Prequel vs Re-imagining, an urban legend

[default]

My fellow Galacticans,

You know how one says "the truth is stranger than fiction". Well in the case of the Battlestar Galactica Revival, this is not the the case. I recieved my e-mail response from David Eick yesterday answering my questions about several topics. Many of us have heard of the "Prequel vs. Re-imagining debate". Well folks, there never really was a debate on the direction of the show. The real debate was budget and casting choices. His words about the "Prequel vs. Re-imagining" debate is that "whoever started it is just plainly spreading bull."

Mr. Eick said, he had never heard of such an option especially this late in pre-production. Maybe some of the sources who were giving information were giving false information about the behind-the-scenes activity just because the knew Continuation fans would be upset at the facts. Maybe someone created the "Prequel vs. Re-imagining" debate to give the fans a sense of they fought well but the TPTB aren't listening. Whatever is the reason, there was never such a debate in January of 2003.

In reality, the mini-series fans letters did not play a decisive factor in the decision because the decision had been made many months prior to the "debate". As for the person known as Treklord, Mr. Eick believes he was a fan playing a cruel joke on the fans. If he is a Universal employee like some say, then this must have been done by someone involved with marketing for the video game. It had no impact on the production whatsoever.

What we have here is an urban legend that the mini-series fans somehow stabbed the Continuation fans in the back. Well folks, that is completely untrue according to Mr. Eick. The only thing our letters did was to bolster the production's ability to secure a larger budget by showing that support does exist for a production not yet filmed. He does say that every little $ they secured on top of the original budget was thanks to the letters of support from the fans of the new mini-series. These letters did not change the direction of the series and it had been planned as a "re-imagining" for several months now.

If anyone wants to take the time to verify these facts with Mr. Eick, you can e-mail him at askdavideick@www.scifi.com with these same questions. It took him three weeks to answer my e-mail but I am glad he did. I would like to thank siress13 for letting the fans know that Mr. Eick does listen and will e-mail people back about legitimate questions.

Sincerely,


Captain James

[Titon]

Yes, the truth *is* stranger than fiction.

Oh what a tangled web the scifi channel weaves.

;)

[TwoBrainedCylon]

My problem here is that this arguement says since the fans weren't being considered then anything we (the Neos) did doesn't matter. "No harm - No foul!" I won't get into all the reasons why here but if these subjects aren't supposed to be discussed here then JUST David Eicks comments should be posted NOT Milton's spin doctoring as to why he shouldn't be blamed.

Otherwise, his "sharing" is nothing more than CF sponsered propoganda.

I'll reserve my other comments.

Two-Brain

[the3rdhuman]

To clean the slate of all of the bad commentary that has tarnished the production for the past few months.

[Micheleh]

It's a PR spin, no more. Captain James, I admit to your right to an opinion.

However, I remind everyone to take into account that this person is a newer member who posts here solely to dispense tailored information with a remarkable level of supposed expertise for a mere fan. (Information which can be easily contractided, btw.) I recommend that everyone be wary of being led in any particular direstion, read the posts, take from it what you will, and avoid being led into argument.

If Mr. Eick wnats to convey anything that badly, he can come here and do it himself. Otherwise it is just more heresay.

[LordStarFyre]

...We're gonna be swamped by the Moore Fan (s) around here telling us that we're just in denial because we are attached to Richard's Undergarments.

:)

[Dennis]

Well, that's not an attractive image. ;)

[LordStarFyre]

Dennis, that was used HERE by a Moore Fan...

After he of course told me I just wanted 70's TV and Disco Hair...

I guess he was bored by the "scripted" Pro-Moore arguments...

[BSGDAN]

...was just such a huge fan of Ron Moore's that he did all of this because he wanted to defend Moore's rights as a writer. This is just too odd. I have to wonder just what Milton is getting in return for his past and continued "services" to the remake staff. It's clear that Milton and his followers are NOT fans of GALACTICA, and they never will be. Instead, most seem to be bored TREKKIES latching on to one of thier more popular writers. I wonder if they bothered to fight this hard for Moore's "rights" when WB cancelled the "Dragonriders..." project. Probably not. Still, they view the original GALACTICA as a relic of the past that has no relevance today (which is very ironic to me, seeing as how Ron Moore is the writer of the ST:TNG episode "Relics"). The followers ("Neos") are too easy to figure out (and BTW, there are way too many of them running things on THIS board), but Milton is somewhat a mystery. I wonder just what made him get into this whole thing. My personal feeling is that Milton is just a wannabe. Sure, he works with the DNC (he makes me embarassed to be a Democrat), but he really wants to work in Hollywood. He likes TREK, which is how he became a vocal Moore supporter. His original attacks as MOORE_MAN were appreciated by Moore himself, and I do believe that he received those "goodies" as a personal thank-you for the support. When the abrasive M_M attacks were working against the production, Moore asked him to change tactics in favor of a more "open" approach. When many misguided "Retros" began to embrace Milton (and you all know who you are) for the sake of compromise, he quietly had his followers working to sabotage those efforts. Now, Milton is running his own website, dishing out propoganda for the new production. Stallion uncovered the very real possibility that Milton is actually working "on site" for the new production. Although we probably won't know for sure if that's the truth or not, it would certainly fall within the realm of possibility knowing Moore's history of rewarding his "number one fan". Personally, I think it's time for people to cease giving credibility to this clown. It's too late to hope that he will keep to his own board (he'll continue to gloat, and he will be allowed to as long as remake fans are the moderators of this board). However, we don't have to feed his inflated sense of self-worth. Milton James will forever be MOORE_MAN, and he will always be a troll (no better than Languatron).

Dan

[Dennis]

Originally posted by LordStarFyre
Dennis, that was used HERE by a Moore Fan...


Well, I should send him/her a little "thank you" for helping keep my weight down today -- put me entirely off my morning snack. ;)

[JSC1]

Original series fans are still screwed. No hope for a continuation.

We're still spat on by fans of the remake.

And Moore and Eick are not willing to listen to anyone but themselves.

It's not fair. And it's not right.

[adjudicator]

your right its not fair and I have discovered that fans of Moores Galatica use strange arguements to prove there point. *oh well*

[Hito]

Originally posted by Dennis
Well, I should send him/her a little "thank you" for helping keep my weight down today -- put me entirely off my morning snack. ;)
That would be me dennis.
And apparently LSF is more fixated on the undergarments than i'd originaly suspected since it is apparently a subject is is not in a hurry to "drop".


Originally posted by LordStarFyre
Dennis, that was used HERE by a Moore Fan...

After he of course told me I just wanted 70's TV and Disco Hair...

I guess he was bored by the "scripted" Pro-Moore arguments...
I am not pro moore, and i never said anything about hair or disco.
My assertion is that it wouldnt matter if Galactica was to come back as a continuaiotn or remake or whatever and it also wouldnt matter if it were moore or desanto or whoever else in charge.
There would alwys be a segment "Hardcore"of fandom that would find a reasopn not to support the production because their nostalgic memories of the original would always trump the artistic vision of whoever was the producer.

[Hito]

Originally posted by adjudicator
your right its not fair and I have discovered that fans of Moores Galatica use strange arguements to prove there point. *oh well*

No more strange than others who support continuaiotn.

[LordStarFyre]

" And apparently LSF is more fixated on the undergarments than i'd originaly suspected since it is apparently a subject is is not in a hurry to "drop"."

Not Really Hito, Why Drop one of the Most creative arguments I've seen the Pro-Moore Factions use to date to defend the Re-Imagining.

Attachment to Richard's Jock was by far the Most Creative one's I've seen used...

[default]

Hello all...

Joining the discussion as a fan of the mini series.

If you take notice, both messages are authored by MichaelLegresley handle.

http://www.scifi.com/mbb/browse.php?rid=3766

http://www.scifi.com/mbb/browse.php?rid=3764

Please tell me what you see?

[adjudicator]

http://bboard.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/1/5/531/851

take a look this is the same thread from the old board.

[michaelfaries]

The "prequel" discussions did take place at Universal months ago. One producer was open to it; another wasn't. In fact, one of those producers reached out and contacted a fan to get his insights about a prequel. (I'm not disclosing the fan's name unless he wishes to step forward and discuss the topic.) Just ask Ronald D. Moore. Just ask David Eick, who seems to be in denial of the subject. It sounds like Mr. Eick and Mr. Moore don't communicate too well.

Mr. Eick's statement of "whoever started it is just plainly spreading bull" is pure bull.

I'll add this: Sandy (Two-Brained) heard prequel discussions via his contacts. I've heard prequel discussions via my contacts. Neither of us has the same contacts. There are others here who have heard things as well; it's up to them whether they want to share their insights or not. It seems too strange that these specific topics were discussed/leaked -- and so many people heard about them.

I'd like to add this, too: Mr. Eick has been contacted for an interview by BattlestarGalactica.com and BattlestarPegasus.com. I welcome the opportunity to discuss the matter with him.

Michael
:colwar:

[Dennis]

Originally posted by Klingon Warrior
Hello all...

Joining the discussion as a fan of the mini series.

If you take notice, both messages are authored by MichaelLegresley handle.

http://www.scifi.com/mbb/browse.php?rid=3766

http://www.scifi.com/mbb/browse.php?rid=3764

Please tell me what you see?

LOL -- what I see is that Sci-Fi has screwed up the importation of messages from the old board.

Take a look here for the originals:

http://bboard.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/1/5/531/851

[default]

Looks like a mistake now that you show the old thread. Thanks Dennis. I never saw the original, just the new version.

Maybe this is David Eick's way of setting up TwoBrainedCylon.

[adjudicator]

just what I was getting at several posts before.

[Afan2]

The new board certainly confuses TwoBrainedCylon with a variety of characters (http://www.scifi.com/mbb/browse.php?rid=3778). LOL! :D

[adjudicator]

I posted to the Sci-Fi board as a reponce to the thread concerning two-brain might be michael and it was never posted however my complaint about it not being posted was...

[Afan2]

Did the text of your reply contain antything objectionable?

My reply - not posted yet either - was the following:

'Look at the original posts:

http://bboard.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/1/5/531/851

Boy, is this new board a mess! And I thought the previous one already WAS moderated!
Suits...'

(I know they don't like being called 'suits'...;))

[michaelfaries]

Originally posted by adjudicator
I posted to the Sci-Fi board as a reponce to the thread concerning two-brain might be michael and it was never posted however my complaint about it not being posted was...
Do I understand correctly that you think I am Two-Brained?

If so, let me state this again, as I've done before: I use one -- and only one -- handle. And it's my real name.

The one and only Michael
:colwar:

[LordStarFyre]

...Dennis, I hate to say this, but that is the kind of Games Moore and Eick play. I'm seeing also, that those who support them aren't above playing those "Win at any cost" games as well. This includes throwing out Bogus charges of Cyber-Terrorism and such.

If Moore was a competent Producer, with a Good Product, he and his minions wouldn't have to do this sort of nonsense.

His actions speak louder than that pathetic POS script he wrote on just how bad a product he is capable of producing.

What amazes me is that it took some people so long to figure out just what a degenerate Moore is. For a long time, so many people were saying "Give him a chance, he's a Professional. Wait and See". Now, even Most of the people that said that have come over to the Light, realizing that Moore is going to Destroy Galactica, and that those who support him are assisting him in doing it.

All this really makes me wonder just how bad Star Trek would have been if Majel Roddenberry, Rick Berman, and Brannon Braga hadn't been there to rein in Moore and his Delusions of Grandeur.

I'm more curious than ever what Braga and Berman REALLY think of their backstabbing little "friend".

:warrior: :warrior:

[adjudicator]

I could not remember the last name, just follow the thread and you see who I refuring to. :)

[Dennis]

I've satisfied my concern as to where the "cyber-terrorism" myth started, and it wasn't a pro-Moore person. But Milton was certainly too quick to go public with it. I never believed in it and would not have published it.

[LordStarFyre]

"I've satisfied my concern as to where the "cyber-terrorism" myth started, and it wasn't a pro-Moore person"

Of course, it would be hard for any Pro-Moore person to do anything wrong, what with their Halos and Harps keeping them from doing anything Evil...

It must clearly be us Evil Old Guard who are responsible...

Geez...

[Atlantiaviper]

This information about there never being a serious prequel vs. remake debate tracks very closely with my own information. I was told that while Moore discussed the matter with Eick and Eisner (the first director) at a very early stage -- well before the script was even written -- that it never came up with the studio or network. Contrary to other reports, as far I know there was never a "debate" within the studio on this issue and certainly no script rewrites ordered with a prequel agenda in mind. I did personally hear Moore talk about the idea once (he was with a group of studio people at Universal and my source was tangentally part of the conversation and I was there to go to lunch with my source) but my impression was he thought it would be too difficult to pull it off. (A caveat -- I really didn't hear much of the conversation, but that was the gist of it to the best of my recollection.)

[kingfish]

In other words they were playing the fans with prequel leads to continuation. The only prequel is for the new game coming out. I am also still wondering about the DVD release since none of the major sites have any info.

Puzzled in Florida

[michaelfaries]

Originally posted by Atlantiaviper
(...) I was told that while Moore discussed the matter with Eick and Eisner (the first director) at a very early stage -- well before the script was even written -- that it never came up with the studio or network. Contrary to other reports, as far I know there was never a "debate" within the studio on this issue and certainly no script rewrites ordered with a prequel agenda in mind. (...)
I'd like to understand why there were three ghost writers working on the script revisions a couple of months ago. And why another writer was already working on revisions back in January.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: I'm wondering if sources heard conflicting information between the BG videogame and the BG remake production scripting.

Michael
:colwar:

[Micheleh]

"Contrary to other reports, as far I know there was never a "debate" within the studio on this issue and certainly no script rewrites ordered with a prequel agenda in mind."

Based on bits and pieces of a conversation overheard while eavesdropping in a restaurant. Good source, lol.

I have to go with Michael and my gut instinct on this one. This denial is only coming up because of the accurate speculation that the Treklord poll was a ruse to get numbers. Why else does Captain James EVER post here, if not to plant misleading information? And no offense, Atlantiaviper, but your track record is hardly better.

[Dennis]

Originally posted by LordStarFyre
"I've satisfied my concern as to where the "cyber-terrorism" myth started, and it wasn't a pro-Moore person"

Of course, it would be hard for any Pro-Moore person to do anything wrong, what with their Halos and Harps keeping them from doing anything Evil...

It must clearly be us Evil Old Guard who are responsible...

Geez...

It was a single individual who was responsible, and for lying rather than for "cyberterrorism" (a ridiculously melodramatic term in and of itself).

[LordStarFyre]

..But Milty, Vince, and the Rest of the Pro-Moore faction ran with that Cyber-Terrorism paint brush like Taggers on Crack, painting EVERY Old Guard, Anti-Moore person they could find with it.

You may find them "free from guilt" but I certainly don't.

Melodramatic it may be, but this insistance that the Pro-Moore types are as pure as the wind driven snow is getting a wee bit tiresome, when the facts clearly show different...

Has Milty Apologized for Accusing Sandy? NO! Has Vince? NO! Has ANY of those that went running about like lunatics about Cyber Terrorist "Retros" coming to get them Apologized for their Insane outbursts? NO!

Instead of doing anything to remove that "melodramatic" taint from the water, they've just clammed up, and said NADA. And a slew of Milty/Moore Apologists have spread out like locusts to defend their behavior, and worse, tried to make it seem like "no harm, no foul".

Sorry Dennis, but while Cyber Terrorism is a Bad thing, FALSELY Accusing Innocent people of it is worse, and THAT IS SOMETHING THE PRO-MOORE TYPES *DID*!

[Dennis]

Originally posted by LordStarFyre

You may find them "free from guilt" but I certainly don't.

I didn't say that I did. Perhaps we should have someone flogged.



Melodramatic it may be, but this insistance that the Pro-Moore types are as pure as the wind driven snow is getting a wee bit tiresome, when the facts clearly show different...



Didn't say that, either. I don't notice the bad eggs on either "side" of this controversy owning up to being troublemakers.


while Cyber Terrorism is a Bad thing, FALSELY Accusing Innocent people of it is worse

Is it, for sure? In any event, that's a finer distinction than I find it necessary to make, since neither is a Good Thing by any stretch.

Retros and neos are "falsely accusing" one another of something or another every ten minutes or so over on the Sci-Fi board. And let's stay clear on one thing: there's no evidence that anyone committed or actively planned any cyberterrorism in this instance -- it was just another round of lying and hysterical over-reaction.

[LordStarFyre]

One must own up to guilt, even though there was No Crime Committed?

"Didn't say that, either. I don't notice the bad eggs on either "side" of this controversy owning up to being troublemakers."

Gee, that sounds like a novel new defence...

Let's see if I understand this right. I can accuse someone of something, with nothing but spun propoganda as my "evidence", and before I have to apologize, I get to wait for the person I falsely accuse of my bogus charge, to cop to being a "bad person" BEFORE I bother to apologize for Falsely Accusing them in the first place?

Only then, I can walk away and say "See they are Really Bad People, and they deserved to be accused anyway"?

Sorry Dennis, I disagree. Milty, Vince, and the Pro-Moore faction stepped on their privates with this one, and no ammount of spinning or "Well, the people who were accused have done other bad stuff so it's OK if they were accused" is going to wash.

Bottom line, sarcastic comments about someone being flogged aside, this instance was worse, not only because this time the ones who started the problem, also went as far as to call in the Authorities (According to Pure as the Wind Driven Snow Milty) and threatened Legal Action...

Trying to legitimize that by saying "Well, both sides have called names" is a bit much...

[Raymar3d]

http://bboard.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/1/5/531/349

HA!

I wonder why?

[jewels]

Originally posted by michaelfaries
Do I understand correctly that you think I am Two-Brained?

If so, let me state this again, as I've done before: I use one -- and only one -- handle. And it's my real name.

The one and only Michael
:colwar:

Michael: they were refering to the fake Michael Legresly(sp?) speader of production good news. Very vague production good news. some of his posts now have two-brain's name at the bottom: some sort of import error* from the old board. (If it's* anything else, I AM cancer man from the X-Files.)
Julie

[AlphaNova]

Just jumping in here, the new SciFi Galactica board has a problem switching handles. A couple of posts I made got credited to other people. It looks like when someone replies to a post and they make their handle e-mailable, the name gets switched to someone else, most likely the name of the person who's post they are responding to.

Again, if you compare the original posts to the ones which were brought over to the new moderated board, you will see the real handles of who posted. This problem with the SciFi board is one of the reasons I don't like it. The other is that is seems to be designed to cut down on communication between the fans with the lengthy wait time for posts to appear. :colwar: