Battlestar Galactica to the Big Screen?

[CaptainTux]

Originally Posted by ernie90125

Hmmm....will Gemini1999 mod you for this ? I wait with baited breath !

And to return to the original topic.....is there anything fans can do at this early stage to influence the direction this new Battlestar venture might take ?

Some may disagree with me, but here goes (with a deep and cautious breath).

The short answer IMHO is we have limited influence. Universal, like any motion picture company, wants to make money off the movie. They want to make more than they spend. There are a lot of factors that go into their formulas. Recent success and failures in the box office are a part of that consideration.

Star Trek is likely one they are looking at. It cost 150 million to make and it made $382 million worldwide. This does not include future DVD sales and other merchandising.

They also have chosen a director who has a pretty good success rate at making movies in the genre that sell well.

As far as the story? There is no script or even writer at this time that we know of. What creative direction will this take? Whichever one Universal can be convinced will make them money on the project.

I do not know how much a difference a letter from a fan makes, or 100 letters, or a thousand letters. But, some form of feedback from perspective audience members may be helpful. But beyond letters, they need to know there is base of people who will see the film. I am sure an online presence helps as well. Are we buying merchandise, DVD's, making fan fiction, art, etc? Are we, in fact, a demographic that will make them money?

I do not know what it takes to be considered a target audience for a production. I am open to feedback and ideas from people who know more about the inner working of the industry, because if there is anything fans could do to let them know we exist and will see it (if done in the spirit of the original), I am willing to take reasonable steps. I am all about consumer choice and I am a consumer.

[jewels]

Originally Posted by Gemini1999

Ernie -

Just so you don't hold your breath too long (and it's baded breath, not baited), no I'm not. Pete is an Admin of this forum and he'd given me a head up regarding his post. Please go back to the discussion at hand.

Gemini1999
Colonial Fleets Moderator

Geeze I've been spelling baded wrong all these years. Did not know that!

<---- My typos are free.

BTW: I started 2 threads for fantasizing while we wait for real news: one cast and one for story. Please go have fun with them.

[Dawg]

I think it's spelled "bated", with a T, not a D. My spellcheck seems to agree....

The "baited" misspelling is actually because of the similarity in sound, and the mental picture it presents - the cat eats some cheese and so "baits" its breath at the mouse hole.

But the verb to bate is unused now - the original phrase "bated breath" means with breathing slowed and shallowed to almost nothing, "...to a state in which you almost stop breathing as a result of some strong emotion, such as terror or awe."

Experts think that "baited" will eventually become the common usage. More's the pity.

Now - what were we talking about?



I am
Dawg

[AlternityOrange]

Originally Posted by Dawg

Now - what were we talking about?



I am
Dawg

Something about bad breath? I lose track...

[Gemini1999]

Originally Posted by Dawg

I think it's spelled "bated", with a T, not a D. My spellcheck seems to agree....

The "baited" misspelling is actually because of the similarity in sound, and the mental picture it presents - the cat eats some cheese and so "baits" its breath at the mouse hole.

But the verb to bate is unused now - the original phrase "bated breath" means with breathing slowed and shallowed to almost nothing, "...to a state in which you almost stop breathing as a result of some strong emotion, such as terror or awe."

Experts think that "baited" will eventually become the common usage. More's the pity.

John -

Thanks for the correction, I just knew that the "baited" was incorrect in spelling and usage. I'll just chalk it up to being an old fart (me) on the spelling. I never knew the definition behind the word - thanks for the background on that. You learn something new every day.

I hope you're holding up well today....

Bryan

[Dawg]

I've had better days, that's for sure, Bryan. Today was a particularly painful end to a bad week.

But I know there's a silver lining and I think I'm still standing - I'm starting to feel mean, so I think I'm over the worst of it.



I am
Dawg

[martok2112]

Originally Posted by Damocles

.......Fanboy?
.......I don't like the term "fanboy". It implies extremely negative connotations. I am definitely not a fanboy, and neither are the rest of us here. Do you consider yourself a fanboy when you can talk Fritz Lang's Metropolis or Robert Wise's The Day the Earth Stood Still and then talk about the Alligator? I don't think so. There is a difference between talking about a story point or plothole; or how a shot was framed and blocked, or about the moral implications of an episode's story point, and knowing that they changed the glue on Nimoy, because it gave him an ear rash.........

I do you the courtesy of explaining my context to you.

I certainly did not direct it at you, Damocles, and I'm sorry if you took my meaning to be so, or to be mean-spirited in general.

When I used the term "fanboyish", it was to denote that I was concerned that certain elements of a potential new (TOS based) Galactica movie could be "fanboyish" with Singer and DeSanto's involvement.

That said, ANYONE can fall into that trap. "Oh, wow, wouldn't it be neat if the Galactica did THIS? Wouldn't it be neat if Vipers had THIS capability that we've never seen before?"

I'm sure you remember Star Trek Nemesis, or at least know of it. John Logan (much as I enjoyed his writing for Gladiator) really kinda "fanboy'd" the movie.

Hell, even I could be accused of fanboyish tendencies with my Galactica continuation stories, and with my own retelling of the holocaust/exodus. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if someone did indeed say: "Hmmm...(such and such) part seems a little fanboyish."



In truth, we've all got a little fanboy in us. We love science fiction, space fantasy, fantasy, anime....hell...even sports fans could be considered fanboys, as all-out as they sometimes get. By this logic, I really should not be overly concerned about "fanboyish" tendencies.

Not everything has to have deep, universal meaning. Somethings are just done, and written because it's meant to invoke good feelings. To that end, I'd enjoy a Battlestar Galactica movie as much as anyone else.

Let's put it like this:

I can't remember who had this notion or idea when they were talking about continuing the original series, but I'd consider "walking Vipers" to be extremely fanboyish.

Watching a Viper do maneuvers in zero-g that are impossible to do in atmosphere...that's not fanboyish.

To have a Viper sprout leg like appendages, and start walking....yeah...to me, that's fanboyish.

As for taking offense to certain terms, acronyms, what not....I certainly take no offense to the term GINO (because I have my own definition of the acronym, contrary to its acrimonial intent...and that's what I see when I see the term GINO used, regardless of who's using it).

Chilax, dude.

Steve

[oldwardaggit]

So If they do recast and start over yet again ( which I'm personally not to crazy about )
I guess the biggest question would be who would play Starbuck. Even if it did end up being 100 years into the future or so and they did it in a flashback style, I wonder who could play that part so that they are constantly chasing and cheating on women but still be likeable to the point where no one can stay mad at him. lol

and Act like he is out to save his own skin first but when the going gets rough, he's the hero at the end of the day.

I think Jason Thompson would make a good Apollo in flash back scenes if that's the way they go.

OWD

[Darrell Lawrence]

Walking Vipers was the idea of the CREATOR of Galactica. The creator of a show would be the ultimate fanboy of it I guess.... or he wouldn't have created it in the first place.

[martok2112]

Originally Posted by oldwardaggit

So If they do recast and start over yet again ( which I'm personally not to crazy about )
I guess the biggest question would be who would play Starbuck. Even if it did end up being 100 years into the future or so and they did it in a flashback style, I wonder who could play that part so that they are constantly chasing and cheating on women but still be likeable to the point where no one can stay mad at him. lol

and Act like he is out to save his own skin first but when the going gets rough, he's the hero at the end of the day.

I think Jason Thompson would make a good Apollo in flash back scenes if that's the way they go.

OWD

Nathan Fillion would be a great choice, in my humble opinion.

Originally Posted by Warrior

Walking Vipers was the idea of the CREATOR of Galactica. The creator of a show would be the ultimate fanboy of it I guess.... or he wouldn't have created it in the first place.

Too true, my friend.

[monolith21]

Starbuck or not...Nathan Fillion would be a great actor for this film! If we all get our wish and Starbuck is played by Dirk, it would be cool to see a similar character running around charming the ladies.

[Darrell Lawrence]

If recast, Cary Elwes is the best choice for Starbuck.

[monolith21]

I've never really thought of him playing a part like that...but he's definitely a fantastic actor!

Man I hope they use Dirk and do a continuation.

[CBSG4ever]

Personally, I think Josh Holloway (Sawyer in the TV series "Lost") would be an excellent choice for a recast Starbuck. Just my humble opinion.

[Damocles]

Originally Posted by martok2112

I do you the courtesy of explaining my context to you.

I certainly did not direct it at you, Damocles, and I'm sorry if you took my meaning to be so, or to be mean-spirited in general.

.........Never took it that way. I said this:

I don't like the term "fanboy". It implies extremely negative connotations. I am definitely not a fanboy, and neither are the rest of us here.

Which means I discussed the class set.

Originally Posted by martok2112

When I used the term "fanboyish", it was to denote that I was concerned that certain elements of a potential new (TOS based) Galactica movie could be "fanboyish" with Singer and DeSanto's involvement.

Fantastical misconception in a false imitation of the original concept to the point of the ridiculous is something I understand all too well. The dune-buggy sequence from Star Trek X was one of such a construct. I would call that ridiculous, and an example of very bad writing, story telling, and film-making on so many levels, with the singular cutting observation of an image of "tail gunner" Worf, as the icing of the critique, but I wouldn't call it "fanboy". I would be more direct to the point; it would be stupid to me, just as the concept of walking tanks in Star Wars, or walking Vipers in CBSG would be.

Originally Posted by martok2112

That said, ANYONE can fall into that trap. "Oh, wow, wouldn't it be neat if the Galactica did THIS? Wouldn't it be neat if Vipers had THIS capability that we've never seen before?"

There is a way to do that. Have you seen the Babylon 5 Lost Tales? One of the peripheral minor plot issues left over from the movie "A Call to Arms", was whether Warlocks used a particle weapon similar to the type of weapon that the Earth's defense grid used in "Endgame". I wondered how Stracyinski could write one thing in, and the CGI guys missed it completely when they CGIed the battle with the SPK in that movie.

Well......


You lay the story groundwork, then you can expand the envelop and back-fill a missed plot-point. There are no walking Vipers possible; since we see no means to incorporate such into a "real" BSG story up to this point. On the other hand in B5 The Lost Tales we see Warlocks fire particle beams that can slice a Vorchan in two, as well as possibly lay waste to the East Coast of the US in a single rake, and thereby prove conclusively that Warlocks can and did shoot their way into a Shadow Planet Killer, and thereby cover the Victory and the Excalibur, as they destroyed the SPK's control center. Its a plot point and story point that needed fill-back.

Originally Posted by martok2112

I'm sure you remember Star Trek Nemesis, or at least know of it. John Logan (much as I enjoyed his writing for Gladiator) really kinda "fanboy'd" the movie.

I disliked Gladiator for much the same reason that I disliked Nemesis. "Gee wouldn't it be awesome if the Romans did this!" Crap "Roman battle tactics", that never existed, offends me as much as that crap dune buggy chase did. The Romans never used massed call fires and pyro in battle like that, first; because they didn't know how, and second; because it was not their warfare "style". There is a style to the way that the real people, about whom you tell story, did things, just as there is, too, in any fictional universe. Offend either one "reality" sensibly, and you produce crap, either as story, or as a recreation of the same "reality".

Originally Posted by =martok2112

Hell, even I could be accused of fanboyish tendencies with my Galactica continuation stories, and with my own retelling of the holocaust/exodus. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if someone did indeed say: "Hmmm...(such and such) part seems a little fanboyish."

In what way? Did you make the characters change their operating moral parameters out of recognition; or did you create a fantastic stretch of the ridiculous? Did you introduce something in plot or story so outre' that someone who reads it would say; "What a piece of cowflop?" That isn't what you think it is. That is not fanboyism. That is just bad writing; which incidentally you do not do. I've read some of it, and it holds together, even if it is not what I would write (I write a little more hard science, and less emotion than you use with character and story.)

Originally Posted by martok2112

In truth, we've all got a little fanboy in us. We love science fiction, space fantasy, fantasy, anime....hell...even sports fans could be considered fanboys, as all-out as they sometimes get. By this logic, I really should not be overly concerned about "fanboyish" tendencies.

The term is fan. The fella who dyes himself purple:


is sublimating his two million years of aggression and hunting impulse into a constructive social activity. He cheers for the team and worries about the ineffective quarterback and the inept receiver corps, because he wants to share in the team's success. He identifies with his "champions" and "side". It was the same when Joe Achaean cheered on Achilles when Achilles chased Hector around Troy a few times. (Only then it was fundamentally more important; since if the "star quarterback" didn't perform as expected, then "Hector" was going to mow down Joe Achaean and a few thousand like him. Ever lose a bet in a football pool?) These are the real reasons, not well understood, why Shatner was not the guy to tell his "fans" to get a life. It wasn't his place. That is why we have the psychiatrists, to help the maladjusted separate fantasy from reality. Shatner was supposed to shut up, sign autographs, and accept the adulation as the "quarterback".

But to the point of Battlestar Galactica. I don't see that "pejorative word" as being applicable to full grown adults as they discuss-especially those who worked seriously in the entertainment industry, or who worked in related fields, or who bring serious skills to the debate; who either supported, or attacked the Alligator, as a show concept, in whatever form, in whichever group, they championed it. What they invested was their professionalism, or those parts of it, or of their life experience, that they used to form their opinions on topic. Remember that word? OPINION?

Originally Posted by martok2112

Not everything has to have deep, universal meaning. Somethings are just done, and written because it's meant to invoke good feelings. To that end, I'd enjoy a Battlestar Galactica movie as much as anyone else.

Not to the people who put millions of dollars into a project, and not to the target audience. That target audience has a justified say in the success or failure of a feature film or TV series. That is why the smart studios, back in the day, did test showings of a film, that their auditors knew was in trouble, and market surveyed an audience to see what was wrong with the product. If it wasn't too bad, they fired the director, and shoved the inept writer off onto another 'project', brought in a second director who knew how to film retakes quick and cheap, and hauled in a "script surgeon" to fix the story. This happened so often, that it was considered "normal" practice before the days of the "auteur" and his "art". It was also actually what the TV censors and S&P were supposed to do in the days of network television-not protect moral standards, as much as ensure "network product marketability". These guys were not in it for "fun". It was about MONEY.

In summary, this subject is about a business relation between the audience (us) and Universal et al, who want to sell us another Galactica product and it should be treated as such. We have a track history, we do together, and its not been a very good one, or very pretty recently. To that end, the way "they" treated the "audience" (fans-i.e US) is very much tied up with the term "fanboy", as that was how they actually saw us.

Originally Posted by martok2112

Let's put it like this:

I can't remember who had this notion or idea when they were talking about continuing the original series, but I'd consider "walking Vipers" to be extremely fanboyish.

I'd consider that to be somewhat less stupid than some of the stuff that was done to the Alligator, recently.

Originally Posted by martok2112

Watching a Viper do maneuvers in zero-g that are impossible to do in atmosphere...that's not fanboyish.

That is physics and you have to write it in, or the science cretins (directors and producers) will not listen to the CGI artists or to the writers.

Originally Posted by martok2112

To have a Viper sprout leg like appendages, and start walking....yeah...to me, that's fanboyish.

Its ridiculous, but it is not what you think it is (fanboyism). Its just stupid writing for an unnecessary and expensive visual effect. If it doesn't advance story or add a plot point, like showing what a weapon will do unless you shut it down (Ice Planet Zero or Endgame), why do it?

Originally Posted by martok2112

As for taking offense to certain terms, acronyms, what not....I certainly take no offense to the term GINO (because I have my own definition of the acronym, contrary to its acrimonial intent...and that's what I see when I see the term GINO used, regardless of who's using it).

Chilax, dude.

I know what I mean by STINO (otherwise known as Berman Drek). I use it to describe a certain vision of a concept, that was not the original concept in any way shape or form. If I were to use the term Berman Drek, then it would be to correctly label a body of 350+ hours of bad writing, lousy filming, blatant idea plagiarism, formulaic one dimensional acting, and general treatment of the audience as if they were all idiots. The arrogant men who concocted STINO were in it for just the quick money and not for the love of product they produced..

One of those men was Ronald D. Moore.

I will therefore chillax, when I see fair treatment of the BSG fans to each other, by each other, not manipulated into camps by some well meaning but not understanding supporters from either side, and not result in what it was in The Franchise for ten years. I will chilax when Universal finally delivers a good product to its target audience as it promised almost a decade ago. It took Paramount almost two decades to get rid of Berman to reboot The Franchise. Universal has its next chance now to get it right, and I wish them well for it, because I want a product that the audience (ALL BSG fans) can unite behind.

So whatever you may think of how I "feel" about "fanboy", understand that "feel" has nothing to do with how I regard the term. The term offends me because it is the attitude that some people who peddle crap product in Hollywood take about their audience (US). They think that the audience is composed of people who will line up and watch or pay for any of the crap they dish out.



That isn't Michael Rennie. That is



Keanu Reeves.

Understand?

[Damocles]

Originally Posted by Warrior

If recast, Cary Elwes is the best choice for Starbuck.

That would be a good choice. He was the best thing in "The Princess Bride" next to Andre' the Giant.

[michaelfaries]

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...goryid=13&cs=1
Posted: Thurs., Aug. 20, 2009, 7:17pm PT
Warner Bros. has closed a deal to remake the 1981 John Boorman-directed "Excalibur," with Bryan Singer producing and developing the picture as a potential directing vehicle.

I'm shaking my head here... This is like the "Logan's Run" announcement of years ago (among others). Is Singer committed to the projects he signs for, or managing to walk away, pocketing his fees and whistling Dixie all the way to the bank?

I'm still wondering what Singer's daily involvement in "House" is. Maybe the production team is far enough into their schedule that he's free to look at other projects, line up the next big BIG thing for himself...

Michael

[oldwardaggit]

I agree with this. Don't know if I can see him walking around with a constant smile and twinkle in his eye the way Dirk did but he definitely has the bad boy presence to carry the part off.

Once upon a time I use to think it was either a continuation with as much of the original cast as possible or nothing but now I'm a little more open minded. I would still love to see that happen first but a prequel, side story, something set far off into the future or anything that lets the original exist would be cool.

I'll still go see the movie if it does as much as stay true to the original but I won't go into the theater totally convinced that I should really be there in the first place.

OWD

Originally Posted by CBSG4ever

Personally, I think Josh Halloway (Sawyer in the TV series "Lost") would be an excellent choice for a recast Starbuck. Just my humble opinion.

[martok2112]

Damocles,

Thank you for your point by point response. I can see where you're coming from, and can understand your P.O.V.

Also, thanks for the YouTube of Babylon 5 The Lost Tales. That is a show I have (up until now) only seen a few episodes of, but of late, have been collecting the DVD season sets. I have just finished Season Three, and am anxious to move on to S4 and S5 (although I've heard the stories get a little inconsistent, especially around S5...but I think that was due to the suits misleading just when they were going to end the show, thus forcing Joe Strascynzki's hand in the writing.)

I've only seen a couple of the movies (In the Beginning and The Gathering), but plan to see the others, and whatever other miniseries, expansions that has been done for B5.

Respectfully,
Steve

[oldwardaggit]

OK , on to business.
I would like to thank every one who has emailed me with their support and all those who took part in the letter writing campaign to Universal.

I am now happy to announce that it paid off.
I sat down with Universal yesterday and hammered out a deal so now I'm happy to announce that ........................

I'M PLAYING STARBUCK IN THE NEW MOVIE!

Yes I know it's hard to believe but after tough negotiations, I signed a deal that includes 3 Twinkies, half of a 3 musketeers bar and all of the writes to Galactica 80.

It was tough going but I had a few demands I had to give up in order to get this deal signed and I won't get into it but lets just say Hollywood will be the farthest I've ever hitchhiked.

There were also a few other things I had to give up in the deal but that's OK because I'm from Canada so it can't be all that cold at night in Hollywood.

If anyone wants my autograph, I'll be handing out signed mug shots as I tour the local soup kitchens.

So hopefully you will see me on the big screen soon. Who knows, through the prisoners work program, you may have me sitting you in your seat before the movie starts.

So thanks again for all of your support.

OWD

[martok2112]

Why you underhanded.....you.....you.....YOU TOOK MY DEAL!


I ....it was IIIIIIII who was to be Starbuck! But nooooooo....you....you and your evil scheming ways have once again stood in the way of my plans for world dom----er...I mean....silver screen glory!

You will rue the day you did this to me!!! Well......go on....start rueing!

[oldwardaggit]

Originally Posted by martok2112

Why you underhanded.....you.....you.....YOU TOOK MY DEAL!


I ....it was IIIIIIII who was to be Starbuck! But nooooooo....you....you and your evil scheming ways have once again stood in the way of my plans for world dom----er...I mean....silver screen glory!

You will rue the day you did this to me!!! Well......go on....start rueing!

Well I heard you wouldn't put the nurses uniform on during your meeting with Universal and everyone knows you must wear the nurses uniform. Hell, even Larson shaved his legs and dawned the uniform.

Sometimes it's even further down because Hatch changed into his nurses uniform in the limo on his way to have lunch with Larson.

Here is a little bit of how that meeting went.

Larson = Nice Uniform
Hatch = I changed into it in the limo on the way over
Larson = I'm impressed, sign here please.

So now you know if you really want to get them to sway your way, you have to wear the uniform.

Larson tried to hold out from wearing it for years but in the end, even he had to slap on that sucker to get this movie deal.

I think he might have had to get it let out a bit though. It's been quite a while since he had to button up that little white number.

OWD

[KJ]

LOL!



what the...! You guys.

KJ

[Reaper]

good thing I'm auditioning for Bojay. I have to wear the Socialator dress though.

[JLHurley]

Speaking of Dirk Benedict...I had to run to the grocery store last night and on the way there and back heard him and Dwight Schultz on an AM radio talk show. It didn't take long for me to recognize Dirk's voice, though he's sounding up there in years. I only heard them discussing 70s/80s TV, the A-Team and "What women these days want." Anyone hear the entire interview and know what was (inevitably/hopefully) said about BG?

[JLHurley]

Oops--I think I can probably answer my own question. I just went to Dirk's site and it lists an appearance with Dwight on Dennis Miller earlier in the year. Probably not a new interview.

[martok2112]

Originally Posted by oldwardaggit

Well I heard you wouldn't put the nurses uniform on during your meeting with Universal and everyone knows you must wear the nurses uniform. Hell, even Larson shaved his legs and dawned the uniform.

Sometimes it's even further down because Hatch changed into his nurses uniform in the limo on his way to have lunch with Larson.

Here is a little bit of how that meeting went.

Larson = Nice Uniform
Hatch = I changed into it in the limo on the way over
Larson = I'm impressed, sign here please.

So now you know if you really want to get them to sway your way, you have to wear the uniform.

Larson tried to hold out from wearing it for years but in the end, even he had to slap on that sucker to get this movie deal.

I think he might have had to get it let out a bit though. It's been quite a while since he had to button up that little white number.

OWD

Nurses uniform? What nurses uniform?

They only told me about the garters and thigh highs!

Curses!!!! The world conspireth against me!

[Damocles]

Which one of you was told to show up with a gorilla suit, a bikini, and a box of chocolates for your interview?

[Darrell Lawrence]

*trips in high heels*

...what are you guys looking at?

[CBSG4ever]

Boy...you people will do ANYTHING to get a part! Sheeesh!

*walks away wearing only a...thong...*