I want to remind people that this is not the first time that the creatives in charge of the franchise have been replaced.

I'm seeing that in light of the news that Jac Schaeffer has been selected to develop a new show, there has been no shortage of criticism at her selection, namely that she isn't one of the 'original' creatives and has no connection to the franchise. However, people need to know that these criticisms equally applied to Jonathan Glassner and Brad Wright when they were first selected by MGM to develop *Stargate* into a show for them. They had *no connection whatsoever* to the original movie and there was no way to know if they would respect the franchise. As a result, it feels like a big double standard to complain about the 'original producers' not being involved in a new show when *they weren't even the original creatives behind the franchise to begin with.*

Glassner and Wright got the *SG-1* job to begin with because MGM wouldn't give Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin the creative freedom they wanted when they were in discussions to develop *Stargate* into a TV show. Emmerich recalled not being guaranteed 'carte blanche' while Devlin had said that they had been asked to 'audition' by submitting a script for MGM's approval, so they backed off. As it is, they were already being asked to compromise on their vision because they wanted to make a theatrical sequel, and now they weren't even guaranteed the ability to make the show the way they wanted to make it. MGM then started soliciting pitches and decided to put Glassner and Wright - who had developed pitches separately - together to make a show.

What's my point? Changing the people in charge isn't a first for the franchise, and while it can be disappointing that the people who shaped the franchise aren't involved, getting new people involved isn't inherently a bad thing. We have no idea if there is a new pitch or what this version of the show could be about, so I intend to wait and see rather than take a position either way.