Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

GALACTICA Reborn ((Todd Moyer talks to Glen about the new movie, Richard Hatch press release, etc. !!!))

Glen here...

...with a follow-up to last week’s story about Battlestar Galactica’s journey towards the silver screen.

While the history of science fiction and television is riddled with "unfinished business", it’s safe to say that Galactica is one of the most notable "unresolved" projects of the last twenty years. Despite accusations that 1978’s Galactica ripped-off 1977’s Star Wars; despite a hideously malformed attempt to revitalize the series in a second season bastardization of the concept; despite protracted absences from the airwaves; Galactica has survived.

And now, it seems, Galactica’s time has come again.

Enter Todd Moyer, the producer of Barb Wire, TimeCop, and the new Wing Commander film. Moyer, a producer noted for making a little money go a long way, has teamed with Galactica creator Glen A. Larson to re-envision the epic saga of a titanic space battleship whose desperate mission is to guide a fleet of bedraggled spacecraft (and the survivors they carry) from their enemy-ravaged homeworlds, towards "a shining planet known as Earth" (where they believe they will find their distant ancestors).

Shortly after posting my initial announcement regarding the new Galactica film project, I had the privilege of speaking with Mr. Moyer, who clarified some already-existing misconceptions about the film project, and offered a few hints as to what kind of Galactica film we might expect to see.

Right out of the gate, I thought I was in trouble. Moyer immediately suggested to that my previous article on the Galactica film had implied his production company (No Prisoners) was only "tangentially" involved with the production of Wing Commander. I did not mean to imply such a thing, as No Prisoners fact...the primary production entity for WC. Any implication to the contrary was unintentional, and incorrect on my part.

As a second order of clarity, Moyer called to my attention a type-o in my article (which was partially adapted from a Reuters / Variety press release).

This guy doesn’t miss a beat.

The Reuters / Variety press release indicated that the film would involve Commander Cain (a character in the original series) searching for the Battlestar Galactica, which had set off on a quest to find the missing tribes of man, who may have come to pre-historic Earth aboard a Battlestar named Atlanits.

In my previous article, I typed "Atlantia", part of a sub-conscious association with the original series, whose opening episode featured an ill-fated Battlestar named Atlantia. Atlantis and Atlantia are two different words. And the difference is very significant in this film. A Battlestar named Atlantis might well have something to do with a particular Earth myth about a "lost city" of the same name, after all...

Now that the amendments and corrections were out of the way, Moyer (who was surprisingly and refreshingly honest, enthusiastic, and forthcoming about this project, and quite pleasant all the way around - even when "correcting" me) turned his attention towards the Reuters / Variety press release which was issued last week, indicating it was actually a bit misleading: "Some people seem to be thinking that the (Variety) plot synopsis suggests the movie will only about Cain looking for Galactica," explained Moyer. "That is not the case at all. The Galactica will be in this movie, and will be an important component in the film. Not to have the Galactica in a Galactica film would be pretty crazy!"

While fans of any franchise inherently resist changes being made to their beloved concept, and worry about what "cool elements" might be left out in a fresh adaptation, Moyer is keenly aware that this Battlestar Galactica project necessitates one particular omission. An omission which is...ironically...likely to be embraced by fans and nay-sayers alike. A few simple words said it all: "No daggits! Please tell the people there will be no daggits in our movie!" (a reference to the fan-lamented mechanical monkey-dog featured in the original series).

When pressed towards more specific details about the production, Moyer referred to the developmental process currently underway at No Prisoners. The company’s in-house visual effects facility (No Prisoners 3DFX) is currently in a design and development phase in an effort to lock down a style and "look" for this new Galactica film. Of NP3DFX’s 19 employees, 12 are former associates of Richard Edlund’s heralded (and now defunct) Boss Film Corporation (2010, Ghostbusters). Currently, five of NP3DFX’s personnel are charged with the specific task of designing vehicles, etc. for Battlestar Galactica.

Which raises the question: how similar to the old series will the new Galactica movie be? Moyer characterized his project as "recognizable as Galactica, with some slight re-thinks. We will see many vehicles and ships which look familiar, we’ll see some entirely new craft as well. We’ve got the structure of a story - and are working with Glen (Larson) to flesh it out, and get everything in order. He’s got a jillion ideas - some of them pretty wild. Right now we’re busy picking and choosing and siphoning which elements will work best for this specific story."

"Once the story has been locked down a little more", continued Moyer (referring to the inherently fluid nature of any project’s story development process), Galactica will then be scripted by a writer named Mike Finch".

Finch and Moyer have worked together before, when Finch made a few revisions to an existing Wing Commander screenplay. His contributions to that project mostly centered on the addition of the dreaded "Pilgrim" subtext which ran throughout the film. Moyer was quick to point out that Finch added the bigotry & discrimination oriented subplot to the WC script at the request of Wing Commander’s director, Chris Roberts. Finch's other credits include adapting Aeon Flux for Paramount, and Silver Surfer for Fox.

"I’d really like everyone to know that we’ve done a lot of thinking about this project," Moyer continued. "This isn’t just something we’re pulling out of the blue, or something we’re doing only because we think it’s cool."

Moyer also alluded to holding over a few specific elements from the original series, such as the flight crews who furiously prepare the fighters for launch, or rush out to lock down the craft once they come in for landing.

And, of course, there will be space battles. "We’re trying to do space battles very differently in this film" offered Moyer. "In Star Wars - and even the original Galactica series - the space battles all take place on a more-or-less flat plain. Ships often chased & attacked each other from behind or the front. We’re looking into the possibility of designing space battles which will be three dimensional. Ships coming at other ships from above, from below, from the sides, diagonally, and so forth. In space, there are an infinite number of maneuvers one can do - it’s not logical that all action should stay horizontal and flat."

When asked whether or not the new film’s "Battlestars" will be recognizable as the Battlestars with which viewers of the original series are familiar, Moyer hesitated, then offered a reinforcement of a previous statement: "there will be some familiar vehicle designs in the film."


As No Prisoners works feverishly to bring Battlestar Galactica to the silver screen, many fans are asking about the fate of original cast member Richard Hatch’s multi-year, heroic effort to resurrect the franchise.

I spoke with Mr. Hatch for quite a while last week. He was very generous with his time - and very sincere in his desire to see "honor" done to the Galactica franchise, and its fans.

I got the strong impression Mr. Hatch is a man deeply devoted to the Galactica cause, and is on a mission to revive the franchise not out of greed or opportunism, but because he believes.

When all was said and done, his production company (Sushan) ended up issuing a press release, which offered the following comments in response last week’s BG movie announcement by No Prisoners (whose release regarding a Galactica feature film was rather pointedly mentioned on MSNBC).


Press Release

March 11, 1999 5:00PM



In response to an article presented by Variety and picked up by MSNBC, Producer Richard Hatch (star of the original series as Apollo) offered the following statements and information: "Rumors like the one that circulated the last few days have been part of the Galactica reality for years. I’ve been privy to many including this one, they seem to have a life of their own. Once in awhile, they are the result of some scrap of truth, but not often, and certainly not in this case. My contacts at Universal have stated that Galactica is still owned by Universal, and that no other deal has been consummated."

Hatch continues, "We are completing or trailer piece within the next few days...I’m not at liberty to discuss any of the details as they are obviously sensitive. They (Universal) are very savvy and realize that this project, if handled with the passion that the demand, can easily become a franchise that can continue for yet another Quarter Century. I strongly believe that the most powerful way to keep the legend alive into the new millennium is to infuse the original concept, story, and characters with a fresh new generation of actors, modern effects and visuals, and solid, thoughtful scripts. This is like old fashioned storytelling where tales were passed from one generation to another. We all have an obligation to be true to this, or it will fail. There are millions of new fans growing up and thirsting for fresh stories. The original series is still being shown in many cities around the world. The support I’ve received proves that there are a lot of people who feel the same."

Where others have come and gone, Richard Hatch has been the driving force behind keeping the legend of BATTLESTAR GALACTICA alive for twenty years through his support of loyal fans, guest speaking, and two successful novels based on the series. In the past two years, there has been a tremendous push towards creating a contemporary film using modern films technology and high tech effects. Towards this end, Hatch is currently producing a promotional trailer to help forward negotiations with Universal in obtaining the film’s distribution rights. He raised sufficient collateral, plus backed the project personally to ensure a quality demo that would do justice to the property. He enlisted Oscar winning Director of Photography Dean Cundey (Apollo 13) for some filming, Dreamscape (Independence Day), Emmy winning FX veteran Brick Price / Wonderworks (Star Trek to Deep Impact), and Grammy winning composer Tom Burton (Calico).

According to Tom Burton, one of Hatch’s producers: "When I heard today the rumor (of another Galactica film in production), with one of two of our investors who will be backing the entire project. As far as I’m concerned, the only missing piece needed for a greenlight is how will distribution be handled. The production company mentioned on NBC has not even bothered to contact any of the actors or creatives from the original series. The cache value of having most of the original cast in a remake is priceless. To create the film otherwise would trivialize it, and would yield something entirely different than what the fans are asking for. Any project of this sort needs to pay more than passing homage to the original. If not, I know I would feel cheated. Richard IS, without question, the current heart and soul of Galactica, as any of the show’s followers can tell you. His drive and love of the project is infectious."

Many parallels can be drawn between this write-in effort and that which brought Star Trek to the film screen. In addition, history seems to be re-writing itself in other ways. The original Galactica series came out shortly after the first Star Wars film 22 years ago, and now it seems the Galactica film will fall squarely between the release dates of the next two Star Wars. Hatch stated: "There was keen interest then, and that is definitely the case now. I find it thrilling that this is happening, and would hope that the project comes to pass in a way that properly fulfills the legacy. This is a dream come true for thousands of fans who believe in the original."

Coincidentally, Mr. Hatch left tonight to host a Galactica series in Fiji.

((end press release))


Glen (Oliver) sighs...((then remembers to tell his readers that AICN will feature a more elaborate description of Hatch's above-mentioned promotional "trailer" later this week.))

Needless to say, Sushan's press release necessitated my backtracking to Moyer.

Said backtrack resulted in a response / rebuttal from No Prisoners - a company which in no way, shape, or form holds any animosity towards Mr. Hatch. Indeed, they seem deeply respectful of his self-sacrificial efforts to keep the Galactica franchise alive.

None the less, they felt some issues needed to be cleared up. Here's what they said:


((The following statement is from No Prisoners, and addresses Richard Hatch & Sushan Production’s press release of last week. It was released to AICN Monday afternoon))

Begin press release

Glen Larson and Todd Moyer wish Richard Hatch the best of luck in pursuing a Battlestar Galactica television series with Universal Studios. However, we feel the rights issues regarding Galactica need to be clarified.

Glen Larson has "separation of rights" under the Writer’s Guild agreement. In simple terms, this means that Universal Studios owns the television rights to Battlestar, and Glen Larson is the sole and exclusive owner of any and all feature film rights to the Battlestar franchise.

Glen Larson and Todd Moyer have formed a joint venture to exploit these rights. Despite rumors to the contrary, Richard Hatch has no rights, legal or otherwise to any elements of the Battlestar Galactica franchise.

This is not meant to preclude Mr. Hatch from some future involvement in the feature film if the producers decide it is appropriate to...or helpful to...the project.

((end press release))


All of which brings to mind a critical question: what about


Moyer and Larson are keenly aware they not only have many expectations to live up to in the eyes of the fans, but owe the fans a certain debt of gratitude. After all, without the fan’s protracted interest in the franchise, filming a Galactica movie would be both unrealistic and untenable.

As such (and in a move uncharacteristic of many productions of this nature), Moyer and Larson are approaching the development & production of Galactica with surprising forthrightness and openness. "This isn’t going to be a security lock-down" indicated Moyer. "Glen (Larson) and I want the fans to know what’s going on with our project, every step of the way. That’s not to say we’re going to give away all our secrets, but in many ways, the fans will be a vicarious part of the creative and developmental process of this movie. We don’t want them to feel like we’ve taken Galactica away from them, and are keeping it all to ourselves. They’ve waited a long time for this day to come, they deserve to know what’s going on."

Accordingly, Moyer and No Prisoners are currently constructing a web site which will take its visitors on the lengthy, step-by-step journey needed to bring Galactica to the screen. This web site, located at, will be frequently updated, and one of its main contributors will be Glen Larson himself. "Glen’s a really philosophical guy" said Moyer of his associate. "I think his contributions to the site will be very interesting, and suggest a lot about how the Galactica universe came about."

((Glen Note: the Galactica movie web site will not go on-line until April 1. AICN will announce its activation as soon as it’s formally up and running. Moyer was also careful to point out that "something very special" will be happening at the site on May 15. More on this in the coming weeks...))

When asked what he would most like the fans to know about Larson & No Prisoner’s updating of Galactica, Moyer thought carefully, then offered...simply..."We really have done a lot of thinking about this movie. I think it’s going to be very special, and very cool."


There has been a lot of negative fan sentiment surrounding this project since Wing Commander’s debut last week. Many filmgoers simply did not like the film, and are not convinced Moyer & Company are up to the task at hand.

Hell, I didn’t even like Wing Commander all that much. Although I consider it an amazing accomplishment for the limitations and constraints which were imposed on the production (economically), there were some major elements which needed repair (in my humble opinion - screenplay and direction first and foremost).

Watching WC while knowing that No Prisoners was sailing towards Galactica next, I could understand why Galactica would be a project that would interest them, and why Glen Larson could stand beside them in good conscience. There’s something about the "feel" of Wing Commander which...on some level...evoked Galactica. The gritty, dirty desperation to survive, the frantic effort of mankind to hold on to his rightful place in the cosmos. Both of these are elements which a good script and better direction might have expanded into meaningful and effective concepts in WC. Hopefully, Galactica will afford the necessary mix of talent and personalities to transcend some of Wing Comander’s shortcomings.

After spending quite a bit of time on the phone with Moyer, after hearing some of the ideas he and Larson have in mind, after checking-out other sources who worked on Wing Commander (and getting a sense of what happened to drag that project down, who was responsible, and why), I have come a belief that Moyer and No Prisoners should probably be given the benefit of the doubt in this instance. I feel they are keenly aware of what works, what doesn’t, and have the capacity to learn from mistakes - whether or not they are personally responsible for said mistakes. These are very critical components in the making of any film.

Does this guarantee that Moyer and Larson’s Galactica will be a great movie?

No, it doesn’t. Even our greatest filmmaker have made...mistakes. Sometimes "things" just gum up the works..

But I can say that...after speaking with Moyer at some length....I honestly sense that No Prisoners and Larson would like nothing more than to make a great Galactica feature film, and will do everything within their power to make it happen...

Aint It Cool News would like extend a mammoth and heartfelt thanks to TODD MOYER at No Prisoners, and to RICHARD HATCH at Sushan Productions, as well as "Hatch’s people".

Coordinating this article was actually quite an undertaking on many levels, and all parties concerned showed vast amounts of openness, professionalism, and patience during the writing of this piece.

Even though AICN gets contacted by "real people" all the time, we never take it for granted - that they communicate with us at all is always profoundly meaningful.

Especially in situations like this...

Questions? Comments? Praise? Ridicule ?
CLICK HERE to e-mail Glen

Or call:

(512) 347-1992

Mail can be sent to:

Glen Oliver

P.O. BOX 160812

Austin, TX 78716-0812


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • March 16, 1999, 8:09 a.m. CST


    by red7ine

    hurmm, apparently no one really cares about this, do they? Sorry man, but this prospect just doesn't sound that great to me. The only reason I enjoyed Battlestar when I was younger was for the Cylons and their badass ships...other than that, it was quite unoriginal and unabashedly ripped off SW...

  • March 16, 1999, 8:30 a.m. CST

    First let me say

    by Matt

    I'm not a BATTLESTAR GALACTICA fan. I've never seen it (a little too young to appreciate it during its original run), but I AM intrigued by its premise. Now, Glen said we should give them the benefit of the doubt- which I'm all for. I'm sure no one person can be held responsible for WING COMMANDER. However, there are things known as track records. And with impressive gems like BARB WIRE and TIMECOP, I just have to wonder- is this worth it? -Brimley

  • March 16, 1999, 8:44 a.m. CST

    Galatica Theme Music

    by Skaught

    I'm all for the film if it's done well...with a good script. Wing Commander looked good (a little dark, though) but the dialogue stunk...storyline boring...So I hope that doesn't happen. They need to make the story HUGE. Not just a little "incident" on the way to earth...they need to either get to earth or do something big...make the story HUGE. ONE THING, though, I love the theme music from Battlestar...very epic and grand. Keep that theme. Spice it up a little if need be, but I really think it's up there with the best of them.

  • March 16, 1999, 9:05 a.m. CST

    Not good vibes on this one...

    by Pope Buck 1

    "At least they're getting rid of the daggits" seems to be the best thing anyone is saying. Which reminds me -- one of the most ludicrous things about the "movie" was that the kid got to keep his pet daggit on board because, darn it all anyway, they just couldn't bear to see that little boy disappointed, so they saved food rations for the daggit EVEN THOUGH THE ENTIRE COLONY WAS STARVING TO DEATH and people were dropping left and right. Yeah, my whole family is dead of starvation -- hope you're enjoying playing with your goddamn DAGGIT, kid. Then, of course, the daggit gets killed and so they devote precious tech resources (again, while people are still starving) to building a ROBOT daggit, just so this poor kid won't lose his pet. Who was this kid, anyway? The CEO's son? The Mu'ad Dib? What's he going to to do when he finds out people aren't ALWAYS going to rush to resurrect his pets at every opportunity? Hmm? Ah yes, such a lost classic we're trying to revive here. Come to think of it, the people who made "Barb Wire," "Timecop" and "Wing Commander" might be just the ones for the job after all...

  • March 16, 1999, 9:14 a.m. CST

    this could be good

    by rayb

    Okay, so Wing Commander, really wreaked... True. In fact, my favorite line from the show was the abysmally poor line, "C'mon Angel, he's a 'good guy'!" Boy! I'd just love to have Freddie defending me... "A good guy!?" And Angel bought it? Heheheheh... Still I agree with Glen, there was a real desperate feel to WC. I just hope that they don't duplicate the whole submarine feel in Galactica. I hate, avoid, abhor, films about submarines. I'm kinda disappointed about No Daggits... I mean, How can they have a Buck Rogers meets Galactica crossover, if Daggit and Tweeky can't get together and Scrappy Doo the crap out of each other? Still, I think BG should be fine now that St:Voyager has tried to rip off every idea that they ever had... I think it could make a fine movie. And the 3D space battles could be "neato" if they can somehow make them visible and not just an eyesore of effects...

  • March 16, 1999, 9:17 a.m. CST


    by MrgnPhnx

    Do me a favor, y'all. Forget for a moment the direction, etc., of WC. That's really not Chris Roberts' forte, I hate to say, though I loved the games, and even somewhat enjoyed the movie. *Feel* it. Hell, no, the fighters weren't bright and shiny. This was a war! The humans were getting their asses kicked! What does that describe better than BG? I'm actually just as happy about Hatch not being involved, at least not yet. Man is boring as hell. When I saw him at a convention, people were falling asleep! (I just went to get Peter David to sign my books. <g>) Yeah, lots of the original was cheesy, but there were still a few bright spots. War of the Gods still gives me the chills. I'll withold judgement until I see the final project, of course, but I like the sound of this. Les the Book

  • March 16, 1999, 9:33 a.m. CST

    Lie down with a dog like Larson, end up with fleas!

    by Uncapie

    Watch your six, Richard! You're gonna get screwed from Larson! He's a pro at it! I hope he dies an ugly, prolonged, horrible death before you go into production. Payback, baby, payback!

  • March 16, 1999, 9:51 a.m. CST

    Barbwire, Timecop, AND Wing Commander?

    by Dolfanar

    Anybody who can consistently produce crap like that DESERVES Battlestar Galactica.

  • March 16, 1999, 10:10 a.m. CST

    Why this won't work. :(

    by Cpt. Zab

    This news seems to indicate to me that the franchise is in jeopardy. Okay, assume that Larson and co. do manage to release a movie involving none of the original cast (which is how it looks to me -- Larson's statement about Hatch participating 'if it doesn't harm the movie' says to me he can be in it if he keeps his mouth shut and does what they tell him. Having met Richard, I doubt he'll be able to do that -- he cares WAY too much about how it'll turn out) will not only alienate fans, but it'll shoot in the foot any chance of Richard's series ever getting off the floor. If a movie comes out with a new cast, TV producers will never want to back up to the old cast at all. It'll be even worse if the movie sucks! Sigh.

  • March 16, 1999, 10:38 a.m. CST

    Battlestar Galactica

    by Darrk103

    The mounting competition between Larson and Hatch sounds like typical Hollywood bullshit. They'll spend plenty of time with their lawyers, no time with their scriptwriters and take a well-deserved bath on the movie... But Galactica doesn't deserve that. Despite its arrival on the heels of Star Wars, it was not a rip-off. They were different types of epics- one is the story of the Maccabees, the other is the Exodus. One of Galactica's beauty points was the way that it tied in so many "ancient mysteries" about humanity and meshed itself with pre-biblical mythology. The other great thing about Galactica was the way that the whole society was destroyed, but represented in the Galactica's refugee fleet. It was done well and felt natural. We followed principal characters tied by bonds of family and friendship across every level of Galactica society, just like in a real civilization. Characters pined for their dead, made new friends,remembered lost loves, took responsibility for the abandoned, remembered their homes and hoped for the future. In Star TrekNext Generation we were told that the ship carried thousands of other people, but who were they? What function did they serve? Unless it was convenient those unnamed thousands- civilians, women, children- were needlessly endangered and ignored. Never so in Galactica. If the movie properly weaves biblical mythology into this family story of the exodus, it will be a good movie. If they just make an action movie like Wing Commander, it will be a silly movie, ignored by all but the die hards and remembered by even fewer. Let the games begin...

  • March 16, 1999, 10:51 a.m. CST


    by mckracken

    ok I can live without Daggits. This Finch guy really worries me, he had better PROVE himself a worthy scribe before he tackles GALACTICA. He isnt even LISTED as being a scribe on WING COMMANDER!! Chris Robertson'd direction ruined WING COMMANDER but everyone does have a valid point. The production of such crap as BARB WIRE and WING COMMANDER (I Liked Timecop!) should send up the red flag ASAP! GUNTER you're so negative and condecending you make me sick. What did you say about Richard Hatch? No acting for the last 20 years? Hey I got news for you buddy, sometimes PEOPLE CHANGE THEIR CAREERS!!!! Richard Hatch is now a Positive Motivational Speaker and doing a damn good job making a decent living! So what if he clings to Battlestar Galactica?? He wants a BATTLESTAR GALACTICA revival for the new millenium and I think its the best damn news I've heard in quite a while!! All you whining sniveling little "I dont wanna see it" bastards are probably 14-15 years OLD NOW and dont even REMEMBER "GALACTICA" when It was on in 1978-1979! LONG LIVE THIS SHOW! I hope Richard Hatch gets his TV show launched too...GO SYNDICATED RICHARD!!! MY FAITH in this show is unending. It CAN be reborn, it just needs fans to STOP WHINING and BITCHING!!! Of course BATTLESTAR GALACTICA's special effects will be better now. I WANNA SEE NEW SHIP DESIGNS!!!!! I will wait for this one.....

  • March 16, 1999, 11 a.m. CST

    BSG Fan

    by LadySkybyrd

    Oh please, people, don't comment unless you know what you are talking about. BSG is not a SW rip-off. Glen Larson had the show in development in the EARLY seventies, under the name "Adam's Ark". Oh yeah, and George Lucas and/or the film company (I don't remember the details on that part) sued Glen Larson/Universal. And they LOST. So much for your rip-off theory. What I'm not happy about is the timing, which allows people like you to shoot their heads off about things they don't know about. This has the chance to be a great revival for a great series... except that it won't include the man who kept the revival going for many years. I just hope to god this doesn't turn out to be Galactica 80 in space.

  • March 16, 1999, 11:03 a.m. CST


    by TVGuy

    I don't understand this animosity towards Daggit. I am a huge fan of BG. I could talk all day about the episode where Starbuck tames a Cylon or the one where Starbuck liberates a penal colony full of idiots. Hell, during my teen years I used Starbuck's cocky self confidence as my guide for picking up chicks. (It actually works if you can do it.) However, Daggit was my favorite character on BG. Remember when he crawled through the air ducts of the ship to save Apollo's son. Personally, I was always disappointed that Daggit never got his own cartoon series.

  • And the one aspect that made it almost watchable, in my opinion. The backstory, more so than the bigotry. Unfortunately, it took a backseat to the video-gaming aspect, but I guess it figures. . .

  • March 16, 1999, 11:19 a.m. CST

    nyeh! nyeh!

    by red7ine

    look, McCrackhead I remember BG first hand, I'm definitely not a 15 year old with nothing better to do (well, maybe SOMEthing better to do than recite arcane knowledge of old sci-fi shows.) I just wonder how bad the 'updated' designs of the cylons will look. Apollo IS better than Tony Robbins as a motivational speaker at least, I caught his seminar at the local Econo-Lodge and it changed my life! I highly recommend buying the set of tapes and the 'I USED TO BE ON TV!' t-shirts that he sells...

  • March 16, 1999, 11:40 a.m. CST

    Buck Rogers anyone?

    by quarlo

    What's Gil Gerard up to lately?

  • March 16, 1999, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Gil Gerard

    by red7ine

    After his son's failed attempt as a Latino-Rap star, Gil has been working with him at the Waffle House on the bypass. Gil does flapjacks and Gerardo's in charge of the jello-cream desserts.

  • March 16, 1999, 12:02 p.m. CST

    Up with Richard Hatch; down with "Wing Commander" guy; and here'

    by Alexandra DuPont

    One thing I've noticed in comparing Hatch's comments against that "Wing Commander" fellow's comments is that Hatch seems committed to good STORIES and IDEAS, while Todd Moyer is obsessed with getting in the GEAR, the SPACESHIPS, and excluding certain ROBOTS... Jesus! The power of well-done sci-fi/fantasy filmmaking is that it can deal with issues and strong themes in a grandiose way, because it doesn

  • March 16, 1999, 12:06 p.m. CST

    stay away from the brown acid...

    by red7ine

    Hey, Eternal, I was responding to quarlo's post about Gil Gerard, but apparently as I was typing it, they were switched around... If you need something to get a grip on, just let me know, I think I got just the thing for ya...

  • March 16, 1999, 12:18 p.m. CST

    The TRUTH about BSG

    by Peteski

    Allrighty, BSG may not have LEGALLY been a rip off of SW, but all you have to do is watch one ep to realize that it sure FEELS like a rip off. HOWEVER, I ALWAYS liked the basic premise of the show - the ragtag band of misfits venturing across the galaxy to find their fabled Eden, a place called Earth. That is a cool concept and making them OUR ANCESTORS IS THE BEST PART. Now, every single one of us has a reason to care about these guys. SW is great melodrama but BSG involves US. This is why I LIKE the idea of BSG. HOWEVER if the same guys who made BARB WIRE, TIMECOP and WC are in charge, we may have a problem - BUT - I was much more impressed with WC than I expected. Sure it still SUCKED - but what sucked about it (as with TIMECOP) was the SCRIPT. The effects were pretty good for a 27 million dollar budget, wouldn't you agree? So, if we can just get a decent script, we'll have a much better shot at a decent BSG. To do this we need a WHOLE NEW PRODUCTION COMPANY! I think Moyer and crew should MAKE the movie, but they shouldn't develop it. I think it's plain to see that Moyer doesn't give a CRAP about the fans WHATSOEVER. Why the hell else would he be so enthusiastic about the project? HE'S TRYING TO CONVINCE GLEN (AND US) THAT THE MOVIE WON'T SUCK! Well, lessee, SOME of the ships will be "recognizable". Hm, well, put Darth Vader in a pink version of his outfit and let him breathe heavy and he's still recognizable, RIGHT? See, in Hollywood, you and your project are only as good as the line of crap you're running - So, the more passionate you seem the more people will believe your project will work. No offense Glen, but just because he SEEMS to be really interested in giving the fans a movie they like doesn't mean he'll succeed. He HAS to make you think that so he can get positive press. It's called ACTING - he's LYING to all of us. Not directly lying, he's just going on and on about how this will be a GREAT and EXCITING film but really all it will be is WC2 with the BSG name on it. As for Glen Larson's involvment in it? He and Moyer are two of a kind - you think TIMECOP, WC and BARB WIRE were bad??? Larson also brought us BUCK ROGERS IN THE 25TH CENTURY, BJ AND THE BEAR, GALACTICA 1980, KNIGHT RIDER, MANIMAL AND AUTOMAN. We're doomed!

  • March 16, 1999, 12:20 p.m. CST


    by PORKY


  • March 16, 1999, 12:36 p.m. CST

    What's all this Star Wars Felgercarb!

    by alcore

    What's all this Star Wars Felgercarb! I mean, really, are they ANYTHING alike? (Other than being SF, I mean?) I see no similarities. There are no Wookies. There is no Death Star. These folks are running from GENOCIDE. They are not a poorly organized but growingly successful rebellion, they are running for their very lives! Galactica taught me about survival. Star Wars was about ultimate victory for the just. There is no comparison.

  • March 16, 1999, 1:03 p.m. CST

    You Bunggeling Hollywood Poopy Brains...

    by X-Ed

    Keep the storyline going. Just like Star Trek. It really is not worth of a remake. Check out the comic series from 2 years ago. It is on the right track. Bring back the cast from the past. LISTEN UP YOU HOLLYWOOD DOE-DOE-HEADS!!!! Read more comics!!! You would get better stories then ya do from them faggots at the studios!!!! aka the new Superman with Cage! Hardee-friggin-harrr!! Go Appolo!! Do it true, if at all.

  • March 16, 1999, 1:06 p.m. CST


    by mckracken

    red7ine if you (like me) were around during Battlestar Galactica's original run,(fan or not) then I obviously wasnt referring to you as being 14-15 years old. Actually that comment came from a chatroom where we were discussing the proposed B.G. movie and one person piped in with "whats Battlestar Galactica?" which immediantly gave away his age (it turned out the kid WAS 15, didnt have access to the sci/fi channel and had never seen the show at all). but Red7ine you sound like a true fan (not the ones that needlessly bash the show for its flaws)...lets just keep our fingers crossed that whoever makes this movie will make it RIGHT, smart and not use Freddie Prince Jr. (except as the daggit!)

  • March 16, 1999, 1:19 p.m. CST

    This fresh floater.

    by Gods Speed Bump

    I just saw WING COMMANDER and it made me want to kick babies!!! I spent WEEKS playing those games, trying and trying and trying and winning and loving the story it was based on. So I was excited when I heard about the movie and I went to see it and afterwards I got up and pissed on every toilet seat in the men's bathroom because I wanted everyone to feel as disgusted as I was! Now I hear they've got their tusky hooks into my precious BATTLESTAR GALACTICA! As we speak, the Galactica hangs over my head. I built it with my chubby, sometimes worthless fingers. I hate that they have this property and I can't wait to piss all over theater I watch it in! Oh, and all you fucks who don't like Daggit? SUCK MY SHRIVELED, RECEDING, CRUSTY, UNWASHED, STINKING COCK!! DAGGIT RULES!!!

  • March 16, 1999, 1:45 p.m. CST

    Speed Bump?

    by Pope Buck 1

    Um, would you like to do us all a public service and tell us which theatre you hang out at, so we can all stay away? Some of us may have gone to see a GOOD movie at the same cineplex, and I'd rather not suffer from your low opinion of something else... Thanks! Appreciate it.

  • March 16, 1999, 1:51 p.m. CST

    No Prisoners & BG!

    by BlackOmega1

    1: Mr. "SpeedBump", get out of the house before you go insane... or rather more insane. 2: NP Prod. created an excellant rendition of a space drama. Yes, there were embellishments, but come on guys and ghasts (speedbump), we all spent HUNDREDS of dollars to play all the WC games since they hit the market. In every issue of the game, we were increasingly impressed, and in the end, it was GOOD. Now, 1999, I go to the thankfully clean theatre, spend my $7.00 and see an honestly good movie with subtle similarity to the game. In and of itself, it was great fun and I thoroughly enjoyed it for what it was. This was not a re-make of the game, just a theatrical interpretation of a video game. If they make the BG interpretation, I'll be satisfied, I'm sure. 3: speedbump - take a bath. Black Omega 1 - OUT

  • I wonder if we might end up seeing Hatch and Universal rushing to make a tv production before Larson and co. can make their film? As silly as it sounds, it seems as if both groups are within legal rights to do so, and both would stand to benefit form being "first". As I think about it, a competition between two different production entities just might garauntee that we are treated to better scripts than if the two sides collaborated. On a different note, this same type of thing might happen if both Toho and Sony release Godzilla movies in the next few years...

  • March 16, 1999, 2:23 p.m. CST

    Gods Speed Bump

    by mckracken

    why do people post the stupidest comments here? About daggit, actually I always found it kind of ironic that when Boxys dog dies, they replace it with a robot dog while being hunted to extinction by robots that were created by another race that was wiped out by there creation. Does anybody here have any information on the final "Galactica 1980" episode where Starbuck befreinds the Cylon while stranded on a deserted planet? He meets with a woman who appears from nowhere bearing child, rebuilds his ship and the Cylon ship for her to make it back to the Galactica and the fleet. I heard that this was originally filmed as part of the Battle Galactica series as a cliffhanger and was never used, so they regurgitated it for Galactica 1980's finale.

  • March 16, 1999, 3:07 p.m. CST

    Starbuck & Daggit

    by TVGuy

    Let me just say that I would rather have Starbuck and Daggit as friends than the angry hate-alls that post to this list. Also, WC was a better movie in every way --script, directing, acting -- than Message in a Bottle. My wife made me go to that piece of crap. I consider WC as my revenge on her. Bottom line, any scifi movie is better than most of the garbage made by Hollywood. Daggit Rules!

  • March 16, 1999, 3:45 p.m. CST

    NEVER remake Robotech

    by Dolfanar

    I just realised something about Sci-Fi Geeks... We all like bad TV. Because we have been subjected to SO much crap, we ALL adopt atleast one really bad TV show that we feel "had potential" or "a good concept" but bad execution. For me it was Robotech (Good Animation, story arc, and continuity, BAD dialogue and Acting, and some silly concepts), for others it's Lost in Space or Battlestar (Some would throw in Star Trek or Dr. Who in that list). Usually we are exposed to these shows as impretionable kids, and they imprint upon us a huge feeling of nostalgia... unfortunately EVERY attempt to revive such a show is futile, WE ARE NO LONGER 7 years old, and regardless of the spiffy new F/x that sense of nostalgia can NEVER be recaptured... Regardless of our FEELINGS for these shows, they are still B-A-D. Period. I would MUCH rather see someone TRY to do something ORIGINAL (gasp!), something that ISN't based on a 1970's TV show. I would EVEN go for an adaptation of a classic Sci-fi novel that we HAVEN't yet seen before. I realise that NEW projects DON't necessarily mean GOOD projects, BUT as I saw someone post on AICN before, "NEW SHIT IS BETTER THAN OLD SHIT I'VE SMELT ABOUT A HUNDRED TIMES BEFORE".

  • March 16, 1999, 4:03 p.m. CST

    Galactica...bring it back-tica

    by Col. TIE

    There's room enuff in the sci-fi universe for both Star Wars and Galactica. Tho maybe not a direct rip-off of SW, there would definitely not have been a Galactica without a SW. I loved Galactica growing up, since there was so little sci-fi on TV and in a pre-VCR world, I couldn't pop in the Holy Trilogy whenever I wanted. The Cylons kicked ass. I'd enjoy seeing a Galactica movie -- I mean better bad sci-fi than more Patch Adamses. Hatch should be involved with any new version -- if for nothing else than to provide some continuity and history. Adama is dead, the logical thing would be to have his son commanding the last Battlestar...Galactica on its neverending quest to find that bright shining planet known as...Earth.

  • March 16, 1999, 6:28 p.m. CST

    Lucas must be laughing his ass off

    by jethro

    Battlestar Galactica was a poor, unoriginal clone, produced by a studio embarassed at having turned down George Lucas' Star Wars, and desperatly trying to get a piece of the space opera cake. And now, 20 years on, it's happening again. I'm sure that, once again, it's not going to be a hundredth as compelling as Mr Lucas' clever expansion on a theme.

  • March 16, 1999, 6:40 p.m. CST

    2 BG revials!

    by nitekatt

    You know this could lead to something interesting-2 seperate revivals! As Mt.Lason stated,he owns the theatrical rights and UNIVERSAL owns the tv rights... A big screen version and a tv version at the same time? I wonder...

  • March 16, 1999, 6:48 p.m. CST

    part II

    by nitekatt

    You know,it's clear that Larson is in this for the money. clearly none of the original cast will appear! Harch on the other hand trully cares about the property and consept,and the people who gave their all for almost a year with 6 days a week-16 hour shooting seds. Also,makes you wonder if UNIVERSAL has first refusal on distributing a film Larson maks on his own-wonder what images and stuff he owns.

  • March 16, 1999, 6:53 p.m. CST

    Superman vs. Batman

    by Lovefield

    The key word in everything we've just read is: franchise. There's a quote in a book about the history of comic books that goes (to paraphrase): "Joe Shuster wanted to create a hero to embody his boyhood fantasies and ideals and created Superman; Bob Kane wanted to make a quick buck and created Batman." No matter how this producer wants to dress this dumb project up it's the same damn thing. Take the above quote, insert Star Wars for Superman, and Battlestar Gallon-of-crap-tica in place of Batman (and change the names of the various 'creative' people involved -- no offense, George) and you get the idea. People, please, I'm asking you now: Phantom Menace will be very, very good, and every piece of sci-fi drivel that arrives in it's wake will be very, very bad -- let's kill this thing early, before we have to sit through another decade of stinkers like Krull and Tron.

  • March 16, 1999, 7:11 p.m. CST

    Moyer + Larson = Bad Movie

    by Bradpumpkin

    Are these the guys you would want to make the "Battlestar Galactica" motion picture? A guy (Todd Moyer) who has only made bad movies based on comic books ("Timecop" & "Barb Wire") and video games ("Wing Commander") teamed with a guy (Glen Larson) who has only made TV shows most of which were bad themselves ("Manimal", "Automan", "Nightman", etc.).

  • March 16, 1999, 7:47 p.m. CST

    Good Scifi...

    by Dolfanar

    "Phantom Menace will be very, very good, and every piece of sci-fi drivel that arrives in it's wake will be very, very bad" What? Look Science Fiction existed 1500 years before "Star Wars" and it will exist 1500 years AFTER Star Wars. The fact that you have benedicted Star Wars "very, very good" without having SEEN the damn thing doesn't say much for your objectivity... As for good Sci-fi... Watch the Outer Limits, and READ the Classics "1984", "Brave New World", "Starship Troopers", "Harrison Bergeron", "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", and hope, PRAY, that somehow, someway REAL science Fiction begins to get produced, and that F/X laden Theme Park Rides (of which "Star Wars" is the originator)begin to bomb, and eventually fade away...

  • March 16, 1999, 9:53 p.m. CST

    Im with Darrk and McKracken

    by jimimack

    BRING IT BACK!! BRING IT BACK!! Darrk, I couldn't have said it better myself! I have been pulling for Hatch for a while now, but I wouldn't mind seeing what Larson can do with a big-screen version. No one has talked about one important factor here: You can bet that Hatch's trailer/demo will find it's way on to the Net, and if it kicks ass, there will be a lot of pressure on Moyer to live up to its promise... All I can say is this: BRING BACK THE EASTERN ALLIANCE!!

  • March 16, 1999, 10:22 p.m. CST

    1500 years?

    by Caliban

    I think that we can pretty safely assume that, even by the loosest possible standards, Science Fiction did not exist 1500 years ago. You do realize that that would have been the year 499? I assure you science barely existed in 499, much less a genre of literature that explored speculative realities based upon science. The earliest examples of science fiction- loosely defined- would be Cyrano De Bergerac's (yes, he was a real guy) stories of travelling to the moon. you big dummy.

  • March 16, 1999, 10:48 p.m. CST

    Hey Angry Local...

    by Peteski


  • March 16, 1999, 11:06 p.m. CST

    LOVEFIELD, this is JUST FOR YOU and no one else...

    by mckracken

    "-- let's kill this thing early, before we have to sit through another decade of stinkers like Krull and Tron." when I read this statement, I immediatly was reminded that KRULL (while painful and stupid) AT LEAST TRIED TO BE ORIGINAL!! Tron also was trying to do something original. You morons beat down 70's TV revival movies AND you beat down movie like Tron and Krull too? Lovefield WHATS YOUR IDEA OF A PERFECT MOVIE????? I got news for you Lovefield, OPEN YOUR EYES!! Star Wars copycats will flood the cinema durring the long wait between prequels just like they did back in the 80's!! WE COULDNT STOP IT THEN AND WE CANT STOP IT NOW SO PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS BECAUSE AT LEAST "BATTLESTAR GALACTICA" WAS TEN TIMES BETTER THAN "BATTLE BEYOND THE STARS", "ICE PIRATES" and "THE LAST STARFIGHTER". "BATTLESTAR GALACTICA" might be a classic TV show from days gone by, but mark my words, there will be BIGGER sci/fi SHIT headed to theaters between 2000 and 2006!! WING COMMANDER is just the tip of the iceberg. :P -McK!!

  • March 16, 1999, 11:06 p.m. CST

    LOVEFIELD, this is JUST FOR YOU and no one else...

    by mckracken

    "-- let's kill this thing early, before we have to sit through another decade of stinkers like Krull and Tron." when I read this statement, I immediatly was reminded that KRULL (while painful and stupid) AT LEAST TRIED TO BE ORIGINAL!! Tron also was trying to do something original. You morons beat down 70's TV revival movies AND you beat down movie like Tron and Krull too? Lovefield WHATS YOUR IDEA OF A PERFECT MOVIE????? I got news for you Lovefield, OPEN YOUR EYES!! Star Wars copycats will flood the cinema durring the long wait between prequels just like they did back in the 80's!! WE COULDNT STOP IT THEN AND WE CANT STOP IT NOW SO PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS BECAUSE AT LEAST "BATTLESTAR GALACTICA" WAS TEN TIMES BETTER THAN "BATTLE BEYOND THE STARS", "ICE PIRATES" and "THE LAST STARFIGHTER". "BATTLESTAR GALACTICA" might be a classic TV show from days gone by, but mark my words, there will be BIGGER sci/fi SHIT headed to theaters between 2000 and 2006!! WING COMMANDER is just the tip of the iceberg. :P -McK!!

  • March 16, 1999, 11:06 p.m. CST

    Hey Caliban

    by Peteski

    SURE they had scifi 1500 years ago, they had it practically before WRITTEN history. Ever hear of Beowulf? That was basically an episode of the X-Files right? And if you don't agree with that, all you have to do is realize that they didn't call it Science Fiction back then - they called it religion.

  • March 16, 1999, 11:57 p.m. CST


    by ship

    i agree with Dolfanar. a lot of us became sci-fi geeks by embracing the crap-tv of the 70's. i like it. but wouldn't it be great if they could make a movie about something we hadn't already heard of! i love BG, but i don't need a movie. if it works great, if it doesn't i won't be suprised. 20 years from now maybe they'll insult us all by making a Babylon 5 movie with re-thought characters and a screwed over plot. i won't get excited about it, or BG.

  • March 17, 1999, 12:47 a.m. CST

    History of Science Fiction

    by Dolfanar

    Actually Petesky I wasn't even speaking as broadly of Beowulf (Which I consider more Fantasy and lump IT in with Lord of the Rings and Star Wars). In the AD 100's the GreeK writer Lucian of Samasota wrote "the Icaromenippus" and "The True History" which describe trips to the moon. And these are NOT the FIRST examples of what WE would recognize as Science Fiction (Just the ones I remember).

  • March 17, 1999, 12:51 a.m. CST

    BTW about the "you big dummy" crack...

    by Dolfanar

    Caliban, I think I need to talk to Prospero about getting a better lock for your cage... How can we have "a brave new world" with people such as you in it?

  • March 17, 1999, 1:55 a.m. CST

    Philip K Dick (Wait, it's relevant!)

    by Palmer Eldritch

    [well slightly] weren't these "No Prisoners" jokers connected to a version of "A scanner Darkly", to be directed by Emma Kate Croghan? I think Universal and Jersey Films were also connected but there's been no word in over a year (and what there wqas then was just a load of internet reports). Does anyone no what happened to this project?

  • March 17, 1999, 1:58 a.m. CST

    BG 1980

    by VarietyWriter

    Aw let's stop slagging BG1980. Yeah, it was horrid, but, as far as I'm concerned, it's canon -- the events happened, folks. The Big G found earth in the year 1980 and everything at that point sucked. This doesn't mean you can't have a movie where the Galactica is still looking for earth, though -- the events could take place prior to 1980. Then there's the fact that we're talking about TV sci-fi -- anybody heard of "parallel universes"? I'd like to think some event occurred after the original series which two realities to be created and, thus, BG1980 is like Trek's Evil Universe only it's the Sucky Universe. It's kind of like those two awful Ewok TV flicks -- like it or not, they're part of the SW universe.

  • March 17, 1999, 4:53 a.m. CST

    No Daggits, No Watchit!

    by picka55

    Are they insane! The damned daggit was the only character with any emotional range in the whole series! What ARE they thinking?

  • March 17, 1999, 5:01 a.m. CST

    Gallacticans are go!

    by Say What

    Who cares if BG took some elements from Star Wars...they were good elements to steal! Star Wars took plenty from past sci-fi and EP1 is going to steal more from the serial sci-fi of the 1930's and 40's (the robots\battle droids are throwbacks to some old comic books of the same era), but who cares as longs as it's entertaining and fresh. My real fear is that BG is going to modernize too much and Mountain Dew itself to death with trying to be hip. The characters need to be in the 25-35 age group like on the TV show and not some Starship Trooper yeehawers acting haircut cool for the camera...I want some maturity! The story and actors should be worry number 1. The effects will never match the EP1 so you better deliver a good story to reduce the dependence on effects. And for BG1980...who cares...ignore it, burn it, and forget it. It was creepy, bad, and boring. C'mon, wolfman jack is in an episode! And some of you foulmouths here that need to use the word fuck like your writing a script for Tarantino don't deserve a Star Wars or a BG or any need a shot of Prozac and have your ass stuck in East LA where you can strut your machismo to those who spill your frustrations out on this board like it's some kind of Betty Ford clinic for the creatively challenged...and brotha I don't care, go get some help or a thesaurus (you know the dinosaur that teaches you new words).

  • March 17, 1999, 6:04 a.m. CST

    No Original Characters = No Movie

    by LANDO

    Think about it, for any new incarnation of Battlestar Galactica to possibly be a viable success, it would have start by providing that thing that no "classic" Galactica fans ever got...closure. Did Apollo ever take over Adama' role?, did they ever make it to earth?, did they ever find out what happened to Cain and the Pegasus?, did Boxey ever lose the bowl cut? These are the things that I myself as a fan want to see. After all, the series ended abruptly for everyone, and most of us are still trying to forget about "Galactica 1980". Ideally, I think that having Richard Hatch in the role of the Galactica's new leader is the ONLY way to go. The next step would be to get as many original cast members involved as possible. What is Dirk Benedict doing these days anyway? His involvement would be huge. Fans would flock to see it. Then the "next generation" could be thrown into the mix with the "veterans", utilizing young actors, while hopefully keeping the studios from worrying over the demographics so much that they gear the movie toward 13-17 year old America. Let's face it, anything else is an insult to the old fans. If Glen Larson helps make a "new styled" low budget Galactica with Freddy Prinze Jr. in the role of Commander Apollo, it won't fly. In effect it would probably re-kill a franchise that's waited over 20 years to re-emerge. Let's hope that doesn't happen.

  • March 17, 1999, 8:19 a.m. CST


    by Nihilon

    actual JOURNALISM on AICN!!! who woulda guessed???

  • March 17, 1999, 9:39 a.m. CST

    A lost and lonely voice of reason

    by Iridnith

    Larson vs. Hatch, new ships vs. old ships, new characters vs. old characters, new actors vs. old actors, keep 1980 vs. ignore 1980, daggit vs. no daggit... Has ANYONE give any thought to just waiting till it comes out and WATCHING the damn movie BEFORE you decide whether or not it sucks? Just curious.

  • March 17, 1999, 9:47 a.m. CST

    A Lost and Lonely...

    by Dolfanar

    Iridnith, you have manged to Drum up THE MOST SPECIOUS argument, EVER to stain these Talkbacks, and one which I had HOPED I would never have to soil my eyes with reading again. Your argument amounts to "Let's NOT talkback, because we should all be brainwashed into believing that this halfbaked movie WON't be crap." You enjoy being urinated on, don't you?

  • March 17, 1999, 10:17 a.m. CST


    by Iridnith

    Someone has missed the point. I have to assume everyone here is literate--since these responses are all typed--so I can only assume that people are simply CHOOSING not to understand. Let me, therefore, spell it out: I am NOT in any way suggesting that we not discuss, debate, or even argue these movies ahead of time. That is, as mentioned, the point of talkbacks. And I am not saying that this movie won't suck. It very well could. And I am not saying that people shouldn't have, or express, their own opinions. That is, after all, what I'm doing too. All I'm saying is that deciding FOR SURE that a movie MUST suck before it's even begun production is the pinnacle of idiocy. Might is suck? Of course it might; the odds are even fairly good that it will. But it's not DEFINITE. And something else, and I'm only going to say this once: despite the juvenile nature of some of these talkbacks, I personally do not choose to degrade either myself, or those other people here who actually have some sense of basic courtesy, by utilizing or sinking to the level of comments such as "You enjoy getting urinated on." If that's really the best sort of argument you can put forth, I'm amazed that you're old enough to reach the keyboard.

  • March 17, 1999, 10:45 a.m. CST

    Spidey sense *Tingling*

    by Dolfanar

    Iridnith you've set off my bullshit detector BIG TIME! You posted; "A lost and lonely voice of reason" Which assumes that you are somehow some paragon of reason, and the rest of us are buckteethed morons who are discussing out our asses... "Larson vs. Hatch, new ships vs. old ships, new characters vs. old characters, new actors vs. old actors, keep 1980 vs. ignore 1980, daggit vs. no daggit... Has ANYONE give any thought to just waiting till it comes out and WATCHING the damn movie BEFORE you decide whether or not it sucks? Just curious." Slamming people SUBTLY is NOT going to keep me or anyone else from calling you on repeating a tired argument of "Well. why don't we wait till it comes out!" or my personal favorite "If you don't like it, don't watch it!" which a logical extension of such a specious(*) point. I care for the sci-fi genre IMMENSILY, and I am sick and tired of seing people fed dumb-downed crap. Watch or Read Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" if you want to see examples of the kind of world I see us going towards. People are being educated and conditioned to be stupid, I only hope that the programming DOESN't stick! (*) I will continue to use this word, ad nauseum until people ACTUALLY stop using such ridiculous arguments.

  • March 17, 1999, 11 a.m. CST


    by Iridnith

    You know what, Dolfanar? You're absolutely right. (Betcha didn't see that one coming.) The "voice of reason" topic heading was poorly chosen. Honestly, it WASN'T my inention to slam anybody. Nor was I trying to encourage people to accept the "dumbing-down" of sci-fi. I too care about the genre--about 90% of everything I read, at least 75% of everything I watch, and 100% of everything I write falls into the sci-fi/fantasy category. I was trying to put a little perspective on a debate that just seemed, to me, to have gotten off on a useless tangent--that is, the declaration that the movie sucks, when it hasn't even been made yet. The "voice" post is only my second post to this site, so I wasn't looking to offend. As far as my second post, well, I call that self-defense. There are enough really stupid arguments going on here without adding any more fuel to the fire. Dolfanar--and anyone else--I will be more than happy to discuss this further, calmly, rationally, and without name-calling. If we can't keep this polite, though, let's kill the discussion now and let the column move on to other topics. Agreed?

  • March 17, 1999, 11:44 a.m. CST

    Wing Commander is a box office bomb! Todd Moyer is a hack!

    by Bradpumpkin

    "Wing Commander" absolutely bombed at the box office this weekend. It placed way down at number seven with only $5 million and it was its opening week! That's less than they spent on advertising! This video game masquerading as a movie actually placed lower than such other miserable films as "The Rage: Carrie 2", "The Deep End Of The Ocean" and "Baby Geniuses" for god's sake! Way to go Todd Moyer -- you sure no how to bring in those hit movies! Please, someone at Universal keep this talentless hack away from "Battlestar Galactica"!

  • March 17, 1999, 12:15 p.m. CST

    interesting issues

    by efxjoe

    I've been reading all the comments on the new Galactica movie, and thought I'd add a few thoughts. Like a lot of you, I liked the old series - it was flawed, but had a great premise and a lot of cool designs. I wouldn't count the film out before it's even made - even Lucas can make a flop - "Howard the Duck " comes to mind. And though Wing Commander sucked, the credit for that goes to Chris Roberts, whose baby it was. Whether Todd Moyer can make a good Galactica film (and I hope they read all these comments) will really depend on how good a script the writer can come up with. I definately think Hatch should have some sort of role - even a cameo to show Apollo alive and keep a link to the past saga. I also hope they don't radically change the ship designs (except the Viper). Of course, if they do something like the Classic Enterprise-Wrath of Khan Enterprise transformation, cool. If it's an Enterprise-TNG squat duck-like makeover, bad. I'll hold out hopes for a good film, even with Hollywood's recent track record.

  • March 17, 1999, 12:29 p.m. CST

    WC did not bomb at the box office

    by TVGuy

    WC cost $27 million to make. It made $5 million it's first weekend. Even if it closes at the box office today, it will not be a bomb. Between US box office, overseas box office, video rental and being shown a hundred times on TNT or UPN in a year or two, this movie will make money for its investors. The US and global entertainment market is so huge that even disappointments like WC are still good business deals. What we have is too much money being thrown at too little talent. If you don't like this situation, quit your day job, fly to Hollywood and make something worthwhile. Personally, I like this situation. It allows for the profitable creation of great but underappreciated films like Dark City and Army of Darkness

  • March 17, 1999, 12:29 p.m. CST

    WC did not bomb at the box office

    by TVGuy

    WC cost $27 million to make. It made $5 million it's first weekend. Even if it closes at the box office today, it will not be a bomb. Between US box office, overseas box office, video rental and being shown a hundred times on TNT or UPN in a year or two, this movie will make money for its investors. The US and global entertainment market is so huge that even disappointments like WC are still good business deals. What we have is too much money being thrown at too little talent. If you don't like this situation, quit your day job, fly to Hollywood and make something worthwhile. Personally, I like this situation. It allows for the profitable creation of great but underappreciated films like Dark City and Army of Darkness

  • March 17, 1999, 12:54 p.m. CST

    WC was definitely a box office bomb!

    by Bradpumpkin

    To TVGuy: "Wing Commander" was definitely a box office bomb -- read Variety or The Hollywood Reporter, everyone agrees on this point. Its budget was $28 million -- but that was only the production budget. There are also promotional and advertising budgets on top of that figure which are added on each time they release the film in a new market -- be it theatrical, cable, video, or foreign. These advertising budgets are huge and can range from $5 - $20 million more than the production budget. "Wing Commander" will probably not make a profit.

  • March 17, 1999, 1:20 p.m. CST

    I was... right?

    by Dolfanar

    Um... yeah... Y'know I don't think it's fair for you to blind side me like that (conceding a point), um can't you call me a bully, or a fanatik or something? At least then I can reply whittily (I HATE reasonable people). PS To efxjoe: For bringing up Howard the Duck *shiver*, you should be taken out into the street and beaten with a tire iron, before being hung by your testicles. Thanks to you I won't be able to turn on my TV for fear of happening upon *IT*. Jesus I can't even bring *IT* up when I'm arguing AGAINST George Lucas, it's just too cruel and underhanded...

  • March 17, 1999, 2:19 p.m. CST

    More TV Movies!!

    by Joe Buck

    I'm all for Galactica, but I'm afraid this will just be another poorly done TV to movie movie. Though who knows, once in awhile, like Adam's Family or Brady Bunch they turn out good. They just better have Cylons and Imperious Leader! I still have my Cylon Raider someplace, one of the early ones that fires before kids swallowed the "bullets" and they started molding them to the ships. News of Galactica, though, could presage the coming of the late 70's-early 80's TV movies, now that the 60's have (hopefully) been exhausted. Although with My Three Sons coming, can Patty Duke be just around the corner? Let's just get this over with quickly, bring on Sanford and Son, Automan, Greatest American Hero (actually that might not be a bad one), how bout Facts of Life done as an exploitation flick? Or with Shaft and other Blaxploitation remakes on the horizon they could do Good Times or Whats Happening. It's coming folks, just wait, in 5 or 10 years we'll be talking about Cheers or A-Team movies:)

  • March 17, 1999, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Facts of Life movie

    by Pope Buck 1

    I love it! I can see it now: "BOARDING SCHOOL GIRLS IN TROUBLE!"

  • March 17, 1999, 5:28 p.m. CST

    Get some Military Advisors!!!!!

    by TheDoctor

    First things first. Please get this new production a good pair of advisors from the navy and the airforce. Toss in a few nasa folks as well. Then sit down with some good SF writers from the deadtree world of writing. This would have have made WC a damn good movie - but once again - dumb assed writers/directors make a movie featuring a military and all I can say is these characters deserve to get killed. "Push that wreck off my landing deck" Escuse me? Every Navy carrier has rescue crews on standbye when there is a bird aloft. The cost to train a new piolot is several times the COST of the damn ships they fly. Even if they get layed up for a while. Someone above talked about "Not ripping off old TV/movies - but some something origional... bring a sci-fi book that hasn't yet had a movie treatment forward... etc" Well - "Starship troopers" Was a damn good book - and one with a Military force in it. The book had nothing to do with the movie - other then the title. So be careful what you ask for. My advice is they write a general story arch. When it comes for tactical stuff, run it by your advisors, then have that run past your science advisors, then have the writers plug that back into the story.

  • March 17, 1999, 6:32 p.m. CST


    by 20th Century Fox

    Yes BG was chessy (They should kill the Daggit in the first five minutes) but it had alot of depth that put it WAYYYY ahead of its time. And when you consider all the forces against it when it came out you see how good it really was. ST:TNG had it on EASY street compared to what BG had to face... P.S. WC was OK it did entertain me...

  • March 17, 1999, 7:04 p.m. CST

    Biblical/Historic Reference Tie-ins

    by Vincent

    I hope they do decide to make the Battlestar movie. Based on some of the info floating around regarding how the 13th "Lost Tribe" arrived at Earth (presumably on a Battlestar named Atlantis)- I can see how this could make for a good movie. What would be really great is if the plot maybe went along the lines of: 1) Battlestar Galactica is chased for years by Cylon fleet. 2) In 2nd season, it arrived at Earth, and they found that Earth was still too "primitive" to be able to defend itself against the Cylons, so they swung out of the Solar System to lure Cylon forces away from Earth system. 3) maybe the Galactica just takes off and hangs outside (within a light year or two) of the Earth system - hiding from Cylon fleet. In the meantime, the Cylons who chased them could accidentally stumble on and discover the Earth system and the whereabouts of the Galactica and decide that they can destroy Earth and Galactica in one large final swoop - but in order to do this, they need to call all or most of their main task forces to the Earth system. Maybe it takes about 20 to 30 years for this fleet to arrive - in the meantime, the Cylons and their fleets can have upgraded to new state of the art hardware for a snazzy high-tech look (this gives the movie artists the chance to tone up the special effects big time). 4) During the 20 or so years Galactica and its flock of escorts is hiding out, they can occasionally send small scout ships to check on Earth progress. During these missions, they also try to find out when and how the Earth folks arrived at Earth so long ago. Maybe they search libraries for ancient volumes or some such folklore. On their most recent trip, they discover that we are now in the late 1990's or maybe even early 2000's and that we have a world wide network in place (i.e. Internet). They use this as a resource, and it points them to some experts or maybe out of the mainstream archaeologists who have some clues and hints about Atlantis. They take this info (or maybe even confront the archaeologists) and take them and their data back to Galactica. 5) At the Galactica, using the available info, they piece together that the Atlantis was actually an ancient Battlestar/Colony Ship design - meaning that its primary function was first as a Colony ship and secondarily as a Battlestar. As a Colony ship, it was HUGE - maybe 10 times the size of the Galactica!!! in order to carry 100,000 or 1 million colonists to a world for colonization. Also, because of the distances that needed to be traveled it had huge engines and massive armaments for protection - basically even though of an outdated design, still a massive piece of firepower!. The research could also indicate that the Atlantis "sank beneath the waves" - this could imply that it is still on the Earth under the sea. Now, my take on this is that it could either have been stored in a HUGE undersea cavern hollowed out for the purpose of storage against the day when it might be needed again. The cavern could be under asea on EARTH, but my personal choice would be under the MARE IBRIUM (sp?) "sea" on the MOON!! 6) Using this info, the Galactica could try to locate the BattleStar Atlantis in the moon, and could locate it. It should be in fairly good shape since it would be adequately safe from meteors, etc. while buried in its cavern. Coincidentally, while performing long range surveys, they could also discover that there is a HUGE fleet of Cylon ships approaching the Earth solar system - perhaps only a month or two out. 7) Knowing that they cannot outrun this fleet and leave Earth to the mercy of the Cylons, the Galactica folks decide to try and get the Atlantis operational. But in order to do this, they are going to need lots of help. At this point, they should try to introduce themselves to the United Nations on Earth and explain the situation. Now they have the opportunity to get volunteers - they could train people to fly all the thousands of fighter craft that would be located on the Atlantis, and we could even have some primitive hyperorbital shuttle craft developed by NASA get into the fray (maybe acting as Earth defense craft while the Galactica and Atlantis fight it out with the main Cylon fleet in a higher orbit). Anyway, this could be a great leadin, and then maybe they could create a great space combat scenario with ships fighting it out on the moon, in deep space, in Earth orbit, and maybe even F16's and shuttle craft in Earth Orbit, and over the skies of Earth cities . Now that would be a great movie!

  • March 18, 1999, 11:20 a.m. CST

    Oh, sweet, stinky Galactica...

    by Jimmer72

    How can I be so torn? I, like most 8-year-olds at the time, loved Galactica (and G1980, for that matter). It wasn't until I got older and saw all the reruns on the Sci-Fi Channel that I realized that my beloved show was actually I gigantic heap of steaming daggit shit. And now I ask myself, do I honestly think that a big-screen version of BG will be any good? My answer: No. Do I want to see it anyway? HELL YEAH!!! BY YOUR COMMAND, BABY!!!

  • March 19, 1999, 12:11 p.m. CST


    by DAH66

    Those who don't remember the past are doomed to repeat it. Let's reflect. Hmmmm. Galactica 1980 was a dismal failure because it did not include the original cast and strayed to far from the initial BG concept. OK. That's an easy lesson to learn. But, wait. It looks like history is about to repeat itself. Who would've thought this could happen in Hollywood? Lesson number two. The science fiction epics that do best are the ones that have a strong 'guiding voice'. For example, Roddenbarry, Lucas, and JMS. I think Hatch could easily be added to this list. I met Mr. Hatch at a convention in Baltimore, MD. He was energetic, positive, and creative. He understood science fiction and what the fans would want to see. The success of his novels is PROOF that he can deliver the goods. Why would anyone want to pursue a Battlestar Galactica revival without his involvement? There are two main reasons why BG has endured over the years. One being the power of the original concept and the other being Mr. Hatch's extraordinary efforts to bring it back. It saddens me to think that Glen Larson and his associates may be able to exploit the years of hard work that Mr. Hatch has devoted to this revival. Hopefully passion and common sense will overcome the pursuit of the all mighty dollar. A pursuit that has green-lighted the production of such films as Barb Wire and Wing Commander. Well. That concludes today's lesson. Thanks.

  • March 19, 1999, 12:29 p.m. CST


    by Iridnith

    <<Wing Commander could not have been great because of the budget.>> REALLY?! Gee, thanks Grinch. I had no idea that budget was the sole deciding factor on this sort of thing. Gosh, I guess that means that the first Star Wars must really suck. I mean, it only cost about $10 million, and that was pretty low even for the time. Too bad, I liked that movie too. And hey, Waterworld must have been one of the greatest movies of all time! Thanks for pointing out that those of us who thought it was fairly lame are wrong!------ Okay, sarcasm aside, while a low budget would be a serious hurdle for a BG--or ANY sci-fi movie--to overcome, it hardly makes it impossible. Wing Commander makes a good example. Granted, the acting wasn't the greatest, but it, by itself, wouldn't have ruined the movie. And granted, the Kilrathi looked like they were made of that rubbery crap they use to make things like My Little Pony dolls, but again, that can be overlooked. The two BIGGEST problems with that movie could have been fixed WITHOUT raising the paltry budget all that much.------ First, the script should have been rewritten, almost from the ground up; but there are good writers out there who'd have been happy to do it for cheap, just in order to get into the business and have a script credit (and if you don't believe me, I happen to know several). The other problem, the editing, could have been better performed by a monkey with an exacto knife. Again, a better editor wouldn't have added all that much to the production costs. In other words, WC COULD have been great--even with the tiny budget, if only people had been willing to try. The same holds true--at least hypothetically, although quite possibly not in reality--for BG.

  • March 20, 1999, 3:35 p.m. CST

    Stop the bitching and think of making a great movie

    by Bhangram

    Assuming this movie isn't just hype, bluff and bullshit, I strongly urge Richard Hatch and Glen Larsen to bury their feud and collaborate on the movie. It seems from what Moyer said to AINT IT COOL NEWS, the producers are interested in continuity, so I think some of the original cast will be asked to be involved in some way. We want a great movie with some involvement from the original cast, so I hope both Hatch and Larsen will cut the bitching, and the original Apollo will be in this movie. Think of making a great movie, guys, and forget the ego war.

  • July 13, 2006, 8:23 a.m. CST

    A tax-evading Survivor winner?

    by Wolfpack

    God, how stupid does one have to be to not report a million won from Survivor?