Who Owns Stargate?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Who Owns Stargate?

With a new Stargate movie recently announced, MovieBob wants to know just who has the rights to said production.

Read Full Article

It'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out - maybe more interesting than actually watching the movie, which is likely filed next to the ID4 sequel in Emmerich's "Stuff I have to do to shore up the clout to get Stonewall released.

Looks like you're missing this, Bob: "

OT: Honestly, I'm just surprised that they think the movie version is what they should be basing things on. The TV show, despite not being super-popular, has plenty of devotees, and I think that Richard Dean Anderson still has a bit of name recognition in him. I mean, Roland Emmerich is best known as "the guy who cranks out a bunch of not-great disaster movies"; is there enough cachet in his name to warrant giving it back to him and Devlin?

Well, since the TV series definitely is not coming back so i suppose we better be glad we are getting something.

Even if it ditches 14 years of continuity for a fresh (or would that be the original?) take on the franchise.

Anyway, all thats left now is to gawk at what actors they can grab for it, gawk at the trailers, and then await the retrospective Certifcaion of Not Shit.

Thunderous Cacophony:

It'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out - maybe more interesting than actually watching the movie, which is likely filed next to the ID4 sequel in Emmerich's "Stuff I have to do to shore up the clout to get Stonewall released.

Looks like you're missing this, Bob: "

OT: Honestly, I'm just surprised that they think the movie version is what they should be basing things on. The TV show, despite not being super-popular, has plenty of devotees, and I think that Richard Dean Anderson still has a bit of name recognition in him. I mean, Roland Emmerich is best known as "the guy who cranks out a bunch of not-great disaster movies"; is there enough cachet in his name to warrant giving it back to him and Devlin?

I imagine Emmerich has enough currency to make this work even if it's bad. Which seems to be his movies i a nutshell.

gigastar:
Well, since the TV series definitely is not coming back so i suppose we better be glad we are getting something.

Honestly? I think I'd prefer it if they let it rest.

I'm not sure the movie is enough of a classic to have a fanbase separate from the TV show. I mean, looking at other movies that came out in 1994 I see Forrest Gump, Shawshank Redemption, Lion King, Speed. I mean Street Fighter came out in 1994 and I would say its had a larger impact. It would be interesting if I'm wrong though.

The TV series has a lot of gold in it. (Gold that gets significantly harder to find after season 7/8 of SG1, but gold nonetheless.) It would be a shame if they wasted it because the director's personal feelings.

It's Devlin and Emmerich. Go back to the source material, start over, etc. Just keep them as far away from the project as possible.

In light of Guardians of the Galaxy, I could see Lexx getting a decent movie reboot.

I love the Stargate TV shows, not the cartoon though, and I can see the new film as only a positive thing. Maybe this will generate a new TV show, unburdened from the mass of continuity of the existing TV franchises?

LEXX getting a cinematic reboot? A TV series so sexually charged and weird being given control over by a bunch of Producers... *shudders*... even as a thought experiment that could only go horribly wrong... speaking of which I just remembered Eva Habermann as Zev... I need some alone time now.

On the other hand, as others have said I think Stargate has enough to tell that multiple iterations can exist, certainly more worthy of a reboot than Star Trek (which still had plenty of stories to tell in it's universe).

While usually it's a given that I believe "fuck everyone who uses legal franchise control to stop creative works from existence", to answer this particular article's main question, I would expand that by saying, Fuck everyone who claims moral "ownership" over any cultural concepts more abstract than the copyright of a specific work.

I'm sick and tired of this culture that takes it for granted that whole fictional universes "belonging to" someone is the natural state of affairs, or that a work's creativity (or it's lack) can be identified based on the usage (or it's lack) of a handful of trademarked works showing up.

Interesting to compare this announcement to that of the Star Wars sequels. Here, the majority of Stargate fans are vocally outraged at Devlin and Emmerich's intent to throw out the television continuity.

For Star Wars, people seemed overjoyed that the EU was getting trashed.

Similar situation, different results.

Given on how low a note the Star Gate franchise ended (Atlantis's last 3 seasons, the crappy post script SG1 seasons that was canceled abruptly with out a resolution, and the stupid Universe show that was Scifi, or had they renamed themselves syphilis by then, channels inept attempt to recreate the Battlestar Galactica success) a reboot isn't a bad idea.

Matt K:
In light of Guardians of the Galaxy, I could see Lexx getting a decent movie reboot.

In light of LEXX, I could see Lexx deserving a decent movie reboot!
But... these days I can only imagine it would get homogenized to look like everything else and lose that "special something" that made me cringe while watching and yet come back week after week despite myself. :P

Zachary Amaranth:

gigastar:
Well, since the TV series definitely is not coming back so i suppose we better be glad we are getting something.

Honestly? I think I'd prefer it if they let it rest.

Lets be realistic, were they really going to let one of the biggest science-fiction TV franchises rest in peace during a time when science-fiction is cool?

Soviet Heavy:
Interesting to compare this announcement to that of the Star Wars sequels. Here, the majority of Stargate fans are vocally outraged at Devlin and Emmerich's intent to throw out the television continuity.

For Star Wars, people seemed overjoyed that the EU was getting trashed.

Similar situation, different results.

The difference is the fans follow the beloved and well fleshed out characters. They don't mind all of the convoluted EU being dumped because after hundreds of thousands of pages of it there are really only 2-4 characters in it that the fans could even identify. The primary draw is the original characters from the movies. Heck a huge percentage of Star Wars fans abandoned the EU en mass when it was felt that one of those original characters had been treated badly by the later authors.

Whereas Stargate has the exact opposite issue. The original movie was a neat story and a cool concept. It was a fun watch, but honestly Kurt Russel and James Spader in it while good, weren't exactly endearing. At least not in a franchise building beloved character sort of way. They were cold distant and troubled. It made for some interesting short term drama and conflict. But they weren't anybody that viewers really wanted to come back and spend more time with, or learn more about.

Contrast that with Stargate SG1. Say what you will about whether or not it overstayed it's welcome, or the quality of it in the end, it had the best on screen chemistry amongst its cast since the original Star Trek. Michael Shanks and Richard Dean Anderson took Russel and Spader's original roles and made them much warmer and more identifiable. O'Neill was no longer a stressed out suicidal PTSD sufferer mourning his son. There was more depth. There was more of an arc. And heaven forbid what the fans will do at this point to a version of Stargate that lacks Carter, or /shudder Teal'c. Imagine if JJ Abrahm's rebooted Star Trek and just said "I don't like this Spock character, who needs him. I don't want to go in that direction!" Granted Roland and Emmerich are the original creators. They can attempt to sell fans on their vision. But fighting against fans core expectations is not typically a winning formula. Granted Battlestar Galactica did it, but the small screen is a different sort of space for this kind of thing. You can grow a new branding and ease people into it over some time via word of mouth. Big budget movies are "bet it all on the first weekend". And when the first people comming out of the initial screening are going "It sucked, none of my favorite characters were in it" and you have Lone Ranger all over again. Or as a better comparrison, Roland and Emmerich's 1994 Godzilla. If WB is serriously considering making this, they need to go back and look at everything involving that, and realize that is what would be going on here.

Soviet Heavy:
Interesting to compare this announcement to that of the Star Wars sequels. Here, the majority of Stargate fans are vocally outraged at Devlin and Emmerich's intent to throw out the television continuity.

For Star Wars, people seemed overjoyed that the EU was getting trashed.

Similar situation, different results.

The biggest difference is that with Star Wars, a lot of the EU was just bad, or made no sense. People also didn't have to really care about it, it being completely non-integral to the movies, so it was a non issue really. With Stargate, the real heart of the franchise(is that even the right word?) was the TV shows, with one movie that kicked it off. So saying, "We're rebooting the whole series, and the TV shows are not part of the story now" is really just saying: "The TV means nothing to us, so we are going to break anything you may or may not like".

Now, this could be awesome, and might respark interest in the series. Heck, there might even be a new series. But this could also be a total failure because the people they want to get into the theater, the fans who kept the series on the air for 14 years, are being alienated away from it by being told "We hate the thing you liked, so we're doing away with it".

Bill Nye the Zombie:

Soviet Heavy:
Interesting to compare this announcement to that of the Star Wars sequels. Here, the majority of Stargate fans are vocally outraged at Devlin and Emmerich's intent to throw out the television continuity.

For Star Wars, people seemed overjoyed that the EU was getting trashed.

Similar situation, different results.

The biggest difference is that with Star Wars, a lot of the EU was just bad, or made no sense. People also didn't have to really care about it, it being completely non-integral to the movies, so it was a non issue really. With Stargate, the real heart of the franchise(is that even the right word?) was the TV shows, with one movie that kicked it off. So saying, "We're rebooting the whole series, and the TV shows are not part of the story now" is really just saying: "The TV means nothing to us, so we are going to break anything you may or may not like".

Do you not see how this same thing could be said about Star Wars? The EU revived Star Wars in the 90s. Sure, it might not be "the heart of the franchise", as you put it, but it was a major point in sparking new interest in the franchise.

"We're continuing the whole series, and the books and games are not part of the story now." "The EU means nothing to us, so we are going to break anything you may or may not like."

A lot of the EU was bad, the last few series have been awful. Stargate also had a lot of bad in it, to the point of Universe feeling like an entirely different show, and Atlantis dragging its heels.

While I took umbrage with the last few stories the EU has done, I'm still unhappy to see it go. There are new books being made, but none of them will reference the old material. If they had allowed the old EU to continue parallel to the new stuff, operating under the Legends Title, I'd have no problem. I'd consider Stargate TV Canon continuing without feeling the need to adhere to the new films to be a similar compromise that would satisfy everyone.

castlewise:
I'm not sure the movie is enough of a classic to have a fanbase separate from the TV show. I mean, looking at other movies that came out in 1994 I see Forrest Gump, Shawshank Redemption, Lion King, Speed. I mean Street Fighter came out in 1994 and I would say its had a larger impact. It would be interesting if I'm wrong though.

The TV series has a lot of gold in it. (Gold that gets significantly harder to find after season 7/8 of SG1, but gold nonetheless.) It would be a shame if they wasted it because the director's personal feelings.

I have always considered myself a fan of both the original movie and the show. I have to agree though that by and large it didn't have that much impact beyond on the larger cultural zeitgheist. That said, part of the reason SG-1 slumped a bit after season 7 was specifically because Richard Dean Anderson said he was "too old for this s***" he tried to stay on and do some guest episodes for continuity, but the show had to bring in John Crichton and Erin Sung to help fill things out. I don't think now, a decade even later, Anderson is going to want to reprise his version of O'Neill, at least not to carry a movie.

Any movie is going to be starting in part from scratch. I'd hate to see the show's continuity thrown out completely, but I think picking up from the end of SG-1/Atlantis/Universe is just not possible.

faefrost:

Snip

I completly agree however as much as I love Sg1 (but not S9/10) and Atlantis I am still willing to give it a chance. It might not be the Stargate I know and love but neither was Stargate Universe so we don't really have anything to loose.

And Devlin and Emmerich could still win some of the fanbase over. They would have a better shot than Brad Wright and Robert C. Cooper would at this point considering some of the decisions and comments they made at the start and end of SGU.

castlewise:
I'm not sure the movie is enough of a classic to have a fanbase separate from the TV show. I mean, looking at other movies that came out in 1994 I see Forrest Gump, Shawshank Redemption, Lion King, Speed. I mean Street Fighter came out in 1994 and I would say its had a larger impact. It would be interesting if I'm wrong though.

The TV series has a lot of gold in it. (Gold that gets significantly harder to find after season 7/8 of SG1, but gold nonetheless.) It would be a shame if they wasted it because the director's personal feelings.

I assume you mean Street Fighter's big impact was being so laughably bad.

I liked SG-1 and I loved Atlantis (It was one of my three favourite shows when I was growing up). Heck, I even liked Universe - apparently I'm the only one. When I first say Robert Carlyle in Once Upon a Time I immediately shouted, "DOCTOR RUSH!" I usually hold the mantra that one should wait until they see the movie before passing judgement so I'm not going to go major ape on this, but... Knowing Roland's previous works, and know what he thinks of the TV franchise (Which, let's face it, isn't just a spin off but the main attraction) really makes me worried about the film.

Of course if it's bad I'll just ignore it.

What really cheeses me off is that we won't be wrapping up the story of the TV shows. Fans have been begging for Stargate Extinction, even if it would just be a tv-budget movie, to wrap up loose ends in Atlantis. Instead we get a big budget movie that will probably go against everything the fans wanted. No Stargate: Extinction. No Stargate: Revolution. Just Roland.

LEXX won't come up. It's so much like today's American corporate culture that it hardly passes for science fiction any more. What? Your employer doesn't force you to donate internal organs for the enhancement of company profits? What dream palace do you work for?

I liked the film and loved the TV show. I think my biggest problem with the announcement wasn't so much that they wanted to go back to the beginning, I can get behind the original creators wanting to continue the story their own way. It was the lack of respect for the TV show, which, like it or not, is the reason many of us care about the franchise.

I liked SG-1 and I loved Atlantis (It was one of my three favourite shows when I was growing up). Heck, I even liked Universe - apparently I'm the only one

Not so, I loved SG1 I actually ended up loving Atlantis more and I hated Universe at first but came to like it as well so don't worry you aren't the only SG fan out there that liked all 3.

Instead we get a big budget movie that will probably go against everything the fans wanted. No Stargate: Extinction. No Stargate: Revolution. Just Roland.

This is why the movie will see zero of my cash. For the same money as one of these big budget movies they coould have had tied up Atlantis, they could have given us the SG1 movie that saw the project go public and we probably could have had a tie up to Universe, ended the franchise and then let it rest for half a decade before a proper reboot.

Instead we get some bastardised continuation of a a 20 year old semi mediocre sci-fi movie that will go out of it's way to ignore the expanded universe created by it's far more successful TV spin offs. Heck it looks like they won't even Star Trek it (that's using time travel to go back in time and take a huge dump on the franchises expanded universe so that you can then tell new stories that look and sound shockingly the same as the stuff we saw pre reboot, KKKKKHHHHHHHAAAAANNNNNN!)

gigastar:

Lets be realistic, were they really going to let one of the biggest science-fiction TV franchises rest in peace during a time when science-fiction is cool?

You just made it out like we should be grateful we're getting anything, and now you're saying it was more or less inevitable. Which is it? Was it a given, or should we be thankful that we're getting something? Because I agree with the latter premise: realistically, they will whip even a dead horse provided it hasn't completely been turned to Jell-O.

But if this is about our desires or appreciation, I'd appreciate nothing more than the concept of Roland Emmerich setting the future of Stargate. Why? Because when there was nothing, at least I had some degree of hope.

The movie was okay. Just okay. SG1 is one of my favorite shows of all time. If they want to reboot it, get the writers from the show, not the guys also made White House Down, The Day After Tomorrow, and the 98 Godzilla.

Soviet Heavy:

Do you not see how this same thing could be said about Star Wars? The EU revived Star Wars in the 90s. Sure, it might not be "the heart of the franchise", as you put it, but it was a major point in sparking new interest in the franchise.

But then, it wasn't the same thing. It wasn't the "heart of the franchise." Lucas was never pushed out for the EU; his material was always considered canon. Even when it was bad or dumb.

If the two had been treated the same, you might see the same reaction. But they weren't.

Darth_Payn:

I assume you mean Street Fighter's big impact was being so laughably bad.

Well, negative impact is still impact.

Rellik San:
LEXX getting a cinematic reboot? A TV series so sexually charged and weird being given control over by a bunch of Producers... *shudders*... even as a thought experiment that could only go horribly wrong... speaking of which I just remembered Eva Habermann as Zev... I need some alone time now.

On the other hand, as others have said I think Stargate has enough to tell that multiple iterations can exist, certainly more worthy of a reboot than Star Trek (which still had plenty of stories to tell in it's universe).

Look, I love Lexx, I love the idea, the setting and the whole camp, torture-fuelled, nonsense of it all, but have you watched it recently? After the first series it was rubbish. Not even rubbish in a Zombie Flesh Eaters 2, Firepower, kitchey way but rubbish. I mean just look at this:

... Okay, that was pretty good. Think I'm going to have to watch all of them and refresh my memory. There'd be no point making it into a movie though; there would only be you, me and, like, 10 other people who would go and see it.

I'd go and I'd pay for everyone I love to come with me :)

Wasn't Stargate a series of novels before it was a film? ...or were the novels based on the film? I don't know. All I know is I remember reading a Stargate novel and wondering why the hell it seemed so radically different than SG-1 before figuring out that it was not part of the same canon.

castlewise:
I'm not sure the movie is enough of a classic to have a fanbase separate from the TV show. I mean, looking at other movies that came out in 1994 I see Forrest Gump, Shawshank Redemption, Lion King, Speed. I mean Street Fighter came out in 1994 and I would say its had a larger impact. It would be interesting if I'm wrong though.

The TV series has a lot of gold in it. (Gold that gets significantly harder to find after season 7/8 of SG1, but gold nonetheless.) It would be a shame if they wasted it because the director's personal feelings.

The list of movies you give lacks one important thing... Scifi. In 94 no one was releasing good scifi movies, there was a Star Trek movie that year, but Generations wasn't exactly the strongest the series had ever been. So when a new IP shows up and the movie does fairly well it got a lot of attention from the type of people who wanted to see something a little different.

Fast forward twenty years and I have enough distance to be very very unimpressed by the TV show. 9 times out of 10 whatever alien world they visited looked like the same stretch of forest in Vancouver. I wasn't always on board with their lore choices. When you compare it to TV of this decade SG-1 just comes off as half-hearted and dull (and doubtlessly hindered by their non-budget). It was great background noise on Monday nights when Scifi showed four hours of it while I did my homework in college, but when I wanted a break from homework I still went and hung out with my friend who worked building security and didn't watch SG-1.

The less said of the other series, the better.

Ooh. I want a Max Hedroom Reboot! (Movie, not series.)

Right?

I liked Most of SG1 and most of Atlantis past that it goes down hill.The movie was okay but if they ignore the TV series and do their own thing its not going to end well...

I don't normally say this, but I think the best Idea is to do a total reboot. SG1 is now hugely more popular than the campy barely-remembered original movie. 20 years is a long time, why not just make a new "Star Gate" and if it sells they can turn it in to a trilogy. Make up some more interesting characters too, Daniel Jackson and O'Neil are such Hollywood stereotypes in the movie.

It gives them full license to do almost anything they want except get rid of the Star Gate (which is almost infinitely versatile as a set piece anyway) and probably aliens that take over human bodies and like Egyptian-style things (which were a good idea anyway).

canadamus_prime:
Wasn't Stargate a series of novels before it was a film? ...or were the novels based on the film? I don't know. All I know is I remember reading a Stargate novel and wondering why the hell it seemed so radically different than SG-1 before figuring out that it was not part of the same canon.

Yep, there were 5 novels written by Bill McCay that followed the movie canon and were based on notes by Emmerich. I remember reading at least one of them but can't recall what the heck they were about. I remember a bit about trying to integrate Abydonian refugees into Earth society? I never bothered to look for the rest of the series because the TV series gelled better with me

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here