What Stargate's "Demise" Can Teach Us About Life (and Storytelling)

If you know me, you know I am a big fan of Stargate Universe. This is obvious if you follow my tweets (I'm @whisperingloon on Twitter) or if you listen to my podcast (The Fanboy Tollbooth), especially the most recent episode and it's "The Adventures of Ben and Lou, Lou Bitterman" segments, which features a sci-fi fanboy dealing with Lost withdrawal and finding comfort in a Lost replacement show: Stargate Universe.

Spoiler alert for "Ben and Lou": Stargate Universe was canceled.

Which is what this blog post is about. No, not Lou. Stargate Universe. And the universe of Stargate.

Here's the deal, for those who are unfamiliar with Stargate. I'm going to avoid arcane details for people who could care less about the Stargate franchise, because this blog post is both about Stargate (which is really only for geeks -- which I am) and the art of storytelling and how it relates to life (which is really only for humans -- which I am as well).

But you do need some background. There have been three Stargate series (although I count them as four because I'm a geek). Series 1 is Stargate SG-1, which ran for 10 seasons. To me, the last two seasons were a new series because it featured two new cast members in lead positions and had a completely different story arc going. Meanwhile, during the last few seasons of Stargate SG-1, Stargate: Atlantis was also on the air. It ran for five seasons. Finally, after an abrupt cancelation of Stargate: Atlantis, a third Stargate series, Stargate: Universe, was launched.

So what happened? Well, much has been written about how Stargate died and how it didn't pull in the numbers and all of that, and how science fiction fans are not watching television live, when advertising matters, but instead are watching online or recording it to watch later, when they can skip advertising. Much more will be written about the issue in more general terms, because while science fiction is ahead of the curve in these matters, all of Hollywood, from movie makers to television creators, are trying to figure this out. And they are a lot smarter than me, so I'm not going to figure this out.

Okay, they're a lot richer than me anyway.

No, I'm looking at this with an eye toward storytelling and connecting with your audience. Again, without getting into the arcane details, here's what happened with the different Stargate series:

 Almost the entire "main" cast from the ten seasons of Stagate

Stargate: SG-1 always seemed to be ready to be canceled, to me anyway. So the show was very episodic, with self-contained stories, but as they went they started doing some longer story arcs that resolved themselves at the end of the season, when they thought they'd be canceled. Now, I don't know if that is true, because I only started really watching Stargate last summer. This is just my impression. But a number of seasons have season finales that would have made for very satisfying series finales. Toward the end of the series, though, the season finales started becoming big cliffhangers. Like "how will the universe survive?" type cliffhangers. And after one of those cliffhangers, at the end of season 10, Stargate: SG-1 was canceled. But no fear, the storyline was resolved in a very well made direct-to-DVD movie. And then, to top it off, they made a second direct-to-DVD film, a stand alone movie that gave a satisfying send off to some of the characters. Another direct-to-DVD movie was planned . . . more on that a few paragraphs in the future.

Love this image of the Stargate: Atlantis cast. Can you tell that Atlantis had something to do with water?

Stargate: Atlantis is much more cut and dry. Every season ended on a cliffhanger, and they were told that Stargate: Atlantis was going to be canceled and they had just enough time to make their final episode serve as both a sort of conclusion to the show and a sort of cliffhanger. And the cliffhanger was going to be resolved in a direct-to-DVD movie . . . more on that a few paragraphs down.

 Stargate: Universe's Lost-like ensemble cast

Stargate: Universe was even MORE cut and dry. Less space opera fantasy and more Lost-like or Battlestar Galactica-like, it was a continuing story that was meant to be more gritty and more "real". Very few episodes were just stand alone episodes. Instead, you had to watch every episode to make sense of what was going on. Ratings got lower and lower . . . and then, after season 2 was in full swing and had pretty much been set in stone, Stargate: Universe was canceled. The finale airs next Tuesday, and it is supposed to end on a cliffhanger. (I've heard someone say that it would either serve as an exciting cliffhanger or a bittersweet finale, or something similar. we'll find out next week.)

Of course.

So the suggestion of a direct-to-DVD or direct-to-digital download has been floated around. Something that would give some closure to the novel-like storytelling used for Stargate: Universe. But it was just announced that MGM has officially stated it will not happen, and now sets are being struck and offices cleared out.

This means that the Stargate: SG-1 movie, which was supposed to be an incredible adventure to send off the main character of Stargate (Richard Dean Anderson's character O'Neil -- can't remember if it's one "L" or two -- who wasn't in the first DVD movie and was a minor character in the second) is dead. This means that the Stargate: Atlantis movie, which was supposed to wrap up any dangling plot threads (and there were a few) is dead. This means the Stargate: Universe movie which would have completed the planned plot (three seasons worth!) is dead.

It also means no resolution for the Saturday morning Stargate show, something no one cares about anyway (although I strangely want to see it because of the intense negativity toward it)

This makes me sad. For two reasons. One, I like the story and the characters! A lot! Two, I've had comic series canceled on ME before, before I had a chance to finish the story I wanted to tell, and that hurts! It happened with ArmorQuest (although I've had a chance to revisit that, and more AQ stories in in process as we speak) and it happened on Lullaby and The Imaginaries. Like the Stargate: Universe people, I dream of a chance to make the comic book version of a direct-to-DVD movie . . . perhaps just 48 pages to complete Alice and her fellowship's quest in Lullaby or 48 pages to complete Tanner and Greatman's mission. So far as I know, that chance will never come.

But on the flip side, ending the Stargate franchise like this is, in a way, satisfying to me. The more I thought about it, the more "real" this felt. And not in the way that Stargate: Universe was supposed to be more "real" because it was all gritty.

 Stargate: Universe also boasted some of the best and most beautiful TV sci-fi visual effects

I understand that a satisfaction comes from a completed story. There is something in human nature that wants an ending for a story, and especially wants a satisfying ending to a story. I do not know exactly why this is. I have some ideas, mostly philosophical (in the loosest sense of the word) and religious, and maybe just a little bit psychological . . . but only accidentally. As humans, we want to see justice. We want to see people we care about (and characters we care about) prevail. We want to see people face challenges and overcome them. We want to be encouraged that there is a happy ending to all this strife. (Because, as I believe, there IS in truth a happy ending to all this strife.) This is when we are watching the news, watching our friends, and watching our stories.

So, for Stargate fans, when they watched the characters they grew to love on Stargate: SG-1, they were glad to see the heroes beat the bad guys and overcome their personal issues.

And when they watched the characters they grew to love on Stargate: Atlantis, they were sort of glad to see some conclusion to the problems those characters faced, even if there were some lingering issues.

And when they watch the characters they grew to love on Stargate: Universe (admittedly, fewer Stargate fans seemed to love these character, partly because they were harder to love since they weren't as heroic or perfect) they aren't going to get a chance to see them overcome their main conflicts. (Although, in reference to the last parenthetical, there were a LOT more conflicts and the characters have had to make greater strides to overcome their problems and some problems were, indeed, overcome.)

 No more new journeys through the gate to explore strange new worlds and seek out new . . . sorry

But here's what I like about the Stargate franchise going out like this: it's a lot like watching the people in our lives. Life doesn't wrap up a character arc in a nice bow and then roll credits. No, we overcome a problem and then face another or perhaps the other problem comes back to bite us. And so things that I have seen people complain about in Stargate: Universe, and things that bugged me, don't anymore. For example, in Stargate: Universe, characters from the other two series have shown up. And they've shown up in ways that are a little vague. One character was promoted to command a starship. Another character has become the "big boss", having been promoted to general. Another character, who used to be a "suit" (in SG-1) and was made into an "officer" (of sorts, in Atlantis) showed up as a "suit" again in Universe. How? Why? They never said. Meanwhile, another character shows up and very little seems to have changed. And in the meantime, the crew who make up the main cast of Stargate: Universe? Their story is either going to have a bittersweet ending or just be forever a cliffhanger.

In other words, here's what we can take away from Stargate: Universe:

Life goes on. No, I don't mean that in the William Shatner telling Trekkies to "get a life" sense. And I don't mean "you show was canceled, but don't worry, life goes on".

I mean that "life goes on" has become the THEME of the entire franchise.

People grow.

Challenges come and go. And come. And go. And . . .

There's only one set of end credits.

Now, for some these kind of statements may strike a negative chord. For others, it's a positive one. And for others, it's bittersweet. But this is the theme of the franchise, and like any theme of any story, what the audience does with it is up to the individuals of the audience.

Am I reading too much into a science fiction fantasy? Perhaps. Is this what the creators intended people to think about? I doubt it.

But this IS what science fiction is for, isn't it? To make us think about our world and our place in it? Come to think of it, that's what all storytelling is about.

This is a situation where the theme is unintentional, I think. But, like any story, the theme must be grappled with (or ignored) by the receiver of the story. And I think that too often, storytellers forget that the themes of their stories do connect with the readers or viewers. Conversely, sometimes I think storytellers think too much about their themes, forcing a theme that's not there and missing the theme that has appeared.

 Maybe Stargate will get some sort of hipper, edgier reboot?

I'll still be interested if they do a new Stargate series or movie . . . and if they ever came knocking on my door to ask me to help them out with a Stargate: Universe comic, I'd not hesitate to say yes. But unless they REALLY botch next week's episode I have a feeling that even if the plot is left hanging, I'll have a good feeling about the franchise.

Until then, I have two more episodes of Stargate: Universe to watch. (Yeah, I would be watching as I write this, but I watch it using iTunes . . . so not only do I have to wait until the day after the show airs, I'm also one of the fans who contributed to its demise by not watching it live . . .)

~ Ben

UPDATE: The third to last episode, "Epilogue", could have (with just a few tweaks) been the final episode of the series. And the whole "life goes on" aspect of things I was talking about was directly addressed in the episode.

2nd UPDATE: The penultimate episode, "Blockade", was tense and emotional and exciting and satisfying. This series just kept getting better and better, especially this season.

LAST UPDATE: There is NO way the producers and creators did not know they were facing cancellation when they wrote the finale. In fact, it felt to me like the episode itself, when the characters were talking about a life or death situation they faced, it was almost like they were talking ABOUT the show. And it ended as I hoped . . . (without spoiling it for you) it ended with the implication that the characters have more stories in front of them, but we just won't see them . . . for now.

THE WAY OF THE WRITER: What can VW's l'il Darth Vader teach us about storytelling?

I love this ad. I'm not the only one. Not by a long shot. There's a reason they "leaked" this ad before the Super Bowl . . . they knew it was gold, and didn't want it to be lost in the shuffle:



So, aside from being cute and making my nine-year-old giggle like a mad man . . . what can this teach us about storytelling?

A couple things. First, it has to be said, this commercial is great because it is a one minute mini-movie, and it has an definite beginning, middle, and end. The character wants something, the character works hard toward getting that something, and the character grows in the process as he achieves his goal. Hilariously. There's even a three act structure in there. But I'm not going to get into that . . .

But here's what I was thinking about:

This commercial uses the icon of Darth Vader to hilarious effect. And it works. Why? Because we know the character. The imposing, powerful visual of Darth Vader is not just a part of pop culture, but culture in general.

And I was thinking about Darth Vader in the original trilogy of Star Wars and the prequel trilogy. The original trilogy builds this iconic character subtly. There is a LOT of showing and only some telling. We fear Darth Vader. Why? Because everyone else does. We SEE that. We fear Darth Vader. Why? Because he kills people. We SEE that. We feel for Darth Vader's plight. Why? Because he has to choose between a life of power and a sacrifice for this son. We SEE that. Yes, there were some details that were told to us -- that he and Obi-Wan used to be friends, but even that was told to us with an ironic twist. It came from an unreliable narrator.

This is why the original trilogy worked.

And why the prequel trilogy didn't.

No, I'm not going to get on a "the prequel trilogy stunk" geek rant. I have my podcast for that. (If you haven't listened to the podcast, you should. I think you'd like it. It's a few friends just chatting about pop culture stuff, with some comedy "sketches" thrown in for fun.) First of all, it's an easy target. But I want to get into one detail: those prequel movies have so much exposition. So much of those movies rely on what is TOLD to us.

"Show, don't tell" is a common mantra in writing books. And for good reason. Let's look back at the VW ad. Whether you are a geek or not, most likely it worked for you. (Unless you have no soul.) (Just kidding about the soul bit. Of course you have a soul. It's just a dark, bleak one.) (Again, just kidding.) I'd be willing to bet that someone who has never seen Star Wars would get this commercial. Why? Because you know this kid really, really wants to have the force and be able to make things come to him . . . or knock things over . . . or make the dog bend to his will. Why? Because we SEE that. There is no dialogue. No narrator telling us "all he wanted was to have the power". The kid never says to Mom "I wish I had the force". Dad doesn't explain his actions.

It's just good storytelling.

~ Ben

Story vs. History

I was listening to Peter Kreeft's "podcast" (in quotes, because technically it's not him podcasting but posting lectures that can be accessed freely) about Imagination while on my walk this morning. Peter Kreeft has become a moprning companion of late. He and I have been talking about story ideas and fundamentals of storytelling and philosophy of fiction. Of course, it's a one way conversation, and he has no idea that he's a part of it.

But he is.

I highly recommend listening to his lectures. They are brilliant and insightful. And he talks about Lewis and Tolkien a lot.

But as I was listening today, I had a thought. It didn't have a lot to do with what he was saying, but I was struck by a thought.

Story is false, but can contain much truth; history is true, but can be interpreted falsely.

There's all sorts of implications that can then be made. History is jaded by our own personal perceptions. Story has power.

And I got to thinking about all these ideas . . . big, philosophical ideas . . . about Art and Truth and Life and Other Big Concepts that I capitalize to make them even more Grand!

And then, I had another thought that brought me back down to earth. With all those concepts and implications and philosophical ideas (which are Good, and deserve thought), there is one Big Durn Ol' Trinity of Truth in Writing:

1. Just write.
2. Do your best.
3. Be honest.

Follow those guidelines, and you're on your way to meaningful fiction . . . or meaningful nonfiction . . .

Just some thoughts. Not sure what they're worth, but there they are.

~ Ben

Not-so-Nano Film Review #21 -- Delgo

(SPOILER WARNING. Not that you need to worry about it, since you're not really going to see this movie, are you?)

Needed to get away last night. I have a check from a script I wrote a few months ago. I hadn't been to a movie in a while.

I went to see Delgo for four reasons:

1. I'd heard about it over the years and was curious. It's had a long and tough history, struggling to find a distributor, even with an all star cast and good buzz online.
2. Wanted to see if it really was THAT bad. Couldn't be, could it?
3. Figured I'd be alone in the theater.
4. Knew it wouldn't last long in theaters.

#3 was correct. In fact, according to this article, it averaged to two people per screening last weekend. Wow. This means that #4 is also correct.

And yes, to #2, it was that bad. Mash all the annoying things from Disney movies (but leave out the awesome) with Star Wars semi-mystical mumbo-jumbo and Lord of the Rings battle scenes and you get Delgo, a movie that can't seem to figure out who its audience is or where it wants to steal its plot points from.

I hate to be harsh, but . . . man.

You've got a painfully unfunny slipstick sidekick and a dog-creature that pees on someone, juxtaposed against casual killing (the main character knocks some troll-like creatures to their death miles below, a smile on his face) and assassination and gambling addiction.

All the deaths are off screen, usually with the implication of a stabbing and then a hand falling limp, which lessens the emotional impact of a screen death for children, but also lessens the emotional impact of a screen death for the older viewers that the death was put in the story for in the first place. It happens multiple times, as well.

Add to that confusing, inconsistent character development (Delgo hates the buterfly-ish people because they killed his parents, butterfly-ish people ruin his sacred temple, but he still keeps his date with the butterfly-ish princess, has a painful Disney musical number "we're gonna put all our hopes and dreams and troubles into two or thee sentences for each other so the audience doesn't miss it" only without the music number, flirts with her, almost kisses her, and THEN remembers he's supposed the hate the butterfly-ish people -- the worst example of inconsistency).

Oh, and don't forget the (SPOILER WARNING) bad guy who got killed ten minutes before the end of the movie who turns out not to be dead ten seconds before the end of the movie, but no one noticed before he had time to crawl through not one but TWO cheering armies to get close enough to throw a spear at the heroes who are about to kiss, only so the sidekick can save the day. It's a useless scene that does nothing for the theme or story, and it's not the only scene like that.

The theme of revenge is never fully explored with the characters. It's given lip service by the mentor-character, but when (SPOILER WARNING) Delgo's new friend, a butterfly-ish warrior, is killed in front of his eyes, the killer runs away and Delgo never gets a chance to internalize and use his lesson about revenge. He smashes some tables in anger. But the filmakers are making a movie where the theme deals with revenge, and they make a point to have the murderer of Delgo's friend run away and do not let Delgo confront the theme! Then Delgo goes off to the next part of the story, and it's as if his friend's murder never happened.

Or (SPOILER WARNING -- do I need to say that?) when butterfly-ish princess confronts her mother's murderer, gives her a cool looking flying butterfly-fu kick to knock her into a deep crevice. The princess intends to kill the bad guy. It's the final climax of the movie (except the OTHER bad guy who rises from the dead ten seconds before the credits roll). The princess (the other lead character, next to Delgo) wants to kill the bad guy. Kicks the bad guy toward the crevice. But the bad guy doesn't fall down. Oh, wait, then the ground opens up beneath the bad guy. Good. The princess doesn't kill the bad guy. She wants to. She tries to. She fails. But the bad guy dies anyway. But it wasn't by the princess's hand, so that means it satisfying to us! Bad guy dies! And good princess didn't do it!

The backgrounds and creature design are awesome. The voice acting is decent (there's a big name cast . . . well, they were big names when the movie was made ten years ago). The character design is nice and expressive. Some animation is weak, but forgivable. The popcorn was okay.

Overall, Delgo is a movie that loses sight of its audience, characters, and story, though. Which is amazing, considering it had six credited writers and something like twenty story consultants. (Maybe more.) Is this an example of writing by committee? Is that why it fails to deliver? Or is it an example of a bad script that couldn't be rescued? I don't know where the blame lies. I just know this is the only time I have left a theater really wanting my money back . . . especially in this economy.

Not recommended. But you don't need me to say that. You already didn't see it.

~ Ben

PS -- I do find watching and reading bad examples of storytelling to actually be helpful to me as a writer. You can learn from seeing people do it wrong, just like you can learn from people doing it wrong.