Stargate Universe - is good Sci-Fi now dead?

Or, a better topic should be 'another one bites the dust'.

I started watching SG-U when it first rolled out, and like most people was a little shocked at how different it was than the often campy but fun SG-1, or ridiculously bad Atlantis. SG-U was much darker, edgier, and seemed to take a lot of it's tone from the highly succesfull BSG. Unfortunatley, it also took some bad ideas from BSG in that before long the series degenerated away from good ideas and spent more time with main characters arguing and killing each other. At least BSG took a couple seasons to degenerate to all out bickering. So, I lost interest, which confirmed by it's rating drop also including a good portion of it's audience, ahem.

A friend of mine told me Season 2 was worth watching, so I finished up watching Season 1 on Netflix, and started into Season 2, and you know, he was right. Before long we were back to good stories centering on Sci-Fi related themes and ideas worthy of the premise. Actually, it got REALLY good with the characters coming together and some solid visuals worthy of good old space opera. Writers 1 / Audience 0.

But of course then SciFy channel killed it off along with Caprica, and the middle finger ScyFy gave in rebuttal to the fan base kinda says a lot of the current state of prime time programming. Basically it's a numbers game in terms of ratings, and while that's always been the case with networks it's critical more than ever to come out of the gates running. The real irony is NetFlix and recorders are as popular as ever and likely distorting Nielsen ratings more than ever. It's not just about SG-U, but any series you like that was well written but cancelled early. Wanna wait to watch it on Netflix or other? That just hastens it's demise.

I know this much, if I were a Hollywood writer I'd be a flaming alcoholic. The real moral to this is Science Fiction series are about Science / technological concepts and solving problems, and not characters arguing with each other and forming alliances. SG-U finally got this right after the second season started and did so admirably, but the first season problems were a fatal blow. If you gave up on it like I did the second season is very much worth seeing, and it looks amazing in HD. Might be awhile before we get another true Sci-Fi series.

I watched it through, and loved the second season. I had to download it weekly, as it wasn't airing in Australia at the time. What these people need to learn is that the TV rating system is flawed, and cannot give them the number of their true global audience.

In order for shows like SG:U to survive, I'd be perfectly happy for a sanctioned torrent release of the show, with ads if necessary.

TV companies are worse than the music industry in realising that the world is very much one place, and content can't be regionalised. They need to look at the big picture, and work in such a way that they can leverage a global audience, and continue to make good shows, rather then crap that rates well with the proletariat.

Not sure about you, but when Rush discovered what the Ancients were looking for and the true reason the Destiny was built it gave me chills. One of the most most original and bold concepts I've seen in Sci-fi in a long time. "There is a pattern..."

Eli was an awesome character and a big reason I got into it. The end of the final episode and the look on his face....well, just brilliant. There are so many Sci-fi books I read as a kid that tried so hard to convey the same image. Almost as good as when he brings his mom (via the communication stones) onto the bridge and her reaction. Very good stuff.

Thanks for the heads up. I actually never watched it based on some early not so great reviews. In addition, the honest truth is the last few years I've had a lot of trouble following any series. The way networks continually flip around the times and days of many series is a good reason why. My crazy schedule is a second reason.

Speaking of sci-fi series with great potential being killed way too early, anyone here remember Space:Above and Beyond? That show never had a chance because the time slot always followed football, and it always ended up starting late. While the premise of the show was standard sci-fi fare (war with aliens), it was really the storylines and acting which made the series. The writers were on a roll towards the end, but of course as with practically all shows I enjoy, the network killed it.

I agree with mvyrmnd that better shows need to be made. I think today's TV producers seriously underestimate their audience. Instead of the steady diet of garbage catering to the least common denominator, it would be nice to see shows made where those involved could look back and be really proud of what they did.

I recall Above and Beyond never getting a chance to develop. Shows today jump into high gear faster than those +10 years ago, so Above and Beyond never got a chance. 'Firefly' is perhaps the most notorious example of a show killed off too early, however, it wasn't exactly Sci-Fi....just a good time. I think you'd like and find SG-U, particularly the second season, stimulating and worth the time. Oh yeah.....they got it right with the O-sequence star. I'm certain a college astronomy instructor somewhere is smiling

.............

blasterman said:

Not sure about you, but when Rush discovered what the Ancients were looking for and the true reason the Destiny was built it gave me chills. One of the most most original and bold concepts I've seen in Sci-fi in a long time. "There is a pattern..."

Click to expand...

It's one of the best SciFi premises I've seen in a while. It's a shame it'll never get to be explored. I think the writers were just managing to hit their stride, and had come to realise that a good SciFi plot was far more valuable than people arguing on a space ship.

I look forward to seeing it each week

I never got into the whole Stargate thing - but any future Star Trek films are dead to me as long as they stay in the mode of the JJ Abrams disaster of '09... so I can empathize with your feelings, if not the specifics.

I keep praying Warner will pull their head out and give J. Michael Straczynski the money for a full-bore Babylon 5 feature film that might lead to a new TV series in that universe. Yes, I'm dreaming.

On the other hand - I loved TRON: Legacy, and there's supposed to be an animated prequel TV series coming; I have no idea how "kid friendly" it will be, but if they let it be reasonably adult it could be worth watching.

I'm not against Abram's Trek. The plot device used to reboot the series is valid enough. I'm just keeping an eye out for them adhering to canon for all pre 23rd century events.

I think it's necessary to make the distinction between TV and Movie Sci-Fi. I haven't been inspired by anything on TV in quite awhile. We are fed glossy but kinda' dumb TV reboots like V, for example. On the other hand there have been some remarkable stand-outs in major motion picture Sci-Fi in the last several years along with plenty of lousy stuff too. Star Trek was indeed a huge disappointment, at least for me.

Two come right away to mind for sheer originality, intelligence and execution, District 9 which got first time director Neill Blomkamp a nomination for Academy Award Best Picture and Moon, directed by Duncan Jones (David Bowie's kid).

District 9 starts out like a light comedy with the role of bumbling petty bureaucrat Wikus van de Merwe played by first time (and essentially untrained) actor Sharlto Copley in a remarkable performance that reminded me a lot of a young Peter Sellers, then evolves into an intense drama and finally explodes into one of the most exciting and astonishing action films I've seen in years. The film explores a variety of unique and thought provoking social themes such as the poorest black shanty town residents finding themselves in the unique and unfamiliar role as xenophobic bigots. Some aspects of this story were drawn from the real world events of Cape Town South Africa's District 6 which is best known for the forced removal of over 60,000 of its inhabitants during the 1970s by the apartheid regime. The film features stunningly well done production design, (Peter Jackson was the producer) highly realistic special effects and aliens, the likes of which we haven't seen before, along with very creative story telling through the use of hi rez hand held cinema verite techniques using the RED ONE digital camera platform, CCTV captures, newscasts and interviews. The best Sci-Fi film I've seen in ages and one that had a freshness like nothing I've seen before.

Then I saw Moon on Blu-ray. Another totally unique, well executed and highly creative film with Sam Rockwell in the starring role and Kevin Spacey voicing the "Hal-esque" robot. This film makes many direct and conscious references to sci-fi films of the 60's, 70's and eighties and uses a minimum amount of CGI and a maximum amount of old school model making and table top photography giving the piece a unique look and feel reminiscent of these older films but thoroughly up to date at the same time. Again, here is another thought provoking film that is highly entertaining while raising fascinating ethical issues which is what the best science fiction usually has a way of doing. The film totally defies expectations in clever ways and has a wonderfully evocative, haunting soundtrack by Clint Mansell that really adds to the film. One of the most remarkable things about this film is that it was produced on a budget of 5 million dollars but has the look and feel of a movie costing at least ten times as much.

If you like good Sci-Fi and haven't seen either of these you are really missing out on something. They make me believe good sci-fi is alive and well, only a bit few and far between.

I understand a film version of William Gibson's Neuromancer is in the works. I just hope they don't bleep it up.

Moon Trailer

District 9 Trailer

I haven't seen Moon yet, but I agree 100% about District 9. I was blown away by that film. I loved the main character's transformation from a spineless, wimpy bureaucrat into a hero at the same time as his body is making a physical transformation of its own. In addition, there's social commentary all over the place but it's never in your face. I particular liked the aliens. It was refreshing to see an alien which doesn't have a form factor which is amenable to being playing by a human in a costume. The aliens HAD to be done in CGI, but it was totally seamless. Christopher Johnson had as much depth as any of the human characters. The "semi-documentary" format of the film further enhanced its originality. To top it all off, the main characters all seemed "real", each complete with their own set of entirely believeable vices. I only wished I had caught it while it was still in the theaters.

I haven't been inspired by anything on TV in quite awhile

Click to expand...

Normally I'd agre with you, but having seen everything in this thread I can clearly state SG-U was a marvelous exception to this. Certainly quantum orders of magnitude more stimulating than 'made for happy meal crap like 'Avatard'. Also, see what Wallstreet has to say about theatrical 3D technology and why indeed it was just a fad after all. Oddly one reason SG-U was left with a cliff hanger was a movie was in the works, but the producer/writer backed out.

JJ 'Lens Flare' Abrams is a better marketeer than director, but he did channel Spielberg pretty effectively in 'Super 8'. I had a lot of hope for his Trek film, but like others here found it dissapointing and the second half spent more time making fun of the original characters than being innovative. In any respect, the Trek franchise stopped being true Science Fiction long ago, although Patrick Stewart tries.

'District 9' was awesome for a couple reasons. First, the screenplay and story was exceptional. Next, it was my first experience in a DLP theater where the film was shot with a RED cine digital camera and the theater experience was immaculate.

I also have fond thoughts for 'Tron: Legacy' and was dissapointed the eye candy got all the attention and not the real ideas presented. There was more to this film than a liquid acrylic and leather fetish. The pursuit of pefection, corporeal or otherwise, is itself an imperfect goal...uh, man.

Mixed thoughts on a 'Neuromancer' film. The material is a bit dated and cyberpunk kind of died with the Matrix films, but a solid director and screenplay might produce.

I was so happy when SGU got cancelled. It was a neurotic soap opera in space pretending to be Sci-Fi. Whenever threads of quality Sci-Fi themes appeared (such as Rush discovering what the Ancients were looking for), they were quickly extinguished with irrelevant teleport stones drama themes that remained superficial and went nowhere. There was never enough episode time to properly develop both the home relationships and the Destiny adventures, and cramming both into a single episode was insane and alienated their audience.

Last good tv show that figured out a complex character development which did not detract from the Sci-Fi theme was BSG. The SGU writers blew their chance of holding the audience early on. They didn't listen to the fans, and now the series is gone. Good riddance. The writers/producers made a parting shot at the fans who rejected them, saying now there will be no more SG or SG movies. It is a price worth paying.

As EZO said, sci-fi movies are completely different from serial TV shows. District 9 was awsome. Moon was great and well worth watching on BR, but not at the same level as D-9.

Avatar's box office sales speaks for itself despite the irrelevant critics. The sequel will also smash all other blockbuster records. I love how its success drives that small number of critics crazy--and they just can't stop from trying to discredit it.

Separate from movie theater box office returns, 3D TV sales are doing quite well, thanks to the boost from Avatar which has not been generally released in 3D (temporary exclusive Panasonic deal). Unlike Avatar, most movies using 3D don't know how to use it, and customers discriminate good from bad before paying the 3D premium price.

From the earlier link:

Michael Lewis, CEO RealD, asked to "not read too much into the results of a couple of movies." However, Rich Gelfond, IMAX counterpart, is realistic. He admits that the 3D created great enthusiasm when it came to the public. From now on, their success at the box office will be limited to movies that are good. "Some films in a format will work, other films not." And in that case, the films shot in 3D really have more choices to demonstrate that work that the stereoscopic swollen after filming (as Alice in Wonderland or Clash of the Titans). Lewis said in a conference that the studios are learning how to best use this technology to produce films. "It s a relatively new medium, which is in its infancy." He also recalled that the 3D version of Megamind and Tron: legacy hearings last fall had more than 65%.

Click to expand...

Eventually studios and producers will figure out that only a select number of films are enhanced by 3D, and they will learn how to use it properly. In the meantime, there will be industry casualties who overuse it trying to ride Avatar's coattails.

I have enjoyed SG:U and am disappointed to find out it is cancelled.

The thing I think many of these dramas suffer from is over-stretching, after all, all good things must come to an end. The plots often get drawn out to try and squeeze one more season out of it. If they could just get on with it and bring the story to an end BEFORE the series gets cancelled it would make it much better for the viewers who are always starting new series only to have them taken away, just like borrowing a book form the library and finding the last few pages have been ripped out.

..............

When SGU started I didn't like it very much as the characters were very annoying and the "soap opera" drama was getting old FAST. However, after I found out that it was cancelled, the episodes seemed to get better as more interesting sci-fi themes took over instead of stupid bickering that the producers and writers tried to copy off of BSG (although BSG did interpersonal conflict the right way). I found the episode where they tried to first negotiate and then take by force the planet that could dial the gate on the ship pretty good, and I thought that the whole civilization that was started by the characters in the past was an interesting idea (I'm not sure if this idea has been done before in another series). As I realized that Stargate Universe was really the only science fiction show left on TV I started to like it more, but not as much as Atlantis or the earlier-mid seasons of SG1 (which got really stale at the end).
Of course TNG is better than all of these shows on just about every level except for effects, which is understandable.

I thought that the 3D use in Avatar "made" the movie. As someone who plays a lot of video games with similar effects (like depth of field, particle and smoke effects, etc.), seeing the difference that binocular vision made with them was quite amazing. I remember how much better the tracers frome the air vehicles looked in 3D as well as the particle effects (mostly stuff hanging in the air like dust). The 3D displays that the characters in Avatar used looked much better in 3D (obviously). From time to time I watch Avatar for a few minutes when it is on channels like HBO in HD (but not in 3D as I don't have a 3D TV) and the effects are basically lost; to me they are just like any other computer renderings and lose any uniqueness without the 3D. Since Avatar's plot is basically just a vehicle for special effects in 3D, watching the movie like this on TV is pretty useless for me.

LuxLuthor said:

As EZO said, sci-fi movies are completely different from serial TV shows. District 9 was awsome. Moon was great and well worth watching on BR, but not at the same level as D-9.

Click to expand...

Both films are outstanding but I entirely agree with your comment here. It's hard to really compare the two. Keep in mind that District 9 was Neill Blomkamp's very first feature film. I just can't wait to see what his next effort will be like.

Of course, that's what people said about Duncan Jones' Moon after its debut and his next film was Source Code. I haven't seen it yet but it's certainly been very well received.

Ultimately, it comes down to the director and when we have directors like Blomkamp and Jones who are interested in making intelligent films with substance rather than commercial popcorn fluff we can expect to get some great Sci-Fi. The same can also be said of Christopher Nolan. How many lame Batman movies did we have to suffer through until we got Batman Begins or The Dark Knight? Inception wasn't too bad either in regards to being something new and refreshing that we haven't seen before.

I have never said that the source of Avatar's magic was the plot. It was a predictable plot, with average acting, and what you should have expected from Cameron's limited background. What made it such a breakthrough movie was the total immersive experience in 3D. It re-launched 3D which had been a failed fad 40-50 years ago. It was literally the first movie that used 3D as a powerful cinematic element, evoking audience immersion normally accomplished only by outstanding writing, directing, and acting. It should have never been shown in 2D theaters, although the colors & details were still unique and remarkable to see...similar to the breakthrough effect of the video game Far Cry when it first came out. It is ignorant to think that 3D is gone after Avatar's monumental success, and current TV sales. Same with BR technology that early critics (myself included) said would not last with digital streaming downloads.

The best Sci-Fi movie for me personally is Blade Runner on BluRay, followed by the first Matrix. Absolutely true about Nolan.

I watched SGU as my first regularly viewed 'gate series and I liked it a lot- makes me thing that others may have been burned out on the Stargate idea before SGU started, or that it was too different from the other versions to bear the name. Whatever the reason, I don't see why it was so disliked- I thought it was rather better than most scifi shows and I would have stuck with it for a long time. I mean they had good writing and a stellar cast and even hired a real geek as a leading actor and all.