TV/Movies Megathread

[The Brain]

They could have just renamed it Dominance Warfighting Gate.

[crazy canuck]

Its audience was large, so I'm not sure why there was a need to increase the audience to make this viable show.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Its audience was large, so I'm not sure why there was a need to increase the audience to make this viable show.

Line must go up

[crazy canuck]

Its audience was large, so I'm not sure why there was a need to increase the audience to make this viable show.

Line must go up

They have so many crappy shows. Why wouldn't they go with a good one?

[celedhring]

Stargate was a very successful niche show, but it was niche. That said, it's not like Amazon Prime TV is a ratings juggernaut. If it attracted the same audience it did in the 2000s, it would be one of their top shows. They have dumped inordinate amounts of money in far worse bets.

But it's not like Amazon seems to know what they are doing. They seem to have dozens of projects that don't go anywhere.

[Sheilbh]

Amazon's series output is very very weird.

[HVC]

Amazon's series output is very very weird.

At the very least they have a knack for taking established IP and turning their fans against it*. Might be a small blessing with SG.

*The expanse and fallout being pleasant exceptions. Although the first three seasons of the expanse were better, but Amazon didn't trash it or anything.

[viper37]

The inside track I'm getting (third-hand, mind) is that the project lost its internal champions during a recent executive turnover.

That's the word on  Reddit coming from more official sources.

Joseph Mallozi also said the show was designed to have a more broader appeal while still serving as a continuation to what was done previously.

[viper37]

Amazon's series output is very very weird.

At the very least they have a knack for taking established IP and turning their fans against it*. Might be a small blessing with SG.

*The expanse and fallout being pleasant exceptions. Although the first three seasons of the expanse were better, but Amazon didn't trash it or anything.

The first 2 were written and aired outside of Amazon.
The 3rd was outlined by the time Amazon picked it out, with final writing being done once Amazon picked it up.

[viper37]

Stargate was a very successful niche show, but it was niche. That said, it's not like Amazon Prime TV is a ratings juggernaut. If it attracted the same audience it did in the 2000s, it would be one of their top shows. They have dumped inordinate amounts of money in far worse bets.

But it's not like Amazon seems to know what they are doing. They seem to have dozens of projects that don't go anywhere.

Anything not SW or ST in sci-fi is pretty niche, come to think of it?  Not that many people have seen the Expanse or Fallout compared to Star Trek or the Mandalorian.

Even BSG, outside of sci-fi fan, it's not that widely known, and there are still people discovering it today.

[HVC]

Yeah, sorry, that's what I was trying to say. They didn't ruin it after they got it.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

The inside track I'm getting (third-hand, mind) is that the project lost its internal champions during a recent executive turnover.

That's the word on  Reddit coming from more official sources.

Joseph Mallozi also said the show was designed to have a more broader appeal while still serving as a continuation to what was done previously.

Not everything needs to have a broader appeal. Make the appeal too broad and it becomes unappealing to even the original fanbase because what made it interesting is removed by committee in order not to rock the boat.

[celedhring]

Stargate was a very successful niche show, but it was niche. That said, it's not like Amazon Prime TV is a ratings juggernaut. If it attracted the same audience it did in the 2000s, it would be one of their top shows. They have dumped inordinate amounts of money in far worse bets.

But it's not like Amazon seems to know what they are doing. They seem to have dozens of projects that don't go anywhere.

Anything not SW or ST in sci-fi is pretty niche, come to think of it?  Not that many people have seen the Expanse or Fallout compared to Star Trek or the Mandalorian.

Even BSG, outside of sci-fi fan, it's not that widely known, and there are still people discovering it today.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if SG was the most successful sci-fi show of the 2000s not part of Star Trek, ratings-wise. And that would still be niche.

Sci-fi television hasn't had the "Game of thrones" moment that brought fantasy TV to the mainstream. The first Star Wars Disney shows did good numbers I guess?

[viper37]

The inside track I'm getting (third-hand, mind) is that the project lost its internal champions during a recent executive turnover.

That's the word on  Reddit coming from more official sources.

Joseph Mallozi also said the show was designed to have a more broader appeal while still serving as a continuation to what was done previously.

Not everything needs to have a broader appeal. Make the appeal too broad and it becomes unappealing to even the original fanbase because what made it interesting is removed by committee in order not to rock the boat.

Exactly, The Mandalorian has become a little too cartoony by seeking broad appeal as it evolves.

[crazy canuck]

Speaking of the Mandalorian, I see Disney executives are thinking that the low turn out to the movie is due to them releasing too movies or too short period of time.

Part of the explanation might just be that people object to who owns Disney and don't wanna give that corporation any more money.