Matt Roush article from TV Guide.com
Aug. 22nd, 2006 01:02 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
eregyrnhttp://community.tvguide.com/forum.jspa?forumID=700000048
This is a sympathetic but level-headed pondering of SG-1's cancellation. Roush likes SG-1 well enough (he appeared on the "Inside" special to say nice things about it), but folks may remember him as a passionate "Farscape" fan. So he's got that perspective on this.
The thing is, I agree with him, in a lot of ways. As I remarked yesterday, the *timing* of this announcement is what really stunned me; not the substance of it. I was already thinking that if SG-1 got an 11th season, it would be very lucky. I was indeed half-expecting to hear that it was being cancelled. For me, it was impossible to watch the build-up of signals that SciFi was sending with their various shenanigans, and not get that feeling.
And I have often had the thoughts that Roush airs. 10 years is nothing to sneeze at. I would rather a show go out at some kind of high point than linger on until it hits a really embarassing place. (The discussion/debate over whether SG-1 had reached that, or had not reached it yet, is a separate issue, I think. Feel what you will about the last two seasons or the last four seasons, or whatever. I personally wasn't loving the show as much in S9/S10 as previously, but I have my own personal barometer for these things -- called "Buffy" season 6/7 -- and from my viewpoint, at least, SG-1 was diminished but not at the "take it behind the barn and shoot it" stage yet.)
So I'm in two minds about all of the "save the show" sentiment floating around, and at the rumored efforts being made by Bridge and MGM.
Because the thing is -- in some ways, this is the 10th season of a show that I don't want to see become a shambling zombie. In other ways, it has to be acknowledged that it is the 2nd season of what the people *making* the show always sort of intended to be a sequel show anyway -- "Stargate Command", which is what they would have called it if the SciFi Channel hadn't vetoed the idea. And I feel badly for the folks who have honestly been trying to *make* that sequel show work. I also feel badly for the folks who have been loving watching it as much as ever, or more so. While I think that SG-1 maybe has reached the end of its natural lifespan... I feel that the whole concept of "SGC" as a show maybe hasn't.
So I'm not quite sure what I'm hoping will happen to "SGC", as such. (I am sure of this: the more I think of it, the more I think migrating some of the characters over to SGA is a poor idea... for SGA itself.) For "SG-1", there's a few things I'd like to see happen.
As Roush says: the end of S10 treated with dignity. (But hey, it's the SciFi Channel, so good luck!) As I was remarking yesterday -- as shitty as the timing of this announcement is, there may be a bright side to it. And that bright side is that eps 19 and 20 weren't written yet. Bridge has lots of warning now to figure out how to end the series. We will not be trapped by their having made a HUGE CLIFFHANGER because they were, for once, banking on the idea of S11.
I do not think there is any way they can wrap up the Orii plotline in that time. But the thing is, we've been dealing with this since S6 -- at which point we all knew the show might end with the long-running Goa'uld plotline unresolved. *shrug* We knew then they were hoping to make a movie to give the show's overall storyline closure. (They wanted it to be a feature film, like "Serenity"; I myself was always placing money on tv-movie or mini-series, even then.) So I don't see how the situation right now is *that* different from what it was. The same options appear to be on the table.
I personally lean towards the tv-movie/mini-series option. I think reaching towards a feature film is a bad idea (for a franchise that is so heavily dependent on its backstory). I think that a tv-movie or series of movies, or a mini or two, could probably be enough to give closure, and/or to tell some nice one-shot stories, and it's a way of concentrating effort and budget to produce something good. And it would keep canon open, to an extent, or at least make that a possibility -- without necessarily confronting us with the agonizing over the show's inevitable cancellation *again*. (Because even if it gets picked up for a S11... then you continue to have the anxiety over its ratings performance, and how much longer it can go on, etc.)
But that's just my personal preference, and I respect the folks who honestly feel there is a case to be made for giving what is essentially the 2-year-old "Stargate Command" some more time. Even if I'm not as hopeful that it'll actually happen.
However, I see nothing wrong with the idea of asking for a *lot* (S11) and settling for a bit less (movies, etc.). It may be a good negotiating tactic.
I will say this, though -- I think a good bit of my very emotional reaction yesterday was all tied up in how this affects the community/fandom, and the way that is important to me *apart from* the way my enjoyment of the show is important to me. And the outpourings of fannish reaction around LJ, that I have seen at least, have soothed some of my distress over that.
This is a sympathetic but level-headed pondering of SG-1's cancellation. Roush likes SG-1 well enough (he appeared on the "Inside" special to say nice things about it), but folks may remember him as a passionate "Farscape" fan. So he's got that perspective on this.
The thing is, I agree with him, in a lot of ways. As I remarked yesterday, the *timing* of this announcement is what really stunned me; not the substance of it. I was already thinking that if SG-1 got an 11th season, it would be very lucky. I was indeed half-expecting to hear that it was being cancelled. For me, it was impossible to watch the build-up of signals that SciFi was sending with their various shenanigans, and not get that feeling.
And I have often had the thoughts that Roush airs. 10 years is nothing to sneeze at. I would rather a show go out at some kind of high point than linger on until it hits a really embarassing place. (The discussion/debate over whether SG-1 had reached that, or had not reached it yet, is a separate issue, I think. Feel what you will about the last two seasons or the last four seasons, or whatever. I personally wasn't loving the show as much in S9/S10 as previously, but I have my own personal barometer for these things -- called "Buffy" season 6/7 -- and from my viewpoint, at least, SG-1 was diminished but not at the "take it behind the barn and shoot it" stage yet.)
So I'm in two minds about all of the "save the show" sentiment floating around, and at the rumored efforts being made by Bridge and MGM.
Because the thing is -- in some ways, this is the 10th season of a show that I don't want to see become a shambling zombie. In other ways, it has to be acknowledged that it is the 2nd season of what the people *making* the show always sort of intended to be a sequel show anyway -- "Stargate Command", which is what they would have called it if the SciFi Channel hadn't vetoed the idea. And I feel badly for the folks who have honestly been trying to *make* that sequel show work. I also feel badly for the folks who have been loving watching it as much as ever, or more so. While I think that SG-1 maybe has reached the end of its natural lifespan... I feel that the whole concept of "SGC" as a show maybe hasn't.
So I'm not quite sure what I'm hoping will happen to "SGC", as such. (I am sure of this: the more I think of it, the more I think migrating some of the characters over to SGA is a poor idea... for SGA itself.) For "SG-1", there's a few things I'd like to see happen.
As Roush says: the end of S10 treated with dignity. (But hey, it's the SciFi Channel, so good luck!) As I was remarking yesterday -- as shitty as the timing of this announcement is, there may be a bright side to it. And that bright side is that eps 19 and 20 weren't written yet. Bridge has lots of warning now to figure out how to end the series. We will not be trapped by their having made a HUGE CLIFFHANGER because they were, for once, banking on the idea of S11.
I do not think there is any way they can wrap up the Orii plotline in that time. But the thing is, we've been dealing with this since S6 -- at which point we all knew the show might end with the long-running Goa'uld plotline unresolved. *shrug* We knew then they were hoping to make a movie to give the show's overall storyline closure. (They wanted it to be a feature film, like "Serenity"; I myself was always placing money on tv-movie or mini-series, even then.) So I don't see how the situation right now is *that* different from what it was. The same options appear to be on the table.
I personally lean towards the tv-movie/mini-series option. I think reaching towards a feature film is a bad idea (for a franchise that is so heavily dependent on its backstory). I think that a tv-movie or series of movies, or a mini or two, could probably be enough to give closure, and/or to tell some nice one-shot stories, and it's a way of concentrating effort and budget to produce something good. And it would keep canon open, to an extent, or at least make that a possibility -- without necessarily confronting us with the agonizing over the show's inevitable cancellation *again*. (Because even if it gets picked up for a S11... then you continue to have the anxiety over its ratings performance, and how much longer it can go on, etc.)
But that's just my personal preference, and I respect the folks who honestly feel there is a case to be made for giving what is essentially the 2-year-old "Stargate Command" some more time. Even if I'm not as hopeful that it'll actually happen.
However, I see nothing wrong with the idea of asking for a *lot* (S11) and settling for a bit less (movies, etc.). It may be a good negotiating tactic.
I will say this, though -- I think a good bit of my very emotional reaction yesterday was all tied up in how this affects the community/fandom, and the way that is important to me *apart from* the way my enjoyment of the show is important to me. And the outpourings of fannish reaction around LJ, that I have seen at least, have soothed some of my distress over that.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-08-22 10:39 pm (UTC){{{more big hugs}}}
no subject
Date: 2006-08-23 03:48 pm (UTC)I just... while it'd be kinda cool to see this show get the Serenity treatment, on the other hand, I have simply never been able to imagine it on the big screen. On the big screen, and pulling in movie-theatre level audiences.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-23 09:59 pm (UTC)and i do agree...it's got more of a small-er screen feel to it for me. although when i saw the movie in the theatres....well, that was before sg-1 so any objectivity i might have had is shot. ;)
no subject
Date: 2006-08-24 03:16 pm (UTC)Even when they brought Serenity to the theatres, you notice, they did change a number of things slightly from the series. But even then, the series was SHORT. So you had a double whammy there. It wasn't that unreasonable to think that potential audiences MIGHT check out the series, because it is a low investment of time and there just isn't that much material to "master". But, second, they also went to *some* lengths to make the film low-entry, so that it stood alone.
I simply do not see how a SG-1 feature film could stand alone. At all. And there is way, waaaaaaaaaaaay too much backstory to expect a film audience to master, if you get them to care in the first place.
I don't know what Firefly's viewing numbers were in comparison with SG-1's, either. And of course we are not counting SG-1's healthy audiences in countries outside of the U.S. But as much as I love Stargate, it's NOT TREK. In terms of sheer audience numbers that can be counted upon to go see it in the theatre. It just isn't. And it doesn't have Trek's cultural cachet, which at least when they started up the movie franchise was being counted upon to draw in people who weren't die-hard fans -- but who are absolutely necessary to make enough money for a film to be worthwhile.
SG-1's biggest audience on SciFi right now is about 2.5 million people (based on the ratings of "200"). Even if every single one goes to see a film in the theatre, that's $25 million dollars... and that is a theatrical flop. *shrug*
no subject
Date: 2006-08-24 09:42 pm (UTC)i'd hate to see them sabatage any future success by expecting people to make that kind of leap. i hope that they'd be smarter about their audience too.