Going Out On A Limb.....

[Malkyte]

Originally Posted by ernie90125

Malkyte - sorry I haven't been clear. I was refering to Enterprise as the failure. Star Trek was mothballed because of the failure of a prequel series which was uninspiring in my view.

To clarify....I LOVE the Kirk movies, and enjoyed a lot of The Next Generation. They were not failures.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Ahh, thanks for the clarification! That makes a lot more sense!


Malkyte

[Tabitha]

How, exactly, does having a prequel preclude the continuation from happenning? It seems to me that the current mess was caused by an idea being usurped by the evil hammer empire. Well, they cannot steal from a prequel project, since theres no way that GINO could try to take characters and events that have yet to be invented. AND after any prequel (which doesnt have to even HAVE the origional characters in it, if people are fanatical about that, then the interest in a continuation would likely be STRONGER. After all, most people who tune into skiffy probably do not know the origional cast or characters enough to have bonded with them. So it makes sense to give them a few "friends" that thye want to know more about. Those friends become part of a continuation project which leads us to...... WHAT YOU ALL FRAKKIN WANT! Sometimes the only way over a steep mountain, is to back off a hard sloap and find another path. I mean, cmon, its called seeing a bigger picture, or thinking outside the box, or whatever metaphor of the day you wish to use. The ram rod "lets just shove our vision down some producers throat till they give it to us" approach didnt work, it sorta screwed the pooch. So ok, we back off, start a prequel, wait for GINO and Ms Hammer to go fly off into the sunset, and then we get what we want. I fail to see how having something true to BSG to generate interest in OUR vision of BSG, as well as to fill in the gap and maybe win fans over who are faling off the GINO train, can be a bad thing.

tabbi

[Malkyte]

Originally Posted by Warrior

So that brings me back to- Why do so many people NOT want to see a continuation with the original cast by tossing out ideas of prequels/remakes as the way to go?

Speaking for myself,

First and foremost I would LOVE to see a continuation with as many of the original cast as possible!

But if for some reason that is impossible,(mainly due to Hollywoods limited ability to understand what works and what doesn't) then I am open to a FAITHFULL remake and/or a prequel that is canon friendly!

But again, first and foremost, a continuation with as many of the originals as possible should be our objective, until there is not enough of them left to do it!




Malkyte

[Malkyte]

Originally Posted by jjrakman

For me I'm never really interested in any remakes at all, that all pretty much suck. And I don't want to see prequels for the most part, unless they're very well done and stick to established show cannon, unlike Enterprise. But I definitely do not ever want to see the young Adama or a teenage Starbuck.

Agreed. NO young Adama or Starbuck. If a prequel is to be explored... show how the Cylon war began. Show other stories of adventure, exploration, and such of the Colonial life. If as a brief cameo, they want to have the Galactica do a fly by, I can live with that, but otherwise, focus elsewhere!


Malkyte

[Malkyte]

Originally Posted by Tabitha

How, exactly, does having a prequel preclude the continuation from happenning? It seems to me that the current mess was caused by an idea being usurped by the evil hammer empire. Well, they cannot steal from a prequel project, since theres no way that GINO could try to take characters and events that have yet to be invented. AND after any prequel (which doesnt have to even HAVE the origional characters in it, if people are fanatical about that, then the interest in a continuation would likely be STRONGER. After all, most people who tune into skiffy probably do not know the origional cast or characters enough to have bonded with them. So it makes sense to give them a few "friends" that thye want to know more about. Those friends become part of a continuation project which leads us to...... WHAT YOU ALL FRAKKIN WANT! Sometimes the only way over a steep mountain, is to back off a hard sloap and find another path. I mean, cmon, its called seeing a bigger picture, or thinking outside the box, or whatever metaphor of the day you wish to use. The ram rod "lets just shove our vision down some producers throat till they give it to us" approach didnt work, it sorta screwed the pooch. So ok, we back off, start a prequel, wait for GINO and Ms Hammer to go fly off into the sunset, and then we get what we want. I fail to see how having something true to BSG to generate interest in OUR vision of BSG, as well as to fill in the gap and maybe win fans over who are faling off the GINO train, can be a bad thing.

tabbi

I don't see the connection. How does a prequel make people want to see a continuation of characters that they are neither familiar with, nor would become familiar with if they are not in said prequel? Does not make sense. If a prequel is made and people find it interesting, they are going to want more of the SAME thing and not a whole new group of characters that they know nothing about. They are going to want to see what happens to the characters they have just discovered in the said prequel, not some distantly forgotten characters.

Maybe I am shortsighted, but I just don't see the logic behind this strategy.


Malkyte


WooHoo, I finally got my first Cylon Raider!!!!

[Darrell Lawrence]

Mal, that confused the heck out of me as well...

[Tabitha]

Well, its the same way that ST:TNG got people interested in the world of ST so that they would give DS9 a chance to tell its story. If not for TNG I doubt DS9 would have gotten anwhere, but people said, Oh I get it Ive seen things like this, I understand the bad guys and stuff. In return Voyager got its chance because people understood what it was like. They gave the characters a chance because they had had a taste fo something very similar. It does make sense.

tabbi

[Malkyte]

I'm not sure that, that is the same thing as what would happen with BSG.

First TNG was a continuation of TOS, with some of the TOS characters making cameos, and it did okay. DS9 built on TNG, by bringing a couple of characters over from TNG and adding new ones, and it did okay. But nowhere did this reignite an interest to bring back the TOS crew in any meaningful way. Instead, another new set of characters were created (Voyager), which some liked and some didn't... and still no meaningful return of the TOS characters.

Finally, a prequel was thought up... and we know how that ended up.

So while new characters were created in the ST universe, the additional shows never brought back enough intrest to the original characters to explore again.

And remember that by the time TNG came about, there were at least 3 or 4 CONTINUATION movies with the TOS characters. If anything, the movies helped build interest for the new ST series, not the other way around.

So if anything, the reverse of your strategy would work. Make a faithfull continuation AND THEN expand the BSG universe with new characters.


Malkyte

[Darrell Lawrence]

Tabbi, this is what I got out of that post- A prequel w/different cast would make people interested in seeing Dirk and co in a continuation.

I don't see that happening. A closer comparison than the example you posted would be this- Enterprise (the prequel) making people want to see Kirk and crew.

That just never happened, and I doubt it'd work for anything in similar circumstances.

[Tabitha]

The biggest factor you all seem to be hitting on is Enterprise. Well, screwing around with the Star Trek timeline, they way they did, turned off a lot of us fans. I boycotted the series when they started it, since finding a Klingon in a corn field is simply not possible under cannon Trek history. So right from the start it alienated its fan base by monkeying around with the history. So to base ANY relavance to Enterprise is like comparing the GINO project to TOS and asking why people like TOS less or more. Its apples and oranges. TOS Star Trek was a short lived and at the time not incredibly popular series that just took on a cult following. Anyone being intellectually honest MUST admit that. Its ratings got punched in the teeth by its rival, Lost In Space. So the real deal was ST:TNG. That really was the most successful and most popular of all the Trek series, and it DID spawn the latter series.
Cameo appearances by the origional actors would benifit a prequel project, but due to their advanced age, and the fact that many may not WANT to go back to their roles (After all, has anyone gotten it in writing that they even WANT to do a continuation or is that a huge assumption?) so of course, replacements would be needed, but then, if Loren Green had died during TOS filming, there would certainly have been either a replacement, or some version of him to fill the role. The same applies with all of the cast. A successful series cannot rely on its actors, it must be the story line, the characters, the environment, that makes it successful. The actors are wonderful, and I love them, but its short sighted at best to say that a series cannot be successful because it isnt cast exactly like it was to begin with. People change, and they may not play the parts exactly the same ect ect ect.... In other words, life happens and the only common thread will be the story.
First off, the writers are probably different, continuation or not. With different writers, comes different personality quirks and ideas. That alone would be obvious. Anyone doubting this should watch Buffy from season to season as more and more of the writing was placed in the hands of more and more writers. The characters changed, at first subtle changes, then gradually more and more obviously. So too, would it happen with either idea, continuation or prequel. You cannot freeze time and make it last forever. The dance changes and eventually the last song plays. Its just a fact of life. No new project is going to be exactly what the origional series was. It simply will not be, and to hope or want it to be is an excercise in futility.
Finally, To grow means taking chances, and risk. Its risky to try a prequel, but there are so many stories and so much to work with in a prequel, that it should be taken seriously as an idea to kick start the legacy. Running TOS episodes during the prequel run would stimulate interest, but more importaintly, it would show the progression. People may very well say, "Oh I get it, thats why they didnt stay and fight" or "So THATS why they got that name" ect... You can make TOS even more vivid and colorful if you actually tell some history. After all, isnt the lions share of creating characters that become more than just a part, done by creating a past and a personality that is believeable and understood? Doesnt anyone want to know what truely transpired before the attack to make Baltar evil? Or Adama distrustful? Or Apollo wise? Or Starbuck... Starbuck? Wouldnt you like to understand Colonial life and what a socialator does, or why the Geminese are such good card players? There so much in TOS to be explored, but it cannot be explored if its blown up in the first hour. Take a chance, risk the unusual, and back a prequel, after all, it didnt work the other way, so whats there to lose?

tabbi

[jewels]

this thread has certainly had it's turns.

I cringe inwardly when I see the word prequel, because back in 2002-3 that was suggested as an alternate route for something else.

the way to bring all those backstory aspects into a story in process is to handle it much like LOST does--via flashback.

the thing that made Galactica different was this human culture's flight or exodus from there decimated home worlds and their search for their brothers, earth's 'colonizers'. To pick up the story again, it doesn't make sense to start anywhere that doesn't contain the rag-tag fleet's existence or journey, the lone battlestar protecting her civilian charges. that was what something averaging--roughly here--30-40 million viewers remember.

[Eric Paddon]

I have to be honest, not one of these arguments in favor of prequel makes any sense to me.

TNG was *not* the real deal, the successful movie series which was a continuation of the original Trek series is what made all subsequent Trek properties possible. And it's no surprise that the one Trek movie that above all others kickstarted the property into something long-term was Star Trek II, which unlike the first movie, went back into the series for inspiration. Without that, you have no Next Generation and nothing else after the first movie in all likelihood.

And second, how can you realistically expect original series actors to have any involvement in a "prequel" even in a cameo? That only works if you set the action a hundred yahrens later, which is a much more acceptable compromise, because you're continuing the original storyline and TOS episodes then tell us how it all started out.

A prequel is no solution at all for me.

[Sept17th]

Originally Posted by jewels

...the lone battlestar protecting her civilian charges. that was what something averaging--roughly here--30-40 million viewers remember.

Exactly, while Benedict et'al including Hatch--yes even him--are still around walking upright nothing else but continuation appeals to me.

[jewels]

i remember, when i was planning my galacticon trip, asking people i knew if they remembered BG. It intrigued me that everytime someone remembered it, the response was the same thing-Starbuck and Apollo. THEY were the first thing out of people's mouths. I think that speaks volumes about how the characters were written and acted in the original series.

continuation only makes sense.

[Darrell Lawrence]

Tabbi, first off, do you know what the word "prequel" means, because TNG was *not* a prequel. It was a continuation of the Star Trek universe.

A prequel takes place in the timeline BEFORE the already seen events.

A sequel takes place in the timeline AFTER the already seen events.

This is why everyone is pointing at "Enterprise" in your prequel senarios- Because it is a prequel and takes place BEFORE the original Star Trek.

TNG is a sequel, and takes place AFTER the original Star Trek.

[Damocles]

Originally Posted by Tabitha

The biggest factor you all seem to be hitting on is Enterprise. Well, screwing around with the Star Trek timeline, they way they did, turned off a lot of us fans. I boycotted the series when they started it, since finding a Klingon in a corn field is simply not possible under cannon Trek history. So right from the start it alienated its fan base by monkeying around with the history. So to base ANY relavance to Enterprise is like comparing the GINO project to TOS and asking why people like TOS less or more. Its apples and oranges. TOS Star Trek was a short lived and at the time not incredibly popular series that just took on a cult following. Anyone being intellectually honest MUST admit that. Its ratings got punched in the teeth by its rival, Lost In Space. So the real deal was ST:TNG. That really was the most successful and most popular of all the Trek series, and it DID spawn the latter series.
Cameo appearances by the origional actors would benifit a prequel project, but due to their advanced age, and the fact that many may not WANT to go back to their roles (After all, has anyone gotten it in writing that they even WANT to do a continuation or is that a huge assumption?) so of course, replacements would be needed, but then, if Loren Green had died during TOS filming, there would certainly have been either a replacement, or some version of him to fill the role. The same applies with all of the cast. A successful series cannot rely on its actors, it must be the story line, the characters, the environment, that makes it successful. The actors are wonderful, and I love them, but its short sighted at best to say that a series cannot be successful because it isnt cast exactly like it was to begin with. People change, and they may not play the parts exactly the same ect ect ect.... In other words, life happens and the only common thread will be the story.
First off, the writers are probably different, continuation or not. With different writers, comes different personality quirks and ideas. That alone would be obvious. Anyone doubting this should watch Buffy from season to season as more and more of the writing was placed in the hands of more and more writers. The characters changed, at first subtle changes, then gradually more and more obviously. So too, would it happen with either idea, continuation or prequel. You cannot freeze time and make it last forever. The dance changes and eventually the last song plays. Its just a fact of life. No new project is going to be exactly what the origional series was. It simply will not be, and to hope or want it to be is an excercise in futility.
Finally, To grow means taking chances, and risk. Its risky to try a prequel, but there are so many stories and so much to work with in a prequel, that it should be taken seriously as an idea to kick start the legacy. Running TOS episodes during the prequel run would stimulate interest, but more importaintly, it would show the progression. People may very well say, "Oh I get it, thats why they didnt stay and fight" or "So THATS why they got that name" ect... You can make TOS even more vivid and colorful if you actually tell some history. After all, isnt the lions share of creating characters that become more than just a part, done by creating a past and a personality that is believeable and understood? Doesnt anyone want to know what truely transpired before the attack to make Baltar evil? Or Adama distrustful? Or Apollo wise? Or Starbuck... Starbuck? Wouldnt you like to understand Colonial life and what a socialator does, or why the Geminese are such good card players? There so much in TOS to be explored, but it cannot be explored if its blown up in the first hour. Take a chance, risk the unusual, and back a prequel, after all, it didnt work the other way, so whats there to lose?

tabbi

I'm going to be odd man out in this thread and stick up for the idea of a pre-quel or rather a parallel continuation story here.

First of all I'm going to agree with Tabbi, that we may not be able to get Dirk and Richard to reprise their roles close to what we see in CBSG.

We also have to accept that with the loss of John Collicos, Patrick Mcknee, and Lorne Greene we have huge gaps in the casting. Let us face facts. If we were to reconstitute the story for a continuation, there would be much new casting and much new background writing. The dangers of a Galactica1980(which does not exist), or of another disaster Hammered down the publics' throats could erupt out of even the most well intentioned continuation project; if the writers, or the producer lose track of the story, or the canon universe background.

Actors can be hired and sets made in a continuation to reflect the CBSG, much as TESB and TRotJ reflected a continuation of SW/ANH. But who regards the prequels to the Star Wars trilogy as successfully reflecting the original trilogy? Not I.

As for "Star Wreck(TM)", after the Killer Bees, Berman and Bragga, got through with it? Don't get me started.

I can see where Tabbi is going. As long as you stay true to the story of the Colonies and their struggle against the Cylon tyranny, we can do a prequel, we can do a parallel, we can do a continuation, we can do a reprise. We can do whatever we want, as long as we stay true to the central vision and stick to the canon.

It is the vision of what the Colonials are and what they try to do that is the story. I would love to see what happens to Starbuck, Apollo, and Cassiopea, and Athena, and Sheba, and(especially) Colonel Tigh, and Boomer. I will ask for that. But if, in addition, I find out how the Battlestar Rycon saved Aquaria from a Cylon attack at some point in Colonial history; or how Baltar was turned by Iblis? Then that is gravy to go over my CBSG potatoes and I would love that, too.

As always

[Darrell Lawrence]

It's a given a continuation would have new casting, but ALSO allow for the appearances of original cast members, which is what is wanted.

A prequel would not allow any such appearances of those actors in their original roles.

This is where the Star Trek movies succeeded- We got the original cast in their original roles, along with a few new characters introduced.

Granted, a BG continuation would have MORE new characters introduced, but that is not the point- Getting the original cast in their roles is.

Tom DeSanto was going this route.

[Dawg]

Damocles - when did Patrick MacNee die?

Better tell him....

Anyway - in the case of BSG, a prequel is often suggested in order to deflect discussion and focus away from the potential of a continuation.

You see, a continuation set 25-30 yahrens after Hand of God give us the best of all possible worlds - and those who don't want to see a continuation know this. We would get to see the BSG universe in all its glory - a glory that was never fully realized in '78-79. We get to see beloved characters who were never allowed to fully develop - except in our imaginations. And we get to see a whole new generation pick up the gauntlet and carry the story of the Colonial Exodus forward.

In other words, we old-timers get the universe we fell in love with 25-some years ago, and the young pups get cutting edge storytelling with 21st Century technology. Win-win.

A prequel is all well and good, but it won't bring new interest in the original work to the extent some would have us believe. You only need to look at the Star Wars situation to see that.

And everything that came after the Star Trek of the 1960's - except Enterprise - was a continuation. EVERYTHING. It was the same universe, with the same history and background. The original series was the history of the movies, TNG, DS9 - all of it.

Prequels are useful for explaining the history of a universe (of whatever genre). But it's the most difficult situation to pull off; it's an incredible obligation on the part of the producers to not monkey with what has been established would happen in the future (Enterprise's biggest failure), it takes extensive knowledge of what's been produced already. And the main appeal of such a thing will be to those people who already know the universe being explored.

It is less expensive, less taxing, less controversial, to continue the story. And, speaking of the BSG universe, better for all concerned.

Let's save the prequel for a two-parter flashback.



I am
Dawg

[Damocles]

Originally Posted by Dawg

Damocles - when did Patrick MacNee die?

Better tell him....

Anyway - in the case of BSG, a prequel is often suggested in order to deflect discussion and focus away from the potential of a continuation.

You see, a continuation set 25-30 yahrens after Hand of God give us the best of all possible worlds - and those who don't want to see a continuation know this. We would get to see the BSG universe in all its glory - a glory that was never fully realized in '78-79. We get to see beloved characters who were never allowed to fully develop - except in our imaginations. And we get to see a whole new generation pick up the gauntlet and carry the story of the Colonial Exodus forward.

In other words, we old-timers get the universe we fell in love with 25-some years ago, and the young pups get cutting edge storytelling with 21st Century technology. Win-win.

A prequel is all well and good, but it won't bring new interest in the original work to the extent some would have us believe. You only need to look at the Star Wars situation to see that.

And everything that came after the Star Trek of the 1960's - except Enterprise - was a continuation. EVERYTHING. It was the same universe, with the same history and background. The original series was the history of the movies, TNG, DS9 - all of it.

Prequels are useful for explaining the history of a universe (of whatever genre). But it's the most difficult situation to pull off; it's an incredible obligation on the part of the producers to not monkey with what has been established would happen in the future (Enterprise's biggest failure), it takes extensive knowledge of what's been produced already. And the main appeal of such a thing will be to those people who already know the universe being explored.

It is less expensive, less taxing, less controversial, to continue the story. And, speaking of the BSG universe, better for all concerned.

Let's save the prequel for a two-parter flashback.



I am
Dawg

Patrick McKnee isn't dead, but he may be a little old to play Count Iblis, now. Also, if we expect Dirk and Richard to play their roles of Starbuck and Apollo; we have to factor age into their roles, and adjust the continuation accordingly. That is what I mean by casting gaps. I would say there is room for a prequel and/or a continuation, but I point out to all concerned that whether it is a prequel; or a continuation, the same dangers that Dawg has so prudently brought up about the prequel, apply to ANY effort.

But it's the most difficult situation to pull off; it's an incredible obligation on the part of the producers to not monkey with what has been established would happen in the future (Enterprise's biggest failure), it takes extensive knowledge of what's been produced already. And the main appeal of such a thing will be to those people who already know the universe being explored.

Exactly right. If you don't stay true to the story-that is to the canon-you will ruin whatever sequel, prequel, continuation, reprise, or parallel story you create that you conjoin with the original. It will be GINO II. Who wants that?

I note that with the Star Wreck(TM) continuations(to use the favorite example in this discussion), that many of the continuation movies(All of those with the TNG cast I would argue.) were stinkers. That TNG was a sine wave function as a series; that DS9 was a half parabola; and that ST/Voyager was an inverted correspondent function-that is: TNG is a peaking function that declined; DS9, a function that declined STEEPLY over time; and Voyager, a function that started at its peak and tanked as a series very early, and steeply declined into total failure by the time Enterpise first aired.

At the moment Scott Bakula showed up, as Captain Archer, to quantum leap Star Wreck(TM) into its too-long-delayed deserved grave, the Franchise was dead-killed by Berman and Bragga. When I saw that the best actor on the Enterprise series' pilot was Porthos, the dog, it was enough for me. It was badly executed continuations that killed the vision-not that lame prequel fast-buck maker that was Enterprise.

As always;

[Tabitha]

I think theres some misunderstand here. Im NOT saying a continuation isnt a good idea, Im just saying that prequel (yes I do know what the word means) might be the best way to get classic BSG back into the public. A continuation would run right against GINO, and be compared to it, and since we know that the GINO crowd are very vocal, it would only be asking for the flames of war to start again. To avoid forcing people to take sides in a fight they dont want, we DO have an alternative. We can tell the story BEFORE the story. We can set the ground work for a restoration of TOS. I feel that a continuation would be great, except, its already being done, in a way with GINO. I know, GINO ISNT TOS, but in the mind of the casual viewer, and maybe some of the not so casual viewers, since GINO has run longer than TOS, in a way it actually has more of a story line and therefore can be considered more "BSG" than TOS. I dont agree with this opinion, but Ive debated this with my friends who have watched both, and thats what I come away with after we talk. So Im passing this along, because, those of us in our trenches sometimes dont get the chance to hear what the people on the home front think or feel. Its often far different than what we want or think we will hear.
That said, as unpopular as I am now, I would point out, that there would be NO competition for a prequel, or a spin off, Battlestar Rycon for example. As Damocles was saying, there IS interest in other stories than just the Galactica. Sure we all long to know where Glen Larsen was headed, but after all this time I doubt even Mr Larsen knows where Mr Larsen was headed. For that matter, I doubt ANY of the writers remember what the over all plot line was, since it was changed on the fly from episode to episode, consider the confusion of where Cain was during the episodes with Pegasus. Hes here, hes there, hes everywhere... The lack of a consistant storyline was charming, but that is one strength that GINO has, and to create a series that honors TOS and its principals, the new BSG project MUST be stronger. It MUST have exactly the right ballance and brilliance that GINO lacks, and I just feel that prequel, sequel, or spin off, nothing will satisfy everyone, so to get it of the ground, and to regain the momentum towards TOS, we need to focus on a project that will fly on its own merits, not on just wether its better than the other guy.

tabbi

[TwoBrainedCylon]

I have to take Tabbi's side on this, and as Ernie indicated, we are very seriously considering doing a second audio series that's a prequel to the original Galactica series. The characters will be original but I don't see that as anyway harmful to the Exodus series, which is an expansion/continuation, or any studio approved continuation effort. Concurrently, I can't see a studio prequel effort as being any more harmful to a continuiation effort than anything else that has already taken place with this franchise.

I see a prequel as a great setting that can be pretty well explored. If you look at the hints that the original series provided, the earlier times would be some pretty cool stuff, essentially having much of the sailing ships in the new world feel to it. The Galactica used observation domes for navigation and the asteroid colonies seemed like a cross between the Old West and the Spanish settlements. I personally find this to be a pretty fun setting that opens the doors to do stories that couldn't be done with a continuation.

Enterprise failed because they took the entire premise of the original series and tossed it in the trash can for something they thought was more cool. I think you can link similar failures to most projects that claim to expand a franchise and then just trash it. If Universal opted to do a prequel, they would likely trash it up as well, as that's the swarmy thing they like to do, but I wouldn't have much more faith that they wouldn't tear up a continuation as well.

So, FWIW, if we press on with a prequel audio series it will likely have 6-8 stories and Lords of Kobol willing, should fit in with the original series pretty damn well.


Sandy

[jewels]

Originally Posted by Damocles

Patrick McKnee isn't dead, but he may be a little old to play Count Iblis, now. Also, if we expect Dirk and Richard to play their roles of Starbuck and Apollo; we have to factor age into their roles, and adjust the continuation accordingly. That is what I mean by casting gaps.

every continuation scenario that's been proposed to Universal over the decades has factored whether or not time has passed in along with what happens to characters whose actors are no longer with us or characters that won't be as central as they may have been. patrick macnee is too frail to do a stage/film acting job, that would obviously be a spot for some recasting to occur.

jewels

[kingfish]

My two cents:

1) A prequel could have worked but we wouldn’t have seen the actors back in the roles that made them famous.

2) With the BG universe there wasn’t that much information in the pilot, Saga so a prequel couldn’t do too much harm to the world/cannon of BG.

3) Enterprise failed because it rewrote os Trek cannon. To make up for poor scripts we were shown sex which didn’t help the show, reminds me of another unnamed show.

4) CONTINUATION- This is the way to go IMHO. Richard, Dirk, Herb, Anne, ect are still with us. True Collicos, Greene, Bridges, and a few others aren’t here anymore but they could have been with us but too fragile to reprise their parts so then what? Throw the baby out with the bath water. Some roles would have to be recast whether we like it or not. Better to give a little to receive a lot IMHO.

[Darrell Lawrence]

Sandy, you'd take a prequel over a Continuation in an OFFICIAL production?

Just want to clarify your post in regards to agreeing with Tabbi.

[TwoBrainedCylon]

Nope. but I don't think it would necessarily be any worse either.

I hope DeSanto gets his hands on Galactica but if he had his full way, we'd have seen Cylon-Borgs that I don't think would have been a good move. A prequel showing the early Cylons that was truly faithful to the ideas laid out in the original series would be better to me than a continuation that wandered off into Trek-land or some commentary about modern day politics.

Given the choice, I'd prefer a Continuation but I don't think a prequel would be a bad thing. I also don't think that after a couple of years, a Continuation would be well founded with the original cast, nor should it be.

The cast is getting older and one of the problems with the format is that there aren't a lot of places to promote these people ... which begs the question of what do you do with them. Richard tried to do this with his book and you had a lot of high ranking people just bumping into each other. To me, it was a bit of a mess. Keeping them in place, 25+ years later is a lot like the Trek thing where you keep coming up with wild excuses as to why nothing had changed. Advancing them all works but not if the story remains primarily focused on them. Who wants Commander Apollo and Colonel Starbuck and Colonel Sheba all arguing over who is going to go out on patrol.

IOW, the characters we followed would have to start to fade into the background so a new set of characters come come forward and be the new focus.

So, the "Gotta have Apollo and Starbuck and Boomer" is a limited arguement. It works for a transition but its not the end goal.

This might be why DeSanto wanted to do a CG version.

I want to see the original series elements neatly wrapped up and the themes carried onward. I'd like to see a continuation progress logically. However, under every premise, I see the only viable path to be a transition in which much of the old Galactica foundation fades in the background and a next generation steps forward.

I'd hope that Galactica did this better than they did with Trek, in which we leap very far ahead and then try to backfill as we go.


Sandy

[BST]

Another alternative is to use the 27-year interlude into developing a few more ships to augment the fleet. Maybe not quite the size of a battlestar but, something substantial, nonetheless. Then, there would be a little maneuverability in terms of where to 'put people' because, at their age, Apollo, Starbuck, Boomer, Sheba, ... should NOT be flying patrols. Their value to the fleet would be in positions of command and strategy.

I also agree with the thought that any continuation is going to be a transition from the 'current' generation to the next one. (I said the same thing, myself, on the "Why not a prequel?" thread.)



However, that doesn't mean that the original actors/characters have to be phased out. They can and should play a meaningful role in a continuation saga and not just be there for cameos or a final lap around the field.

[Darrell Lawrence]

Sandy, thanks for the clarification. For a bit there, I was wondering if I'd have to check that second brain for a virus or something

I agree a prequel would work. But it'd need to be one that didn't over-write existing stuff, but can add NEW stuff, ala the Cylon ideas you've had.

But again, that choice would be AFTER certain resources for a continuation are gone

[Tabitha]

I gotta give RH credit for knowing which way the wind is blowing before many others. While Im certainly not pro-*It* Im impressed that he saw his chance to make money and took it without anyone seeing him as a bad guy or a villan. Hes got good business sence and will certainly succeed in his career.
His new job will pay his bills, and he will have the funds to do what he wants to with his life. After the jobs gone, he will have the funds to perhaps... make a continuation, more as a director or producer, than an actor, but he may have the ability to do so. There is typically a bright side if one looks hard enough. While I dont share the opinion that a continuation was ever truely close to becomming a reality (sure I know other dissagree, but I have heard far too many things saying it wasnt) I hope that he might take the backlash to heart, seeing that his fan base loves him, and wants him to be there as Apollo, and welcome him with open arms. I hope that he feels the love and adoration of the TOS fan base, and that he sees us as not fickle hate filled angry fans, but as sad, hopeful, and trusting fans that will back him if he just tries one more time. Maybe some of the modelers and amature actors here can assist his efforts next time. If he had to PAY those actors of the first fan film, I can only imagine that some of the beautiful people on CF and CA would willingly help for free or darn cheap.
RH did what he thought was right, the same as Leonard Nemoy with his Im Spock/ Im not Spock/ Im really Spock again thing. People change, as do their visions. Sometimes we see what we WANT to see, and other times we have to face reality with the cold sick feeling in our stomachs, and just accept that we screwed up and have to take the consequences. Its through love, and understanding that we find out real friends. Not the ones that like us when they agree with us, but the ones that love us even when were wrong, or they are. I guess thats why I can accept that *It* is the thing that RDM thinks is the right thing to do, and the role as Zarek is the right thing for Richard. Just as my moronic posts are what I consider the right thing to say for me. Regardless, Im still a fan of Mr Hatch, and RDM, and TOS. I cant say the same for *It* though sometimes, just sometimes its almost up to the standards of TOS, but only sometimes. So lets not hate, or begrudge, lets just agree we dont agree with him this time, or that we dislike the situation that he/we are faced with. And maybe someday Richard will join us as our shepherd and we can again flock towards some kind of TOS continuation, or off shoot or prequel.

tab

[TwoBrainedCylon]

Darrell,

Nope. Brains working fine. I've just seen enough old shows brought back to life to know that the secondary concern is what format they intend to branch off with. The primary concern is whether or not those making the thing actually care about the original source material or are simply trying to impress everyone else with how creative they can be.

I'd even go for a faithful remake over a haphazard continuation or prequel.

Still, I think there's a lot of opportunities built into the original series universe to do some really top-quality stuff. One direction over another isn't the key. Getting the right people to do it is the key.


Sandy

[Titon]

Hes got good business sence and will certainly succeed in his career

Er this is to funny to even comment on. Business sense? Sorry Tabbi, not even freakin close!