It came as quite a shock to most of the sci-fi community when the Sci-Fi Channel announced the official cancellation of Stargate SG-1 in August.  The "longest consecutively running sci-fi series of all time" was considered to be the flagship of the television network, yet just days after its 200th episode had aired, the news came that SG-1 would not be returning for another season, while her sister show, Stargate Atlantis would be back next Summer.

As you might expect, fans are not happy.  Whilst the reaction is not (yet) as passionate as that of Star Trek: Enterprise fans a few years ago, there are definite feelings of bewilderment, confusion and, in some cases, anger.  Some fans believe Sci-Fi used the show to break the aforementioned longest running record and then, seeing no further reason to keep the show on the air, scrapped it.  Fans feel betrayed, insulted and upset.

I'm sure you can see how crazy the community is at the moment, with rumours and campaigns flying left, right and centre.  Let's try and make sense of it, shall we?

Just a brief summary first:  Stargate SG-1 has been on the air every year since 1996, first airing on Showtime, and later on the Sci-Fi Channel.  The show was considered a great success, with ratings peaking in its eighth season, which also saw the launch of the new spin-off, Stargate Atlantis.  Since the eighth season, ratings have been sinking, with season ten being especially mediocre to date (with the exception of "200").  The cancellation came soon after this landmark episode.

The cancellation is odd, I must say.  It would not be unusual for new shows on major networks to be cancelled after a few episodes with poor ratings, given the more fiercely competitive environment.  However, SG-1 was in its tenth year with ratings that weren't all that bad; and yet it was cancelled after just six weeks. Why did Sci-Fi just decide to ditch the show?

Why did Sci-Fi just decide to ditch the show?

I think there're a few things we must consider before we can answer that question.   Firstly - cost.  The show's original stars (Tapping, Shanks and Judge) are rumored to receive pay raises at least every few seasons; and by now, after ten years, this has probably amounted to a considerable cost to the studio.  So when contrasted with Atlantis, which receives slightly higher viewing numbers, SG-1 probably looks like a less attractive option financially.  If, as was speculated last summer, Sci-Fi launches a third live-action Stargate show, it can retain the benefits of shooting two shows simultaneously in Vancouver with the same writing teams and crews, the new cast can be paid significantly lesser wages than were being paid to the SG-1 stars.  This in itself is an enormously tempting reason to have two shows running, and maybe SG-1 is just too costly to fit in this plan.

In fact, as of August 27th, this would seem to be a definite contributing factor. In a press statement, Sci-Fi's executive vice-president of programming announced that they would be interested in more Stargate "if MGM came to us for less".  This is pretty much absolute confirmation that money is a huge factor in the end of the show.  Having said that, I personally am curious to know exactly how cheap Sci-Fi want the show to be as a recent article by the Hollywood Reporter states that MGM in fact pay a whopping two thirds of the SG-1 budget.  Admittedly, the stated $2.2 million-per-episode budget is rather large (I believe that is a much higher figure than Star Trek: Enterprise enjoyed, certainly in its final year).

Secondly, Sci-Fi's apparently sudden decision may have been decided some time ago.  If, as some fans are speculating, a tenth season was only commissioned to breach the 200 episode mark as well as enter the Guinness Book of World Records, the decision to drop the show after this year may have been decided some time ago, regardless of ratings.

Thirdly, there's The Devlin Factor.  It was recently announced that the producer from the original movie "Stargate" has intentions to finish his originally-intended movie trilogy, and that he believes MGM are open to such a development.  Is SG-1 being pushed off the air in favour of a big-screen continuation?  That remains to be seen, but it is unlikely as MGM seem quite determined to keep SG-1 alive at the moment.

We may never know the true reasons why the show was canned; the reasons certainly aren't as straightforward as they were for shows like Farscape, Firefly and Star Trek: Enterprise.

So is this the end for SG-1?  At the time of going to press, no announcement has been made as to whether the show will continue in another form, or another network.  The only clues I have to go on are the words of executive producer Robert C. Cooper, who has said "SG-1 will go on in some way. We're just not ready to announce how."

"SG-1 will go on in some way. We're just not ready to announce how."

Intriguing.  Again, there's plenty of speculation about what this means.  It may actually be irrelevant, since the decision certainly isn't with Robert C. Cooper, but rather the big-wigs at television networks and MGM.  Of course, it has to be said that the Stargate franchise is a huge cash-cow for MGM, so I imagine that they will indeed be eager to have the show continue for as long as possible to allow for the continuation of new DVD sets and merchandise.  So certainly, the continuation is very possible.

Many fans are saying, "No, shows are never as good when they switch channels..." and all sorts of negative nonsense.  SG-1 is already on its second channel, having originally aired on Showtime before its move to Sci-Fi Channel.  Unfortunately, it may not be allowed to move.

Sci-Fi are behaving oddly on this, and announced as of August 27th, that they would not allow MGM to move SG-1 to another U.S. television network as their "contract with MGM prohibits it."  This could well be the beginning of a rapid deterioration in relations between the giant MGM and Sci-Fi, as it seems neither wish to concede to the other - a dangerous attitude to adopt when two of your channel's hit shows belong to the other company.

Some fans have wondered whether an online-only series is now a possibility, as the current season has been aired on iTunes, with episodes costing $1.99.  Unfortunately, I don't feel this is an option.  A show like SG-1 would be far too expensive to air exclusively online - the viewers just aren't there yet.

A show like SG-1 would be far too expensive to air exclusively online - the viewers just aren't there yet.

A feature film seems the most likely option in this point in time, and indeed, one has been in the works for years, but renewal kept pushing it back.  Now the show hasn't been picked up, the time is right to produce the feature film that's been talked about for so long.

Or perhaps it truly is the end of SG-1, and we have reached the end.  Would a third series replace it?  There have been rumours of a third series whispering across the internet for months, but if I were MGM; I certainly wouldn't take out a new contract with the Sci-Fi Channel after their actions in August.  This could be the beginning of massive rift between the two, with Stargate being tossed and turned in the middle.

Of course, at the moment, everything is speculative.  That's what makes analysis right now so interesting and, at times, wild.  We truly are clutching at straws.  Only time will tell what will become of our heroes in SG-1.