Who's responsible for the end of Stargate?

[Mr. A]

You sort of cancel out your own point here by admitting that other avenues of viewing shows affects all shows, not just SGU, so it's something of a moot point really. I don't see how SGU was affected more by downloading, etc. than other shows so I don't see how this can really be used to "blame" anyone.

It isn't moot. My point was that by making it harder for any scripted show to succeed with the current system, a franchise which we enjoy but which is only marginal popular with the general population will suffer when it wouldn't have been the case otherwise.
Your argument is like saying that if a teacher lowers the grades of every student by one point, nothing changes. But students which were passing with a "D" now get an "F" and fail. Maybe the sci-fi franchises we love happen to be the "D" students.

I don't see how one can be blamed for not watching a show. If you do please edify me. The onus is on the producers to produce a show that will interest viewers. I don't see how anyone can be blamed for not liking a show even if they watched previous incarnations of the concept. That's like blaming me for not liking "Top Design" when I have liked "Top Chef" in the past. They are essentially the same formula (which SGU wasn't, comparatively, btw) but I didn't care for "Top Design". So how is it that I have to share even one iota of the blame for the lower ratings of "Top Design"? That doesn't make sense.

Here's another bad analogy to ponder: I love tomato sauce but I loathe tomato juice. Am I to be blamed (no matter how small that percentage of blame is) for the lower sales of tomato juice because I don't like it?

You're assuming every SG1 and SGA fan who refused to watch SGU did it because they didn't like SGU, but that's not what I said. I wasn't talking about the millions of people who don't like SGU. I am talking about people who would have otherwise watched SGU but were pissed off by the cancellation of their shows and by the attitudes of the producers. I know a few SG fans who never even watched ONE episode of SGU (or at least they claim so).

 

[Graybrew1]

No, not at all. TBTB wanted the critical acclaim that BSG got to stroke their ego's, they assumed that the old audience would watch SGU simply because it had Stargate in the title referencing the fans. The fanship is a living entity that responds to stimuli either negatively or positively which is reflected in viewership or ratings. The palatte referrs to tbtp artistic freedom or skill that they inject into the product or series. There over inflated ego's was given full reign knowning that they could jeopardized several million in viewers doesn't seem to have fiqured into their equation of success until it was too late.

Okay, Wow. Please do not take this as an insult. I really do not mean it as one. But that almost feels like your overthinking the issue.

I really think Shaved is right. It is much more simple. They made a show, people did not like, and did not watch.

Everything you said makes sense, but as you said yourself..... If the show had been oustanding , nothing else would have mattered. People would have watched it and it would have been a hit.. IMHO , they rushed it, maybe because of alot of the more detailed reasons and politics behind the scenes, but it felt half ready.

But that is just my opinion.

 

[Mr. A]

What about the internet?
One could make the argument that sites like GateWorld share the blame for the end of the Stargate franchise: by silencing and ridiculing criticism by the fans even before SGU started, they gave the producers, Syfy and MGM the false impression that everything was OK, thus removing any motivation they might have had otherwise to reconsider changing completely the course of the franchise like they did with SGU.
Likewise, as this censorship and skewing of opinion by the largest Stargate fansite went on into season 1 of the show, Syfy was discouraged to demand changes from MGM, while the writers retained a false sense of confidence that they were on the right track and the ratings would inevitably follow shortly. If they had gotten the rude wake up call from the fans GW and other sites suppressed, season 2 of SGU might have started out with a much different tone and perhaps saved SGU and the franchise.

 

[Graybrew1]

What about the internet?
One could make the argument that sites like GateWorld share the blame for the end of the Stargate franchise: by silencing and ridiculing criticism by the fans even before SGU started, they gave the producers, Syfy and MGM the false impression that everything was OK, thus removing any motivation they might have had otherwise to reconsider changing completely the course of the franchise like they did with SGU.
Likewise, as this censorship and skewing of opinion by the largest Stargate fansite went on into season 1 of the show, Syfy was discouraged to demand changes from MGM, while the writers retained a false sense of confidence that they were on the right track and the ratings would inevitably follow shortly. If they had gotten the rude wake up call from the fans GW and other sites suppressed, season 2 of SGU might have started out with a much different tone and perhaps saved SGU and the franchise.

Anytime I ever tried to suggest this in the past. I pretty much got my head cut off. By the likes of Cimmer, Bandit and Co. I was told repeatedly that the fans on the internet are too small of a specimen to matter at all. I have no confirmation of this , perhaps Briangate might?

 

[shavedape]

It isn't moot. My point was that by making it harder for any scripted show to succeed with the current system, a franchise which we enjoy but which is only marginal popular with the general population will suffer when it wouldn't have been the case otherwise.
Your argument is like saying that if a teacher lowers the grades of every student by one point, nothing changes. But students which were passing with a "D" now get an "F" and fail. Maybe the sci-fi franchises we love happen to be the "D" students.

I'm not quite understanding your point. You referenced the current ratings system verses the new forms of viewing media such as downloading. My response was to say that if the new viewing systems are to blame (even a little bit) then that impunes every show that viewers watch via differing media -- which would be virtually every show in existence (essentially), hence every show would suffer ratings-wise. I still don't see how you can single out one show or even one genre, marginal or not. They're all affected by downloading.

Believe me, plenty of people watch DWTS via download yet are their ratings counted? In fact, just guessing off the top of my head, I'd posit that more mainstream shows are downloaded than are marginal genre shows. So why does SyFy/SGU get to use the blame defense for being hurt by downloading while other shows do not?

You're assuming every SG1 and SGA fan who refused to watch SGU did it because they didn't like SGU, but that's not what I said. I wasn't talking about the millions of people who don't like SGU. I am talking about people who would have otherwise watched SGU but were pissed off by the cancellation of their shows and by the attitudes of the producers. I know a few SG fans who never even watched ONE episode of SGU (or at least they claim so).

Yes, but does that burden those fans with blame is the question? Are disgruntled SGA fans to blame for the demise of SGU because they refused to watch it? And this leads us right back to the question of expected viewership. Regardless of one's reasons for not watching a show how does that infer blame on their part? One can't be obligated to watch a TV show. Just because BW expected SG-1/SGA fans to view SGU that doesn't automatically transfer responsibility for ratings onto Stargate fans. Obligations don't work that way, hence blame cannot be given to an innocent party. It's that simple.

And if it sounds like I put words in your mouth I apologize Mr. A. I'm merely trying to discuss the primary issue of blame in this thread.

 

[Mr. A]

Anytime I ever tried to suggest this in the past. I pretty much got my head cut off. By the likes of Cimmer, Bandit and Co. I was told repeatedly that the fans on the internet are too small of a specimen to matter at all. I have no confirmation of this , perhaps Briangate might?

Are you sure? I think the argument they've been making is that the number of people who participate in online forums is too small to make any difference in the viewership ratings for any show, and that would be true.
What isn't true is that our opinions don't matter and don't influence decisions. If the producers of SG weren't doing focus groups (and they weren't!), then where else would they go to read what fans are thinking about their show? GW and Syfy.com would be those places. Or where did BW all of a sudden get the idea that it was "SGA fans" who were keeping his show from being successful and other such nonsenses?

 

[Graybrew1]

Are you sure? I think the argument they've been making is that the number of people who participate in online forums is too small to make any difference in the viewership ratings for any show, and that would be true.
What isn't true is that our opinions don't matter and don't influence decisions. If the producers of SG weren't doing focus groups (and they weren't!), then where else would they go to read what fans are thinking about their show? GW and Syfy.com would be those places. Or where did BW all of a sudden get the idea that it was "SGA fans" who were keeping his show from being successful and other such nonsenses?

Yes, Okay. That is not what I thought you meant. What you are now saying is something I agree with.

 

[Lilith]

Okay, Wow. Please do not take this as an insult. I really do not mean it as one. But that almost feels like your overthinking the issue.

I really think Shaved is right. It is much more simple. They made a show, people did not like, and did not watch.

Everything you said makes sense, but as you said yourself..... If the show had been oustanding , nothing else would have mattered. People would have watched it and it would have been a hit.. IMHO , they rushed it, maybe because of alot of the more detailed reasons and politics behind the scenes, but it felt half ready.

But that is just my opinion.

I've had alot of time with these guys since almost the beginning of sGU's run. Every scenerio done to death. You are correct they made a show, people didn't not like it and didn't watch. They probably felt like they had to rush it to get the ratings up once they were called on the carpet. Once they realized that it was too late to change the outcome since production was almost complete and MGM wouldn't give a failing show more money to reshoot everything thus the plea to old fans. The section on Burnt Bridges comes to mind.

 

[Graybrew1]

I've had alot of time with these guys since almost the beginning of sGU's run. Every scenerio done to death. You are correct they made a show, people didn't not like it and didn't watch. They probably felt like they had to rush it to get the ratings up once they were called on the carpet. Once they realized that it was too late to change the outcome since production was almost complete and MGM wouldn't give a failing show more money to reshoot everything thus the plea to old fans. The section on Burnt Bridges comes to mind.

Indeed and Agreed.

 

[Tropicana]

Are you sure? I think the argument they've been making is that the number of people who participate in online forums is too small to make any difference in the viewership ratings for any show, and that would be true.
What isn't true is that our opinions don't matter and don't influence decisions. If the producers of SG weren't doing focus groups (and they weren't!), then where else would they go to read what fans are thinking about their show? GW and Syfy.com would be those places. Or where did BW all of a sudden get the idea that it was "SGA fans" who were keeping his show from being successful and other such nonsenses?

If they claim views and opinions from angry SG-1/SGA fans don't matter cos we are insignificant, then we shouldn't be a threat and yet clearly we were. They didn't like that we were up in their asses, so they have tried numerous times to get rid of us, treating us like we don't know anything and yet our views were correct, our predicted end result came true, the ratings trend sided with us and our hypothesis. It only reconfirmed how out of touch they are with reality, when they didn't know how to read the warning signs. Instead of listening to concerns, they decided to pass all the blame onto us; and what has happened? The ratings only continue to fall further.

 

[Lilith]

Indeed and Agreed.

Enjoy your evening, take the phone off the hook, lock the door and just enjoy your Stargate this evening. I remember when I looked forward to Friday nights with Stargate. God I'm getting old.

 

[Graybrew1]

Enjoy your evening, take the phone off the hook, lock the door and just enjoy your Stargate this evening. I remember when I looked forward to Friday nights with Stargate. God I'm getting old.

I actually agreed to do the review. So , I will be watching the ep repeatedly. I promise to try to be bias. But we will have to see, how much they do or do not deliver again.

 

[Lilith]

If they claim views and opinions from angry SG-1/SGA fans don't matter cos we are insignificant, then we shouldn't be a threat and yet clearly we were. They didn't like that we were up their asses, so they have tried numerous times to get rid of us, treating us like we don't know anything and yet our views were correct, our predicted end result came true, the ratings trend sided with us and our hypothesis. It only reconfirmed how out of touch they are with reality, when they didn't know how to read the warning signs. Instead of listening to concerns, they decided to pass all the blame onto us; and what has happened? The ratings only continue to fall further.

Maybe they were delusional because they didn't have any experience with failure. Let's face it we gave them a pretty good run. Perhaps they were like the compulsive gambler who always sees the up side of another bet. That victory that is just out of reach and it could just be next week when it all starts to come up roses. We think they should have seen it coming but we fed the monster for 15 years. I'm sure it never occurred to them that they could fail until .... wasn't it November 2010 when Brad begged us to watch. That was just six weeks before the cancelation. A little to late to do anything about it. I'm just as guilty of blaming his ego as anyone but I'm not so sure he saw it coming even though he was front and center the whole time.

 

[Lilith]

I actually agreed to do the review. So , I will be watching the ep repeatedly. I promise to try to be bias. But we will have to see, how much they do or do not deliver again.

I'll look forward to your review and I'm sure you will do an wonderful job. It will probably be pretty good since they were hoping to get renewed. The last one is always the hook both for the audience and network since contract renewal would be coming up. Everyone was up for renewal since they only had a 2 year agreement.

 

[heisenberg]

Can anyone find where brad wright says SGA fans represent but a few minority of the fanbase?

 

[heisenberg]

Mr. A why did you say illegal downloaders

 

[Tropicana]

Can anyone find where brad wright says SGA fans represent but a few minority of the fanbase?

Your wish is my command!

http://josephmallozzi.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/january-2-2009-brad-wright-answers-your-questions/

“Were you surprised by the reaction of fans to the announcement of the cancellation of SGA and the start-up of SGU?”
BW: No. You guys are actually pretty predictable (take no offense, most fan groups are). Unfortunately, you represent a very small portion of the actual viewing audience we need for financial success.

 

[Illiterati]

I cannot get past the idea that it was TPTB with not necessarily knowledgeable collaboration with MGM and SyFy.

I truly believe that TPTB had attempted to get a completely non-Stargate show greenlighted, and that they were told NO. Then, knowing that they had streetcred with the Stargate shows, they tacked on a couple Stargate related things and resubmitted the idea, at which point, MGM and SyFy said "YES!" because it was Stargate, and neither understands what the Real People (TM) out there are like, and what they will and will not like.

Imagine the show as a redo of Lost In Space, but with some different elements. Instead of a loving family stuck in space because someone (a doctor, just like our beloved Dr Smith) sent them there, you have people who hardly knew one another. The character who HAD a familiar face with her lost him in the first episode, so she doesn't have that connection to another person. This breeds suspicion, etc., especially when you're trapped in a mysterious ship with about a third the number of fluorescent bulbs needed to light it (or the equivalent thereof of Mysterious Alien Technology In A Show Without Aliens).

As far as I'm concerned, it's Lost In Space without it being a family, having The Robot, being humorous or having much of anything to help it connect with the viewer.

That said, I'm now picturing the cast photo of SGU with Dr Zachary Smith (Jonathan Harris) and The Robot included.

...sigh...

 

[Lilith]

He also referenced that we were predictable and only represented a small portion that they need for success or something like that. Man it's been awhile, I'll help you look after DWTS. Try the Brad Wright thread.

 

[Stonelesscutter]

Enjoy your evening, take the phone off the hook, lock the door and just enjoy your Stargate this evening. I remember when I looked forward to Friday nights with Stargate. God I'm getting old.

We have a special thread, just for you.
http://www.gatefans.net/forums/showthread.php/1979-You-know-you-are-mature...?highlight=mature