View Full Version : Battlestar Galactica to the Big Screen?
Promus
September 25th, 2009, 03:55 AM
I think the worst part of those ideas were the character changes and the horrific, traumatic stuff like Athena catching on fire and Adama burning his hands off while trying to put out the fire with his bare hands. I mean...sheesh! Plus it was really part of a hackneyed excuse for them to recast the role of Athena, since she'd have go undergo "reconstructive surgery" or something. Which basically means no Maren Jensen. Which, for somebody like me, is REALLY stupid!! Heck, walking Vipers sounds better than that. :LOL:
TwoBrainedCylon
September 27th, 2009, 07:30 AM
I could have handled some major downpoints in the series. Properly presented, Athena burning up would have been a good (storywise) development, although I'd have taken the character out completely. By the end of the series, Cassie had assumed the watch-hen role for Adama and having him plodding through the emotions of failing to save his daughter would have been a good mechanism to really bring out their relationship and keep Adama as a forefront character beyond stiff commander on the bridge.
I could never accept the walking viper bit.
In my opinion, Larson isn't a developer as much as he is an opportunist. He did a masterful job at bringing talented folks together but as the singular show developer, he's lacking. Ron Moore and George Lucas are similar in that respect as they can get something going but then have no idea what they want to do with it. 98% of Star Wars brilliance was outside of Lucas and similarly, Galactica's flare came from the people Glen hired (some of whom were the same folks from Star Wars).
My concern for Glen's involvement is that he doesn't bring anything to the table other than the copyright ownership and his previous ideas haven't been all that good.
Russell
Singer and DeSanto are far better at developing out
peter noble
September 27th, 2009, 09:11 AM
I'd just like to point out that the walking Vipers are from the Pegasus movie Larson planned to do with Todd Moyer, and NOT from the second season document.
Promus
September 27th, 2009, 04:02 PM
Why is everyone so opposed to the idea of "walking Vipers," anyway? In an odd sense, I think it actually sounds kind of cool.
Certainly better than killing off/recasting Athena!
BST
September 27th, 2009, 08:23 PM
Why is everyone so opposed to the idea of "walking Vipers," anyway? In an odd sense, I think it actually sounds kind of cool.
Certainly better than killing off/recasting Athena!
For me, it would help distance the show from the comparisons to Star Wars.
Promus
September 27th, 2009, 10:49 PM
Possibly, although Lucasfilm might still say it's too similar to the AT-ST walkers from "Return of the Jedi."
dilbertman
September 28th, 2009, 08:21 AM
Possibly, although Lucasfilm might still say it's too similar to the AT-ST walkers from "Return of the Jedi."
Or the "Droid Starfighters" from "The Phantom Menace".
http://www.spencer1984.com/image/m122a.jpg
http://www.spencer1984.com/my_models/droidfighter.php
Jim
peter noble
September 28th, 2009, 08:46 AM
Robotech/Macross got their first in the 80s.
Here's a Valkyrie from the most recent series, Macross Frontier.
Promus
September 28th, 2009, 12:51 PM
Or the "Droid Starfighters" from "The Phantom Menace".
Ah ha, I KNEW there was a better Star Wars example to use!
monolith21
September 28th, 2009, 10:20 PM
I'm not at all keen on the walking Vipers...but it certainly wouldn't be a deal breaker for me if the story was great.
I doubt Singer will use walking Vipers though. He seems pretty set on sticking with the original.
Kronus
October 1st, 2009, 01:36 PM
I agree with BST...the walking viper is a lot like Star Wars and BSG needs to distance from that. The last thing we need is LucasFilms gumming up the works. Besides, I would hope that BSG would strive more for originality...I would hope like Monolith stated about Singer...staying close to the original concepts...
Gemini1999
October 1st, 2009, 04:16 PM
I agree with BST...the walking viper is a lot like Star Wars and BSG needs to distance from that. The last thing we need is LucasFilms gumming up the works. Besides, I would hope that BSG would strive more for originality...I would hope like Monolith stated about Singer...staying close to the original concepts...
Not to mention the fact that a walking Viper.....where's the need? The Colonials have Landrams and power sleds, so it's just not necessary.
Also, given the fact that there have been 2 Transformers films already, the idea of a walking Viper would probably draw more criticism than it would be worth.
Personally, I was never wowed by the idea when I first heard about it.
Bryan
spiderr987
October 3rd, 2009, 01:39 AM
I could have handled some major downpoints in the series. Properly presented, Athena burning up would have been a good (storywise) development, although I'd have taken the character out completely. By the end of the series, Cassie had assumed the watch-hen role for Adama and having him plodding through the emotions of failing to save his daughter would have been a good mechanism to really bring out their relationship and keep Adama as a forefront character beyond stiff commander on the bridge.
I could never accept the walking viper bit.
In my opinion, Larson isn't a developer as much as he is an opportunist. He did a masterful job at bringing talented folks together but as the singular show developer, he's lacking. Ron Moore and George Lucas are similar in that respect as they can get something going but then have no idea what they want to do with it. 98% of Star Wars brilliance was outside of Lucas and similarly, Galactica's flare came from the people Glen hired (some of whom were the same folks from Star Wars).
My concern for Glen's involvement is that he doesn't bring anything to the table other than the copyright ownership and his previous ideas haven't been all that good.
Russell
Singer and DeSanto are far better at developing out
Hmmm... interesting take on things, Russell. I never thought of it like that. I guess it take more than a general to win a war. ...not comparing to the two in character, of course, but Hitler was a propaganda genius, but was clueless on overall strategy and war tactics. Thank God he didn't listen to the very war savvy generals at his command.
Athene
October 3rd, 2009, 10:27 AM
I'm not at all keen on the walking Vipers...but it certainly wouldn't be a deal breaker for me if the story was great.
I doubt Singer will use walking Vipers though. He seems pretty set on sticking with the original.
I'm not keen on the walking Vipers either. I also like the fact that Singer being pretty set on sticking with the original. You can't beat an original IMHO. ;)
spiderr987
October 3rd, 2009, 11:12 AM
I'm not keen on the walking Vipers either. I also like the fact that Singer being pretty set on sticking with the original. You can't beat an original IMHO. ;)
That's true. I'm an even bigger STAR WARS fan, than I am of BSG TOS and look what happened when Lucas strayed from the spiritual origins of the Force and starting getting all Church of Scientology on us, with all the MidiChlorian crap. When Qui Gon Gin pulled out the Tri-quarter and did a body scan and analyzing blood samples, I thought I was watching STAR TREK for a sec. For the record, I prefer to keep my STAR TREK scientific and my STAR WARS spiritual.
Kronus
October 5th, 2009, 06:22 AM
That's true. I'm an even bigger STAR WARS fan, than I am of BSG TOS and look what happened when Lucas strayed from the spiritual origins of the Force and starting getting all Church of Scientology on us, with all the MidiChlorian crap. When Qui Gon Gin pulled out the Tri-quarter and did a body scan and analyzing blood samples, I thought I was watching STAR TREK for a sec. For the record, I prefer to keep my STAR TREK scientific and my STAR WARS spiritual.
You know I reacted the same way! They didn't need to explain WHY the Jedi had the powerof the Force...
Okay I better stop before I get WAY off the main topic...:D
I am really putting a lot of hope and faith (and I know I am not alone in this) into Singer in keeping close to the original and not allowing Larsen and others to stray off into something like Ron's version and have nothing in common with the heart of what made the 1978 BSG "BSG."
Damocles
October 7th, 2009, 05:42 PM
That's true. I'm an even bigger STAR WARS fan, than I am of BSG TOS and look what happened when Lucas strayed from the spiritual origins of the Force and starting getting all Church of Scientology on us, with all the MidiChlorian crap. When Qui Gon Gin pulled out the Tri-quarter and did a body scan and analyzing blood samples, I thought I was watching STAR TREK for a sec. For the record, I prefer to keep my STAR TREK scientific and my STAR WARS spiritual.
Neither were or are; at least not when they drifted out of original concept.
spiderr987
October 15th, 2009, 02:01 AM
It took me this long, before I came across the actor, who has the charm, charisma and playboy attributes to give Dirk's Starbuck role the justice it deserves:
http://www.usanetwork.com/series/whitecollar/theshow/characterprofiles/neal/gallery/n03.jpg
Matt Bomerhttp://static.tvguide.com/MediaBin/Galleries/Shows/S_Z/Wa_Wh/White_Collar/season1/WhiteCollar8.jpg
Matt Bomer stars as Neal Caffrey in the new USA Network original series White Collar premiering Friday, October 23, 2009 at 10/9c.
Bomer's television credits include a lead role in the ABC series "Traveler," and recurring roles on the NBC series "Chuck" and the FOX series "Tru Calling."
In feature films, Bomer starred in New Line's "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning," and appeared in "Flightplan" with Jodie Foster.
Bomer received a BFA from Carnegie Mellon University. After college, he moved to New York, where he worked on stage until landing roles on television.
Bomer currently resides in Los Angeles.
http://www.usanetwork.com/series/whitecoll...s/neal/bio.html (http://www.usanetwork.com/series/whitecollar/theshow/characterprofiles/neal/bio.html)
Kronus
October 15th, 2009, 08:57 AM
Leave it to a girl to find this guy to play Starbuck...:P:
He isn't a bad actor at all, in fact he would make a good candidate for the role. :thumbsup:
bsg1fan1975
October 15th, 2009, 09:18 AM
I know that Adama would have to be re-cast or aooear in CGI form but if he was re-cast I would love to see Mark Harmon play him! I love his portrayal of Gibbs on NCIS and I think he'd make a great Adama
Kronus
October 15th, 2009, 10:05 AM
In all fairness, I haven't given much thought of who would portray Adama well. I still like Tom Selleck now that I have seen him play many roles beside Magnum and noticed how well he would be able to be a good Adama...
I know if he was Adama ther would be a huge influx of female viewers and they will drag their hubbies/bo-friends/kids/friends right along with them.
If they can get a cast that would meet with the what most of us would like to see...this movie will be a big hit...well along with a good story/effects...duh. :P:
spiderr987
October 15th, 2009, 10:16 AM
Leave it to a girl to find this guy to play Starbuck...:P:
He isn't a bad actor at all, in fact he would make a good candidate for the role. :thumbsup:
:LOL: Actually, I'm a guy. ...just have a knack for casting...
Kronus
October 15th, 2009, 01:22 PM
:LOL: Actually, I'm a guy. ...just have a knack for casting... Huh? :blink: At skiffy your profile says female...well you successfully fooled me :LOL::rotf:
spiderr987
October 15th, 2009, 01:44 PM
I never fill that personal stuff out correctly at Skiffy and other sites. I've been stalked several times by some of those Ted GINO creeps, on many occassionl... pretty sad and psychotic
KJ
October 15th, 2009, 02:34 PM
Yes spiderr987 they are, but i figured if you met them in real life you'd be pretty disappointed seeing how either small or weak they'll be or ignorant. They abuse the online use of the internet is all, but those kind of people are all talk and mouth. Push comes to shove they probably crap'em selves, or unable to talk they way of out a real arguement face-to-face etc. Didn't Sandy say he once saw Ted in person, and was sooooooooo....... disappointed he actually did!
Heh, looking back i remember it was old CF member 'R Grant' that sussed him out first and his split personalities. But him and his Gino allies did damage to the TOS BSG revival though, been years but i won't forget 'Christmas 2002' Battle Of Helms Deep as it was called on Skiffy but nor will they, as they certainly got theirs too. Forget'em spiderr, in real life you'd own them. Cos as you've stated, they sad and psychotic. And those types of people online aren't the macho kind.
A witty person can be rude and insulting, but that doesn't mean they'd win the fight for real or any arguement in person though.
KJ
spiderr987
October 15th, 2009, 05:05 PM
Yeah, I agree. Wow! Sandy saw this guy in real life? You'd think, with that in mind, this guy would chill out, knowing we know his real identity. What a head job. He's at it, again, on the SyFy boards. ...goes under the GoramFrakkingNerfHerder and CenturiomTerminator screennames, among many others. He has the mentality of a 12-year old boy. Most of us, recently, placed him on [IGNORE]. He also posts on the imdb.com board under the screennames of Uther8 and many others. If he wants to make an azz of himself, that's fine with me. It's just the stalking bit that really borders on "needs psychelogical treatment asap." He's really given that fandom a really bad name. Most of my "fight-fire-with-fire" responses have been due to that jackazz. I didn't realize what was going on til later, when it was all laid for me over at Moist. It's so sad... SyFy used to be my fav channel, until Hammer came in and turned into her own little funhouse. I hate that place, now. Okay, I'll stop.
-changes subject to avoid mod intervention- :rolleyes:
I can't wait for that new Singer/Larson movie! What did you think my Starbuck suggestion from that new tv show, WHITE COLLAR?
TwoBrainedCylon
October 15th, 2009, 06:46 PM
As memory serves, I was the one who busted open Ted's game with the thread "Milton's House of Cards Falls". I discovered his antics when his posting times and handles (TashaYar, Milton, etc.) fell in tandum and his IPs all linked back to the same server. Things unraveled from there.
Later, I met him for lunch during which he "came clean". It was as close to talking to Gollum as any human being will likely ever come. Ted proved himself to be a total waste of both an abundant amount of flesh and a diseased little mind. The man has some serious mental issues and is in every way, as mentally defective as our own Langy, although there are a few individuals in the GINO crowd and one other from the original series crowd who could give him a run for his money.
I think RGrant was famous for recognizing Langy and his circle of idiocy. I was slow on that one.
With years of experience behind me, I've taken the stance that these folks are pathetic little jokes hardly worthy of anyone's time. I've certainly wasted too much time and emotional capital on them and I suggest that nobody else repeat my mistakes in this area.
All my best,
Russell
spiderr987
October 16th, 2009, 01:34 AM
No, Russell. I am the most embarrassed that I fell for his little game. Seriously, I turned the other cheek for quite some time, hoping the mods at imdb and Skiffy would step in. I was a hopeless romantic in that regard, I guess, not to mention naive. Finally, after barrage, after barrage of unchecked attacks, I snapped, bigtime. I'm ultra embarrassed about how I let him get to me back then. All I can do is try aproach things a bit differently, when confronted with his ilk, such as placing him on [IGNORE], like I've been doing, as of late. I hope you'll understand how abrasive I came off back then, as I was being run through the Ted-ringer at the time and had no idea was going on. *sigh*
BST
October 16th, 2009, 04:54 AM
Spider,
A lot of us got caught by that particular "Ted-ringer". LSF, myself, Sparky, Dawg, TwoBrain, KJ, etc.... those were the infamous Clone War days. Unfortunately, you got a little taste of what we went through.
We only wish that such things as the "Ignore" function existed in those days. It would have made online life a lot less stressful.
BST
bsg1fan1975
October 16th, 2009, 05:58 AM
I would have to agree with you on that one BST even though I've never been to that particular board. There are times in my life where I wish there had been an "ignore" button for so many people or things that irked me!
KJ
October 16th, 2009, 06:00 AM
You forgot to mention the most important person from the TOS fanbase he attacked back then, Mr Michael Faries too! What Ted and his pals did to Mike was disgusting to no end. Mr Faries looked out for people genuinely and warned us of his activities and suffered as a result from Ted's attention. Whats was most disturbing was the way Ted sucked up to people under his alias though?
Remember the whole If i pass by London, i hope we'll have dinner B.S. :rolleyes:
I wasn't completely fooled by him as i suspected and had certain cautions about posting on skiffy even back then. But yes he is indeed a headcase if not a psycho who needs to be in a locked *padded* room with Langy 24/7.
Guess both are still posting into cyberspace to this day, to whomever comes across them with their verbal 'poison' huh?
KJ
KJ
October 16th, 2009, 06:01 AM
He's a tool forget him!
KJ
BST
October 16th, 2009, 06:10 AM
You forgot to mention the most important person from the TOS fanbase he attacked back then, Mr Michael Faries too! What Ted and his pals did to Mike was disgusting to no end. Mr Faries looked out for people genuinely and warned us of his activities and suffered as a result from Ted's attention. Whats was most disturbing was the way Ted sucked up to people under his alias though?
Remember the whole If i pass by London, i hope we'll have dinner B.S. :rolleyes:
I wasn't completely fooled by him as i suspected and had certain cautions about posting on skiffy even back then. But yes he is indeed a headcase if not a psycho who needs to be in a locked *padded* room with Langy 24/7.
Guess both are still posting into cyberspace to this day, to whomever comes across them with their verbal 'poison' huh?
KJ
Yes, Michael really got caught in the cross-fire and I am truly sorry for that. Michael is one of the nicest people that I've had the pleasure of conversing and working with. An example of his generosity is located in the Gallery -- the Battlestar Pegasus Collection. When he was transitioning that site to the new owner, I contacted him about some of the pictures and the next thing I know, I am in receipt of the entire Gallery. Needless to say, we were, and still are, thrilled to have it. He's a gem .... and a true friend.
:)
spiderr987
October 20th, 2009, 06:20 AM
Singer's legal dept may want to look at this...
Hinnyman is up to his old tricks, again....
"Singer has been rumored to be part of a big-screen adaptation of "Battlestar Galactica" from Universal, which would pick up where the 1970s series left off, and leave out the 21st century reimagining by the former SciFi Channel, now Syfy. However, negative feedback from fans about that project have pushed it to the backburner."
http://airlockalpha.com/node/6770
I did a search for part of that phrase with Galactica and Singer as part of the inquiry and the only article that came up with Hinnyman's... If this weasel is lying and misquoting, someone that is contact with Singer needs to have his legal team look at this, immediately.
peter noble
October 20th, 2009, 07:17 AM
Singer's legal dept may want to look at this...
Hinnyman is up to his old tricks, again....
I did a search for part of that phrase with Galactica and Singer as part of the inquiry and the only article that came up with Hinnyman's... If this weasel is lying and misquoting, someone that is contact with Singer needs to have his legal team look at this, immediately.
Actually Hinman didn't write it and it's factually incorrect because it states "Singer has been rumored to be part of a big-screen adaptation of "Battlestar Galactica" from Universal, which would pick up where the 1970s series left off". Anyone with any sense can google the original reports and nowhere do they say that the proposed film is a continuation of the original series.
A few hundred fans on the internet of any of the series of Battlestar Galactica aren't going to influence the decision to greenlight a film that costs a 100 million dollars plus.
The report is a mixture of op/ed and news. I dismiss it because it's amateurish.
spiderr987
October 20th, 2009, 07:21 AM
It's just disturbing how far some of these people would go to spread misinformation about TOS. It's an all time low, even for Hinnyman. I know he didn't write it, but he is owner of the site. Sandy said he had given him another chance. He may be dismayed to see that he hasn't changed at all. Anyways, thanks for replying so quickly. :)
Kronus
October 20th, 2009, 11:57 AM
Yeah, I posted my reply to this tripe:
http://insideblip.com/community/viewtopic....mp;p=2720#p2720
EDIT: What a stinking liar...
No worries mate!
Dawg
October 20th, 2009, 12:42 PM
Yeah, I posted my reply to this tripe:
http://insideblip.com/community/viewtopic....mp;p=2720#p2720
What a fracking liar...
Off topic a bit....
I am on a personal campaign to eliminate the use of the word "Frack" as a substitute for that Anglo-Saxon word. In BSG, it was a single-word expression - Frack. It was not a verb. It was not meant to substitute for that Anglo-Saxon word. It was a simple expletive.
SO KNOCK IT OFF!!!
It has been perverted by - others. Let's return it to its original meaning and intent.
Thank you. :D
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
Kronus
October 20th, 2009, 12:52 PM
Didn't realize it was a no-no...I went back and editted the post...
LZaza
October 20th, 2009, 06:25 PM
Off topic a bit....
I am on a personal campaign to eliminate the use of the word "Frack" as a substitute for that Anglo-Saxon word. In BSG, it was a single-word expression - Frack. It was not a verb. It was not meant to substitute for that Anglo-Saxon word. It was a simple expletive.
SO KNOCK IT OFF!!!
It has been perverted by - others. Let's return it to its original meaning and intent.
Thank you. :D
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
Well, even when I was ten years old, I thought that frack was Colonial for that other familiar four letter word, and felgercarb was Colonial for shi_. Personal campaigns aside, the variations were a natural occurrence, as they were with that other word. Frankly, I think Starbuck getting married is more of an unnatural aberration. :wtf:
Dawg
October 20th, 2009, 08:26 PM
Oh, Kronus & LZaza, it's not a no-no, it's just a personal irritation on my part. And yes, even I associated it that way back in the day.
However, when Larson coined the word he meant it as an expletive you would use in a manner such as "Oh, DAMN!", if you see what I mean.
In the last few years, however, it has become synonymous with that Anglo-Saxon word. It's *ing and *this and *that and *you and the horse you rode in on. It's not the single, explosive expletive it was originally designed to be. It was hijacked by some no-talent writer (well, non-imaginative writer, anyway) to substitute for a specific word so they could cuss up a storm and get away with it.
I want to see a return to the original concept, and that's why I bring attention to it as I can.
Sorry that I wasn't clear about that.
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
LZaza
October 20th, 2009, 09:02 PM
Oh, Kronus & LZaza, it's not a no-no, it's just a personal irritation on my part. And yes, even I associated it that way back in the day.
However, when Larson coined the word he meant it as an expletive you would use in a manner such as "Oh, DAMN!", if you see what I mean.
In the last few years, however, it has become synonymous with that Anglo-Saxon word. It's *ing and *this and *that and *you and the horse you rode in on. It's not the single, explosive expletive it was originally designed to be. It was hijacked by some no-talent writer (well, non-imaginative writer, anyway) to substitute for a specific word so they could cuss up a storm and get away with it.
I want to see a return to the original concept, and that's why I bring attention to it as I can.
Sorry that I wasn't clear about that.
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
Sounds like a particular writer rots your socks on this one, Dawg. I agree that I don't want to see a story where there's more attention placed on the cursing than on the plotline. However, if there's room in BSG fanfic for Baltar to evolve, then there's room for some evolution in expletives. If the writing is good, the characters are true, and there's a love and passion for TOS that's being expressed and shared, then, as far as I'm concerned, it's all good.
Kronus
October 21st, 2009, 06:55 AM
Dawg...I believe you know me pretty well after all these years so I will say:
I am a true...ah I mean "original" BSG lover and I would do just about anything to see it preserved as I seen it and you and I do see eye to eye on this desire and need for it to remain preserved. :cool:
I do not think as strongly about this as you do regarding the word "frack" but I too would like to see a return to the original concepts and direction of the original BSG and if using this word more in line to the original concept means not sounding like the "other" group then you can count on my support.:salute:
But just for the record...I never thought the word frack was ever a reference to something equivilant to Darn it but as it sounded like...the "F" word its self. I was 9 when I heard it and I took it to mean the "F" word being used in a situation that would mean just that. Which was why I felt that it wasn't a violation in the preservation of the Original BSG to adopt it...even though this new usage of it came from somewhere else. :/:
Like I said...I am for the preservation of BSG...I will use this word in its original fashion as we seen it in the show here at Fleets...:salute:
KJ
October 27th, 2009, 02:55 AM
When if anything, there is any new news!
What exactly are they going to do for real?
Even when the rumors drop, its like we the audience kinda already know they're not going with the recent re-imagining series that just ended. So why all the mystery on a version based on the original series being used as a template for a theatrical movie based on the '78 Battlestar show. Plenty of movies are in 'Development Hell' currently and by the time the wait is over and they go into production and are later finished and released, most of them don't even live up to that all hype they've built up.
We all want the BSG movie to be like the Star Trek TOS to 1979 Star Trek TMP movie release in style and development, something that in tone with the original but different on several levels. But many would argue thing shave changed and even the original Star Trek to movie revival, isn't something a BSG revivial today could be compared to in hindsight. Studio gonna do what they want with a Battlestar Galactica theatrical motion picture feature, regardless despite the love and care we want from such a venture. Surely us fans have some say don't we? Or are we doomed to wait and hear their announcements, disagree with it and still be forced to watch something turn into something bad in the long run of things.
Had a proposal, but ain't gonna use it. Not until fans and audiences alike could be in a position where they had a say a "firm" say in things somewhat. Not how the industry works i know, but why give'em my money when none of my concerns as a cinemagoer and fan of the series isn't met at all!
Star Trek fans have alot to be greatful for with; 'Star Trek The Motion Picture' movie. Not a Trek all-time best or favorite movie. But was successful enough to be the first in a long wave of Star Trek films, and was more or less the test-bed or template for Star Trek films long afterwards. A Battlestar Galactica feature film needs to learn alot of that old history of Star Trek's in reviving a TV show into movie format, if BSG in general, is to have a chance at securing an audience in the future. Whether we like it or not.
Still think TOS BSG fandom, needs to get serverly organised in terms of wanting to communicate with the studio (Universal) and voice our opinions, and not being told to wait all the damn time.
But they'd be a long waiting process come the film's actual production anyhow? Too many potential big hit projects like this die cos they aren't supported, sustained nor interest is followed up on. Took just about 4 years to kill off a 'Superman Returns' sequel, don't let Bryan Singer being announced or rumored as director of this Galactica production for him to leave yet again, Universal can't afford news like that to break out.
Just bloody announce something and fast!
KJ
jewels
October 27th, 2009, 06:27 PM
Dawg...I believe you know me pretty well after all these years so I will say:
I am a true...ah I mean "original" BSG lover and I would do just about anything to see it preserved as I seen it and you and I do see eye to eye on this desire and need for it to remain preserved. :cool:
I do not think as strongly about this as you do regarding the word "frack" but I too would like to see a return to the original concepts and direction of the original BSG and if using this word more in line to the original concept means not sounding like the "other" group then you can count on my support.:salute:
But just for the record...I never thought the word frack was ever a reference to something equivilant to Darn it but as it sounded like...the "F" word its self. I was 9 when I heard it and I took it to mean the "F" word being used in a situation that would mean just that. Which was why I felt that it wasn't a violation in the preservation of the Original BSG to adopt it...even though this new usage of it came from somewhere else. :/:
Like I said...I am for the preservation of BSG...I will use this word in its original fashion as we seen it in the show here at Fleets...:salute:
I think the original intention was as multipurpose and even more meaningless as darn. The '70s standardards and practices folks (censors) would have never let them get away with any other take. I think they picked strong consonants so it was a strong sounding expletive.
Damocles
October 28th, 2009, 12:05 AM
Dang.:/:
Aussie Warrior
November 12th, 2009, 06:09 AM
Apparently the movie is in pre-production right now, at least according to Trekmovie.com and their Wednesday news wrap up although it is saying Singer is working with Larson which i don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing but the good thing definitely has to be if reports are accurate on the pre-production stuff.
Preproduction Reportedly Underway on Bryan Singer’s Battlestar Galactica Movie
It looks like there may be some positive movement on Bryan Singer’s proposed "Battlestar Galactica" movie. Examiner.com reports that Singer has begun preproduction on the film and is working with Glen Larson, the producer behind the original 1970’s "Battlestar Galatica" series [via SCI FI Wire]:
Now that pre-production has started, any rumors that Singer’s next project was going to be “X” related (as in X-Men) has been put to rest, along with any shot he had of helming another Superman flick. There’s been no word if Moore will be involved in the re-reboot, yet given the rumored “rocky” relationship between Larson and Moore, it seems unlikely.
Larson holds the film rights to the property. Examiner.com added that they believe Universal Pictures may be targeting a summer 2012 release date for the film.
The link is at
http://trekmovie.com/2009/11/11/sci-fi-movies-wednesday-battlestar-galactica-clash-of-the-titans-ghost-rider-2-kick-ass-spider-man-4-more/
Kronus
November 12th, 2009, 09:29 AM
I think the original intention was as multipurpose and even more meaningless as darn. The '70s standardards and practices folks (censors) would have never let them get away with any other take. I think they picked strong consonants so it was a strong sounding expletive.
Awwww FRACK!
The link is at
http://trekmovie.com/2009/11/11/sci-fi-movies-wednesday-battlestar-galactica-clash-of-the-titans-ghost-rider-2-kick-ass-spider-man-4-more/
Yeah, this maybe a rumor still but many are looking for more information to verify this...I really hope it is moving along...if it is going to be on the big screen in 2011/12 then this report would make sense.
Gemini1999
November 12th, 2009, 11:13 AM
Yeah, this maybe a rumor still but many are looking for more information to verify this...I really hope it is moving along...if it is going to be on the big screen in 2011/12 then this report would make sense.
Kronus -
Someone on another BSG site that I hang out at has the professional version of IMDB.com and the project has indeed been moved from script to pre production status very recently.
Just because there hasn't been some thundering announcment from the sky does not necessarily mean that it's an unfounded rumour.
Bryan
monolith21
November 12th, 2009, 11:56 AM
Indeed. I remember when Tom DeSanto announced in 2003 that he couldn't work on a Battlestar project until after Transformers, everyone jumped on the bandwagon over the next year saying Transformers wasn't going to happen. These things take time!
Even if the whole production is fast tracked, odds are we wouldn't hear anything about a completed script for quite a while if at all.
Its just like the new "V". No news...no news...no news...some casting announcements...BANG the thing is already filmed.
Kronus
November 12th, 2009, 01:16 PM
Kronus -
Someone on another BSG site that I hang out at has the professional version of IMDB.com and the project has indeed been moved from script to pre production status very recently.
Just because there hasn't been some thundering announcment from the sky does not necessarily mean that it's an unfounded rumour.
Bryan
Yeah, that is why is said "maybe" rumored...for this very reason you have pointed out. But even IMDB Pro has been known to be wrong, I just hope not this time around...I really hope they are bang on.
KJ
November 12th, 2009, 07:29 PM
Yeah, this maybe a rumor still but many are looking for more information to verify this...I really hope it is moving along...if it is going to be on the big screen in 2011/12 then this report would make sense.
If finally greenlit, i'd want them to take their time and do it right. A 2012/13 release sounds way more sensible if they allow Singer the time he needs to film it from pre-production right up to post-production. Singer's interview on the Charlie Rose show/X-Men DVD back in 2000, should be a blatant reminder to Universal Studios. To give the director the proper amount of time to put a movie together with the right amount of "prep-time" and development, do it correctly from the get-go. Rather than let it all be rather haphazzardly put together.
He had less time to prep X-Men for a yearly release months later after getting the X-Men directing gig. X2 is obviously way better cos enough time was fitted in there to get everything together.
Apparently the movie is in pre-production right now, at least according to Trekmovie.com and their Wednesday news wrap up although it is saying Singer is working with Larson which i don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing but the good thing definitely has to be if reports are accurate on the pre-production stuff.
I'd hope not and we'd all get an official announcement in the media. Purely because; sets, budget, casting, storywriting, props, costumes, etc have to be build and made possible. Its practically the end of 2009 with 11 months in the year and one more to go. It'll have to take place and any late breaking news events move forward from 2010 onwards now.
Rough outline of events for the Battlestar Galactica movie to get going.....
* Any announcement of the film coming to theaters in the years to come. throughout 2010.
* Pre-production and development. (from whatever start date)
* news reports, casting, onset developments etc.
* Actual film start dates i.e. production on an actual BG movie begins!
* Post-production. and adequate months ahead.
* Scoring of the film and wrap up of post-production.
* TV interviews (Actors/Director, Producers), and marketing/advertisments for the movie begins.
* Premieres and Cannes film festivals etc.
To.....
* Global theatrical release date of film ("Battlestar Galactica")
With dates of events to come up for debate of course. But thats how i see it, and whats to happen in the long run of things.
But 2011 would be to soon in my book, we have no idea when in 2010 an announcement of it officially going into production will happen. If its late into 2010, then 2011 can be sworn off. If early to mid 2010, a 2012 or 2011 release date is fine by me and quite realistic to come about, long as Singer makes it all epic with a huge post-production schedule! 2011 release? Nah if we've waited this long then why rush it, it'll be a guaranteed release down the road. Films that are rushed are sorely lacking in depth story and overall scope. While Bryan Singer isn't someone to spend too long on a movie, i think even he knows he'll need to get this one done right for the audiences and Galactica fans out there.
After being greenlit how long does it take to build all the sets required?
Can't see this being in pre-production when nothing is announced so far, nothing's been leaked and that a film of this calibur isn't going to escape the media's attention nor investigating fans notice neither? without some form of update! And building sets on the studio lot takes time (and that kinda news get leaked fairly quickly doesn't it), so if it ain't greenlit right now. Can't really see the BG movie being in pre-production at all presently.
KJ
Kronus
November 13th, 2009, 07:10 AM
KJ - I am with you on this...why rush it? We have been waiting a very long time for this and it is worth the additional wait to have it done well.
I like the idea of a 2012 release date as well...I just wish I knew someone who would be willing to "consult" some of us here for ideas and suggestions...even if they don't use them all. I know I would volunteer my time.
http://www.thescubasite.com/smile/scared/scared0016.gif Looking for my wife...http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/scared/scared0012.gif
She hates it when I volunteer my time...:D
KJ
November 13th, 2009, 10:27 AM
Thank you, rumors of these dates and years of release. Always come across like internet rumors run amuck etc.
Hopefully when the news is officially announced, it'll be on all media outlets. Magazines will report it big time, and channels wil bandie it around for a few weeks like its hot stuff. and of course it'll be big internet related news on all the major websites.
Then the hype and count down can begin in earnest for real.
Colonial Fleets i hope will undergo some big changes of its own and become an online BG movie website with contacts closely related to the new film (fingers crossed if the mods can get inside info with studio contacts etc?). And CF would need an online webchat forum per se, to cope with many new members/film fans wanting the latest news regarding the film.
Thats how things will develop in the future i reckon! Its what this site and fans have wanted since 1998/99 since the Larson/Hatch fight over BG to Singer/DeSanto's 2001 Galactica revival to Sci-fi Channel's re-imaginning etc. Its been a long road, but once the bomb drops, nothing will be the same again.
Galactica Fandom overall as it is today, would need to evolve once the news of a Battlestar Galactica movie breaks officially!
So are we ready to beyond the minor discussions we're having now? Hmmmm!
KJ
KJ
November 13th, 2009, 10:27 AM
Ask yourselves, how CF would advance as well.
Site's gotta change once the news breaks. This is what fan have dreamed about for years even before majority of BG fans started posting online a decade ago or so.
Whilst Larson and Singer are busy with the studio deals to make this happen, shouldn't we stick to whomever fandom could get in touch with? Tom DeSanto, Richard Hatch or Dirk Benedict and see whether or not they'd have some pull once the movie underway? And have them closely involved with this website.
Just an idea!
KJ
starbucko
November 13th, 2009, 01:38 PM
Ask yourselves, how CF would advance as well.
Site's gotta change once the news breaks. This is what fan have dreamed about for years even before majority of BG fans started posting online a decade ago or so.
KJ
I'm not sure CF should change - certainly "add" to cover the movie more completely as news develops... but I joined because I was getting interested in the original show, not because I was all set to be a mega-fan of some future movie. It might be another facet of the original, such as the continuation, etc, but it's not TOS.
Just a thought from a newbie :salute:
BST
November 13th, 2009, 03:44 PM
Ask yourselves, how CF would advance as well.
Site's gotta change once the news breaks. This is what fan have dreamed about for years even before majority of BG fans started posting online a decade ago or so.
Whilst Larson and Singer are busy with the studio deals to make this happen, shouldn't we stick to whomever fandom could get in touch with? Tom DeSanto, Richard Hatch or Dirk Benedict and see whether or not they'd have some pull once the movie underway? And have them closely involved with this website.
Just an idea!
KJ
KJ,
Great thoughts!
I heard a remark, a long time ago from former Pittsburgh Steeler head coach, Chuck Noll, who said, "the only constant in life is change". I wholeheartedly endorse that remark and just as we adapt, with any change that we encounter, I think the site would as well.
But, for now, the only missing item is the official "greenlight".
Once that's given, strap yourselves in.... it's likely to be one helluva ride!!
(And one that I know we've been waiting for, for a long, long time!!)
:D
spiderr987
November 18th, 2009, 12:50 AM
KJ,
Great thoughts!
I heard a remark, a long time ago from former Pittsburgh Steeler head coach, Chuck Noll, who said, "the only constant in life is change". I wholeheartedly endorse that remark and just as we adapt, with any change that we encounter, I think the site would as well.
But, for now, the only missing item is the official "greenlight".
Once that's given, strap yourselves in.... it's likely to be one helluva ride!!
(And one that I know we've been waiting for, for a long, long time!!)
:D
I whole heartedly agree all said above and welcome and change, as far as supporting the new forthcoming film, based on the one and only real BSG, as created by Glen A Larson. :thumbsup:
LordStarFyre
December 2nd, 2009, 04:15 PM
I whole heartedly agree all said above and welcome and change, as far as supporting the new forthcoming film, based on the one and only real BSG, as created by Glen A Larson. :thumbsup:
I know this is probably a fairly stump dumb question, but has anyone from CF approached the Production Company in regards to this idea?
BST
December 2nd, 2009, 05:43 PM
Not that I know of.
KJ
December 6th, 2009, 04:13 PM
I know this is probably a fairly stump dumb question, but has anyone from CF approached the Production Company in regards to this idea?
Great question LordStarFyre!
Not that i know of? But if i were running CF, its what i'd be in talks to do though. Wouldn't want Universal running things 100% mind you. Fans created this website so the BG fans should continue to run it!, even when there is an official announcement of the Galactica movie. Nuff said on that matter.
Basically Universal Studios should just agree to allow CF to run their promotional campaign (media, ads, internet updates), news articles, web forum discussions (chatroom events etc?), movie set reports. And have an open fan resource centre to talk as such, to communicate to the fans/fanbase etc. (they'd need PR representative though at their end?).
And for CF to be sponsored by Universal Studio itself and have the backing to support it. Running ads on the site, might slow it down, but that kind of money to put'em up on here. Would also help with other requirements of playing the servers each year, especially considering how the site, would naturally have to get to be made much bigger logically, so as to handle all the demands and traffic of going uber-commerical!
With that in mind, if CF getting serious, some of that major 'overhaul' should be either planned or be in effect long before the next official announcement.
Serious changes have to be made to the CF website to expand it (GREATLY) long before any pre-production work were to begin methinks, on the actual movie!
Learn from whats gone on before i say and be ready!
KJ
LordStarFyre
December 8th, 2009, 10:18 AM
Great question LordStarFyre!
Not that i know of? But if i were running CF, its what i'd be in talks to do though. Wouldn't want Universal running things 100% mind you. Fans created this website so the BG fans should continue to run it!, even when there is an official announcement of the Galactica movie. Nuff said on that matter.
Basically Universal Studios should just agree to allow CF to run their promotional campaign (media, ads, internet updates), news articles, web forum discussions (chatroom events etc?), movie set reports. And have an open fan resource centre to talk as such, to communicate to the fans/fanbase etc. (they'd need PR representative though at their end?).
And for CF to be sponsored by Universal Studio itself and have the backing to support it. Running ads on the site, might slow it down, but that kind of money to put'em up on here. Would also help with other requirements of playing the servers each year, especially considering how the site, would naturally have to get to be made much bigger logically, so as to handle all the demands and traffic of going uber-commerical!
With that in mind, if CF getting serious, some of that major 'overhaul' should be either planned or be in effect long before the next official announcement.
Serious changes have to be made to the CF website to expand it (GREATLY) long before any pre-production work were to begin methinks, on the actual movie!
Learn from whats gone on before i say and be ready!
KJ
:) Thanks KJ.
I would love to see CF come out as the major "Clearing house" for Info about the new Movie, if not the Official Home for BSG.
jewels
December 8th, 2009, 07:23 PM
Off topic a bit....
I am on a personal campaign to eliminate the use of the word "Frack" as a substitute for that Anglo-Saxon word. In BSG, it was a single-word expression - Frack. It was not a verb. It was not meant to substitute for that Anglo-Saxon word. It was a simple expletive.
SO KNOCK IT OFF!!!
It has been perverted by - others. Let's return it to its original meaning and intent.
Thank you. :D
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
YAY!!! Way to say it. I never use the Anglo-Saxon word, I favor using the nonsense expletive.
KJ
December 8th, 2009, 10:10 PM
Truth be told. Does it really matter, and realistically speaking in this day and age where things are hardly PC anymore. Don't think it'll ever go back to the supposedly family-friendly version.
Perverted or not new movie version or not. Can't see it happening unless that expletive itself was ditched period. You can't undo society's constant growing de-sensitized nature. Things that were so PC back then won't fly now. And truth be told, i'd expect any newer version of Battlestar Galactica to be totally UnPC and a little more hardcore and extreme anyways!
The 'nonsense' version by Bryan Singer and co might be ditched all-together, if it were to be deemed as one of classic BG's cheesy elements.
I'm not to bothered long as the new movie works on all levels! :salute:
KJ
Dawg
December 8th, 2009, 10:21 PM
YAY!!! Way to say it. I never use the Anglo-Saxon word, I favor using the nonsense expletive.
Thanks, hon. But the fact of the matter is my battle was lost before it began. "Frack" will, now, always be a direct substitute for the Anglo-Saxon word. As KJ says, you can't go back.
Truth be told. Does it really matter, and realistically speaking in this day and age where things are hardly PC anymore. Don't think it'll ever go back to the supposedly family-friendly version.
Perverted or not new movie version or not. Can't see it happening unless that expletive itself was ditched period. You can't undo society's constant growing de-sensitized nature. Things that were so PC back then won't fly now. And truth be told, i'd expect any newer version of Battlestar Galactica to be totally UnPC and a little more hardcore and extreme anyways!
The 'nonsense' version by Bryan Singer and co might be ditched all-together, if it were to be deemed as one of classic BG's cheesy elements.
I'm not to bothered long as the new movie works on all levels! :salute:
KJ
It's not so much the desensitizing or PC-ness, KJ. It's the fact that the harmless word Larson created isn't so harmless now, and will never be harmless again.
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
spiderr987
December 10th, 2009, 10:17 PM
Hey, guys, I think you all may find this thought-provoking editorial by a female science fiction/fantasy and original Battlestar Galactica fan very intriguing:
This editorial expresses, what I've been trying to convey all along....
Women Hate The "Feminized" Sci Fi Channel
Has the Sci Fi Channel lurched too far towards being Lifetime: Television for Women, since its president, Bonnie Hammer, decided to emphasize "human drama" over space battles? Maybe, judging from the suburban Flash Gordan revamp and a spate of Battlestar episodes about Lee Adama's love life. The sad thing is that the Oprah-ized Sci Fi drives away women who really like science fiction, laments blogger Lisa Fary. [Pink Raygun]
http://io9.com/354768/women-hate-the-feminized-sci-fi-channel
The Sci Fi Channel Needs Women!
By Lisa Fary
I thought it was OK for me to be a chick and like space ships and aliens and rayguns without being weighed down by feelings and relationships. However, a recent article in Adweek, “Sci Fi, Feminized“, implies otherwise. It implies that I am as my high school crush, Justin, once said, not a real girl.
Bonnie Hammer, the president of the Sci Fi Channel since 1998, has been actively courting women as viewers since she came on board. Being a chick who likes sci-fi, I’m appreciative of her efforts, but I’m feeling like Ms. Hammer and the gang are stepping over women who genuinely like this stuff to get to women who might kinda like it if there isn’t too much of that science-y, outer space stuff that they don’t get.
“The whole feel of the [Sc iFi] channel was more male and visually darker,” she says. “Its graphics and promos were a little more monster driven. What we’ve done is make it more human, warmer, friendlier.”
People said the same thing about Hillary Clinton’s infamous tears in New Hampshire after being asked how she does it and who did her hair. That moment made her more human, warmer, and friendlier (and possibly less monster-like).
You can’t have a good television show without human drama and character development; it can’t all be about the action and the tech. But, there comes a point when the human drama overshadows the speculative fiction, and that’s when these “girlified” programs lose their way.
[nms:battlestar galactica,1,0]
Case in point: Battlestar Galactica in the mid-second season after Admiral Cain was killed. The season two episode that really stands out as a human drama boner was “Black Market”, in which Apollo investigates said black market and has Lostbacks about some girl he broke up with on Caprica. A girl we had never heard of before and have never heard about again.
I suppose the point was that Captain WhinyPants has commitment issues. (You got yourself a real catch there, Dualla. Almost as good as Commander Riker, I’d say). By the time the season finale rolled around, I had nearly lost interest in the ragtag fugitive fleet and their little election. Thank God the Cylons invaded New Caprica.
That episode, and several others in seasons two and three stopped the plot awkwardly as if to say, “OK, ladies! We’re going to have some human drama now! Get your slippers and some cheesecake!”
A program’s channel of residence affects the perception of it – channels have histories that are hard to break. For example, there was one main reason I didn’t watch Blood Ties. That reason was Lifetime: Television for Women, which, for years, I’ve found to be repugnant. Their programming strikes me as overly emotional, stereotypical “female” drivel, all about believing in yourself and finding your true beauty on the inside. I didn’t imagine that a network like Lifetime would do well with vampire mysteries. From what I hear, I may have missed out on something that I would have enjoyed – all because of my perception of what Lifetime is, and is not.
[nms:blood ties,1,0]
I was just as unlikely to tune in to Blood Ties as I would be to tune into something like Caddy Spacestation, the Golf Channel’s re-imagining of Caddyshack, complete with Chevy Chase (because he’s not even doing the Aflac commercials anymore) and a space gopher dancing to Kenny Loggins (because Loggins is universal). Caddy Spacestation might well be awesome, but it’s on the Golf Channel, and if there’s anything guaranteed to plunge me into immediate coma, it’s golf.
I’m not against human drama, relationships and complex character development. I’m against focusing on that to the detriment of the overall story to lure in the Gray’s Anatomy and Desperate Housewives set. That set isn’t likely to tune to to a channel that’s outside their comfort zone simply because it has human drama. There are already channels doing that much better than the Sci Fi Channel.
David Howe, Sci Fi’s other president, says, “We might say that something seems alienating to women and the writers might need to focus a little more on relationships than space battles.”
I really wonder what the Sci Fi gang considers alienating toward women. Space battles certainly aren’t alienating to women, or they shouldn’t be. Space battles don’t objectify or dehumanize women. You know what is alienating to women? The subtle gender stereotypes that are rampant on Battlestar Galactica.
The virtuous and honorable gals, such as Callie Tyrol and Dualla Adama, get to live; however, if a girl doesn’t follow a few simple rules, she’s toast, such as Cat and the often abused Starbuck.
One has to question how well this strategy is working for the Sci Fi Channel. In courting this female audience as aggressively as they are, they risk hemorrhaging and alienating longtime viewers and fans of science fiction programming, many of whom are also women.
Viewers experienced this with Sci Fi’s Flash Gordon. The premiere pulled in 2.1 million viewers, a number which dropped off significantly after that first week. Many of those early viewers who tuned out will not give the program another look even though it’s now something they may like. Their good faith was spent in those early episodes in which the majority of the story took place in Earthly suburbia and there was little actual science fiction going on.
[nms:flash gordon,1,0]
On that point in a recent interview, Consulting Producer Gillian Horvath said, “In the spirit of the original Flash Gordon, which was aimed at a broad audience, we spent more time transitioning between the familiar and the foreign, so that a broader spectrum of viewers would get the baseline information in order to come along with the show. That was the plan. Whether is succeeded or not, time will tell.”
Time will also tell whether Bonnie Hammer’s strategy for getting women to watch the Sci Fi Channel will succeed or not. “Sci Fi, Feminized” says it is. But, if that’s true, why am I having such a hard time finding something I want to watch?
Never miss an update. Subscribe to Pink Raygun by Email or subscribe via RSS
Lisa Fary is a graduate of the creative writing program at Florida State University and holds an advanced degree in Special Education. Her early exposure to classic Battlestar Galactica in 1979 is largely responsible for her lifelong interest in science fiction and her childhood ambition of being an intergalactic space cowgirl.
http://www.pinkraygun.com/2008/02/08/the-sci-fi-channel-needs-women/
Kronus
December 11th, 2009, 07:42 AM
Enjoyed the article
spiderr987
December 11th, 2009, 12:31 PM
Pretty dead on, stuff, too.
Gemini1999
December 11th, 2009, 01:19 PM
Just a word of caution on this recent posting...
This thread is a thread that's for the purpose of talking about a BSG film in the works (which is pretty clear giving the title).
It does not, however, make itself available for side topic discussions regarding the Sy Fy Channel, Bonnie Hammer - subjects that have nothing to do with the subject of this particular thread.
If you'd like to continue that discussion with the provision that the discussion will not lead into events of the past where BSG and the SciFi Channel are concerned, then I can split the topic off to a thread of it's own.
Otherwise, let's get the discussion back on topic.
Regards,
Gemini1999
Colonial Fleets Moderator
spiderr987
December 11th, 2009, 01:21 PM
Sorry... Freudian slip... just meant it to be a one off type thing. ...searched for a forum to post it, before hand, though.
BST
December 12th, 2009, 08:58 AM
Although we understand that the article wasn't meant to generate discussion about a certain show that's persona non grata around these parts, we all do need to take care that we don't drift down that slippery slope.
Unfortunately, it's easy to do, even if we try not to. For example, the placement of the article in THIS thread tends to sway the focus toward that slippery slope, i.e., Moore's Galactica show. However, if the article had been placed in its own thread entitled, "Women Hate The 'Feminized' Sci Fi Channel" then, that would have been the focus of the article and Moore's show could simply be documentation supporting that focus.
I think Bryan's suggestion about splitting the post into a different thread would be a good idea. The Miscellaneous Entertainment or Other Science Fiction Shows sub-forums might be good alternatives.
:)
spiderr987
December 14th, 2009, 04:39 AM
Thanks, BST!
peter noble
December 17th, 2009, 01:26 AM
http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/105/1055999p1.html
KJ
December 17th, 2009, 03:06 AM
http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/105/1055999p1.html
Meanwhile, with Singer set for Jack the Giant Killer and X-Men: First Class, it's not clear what the status is of the Battlestar Galactica movie he's attached to at Universal.
:wtf: :blink:
Frack
And that expletive can mean whatever you choose (TOS nonsense version or otherwise!).
If he's off the movie, then thats it. Didn't think it'll ever come to this, unless either there's another director's name, equally as big as Bryan Singer comes along to pick the BG movie project and be attached to it until its greenlit. Its 'done & dusted' like a vampire then!
2010 might as well be the time to get along with my life. :/:
How many times like a bull do fans need to charge the "red mat" ('BG film copyrights') with the spanish matador (execs/studio) present, teasing us again and again. Now, only for it to be taken away once again, and the bull (fan enthusiasm) crush and killed afterwards in the arena!
Love this community, brilliant people supporting a franchise that could've once stood shoulders with Star Trek, Star Wars and any other sci-fi franchise. but enough is enough, even a mere hint of delays or negative news not going the right way is a clear crystal sign of 'cold feet' in some of these business meeting to get a film made. Sorry but i'm sick of these peculiarities when TOS Galactica involved in something involving a revival or restart. 30 plus frac..ing[whatever?] years in trying to get this baby going again and somebody up there's laying bets on shafting ('shafted') BG no matter what, over a table (repeatedly!!!).
Can't accommodate, these hollywood jackals any longer. Is this the reward we MUST get, for being loyal and hanging for so long?!? I'll take the lable "geek" over "nerd" anyday. Cos i got a life and thats more important than waiting for flick hollywood execs have shafted for years stretching into several decades now. Despite my fanboy love for BG, enough i ain't a donkey, and i don't want a tasty 'carrot' dangling in front of me for this damn long.
This stings me alot, cos i talked to Bryan Singer briefly at the Superman Returns premiere in London in 2006. He said then when asked by me, that he'd do it (BG movie). Guess the lure of Marvel's Mutants truly is that great, even though that franchise is big enough and can support itself and be done by other directors.
People..........? :(
Without a name i.e. big "established" director. This will fail period. Don't know what Larson's going to do now, but i hope in the future, another big named director can bring in an energetic style, that vastly updates the 'old girl' and keeps the themes of the old series and puts them into a movie incarnation of Battlestar Galactica.
:salute:
I'm sorry, but i figured with news of a movie finally, i'd stick it out still and wait and see if something dropped that'll please everybody, something really significant at long last. But i see the signs now and i'm not going doing down that route again. I'm not getting any younger. And who the hell's gonna be put through that meat grinder, we know how 20th Century Fox got Singer off the 2001 BG revival to do the X2 sequel. Although it led to a great X-Men sequel flick, we were left with no Galactica revival whatsoever!
Now in 2010 its X-Men First Class. We know how vocal the Marvel fans are, heck after DC's comics and movies, i'm a Marvel *head* too. Nope this is the first in what'll be a call for Singer to go back to the X-Men.
So. Hatch Second Coming - refused by Universal. Larson pitch for Battlestar Atlantis - Not taken? 2001 Singer/DeSanto BG - canned by Universal. Universal goes with Re-Imagining (2003-2009). Singer BG movie Deal - put on hold (X-Men First Class). Did i miss anything?
Even if he ended up producer for the movie handled by someone else, he might ditch all that as executive producer, to go do the final season of 'House'.
Haven't we taken too much of a beating already. What about receiving something in return, after all this bloody time?
A sadden KJ leaves the building.
KJ
peter noble
December 17th, 2009, 03:24 AM
Options:
1. The Galactica movie will be produced, but not directed by Singer.
2. it will be directed by Singer but in five to six years time.
3. Singer will drop out all together.
4. Universal's option on GAL'S rights will expire leaving another studio to snap up the rights from GAL for a time.
5. Another studio will will develop a movie and Universal realising that once again they've been complete dunderheads, will develop a new TV series of BG.
Best,
Peter (Still looking forward to the UFO film than this felgercarb.)
Athene
December 17th, 2009, 07:23 AM
I too have read the article.
Until Bryan Singer comes out and says directly he's not directing the Battlestar Galactica movie...so far he hasn't done so...
I've also looked at several other sites...the projected release date for the Galactica movie is 2011/2012...
Bryan Singer has also directed other projects as well...
Superman Returns for instance...which I really enjoyed...and Singer also directed this project...
Here's an article I found on Bryan Singer and his film projects...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Singer
KJ
December 17th, 2009, 11:44 AM
I too have read the article.
Until Bryan Singer comes out and says directly he's not directing the Battlestar Galactica movie...so far he hasn't done so...
I've also looked at several other sites...the projected release date for the Galactica movie is 2011/2012...
We're weeks away from 2010. So a 2012 release says to me that the film would be total *pants* i.e. rushed into production for a quicky release date. Don't think any of us want that after so long. It needs to be done right and correctly. Films done properly take years of development, without being greenlit no, production or pre-production of any kind can begin. No script, set, casting, SFX house, score composer, budget cost being worked out etc.
Far as your statement about how he hasn't said or announced anything yet he hasn't done so. Nor hasn't he officially said he'd do it either? Nor have their been any media related released news updates on that score. Hence news of an all-new X-Men film series ("X-Men First Class") has more way more ammunition than any Galactica movie at this point, even upon the first article rumors, its possibly guaranteed this news will hit E! News and be in magazines and across the internet much faster than news of a BG movie was a few months ago?
The Marvel fan in me might be partially pleased at a X-Men film handled by Bryan Singer once more. But not at all, at the expense of yet another Battlestar revival attempt!!! The biggest two slaps in the face is the fact once again this happens and comes after another Battlestar Galactica try (even if no official announcements have been released this time) and secondly during the month of December. Celebrating Christmas or not, why this kind of bad news during the holiday season.
:(
Peter (Still looking forward to the UFO film than this felgercarb.)
I'm still looking forward to news of; A Robotech movie, Neon Genesis Evangelion, The Hobbit, Halo movie, Wonder Woman movie, A Dark Knight followup etc. Only Sci-Fi movie so far now, that'll will garner my interests from here on in, is what Robert Rodriguez does with his "Predators" revival movie of the Predator motion picture film series!
3 TV series incarnations i desperately wanted to see happen as major epic films as a kid were;
1) Battlestar Galactica
2) Dr Who
3) The Man From U.N.C.L.E.
Numbers 1 and 3 had their TV pilots and 2 parter TV episodes released as films in the cinema going back years ago. But none of them have ever had official movies on the big screen yet? o.k. apart from the Peter Crushing Dr Who films, but they're lacking in comparison the the official TV series version. And it looks like number 1 won't for a long time to come still. And i'm getting too old to be waiting around, i've got other interests and desires to fulfill while i'm kicking about and still young-ish.
Good luck trying to get and sustain the interest in a Galactica movie, when you finally get around to it Universal Studios, cos your going to need it. You've led us around with that carrot for years, about time all the donkeys went to "market" and raided the vegetable table stores, were there is plenty else on offer!
If you all get the metaphor!
KJ
monolith21
December 17th, 2009, 12:06 PM
Even fast tracked he could still direct Battlestar. I think we have to remember how many of these biased articles have been written. They're often penned by Moore's fans and they more than often want to take the wind out of Singer's sails. I'm not too worried about it. Battlestar has been on his radar long enough to make sure it happens. Remember, he got ten million bucks just for signing on to Direct, not produce.
starbucko
December 17th, 2009, 12:42 PM
I don't think we should get all dour about Singer or the movie just yet, anyway. Many quality films are done in much less than 2 years - particularly if they using CGI instead of actual huge sets, etc. and not traveling all over the place filming. Having seen what my son could do in high school with only basic equipment and very little time - I'm not worried. :D
KJ
December 17th, 2009, 12:48 PM
No offence to Bryan Singer, but i thought and figured the only directors commanding that kind of; Getting-Paid-to-Direct-Whether-i'm-Director-Or-Not was a Spielberg, Jackson, or Cameron deal with very few others in tow. And only directors with "Final Cut" say as well, whereas most other directors don't get a say half of the time.
Bias article or not, its not as if Universal's ever been good enough to show full support for Galactica and put news of a BG movie out there to hype it up for the official announcements to follow soon afterwards, is it?
If the new film version takes much longer. Then i say CFF next big thing should be a major push for the Remastered original series to be released finally on Blu-Ray DVD in HD. If the fanbase pushed for that knowing how long it'll take Universal to pull its thumb out, then at least show'em that the global interest for the movie will be there but for now give us something to hype up for the movie even moreso when it gets here, by giving us the original classic series on Blu-Ray along with a brand new remastered version of the series.
Trailer for the film version could at least be pasted onto one of the Blu-Ray remastered BG DVD's for the theatrical feature afterwards.
It'll be harder without the Galactica movie on the horizon to push for it! But if work were to begin on the Blu-Ray BG's by Universal now (by 2010 sometime?), then fans would naturally be more for supporting the eventual movie in whatever form (Bryan Singer directed or not?) it'll end up as.
I better work on that "Remastered BG series on Blu-Ray outline" over Christmas then!
:)
KJ
Athene
December 17th, 2009, 07:36 PM
I don't think we should get all dour about Singer or the movie just yet, anyway. Many quality films are done in much less than 2 years - particularly if they using CGI instead of actual huge sets, etc. and not traveling all over the place filming. Having seen what my son could do in high school with only basic equipment and very little time - I'm not worried. :D
I wholeheartedly agree... :salute:
Even fast tracked he could still direct Battlestar. I think we have to remember how many of these biased articles have been written. They're often penned by Moore's fans and they more than often want to take the wind out of Singer's sails. I'm not too worried about it. Battlestar has been on his radar long enough to make sure it happens. Remember, he got ten million bucks just for signing on to Direct, not produce.
I wholeheartedly agree...:salute:
I've read a lot of articles about the future of the Battlestar Galactia movie...quite a lot...
I too am not too worried about it...;)
Athene
December 17th, 2009, 07:57 PM
No offence to Bryan Singer, but i thought and figured the only directors commanding that kind of; Getting-Paid-to-Direct-Whether-i'm-Director-Or-Not was a Spielberg, Jackson, or Cameron deal with very few others in tow. And only directors with "Final Cut" say as well, whereas most other directors don't get a say half of the time.
Bias article or not, its not as if Universal's ever been good enough to show full support for Galactica and put news of a BG movie out there to hype it up for the official announcements to follow soon afterwards, is it?
If the new film version takes much longer. Then i say CFF next big thing should be a major push for the Remastered original series to be released finally on Blu-Ray DVD in HD. If the fanbase pushed for that knowing how long it'll take Universal to pull its thumb out, then at least show'em that the global interest for the movie will be there but for now give us something to hype up for the movie even moreso when it gets here, by giving us the original classic series on Blu-Ray along with a brand new remastered version of the series.
Trailer for the film version could at least be pasted onto one of the Blu-Ray remastered BG DVD's for the theatrical feature afterwards.
It'll be harder without the Galactica movie on the horizon to push for it! But if work were to begin on the Blu-Ray BG's by Universal now (by 2010 sometime?), then fans would naturally be more for supporting the eventual movie in whatever form (Bryan Singer directed or not?) it'll end up as.
I better work on that "Remastered BG series on Blu-Ray outline" over Christmas then!
:)
KJ
Interesting points...Let's not forget Glen Larson's part in this as well...
I also thought that they were going to be releasing the TOS BSG series on Blu-Ray...
I've been watching quite a bit of the episodes from my DVD collector's edition with the Cylon head on the box... ;)
I came across the article...
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/bryan-singer-signs-on-to-direct-x-men-first-class-neilm.php
KJ
December 18th, 2009, 07:22 AM
Similar to the link you found, here's another one with its lamblasting of the original and prasing of a certain other *cough* *cough* which shall remain nameless.
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/bryan-singer-re-imagines-battlestar-galactica-for-the-big-screen-robhr.php
So there are three options here.
One, the movie can take off from the original series… BAD IDEA because who really cares at this point? The show is fondly remembered more for it’s nostalgia factor than anything else. Some of the original actors are dead, the rest are ancient, and none of them are marquee names.
Two, the movie can take off from the recent series that just concluded a few months ago… BAD IDEA because that story already ended. Folks may disagree with how it ended, but the fact remains that it did end. The story is wrapped up. It’s done. And like option one this requires the audience have prior knowledge. Universal won’t want that if they’re after the largest audience possible.
Three, the movie can take the initial concept of a human/cylon war that sends humanity in search of a new home and just start fresh with new characters and stories… BAD IDEA because Moore’s series is still so resonant, and honestly, no two hour movie will be able to capture one-tenth of the show’s depth and creativity. That said, this will most likely be the path Universal and Singer choose. Using this summer’s Star Trek reboot as their model they’ll pack it full of young actors and lens flares and call it the birth of a new franchise.
Crappy ideas all around, but I guess it could be worse…
Read more at Film School Rejects: Bryan Singer Re-Imagines Battlestar Galactica For The Big Screen - Film School Rejects http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/bryan-singer-re-imagines-battlestar-galactica-for-the-big-screen-robhr.php#ixzz0a3KBNDPe
This is exactly why i'd want the Galactica movie based on the original to be made!
10 years ago i'd have said regardless, the actors of the original should be used. Only ape-ish no-imagination critics and reviewer make comment and baseless judgements. Of course only talented people over the years like Tarantino and few others have respect for the older generation and can use the older so-called 'has-been actors of yesterday as "marquee named" big film stars and place them in whatever feature applicable.
I truly have great concepts for a BG movie without too much 'uber-fanservice' or geek-ish qualities to slow it down or make it out o be amaturish etc. But i'm just that, a fan! And unless i were a writer with some experience under my belt. There's no chance of any script treatment or screenplay you or i could do, to get studio executives let alone a film studio to bank on the right avenue to do this production. They'd get around to it eventually and would hope for the best and its end results.
Give me a year or two to do an 'illustrated screenplay' and i'd knock'em for six with a storyline all mapped and chronicled out for sure, with mind blowing all-new concepts! Although i'd like to team up with a few established "artists" in the industry, in order to do it the right amount of justice!
KJ
TwoBrainedCylon
December 18th, 2009, 02:57 PM
Why the fuss? Why the continual complaints because someone else praises Moore's pile of dog droppings or slams the original? Too many in this group act like these twerps who crank out these articles have some sort of special insight or importance.
I've met a lot of these guys. They're morons. Remember the guy with the Jurassic Park nose who slammed the CFF. A pure idiot if I ever saw one.
If anyone gets their rocks off on "moral ambiguiity" and social commentary from Left-wing freakfests then that's their business and Moore's work appeals to them. Let them rant and be happy.
If anyone finds a three decades old series to still be worth praising (which is my persoanl stance) then be happy as well.
Singer never struck me as a guy who truly loved Galactica. Tom DeSanto does but Singer seemed to be along for the paycheck in my eyes. His leaving the project makes it less likely to happen AS WE UNDERSTAND THINGS but he's not critical or even a prime component to a good film. There are a lot of talented people.
If this film is never made then the GINO crowd will say that wisdom prevailed and that will be the common message. If it does, then it will be praised as the latest and greatest and the example of how GINO should have been. If its another remake, as I suspect it will be, then its also likely going to have some sort of links to make both franchises seem like they fit in the same universe. I strongly suspect that was part of the appeal of making a new project, especially since the info I've heard on the GINO DVD sales is pathetic after the 4th season aired.
This film project (whether it ever comes to pass or not) isn't about honoring the original series. Its about generating money. Star Trek appeals as an example because the abysmal Trek films that were coming out lost the core audience. GINO's core audience has largely abandoned it and there's a lot of unsold stuff that Universal and company want to get someone to buy.
I mention this only so that the film developments stay in some context. Folks could swap out. Idiots can write media articles. Fans can scream and complain.
It doesn't matter. It really doesn't.
If Universal thinks they can make money off of this and boost sales of things that aren't selling then this film will get made. If they don't, this will have the lights turned out without any regrets or delay. That is the key issue not the director or anything else.
... at least that's how I see it.
Russell
KJ
December 18th, 2009, 08:34 PM
So your saying Sandy, if the original wasn't honored and its not a necessary per se. Then why even bring up a new reboot Battlestar movie from Universal's perspective, if they aren't trying to lure in the older fans/audience or like Gino re-create an all-new version based on the outline of Larson's original 78 series, yet have nothing to do with the old show?
Why even call the movie Battlestar either? Defeats the whole purpose of a movie even carrying the name to boot.
Singer's name, was always a selling point to get a brand new BG movie off the ground. Since he was always on about the 78 series. Why do all that merely for the love of money? We all like DeSanto, but he's a producer not director, and twice in a row, news of Bryan Singer doing Galactica as a TV series revival and now movie, turns more heads than those of fans and insiders who know of Tom DeSanto's love for the property likewise.
Singer never struck me as a guy who truly loved Galactica. Tom DeSanto does but Singer seemed to be along for the paycheck in my eyes. His leaving the project makes it less likely to happen AS WE UNDERSTAND THINGS but he's not critical or even a prime component to a good film. There are a lot of talented people.
And i can't tell you enough times, how i've always asked and argued that question as to who/whom would love to a Battlestar movie besides Singer and DeSanto? To no avail for all these years. Its one thing to claim it, but who exactly and what beyond mere guessing games as to how many A-List directors from hollywood, would be lining up to do the Galactica movie? Its never been raised properly, so until then? Singer's the only one i see who's name has been attached to Galactica more than once. And probably will only be the only named director associated with the Battlestar Galactica movie for a long time.
Until i see anybody else claiming to do the same directing job. Singer's always going to be up there at the top paycheck guy in your eyes or not.
I mention this only so that the film developments stay in some context. Folks could swap out. Idiots can write media articles. Fans can scream and complain.
Maybe so, but if the end result is a movie that doesn't work, don't expect me to be around and support simply cos it got Battlestar Galactica labled on it. If the talent didn't get it right, then it failed and might as well be called 'Gino-2.1-The Movie Version'. I don't complain or moan. I raise worthwhile discussion points, militant or not, thats how it is with me. What? should i just be quiet cos it's named "Battlestar" and they did whatever with whomever in the drivers seat?
I think not!
KJ
Athene
December 19th, 2009, 07:31 AM
I've also come across a lot of sites where's been heated debates about the upcoming Battlestar Galactica movie...
I don't give much credence to that....;)
You'd figure if the movie was indeed not going to made then all of the that would be dying down...ya think? ;)
I for one am not going to throw in the towel..so-to-speak-because of one article saying the future of the movie is unclear...it'll take more than that to convince me that the movie isn't going to be made...
I'd like to hear what Glen Larson has to say regarding the project...;)
TwoBrainedCylon
December 19th, 2009, 08:37 AM
I give Larson ZERO credibility on a Galactia movie being made. He's made two many "In two years ..." declarations that not only never came to pass but also had no foundatins from the onset.
For KJ specifically:
Singer is the only director attached to the old series revival twice. He's also the only one who has happily jumped ship the moment a better deal came along. I haven't heard anything from Singer during these intervals stating his love for the original series. I have heard it continually from Tom DeSanto. To me, that says one guy is doing it primarily because they love the concept and the other is doing it to get paid.
I also think its pure folly to believe that Universal has somehow gained new love for the original series. I also think its folly to think that the original series fanbase has grown any larger than before. If they did, you would have heard about the CONTINUATION movie coming on, not something kinda based on the original. I doubt they've given up on the idea of a new and fresh Battlestar Galactica that "fits with the times" (or whatever the latest catch-phrase is). They like the idea of a boost of the original series crowd mixed with whatever phantom GINO fans they keep praising who just didn't actually watch GINO to boost its ratings, mixed with a new audience that isn't turned off by Ron Moore's flavoring. I still contend that Universal could give a rat's ass about "critical acclaim" from a bunch of media columnists. They want to sell tickets and merchandise and make a profit. If you look at all that through the lens of making bucks for Universal, all of this is pretty clear.
If the "GINO: The Plan" DVD had been a big seller, this project would have instantly changed to a Caprica/GINO concept. If in fact it tanked (sales-wise), as I've been led to believe, that doesn't equal a big audience for the original series. In fact, I'd believe they feel that the original series audience that wasn't large enough to justify a revival in 2003 has only gotten smaller after GINO, partly because Universal likely feels that some of these people are won over already and still didn't make the GINO audience large enough to pay the bills and partly because the concept is simply burned out.
One hit Galactica movie and all of this will instantly change, which is why I think the Trek reboot is a good example but Singer isn't a critical element to making that happen in my opinion. He's also not critical to Universal's key ambition in my mind, which is to sell a lot of unsold GINO stuff and hopefully generate enough interest to give Caprica a fighting chance as a series.
All my best,
Russell
peter noble
December 19th, 2009, 09:10 AM
I also think the suits at Universal don't care either way, if they made a continuation, remake, or reimagination. BG is just a property to exploit. Fans of any version of the show don't come into play when you're talking about worldwide box office.
They had to negotiate with Larson to but his rights for a time, so I'm sure on some level they've had to accommodate his wishes. If the movie does or doesn't get made, there will be one man who made money either way, and that's Glen A. Larson.
I don't think it will get made at Universal, purely because as a company is so badly run and the Comcast takeover I don't think is going to rectify that in any way.
My bet is, that Universal's option will expire in five years and some other studio or independent will swoop in and make a BG movie.
I'll see you all in 2017 then.
KJ
December 19th, 2009, 07:20 PM
I agree with your last post Sandy! Truly sorry if i sounded a little aggressive before, just that i support a movie version of old BG so much that dashed hopes, kinda piss me off real bad is all, no disrespect to you intended.
Galactica and several sci-fi/fantasy properties, have always been seen as the Rodney Dangerfield's of copyrighted TV series creations. Pity nobody sees their inate potentials and abilites though. They could do so bloody much in the right hands.
KJ
monolith21
December 20th, 2009, 02:41 AM
I'm reading a lot of crazy ideas in these last few posts that seem to know something I don't. Has DeSanto bailed out on this project? Had Singer said he is not doing it now? I can't find that sort of information anywhere and yet it is referred to here as if it is fact.
If it is conjecture then I can understand. I just want to know if I'm missing something.
I mean ZERO offense to anyone by this, but there are just as many people around here that jump on the downer band wagon as there are that get excited or get their proverbial panties in a bunch when some idiot blasts the original in talk back.
I agree though. What they say doesn't matter. I do say ignoring them completely is a mistake though. If their voices are the only ones making noise...well the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
If we all take the "ignore it and hope for the best" in silence attitude then we'll be drown out by some pretty lewd and opinionated pieces of work.
It doesn't take much to represent what we hope to see come of this movie. We don't even have to acknowledge the arrogance of some of the other new series fans. I do think its necessary that we show our support in some highly visible capacity.
I completely understand that some of us are burned out fighting for this. Its entertainment and when it ceases to be fun what is the point? If I were in that position I would simply want to wish those with some fight still in them the best of luck and to stay focused on what they want to see in this film and not what ignorant felgercarb the naysayers might be throwing around.
Anyone else notice that its only the very anti Singer Battlestar sites that are reporting he probably won't do it next? I'd say given the effect that news has had on the tone of this thread lately it was a brilliant move on their part.
Come on people! No where in these articles does anyone who knows anything say that Singer is not going to do Battlestar.
spiderr987
December 20th, 2009, 04:29 AM
I'm not buying into anything that Praise Moore/anti-Larson media has to INSINUATE about the real Battlestar Galactica movie being made. I'm heading steady until I hear something concrete. I've been through too much, with this franchise to do otherwise. I am battle weathered and tough. Nothing to see here, folks. ...not, yet. Carry on...
peter noble
December 20th, 2009, 06:24 AM
Has DeSanto bailed out on this project.
Nowhere has it been said that he's even attached to this project.
I completely understand that some of us are burned out fighting for this. Its entertainment and when it ceases to be fun what is the point? If I were in that position I would simply want to wish those with some fight still in them the best of luck and to stay focused on what they want to see in this film and not what ignorant felgercarb the naysayers might be throwing around.
Over the years, I've come to know how the film business actually works. Foremost it's a business, emotion doesn't come into it, it's all about the cash. Just because a film is announced, it may take years and years for it to be made, or it may not get made at all.
Fans of any persuasion have no bearing on the decisions made by film executives, unless, maybe, their fanbase is large enough to guarantee 'X' amount of profit for 'Y' amount of budget. The exceptions might be the Star Trek and Star Wars fanbases.
Has for fighting, Battlestar Galactica really isn't worth fighting about, the challenges of real life are worth fighting about, not some TV show.
I''m not interested in wasting my money on fan BG campaigns or petitions because I know from first-hand experience they don't work.
The joy I get out of BG, these days is collecting photos and articles on the show, David Kerin's fan productions, the articles on Galactica.tv, well done CG art and the physical model recreations at Resin Illuminati.
I still believe that one day there will be a Battlestar Galactica film and at some point another TV series, but not two years from now, maybe five to 10 years.
starbucko
December 20th, 2009, 08:07 AM
I don't understand where the idea that the movie is gone has come from either. These are just a sample of articles I've found and they all still have Singer attached/connected/whatever you want to call it to Battlestar.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118012931.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
http://splashpage.mtv.com/2009/12/18/fox-confirms-bryan-singers-x-men-return-hires-new-writer-for-first-class/
http://www.collider.com/2009/12/18/bryan-singer-provides-more-details-on-his-plans-for-x-men-first-class/
As a newbie, I must say it's no wonder I've found this fandom so confusing - one sentence in one article and the whole fandom explodes in suppositions and assumptions and rumor (treating all as *fact* for some reason) - and then either lands at the Gates of Glory or in the Pits of Hell.
So Singer's got more than one movie to be working on. Doesn't mean it's time to pull out the sackcloth and ashes - or the war paint. Only means he'll be a busy boy.
spiderr987
December 20th, 2009, 09:17 AM
My point, exactly. Come on, people. You know the drill. This is nothing but the media insinuating something... We all know there are certain parties in the media, there all up SyFy's butt.
KJ
December 20th, 2009, 09:59 AM
Look, i don't want nor like sounding negative on the Galactica movie issue. But the last time we had a revival going and Singer was asked to step away by 20th Century Fox to go prep X2 in early 2002, where exactly did all the hoping for the BG revival circa 2001-02 lead us after he walked away.
To April 2002 where syfy made an announcement we all didn't like, fans of the series and casual sci-fi folks alike.
So i hope that point is made crystal clear because of previous experiences we have together and not cos of some recent mere news thats cropped up out of the wood work! I've always been too passionate for my own good, but i've got a lot of good common sense people. Like its been said on here before. Fanbase is always going to have BG; fan movies, fan edits, fanfiction, CGI mesh projects, audio dramas etc etc.
If the Galactica movie not coming out past 2011 or 2012 i've got plenty of fantasy/sci-fi fictional TV/film projects i'm truly interested in, that i'd personally like to see happen. If Universal can't be arsed for 32 plus years to get it right and work out they have a "sleeping Juggernaut" constantly drugged in their basement, its their loss.
But life goes on (sadly without a BG revial of anykind?). :(
KJ.
P.S. (*For laughs*) A particular sequel, lol.
Sleeping Giant: Ugh, whats going on...
(Bryan Singer steps into hospital room)
Singer: Ya know. When i think about it old buddy. Fox's recent visits have opened my eyes.
Sleeping Giant: Ugh....hmmm huh, to what?
Singer: That a) Marvel and Fox made me another offer to do the X-Men, with full quality control, final cut EVERYTHING. And b) Nothing's more important than the almighty dollar! And that money talks
Sleeping Giant: ("shock horror") What!!! :yikes:
(Singer drugs his old friend)
Sleeping Giant:Nooooooooo...! Zzzzzzzzzz!
(Doctor passes by hospital wing)
Doctor: Huh..........Not again! Hey HEY wake up. nurse get help, i've gotta keep him awake again. Err... hmmm lets see (holds giant's hand) who starred in the Christmas movie 'Fred Claus'.
Sleeping Giant: ugh......A bearded Lorne, (passes out) Greeneeee....Zzzzzzz!
;)
spiderr987
December 20th, 2009, 10:12 AM
:LOL: Of course, our fandom can always use some humor.
Athene
December 20th, 2009, 11:07 AM
I too am holding steadfast and steady until I see something concrete.
And certainly not by one sentence in one article...that is NOT enough to convince this long time fan of the original BSG series that a movie won't be made...I wanna see fact and there isn't any yet that the movie won't be made...NONE
Many directors work on more than one movie at a time...it's been done...
and who's to say that Singer won't be able to do it...
He'll just be very, very busy... ;)
TwoBrainedCylon
December 20th, 2009, 05:21 PM
I fully concur with Peter. He said it as clearly as anyone could.
All my best,
Russell
martok2112
December 20th, 2009, 07:28 PM
I fully concur with Peter. He said it as clearly as anyone could.
All my best,
Russell
Fully agreed.
Hey, Russell, my good friend. :)
Happy Holidays to you and to everyone here, whatever you celebrate during this season.
monolith21
December 21st, 2009, 12:25 AM
The apathy just seems a bit negative I guess. I love this board, and truthfully...as much as you can love people you only know through words...I love you guys.
I do fight for Battlestar Galactica. Is it the same type of fighting I do for the kids I work with? Of course not. Its a completely different beast. Of course studios don't listen to fans. I've learned quite a bit about the entertainment industry as well. The attitude I take is this. You don't fight city hall head on. What you do is rally people. You make "them" want to change their mind.
We won't inspire anyone with apathy disguised as being realistic. Nothing says we have to inspire people...that is true.
It just seems like a good idea to me.
Athene
December 21st, 2009, 08:15 AM
I'm still not convinced that a movie isn't going to be made...not at all...
Here's another site with respect to Battlestar Galactica 2011 movie...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1383701/
Until I see it in print...that the movie's not going to be made...and it's fact...then I'll believe it...so far I haven't...not anywhere... ;)
I've got my calendar marked for 2011...:salute:
'nuff said...
Athene
December 21st, 2009, 08:20 AM
My point, exactly. Come on, people. You know the drill. This is nothing but the media insinuating something... We all know there are certain parties in the media, there all up SyFy's butt.
I wholeheartedly agree. :salute:
There is quite a difference between insinuation and fact... ;)
Athene
December 21st, 2009, 08:22 AM
Here's also another site...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlestar_Galactica#Feature_film_.282010.2F2011.29
BST
December 21st, 2009, 05:33 PM
The apathy just seems a bit negative I guess. I love this board, and truthfully...as much as you can love people you only know through words...I love you guys.
I do fight for Battlestar Galactica. Is it the same type of fighting I do for the kids I work with? Of course not. Its a completely different beast. Of course studios don't listen to fans. I've learned quite a bit about the entertainment industry as well. The attitude I take is this. You don't fight city hall head on. What you do is rally people. You make "them" want to change their mind.
We won't inspire anyone with apathy disguised as being realistic. Nothing says we have to inspire people...that is true.
It just seems like a good idea to me.
Monolith,
Thanks for the kind words. :)
It's not apathy so much as it's that unpleasant feeling you have when you've just gotten off a roller-coaster that wasn't kind to you. We've been on a rather tortuous roller-coaster the last 7 years and this is just one more time where we've found that some of the track is missing.
Hopefully, it's a small amount of track that's missing and it can be repaired.
;)
TwoBrainedCylon
December 21st, 2009, 07:33 PM
Steve,
Hello my friend. I hope things are going good for you in N'awlins!
I'm packing up and heading out to Afghanistan in the next few weeks. Gonna rush off with the surge and see if I can save some kids in the process. I do get Christmas here but will likely celebrate next year in some very high and cold mountains.
Hopefully there will be some better Galactica news when I return or if not, hopefully Caprica will have developed into something cool. I liked the pilot and only wish it wasn't attached to GINO but I like Jane as a writer and perhaps some good will come of that.
For the Singer (maybe not Singer) movie, I'm a "whatever will be will be" sort of guy. I'm reading where that's apathy but I see if as not pretending that I'm more important to the studios than I know I am. I think they want to sell GINO stuff but perhaps they are looking at getting a new, larger audience and if they can come up with a formula that grabs everyone, only good can come of that.
If you're still around in LA in 2011 then I will probably drag the (then wife) to see you guys and buy you a good dinner. I'd greatly enjoy the pleasure of your company for an evening.
All the best my friend.
Merry Christmas to you and everyone else,
Russell
spiderr987
December 21st, 2009, 09:29 PM
I think they want to sell GINO stuff but perhaps they are looking at getting a new, larger audience and if they can come up with a formula that grabs everyone, only good can come of that.
Yeah, and I think the obvious choice was TOS BSG to them. Larson produced Battlestar Galactica in the same vein as STAR WARS, even using Dystra to do the effects. ...and look how tickets, dvds and merchandise has been sold via that property.
Aussie Warrior
December 21st, 2009, 11:25 PM
Apparently Singer has concluded discussing a deal for Battlestar Galactica and is looking for a writer for the movie according to the Yahoo 7 news service
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/entertainment/6614611/director-singer-shares-x-men-holiday-plans/
martok2112
December 22nd, 2009, 01:40 AM
Steve,
Hello my friend. I hope things are going good for you in N'awlins!
I'm packing up and heading out to Afghanistan in the next few weeks. Gonna rush off with the surge and see if I can save some kids in the process. I do get Christmas here but will likely celebrate next year in some very high and cold mountains.
Hopefully there will be some better Galactica news when I return or if not, hopefully Caprica will have developed into something cool. I liked the pilot and only wish it wasn't attached to GINO but I like Jane as a writer and perhaps some good will come of that.
For the Singer (maybe not Singer) movie, I'm a "whatever will be will be" sort of guy. I'm reading where that's apathy but I see if as not pretending that I'm more important to the studios than I know I am. I think they want to sell GINO stuff but perhaps they are looking at getting a new, larger audience and if they can come up with a formula that grabs everyone, only good can come of that.
If you're still around in LA in 2011 then I will probably drag the (then wife) to see you guys and buy you a good dinner. I'd greatly enjoy the pleasure of your company for an evening.
All the best my friend.
Merry Christmas to you and everyone else,
Russell
Russell,
Please stay safe, and do good works over there, my friend.
All the best to you and yours,
Steve
spiderr987
December 22nd, 2009, 03:47 AM
...yeah, Russell. I have several friends in the military and have just returned from tours over there and/or about to head out. Stay safe!
KJ
December 22nd, 2009, 04:28 AM
Thats a neat link with new info Aussie Warrior, thank you for putting it up. :)
Hmm? Out of all tha news, kinda wish Bryan Singer were asked if he'd do a Superman Returns Extended cut on Blu-Ray & DVD. Something that'll release all the footage and show what the story would've really been like with the 'Return To Krypton' sequences restored and plenty other cut scenes he left out of the story as it was scripted.
On the Battlestar news. Hope that little tipbit gets out to other websites at least. Any news of the Galactica movie at this point, which is positive is a good thing and might lead to relieving some fans out there besides us lot, lol.
For: The TwoBrainedCylon.
Merry Christmas Sandy and take care of yourself. :salute:
Nice to know your driven by other things besides chinwaging with us about fandom discussion, and real life concerns and issues take heart. And you got other interests. But please be careful, the conflict out there seems to be neverending and the constant news being given to us about the bleak situations out there is always in the headlines, nothing compared to being out there in person i know.
Not as if you haven't done this before but still be careful and be constantly aware and alert of your surroundings, your things, other people etc in another country which is currently a warzone hazzard. Do what you have to but don't get sentimental or drop your guard. News of British and Amercian troops getting killing in this war or crisis/conflict whatever you want to call it, is really getting depressing to hear about on the news.
Be safe and stay safe.
Laters :thumbsup:
KJ
peter noble
December 22nd, 2009, 04:58 AM
Apparently Singer has concluded discussing a deal for Battlestar Galactica and is looking for a writer for the movie according to the Yahoo 7 news service
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/entertainment/6614611/director-singer-shares-x-men-holiday-plans/
That's the first direct quote after all these months.
The only deal that isn't firmed up is the Excalibur one and two projects have scripts, Jack The Giant Killer and X-Men First Class, which is a second draft as Josh Schwartz, co-creator of Chuck had done a draft previously.
Jack is in pre-vis and is the furthest along, with X-Men next, and at the moment Galactica is third with Excalibur holding up the rear.
No decision can be made to greenlight a BG movie until a script is written that is acceptable to all concerned and they can cost it up. So, at the moment events are in motion but we're looking at least 2013, 2014 for a BG movie to be released (IF all goes well).
KJ
December 22nd, 2009, 11:19 AM
Apparently Singer has concluded discussing a deal for Battlestar Galactica and is looking for a writer
Come on Eric Paddon? This is your chance, this is what your calling is... :D
Seriously though. One wonders who's got the writing chops to truly do an all-new version of BG with the themes and influences from the classic TV series, yet update and somewhat "reboot" the mythologies of Galactica outright for the big screen. Or at least put some 'spin' on the original conceptualised works of Larson and Stevens (?), and introduce all new ones?!
Not an easy task when you look at it.
KJ
spiderr987
December 23rd, 2009, 01:27 AM
Larry Kasdan of EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK!! He's currently working on ROBOTECH THE BIG CHILL REMAKE and THE RISK POOL.
KJ
December 24th, 2009, 02:00 AM
Look, all i really want to know is.....
When its closer to actual production on the movie, which one of you, or to be more pacific. How many of you will be dawning the 'nurses' uniforms for the various auditions and casting call?
Come on, i want a show of hands.
:LOL::D
Hey, its Christmas Eve, time to lighten up! We'll talk more seriously when more news develops and is released. But for now. Happy holidays people.
KJ
monolith21
December 24th, 2009, 02:28 AM
Look, all i really want to know is.....
When its closer to actual production on the movie, which one of you, or to be more pacific. How many of you will be dawning the 'nurses' uniforms for the various auditions and casting call?
Come on, i want a show of hands.
:LOL::D
Hey, its Christmas Eve, time to lighten up! We'll talk more seriously when more news develops and is released. But for now. Happy holidays people.
KJ
Okay I'll do it.
spiderr987
December 24th, 2009, 03:39 AM
Look, all i really want to know is.....
When its closer to actual production on the movie, which one of you, or to be more pacific. How many of you will be dawning the 'nurses' uniforms for the various auditions and casting call?
Come on, i want a show of hands.
:LOL::D
Hey, its Christmas Eve, time to lighten up! We'll talk more seriously when more news develops and is released. But for now. Happy holidays people.
KJ
HAPPY HOLIDAYS, KJ! :superholy
Kronus
December 24th, 2009, 07:05 AM
When its closer to actual production on the movie, which one of you, or to be more pacific. How many of you will be dawning the 'nurses' uniforms for the various auditions and casting call?
Oooo, count me in...so should I go in a traditional uniform or Fredricks of Hollywood style? :naughty: White comfortable nurse shoes or sleezy high heels and fish net stockings :drool:
Monolith, we need to coordinate, I don't want us showing up in the same outfit...:/:
monolith21
December 24th, 2009, 03:34 PM
That would be bad. How would they tell us apart?
Kronus
December 29th, 2009, 12:15 PM
Oh wait I know, you have a beard!
DOH! Wait a minute...I'm growing mine again for the February convention...oh I know, I'm taller! LOL! :D
I know, I can wear the low heels (2 to 3 inch) and you can break out the elevators! :P:
Ah forget it...they will just have to see two of us wearing the same thing. :errr: :rolleyes:
monolith21
December 29th, 2009, 10:24 PM
You had to go and bring up the height thing didn't you! I knew it. You're being taller than me on purpose.
As for the writer, I hope Singer sticks with David Hayter. After seeing Watchmen, that man absolutely knows how to be true to source material. Regardless of whether one liked Watchmen or not, he was pretty dead on. He even made the few changes made in the adaptation feel very in universe.
Singer usually goes to Hayter for his films. I think that unless the studio insists otherwise, he'll be the one to write it. I am all for it!
oldwardaggit
December 30th, 2009, 05:09 AM
You had to go and bring up the height thing didn't you! I knew it. You're being taller than me on purpose.
As for the writer, I hope Singer sticks with David Hayter. After seeing Watchmen, that man absolutely knows how to be true to source material. Regardless of whether one liked Watchmen or not, he was pretty dead on. He even made the few changes made in the adaptation feel very in universe.
Singer usually goes to Hayter for his films. I think that unless the studio insists otherwise, he'll be the one to write it. I am all for it!
So the news title can read something like this.
From lovers to haters to Hayter, the history of Battlestar Galactica.
Or something like that :rotf:
I haven't been here in quite some time and some here probably don't even know who the %^&* I am. :rotf: but when is this thing ever going to happen? :drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool:
OWD
BST
December 30th, 2009, 05:46 AM
So the news title can read something like this.
From lovers to haters to Hayter, the history of Battlestar Galactica.
Or something like that :rotf:
I haven't been here in quite some time and some here probably don't even know who the %^&* I am. :rotf: but when is this thing ever going to happen? :drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool:
OWD
.... And then, there are some of us who DO know who you are.... ;)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, my friend!!
:) :salute:
KJ
December 30th, 2009, 10:36 AM
So the news title can read something like this.
From lovers to haters to Hayter, the history of Battlestar Galactica.
Or something like that :rotf:
I haven't been here in quite some time and some here probably don't even know who the %^&* I am. :rotf: but when is this thing ever going to happen? :drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool:
OWD
Oh i 'KNOW' who you are...., see my signature!
:D:salute:
Have a very 'Happy New Year' OWD!
KJ
Watch-Ryder
December 31st, 2009, 09:32 PM
You had to go and bring up the height thing didn't you! I knew it. You're being taller than me on purpose.
As for the writer, I hope Singer sticks with David Hayter. After seeing Watchmen, that man absolutely knows how to be true to source material. Regardless of whether one liked Watchmen or not, he was pretty dead on. He even made the few changes made in the adaptation feel very in universe.
Singer usually goes to Hayter for his films. I think that unless the studio insists otherwise, he'll be the one to write it. I am all for it!
Yeah, I have high hopes for the new BSG film. A 're-imagining' just doesn't cut it for me. It's got to be a continuation or a re-make.
Fingers crossed :)
monolith21
January 1st, 2010, 03:20 AM
Here's to hoping 2010 brings us good news!:beer::beer:
Reaper
January 1st, 2010, 08:21 AM
Here's to hoping 2010 brings us good news!:beer::beer:
HERE HERE!!! :beer::beer::beer:
oldwardaggit
January 2nd, 2010, 09:59 AM
.... And then, there are some of us who DO know who you are.... ;)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, my friend!!
:) :salute:
Right back at ya :salute:
OWD
oldwardaggit
January 2nd, 2010, 10:01 AM
Oh i 'KNOW' who you are...., see my signature!
:D:salute:
Have a very 'Happy New Year' OWD!
KJ
And right back at you to :salute:
OWD
spiderr987
January 15th, 2010, 02:44 AM
...well, it looks like I'm gonna be posting here a lot more, than I have been in the past. :rotf: Just for the record, what can be done to make sure FLEETS is the board, that is the mainstay for discussion, news, etc, concerning the TOS film, as we approach it's release into theatres. The official board for the imposter show is very undeserving of the traffic, attention, hits, etc, but that's all I'll say abou that. We can definitely expect a barrage of negative campaigning, against the film, as it's already begun. ...would love to keep that element out of our fandom. Any thoughts?
p.s. Again, this is not a prompt to bring up and bash that other show, but I just want to make sure this board is rewarded the right to be homebase for operations for several reasons. I know there are members/admins on this board, that are insiders in the TOS world. Maybe you guys could provide exclusive interviews, info, etc.
Watch-Ryder
January 18th, 2010, 02:20 AM
...well, it looks like I'm gonna be posting here a lot more, than I have been in the past. :rotf: Just for the record, what can be done to make sure FLEETS is the board, that is the mainstay for discussion, news, etc, concerning the TOS film, as we approach it's release into theatres. The official board for the imposter show is very undeserving of the traffic, attention, hits, etc, but that's all I'll say abou that. We can definitely expect a barrage of negative campaigning, against the film, as it's already begun. ...would love to keep that element out of our fandom. Any thoughts?
p.s. Again, this is not a prompt to bring up and bash that other show, but I just want to make sure this board is rewarded the right to be homebase for operations for several reasons. I know there are members/admins on this board, that are insiders in the TOS world. Maybe you guys could provide exclusive interviews, info, etc.
I can see about putting some links to this forum on my BSG TOS squidoo page for a start :)
spiderr987
January 19th, 2010, 12:08 AM
That would be great. We want to make sure the only forums and entities that have been truly loyal to TOS are the ones that benefit from any success from the Larson/DeSanto film.
monolith21
January 19th, 2010, 01:51 AM
I'm still holding my breath waiting to hear news the DeSanto is actually involved. So far its just Singer and Larson (to some extent). He really does need to be in on this!
spiderr987
January 19th, 2010, 01:58 AM
That would be awesome! ...and, I don't want anyone from the imposter show involved in the film in any way, shape or form.
Watch-Ryder
January 19th, 2010, 03:42 AM
That would be great. We want to make sure the only forums and entities that have been truly loyal to TOS are the ones that benefit from any success from the Larson/DeSanto film.
Ok, just added the link here! :D
http://www.squidoo.com/battlestargalactica1978
spiderr987
January 19th, 2010, 12:34 PM
That's a nice-looking page! :coolangel
Kronus
January 20th, 2010, 12:30 PM
...well, it looks like I'm gonna be posting here a lot more, than I have been in the past. :rotf: Just for the record, what can be done to make sure FLEETS is the board, that is the mainstay for discussion, news, etc, concerning the TOS film, as we approach it's release into theatres. The official board for the imposter show is very undeserving of the traffic, attention, hits, etc, but that's all I'll say abou that. We can definitely expect a barrage of negative campaigning, against the film, as it's already begun. ...would love to keep that element out of our fandom. Any thoughts?
Well my friend you did go a bit "thick" over there...it was funny what you did...but a bit too thick even for them, well with one exception that you were not one of the "elite". But we can continue this discussion offline.
This site should get full credit for being there from the beginning for a TOS BSG showing of any kind whether it be a movie or series. I'll be sure to make a signature block in all my profiles on all of the sites I use my Kronus ID...what the heck, I'll just add it to all of my profiles on ALL forums I am on.
monolith21
January 20th, 2010, 09:56 PM
Those boards will always be a nightmare. Its true, when people come looking for news on the new film it would be nice if they came to a friendly environment like this place. I don't think that will escape Singer and his crew.
At the end of the day, the haters are a small group of people. I think its important that we represent "our" side lest things seem unbalanced, but at the same time we need to keep in mind that we're not going to change their mind.
There are a nay sayers...but as the saying goes "there are those who believe".
I take it you're still fighting the good fight over there Spiderr. Keep the faith man, and remember not to slug it out on their level. Get to higher ground! lol
Watch-Ryder
January 21st, 2010, 03:35 AM
I've started a thread over on an Irish Thread and I'm taking some flak.
I'm handling them but the trouble is the age group we have that's seen and 'into' the newer BSG 2004 is active and tends to be anti TOS :(
BST
January 21st, 2010, 04:45 PM
Those boards will always be a nightmare. Its true, when people come looking for news on the new film it would be nice if they came to a friendly environment like this place. I don't think that will escape Singer and his crew.
At the end of the day, the haters are a small group of people. I think its important that we represent "our" side lest things seem unbalanced, but at the same time we need to keep in mind that we're not going to change their mind.
There are a nay sayers...but as the saying goes "there are those who believe".
I take it you're still fighting the good fight over there Spiderr. Keep the faith man, and remember not to slug it out on their level. Get to higher ground! lol
Speaking on behalf of Fleets, I really do appreciate how much affection that you folks have for the place. Fleets is special because of folks like you, who simply want to share their love for Galactica and other areas of interest like artwork, costuming, fan fiction, collectibles, etc. For me, it's been a refuge from the nastiness of real life and has given me the priceless opportunity to connect with so many folks from so many different backgrounds and parts of the world.
Regarding the haters, don't even give them a second thought. This staff has seen it all from the "haters" crowd and, quite frankly, the "haters" will NEVER disrupt this site's peacefulness. Now, with the "haters" remark, I want to make one thing perfectly clear -- the "haters" are the spiteful, mean-spirited, thoughtless troublemakers who want to do nothing except cause unrest amongst folks. They should NOT be confused with folks who enjoyed Moore's show. Those folks simply liked a show that some here did not and a tv show would never be something that I would sacrifice a friendship over.
monolith21
January 21st, 2010, 07:55 PM
Well said! It became apparent to me on Galacticruise that the haters I was constantly exposed to in no way represented all the fans of that show. I should have known better.
Don't get me wrong, I think the haters should be called out on their junk when out and about. Wouldn't want their poison to spread. However, its about keeping things open and not necessarily fighting. I'd rather win over one of the open minded ones than go head to head in a...well forum argument.
I think those of us at this site are at our best when we're being creative and supportive of our interests.
Good stuff BST! Thanks for all you do.
BST
January 22nd, 2010, 07:01 AM
Thanks for the kind words, monolith.... :)
***********
Don't get me wrong, I think the haters should be called out on their junk when out and about. Wouldn't want their poison to spread.
Most often, though, it's best just to ignore them. A troll will starve when not fed.
;)
monolith21
January 23rd, 2010, 01:55 AM
Good point!
Kronus
January 24th, 2010, 07:28 PM
Don't get me wrong, I think the haters should be called out on their junk when out and about. Wouldn't want their poison to spread. However, its about keeping things open and not necessarily fighting. I'd rather win over one of the open minded ones than go head to head in a...well forum argument.
Well you know how I can get in person, LOL! I am tactful and polite and VERY strong in playing nice or I'll call you on it. Fighting does nothing but stir up strife and when that happens nothing gets accomplished.
So did you guys hear this:
(Posted by our buddy bishop37 on Skiffy)
VARIETY: Universal Pictures has upped Scott Bernstein to exec VP of production.
Best known for his work with genre material like "Hellboy II: The Golden Army," Bernstein has also been involved with many of the studio's hit comedies, including "The Break-Up" and "Role Models." He is currently shepherding "Your Highness" and the prequel to John Carpenter's "The Thing." Bernstein is also developing Dark Horse's graphic novel "The Umbrella Academy" and the bigscreen adaptation of "Battlestar Galactica."
He'll report to U prexy of production Debbie Liebling.
Scott has a real sense of what's next in pop culture, which informs his work on comedies and genre films," said U co-chair Donna Langley. "He's been a great asset to the studio."
Before joining U in 2007 as a senior VP of production, Bernstein worked as a production exec at Revolution Studios, Lionsgate and Ignite Films. He also did stints at Mostow/Lieberman Prods. and the Draizin Co.
Bernstein began his film career at Jon Peters Entertainment as a story editor-production exec.
KJ
January 24th, 2010, 11:16 PM
I'm hopeful news like that, even way before any official announcements or early during pre-production before it begins its phase. That talented concept artists are assigned to go over the early script drafts (screenplays) and whatnot from Singer's team to flesh out even the most remote ideas and theories and illustrate/paint them in the planning stages way ahead, of making the actual movie. Although Bryan Singer usually has the excellent Guy Dyas and Ben Procter with him for his movies, just in case i pray he also get a hold of a few others who have recently done sci-fi/fantasy flicks like Ryan Church to name but one and few others.
http://www.ryanchurch.com/index.htm
http://www.stevejung.net/index.htm
http://www.benprocter.com/SITEv2/HTML/HOME.html
And i'd love to see Josh Nizzi do a updated Cylon design (Please check out his portfolio!!!) it would be sweet, baby!
http://www.joshnizzi.com/
These guys recently did the Transformers sequel, crap film (due to Bay and the writers) but fantastic design work (been gathering the jpeg artworks of that movie) throughout, so i wish that several of these artists along with any other who are talented enough ('Doug Chiang' is another) become apart of the production, once it gets going of course.
:D :)
Like i've said though. Hope they place becomes the "hotbed" for BG motion picture movie news once the official announcement comes in and the studio communicates with the fans and audience on here, and put some REAL funding into running ColonialFleets big time (going commercial etc?) when things take off finally.
Till then, i'll get on with my life and not wait around. When it truly does happen, i'll be back simple as.
KJ
monolith21
January 25th, 2010, 02:19 PM
Sounds like they are putting their big guns behind this! Its about time!
BST
January 25th, 2010, 07:40 PM
"These guys recently did the Transformers sequel, crap film (due to Bay and the writers) ..."
What was wrong with Transformers II? The Transformers comics and toys hit the markets during my post-school age days and I wasn't a big follower but, when the movies came out, based on the production crew and the good reviews here and elsewhere, I gave them a shot and was very pleasantly surprised. So, all that I really know about them are the movies.
monolith21
January 25th, 2010, 08:43 PM
The second film tried to cram a lot in but I liked it overall. I do think the first movie was better. The two "jive" autobots were a bit much in the second one.
KJ
January 27th, 2010, 05:47 PM
What was wrong with Transformers II? The Transformers comics and toys hit the markets during my post-school age days and I wasn't a big follower but, when the movies came out, based on the production crew and the good reviews here and elsewhere, I gave them a shot and was very pleasantly surprised. So, all that I really know about them are the movies.
Take it from a G-1 fan who did grow up watching the original animated series. Its adaptation could've been a hell of alot better and superior to what Michael Bay eventually put out. Monolith21 had it right about TF2, believe me. If bay did and got a hold of doing the BG movie and put 'Humping Robots', pot head moms, Stupid dialogue and a whole bunch of whacky nonsense, it'll be akin to him making BG with Bell Bottoms/flairs, 70's hair and the usual negative BG cliches some ignorant people lable it with etc.
Regardless of its current success, its source material weren't even 50% accurate or represented properly, and i'm not the only fan (hardly?) who holds that kind of opinion on web forums accross the internet!
Sounds like they are putting their big guns behind this! Its about time!
Well i hope as stated on these boards for the past couple of months, that we can get some kind of big annoucement in regards to the Battlestar Galactica feature motion picture movie, pretty soon, and that something truly major happens with ColonialFleets in regards to that kind of development from the studio trying to get BG on the silverscreen?!
Which leads me to ask again, even before then, can get the BG movie threads to be divided up in certain sections?
1) The main one covering the important news developments (i.e. this one). For the released studio info only (no offtopic Posts allowed!)
2) One for discussing its possible production elements. Who we'd want as director, producer (others besides Tom DeSanto), scripts, casting (serious kind i.e. no nurses uniforms debates, lol?), location work, artist, visual effects, stunt team etc?
[maybe thats a little early but we'd need a proper place to focus certain areas of discussions i think? that won't jumble-up the main threads for that discussion]
3) Fan forum/chat room threads. Once its greenlight or even before then any relevant news items to be of importance i.e. convention appearences (i.e. ComicCon, Wizardworld etc?) minor convention meetings and get-togethers, and an online chat area for fans to discuss things not of the officially released infomation, but for fandom topics relating to the movie but in th more open sense of what we'd want and any communication between the fans/audience and the studio?
4) And an advanced "Search Engine" on the pages to find post & threads sections, buried within the system and site especially if you're new or looking for an older thread/post page from long ago etc.
And so forth etc!
Discuss...
Laters players :salute::cool:
KJ
BST
January 27th, 2010, 08:17 PM
KJ,
A lot of those items we already have in place, like the Convention forum and the Chat area (which hardly anyone uses.... it's available for folks all the time). What we can do is to give extra prominence to those items by "Sticking" them to the top of the particular forum.
Additionally, if and when this all comes about, we can always set up a specialized forum for production related coverage, threads, discussion, etc.
For 'official' items, depending on how all this will work -- if Fleets will be tapped to play a significant role in this endeavor, we can likely set up some sort of "read only" section that will only be updated by moderators/admins.
I hope that this wasn't too vague but, in reality, there's not a whole lot that we can't do, it's just a matter of what we will need to do, when we will need to have it done, and when we find out what we have to do.
:)
KJ
January 27th, 2010, 09:01 PM
Understandable BST.
Additionally, if and when this all comes about, we can always set up a specialized forum for production related coverage, threads, discussion, etc.
Alright, long as you remember who kept asking for this to happen and how to go about it.
;)
Hope if and when CF goes commercial for the BG movie, the site can handle the massive in-flux of all-new folks constantly asking and debating the upcoming movie. It'll make our debates right now by the existing fandom seem pretty tame by comparison.
Any chance of the "Search Engine" though? CF could certainly do with that right now, couldn't we?
KJ
Ramses
February 15th, 2010, 12:34 PM
it would be great to see a big screen BSG TOS. I dont see that it needs reworking maybe expand and explain things from the show. a more updated look. and no i dont mean redisign but a more modern tech feel without changing the basics.
maybe it would help if some one or a group made a really good fanfilm. with all the fans out there I would bet who ever did it could get help in scriptwriting. CGI, modeling. acting. Locations you name it. would be kinda of cool to see a full length feature made well and cheap by fans.
anyway.. just a dream of mine LOL. maybe the site should host a Script writing contest. let the fans suggest the basic plots for the writers to use.
okay sorry enough of my fantasty's. LOL
spiderr987
February 23rd, 2010, 05:28 AM
It took me this long, before I came across the actor, who has the charm, charisma and playboy attributes to give Dirk's Starbuck role the justice it deserves:
http://www.usanetwork.com/series/whitecollar/theshow/characterprofiles/neal/gallery/n03.jpg
Matt Bomerhttp://static.tvguide.com/MediaBin/Galleries/Shows/S_Z/Wa_Wh/White_Collar/season1/WhiteCollar8.jpg
Matt Bomer stars as Neal Caffrey in the new USA Network original series White Collar premiering Friday, October 23, 2009 at 10/9c.
Bomer's television credits include a lead role in the ABC series "Traveler," and recurring roles on the NBC series "Chuck" and the FOX series "Tru Calling."
In feature films, Bomer starred in New Line's "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning," and appeared in "Flightplan" with Jodie Foster.
Bomer received a BFA from Carnegie Mellon University. After college, he moved to New York, where he worked on stage until landing roles on television.
Bomer currently resides in Los Angeles.
http://www.usanetwork.com/series/whitecoll...s/neal/bio.html (http://www.usanetwork.com/series/whitecollar/theshow/characterprofiles/neal/bio.html)
Hey, guys! Bomer's show, WHITE COLLAR, is really taking off in the ratings on USA, which will give him the star power and experience he needs to play Starbuck on the new Larson/DeSanto TOS movie... that is ...if they decide to recast. I still hope they decide to go the continuation to have Dirk reprise his role and also as a :P: in Bonnie, Eick and Hammer's face. If they do go the continuation route, I would love to see Bomer cast as Dirk's son.
JSC1
February 23rd, 2010, 08:18 AM
What was wrong with Transformers II? The Transformers comics and toys hit the markets during my post-school age days and I wasn't a big follower but, when the movies came out, based on the production crew and the good reviews here and elsewhere, I gave them a shot and was very pleasantly surprised. So, all that I really know about them are the movies.
Well for some reason whenever the Megatron interrogates Sam scene happened I started nodding off. I think I even fell asleep a few times when that scene came on.
Westy
February 25th, 2010, 05:19 PM
Hey everyone, long time no see. I read the last few pages in this thread and was wondering if there's an official site for this movie yet? I saw on IMDB that it's still in preproduction, so maybe it's too early for an official movie site still...is there anywhere for reliable news on it? Cast? pics? anything yet?
Dawg
February 25th, 2010, 08:24 PM
If you've read the last few pages, Westy, you know as much as any of us.
We're hoping...
And welcome back. ;)
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
jewels
February 26th, 2010, 10:01 AM
Hey, guys! Bomer's show, WHITE COLLAR, is really taking off in the ratings on USA, which will give him the star power and experience he needs to play Starbuck on the new Larson/DeSanto TOS movie... that is ...if they decide to recast. I still hope they decide to go the continuation to have Dirk reprise his role and also as a :P: in Bonnie, Eick and Hammer's face. If they do go the continuation route, I would love to see Bomer cast as Dirk's son.
I think Bomer has the right touch for Starbuck also if they plan on starting back at the beginning again. I'm really enjoying White Collar. It's starting to hit it's stride, the cast has good chemistry and they are starting to put a little more intrigue and story arc into the plots.
Hi Westy!
monolith21
February 26th, 2010, 02:04 PM
I'm not to keen on anyone playing Starbuck but Dirk Benedict. He can play a Starbuck like character all the live long day...but call him something else! I'll watch it if they go the Abrams Star Trek route...but I'd be a whole lot happier if they didn't.
Don't get me wrong, I want to see a new group of hot shot pilots in those vipers, but I want them to be their own new characters.
Centurion Draco
February 27th, 2010, 08:32 AM
So like us all, I've been quietly watching this develop, not daring to hope after so many false dawns over the years, not wanting to even comment and 'add to the smoke' if this is going to be another (probobly the last) false hope, but now it does seem to be gathering momentum.
So I 'am' going to join the discussion as I feel its time to ask a few things, and begin the painful process of daring to hope.
1. Has anyone from the original cast admitted to being approached about the possibility of being involved in this?
2. What can we do to increase the possibilites of the project (if it does happen) including the original cast and being a continuation rather than a 'retelling' a 'reboot' or any other damn thing likey to saddle the franchise with another atrocity?
3. Should we start with a dedicated forum to focus campaigns and gorups etc?
4. Will CF have an official 'position' on what we are looking for in this project, if it really is going to happen?
KJ
March 5th, 2010, 09:34 PM
Truth be told, 10 years ago i'd have fought tooth and nail fighting for the original cast to be in the Galactica theatrical movie 100% all the way. Now is 30 plus years later though. What realistically is the chance of the main surviving cast of that classic series all getting back together to kick-start an all-new BG movie franchise and recapture the lighting-in-the-bottle again?!?
:(
Even lesser TV shows made into movies these days, don't have their original cast members in them at all, either that or they're given minor walk on cameos (i'll be watching the A-Team this summer to see how Dirk gets on in that one?). To be honest and quite frank, i can envision a kick-ass BG movie still, but the original cast's involved isn't now going to be what it could've 10 years earlier with some studio trust issues put aside?
Won't forget Jack Stauffer's funny comment nearly 5 years ago at Birmingham NEC Comic Convention, where he said; "If they don't hurry up, it'll be old guys in space". Lol, but true. and while Clint Eastwood gets respect in hollywood (cos he always played tough gunfighters in 'Westerns', think that kinda rubs off on people in real life too?) many aging actors his own age don't have his level of respect or studio leaverage in terms of negociations, pulling power, board meetings, casting and directing opportunities etc. Any new BG film would need someone with selling power (Bryan Singer), respect and would get all new actor to play parts in it. If they still went with the originals to some degree they'd be given the minor speaking parts or have the walk on roles. trouble is where does the story start? Singer's Superman Returns followed on from Superman The Movie and Richard Lester's Superman 2 (Even if Singer prefers Donner's 2 cut) a Galactica might reference the TV show but i can't see it following on from BG:Hand Of God at this point in time and it'll be more or less; realistically a major do-over instead.
Important question then............?
For a battered 3 decades plus a sci-fi TV series classic. Where's exactly would our investment be in all-new BG characters we've never heard of or even seen yet.
Singer's gone the SR route with a semi-reboot and the Superman fans roasted him somewhat over Superman Returns. But logically i can't see Universal Studios greenlighting a major continuation and casting Richard Hatch back as an aged Apollo, Dirk as battlescarred Starbuck and Herb as a grayhaired retired Boomer?! Just doesn't happen in hollywood today. But i'd go with a semi-reboot if the older cast members were shown that kind of respect and the new stars were given the ropes in tow with them equally rather than, new guys in this sci-fi movie and the old originals for 30 seconds or blink and miss'em moments etc. Later on the sequels gived them the majority of the limelight and they'll takeover, but the big event "Baton/Torch handling" should come with the first movie!
1. Has anyone from the original cast admitted to being approached about the possibility of being involved in this?
2. What can we do to increase the possibilites of the project (if it does happen) including the original cast and being a continuation rather than a 'retelling' a 'reboot' or any other damn thing likey to saddle the franchise with another atrocity?
Once there's any kind of headway with news from the studios officially and not just run-of-the-mill rumors. I say let CFF do a poster; commisioned if need be by a professional! (thinking Dru Stuzan!) for ComicCon and get the CFF movement ready for a ComicCon segment where the news can be organised properly with fandom in tow.
Second and most important. Making CF as the movie's official website staging area. But thats another story, i'm sure the mods will want in on all that hoopla themselves, long as they have their original influence and Universal and CF work together in putting together the BG movie website. It would certainly go a long way in showing that the fans want the BG movie to be something "Major League" special and it does.
Thirdly, if anything can get Glen Larson himself involved more directly with CF or the movie in terms of what his wishes are; writing, interviews, PR with the fans and the website etc. Thats what i'd like to see!
Anything else? :errr:
KJ
monolith21
March 5th, 2010, 10:01 PM
It seems that people think that when I say I want it to be a continuation I mean I want all those guys flying around in vipers no matter how old they are.
They are going to use a cast of hot young actors absolutely. They will be a major driving force in the film and I'm okay with that. I just don't want them playing the exact characters that have come before. Starbuck and Apollo would either be retired or in command positons by now hopefully.
I see no problem with it and I know it would sell. The characters will not be exact. The names themselves are not so important that they can simply attach them to any actor and make it Battlestar. There is room for new characters within the story.
They could go the Star Trek route and play the same characters with new actors. I'd still watch it and it might be good. Its not ideal though. Why start over when they could use all that rich history that has been set up and the long standing fandom to support it.
I think with Singer at the helm, there is a good chance at him getting his way. Remember, Superman Returns was a big chance for him being that it was a continuation. It was not a failure despite some very vocal opinions.
Its all on Singer. He can pretty much do what he wants. If he has the vision to see a way to make this thing a continuation he can do it.
KJ
March 6th, 2010, 09:45 AM
I wasn't saying anything bad about your previous comments Monolith21.
Only airing my views since the question was asked mind you. :D:salute:
Still they've gotta drop something Battlestar Galactica movie related soon in 2010 at some time. Since the news of Singer and Larson involvement came out in August last year. How long do people stay on announced movies far as the development stages go? Bryan Singer's got several motion pictures in the pipeline hasn't he?
X-Men First Class, a drama, plus another sci-fi project of some sort? Where does BG fit into that mix and how far along is the Battlestar Galactica motion picture.
Might E-mail Garth Franklin over at 'Dark Horizons' and ask whats the beef and if he's heard anything yet.
KJ
monolith21
March 6th, 2010, 04:14 PM
Sorry if that came off aimed at you man! Not at all, everyone around here gets me!:rotf:
You made me think of a few conversations I have had recently about a continuation. Some people just assume right away that I mean all the original characters doing exactly what they did thirty years ago. I don't think that is a real expectation at all!
Like I said, if they do something similar to what Abrams did with Star Trek I'll go see it for sure. More than a few times. I just think that they should go more the route that "Tron Legacy" is taking. Its not as hard as people think to pick a story up thirty years down the line. They just have to get out of the rut of thinking that everyone has to be exactly like they were back in the day. If they go for realism it will be a completely new chapter in the story of Battlestar Galactica.
KJ
March 6th, 2010, 05:04 PM
Tron Legacy looks to be sweet indeed, can't believe it almost 28 years later and that movie's getting a sequel. And that teaser trailer is just that not revealing too much but gets us pumped up for the film overall. But yeah its a neat example to use.
Classic Galactica's been said to have many avenues to have a comeback story told and envisioned. So even with all-new actors obviously headlining the new motion picture production, it's not beyond all reason to either include the originals and pass the "baton" in or two feature films based on the BG series. Or as Singer might do, and have a semi-reboot (SR style) of some sort and reference the original series while giving us something 80% new with the movie layered with 'easter eggs' TV series nods for us long time supporters.
This could go either way right now. :errr: :blink:
Hope something is announced soon seeing as after the announcements are all said and done, they'd have to begin development work and raise funds for the budgets, write script drafts etc. Its probably happening right now, but without anything being passed onto us (i.e. 'joe public') we're starting to fret a little bit?
Projects and films that were rumored usually have followup news clips. And the biggest stamp of approval this news and talk of a Galactica movie being done is for the news to hit E! Entertainment (and where's E!'s Battlestar Galactica The E True Hollywood Story by the way?) and the media news channels, or for there to be such a news breaking about BG that everywhere gets it websites, media, magazines (even 'Rolling Stones') etc.
Til then, the internet gossip usually doesn't entertain me enough to say its real unless it got pictures and proof via a known reporter being credited for the late breaking news.
KJ
monolith21
March 7th, 2010, 03:15 PM
I think we're all getting anxious for some news. Of course as with most movies, the fact that we haven't heard anything yet means nothing. Its not good and its not bad. Like I said, DeSanto announced Transformers in 2003 and had been working on it for some time. That didn't materialize until 2007. The fact that this has been fast tracked probably means it won't be that long, but a year or so is not unheard of.
KJ
March 7th, 2010, 03:39 PM
DeSanto and Don Murphy, these days only seem to be credited for developing Transformers and then later bringing it to Spielberg and Michael Bay's attention to be fair! Considering how the terrible sequel turned out last year besides the modest first picture (which is far better the the second movie), don't think DeSanto's hard work in 'getting over' or making the REAL film projects he wants to do in hollywood is quite over, just yet to be honest.
Trouble with BG is it development process is basically; rumors of it going to be made then ............. nothing truly happens *sigh*. Whereas with most other developments they're clearly in development hell or ARE being made! Galactica being turned into a big theatrical picture always had this very troublesome "middle ground" where even those trying to revive it don't know where it stands exactly?!? So yeah we're anxious and for damn good reason though, considering the rather painful past history of trying desperately to revive it properly! We're going down the same path yet again, so you'd think we would've learned not to take the road that leads to nowhere or that 'magic roundabout' route that goes in circles metaphorically speaking?
KJ
peter noble
March 7th, 2010, 03:45 PM
the fact that we haven't heard anything yet means nothing. Its not good and its not bad
You speak the wisdom of the Lords.
Centurion Draco
March 7th, 2010, 04:36 PM
Hmmm, Interesting thoughts Gentlemen.
I'm looking for a continuation of the original story arc. Not a reboot of any sort.
It can (and clearly needs to) be different in many ways from the original as times and tastes have changed, but that doesn't mean we have to lose the flavour or the 'magic'.
I'd expect to see the original actors cast on prominant roles. Not cameos or walk-ons. I think we all understand that the 'hot shot pilots' are going to be new young actors, but there's still room for our familiar names.
Just the first ideas that pop into my head....
Richard Hatch - Commander Adama.
Dirk Benedict - Colonel Starbuck (training and leading the Squadrons)
Laurette Spang - Chief Medical Officer.
Herb Jefferson - Commanding a converted and retro fitted fleet ship (as some kind of makeshift military warship/fleet Aux to Galactica)
Noah Hathaway - as whatever he darn well pleases cos he's a top bloke!
Anne Lockhart - President Sheba
And the now rather venerable memebers of the original cast on the quorum of the 12.
And proper Cylons, obviously.
There is no need to rewrite the main roles to reprise the original premise when its 'been done'.
The only thing that makes sense is to continue the original series with a 'real time' gap from then to now. Its actually a good 'angle' to use. The new young characters would have all been born on the journey, never having known peace, the old characters in senior roles.
P.S. If we did get this... would we officially be the most fanatical and devoted fans in the history of SF?
monolith21
March 7th, 2010, 08:57 PM
You speak the wisdom of the Lords.
Thanks! I think we've all had our hopes raised and then dashed so many times that its hard not to be a bit suspicious, but every bit of news that does come out seems to point to some kind of movement. Best just to wait and see I suppose.
Centurion Draco, you bring up a good point! Noah Hathaway could be in the new film playing his old character without any trouble.
KJ
March 8th, 2010, 04:48 PM
This is exactly what i was saying though. We wanted something like that for quite some time long before any internet revival campaigns were launched etc. But realistically in this day and age, we'd be even lucky to get all that from the studio thats done practically Jack with Battlestar Galactica for 3 decades or so.
:(
Beyond Hatch and Benedict at best, getting Bryan Singer or those in charge to even acknowledge or put the original TV stars in this piece for equal amounts of screen time next to brand new younger generation of movie stars for the BG big screen adaptation is pushing it? Haven't seen studios respect older TV stars unless they were put into a Tartantino production movie a la veteran actor 'Michael Parks' one of Quentin's favorite actors from his childhood etc. It take those with major pulling power to convince the current suits to do the cool thing were always asking for. Generally TV stars aren't brought over to do the movie version with the same amount of equal clout they once had. Studios these days want to push new people and forget what came before. Sad but true, which is why i'm still taking Edward James Olmos' 2002 advice. Don't go through the pain. Like many, lets just wait for the news to develop if it ever does, and if it doesn't, just walk away then. Cos i ain't getting any younger by waiting for unrealistic news to drop for a BG motion picture!
Most painful thing about this fandom is how the studio squandered the opportunities they had for years, and yet we keep asking, 'whats happening' as if they're listening to us still?!? WTF, sorry but even i've woke up to the fact they don't produce nor listen to you 90% of the time as what you truly want or ask for.
Even if the greenlit BG movie announcement comes up later on in the year, we'll see if whether or not we're actually listen to or ignored. Whether the BG movie a reboot or semi-continuation. Cos i seriously think we better stop insulting ourselves thinking more than 3 to 5 old school cast members will be in there long enough to play a factor in keeping appearences and the original vibe of the 78' TV series. At best expect Singer to retool Galactica for the big screen, albeit reboot or semi-continuation. For the past 10 years leading up from 2000 to 2010. I haven't seen any examples of television series to movies, keeping the TV series feel in there for even 10% of the time to be brutally honest. So why are we still doing so? It not going to happen if EVER! To quote Lt Sheba from 'LL' time to be realist/realistic i think!
Don't get me wrong, wanted a continuation done that way for years (*see CD's post above). But Universal's obviously let time go by where the age factors too overwhelming and going with a younger cast is. hate the word? More viable (ugh *sick*)! I want a Galactica movie to be done so badly, yet i just know with all the recent films over the past 10 years or so, we didn't have the "pull" to get it done that way.
At this rate we'll be lucky to even have an; 'artsy fartsy' BG movie with somebody totally original in directing it!
KJ
spiderr987
March 11th, 2010, 02:41 AM
I prefer a continuation, that way Dirk could reprise his character as Starbuck, as the senior Viper pilot training commander, and Matt Bomer's talents could be used as his son, also the hotest new Viper pilot in the fleet.
Athene
March 13th, 2010, 07:40 AM
I prefer a continuation, that way Dirk could reprise his character as Starbuck, as the senior Viper pilot training commander, and Matt Bomer's talents could be used as his son, also the hotest new Viper pilot in the fleet.
I prefer a continuation too. We could also have Laurette Spang reprise her role as Cassiopeia and Richard Hatch as Apollo and Herbert Jefferson Jr as Boomer and Terry Carter as Tigh and Anne Lockhart as Sheba and many others of the original cast members and then have some new characters to introduce and still keep the fun and heart of the original and in my honest opinion the "true" Battlestar Galactica series.
I really would love to see something like that on the big screen. :salute:
David Kerin
March 13th, 2010, 09:26 AM
I'm thinking, as much as I'd love it to be, that a continuation will not happen with the movie. But I've been thinking of how it could be new, yet honor and utilize the original series, and what comes to mind is that Star Trek approach of an alternative timeline to the story. However it would alter where our characters are and who all would be involved.
But what if, in this alternative timeline, the Cylon deception did not happen for another 30 some years. We would still have Richard and Dirk as seasoned warriors, but in different times of their lives when this takes place. Apollo as Commander? Or second in command and in charge of all squadrons. Dirk playing the part of the 60 year old Starbuck who never quite grew up, teaching and leading the new warriors. That way Hollywood can get the young fresh faces they so crave, and our original actors and characters are still there.
I don't think it would even need to be explained that it is a different timeline in the movie, as they did with Trek. They just present the story in this new approach and not worry about people who have not seen the original series... to them its just a new story they can enter from scratch. Yet the fans of the original will know. Maybe some animated shorts can be produced, as they did with the Matrix, and release on the web to fill in the story for fans who want to know more. Use that to explain the divergence, like the Ship of Lights saving the fleet by resetting it to an earlier time, thus altering the flow of history.
Just a thought.
KJ
March 13th, 2010, 10:51 AM
The trick is though, to convince the studio (Universal) and Bryan Singer to do it as such isn't it!
:salute::cool:
Agreeing with you David, we've all got the passionate perfect BG movie in our heads. Thing is though in real life times have changed and today's theatrical big sci-fi movies aren't the 100% dream projects they once were and such movies are so rare and sparce, along the lines of; Alien film series, T2, Aliens Vs Predator (in terms of it being done and not how it went etc?), Tron (and its eventual sequel at this year's end), Star Wars trilogy, Matrix trilogy, Avatar and so on.
Battlestar shouldn't deal with alternate timelines anymore that it should go with time travel. Not to limit it in the science fiction realm or anything. Only that it wouldn't really be any different than whats come before in doing original stories so. Reckon a reboot or semi-continuation with more of a younger cast and only so few originals as we've stated, would garner the kind of movie that would be realistically done as of today. Harsh but true. Which is why our communication with the studios is of 'paramount' (pun on a certain film studio) importance. As to what we'd like to see, is something i hope we can voice opinions on and they'd hear us on. So with ComicCon 2010 months away now, is there any chance of a Battlestar Galactica movie panel annoucement hall being allocated or being organised? Could the fans put one together along with Larson & Singer's and the studios knowledge ahead of time?
Like Shatner's Captain Kirk once said in Star Trek's Mirror mirror episode: Push till it gives. Cos while we should wait, in a way if our voices aren't heard, then usually film studios do what they want without ever knowing their target audiences properly and produce crap! A Galactica movie can't afford all that after 3 decades of mis-steps and getting it wrong. It still has to prove itself as something major in many people's eyes include us fans who definitely like to see that massive potential finally reached onscreen.
I'd seriously like to know what Bryan Singer's doing right now and could anyone in the 'know' right now. Chase him down and ask him whats up with the upcoming BG motion picture he and Larson's got planned per se?!
KJ
KJ
March 13th, 2010, 11:03 AM
P.S.
Even if we'd have to pay and hire out for a damn good journalist to chase him down and ask all those questions etc. Can't see why not, been a while since i've read a Galactica article in a magazine (Dreamwatch, Cinescape, TV Zone etc) i was dying to read and it was truly something extraordinary.
Thats what has to actually happen in relation to any late breaking news for the Galactica film. An announcement and a magazine article about it in print soon afterwards with pictures taken. The internet naturally going to go into meltdown with fan reactions thereafter, lol.
We just need to get real organised like the Trek and Star Wars fanbases. But thats always easier said than done isn't it. (*frowns*)
KJ
monolith21
March 13th, 2010, 01:26 PM
I don't think Bryan needs much convincing to do a continuation. He was convinced before. He has a history of remaining true to source material and staying true to fans. The only reason he recast Superman was because the lead characters ARE the story. With Battlestar there is room for a new set of characters.
We'll see, but I have a lot of hope. I don't think he would have fought as long and hard to get Galactica only to completely cave in the eleventh hour.
BST
March 13th, 2010, 02:24 PM
Considering the efforts from both Larson and Moore, we've seen the Colonial Holocaust 2 times. I really don't think that it is necessary to see it again and no matter who helms the project, I don't have high hopes for it, in story terms, if they go that route again.
When Paramount rolled out Star Trek:TNG, they did a tribute to the original Trek with the cameo by DeForest Kelley. Further along the timeline, they visited with Spock and Scotty and, eventually, Kirk. All of the storylines were very plausible and except for the fact that most folks do not like the way Kirk was killed off, I don't think that any of the stories suffered as a result of re-introducing a character of old.
That's why I keep going on about a "next generation" storyline for Galactica. It IS very easy to do and there are some recent movies that have given ideas for excellent segues from TOS Galactica to a next-gen movie.
Personally, I think that a continuation is the only route that really makes sense. The pieces are all there.
Just do it!!
gmd3d
March 13th, 2010, 02:39 PM
Considering the efforts from both Larson and Moore, we've seen the Colonial Holocaust 2 times. I really don't think that it is necessary to see it again and no matter who helms the project, I don't have high hopes for it, in story terms, if they go that route again.
When Paramount rolled out Star Trek:TNG, they did a tribute to the original Trek with the cameo by DeForest Kelley. Further along the timeline, they visited with Spock and Scotty and, eventually, Kirk. All of the storylines were very plausible and except for the fact that most folks do not like the way Kirk was killed off, I don't think that any of the stories suffered as a result of re-introducing a character of old.
That's why I keep going on about a "next generation" storyline for Galactica. It IS very easy to do and there are some recent movies that have given ideas for excellent segues from TOS Galactica to a next-gen movie.
Personally, I think that a continuation is the only route that really makes sense. The pieces are all there.
Just do it!!
my thoughts also
KJ
March 13th, 2010, 02:51 PM
I know monolith21, i got to chat with him briefly at the London premiere of SR in 2006! And while he was a little *bitter sweet* over the 2001 revival attempt of Galactica for television. Guess as someone familar with how the hollywood system works, he just moved on saying 'wish it could've happened' etc. Did ask him at the time i had with him about what he'd do, if he got to do it on the big screen instead, would he call in Tom DeSanto and such etc.
He said and how they're friends and such but, he could've been saying yes simply cos he was rushed all around and was merely being nice? Reckon though thats what he thinks too though and would go there in a heartbeat.
Never thought after last August, that he'd ever been in this position again though. It was certainly a 'Twilight Zone' moment for me personally.
;)
Like i said though, comes down to all those backroom deals by execs and whatnot. So who really knows what the scriptwriters will do when it comes down to the script drafts and various screenplays themselves when it finally gets down to it all. And whats Glen Larson exact role in all this hubbub.
Writer, (executive) producer (hard to picture but you never know) creative consultant, credited as creator with minor oversite duties etc? Or if DeSanto will be brought in at some point later on? So as i've stated in the past, perhaps the next CFF movement could be to get the BG fanbase far more involved once the next announcement is positive in relation to the Galactica movie actually being done and moving closer to an official greenlit status afterwards.
Food for thought ladies and gentlemen! :cool:
KJ
monolith21
March 14th, 2010, 05:35 AM
I have a feeling that Universal has been pushing for a recast continuation much like "Superman Returns". It very well could end up that way, but I think Singer will do what he can (which is considerable!) to make it a traditional continuation.
Of course we'll have to wait and see...but that whole waiting thing is certainly getting old isn't it? lol
KJ
March 14th, 2010, 03:08 PM
Indeed. And while we're told to continuously wait all the time. I say taking a quotable saying that a former/previous Galactica incarnation once lobbied at us TOS fans at one time.
In regards to a BG movie. We say: Give it a chance!
Cos, the wait is over! [insert Eric Bana's Nero 'Star Trek' image here, lol]
:D
KJ
monolith21
March 14th, 2010, 03:25 PM
Yeah, I've used that a few times on naysaying fans from across the tracks. Very few of them get it...but it makes me smile!
Aussie Warrior
March 25th, 2010, 07:59 PM
Heres some more news on the pile of productions Bryan Singer has on his plate.
http://www.airlockalpha.com/node/7228
If this story about Bryan Singer dropping out of X-Men: First Class is true, I wonder what it means for Battlestar Galactica?
monolith21
March 25th, 2010, 11:52 PM
As far as I know Singer was not attached to X-Men the way he is with Battlestar contractually speaking. He asked them to "hold it for him" which is a lot different than having signed a deal for an impressive sum of money to direct a film. He is getting a LOT of money just to direct Battlestar. The paycheck actually made headlines. Not so much with the new X-Men, it is just a hot topic these days.
Don't get me wrong, I am fully aware of how many things can change between now and then. Singer is only contractually attached to do two films as of now I believe and one of them is Battlestar.
KJ
March 26th, 2010, 12:25 AM
Goes without saying that we'd absolutely love for Bryan to do a Battlestar Galactica motion picture now seeing as it long overdue! He told Fox to wait last time and they didn't, and a recent X-Men: First Class news link said Lauren Shuler Donner knew putting Brett Ratner in the X3 position was a mistake (implied somewhat*), so no, i don't think Bryan can be forced to choose again, make'em wait again they'll ought to be more patient and not so impatient as Marvel projects getting quickly rebooted is now coming under fire (see Spider-Man, Fantastic Four) from film fans and critics alike as of late.
(*) http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2010/03/bryan-singer-and-the-xmen-together-again.html
But much as i want the announcement, i also want this to be a huge epic 'piece' when all is said and done and the greenlight is given. Cos i'd want everything from start to finish be multi-layed and and structured properly i.e. scripts, budget, production costs, etc. Let Bryan Singer do his thing and be given free reign (final cut too!) as well.
Doesn't have to be out in cinemas within the next 2 years. A Battlestar Galactica motion picture could be out by 2014 long as its all planned properly and done right correctly from the get go. I'd be happy and so would alot of fans!
But i definitely wouldn't mind some news dropping soon for BG the movie this year in various media outlets and across the internet!
KJ
monolith21
March 26th, 2010, 12:33 AM
No kidding! Some news would be nice.
KJ
March 26th, 2010, 05:15 PM
Some news, a media report on E! Entertainment, the works! :cool:
With bells on etc.
KJ
monolith21
March 27th, 2010, 12:19 AM
I second the bells.
KJ
April 26th, 2010, 02:48 PM
*sigh* no news still. (*slumps shoulders*) :( :wtf:
Seriously though with no new news coming forth, what exactly do we want to see happen realistically with any Battlestar movie development!
With no news on whether or not somebody's working on any script drafts or figuring out what kind of variation of a 'take' on Galactica far as movies go would be like, we're always stuck at asking the best questions with no answers from anybody? It getting frustrating and very annoying at not being taken seriously enough by the studios and executives who own the copyrights to the original show, yet they supposely planning to make a BG movie for us to all watch?
Hmmm. Once again we're sitting and waiting for news, and when we decide to either campaign and go about trying to work up attention for any Bg movie, we're seen as nutty obsessives.
Its a pain in the ass sometimes being classic series Galactica fan, cos you'd know by now that respect isn't exactly walking in the door and patting you on the back!
Who thinks CF should start two "clocks" one from 12 plus years ago still ticking away as to whether or not a BG movie will ever happen? And one from Bryan Singer's last news clippings and be something rather news and subtle in trying to get the necessary attention of those in the studios to *cough up* and do something Battlestar Galactica movie related again.
Cos by now we're always going to be in that Damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, so i reckon we should always 'poke' (carrots and all) and see if that "donkey" rises up to take some action!
What do you say....?
KJ
srfireside
June 7th, 2010, 11:47 AM
The most recent info I can find says the movie is currently in pre-production and Bryan Singer is slated to direct. The film is still slated for release in 2011. No info on who's going to be acting or who (if anybody) is helping with the script. Lots of questions for a movie that is planned to be out in a year.
Centurion Draco
June 30th, 2010, 04:59 PM
Still waiting, still watching, still hoping.....
And with almost ZERO positive buzz surrounding this project, and this sort of thing on the net: http://www.scifimoviepage.com/upcoming/previews/battlestar-remake.html Are we still believeing that this will happen?
If projects like The Hobbit are being put on hold, UFO seems to be in limbo, and literally endless others are stalling.... where do we stand?
Dawg
June 30th, 2010, 07:48 PM
We stand in exactly the same place we did yesterday, and the day before.
Fans. Hopeful fans. Fans who have been burned before by talk and broken promises.
Nothing has changed.
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
Centurion Draco
July 1st, 2010, 12:37 PM
We stand in exactly the same place we did yesterday, and the day before.
Fans. Hopeful fans. Fans who have been burned before by talk and broken promises.
Nothing has changed.
I am
Dawg
:warrior:
You know I keep seeing really well produced fake teaser trailers for movies appearing on youtube etc.
Be kinda cool to have a viral campaign for BSG2011 to get some kind of a more positive buzz going......
monolith21
July 6th, 2010, 10:30 PM
I'm with ya! We were talking about that earlier in the thread. You willing to take a lead on that?
Centurion Draco
August 7th, 2010, 03:35 AM
I'm with ya! We were talking about that earlier in the thread. You willing to take a lead on that?
I'd love to but don't have the skills sadly.
Thunderstruck
February 16th, 2011, 07:43 PM
Well, I looked back bout the past year of this thread.
DITTO's and Mega Ditto's. I concur.
As in one post, I am pretty sure Spiderman was held up for so long due to court fight over rights. and technology limits(way back when)
As for BSG- AGAIN DITO DITOO DITTO.
My take is that some of these heads don't know what they are doing.
Star Trek and BSG both 1 seasoner's that were shut down. And look at their Legacies!!! Oh the Rewards from Star Trek, you would think they learned something. Problem with a lot of America is it always has to be something new, something fresh- Nay they forget how long literary works have been in circulation and popular decades to centuries.
NEWS MAYBE! I did read somewhere in past month that universal did give the green light for this- that is all I know.
in my mind, I would like to see a continuation or final of the original.
or a restart with following films. A possible trilogy of films beginning with
The Destruction of the Colonies.
The Escape
The Arrival
maintaining some sense of the original series.
my two cents.
monolith21
February 16th, 2011, 11:52 PM
I'd just like news that there is at least a script. That would be awesome!
peter noble
February 17th, 2011, 01:24 AM
At least three people have told me it's dead due to internal squabbling and that Universal won't do it without Singer, who wouldn't be free until 2014.
PaulGTweed
February 17th, 2011, 06:37 AM
Well, I looked back bout the past year of this thread.
DITTO's and Mega Ditto's. I concur.
As in one post, I am pretty sure Spiderman was held up for so long due to court fight over rights. and technology limits(way back when)
As for BSG- AGAIN DITO DITOO DITTO.
My take is that some of these heads don't know what they are doing.
Star Trek and BSG both 1 seasoner's that were shut down. And look at their Legacies!!! Oh the Rewards from Star Trek, you would think they learned something. Problem with a lot of America is it always has to be something new, something fresh- Nay they forget how long literary works have been in circulation and popular decades to centuries.
NEWS MAYBE! I did read somewhere in past month that universal did give the green light for this- that is all I know.
in my mind, I would like to see a continuation or final of the original.
or a restart with following films. A possible trilogy of films beginning with
The Destruction of the Colonies.
The Escape
The Arrival
maintaining some sense of the original series.
my two cents. Star Trek TOS lasted THREE SEASONS. Classic BSG lasted only one season.
Titon
February 17th, 2011, 08:44 AM
At least three people have told me it's dead due to internal squabbling and that Universal won't do it without Singer, who wouldn't be free until 2014.
I find that interesting since Singer really is not the one to push Galactica. Why you would want him involved since he complelely botched Superman? Oh well personally i think it's to late for Galactica TOS, at least the one we remember.
gmd3d
February 17th, 2011, 08:46 AM
I find that interesting since Singer really is not the one to push Galactica. Why you would want him involved since he complelely botched Superman? Oh well personally i think it's to late for Galactica TOS, at least the one we remember.
same here. I have little hope now that it will be done....
PaulGTweed
February 17th, 2011, 10:51 AM
same here. I have little hope now that it will be done....
I was thinking the same last night. If a BSG film is not going to be done now. It never will be.
peter noble
February 17th, 2011, 11:11 AM
I find that interesting since Singer really is not the one to push Galactica. Why you would want him involved since he complelely botched Superman? Oh well personally i think it's to late for Galactica TOS, at least the one we remember.
To be truthful, I don't think anyone who's tried to revive it before should be involved, because from where I'm standing as a fan, it's a 100% failure rate.
TOS forever belongs to the fans now, as it did after '79. I think some how, in the end, it's fitting that the people who really cared about it should look after the old girl.
Gemini1999
February 17th, 2011, 01:13 PM
At least three people have told me it's dead due to internal squabbling and that Universal won't do it without Singer, who wouldn't be free until 2014.
Not that it might be significant, but I went to IMDB.com yesterday and clicked on the entry for the new film. The status says that it's in production, which may mean nothing at all, but the "popularity meter" for the listing showed an uptick of 21 percent recently. I don't have the professional version of IMDB.com, which it referred to in order to get an answer as to why it went up.
Is anyone here a member of IMDB.com that spent the extra fee to look at the pro version?
Bryan
peter noble
February 17th, 2011, 01:41 PM
Not that it might be significant, but I went to IMDB.com yesterday and clicked on the entry for the new film. The status says that it's in production, which may mean nothing at all, but the "popularity meter" for the listing showed an uptick of 21 percent recently. I don't have the professional version of IMDB.com, which it referred to in order to get an answer as to why it went up.
Is anyone here a member of IMDB.com that spent the extra fee to look at the pro version?
Bryan
Bryan,
I wouldn't put any stock in IMDB, information can be submitted by any member, not just people within the industry.
As for the popularity meter, I've noticed some 'thawing' in people's attitudes post new series, which is welcome.
Thunderstruck
February 17th, 2011, 01:46 PM
No am sorry , just learned of IMDB.
And my mistake, I thought Star Trek TOS was just like 24 episodes.
maybe because they only kept airing those :-). maybe 2 yrs old when it ended.
I know of ST TOS because my father watched it whenever it was on and every Saturday night 70's and 80's. But I was there for the initial season of TNG and still watch it on occasion still. It has held up well.
Well, like most I really wish they would at least do something. I was not too partial to the re-imagined BSG.In fact I recorded some of the first 2 seasons and still have not had a desire to watch any of them. For me it seems to be lacking something or rather is not what I expected or imagined it would be.
Kinda soapy I guess.
Well, if they do not make one. I will make my own then LOL!
Am learning how as we speak.....
In the words of long time Columbus resident Billy Ray,
" ind it bout time sumbody dun sumtin"
Titon
February 18th, 2011, 03:55 AM
To be truthful, I don't think anyone who's tried to revive it before should be involved, because from where I'm standing as a fan, it's a 100% failure rate.
TOS forever belongs to the fans now, as it did after '79. I think some how, in the end, it's fitting that the people who really cared about it should look after the old girl.
Quite frankly the infuriating part of all of this is that we have done just that. Galactica was reimagined because the TOS fan's kept it in the limelight for years before SCIFI wiped there butt's with it. I wish i had the energy, time and money to do something. But again it's been a nightmare to finish anything remotely close to a fan endevour.
gmd3d
February 18th, 2011, 04:37 AM
Quite frankly the infuriating part of all of this is that we have done just that. Galactica was reimagined because the TOS fan's kept it in the limelight for years before SCIFI wiped there butt's with it. I wish i had the energy, time and money to do something. But again it's been a nightmare to finish anything remotely close to a fan endevour.
there have been a few tries for a fan film anyway .... few shorts that have grabbed attention.
Now where near the star wars and Star Trek type of effort.
having tried a few of them myself over the last few years.
I am going to give it a go for BSG one last time... most of the models are now available. but its going to be CGI all the way.
I am just waiting for one other person to get in touch with me. I was going to do a Buck Rogers one as you may know but decided to drop that due to the huge build I would have to do. as I said. most of what's needed is available. Here
But I do wonder is there the energy left and enthusiasm, with that the time can be found. if I go for it will there be member here willing to help.
not in the CGI aspect only that just apart of it.
Voice talents
Production talent
my skills only go so far.
I have a story idea too.
I have had since I posted a Colonial Fleet Fan Film thread one offer of help. that's why I am also doing the Techmanual
which will act as a guide or Bible for the production.
where we as a fan site discuss the shows vessels and equipment. iron out the creases and fill the gaps in the show.
peter noble
February 18th, 2011, 12:14 PM
But again it's been a nightmare to finish anything remotely close to a fan endevour.
Don, if you do, do something one day, just do it on your own and to suit you own tastes like Dave Kerin has done and Steve is doing.
You'll be a lot happier.
martok2112
February 18th, 2011, 01:09 PM
I agree. Largely do it for yourself. See Galactica the way you'd like to see it, and if others share your vision, so much the better. :)
And it's a big bonus when others like your vision as well. :salute:
gmd3d
February 18th, 2011, 01:33 PM
yes I agree to what Peter and Steve say...
its what I am also doing ..
monolith21
February 18th, 2011, 06:35 PM
Fan films are great, but I'm still backing the film. I think 2011 was a WAY optimistic year to even dream of having it done. I remember hearing about Transformers back in 2003 and having everyone say it wasn't going to happen. 2007 rolls around and there it was.
Singer hasn't let me down yet with his projects. I even loved Superman Returns. It wasn't as good as his X-Men films (which I don't think anyone will ever top) but I thought it was a good movie.
Andreas
August 7th, 2011, 06:46 AM
Hello my Friends,
hope you are all ok.
It looks like that the Movie is dead in the water again!?
No news,on imdb the release date 2012 is gone, Glen A. Larson suing Universal,
no word from Singer anymore.
Hope we see a Big Screen Movie from the old Concept!!
the old Concept
kingfish
August 7th, 2011, 08:33 AM
i am hoping to see a bg movie in my lifetime.
Andreas
August 7th, 2011, 08:56 AM
Yes i also want to see the movie in my lifetime....and the clock is ticking!
I don't understand Universal because i'am sure the have a Franchise like Star Wars in his hands and can make a lot of money only from the merchandising.
I had hope that, ''after Tom deSanto made a lot of money with Transformers'' he can bring ''Saga of a Star World'' to the big screen.
Greetings:salute:
peter noble
August 7th, 2011, 11:47 AM
Dead as a doornail I'm afraid.
Tom DeSanto's producing career is in the toilet at the moment.
Benedict
August 7th, 2011, 11:48 AM
Indeed. I'm more or less fixed at the point that if it happens, great but no matter if not. Rather BSG78 than anything else really.
Andreas
August 7th, 2011, 01:16 PM
Dead as a doornail I'm afraid.
Tom DeSanto's producing career is in the toilet at the moment.
???
First what i read about that!?:?:
Gemini1999
August 7th, 2011, 09:06 PM
Dead as a doornail I'm afraid.
Tom DeSanto's producing career is in the toilet at the moment.
Peter -
A bit more clarification about Tom's career as a producer would be nice. Tom is credited as a producer on Transformers: Dark of the Moon and it's been doing rather well. I don't know how that translates to being "in the toilet".
I also don't see the connection between Tom and a BSG film. He's never been connected to the current film project that I've ever seen.
Bryan
Andreas
August 8th, 2011, 12:01 AM
I only thought a producer like Tom deSanto could help to get a Big Screen movie !
Because he said a few years ago that he will be always interested in the
old concept and his name is may be more interesting as Glen A. Larson
at the moment for the big studios.
But Glen A. Larson have the rights for a Big Screen Movie only he !
Only Bryan Singer ''Bad Hat Harry Productions'' is on the list as producer.
Senmut
August 8th, 2011, 01:49 AM
Well, I wish they'd get off their astrums and DO SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!! All this "discussion" and "negotiatons" achieves NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
kingfish
September 23rd, 2011, 03:21 PM
maybe a fracking miracle will happen.
TwoBrainedCylon
September 24th, 2011, 09:39 AM
To quote myself from Feb 2009:
I'm a divorced guy with a boat ... and I've heard this story before.
Russell
And now for an outright rant:
Is anyone surprised that this turned this way?
I would never expect that anyone who is familiar with the dynamics of Battlestar Galactica would ever hope that any large budget effort would ever be made to bring back the original series. Once GINO hit the air, the old series was effectively dead to all conventional media. Michael Faries recognized that. Richard Hatch did as well. The fans can add all the rationalization they want but it doesn't change the core fundamentals.
I'll skirt along the fleet rules and say that Ron Moore was right in his approach to GINO. He recognized that the baseline story of space fighter vs. space fighter was over. The planet of the week storyline is also dead. Everyone has their own opinions regarding how he handled his attempt but he did recognize that in 2003, the concepts that worked really well in the late 1970s had grown stale. They're even moreso now. Likewise, killer robots out of control has also become a bad cliche, where it was pretty powerful stuff in the 70s. That won't carry a budget either.
I won't use stupid catch-phrases like "audiences are more sophisticated" but will note that for these ideas to work again, we have to experience a period of complete absence in which both visual effects technology needs to gain another level of the WOW factor and people's memories need to be purged with other themes. We're at that stage now and when we're out of it, the original series actors will be way too old to work and the elements of Galactica will be so antiquated that nobody will care if they're preserved or not.
I suspect some are likely irritated at this point but follow me for a moment.
Even if you overcome the above, to get a continuation or a remake to work, you have to bring in a strong, new storyline with a good concept. If set in the arena of space, it has to be different but still hold all the classic elements. This isn't impossible to do but it is challenging in that you have to smash through the conceptual roadblock I detailed above. I arrogatnly think I could do it but if I were writing the multi-million dollar check, I'd ask myself why such a ground-breaking concept with a good new twist should be anchored to a 70s television series. Why not make it something new that could really run off and be a super-hit without any constraints. (Please note that this is not the same idea as Ron Moore/David Eick's whines about being anchored by the name. It deals with running room for a franchise that is lucky enough to have a solid breakout.)
Some have referenced TRON and I think that's a good example. TRON was a big risk and it seemed to have worked but I'd argue its weakest elements were the parts that tied it to the first movie. The same goes for Galactica. I wish it weren't true but I really think it is and until someone can answer why the old series makes a dynamic new concept stronger rather than weaker, I don't ever see this situation changing.
The fans have never seemed to accept this. I hear over and over about how a new, great concept can re-energize the old series but never about how its helped by it. Keeping in mind that the producers aren't working on the "isn't it cool" concept. They want to know what will make the biggest impact with their millions of dollars.
This is made even worse now in that anything called Battlestar Galactica will bring up two concepts in people's minds. Would you risk millions on GINO? Its numbers don't support it. Would you risk millions on an old series that seemingly has only a modest support from a few scattered groups on the Internet? I wouldn't and I'm one of the big proponents. So, your option is a 3rd version.
For the moment, suppose that played out. You have a 3rd version in which a space colony is wiped out by robots. A fleet of spaceships must flee into the darkness. Then, -- (you can fill in the blanks here).
Almost everyone who watched this would immediately have two reactions. (1) Seen all this before and (2) This isn't like GINO/original. If you're funding millions to get a new concept out, why would you burden it with this sort of lead-in?
In other words, Galactica is now in a bad Catch-22 scenario in which it can't revive without a strong new concept and its not worth burdening a strong new concept with the legacy of Galactica. This is the handicap that GINO placed on this franchise and whether anyone likes it or not, GINO can't be ignored.
That's why I doubt you will ever see a feature film. TRON, the A-Team, Knight Rider, and all the rest have enjoyed a revival of sorts but the comparison isn't valid IMO because they didn't enjoy a remake beforehand. Also, keep in mind that even under optimum circumstances, such revivals haven't done all that well and their chances of success looked far better than those of Battlestar Galactica.
Anyone want to tar-and-feather me yet?
However, so as not to leave this as a thunderstorm dropped on a picnic, I'd reference the indie short "Hunt for Gollum". (Find it on YouTube). Combine it with the current concept of "Blood and Chrome", which is now geared towards an Internet delivery. Given the advancements in technology since 2003, I'd expect the progress that will hit around 2015 will make an expansion of any franchise both economically and financially feasible.
That will change the game and lower development costs so radically that any franchise can be advanced because the requirements of viewership will become so low that a bunch of Internet clans will be enough to justify funding and production of media efforts that were previously not even remotely feasible. Peter was the first to recognize this, in that he thought the viable path for Galactica was a direct-to-DVD effort. I'd argue that he had the right idea, just an imperfect delivery.
In my view, the future of Galactica isn't in discs. Its in direct downloads.
When that occurs, (I'm predicting about 2015), the idea that Universal doesn't want viewers to get confused by different versions should reverse itself as their main concern will be getting as much material as possible in place to get viewers to go to their tailored download menu. If something related to the original series got more folks to go to the menu that includes the latest "Blood and Chrome" effort, then Universal wins. All the original series effort has to do is break even and its a success al around. If a fan-made documentary about Richard Hatch makes them go to the menu, so much the better. ANYTHING that brings in more people outside the normal fan set becomes a benefit at this point. That's a different scenario than the present concern in which they and SyFy need to build a steady fanbase dedicated to a stable franchise and keep it focused along a designated path.
That's where the future of Galactica lies and I frankly think hoping for anything else is just folly.
I'm no longer divorced but I still have a boat.
I also suspect that I've just earned another chapter in Langy's next book but at least that keeps some continuity in life.
All my best,
Russell
Gemini1999
September 24th, 2011, 08:15 PM
Russell -
There's a lot of common sense in what you say about this.. When I take a look at the IMDB listing for BSG and see how many productions have that name in common and then note that the Bryan Singer film has been mired in pre-production for such a long time, it makes me think that we'll be lucky to see this project at all. At the very least, I don't think that it will be something we will expect if it does materialize.
If and when this project gets off the ground, I'll go see it in whatever form it takes. Until then, it's just something that's in the dusty corners of my mind that I wonder about when it comes to mind.
Until then...
Bryan
Charybdis
September 24th, 2011, 08:24 PM
Very cogent and well thought out plan...let's even hope that that version gets done!!! May the Lords Guide Us All...
Senmut
September 24th, 2011, 11:47 PM
Anyone want to tar-and-feather me yet?
No, but I would consider solonite suppositories. :(
Gemini1999
September 25th, 2011, 09:27 AM
Folks, speaking as a moderator, remember that we have rules in regards to pointed comments aimed at other forum members. Commenting on a topic is appropriate in an open forum, but if you have problems with someone personally about something they have said, take those comments to PMs if you feel the need to discuss it.
I'm not saying that there is a problem at this point, just a friendly reminder.
Regards,
Gemini1999
Colonial Fleets Moderator
Senmut
September 25th, 2011, 07:59 PM
Okay. What about soft and non-addictive solonite suppositories?
BST
September 25th, 2011, 08:58 PM
Okay. What about soft and non-addictive solonite suppositories?
Have they worked well for you?
:D
Inquiring minds want to know.
Senmut
September 25th, 2011, 09:38 PM
None of my victims have ever complained.
martok2112
September 25th, 2011, 09:55 PM
I guess they're alright then. HA ha ha ha ha. :)
gmd3d
September 26th, 2011, 12:52 AM
having read Russell´s post again. I tend to agree with it.
It hurts because it true as far as I can see.
Senmut
September 26th, 2011, 03:19 AM
Blasphemy!
P.S. When ya gonna light that fumerello?
gmd3d
September 26th, 2011, 04:48 AM
lol.
don´t get me wrong . I would love to see the Galactica on the big screen with all our favourites and a few new faces ..
as for the fumerello !! soon as someone invents a colonial lighter ..... (what is a colonial version of a zippo. does the
colonial laser have a zippo feature ?? )....
137th Gebirg
September 26th, 2011, 12:51 PM
Russ:
Your earlier essay makes a lot of sense, on lots of different levels. While I am under no illusions that my fondness for NuBSG is in the minority here, my love for the original series should also be equally great and well known (yes, it can happen) :) . I, too, think that at this point a redux of TOS will likely not ever happen, at least not in the form we would come to expect. My head spins somewhat at a "third" version, but weirder things have happened. Each of the Highlander series and movies seem to draw only tenuously from their predecessors, and now I hear a remake of that franchise may be in the works. This could be okay for a property that always intrinsically played fast-and-loose with internal continuity, but I think BSG may only suffer to some degree from yet another "fresh" new take. I do think it needs to take a long rest before this happens, but I don't think it's entirely out of the question.
And yes, like it or not, for better or for worse, NuBSG has made an indelible mark on the franchise which cannot be ignored. To do so would be to only complete denial of its impact, and that it can be effectively erased from genre's memory. Not concerned about tar-and-feathering or solonite suppositories (lol!) as I've experienced that before on this topic. It's all good...
137th Gebirg
September 26th, 2011, 12:55 PM
lol.
don´t get me wrong . I would love to see the Galactica on the big screen with all our favourites and a few new faces ..
as for the fumerello !! soon as someone invents a colonial lighter ..... (what is a colonial version of a zippo. does the
colonial laser have a zippo feature ?? )....
I used to sell those. :)
Senmut
September 27th, 2011, 12:56 AM
lol.
don´t get me wrong . I would love to see the Galactica on the big screen with all our favourites and a few new faces ..
as for the fumerello !! soon as someone invents a colonial lighter ..... (what is a colonial version of a zippo. does the
colonial laser have a zippo feature ?? )....
It's called an ignitron. The best are by Flintex. The Last name in Flame.
kingfish
September 27th, 2011, 06:50 AM
one of the biggest things that hurt Galactica was Galactica 1980 which started out great but needed life support at the end of it's run.
TwoBrainedCylon
September 27th, 2011, 04:24 PM
I'm a bit surprised to hear that anyone thought G1980 started out great. I'll be the first to admit it had some potential but for me, it had way too much downside from the onset to go anywhere. I am probably more fond of G1980 than most but only for the attempted effort, -- although Wolfman Jack still makes me smile.
When talking about 3rd versions, not a lot come to my mind. Offhand, I'd say "The Thing" and "Rise of the Planet of the Apes". FWIW, I thought Rise was awesome. The new "Thing" looks pathetic to my eyes. So if you're gonna find an icon to point to, seems like Rise would be it.
What's the comparison to Galactica? Honestly, I wasn't sure and in some ways, Rise argues against the very points I feel are givens with the Galactica franchise. So, to be fair about it all, I went to Google. It was immediately enlightening:
When I Google "Battlestar Galactica" I have to go a page and half to find anything that looks like it belongs to the original series. That only comes via Kobol.com, which only pushes props. BattlestarGalactica.com seems almost solely dedicated to GINO, although a token combined graphic appears at the top. Can't say I'm very impressed with the graphics Richard is using of late. Galactica in any interpretation deserves better on a site that bears its name.
When I Google "Planet of the Apes" I immediately get references to the original film. I get the latest, (Rise) but its about even in results of the old and new.
What does that mean? I guess that's open for interpretation but I'd bet if anyone could figure out why the 1968 Apes is still praised by everyone and the original Battlestar Galactica is scorned so loudly by those seeking the latest and greatest, they'd likely earn the keys to the kingdom.
All my best,
Russell
Darrell Lawrence
September 28th, 2011, 09:22 AM
While Rise is indeed awesome, they didn't trash the original while making it. Rather, they praised the original.
The original Galactica was trashed from the onset by the nuBG makers.
Therein lies the difference.
As for third incarnations.... Trek had a second (movie era, quite different than the series), third (TNG), fourth( DS9), fifth (VOY), sixth (ENT) AND a seventh (the latest movie) incarnation. None of the previous versions (except maybe "Enterprise" prior to the newest movie) were trashed by the succeeding incarnation.
Stargate had multi incarnations as well. None of the previous were trashed by the following versions.
TwoBrainedCylon
September 28th, 2011, 09:31 AM
True, but I suspect there is a deeper answer, as I don't relegate the mass of fans and potential audience into being a bunch of mindless robots who automatically respond to whatever advertising is thrown in front of them. Certainly there are the passionate freaks but I don't subscribe that everyone reacts blindly to the wave of the Universal magic wand.
I base this partly on the factor that given the amount of support and resources poured into it, GINO was what I'd call a failure, and I'm not speaking of its content -- just return on investment for the dollar. Its audience returns were well below what they should have been. Similarly, the Tim Burton version of Apes flamed (and rightfully so), even though it praised the original Apes films as well. Same with the Apes television series, although I thought it was quite good.
If you're right that the production team and marketers have that sort of power over an existing franchise then my concept of the intelligence of the average Sci-Fi fan is way too high.
All my best,
Russell
Darrell Lawrence
September 28th, 2011, 09:44 AM
A good analogy would be something not scifi, but does tend to aim at a similar audience- The WWE. They throw some of the most ridiculous, unbelievable storylines out there, and basically tell the fans what they like, and guess what? Those fans keep coming back for more.
Moore and company started the "70's hair/disco" stuff in a disparaging manner towards the original, and look at how things followed that. So yeah, marketing can somewhat tell its fans what to like/dislike.
peter noble
September 28th, 2011, 11:54 AM
There just isn't any demand for the original Galactica, or the newest incarnation (as a movie) either.
If anyone says there is, then this forum which has 235,274 members wouldn't have just 69 active members.
TOS had quite a good name before the new series started, I don't think four million and something people would have bothered to watch the mini-series if it hadn't had a decent rep.
Universal (with the help of stealth marketers, hostile fan groups and their own TV producers) destroyed the original to build up the remake.
I've never seen a studio deliberately destroy its own IP.
Amazing.
borjis
September 28th, 2011, 02:52 PM
I would be happy if Universal released the theatrical version of Saga of a Star World on Blu-Ray.
ernie90125
October 17th, 2011, 10:37 AM
http://blastr.com/2011/10/bryan-singers-remake-of-e.php
While Singer was attending the annual Sitges Film Festival, the director spoke to SFX about how the deal has fallen through:
"Yeah, unfortunately it is no longer going to happen," he says. "I was really enthused to do it. I'm a fan of John Boorman's movie and it was my intention to get it going after Jack The Giant Killer was completed. The project was with Warner Bros and what happened is that another King Arthur project was brought to them during that time. Basically, it was just more ready to go into production than ours was. That is why our version of Excalibur ended up being negated. But, when that happened, it allowed me to go straight into developing Battlestar Galactica - which I think will be really exciting."
While we're a bit bummed out we won't get to see a new version of Excalibur (though the film's an absolute favorite of ours, it would have been cool to see an updated version—if done right, of course—since it hasn't aged as well as we'd hoped), we're quite excited about the fact that Singer is moving ahead with his reboot of Battlestar Galactica.
Singer's version will have nothing to do with Ron D. Moore's recent successful take on the classic sci-fi series, but will rather be a re-imagining of Glen Larson's 1978 original series, with Larson on board as a producer.
137th Gebirg
October 17th, 2011, 12:56 PM
Interesting! There may be hope yet. Thanks for the info... :salute:
TwoBrainedCylon
October 18th, 2011, 10:25 AM
Since this film effort has been nothing but bad news, any positive spark is hopeful but I'm also left wondering if there has ever been a project that Singer hasn't put higher on his priority list than trying to develop Galactica?
I suspect the moment he's offered the chance to do the live action version of "Hello Kitty" or a remake of "Bedtime for Bonzo", Galactica will get kicked to the curb for another year or so.
All my best,
Russell
martok2112
October 18th, 2011, 12:16 PM
Sounds about right.
Gemini1999
October 18th, 2011, 01:35 PM
Since this film effort has been nothing but bad news, any positive spark is hopeful but I'm also left wondering if there has ever been a project that Singer hasn't put higher on his priority list than trying to develop Galactica?
I suspect the moment he's offered the chance to do the live action version of "Hello Kitty" or a remake of "Bedtime for Bonzo", Galactica will get kicked to the curb for another year or so.
Russell -
I totally get that... First, Singer's gonna remake Logan's Run, then that doesn't pan out, moves on to another "I wanna remake..." and then another after that, which doesn't even address the projects that he actually has completed. It almost makes you wonder how passionate he really is about making this film at times. I will be happy to see a completed project, but until it's actually in production, it all feels like typical Hollywood posturing to keep their name in print.
I'll still be around if and when it happens, but until then, I just continue on as I usually do.
Bryan
GalacticanCajun
October 19th, 2011, 08:29 AM
Sorry I haven't been here since 2006, but I just want to say if this gets made, I will be there to watch for sure.
David Kerin
October 19th, 2011, 03:21 PM
I think I'll believe, and be a bit more excited, when I can see some preproduction sketches... or some casting... anything that gives it a bit more weight. It does seem like Singer has been in this habit of attaching his name to things, and they they never come through. Hopefully he really will focus on this now, and maybe Battlestar can become the successful franchise Universal wants it to be.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.