Dean Devlin talks gate

[Stonelesscutter]

I highly doubt that anybody will be hugging anyone. Or else.

Oooo all the more reason for hugging.

 

[Graybrew1]

Oooo all the more reason for hugging.

Good luck trying.

 

[OMNI]

Just don't try to hug me, bro.

no worries there man

 

[OMNI]

Green to you. I am the same way. Don't touch me unless I ask you too, or BEWARE.

nice to know im not alone

I'll be trying to hug everyone.
Even OMNI.
But I'll be making sure I'm wearing protection.

heheheheheheh... or should i say MUHAHAHAHAHAHA cough cough..

 

[Inara]

Anyways, back to Stargate....I think that any movies from Devlin would be AT LEAST 3 years away, and we dont even know if they have been written yet. They have to dump so much that Brad added in later, like the snakeheads. They are NOT called Jaffa, and they do not have symbiotes or Goa'uld System Lords. There is no naqueda or Ancients, and the stargates from the movie can gate to other galaxies with no problem (Abydos is supposed to be in a different galaxy, not the Milky Way). I dont see a way to use any of the TV canon.

Of course time has passed since then, but when I was first hearing about the Stargate movie intended to be the first of a trilogy, the talk was that it would be a loosely connected trilogy. Not necessarily the same cast, setting, time period, but it would ultimately be in the same universe. I think they were going for an "all mythology came from one source, we just muddled things up" which is sort of what they did on TV, but it's also a pretty common idea in fiction, so it could be done with a totally different take.

The reason Devlin's pissed about the series is he essentially had the rights stolen out from under him, which then meant he couldn't make another film in his intended series. One of the finance companies involved in the production of the movie got nervous the movie was going to bomb shortly before it was released, so they sold the rights. Devlin and Emmerich didn't know it was happening, or they would have tried to buy the rights themselves, and might have succeeded because I understand the deal happened so quickly the price wasn't all that high.

He's never been rude to the fans of the TV series, or at least not to my knowledge. Rude to the people who usurped his film vision? A bit, but nowhere near the snark that BW dished out to him... and he and his cohorts did diss the fans. But consider that Daniel Jackson was a bit of a Gary Stu for Devlin too, and methinks the sting was a bit personal to have it all taken away and warped by someone else.

I imagine his original plans will be tweaked, if only to get in some new ideas from current events. I also wouldn't mind a bit of a tweak of the series, such as a one-liner that only those in the know would get, but nothing mean or aimed at fans. Picture it, Daniel Jackson back from Abydos, bitching that someone stole his original theory about the pyramids, then got it all wrong and published his work and got a lot of attention and praise for years. People in his audience at the start of the original movie did think he was a flake with crazy theories, but they got the details wrong. The wrong details that then became part of the canon for SG-1. Irony.

The above brought to you by old fan geezer memories from the era the movie was out (thank you Starlog, my window into the geek world before the Intarweb), as well as at a mini-con for SG-1 at Dragon*Con several years ago. Might not have all the fine details in the right spot, but rough brushstrokes are there.

I'm not sure how a theatrical movie tossing out the TV show canon would work, but it might actually be a plus. I recall a lot of Browncoats being dismayed that a lot of people who might normally have seen a sci-fi film like Serenity didn't, because they heard it was a continuation of a TV show and they didn't want to come into a story after 13 episodes. Then there were those who only learned of the show after seeing the movie and went back to watch Firefly. We've got nearly two decades of Stargate-verse, and that would daunt any person to watch before seeing two movies, but it could get some fresh viewers in from a new reboot, a la the Star Trek reboot.

Though if the publicity for it makes a point of saying it's a new film from Devlin and Emmerich (if he's involved again) and maybe push it as an original film (without a requirement of even seeing the first one, much less the series), it might get mainstream viewers in the seats. I'm trying to recall "loosely connected movies" (that weren't just cheap sequels with the numbers filed off) and I'm drawing a blank at the moment. I know I've seen several books done that way, with maybe just mentions of previous characters and events, but it's a new self-contained story.

 

[heisenberg]

I just want stargate back on TV . TV series>Movie IMO.

 

[YJ02]

Of course time has passed since then, but when I was first hearing about the Stargate movie intended to be the first of a trilogy, the talk was that it would be a loosely connected trilogy. Not necessarily the same cast, setting, time period, but it would ultimately be in the same universe. I think they were going for an "all mythology came from one source, we just muddled things up" which is sort of what they did on TV, but it's also a pretty common idea in fiction, so it could be done with a totally different take.

The reason Devlin's pissed about the series is he essentially had the rights stolen out from under him, which then meant he couldn't make another film in his intended series. One of the finance companies involved in the production of the movie got nervous the movie was going to bomb shortly before it was released, so they sold the rights. Devlin and Emmerich didn't know it was happening, or they would have tried to buy the rights themselves, and might have succeeded because I understand the deal happened so quickly the price wasn't all that high.

He's never been rude to the fans of the TV series, or at least not to my knowledge. Rude to the people who usurped his film vision? A bit, but nowhere near the snark that BW dished out to him... and he and his cohorts did diss the fans. But consider that Daniel Jackson was a bit of a Gary Stu for Devlin too, and methinks the sting was a bit personal to have it all taken away and warped by someone else.

I imagine his original plans will be tweaked, if only to get in some new ideas from current events. I also wouldn't mind a bit of a tweak of the series, such as a one-liner that only those in the know would get, but nothing mean or aimed at fans. Picture it, Daniel Jackson back from Abydos, bitching that someone stole his original theory about the pyramids, then got it all wrong and published his work and got a lot of attention and praise for years. People in his audience at the start of the original movie did think he was a flake with crazy theories, but they got the details wrong. The wrong details that then became part of the canon for SG-1. Irony.

The above brought to you by old fan geezer memories from the era the movie was out (thank you Starlog, my window into the geek world before the Intarweb), as well as at a mini-con for SG-1 at Dragon*Con several years ago. Might not have all the fine details in the right spot, but rough brushstrokes are there.

I'm not sure how a theatrical movie tossing out the TV show canon would work, but it might actually be a plus. I recall a lot of Browncoats being dismayed that a lot of people who might normally have seen a sci-fi film like Serenity didn't, because they heard it was a continuation of a TV show and they didn't want to come into a story after 13 episodes. Then there were those who only learned of the show after seeing the movie and went back to watch Firefly. We've got nearly two decades of Stargate-verse, and that would daunt any person to watch before seeing two movies, but it could get some fresh viewers in from a new reboot, a la the Star Trek reboot.

Though if the publicity for it makes a point of saying it's a new film from Devlin and Emmerich (if he's involved again) and maybe push it as an original film (without a requirement of even seeing the first one, much less the series), it might get mainstream viewers in the seats. I'm trying to recall "loosely connected movies" (that weren't just cheap sequels with the numbers filed off) and I'm drawing a blank at the moment. I know I've seen several books done that way, with maybe just mentions of previous characters and events, but it's a new self-contained story.

I know its been a long time since this was posted, but-well, thank OM1 for his redirect here from the newer thread

Inara, when you bring up the point of Devlin being upset about the rights being yanked from him, hence his dislike for the series. Wow, so simple and probably overlooked by many.

How often have any of us refused to acknowledge good work by someone else SIMPLY because we do not like that person or how they obtained there position? Pretty damned often for many of us I would guess.

With this in mind, how could Emmerich and Devlin NOT LIKE the fact of 16 yrs of TV gate? It always brought a fan back to remembering their original movie, yes?

Would anyone be talking to these guys now about making a reboot trilogy if NOT FOR THOSE 16yrs?

Think Not.

 

[Overmind One]

I know its been a long time since this was posted, but-well, thank OM1 for his redirect here from the newer thread

Inara, when you bring up the point of Devlin being upset about the rights being yanked from him, hence his dislike for the series. Wow, so simple and probably overlooked by many.

How often have any of us refused to acknowledge good work by someone else SIMPLY because we do not like that person or how they obtained there position? Pretty damned often for many of us I would guess.

With this in mind, how could Emmerich and Devlin NOT LIKE the fact of 16 yrs of TV gate? It always brought a fan back to remembering their original movie, yes?

Would anyone be talking to these guys now about making a reboot trilogy if NOT FOR THOSE 16yrs?

Think Not.

I think they would. They approached MGM several times before their announcement for these new movies way back in 2006. In 1996, they wanted to do the next movie but the TV show derailed that. I dunno...if I was creating a story and only partially finished it, I would feel it was incomplete. Especially if somebody else took the idea for the project and created something similar to it but not the same. It did not help that Brad Wright was/is such an arrogant, self serving prick. He wanted to make Stargate his cash cow and he did exactly that. You can hear him in a video talking about how Stargate is a "franchise" and all that jazz, and he thought Stargate fans were just gonna lap up whatever he slopped on the plate. He was wrong. Not only that, but after he messed it all up with SGU, MGM is going back to the source which gave it value in the first place...Devlin and Emmerich.

 

[Gatefan1976]

I don't see why there cannot be concurrent activities.
I too would like to see where D&E wanted to take the gate, but I am not sold on the whole "they made it a valuable property" deal. I could quite happily live with the same deal in Trek as well, as long as trek movies got themselves someone who cared about trek and not just lens flares an summer blockbusters. ST:TMP was a "blockbuster", and it blew chunks. TWOK however was just a great Star trek story, and it shows when you ask fans what their fave movies with the TOS cast.

Just gimmie a good story, and I'll give it a go

 

[shavedape]

I know its been a long time since this was posted, but-well, thank OM1 for his redirect here from the newer thread

Inara, when you bring up the point of Devlin being upset about the rights being yanked from him, hence his dislike for the series. Wow, so simple and probably overlooked by many.

How often have any of us refused to acknowledge good work by someone else SIMPLY because we do not like that person or how they obtained there position? Pretty damned often for many of us I would guess.

With this in mind, how could Emmerich and Devlin NOT LIKE the fact of 16 yrs of TV gate? It always brought a fan back to remembering their original movie, yes?

Would anyone be talking to these guys now about making a reboot trilogy if NOT FOR THOSE 16yrs?

Think Not.

I think if Brad Wright's vision of Stargate had never materialized then the original movie would have had at least one sequel. We can only guess as to how that would have gone to be honest.

 

[Overmind One]

I don't see why there cannot be concurrent activities.
I too would like to see where D&E wanted to take the gate, but I am not sold on the whole "they made it a valuable property" deal. I could quite happily live with the same deal in Trek as well, as long as trek movies got themselves someone who cared about trek and not just lens flares an summer blockbusters. ST:TMP was a "blockbuster", and it blew chunks. TWOK however was just a great Star trek story, and it shows when you ask fans what their fave movies with the TOS cast.

Just gimmie a good story, and I'll give it a go

Perhaps I should have rephrased it..."Devlin and Emmerich created Stargate". Without them there would be no Stargate to be valued or to be a property. Brad, Glassener, Cooper, Mallozzi, Mullie cant make that claim.
--- merged: Sep 12, 2013 at 9:24 PM ---

I think if Brad Wright's vision of Stargate had never materialized then the original movie would have had at least one sequel. We can only guess as to how that would have gone to be honest.

Well...we are getting two, and if they stick to dumping the whole Brad Wright tangent (not even a nod to it and definitely no alternate timeline thing), we can find out exactly like it would have gone. Only Devlin and Emmerich can tell us, nobody else. Im excited about it!

 

[YJ02]

I don't see why there cannot be concurrent activities.
I too would like to see where D&E wanted to take the gate, but I am not sold on the whole "they made it a valuable property" deal. I could quite happily live with the same deal in Trek as well, as long as trek movies got themselves someone who cared about trek and not just lens flares an summer blockbusters. ST:TMP was a "blockbuster", and it blew chunks. TWOK however was just a great Star trek story, and it shows when you ask fans what their fave movies with the TOS cast.

Just gimmie a good story, and I'll give it a go

I agree with this totally-don't see why two tracks-tv and film-can not co-exist. Only except for:
1-Corporate greed
2-People are stupid, they would be too confused over the two, non-parallel stories existing

UNless

The SGC in the film world and the SGC in the TV world were in different dimensions/universes-then the two could meet -now I would like to see that.
--- merged: Sep 13, 2013 at 2:26 PM ---

I think they would. They approached MGM several times before their announcement for these new movies way back in 2006. In 1996, they wanted to do the next movie but the TV show derailed that. I dunno...if I was creating a story and only partially finished it, I would feel it was incomplete. Especially if somebody else took the idea for the project and created something similar to it but not the same. It did not help that Brad Wright was/is such an arrogant, self serving prick. He wanted to make Stargate his cash cow and he did exactly that. You can hear him in a video talking about how Stargate is a "franchise" and all that jazz, and he thought Stargate fans were just gonna lap up whatever he slopped on the plate. He was wrong. Not only that, but after he messed it all up with SGU, MGM is going back to the source which gave it value in the first place...Devlin and Emmerich.

Ok, got it. But just how popular was the SG movie? How many other movies from that time, with similar results/box office takes, are now being discussed for a reboot? I am sure there may be some, just can't recall it now.

 

[Gatefan1976]

IIRC Yong SG cost around 50m to make and ticket sales were around 195m worldwide.

 

[shavedape]

IIRC Yong SG cost around 50m to make and ticket sales were around 195m worldwide.

If those numbers are correct then that's a pretty good return on investment, so that begs the question of why they didn't immediately make a sequel? Just thinking aloud I'd have to say that the TV show couldn't have been a contender because what studio is going to turn down a pay day of that size for just one movie?

*I'm not disputing your numbers here, I'm just wondering how a TV show, which is guaranteed lower take home pay, would have gotten precedence over a sequel. I'm scratching my head on this one.

 

[Gatefan1976]

If those numbers are correct then that's a pretty good return on investment, so that begs the question of why they didn't immediately make a sequel? Just thinking aloud I'd have to say that the TV show couldn't have been a contender because what studio is going to turn down a pay day of that size for just one movie?

*I'm not disputing your numbers here, I'm just wondering how a TV show, which is guaranteed lower take home pay, would have gotten precedence over a sequel. I'm scratching my head on this one.

Yeah, I double checked 'em dude, they are right.

Umm, hmm, well, GOT costs more per season to produce for what, 12 eps?? (diff timeframe granted), so you are left with the usual suspect of advertising dollars.
I dunno any hard and fast facts on this, but I would think that even a 3 year series (which can easily cost less than your average blockbuster) can rake in more money in ads and series sales than a stand alone movie. You are a retail man, it's the old margin VS sale quantity discussion.

 

[shavedape]

Yeah, I double checked 'em dude, they are right.

Umm, hmm, well, GOT costs more per season to produce for what, 12 eps?? (diff timeframe granted), so you are left with the usual suspect of advertising dollars.
I dunno any hard and fast facts on this, but I would think that even a 3 year series (which can easily cost less than your average blockbuster) can rake in more money in ads and series sales than a stand alone movie. You are a retail man, it's the old margin VS sale quantity discussion.

Right but I was just thinking how Hollywood is always impatient for the big bucks, hence my wondering why they didn't jump at the lump sum payment of a sequel. But then again, sequels generally only do a portion of the business that the originals do, or so I've heard. I don't know if that's the case anymore.

At any rate, it is interesting to ponder how that all came about. Remember, when SG-1 first aired it was on Showtime here, which is a cable channel that doesn't have advertising, i.e. commercials (I assume you have Showtime in Australia, so forgive me if that sounds patronizing. Just didn't want to assume anything). So initially all the money the show was bringing in was from cable subscribers of that channel. Again, that begs the question of why they chose to go the route of a TV show instead of an instant cash payment via a movie sequel.

 

[Bluce Ree]

If those numbers are correct then that's a pretty good return on investment, so that begs the question of why they didn't immediately make a sequel? Just thinking aloud I'd have to say that the TV show couldn't have been a contender because what studio is going to turn down a pay day of that size for just one movie?

*I'm not disputing your numbers here, I'm just wondering how a TV show, which is guaranteed lower take home pay, would have gotten precedence over a sequel. I'm scratching my head on this one.

TV show, merchandising, syndication

Right but I was just thinking how Hollywood is always impatient for the big bucks, hence my wondering why they didn't jump at the lump sum payment of a sequel. But then again, sequels generally only do a portion of the business that the originals do, or so I've heard. I don't know if that's the case anymore.

At any rate, it is interesting to ponder how that all came about. Remember, when SG-1 first aired it was on Showtime here, which is a cable channel that doesn't have advertising, i.e. commercials (I assume you have Showtime in Australia, so forgive me if that sounds patronizing. Just didn't want to assume anything). So initially all the money the show was bringing in was from cable subscribers of that channel. Again, that begs the question of why they chose to go the route of a TV show instead of an instant cash payment via a movie sequel.

Guaranteed revenue vs gambling on a sequel during an era of "sequels always suck". Even today, successful sequels are a rarity.