mrv3000 | (no subject)

Current Mood: confused

Entry tags:

sg-1

(no subject)

Um...

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=3&id=37194

o_O

Did the original movie make that much money to begin with? And isn't your fan base now tied to the TV show?

ETA: Also, that O'Neil has *one* L, dammit! ;)

Anyhoo, back to writing!

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

I get the impression, though I don't know for certain, that the first movie did pretty well. Even so, I really don't get how this is a good idea. Like you said, the people who want to see more Stargate have probably all gotten hooked on the TV shows. I don't see the need to make a completely separate movie series. That's only going to confuse people, especially if/when there's ever a Stargate SG-1/Atlantis movie.

Eh. Not that anyone regularly accuses movie producers of extreme intelligence and logic.

There were six horrible books that go after the movie. Where the Goa'uld aren't....Goa'uld at all. There are no symbiotes or anything.

Also, I wouldn't mind James Spader but NONONONONONONONONO to Kurt Russell.

Okay, then. I'm not sure how that will work out. As you said, I'm not sure the original made that much to begin with. I did love the original - I wouldn't have started watching SG-1 if I hadn't. But I've grown leery of sequels, especially since the Matrix trilogy didn't really pan out and I'm currently pretending there was only ever one Matrix movie. I do find it interesting that his intention was that the sequel be 12 years later. That could be cool.

This is completely unrelated to that news, but whenever I see that icon of yours, I think of farting ducks.

Just so you know that little nugget of information, I'm sure your world is better for it!

Personally, I'd be interested to see where they go with it.

But it would be weird in that the movies and series could no longer be linked as they are, since the histories would end up going in entirely different directions. Weird, but interesting!

I would forsee a few not fandom types going to the cinema and going '...where the hell was macgyver?' cos joe bloggs won't twig that the new films aren't meant to have anything to do with the series.

Apart from the Col O'Neil/l, Daniel Jackson, aliens, pyramids and oh that great big round circle thing that takes you to other planets.

I get the impression, though I don't know for certain, that the first movie did pretty well.

I remember seeing it in the theater. I think it did okay. Not a huge blockbuster though or something I would have thought would have gotten sequels. Of course nowadays they'll make a sequel for anything.

Even so, I really don't get how this is a good idea. Like you said, the people who want to see more Stargate have probably all gotten hooked on the TV shows. I don't see the need to make a completely separate movie series. That's only going to confuse people, especially if/when there's ever a Stargate SG-1/Atlantis movie.

Good point. Kinda axes any possibility of that. Not that I was gung-ho about seeing a SG-1/A movie...

Eh. Not that anyone regularly accuses movie producers of extreme intelligence and logic.

Good point.

There were six horrible books that go after the movie. Where the Goa'uld aren't....Goa'uld at all. There are no symbiotes or anything.

Oh dear.

Also, I wouldn't mind James Spader but NONONONONONONONONO to Kurt Russell.

James Spader was adorable as Daniel. But you're right - Kurt Russell did nothing for me as Jack.

I did love the original - I wouldn't have started watching SG-1 if I hadn't.

Yeah, I remember thinking the movie was fun. And I know it made me pay attention when I discovered that Showtime was airing a little show called SG-1.

(Wow. Flashback to Showtime days.)

But I've grown leery of sequels, especially since the Matrix trilogy didn't really pan out and I'm currently pretending there was only ever one Matrix movie.

I *loved* the first Matrix movie. Saw it about 5 times in the theater. The second movie killed it dead for me. I still have never seen the third movie.

I do find it interesting that his intention was that the sequel be 12 years later. That could be cool.

Well, they could wipe the slate clean that way. Basically start up the same way that Children of the Gods did with Jack getting pulled back in. Daniel still on Abydos...

BWAH!!! Well then I shall use it again.

Personally, I'd be interested to see where they go with it.

Hopefully they won't just reenact Children of the Gods. If they're going to do something different, I hope it's really different from the TV series.

But it would be weird in that the movies and series could no longer be linked as they are, since the histories would end up going in entirely different directions. Weird, but interesting!

Yeah. Before the movie was just part of the TV-verse, with the small inconsistent details smoothed over. But now there will be two separate universes.

I would forsee a few not fandom types going to the cinema and going '...where the hell was macgyver?' cos joe bloggs won't twig that the new films aren't meant to have anything to do with the series.

Yeah, right. Plus anyone who would be interested in this movie to begin with probably is at least aware of the SG-1 show.

And isn't your fan base now tied to the TV show?

That would be my question. I mean I couldn't see anyone other then RDA and Michael Shanks playing Jack and Daniel.

It would be very very different, that's for sure. And rather hard to ignore all the TV canon.

And rather hard to ignore all the TV canon.

It would just be strange with diffrernt actors.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only