New Battlestar Movie!!!

[Armando]

It seems like they don’t have anybody running Skiffy that actually appreciates scifi, as evidenced by the craaap they pump out. I understand money and advertising is important… but they don’t really have anybody over there that wants to elevate the genre, or put out a quality product.

I think the problem might be that they have people who THINK they appreciate SciFi, which means that they like B-movies and space operas. What they might need is to bring in total outsiders alla Stanley Kubrick circa 1968 to do something with the genre that is respectful and wise, rather than more of the same.

Or, give Ron Moore and Joss Whedon license to do whatever the frak they want, sink or swim. Those guys really GET what the genre can do on TV. And keep in mind that, until I saw BSG in 2004 (which I’d planned to ignore because of the cheesy original), I would have counted myself as someone who just liked space opera as well, when he dabbled into SciFi at all.

[Glimfeather]

And keep in mind that, until I saw BSG in 2004 (which I’d planned to ignore because of the cheesy original), I would have counted myself as someone who just liked space opera as well, when he dabbled into SciFi at all.

Well, that was until we got to you.

Isn’t it so much better now, Armando?

[Colonel_Forte]

I think the problem might be that they have people who THINK they appreciate SciFi, which means that they like B-movies and space operas.

That actually makes sense, although I don’t think bringing in any big marketable name is necessarily the solution either. The people who are really good at it already will always find a way to get their stuff to people, which is why Whedon’s goofy Neil Patrick Harris show was broadcast via internet. The best sci-fi will reach people somehow. The crap that gets made is usually a money/vanity issue and ultimately if it’s really crap it won’t make anything.

Sci-Fi’s real money comes from it’s 3 or 4 big shows (the Stargate franchise, BSG, Eureka) and it’s reruns. The Saturday night movies appeal to just enough of the right people that they make enough money that they aren’t a waste according to the accounting people. The best sci-fi will end up on better networks or in better films. BSG was only on Sci-Fi because the mini was successful there, I’m guessing, otherwise NBC would have shown it.

I hate to say it, let Larson make his little crap movie. He hasn’t made any serious money since his 80’s shows and the semi-successful relaunch of Knight Rider makes him think he’s a successful TV creator. When the new movie flops, because only the biggest fiends will watch it because they need to (“I’ll watch it because it’s BSG!” for example, no offense, just saying, I’m the same way about Stargate so I understand), Larson will get laughed at and RDM will be vindicated, especially in the uber-fans, such as us, eyes.

[Skipper1974]

Called 1980 and it BLEW!!!

It would be a monumental mistake on universals part and yes, as I read before, you cannot do this series justice in 2 hours…

Ergh… But I’d spend the money to go see it anyway!!!

Capt. Eric “SKIPPY” Starcher
Master-At-Arms BSG-75

[wisebob134]

Galatica 1980 had a smaller budget and bad writing (even compared to the original). I think it would be fun to see a campy space opera ending to the original series. I hope they don’t even try to make it serious. I wanna see model ships flying on badly done greensceen work. If they make it campy enough it could be fun. Besides continuing the RDM Bsg would be stupid. We’ve already seen the serious version of this story. I don’t need another one.

[Pike]

Camp. I hate camp. /Anakin

[Casilda]

Camp. I hate camp. /Anakin

ROFL…

me too, ani.

[WashIsMyHero]

I agree with the chorus that this is a bad, bad idea. The original series was very much a creature of its time, which would be

thirty years ago

. The reimagiation of the series brought it up-to-date, breaking new ground in many ways. The old was more of a Starwars knockoff and was campy even then.

The only way this would work, is if they give it the Starsky & Hutch treatment and would only serve to cover over the patheticness of it all.

[MsElegante]

I must say that I agree with the comment so far.

Why Universal/NBC/Sciffy would even think of turning back the clock on what RDM has created is disrespectful to RDM, David Eick, the actors, etc. and the fans who have been loyal.

Universal/NBC/Sciffy would not know a good thing if it bit them in the sorry Barb.

That’s how I feel. If they really want to make a sci-fi movie based on an old show, then do Space 1999. I always liked that show. Just change the name to Space 2099.

[bigdamnhero]

I think the problem might be that they have people who THINK they appreciate SciFi, which means that they like B-movies and space operas. What they might need is to bring in total outsiders alla Stanley Kubrick circa 1968 to do something with the genre that is respectful and wise, rather than more of the same.

Or, give Ron Moore and Joss Whedon license to do whatever the frak they want, sink or swim. Those guys really GET what the genre can do on TV. And keep in mind that, until I saw BSG in 2004 (which I’d planned to ignore because of the cheesy original), I would have counted myself as someone who just liked space opera as well, when he dabbled into SciFi at all.

Yes. Space Opera is cool if that’s what you’re in the mood for… a geek can’t survive on high-bow entertainment alone. I liked Andromeda just fine, but science fiction doesn’t have to be all photon torpedos and dilithium crystals. Scifi has a built-in ability to explore the human condition, unique to its genre; unlike others, which can sometimes strain under the weight of ideas that scifi holds up easily. I’m just tired of NBC and Fox wanting me to lower my tastes… I think they should be striving to raise theirs.