Stargate and Star Trek

[Storm Raven]

Of course, it is cheaper. They're filming it in Canada.

My guess is the next Trek TV series -- if there is ever one -- will be outsourced to Canada or New Zealand.

Filming in Canada (or New Zealand) can be done for just about any show to make production cheaper. I believe that exclusive of where it is filmed, Stargate is probably cheaper to produce than most other science fiction shows, such as Battlestar Galactica, or whatever iteration of Star Trek goes into production next.

 

[Ranger REG]

Filming in Canada (or New Zealand) can be done for just about any show to make production cheaper. I believe that exclusive of where it is filmed, Stargate is probably cheaper to produce than most other science fiction shows, such as Battlestar Galactica, or whatever iteration of Star Trek goes into production next.

Yep, even American-produced sci-fi genre are being outsourced. :\

 

[Elf Witch]

Then I hope I'm wrong. I'm looking forward to the syndicated 9th season this fall.

So you have not seen seaaon 9? I don't think it is the strongest season but it was an improvment over the season 8 I felt that in that season it was like RDA was just bidding his time to the end of his contract.

It was also the season where the team never seemed to leave Earth. Jack maybe a great Col. but he was not that great a general.

 

[Ranger REG]

It was also the season where the team never seemed to leave Earth. Jack maybe a great Col. but he was not that great a general.

Personally, I don't think O'Neill is the kind of guy to take a desk job. Even when he was heading SGC, he still wear his field uniform, in case he needs to gear up. He comes from a long line of heroic leaders in this genre, stemming from Kirk.

 

[Elf Witch]

Personally, I don't think O'Neill is the kind of guy to take a desk job. Even when he was heading SGC, he still wear his field uniform, in case he needs to gear up. He comes from a long line of heroic leaders in this genre, stemming from Kirk.

I agree but for dome reason the writers just could not seem to get a grip on how to write it. Like I said season 8 not one of my favorites though their were some good episodes in it. I did like Jack's letter to General Hammmond. And the way he handles Baal.

 

[VoidAdept]

One nice thing about filming Stargate in Vancouver (other than the fact that it's cheaper) is that there's tons of locations for outdoor filming within a few hours from the city. Need a forest? Go to UBC or Stanley Park. Need a shot for Antarctica? Whistler's an hour away by helicopter. There's desert-like areas a few hours' drive away. There's also lots of beach/waterfront locales. Anything else can be filmed on the sound stages... which I happen to work a few blocks away from.

 

[Orius]

Like Ranger I'm a season behind, and unfortunately I skip most of the discussions around here because of it. But I agree with much of what's stated here:

• The show's not geeky. The premises of both series are both simple. In SG-1 you got alien parasites that are bad guys responsible for much of ancient human cultre. In Atlantis you got space vampires (not groundbreaking or terribly original, but easy enough for anyone to grasp). Sure there are shows out there like Babylon 5, Farscape, and Firefly, but those tend to appeal to hardcore fans only, and what happens is that they have a hard time attracting viewers. And in the cases of stuff like B5 and Farscape, there's long running deep plotlines that make the show harder to understand if missed. The people in the Stargate universe tend to be pretty normal and easy for the average viewer to understand, and so easier for more people to follow, probably much in the same way Quantum Leap was.
• The show isn't too serious or pretentious. Ok, Star Trek: The Next Generation was the most successful in the franshise, but boy did it take itself far too seriously. Stargate pokes fun at itself, the biggest example from season 8 being "Citizen Joe". It also pokes fun at other popular Sci-Fi franchises, Star Trek being a frequent target, and Star Wars to a lesser extent. The producers definitely seem to be having lots of fun with the show.
• The good guys win. Yeah, some Sci-Fi series like to make things bleak and gritty for realism. But the producers understand something important: many viewers don't want this, they want to see the good guys win. Stargate generally delievers this without giving the good guys easy victories or by making the bad guys incompetant bunglers.
• Smart episodic setup. As mentioned above, Star Trek often ignores itself. THere's not technological advancement, and the episodes, particularly in TOS and early TNG aren't connected in any meaningful way. In Stargate, there's long-running plotlines that are continually being advanced with stand alone episodes interspersed within. There's noticable technological advancements as well, like naqida generators, the Prometheus and Daedalus, etc. And the writers and producers have a pretty good handle on Sci-Fi audiences; they know the hardcore fans tend to remember lots of picky details, and they keep things more or less consistant. Compare that to Star Trek which has continuity holes you can fly an armada of Borg Cubes through, or something like B5 or Farscape which has lots of really obscure details which make the show unfriendly to anyone not taping and watching the episodes like 5 or 6 times each.

Now I'm not knocking or putting down any of the shows I mentioned above, nor to I think Stargate is entirely perfect. But I can see why it's probably the most successful Sci-Fi franchise (in America anyway) atm.

 

[kinem]

What Orius said, plus largely due to the continuity, in many episodes it is possible to puzzle out what is happening, or what should be done, based on what happenned before (or if you're like me and watch repeats having missed the early seasons, on knowledge of what has come after).

In many ways, Stargate (especially Atlantis) is the new Star Trek: All aliens speak English; it is common to explore new planets; there are powerful FTL spaceships and they have transporters, shields, energy weapons, FTL radio, shuttles, and cloaking devices; some characters constantly get hit on by aliens; there exist all-powerful beings (Q, the ascended); energy weapons that stun are often used; and many other conscious similarities. The only real differences are the addition of the stargate, the contemporary setting, and less cheesy baggage. In other words, just about anything a Star Trek fan would want, he could get from Stargate.

 

[Ranger REG]

In other words, just about anything a Star Trek fan would want, he could get from Stargate.

Except it is controlled by the Air Force, not the Navy. :\

But hey, at least we got some a marine unit in Atlantis.

 

[Elf Witch]

Like Ranger I'm a season behind, and unfortunately I skip most of the discussions around here because of it. But I agree with much of what's stated here:

• The show's not geeky. The premises of both series are both simple. In SG-1 you got alien parasites that are bad guys responsible for much of ancient human cultre. In Atlantis you got space vampires (not groundbreaking or terribly original, but easy enough for anyone to grasp). Sure there are shows out there like Babylon 5, Farscape, and Firefly, but those tend to appeal to hardcore fans only, and what happens is that they have a hard time attracting viewers. And in the cases of stuff like B5 and Farscape, there's long running deep plotlines that make the show harder to understand if missed. The people in the Stargate universe tend to be pretty normal and easy for the average viewer to understand, and so easier for more people to follow, probably much in the same way Quantum Leap was.
• The show isn't too serious or pretentious. Ok, Star Trek: The Next Generation was the most successful in the franshise, but boy did it take itself far too seriously. Stargate pokes fun at itself, the biggest example from season 8 being "Citizen Joe". It also pokes fun at other popular Sci-Fi franchises, Star Trek being a frequent target, and Star Wars to a lesser extent. The producers definitely seem to be having lots of fun with the show.
• The good guys win. Yeah, some Sci-Fi series like to make things bleak and gritty for realism. But the producers understand something important: many viewers don't want this, they want to see the good guys win. Stargate generally delievers this without giving the good guys easy victories or by making the bad guys incompetant bunglers.
• Smart episodic setup. As mentioned above, Star Trek often ignores itself. THere's not technological advancement, and the episodes, particularly in TOS and early TNG aren't connected in any meaningful way. In Stargate, there's long-running plotlines that are continually being advanced with stand alone episodes interspersed within. There's noticable technological advancements as well, like naqida generators, the Prometheus and Daedalus, etc. And the writers and producers have a pretty good handle on Sci-Fi audiences; they know the hardcore fans tend to remember lots of picky details, and they keep things more or less consistant. Compare that to Star Trek which has continuity holes you can fly an armada of Borg Cubes through, or something like B5 or Farscape which has lots of really obscure details which make the show unfriendly to anyone not taping and watching the episodes like 5 or 6 times each.

Now I'm not knocking or putting down any of the shows I mentioned above, nor to I think Stargate is entirely perfect. But I can see why it's probably the most successful Sci-Fi franchise (in America anyway) atm.

I think you hit the nail on the head of why Stargate is going into its tenth year. It is an easy show to watch. You can actually come into it at any point and watch it with very little problem. Sure its nice to have seen all the episodes but it is not like say Lost or Battlestar Galatica where you just don't get it unless you have seen all the episodes.

And you are really right about the good guys winning. I know it is popular to have gritty shows now a days and on most BG boards fans talk about much they love how screwed up the characters are and how the good guys don't always win and often make fun of Stargate. But I know several people who are turned off just for that reason.

I watch BG but I like Stargate better. I watch TV and I read for escapism. I want the good guys to win and I want my good guys to be kind of fun do the right thing stand up guys not screwed up alcoholics angst ridden people in need of a good dose of prozax. Half the time on BG I find myself rooting for the cyclons because the humans just don't deserve to win.

I know that when Stargate first came on the air their was some criticism of RDA portrayal of Jack O'Neill because he was not as angry and depressed and suicidal as Kurt Russell's character in the movie. I didn't agree with the critics on this. It worked in the movie but watching that character week after week would have just sucked the fun out of the show. They choose to allow Jack's character to heal from his son's death and move on and it worked.