Question to Michael

Apothis · December 30th, 2002, 02:00 PM

I noticed today on the Sci-Fi Board that there is talk of possible rewrites for Moore's script. Is this a possibility or is the script set in stone and nothing can change it?

michaelfaries · December 31st, 2002, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Apothis
I noticed today on the Sci-Fi Board that there is talk of possible rewrites for Moore's script. Is this a possibility or is the script set in stone and nothing can change it?

Personal opinions, and not absolute facts:

I believe the script is final. Universal is seeking to get BG off the ground. They're evaluating everything again, though, in my humble opinion, based on public dischord from the casting sheet information which leaked 2.Dec.02 on filmjerk.com.

Mr. Moore is focused on "Carnivale" (the cable TV series in the U.S.) at the moment; David Eick is carrying the BG production reins at the moment.

Universal doesn't believe that fans totally understand what makes a successful television series. (It's their expertise; they "know better.") They also know that they have a potential blockbuster IF it's done right. They've waited for years for the "right person/people to come along." They liked Richard; they liked Glen. They wanted something more, though, like a James Cameron. (I'm not kidding.)

One of the troubles is, science fiction is expensive to produce. (I'll remind everyone that it was Dravishol/Ravishol who pegged one major problem: The budget in DeSanto/Singer's production.) Vivendi Universal needs to make money, not lose more of it. They need a qualified, proven production team to pull it off. They've lost a fair sum of $$ in trying to get this show off the ground. The development costs have been eating at them.

Right now, the low vote of confidence in Moore/Eick's BG remake is evident. The flow of snail mail to Vivendi Universal has ebbed; they actually want a LOT more letters -- and can't accept that people are simply tired of Vivendi Universal not listening to their past wants/hopes.

People are not supporting the new BG production like they expected. Vivendi Universal is purportedly rethinking things, or so I'm hearing. That doesn't mean everything is fine and dandy.

I believe they're considering rewrites of the Moore script. (Which is a mistake. It can't be changed easily to anything that fans want, even if it means gender reversals for some, sex omissions in some scenes, and changes for the Galactica. Scrap the entire script and talk with a study group of fans, like ourselves.)

BG will not be shelved indefinitely. Even if Moore/Eick lose it, it's my opinion that there are plenty of folks who want a shot at it. And I'm not talking about just Larson, Hatch, or DeSanto either.

It ain't over just yet. But whoever gets Galactica off the ground will have to make it fly high... or that's it for this property. It can't survive another "Galactica: 1980" failure. And right now, the current remake plans are damning the property to that fate. This is IT. The new show has to succeed. Vivendi Universal knows it. That's why they're taking another look. We'll see how smart they are about it, though.

Michael
:colwar:

Apothis · January 1st, 2003, 06:42 AM

Thanks Michael. That sure is alot of good information.

dah66 · January 1st, 2003, 10:01 AM

The answer to Universal's 'big name' problem is obvious - Stephen Sommers. The guy that wrote and directed The Mummy movies for Universal.

Let's face the facts:
1. He gave the studio a major franchise with the Mummy movies.
2. He's got that "Egyptian thing" going on. Galactica had that "Egyptian thing" too.
3. He liked Star Wars. This would be his chance to make a movie with robots and space ships.
4. He's a "known name". Meaning, they could advertise the new Galactica with "From the writer and director of The Mummy and the Mummy Returns..."

Anyway, this seems like the perfect match up to me. I doubt that we would get a production with great emotional depth, but I'm betting it would be fun!

Dave

peter noble · January 1st, 2003, 12:38 PM

Michael, RDM has mentioned they've got an eight figure sum for a budget, I thought Tom had less to work with?

Peter

michaelfaries · January 1st, 2003, 06:26 PM

Tom had more, from what I understood.

M.

January 1st, 2003, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by michaelfaries
Tom had more, from what I understood.

M.

a bigger budget for a 2 hour pilot tele movie compared to a 4 hour mini series.