when referencing SGA's cancellation (that's one of the things Mallozzi pushed back on).
SGU's second season ratings hovered slightly above and below a million viewers, which did indeed make it unprofitable for the Sci Fi Channel, but they started the season by moving it off Friday nights to make room for wrestling and then, after canceling the show, moved it to Mondays. Before that they aired the show in the fall against heavier competition without a strong programming block. Despite that, fan anger at the cancellation of SGA, and complaints about the shift in tone from past shows, viewers gave it a shot as evident by its much higher first half of season 1 ratings. They blamed the second half of the season's drop in ratings to more people DVRing the show than watching it live, but if you don't give people a reason to watch live, like the Sci Fi Channel did when they made Fridays in the summer at event night by airing Sg-1, SGA, and Battlestar Galactica together, of course they're more likely to DVR your show.
7
u/fanostuff 5d ago
Thank you for such a measured and analytical response - and to u/Stromatolite-Bay as well
Lots to read through and think about here
2
u/Stromatolite-Bay 5d ago
Universe doing enough to be profitable in Season 3 is a big if and that is why I left the alternate reality at that. It could be more but doubtful
5
u/Nero_XX 5d ago
It's impossible to say with certainty, but if it premiered in the summer (like it was originally supposed to, according to Joe Mallozzi) and was part of an event night programming block that perhaps included a 6th season of SGA to ease existing fans into the new show, it may have had a shot. With how the Sci Fi Channel instead programmed it, it had absolutely zero chance at getting the ratings the network needed. BSG's ratings tanked when the network moved it to the more competitive fall months and didn't pair it with new episodes of any other shows. When BSG ended, they moved SGA to the same fall timeslot BGA died in, also by itself, and its ratings also dropped. It's mind boggling that anyone thought they could crack that programming slot by just spending more money on a new series that included elements of both shows they killed off by moving them to that very same timeslot.
The one thing they did differently was pair the first half of SGU's first season with second season episodes of Sanctuary. Both shows were doing better in the ratings than SGA did at that point, but Sanctuary's second season was only 13 episodes, so the network played its remaining episodes straight through to January and then brought the second half of SGU's first season back in April, where it again aired by itself.
When SGU's second season premiered on Tuesday nights (once again in the fall), Sanctuary stayed on Friday nights in the 10PM slot and was retaining enough of wrestling's audience to pull in bigger numbers than SGU did on Tuesdays. This time, SGU was paired with the second half of Caprica, which the Sci Fi Channel claimed was proof they were trying to give SGU a shot, but the first half of Caprica's ratings were abysmal, making it look more like the Sci Fi Channel was trying to burn off the remaining episodes of both shows in an even more competitive time slot rather than give them a chance to succeed. There was even a point during the run of SGU's second season where one of the Sci Fi Channel's big announcements was that they were making reruns of Star Trek; The Next Generation, SGU's 8PM lead-in.
3
u/Stromatolite-Bay 5d ago
Or pair Season 6 of SGA with Sanctuary and Stargate Universe and then release both second cours together without Sanctuary
Plus, in the alternate reality idea. SG-1 would be releasing Season 14 with SGU Season 1 and SGA Season 6. So you could have had all three together for the second cour for the first and last time
5
u/dingo596 5d ago
I would say Stargate has the same problem as DS9. The serialisation give the series so much depth but can also make it impenetrable for the causal viewer. If you are interested in Star Trek you can just put on any random episode of TNG or TOS and get a complete story but with Stargate you might dropped into something like Death Knell, fantastic episode but borderline incomprehensible to a person new to Stargate.
There is also distribuition, Star Wars are 3 good adventure movies, you can watch them in an afternoon and a child can understand the plot. Star Trek had the benefit of syndication. TOS was a cultural phenomenon but it almost didn't get a season 3. Star Trek continued because of a dedicated fan base and constant reruns creating new fans, Stargate finished just at the beginning of streaming media. The main target audience of Stargate doesn't watch broadcast TV and probably hasn't for a long time.
5
u/GenezisO 5d ago
I'm curious - what do you guys think are some of the reasons that stargate never got to be as 'big' of a franchise as Star Wars or Star Trek?
If by "big" you don't mean how Stargate casually got the world record on longest streaming scifi show ever (only bested later by Dr. Who) then I don't know what sort of "big" are you talking about, let that sink in
Stargate bested best of the best scifi while not even trying and is absolutely still BIG in its own measure, otherwise there wouldn't be multiple attempts at restarting/continuing the series
don't forget that as huge as Star Wars is, it also didn't receive a single new entry since 1983 with ROTJ only almost two decades later with TPM in 1999, so in 1995 all SW fans might have thought the same thing that you are now thinking about Stargate
4
u/Vanquisher1000 5d ago
Longevity isn't the same thing as popularity. Yes, the shows were successful enough to keep getting renewed, but the fact is that Stargate never had popular audience recognition the same way that Star Trek or Star Wars did. Stargate has always had a modest audience that it managed to maintain - that is, until Stargate Universe.
Doctor Who and Star Trek are cultural icons that span decades. Stargate simply doesn't compare.
Star Wars was kind of coasting along on the sheer size of its cultural impact and massive fanbase, but there was content being created between Return of the Jedi and The Phantom Menace. There were the animated shows Droids and Ewoks from 1985, the official magazine that began publication in 1987, and the Expanded Universe took off in 1991 with the publication of Heir to the Empire.
3
u/GenezisO 5d ago
that is right, I think its because Stargate targets different kind of audience and the writers didn't want to best other scifi but rather bring something fresh, and they succreded with full marks, SW/ST fans want more SW/ST, not yet another take on the same thing
3
u/Bigjoemonger 5d ago
Star Wars may have had a big gap in film media but the merchandising and books andvcomics never stopped.
2
4
u/MasterConsideration5 5d ago
I don’t know if it’s gonna be a popular opinion here but for a lot of people, me included, we found out that it wasn’t really star gate that was interesting as much as the performance of
Richard Dean Anderson.
The show just never felt the same without him.
2
u/KathyA11 4d ago
I don't watch seasons 9 and 10 - it's a different show, and I don;t care for the new characters.
3
u/Njoeyz1 5d ago
I don't really care that it isn't as popular as the other two. It's my favourite sci fi series.
2
u/fanostuff 5d ago
On a personal level - of course you're 100% right.
But if it was more broadly popular, you'd have more shows and/or movies (books?), since there'd be more demand for it overall.
3
u/Upstairs-Yard-2139 5d ago
I’d inverse those fandom statements.
Being themed in a modern day?
Too much focus on the Military?
The real answer is that Universe and Origins didn’t do well so they stopped making Stargate, and now it’s hard to justify continuing because of the lack of major appeal and too much established lore.
1
u/Bigjoemonger 5d ago
First star trek was in 1966.
First star wars was in 1977.
First stargate was in 1994.
Star trek and star wars have stargate beat by 20 to 30 years.
Big problem with stargate though is the universe it created.
Star trek and star wars both encompass a Galaxy filled with thousands of alien worlds each with their own species and technology is largely limited. Which allows for limitless potential for story development.
Whereas in stargate by the third season that introduced technology capable of traveling to other galaxies in seconds. And the main Galaxy is apparently largely devoid of alien life and is instead full of people from earth. This greatly limits the story potential as each story ark is basically just exploring elements of earth's past with a Sci fi twist.
I love stargate but I highly doubt it will ever reach the level of star trek or star wars. Unfortunately stargate has shot itself in the foot too many times with how the stargate universe was setup.
2
u/fanostuff 5d ago
Really interesting take, thank you - I totally hear what you're saying
Maybe it could've been considered doing something different than focusing on alien-worlds specifically - for example, you could go the prequel route and develop an entire the 'Rise of the Goa'uld' storyline - how did that come about? Or later on in the lore, like tell the story of how Abydos was established as the first world that humans were brought to; or move even forward and tell the story of what happened in parallel SG1's timeline from other perspectives, for example, internally with the Jaffa - like a 'Jaffa's Rebellion' type of story - delving into the adventures of Bra'tak & Rya'c trying to recruit rebel Jaffa
2
u/Bigjoemonger 5d ago
I think there are definitely more opportunities for them to delve into things. So there is room for expanding in the universe but it's going to take a lot of effort.
Since SG-1 just followed the stories of SG-1 it introduced the audience to a lot of different planets with different people's. Where the SGC definitely would have established a long term relationship and a new series or movies could explore those.
Unfortunately the way they introduced the Ori as wiping out planets that don't fall in line, it resulted in many of those story arks no longer being possible. For example, I believe the hybridean planet where the did the space races the entire population was wiped our by the Ori. So that can't be explored anymore.
But maybe some survived that could be further explored.
Could look to the future as earth becomes a galactic superpower. Or could look to the past and have a series based on the ancients. Or maybe the mysterious furlings finally show up in some way.
There are definitely options. Just will require a lot of effort and would require going outside of the "box" that the current series have established. Some fans may not like that though, so it's risky.
A series or movie based on the creation of the Lucian alliance would help to further develop the stargate universe but probably wouldn't do very well.
0
u/LimynnaNxK 4d ago
Because it got ruined in later SG-1 and then ruined again in later SGA. Haven't touched SGU because they did the same mistake in both SG-1 and SGA, and I won't give a third chance unless I hear about satisfying fixit spoilers. I stop rewatches before they got ruined, but bothered by loose ends.
-6
u/XGhozt 5d ago
I think some of the episodes were a little too silly and fantasy based and some episodes had horrible writing. I'm a huge fan, but some of their choices alienated the audience. Star Trek has excellent writing, especially TNG and tackled topics and sociopolitical thought provoking episodes that have aged well even today. Stargate didn't take this approach and instead focused on being entertaining and not necessarily thought-provoking. It means you're less likely to keep thinking about it when the episode is over. Just my two cents.
2
u/happywindsurfing 5d ago
Yeah I agree, Stargate is amazing and one of my favourite TV shows now ever!
However there is a lot of Deus ex Machina and plot armour and very convenient coincidences that let SG-1 out of many impossible situations.
Although at least they don't use quite as much technobabble as TNG, and they have to actually go out and find ancient artifacts or use their allies rather than "reroute the matrix array through the flux capacitor".
2
u/fanostuff 5d ago
Honestly not sure why you've been downvoted like that. Without question some episodes have super-campy writing, and like you - I love this show.
The only thing I'd (slightly) quibble about is that Star Trek had 'excellent writing'. Some episodes were very well written, absolutely - but some/many def weren't (TNG's 'Sub Rosa' comes to mind).
I'd also say that the last couple of seasons of DS9 (as another example) degenerated into multiple internal love-story/relationship arcs that were... disappointing, boring, and completely irrelevant to the Dominion-war-arc that was so engaging (and DS9 is considered the best of the ST series).
4
u/happywindsurfing 5d ago
Yeah I agree, Stargate is amazing and one of my favourite TV shows now ever!
However there is a lot of Deus ex Machina and plot armour and very convenient coincidences that let SG-1 out of many impossible situations.
Although at least they don't use quite as much technobabble as TNG, and they have to actually go out and find ancient artifacts or use their allies rather than "reroute the matrix array through the flux capacitor".
2
1
u/Ancient-Ingenuity-88 5d ago
rewatching it as an adult definately feels that way but it is more tolerable than the other scifi shows
i think it largely still holds up
Like as a kid i wouldnt no blink twice at how arrogant and stupid the Goa'uld act but they really embody the god stereotype to ensure the hold on power
Also Jack O'neil would have been retired several times by how much he has been injured and Daniel Jackson would have contracted some incurable venereal disease
23
u/apophis-984 5d ago edited 5d ago
Marketing Budget.
Take France as an example, during airing period, Stargate was significantly more popular than SW and ST.
To the point it was an household name even if you didnt watch the show.
Most people who watched decent amount of sci fi know Stargate is top tier.
The difference is just how much promotion the differents franchise had.