Info from Ron Moore

TwoBrainedCylon · January 1st, 2004, 09:58 AM

This morning, Ron gave me permission to release this information:

It is a bit more than a week old. I presume that if there was an update to the original report, Ron would have mentioned something. I'll presume this is current as of the morning of 1 Jan 2004.

According to Ron, the execs are in discussions on how to procede. The series regulars were given more money and their options were extended into January to give SciFi more time to make a final decision. Hopefully a decision will be made by mid-Jan.

Nothing really new here, and frankly, Ron isn' always the first person informed of such things, but some might find this useful. It does coincide with what I understand others have been saying, minus the idea that a decision has already been made.

Sandy

sharpe26 · January 1st, 2004, 10:08 AM

well, some news is better then no news at all.

TwoBrainedCylon · January 1st, 2004, 10:24 AM

I just got an update that is accurate as of 13:00 EST 1 Jan 2004. This comes from BOTH Ron Moore and my contact at Skiffy. Their e-mails hit back to back:

"Heavy talks" are underway. According to Ron, money has not been an issue for this production and the initial steps are typical of what is normal for a miniseries progressing to a series. Ron has not been contacted about a 2005 miniseries and such a plan is difficult given the actors contracts. All of the discussions with Ron have focused entirely on a weekly series to show in 2004. According to my friend at Skiffy, if this plan were to go through, the series would show in Aug 2004.

Ron is under the impresssion that Skiffy hasn't made up their minds about going to a series and are debating if they want to make this a series. They are pressing forward with possible storylines, writer's bible, etc. My Skiffy contact says that they have already decided that they do want to go to a series but money is the issue. As I said, nobody has ever told Ron that money is a problem. Ron has also not been informed of any legal issues with Larson outside of the writing credit on the miniseries.

Sandy

koenigrules · January 1st, 2004, 10:30 AM

Let's hope the series goes through.
It sounds good!

Darth Marley · January 1st, 2004, 10:45 AM

I'll only start hating you when you bring bad news.

January 1st, 2004, 10:47 AM

I'm taking bets as to how long it will take for this to show up "somewhere" as a "news item."

TwoBrainedCylon · January 1st, 2004, 10:50 AM

As long as it takes to get it cut and pasted onto one site so the "somewhere" doesn't have to credit CF or CA for the info.

Sandy

Darth Marley · January 1st, 2004, 10:51 AM

Haha.

I did check over there,nothing yet.

January 1st, 2004, 10:56 AM

Quote:

As long as it takes to get it cut and pasted onto one site so the "somewhere" doesn't have to credit CF or CA for the info.

Sir, you won a cigar!

sharpe26 · January 1st, 2004, 11:01 AM

well now, the question now is going to be ; will there be two galacticas?

January 1st, 2004, 11:05 AM

The only precedent I can think of for that would be the Ghostbusters cartoons. There was the Filmation one, and then the one based on the Dan Aykroyd movies. Two completely different universes, but both shows were titled by the same name.

TwoBrainedCylon · January 1st, 2004, 11:17 AM

Actually, I think Hinman did get an actual e-mail direct from Ron (or a copy of one from somewhere). The text he quotes is pretty exacting to an e-mail I got. I don't think the CA or CF posts were his source.

Sandy

January 1st, 2004, 11:44 AM

Not to doubt your sources guys, but this report seems too good to be true. Though I admit, it makes a lot of sense, I'm just not getting the whole part about him leaving Carnivale. He was happy as hell that it got picked up for another season, and now he's leaving just for a chance to do Galactica? I mean crap, for a chance to Galactica I'd probably leave too, but my point is why is he announcing it. If it were me, I'd wait for Galactica to be officially greenlighted before I made any quick decisions.

I dunno, thats just me. I like job security.

larocque6689 · January 1st, 2004, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jjrakman
Sir, you won a cigar!

Smoked by Katee Sackoff?

TwoBrainedCylon · January 1st, 2004, 11:47 AM

Ron didn't mention anything to me about Carnivale. I don't know anything about that part. Hinman's text regarding BSG was very close to what Ron sent me.

Sandy

January 1st, 2004, 11:47 AM

BTW- Someone on the G2003 mailing list said Colonial Fleets was Anti-BSG. A bunch of guys stood up for it on the list, but I thought it was funny as hell. Who makes a website thats anti-BSG and calls it something right out of BSG without putting some derogatory twist on it. Like "Colonial Streets" or something tlike that. :P

January 1st, 2004, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TwoBrainedCylon
Ron didn't mention anything to me about Carnivale. I don't know anything about that part. Hinman's text regarding BSG was very close to what Ron sent me.

Sandy

Thats what I thought. See that's the only part that doesn't make sense. The rest is more than likely true. I can see the studio taking at least a month to make a decision on a series as controversial as a BSG remake. They're probably sitting in a big high-rise office, asking each other "Ok, just how badly can we screw this thing up?"

larocque6689 · January 1st, 2004, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike Wright
BTW- Someone on the G2003 mailing list said Colonial Fleets was Anti-BSG. A bunch of guys stood up for it on the list, but I thought it was funny as hell. Who makes a website thats anti-BSG and calls it something right out of BSG without putting some derogatory twist on it. Like "Colonial Streets" or something tlike that. :P

Koenigrules and the member of the Yahoo G2003 list was echoing comments which were ultimately traced back to the webmaster of syfyportal.com on his own message board. I have stepped back from this. Said webmaster and Tom have since communicated about the matter and I trust Tom's judgment in dealing with this fairly and to the benefit of ColonialFleets.

dec5 · January 1st, 2004, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TwoBrainedCylon
I just got an update that is accurate as of 13:00 EST 1 Jan 2004. This comes from BOTH Ron Moore and my contact at Skiffy. Their e-mails hit back to back:

"Heavy talks" are underway. According to Ron, money has not been an issue for this production and the initial steps are typical of what is normal for a miniseries progressing to a series. Ron has not been contacted about a 2005 miniseries and such a plan is difficult given the actors contracts. All of the discussions with Ron have focused entirely on a weekly series to show in 2004. According to my friend at Skiffy, if this plan were to go through, the series would show in Aug 2004.

Ron is under the impresssion that Skiffy hasn't made up their minds about going to a series and are debating if they want to make this a series. They are pressing forward with possible storylines, writer's bible, etc. My Skiffy contact says that they have already decided that they do want to go to a series but money is the issue. As I said, nobody has ever told Ron that money is a problem. Ron has also not been informed of any legal issues with Larson outside of the writing credit on the miniseries.

Sandy

Thanks TBC!!!

I think they can avoid the contract problems by just doing the mini series this year.....while everything is still freash!! Give the story closure in a 6 hour mini.......sell the DVDs......and then think about a series later after SG1 Atlantis is on the air......which will probably be another source of money for Scifi..like SG1.......

As a fan.....I want to see a happy ending!!!!! And this is the best way to do it IMO.

koenigrules · January 1st, 2004, 12:23 PM

Sounds to me like we're back at the miniseries rumor mill again.
Look, either Galactica will be a series or not- based on the Ron Moore update.
Let's not start spreading new rumors, OK?
Pretty soon we'll be back to the nonsense that it was never conceived as a series & that the 4 hour miniseries was all that there was (the December 10th post, remember?).
Let's await news of the series, OK?

koenigrules · January 1st, 2004, 12:39 PM

Sounds to me like Sci-Fi Channel bashing continues as well.
One should congratulate Sci-Fi for considering Galactica as a series.
Other networks would pass without giving it the time of day, including Fox (remember Firefly?), WB, UPN & of course the major networks!
Whatever Lords of Kobol you pray to, let's wait for the pick-up of the series.
And that should be more of a reality with each passing day!
Avoid all other rumors that say otherwise.
Thanks Ron & thanks Sci-Fi for giving us some good Sci-Fi on TV!

TwoBrainedCylon · January 1st, 2004, 12:43 PM

Koenigrules,

I'm not going to get into a debate with you. The 10 Dec post NEVER said such a thing. It said that there wasn't going to be any series soon due to a lack of funds. Everything that has followed strongly indicates that was a true statement at the time it was made and was only reconsidered after the weekend ratings showed stronger than anyone at Skiffy suspected.

I'm frankly getting pretty tired of this trollish activity from you and a couple of others each time I make an information post. Plus, as I understand things, you have been promiting the idea that Fleets is a "hate site". If this is how you feel, why are you here in the first place? Is it merely to try to tear apart any information forwarded that isn't delivered by G2003.net or SyFyPortal.com? If you have another purpose here, I don't see it.

Regardless, I don't appreciate my posts being mischaracterized, especially since I have yet to see anything at all that indicates they are wrong and at least one official statement (IGN) saying that the post is correct.

Basically, give it a rest.

Sandy

peter noble · January 1st, 2004, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by koenigrules
Pretty soon we'll be back to the nonsense that it was never conceived as a series & that the 4 hour miniseries was all that there was (the December 10th post, remember?).

I don't think anyone on a board I frequent has said it was never conceived as a possible series, both David Eick and Ron Moore have stated in interviews that they hoped it would go to series and accordingly the mini leaves it open for a series to be developed.

As for the Dec 10th post, I seem to recall, it stated that according to a source within Sci-Fi that there was no money for a series due to their budget having been allocated for 2004.

We'll all know the state of play when we hear official confirmation from Sci-Fi, then the rumours on the bulletin boards or from SF-related internet "news" sites will be either confirmed or shot down as just rumours.

Regards,

Peter

koenigrules · January 1st, 2004, 12:46 PM

You missed the point of my posts.
Rumors are starting again on a miniseries & I see negative opinions about Sci-Fi.
Can I not post this info or not?
Or is this board slanted to not praise Sci-Fi's decision.
Confused here....

TwoBrainedCylon · January 1st, 2004, 12:51 PM

I'll help you out of your confusion.

Some people (myself included) are being told what's developing with a possible series. Others are leaping in with an agenda intent on causing trouble. You sound like the latter.

I don't question anyone's information or integrity until I have information that confirms either is invalid. At best, the criticisms about the 10 Dec post are people's speculation that they don't believe it. That's fine. Everyone is welcome to do that. Attacking those that provide information is unwarranted. Altering what posts actually said and then proclaiming that the poster was wrong and is lying and shows a disturbing agenda on the part of those doing it. Michael Hinman did this several times. You are doing it now. I don't appreciate it and would like you to stop immediately.

Claiming you are confused or that any board is slanted because people don't appreciate your bad conduct is insincere and childish.

I hope things are clear now.

Sandy

peter noble · January 1st, 2004, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by koenigrules
You missed the point of my posts.
Rumors are starting again on a miniseries & I see negative opinions about Sci-Fi.
Can I not post this info or not?
Or is this board slanted to not praise Sci-Fi's decision.
Confused here....

Your posting aren't you, you've answered your own question.

Here, like many other boards you are going to read both negative and positive posts about Sci-Fi.

From someone outside the country, they certainly appear to have P.O.ed a lot of their potential audience off over the years. Hopefully when the NBC deal is 100 per cent sealed that will change. After all, a new broom sweeps clean.

Peter

koenigrules · January 1st, 2004, 12:57 PM

I am not aware of the agenda you mentioned.
All I wanted to say is that it gets confusing when a lot of rumors keep cropping up that state Galactica is a No Go.
I loved the mini & am looking forward to a series, that's all.
I am a fan of the old & new show.
I loved it as a kid, I love it as a 40s something adult!
And I consume as much info as possible on any Galactica site that I can- without knocking anyone.
I hope I've clearly stated my position here.
Thanks Sandy.
Jim

TwoBrainedCylon · January 1st, 2004, 01:08 PM

Jim,

My perception is that at least six people are all explaining what they honestly feel is going on. I take it that six people are telling the truth. Since a new series is going to involve multiple companies with varying employees, different people are going to hear different things. They also know decisions at different levels.

I only have reason to think that one person may be lying in this whole thing. Beyond this one individual, even Ted Gorospe, whom I have a long and ugly history with, seems to be telling a fairly straight story from what I hear. I think his information is as correct as mine or almost anyone else's. They come from different people.

In the same way that a car wreck generates varying stories, all from the same true event, this undoubtedly will as well. I personally think everyone who is interested should make a huge effort in just reading the facts presented and take them with what they say and nothing more.

For instance, the 10 Dec post you referenced said that Skiffy wasn't planning to make a series soon due to lack of funds. This decision came from a meeting that had been pre-arranged, although the lack of funds announcement was something of a surprise to some people at the meeting. The post means nothing more than that. There was a meeting. They made the decision. (Actually the post was meant to encourage people to stop fighting like idiots but that purpose failed badly).

I'm convinced that many who didn't like that post already knew that Ron Moore was concurrently working on script ideas and a series bible. If you read beyond these facts, it seems like someone is lying. In fact, both reports are true. They are just coming from different elements. That doesn't make them rumors.

If you really don't want to deal with rumors, then the very, very simple solution is to ignore everything that isn't an official announcement. That includes BBoard posts and "news" you might see on a website. I personally wouldn't put any more credibility to a website report than I would a BBoard post. Both are equally easy to make.

If you want to sift through rumors, then figure out who you trust and who you respect. That's your right. You don't have a right to lash out at others who provide info or may trust or respect people other than those you've chosen to listen to.

Sandy

BST · January 1st, 2004, 01:19 PM

I am re-posting this from another thread:

Quote:

Until an OFFICIAL announcement by Sci-Fi, there is NO REASON to believe that a follow-up to the show will OR will not be. The fact that the issue is being discussed, at this time, means that NO decision has been made yet. It is all speculation UNTIL officially announced by Sci-Fi.

THAT is the bottom line.

If there is news, please treat it as such.

January 1st, 2004, 02:18 PM

Wow. This reminds me of YARNS ago, when the Pre-Scifi-Art team then known as 3D Warriors did battle with the evil Behaviour Group, who sought only to polute all decent loving Trek lovers with their "We alone are allowed rights to the Trek Franchise" banter.

I guess you could look at this in a good light. Years later, we were all friends, and many successful websites and groups sprung from it, arguably bettering the Internet as we know it... Though Trek died, I guess that wasn't good. But the point is, you guys will get over this, if not years from now, because we'll all either be still hoping for some incarnation of Galactica or we'll have at least one, and we'll all be pushing for the continuation. (Or we'll have the continuation too, in any case, we'll all be happy!) And all will be well, because it will be a good time. A time when there is no crappy Trek on the air. (Hell, I think most of us don't even care if its on the air at this point... They tried fixing it, just leave it alone for a while is all I'm saying...)