Would you like Galactica animated?

[Mustex]

Originally Posted by warhammerdriver

FINALLY! An idea to bridge the gap between TOS and a 20+ year later continuation (which I admittedly have a hard time wrapping my brain around).

I'd watch. And I think Anime would be the way to go (except for the always bushy hair and HUGE round eyes on the female characters). Someone would have to keep an eye on the animators tho. They LOVE to use lots of color on military craft. I guess that's where Larson and Desanto fit in.

Um, BTW big eyes in anime are a symbol of innocence. I think that would be an automatic with TOS (although if it were TNS it would be big lips, because that's for evil people).

[Mustex]

Originally Posted by CommanderTaggart

• As for style, I would not want Japanime... it's just so silly. I'd prefer 3D to 2D to make it look less "cartoony," and give it a greater sense of gravitas.

You haven't watched much anime have you? I don't mean this offensively, but unlike American animators the Japanese have great diversity in their styles. I grant you DBZ is cartoony to an extent, but "Blue Gender" is very gritty and real feeling (in one episode a van was turned upright, and the girl inside fell to the back and died from busting her head, definately not anvils falling from the sky kind of violence).

[Mustex]

BTW, I'm afraid of the reaction I'll get for even suggesting this, but if Larson has the cinema rights, and Universal has the TV rights, who has the straight-to-video rights? Think about it, they used "Van Helsing: The London Assignment" as a way of building publicity, and pulling in some extra cash. Why not use some straight to video animation as proof-positive to Larson that we're still here (it could sell 150,000+ copies like the series, maybe more sense it wouldn't cost $100; plus it could lure in more anime fans).

[thomas7g]

Originally Posted by Mustex

Um, BTW big eyes in anime are a symbol of innocence. I think that would be an automatic with TOS (although if it were TNS it would be big lips, because that's for evil people).

I'm a former animation student and took history courses in it.
So I can tell you the story.

Its actually kinda funny. Out of the ashes of WWII japan arose this little guy named Osamu Tezuka who would become the father of japanese animation. The first real animator in Japan and very prolific and imitated. He created Astro Boy, and Kimba and a bunch of other animation. And basically everyone in Japan followed his style for years. Many still do.

But he developed his style after watching Disney's Bambi, which he absolutely loved.

[thomas7g]

The funny thing is, that He influnced a guy who would be later known as the Japanese Disney, Hayao Miyazaki. And Miyazaki's stuff was so loved by Disney animators that they changed how THEIR characters looked. Glen Keane is the BIG heavyweight in Disney animation studios. And he loves Miyazaki. And you can see it in The little Mermaid, Aladin, Pocahontas and Tarzan.

[peter noble]

I think you can do an animated show and have it appeal to all ages, just take Batman: The Animated Series as an example of the depth of storytelling and its wide appeal.

Also, with an animated series you can merchandise the hell out of it, something you can't do with Slutty Cylon Sexbots!

Peter

[Senmut]

No. The critics will dismiss it as just another cartoon, and it would fail, making getting the film we want even harder to achieve.

[repcisg]

We need to face some hard truths.

Tom DeSanto does not share information easily or often, his followers are often forced to follow his actions in order to get an insight on what is going on. He is a live action producer, for him to go animated can only mean all doors to live action have been closed. In 1978, animation meant cartoons, not serious entertainment. So NBC probably owns the animation rights. And now that door has closed, at least for now.

Richard pushed very hard for a very long time, then began to distance himself from the project, to push his own project (Magellan). Now he will do two episodes in the new series. His message is clear.

Glen Larson owns the theatrical rights to the old series, he says he would like to do a movie. BUT he is getting on in years, may not have the strength to go forward and does not share. He has said many times Galactica is his baby. So why would he change at this point? He refused to share with Richard, he even helped close some of the doors in Richards face. And he seems to have done little to help Tom, I don’t buy Tom’s explanation of what happened, Eck was out looking for Moore before 9/11.

A fan based animation probably the best we can expect before the end of this decade, I would love to be proven wrong, I really would , but I don’t think I will be.

Now I‘m finished with the negative stuff – time to move forward.

We have many great talents here, many diverse backgrounds and a broad range of ages. The perfect conditions for total Chaos – I love it already. Guys and Gals all that is missing is a determination to do it. Richard is a great example, he risked all to make the trailer of Battlestar Galactica and then turned failure into success. He is working in acting again, rebuilding his reputation, and through that opening doors for Magellan. We can do the same.


So let’s get to work. We need many things:

A story to tell – plot, time line, art work, legal stuff, and many more things. Lets start a list.

[gmd3d]

So let’s get to work. We need many things:

A story to tell – plot, time line, art work, legal stuff, and many more things. Lets start a list.

OH I like this kind of thinking , I have been building up on a few thing over the last few months for my PC , Drawing pad Wacom, Truespace, and other bits and pieces, some I have yet to get and its all aim at art , I would like to sign up, (once I learn how to use this stuff) my only prob is my PC has not enough RAM only 128
I will be buying more after Xmas.
Once I get that watch out You guys will see alot more art coming this way.

[kingfish]

The BONO Law applies.

[gmd3d]

what's the BONO law?? have not hear that one before

[BST]

Originally Posted by kingfish

The BONO Law applies.

Kingfish,

Please elaborate.

BST

[repcisg]

Sonny Bono, while in congress pushed through some major changes to the copyright laws. Some of them quite draconian. However since his death most of the harsher components have been taken out or watered down.

But if we do a fan based story and do it only for "our own" use then far use laws apply. In otherwords as long as we do not charge or recieve compensation for our efforts we can go forward.

One important factor to keep in mind in a project such as this, it will be excelent "Training" exercise, that training can then be used to produce original works we can recieve compensation for.

[BST]

Thanks, rep.

I'm vaguely (very vaguely) familiar with the Sonny Bono law and when I saw KF's remark, I wasn't sure what part of the law he was citing.

[kingfish]

When it comes to who owns what in the Galactica universe the knot becomes very tight and confusing. Universal owns the Galactica Logo and characters. Larson has the intellectual rights ie the story can't be precisely duplicated WITHOUT his permission visa vie the Bono law:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Bono_Co...m_Extension_Act



Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
In the United States, the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 extended the duration of U.S. copyrights by 20 years. Before the act, copyrights lasted for the life of the author plus fifty years. After the act, copyrights lasted the life of the author, plus seventy years in the case of individual works, or seventy-five to ninety-five years in the case of works of corporate authorship and works first published before January 1, 1978. It also affected works still under copyright that were published prior to this date, increasing their term of protection by 20 years as well. This effectively 'froze' the advancement date of the public domain in the United States for works covered by the older fixed term copyright rules. Under this act, no additional works made in 1923 or after, and that were still in copyright in 1998, will enter the public domain until 2019. Unlike European Union copyright extension legislation, the Sonny Bono Act was not retroactive. It did not revive copyrights that had already expired.

Under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works states are required to provide copyright protection for a term of the life of the author plus fifty years. However, the convention permitted parties to provide for a longer term of protection, and between 1993 and 1996, the European Union provided protection for a term of the author's life plus seventy years (see Directive on harmonising the term of copyright protection). The United States, however, only provided for the minimum required by the convention.

As a result, many literary works, movies and fictional characters, which were quite profitable for the copyright owners, were threatened with soon passing into the public domain. This included several characters owned by the Walt Disney Company; without the act, Mickey Mouse would have entered the public domain between 2000 and 2004 when early short films such as Steamboat Willie and Plane Crazy were due to reach the end of the 75-year copyright term. Still, in several countries (e.g. in Russia, where the Berne convention was not retroactive) Mickey Mouse and all other works created before 1970 are in the public domain.

Copyright owners successfully lobbied Congress for an extension of copyright, to provide for the same term of protection as exists in Europe. Both houses of the United States Congress passed the act as Public Law 105-298 with a voice vote, making it impossible to determine who voted for or against.

As a consequence of the act, no copyrighted works will enter into public domain due to term expiration in the United States until January 1, 2019, when all works created in 1923 will enter into public domain.

In addition to Disney (whose extensive efforts in lobbying for passage of this lent it its darkly humorous nickname of "The Mickey Mouse Protection Act"), Mary Bono (Sonny Bono's widow and Congressional successor) and the estate of George Gershwin supported the act. Mary Bono, speaking on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, noted that "Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever", but that since she was "informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution", Congress might consider Jack Valenti's proposal of a copyright term of "forever less one day".

Proponents of the Bono Act argue that it is necessary given that life expectancy has risen dramatically since Congress passed the original Copyright Act of 1790, that a difference in copyright terms between the United States and Europe would negatively affect the international operations of the entertainment industry, and that some works would be created under perpetual copyright that would never be created under time-limited copyright. They also claim that Congress has the power to pass whatever copyright term it wants because the language "To promote the progress of science and useful arts" in the United States Constitution is not a substantive limitation on the powers of Congress, leaving only the restriction that copyrights may only be for a "limited time". Given this interpretation, a million years would still be a valid "limited time" under the letter of the Constitution.

Opponents of the Bono Act consider the legislation to be little more than corporate welfare and have tried (and failed) to challenge its constitutionality, claiming that such an act is not "necessary and proper" to achieve the purpose of "promot[ing] the progress of science and useful arts". They argue that most works bring most of the profits during the first few years and are pushed off the market by the publishers afterwards. Thus there is little economic incentive to extend copyrights except for the few owners of wildly successful franchises, such as Disney. They also point out that the Tenth Amendment limits the powers that a treaty can grant to Congress. More directly, they see two successive extensions of approximately 20 years each (the Copyright Act of 1976 and the Bono Act) as the beginning of a "slippery slope" toward a perpetual copyright term that violates the spirit of the "for limited times" language of the United States Constitution, Article I, section 8, clause 8. They question the proponents' life expectancy argument, pointing out that the copyright term under the 1790 act lasted only twenty-eight years, that life expectancies have not risen threefold since 1790 (ignoring infant mortality, they have increased barely ten years), and that even though terms of patents have not been extended in parallel, patents adequately reward investment in the field with only a twenty-year term. It has been said that extending copyright terms to "harmonize" with those elsewhere can involve a "leapfrogging" effect (http://www.troutworks.com/Joycelog/j...edate=20030115): two sides repeatedly extend their copyright terms to try and keep up with each other. Opponents also question the proponents' "works would not be created" argument by pointing out proponents' hidden assumption that the goal is to create all works, whereas the authors of the United States Constitution considered the goal "to promote the progress of science and useful arts." In fact, some works created under time-limited copyright would not be created under perpetual copyright because the creator of a distantly derivative work does not have the money to purchase a license from the owner of copyright in the original work, or the individual or privately held owner of copyright in the original work might refuse to license a use at any price (though a refusal to license may trigger a fair use safety valve). One can thus argue that a rich public domain is necessary for artistic creation.

For example, the works of Shakespeare and the Greek myths have been the basis for much of Neil Gaiman's writing, which might well not have been created if they were still under copyright. Recent works that have entered the popular culture, and for which copyright is arguably not appropriate, include the novels that created Frankenstein and Dracula, both originating in the 19th century. Most of the holy writings of major religions are also in the public domain, which allows them to be adapted. If the Roman Catholic Church had a perpetual copyright on the letters of Paul of Tarsus, it could have refused to license them for translation or for use by other churches. Many of Disney's most famous feature movies are themselves based on public domain works.

Publishers and librarians, among others, brought Eldred v. Ashcroft to obtain an injunction on enforcement of the act. Oral arguments were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on October 9, 2002, and on January 15, 2003, the court held the CTEA constitutional by a 7-2 decision. The plaintiffs in the Eldred case have as of 2003 begun to shift their effort toward the U.S. Congress in support of a bill called the Public Domain Enhancement Act that would make the provisions of the Bono Act apply only to copyrights that had been registered with the Library of Congress.

Other groups practice civil disobedience by violating the act in public. However, these challenges have so far met with little success.

The act was named after the late Sonny Bono, who had lobbied for extending the duration of copyrights. It was passed shortly after his death.

President Bill Clinton signed the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 on October 21, 1998.



Thoughts:

Glen Larson managed to copywrite the Pegasus universe. Larson was looking to make an IMAX Pegasus movie.

BG is also unique because it started off as a movie. It was marketed in Canada before being shown in the United States. Larson purchased the MOVIE rights from Universal for a HUGE sum of money, ie we have hope of a big screen movie someday.

I would support an anime continuation but I am under no illusion who the target audience would be: much younger fans since it would have to run late at night on the Cartoon Network just like other teenager/young adult anime shows. The main characters would have to be younger than even our heroes in the 1979 show were at the time. It would end up somewhere between Galactica as we know it and something more like Robotech, Star Blazers, or Gundam Seed.

To a large extent the original Star Blazers already has many of the elements of an animated Battlestar Galactica. In a thread a long time ago we even wrote about many of the similarities between Star Blazers and Battlestar Galactica. To some extent Battlestar Galactica could be called a live action anime. You don't even need to change the big hair, watch Yu-Gi-O lately?

Watching the new Justice League Unlimited however gives me hope that with the proper production crew and writers a potential Battlestar anime would be adult and well made.

[Krystal]

Originally Posted by Warrior

The one thing that worries me though is the fact that if too much is invested in making an animated continuation, then that may be ALL we get... with it pushing the chances for a live action movie down even further than it's been pushed.

I worried about that too, I have to admit that the choice of an BG animated doesn't appeal to me personally. I prefer to see a continuation movie. So, can we get the three: animated series, continuation movie and continuation series? Of course that thinking in the long run, a very long run I suppose. Sorry, I feel greedy. :confused:

Krystal

[gmd3d]

Thanks for the info Kingfish and repcisg, ha ha
I was wondering what U2's Bono ha ha had to do with Galactica, but of course I have heard that Sonny Bono became a major player in congress before he died. but not his laws. I just did not make the connection to Sonny

god would my face be red if i had persued that line , to quote homer
"D'OH!!!!"

[cobrastrikelead]

CGI is definitely getting to where a film done in that manner could be well made. But a continuation theatrical movie would be great to have too.

[Mustex]

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question. If DeSanto did something like "Van Helsing: The London Assignment" that went straight to video (hopefully to promote the movie), whose rights would he have to get?

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Gemini1999

Tom -

You know how I love anime....! I would love a high quality anime-type BSG film (or series), just as long as it didn't mess with the concepts, visually or story-wise, to suit the OAV style of anime.

Just seeing something that looks like what we want and seeing familiar faces (anime-wise) along with the familiar voices would be rather exciting!

Best,
Bryan

I agree and it would save a lot of money also.

[repcisg]

First he would ne NBC's permision to do "a" Battlestar project. Then if it is a feature film, even if it goes dirctly to DVD, he will need Larson's.

[thomas7g]

Originally Posted by Mustex

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question. If DeSanto did something like "Van Helsing: The London Assignment" that went straight to video (hopefully to promote the movie), whose rights would he have to get?

Basically the rights for Battlestar Galactica belong largely to Universal whose parent company is now NBC. Though I'm sure you would also run into some legal problems if somehow Glen Larson (who created the show) wasn't compensated.

Btw- I don't think a direct to video project would be financially viable. The cost to produce would be too high.

And it doesn't really make alot of sense to go straight to video. Once you got it produced, it doesn't cost much to air it. You just have to earn as much money for the network from sponsers as the show you are bumping to air it.

[CommanderTaggart]

Adult-oriented animation isn't out of the question. Again, perhaps DeSanto is looking at this as a way to make TOS fresh again, with a much smaller investment than a feature would demand. Use the animated series to generate excitement about TOS, and build the market to the point where a feature is inevitable.

I mean, that's only a guess as to what DeSanto might be thinking... but, it's not illogical. Captain.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by CommanderTaggart

Adult-oriented animation isn't out of the question. Again, perhaps DeSanto is looking at this as a way to make TOS fresh again, with a much smaller investment than a feature would demand. Use the animated series to generate excitement about TOS, and build the market to the point where a feature is inevitable.

I mean, that's only a guess as to what DeSanto might be thinking... but, it's not illogical. Captain.

I agree

[Mustex]

Originally Posted by thomas7g

Basically the rights for Battlestar Galactica belong largely to Universal whose parent company is now NBC. Though I'm sure you would also run into some legal problems if somehow Glen Larson (who created the show) wasn't compensated.

Btw- I don't think a direct to video project would be financially viable. The cost to produce would be too high.

And it doesn't really make alot of sense to go straight to video. Once you got it produced, it doesn't cost much to air it. You just have to earn as much money for the network from sponsers as the show you are bumping to air it.

I'm not saying don't EVER air it. They eventually aired the "Animatrix".

[Megoman]

I would watch an animated Galactica production if done in either CGI(Roughnecks & Final Fantasy) style or something similar to a certain female character that is seen on the homepage of this site. Just as long as the plotlines are well written and not too "kiddie". The Clone Wars on the cartoon network was well written and the voiceover people did a great job, but I didn't care for the animation style used. If NBC/Universal were to go along with this who do you think would be good choices to do the voices of Adama, Baltar, Athena, Cain, & Boxey(if this were set right after the events in Hand Of God)?

Possible voices:
Adama(Stephen Collins)
Baltar(Ronny Cox)
Athena(the woman who portryed her in The Second Coming Trailer)
Boxey(???)
Cain(Denis Leary)
Lucifer(Anthony Stewart Head)

Of course, the budget may not allow for some of these folks. Just my $0.02 worth.

[martok2112]

Originally Posted by Megoman

I would watch an animated Galactica production if done in either CGI(Roughnecks & Final Fantasy) style or something similar to a certain female character that is seen on the homepage of this site. Just as long as the plotlines are well written and not too "kiddie". The Clone Wars on the cartoon network was well written and the voiceover people did a great job, but I didn't care for the animation style used. If NBC/Universal were to go along with this who do you think would be good choices to do the voices of Adama, Baltar, Athena, Cain, & Boxey(if this were set right after the events in Hand Of God)?

Possible voices:
Adama(Stephen Collins)
Baltar(Ronny Cox)
Athena(the woman who portryed her in The Second Coming Trailer)
Boxey(???)
Cain(Denis Leary)
Lucifer(Anthony Stewart Head)

Of course, the budget may not allow for some of these folks. Just my $0.02 worth.

Some good ideas there, Megoman.

I think perhaps Alyson Court (Jubiliee from the old Fox Xmen/ABC Beetlejuice cartoons) might be a good idea for Cassie or even Sheba.




Respectfully,
Martok2112

[warhammerdriver]

If something fan-based or fan-produced were to be done, we would definintely have to come up with a mission statement of sorts, probably along these lines:

"These works are made by the fans of Battlestar Galactica for the enjoyment of their fellow fans. Any monies generated in excess of production costs are to be donated to (insert favorite charity here)."

That's basically what the people at 5yearmission.com (a fan generated online ST series) have done. Paramount has reviewed their work and said basically that if they don't make any money from it, we don't mind. I head a rumor that Paramount is very interested in what they're doing from a possible future ST TV series standpoint.

[repcisg]

warhammerdriver brings up a good point, what to do if NBC choses to use what we produce. We should have an agreement in place defining how much each person gets.

I would suggest at this point that every one who contributes, no matter how much or how little, gets an equal share. Because at this point in time it is impossable to to say how much or how little each persons contribution will be and without such an agreement NBC wil never talk to us.