sf/f TV development news - 2013

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Yeah, calling nuBSG "a remake in name only" doesn't make sense. It was a remake, a reimagining, and a reboot, all.

I meant the GINO phenomenon - Galactice In Name Only, that kind of thing. I keep running across people using that term (Abrams = TINO, etc) so I was under the impression that it was more familiar than apparaently it is.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Yeah, calling nuBSG "a remake in name only" doesn't make sense. It was a remake, a reimagining, and a reboot, all.

I meant the GINO phenomenon - Galactice In Name Only, that kind of thing. I keep running across people using that term (Abrams = TINO, etc) so I was under the impression that it was more familiar than apparaently it is.

No I got you, I just don't think nuBSG really qualifies as that. In that case certainly, it's a misnomer, a spin applied by the detractors. I have no interest in perpetuating that misapplied label. Same with nuTrek.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

So you think nuBSG is an accurate and faithful remake? If it were, it wouldnt be nearly as good. Hurray for GINO.

The TINO stuff is ludicrious, of course.

 

[Harvey]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

It's a remake, not a photocopy. What would it have to do to be considered "faithful" in your eyes?

 

[Kegg]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^
I think Temis is at least partly referencing how upset fans of the original Battlestar were about the new show being very different tonally and so on (hence them using the term 'Galactica In Name Only'). I think we could see a repeat of that with Blake's 7.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

No Temis, what I mean is that being "faithful", whatever that means, isn't a condition of being a remake in the first place, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^
I think Temis is at least partly referencing how upset fans of the original Battlestar were about the new show being very different tonally and so on (hence them using the term 'Galactica In Name Only'). I think we could see a repeat of that with Blake's 7.

Yes. Doesnt everyone know about the Stardoe, GINO, etc hysteria that accompanied Ron Moore's remake from the very first? His version of BSG was vastly more of a departure from the original than Abrams' Trek.

Moore didn't make any attempt to recreate the colorful-adventure tone of the original. Instead, he went as far from that tone as I could imagine. And he changed many details but the tonal change was the big thing.

I think it was fully justified, but I understood why fans of the original were outraged. By contrast, Abrams stuck to the tone and spirit of Trek, and only changed what he had to, in order to create a funancially viable big budget Hollywood movie.

Abrams wanted to further the existing vision of Trek, but Moore superimposed his own vision on BSG. My hunch is that B7 will be more of a BSG situation because the show's name and fanbase is probably similar to where Moore found BSG - nobody is going to be highly motivated to stay true to the original.

No Temis, what I mean is that being "faithful", whatever that means, isn't a condition of being a remake in the first place, as far as I'm concerned.

You mean, remakes dont need to be faithful? I agree. I think both Moore and Abrams were right be faithful and unfaithful respectively. I dont care about faithfulness, I care that the results are good.

But the True Believers don't think like me, and there are always True Believers, apparently for everything. They've been slamming Moore, they've been slamming Abrams, and they'll slam this new version if B7, I'd bet money on it.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Or, you could just peruse this handy infographic that explains what reboots are good, bad, likely and unlikely. Star Trek reboot on TV? Likely and good! Everyone agress, right?

 

[RJDiogenes]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^^ Depends on the results, which are unlikely to be good at this point. And I disagree that Abrams was in any way faithful to the tone and spirit of Trek. Quite the opposite, actually.

And wasn't Moore a proponent of GINO himself? I believe he has said that he wished he wasn't stuck with recycling the name and terminology from the original BSG.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

And wasn't Moore a proponent of GINO himself? I believe he has said that he wished he wasn't stuck with recycling the name and terminology from the original BSG.

How would that make him a proponent of GINO? Are you saying that it wasn't Moore's idea to remake Galactica in the first place? And, how does that explain this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_Six_(Battlestar_Galactica)#Gina_Inviere]:

Series creator Ron Moore says in the DVD commentary for "Pegasus", the name "Gina" is directly meant as a jab against critics of the reimagined series who use the derogatory term "GINO" (Galactica In Name Only) to describe it.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Well, then, perhaps I heard wrong. I've never paid much attention to the show. I could have sworn I read an article where he was unhappy to be stuck with the baggage from the original BSG-- I assumed from the context that it was forced upon him by Sciffy.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Well, then, perhaps I heard wrong. I've never paid much attention to the show. I could have sworn I read an article where he was unhappy to be stuck with the baggage from the original BSG-- I assumed from the context that it was forced upon him by Sciffy.

Even if that's true, a remake need not retain everything from the original. So, in and of itself being forced by "overlords" to retain more material than might be preferred would be irrelevant to whether the project was, at heart, a RINO.

Said another way, touching other bases doesn't cancel out the presence of a core.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Yeah, calling nuBSG "a remake in name only" doesn't make sense. It was a remake, a reimagining, and a reboot, all.

Yep. Exacty so. I've seen most of the original Galactica and all of the remake, and the notion that Moore's version paid only lip service to Larson's is a non-starter.

It helps, of course, to actually pay enough attention to a thing to critique it with some accuracy, if one's determined to critique at all.

 

[doubleohfive]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Well, then, perhaps I heard wrong. I've never paid much attention to the show. I could have sworn I read an article where he was unhappy to be stuck with the baggage from the original BSG-- I assumed from the context that it was forced upon him by Sciffy.

Seriously? After all this time and all the negativity you've thrown at the re-imagining, you "never paid much attention to the show" ?

You don't think it's arrogant or well, silly to judge something based on whatever minuscule attention you did pay it?

How in the world can you make an informed opinion on something if you haven't paid any attention to it? That'd be like me telling you your writing is shit because I don't like the cover art of your book. (Which I'd never do, by the way, because if I were to comment on any of your writing, I'd have taken the time to read it first.)

Really disappointed in this.

It helps, of course, to actually pay enough attention to a thing to critique it with some accuracy, if one's determined to critique at all.

Precisely. If only more people online who are so hell bent on bitching about stuff would follow this simple advice, we'd have less stupidity to sift through.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Well, then, perhaps I heard wrong. I've never paid much attention to the show. I could have sworn I read an article where he was unhappy to be stuck with the baggage from the original BSG-- I assumed from the context that it was forced upon him by Sciffy.

Even if that's true, a remake need not retain everything from the original. So, in and of itself being forced by "overlords" to retain more material than might be preferred would be irrelevant to whether the project was, at heart, a RINO.

Said another way, touching other bases doesn't cancel out the presence of a core.

Nevertheless, he was obviously not a fan of the original and wanted nothing to do with it-- you would think he'd be happy to have it be called a RINO.

Well, then, perhaps I heard wrong. I've never paid much attention to the show. I could have sworn I read an article where he was unhappy to be stuck with the baggage from the original BSG-- I assumed from the context that it was forced upon him by Sciffy.

Seriously? After all this time and all the negativity you've thrown at the re-imagining, you "never paid much attention to the show" ?

You don't think it's arrogant or well, silly to judge something based on whatever minuscule attention you did pay it?

How in the world can you make an informed opinion on something if you haven't paid any attention to it?

Because I watched the mini-series, the first half of the first season, the finale and various bits and pieces along the way. What I didn't do was follow all the behind-the-scenes trivia.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

‘Babylon 5′ Creator For Pandemic series for ABC in development

The untitled project is described as a high-octane pandemic thriller that combines closed-ended procedural and serialized elements

ABC has put in development a pandemic thriller drama from Overbrook Entertainment, the company co-founded by Will Smith and James Lassiter.

Lassiter and Overbrook partner Jada Pinkett Smith are executive producing the project, written/executive produced by Babylon 5 creator J. Michael Straczynski and financed by Georgeville Television

Like with all Georgeville projects, the ABC drama has a script-to-series commitment, meaning that if ABC likes the script, that will trigger a 13-episode series order.

I think a pandemic offers a lot of stories and multiple characters' viewpoints like in Contagion. A 13-episode series would allow for great character development and thriller-like aspects like The Killing series.
I think if it gets the greenlight then the pilot won't feel so standalone and instead introduce a lot more characters.

also in the genre in preproduction right now TNT has a pilot shooting:

The Last Ship, with Michael Bay directing, will follow crewmembers of a naval destroyer who wind up among the last survivors on Earth after a virus decimates the population.

I guess ABC wants to get in on this genre. I have a feeling though TNT will do it better.

related:
the last pandemic film/TV series which was realistic but not great. I loved the music though.
"Contagion" virus thriller dir. by Steven Soderbergh

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^^ Depends on the results, which are unlikely to be good at this point. And I disagree that Abrams was in any way faithful to the tone and spirit of Trek. Quite the opposite, actually.

Well there's no point to arguing about that, since its obvious to me that Abrams was true to the spirit of Trek, that Moore was not true to the spirit of original BSG, and that both decisions were the correct one. But in the end, the only thing that really matters is, were the results good?

But by "results," if you mean B7, why couldnt the results be perfectly good, regardless of whether its true to the spirit, tone, or canon of the original?

 

[doubleohfive]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

Well, then, perhaps I heard wrong. I've never paid much attention to the show. I could have sworn I read an article where he was unhappy to be stuck with the baggage from the original BSG-- I assumed from the context that it was forced upon him by Sciffy.

Even if that's true, a remake need not retain everything from the original. So, in and of itself being forced by "overlords" to retain more material than might be preferred would be irrelevant to whether the project was, at heart, a RINO.

Said another way, touching other bases doesn't cancel out the presence of a core.

Nevertheless, he was obviously not a fan of the original and wanted nothing to do with it-- you would think he'd be happy to have it be called a RINO.

Well, then, perhaps I heard wrong. I've never paid much attention to the show. I could have sworn I read an article where he was unhappy to be stuck with the baggage from the original BSG-- I assumed from the context that it was forced upon him by Sciffy.

Seriously? After all this time and all the negativity you've thrown at the re-imagining, you "never paid much attention to the show" ?

You don't think it's arrogant or well, silly to judge something based on whatever minuscule attention you did pay it?

How in the world can you make an informed opinion on something if you haven't paid any attention to it?

Because I watched the mini-series, the first half of the first season, the finale and various bits and pieces along the way. What I didn't do was follow all the behind-the-scenes trivia.

Yet you complained about the series well beyond the end of the first season, complained about the show for years after you stopped watching it. I even remember at one point (perhaps more than once) you referred to Edward James Olmos as "old leatherface."

How do you honestly expect people to take you seriously?

 

[doubleohfive]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^^ Depends on the results, which are unlikely to be good at this point. And I disagree that Abrams was in any way faithful to the tone and spirit of Trek. Quite the opposite, actually.

Well there's no point to arguing about that, since its obvious to me that Abrams was true to the spirit of Trek, that Moore was not true to the spirit of original BSG, and that both decisions were the correct one. But in the end, the only thing that really matters is, were the results good?

Yes, they were. That's an opinion of course, but it's one backed by the overall success of each production, be it financially (especially in the case of Trek 2009) or critically (especially in the case of nuBSG.)

 

[RJDiogenes]

Re: sf/f TV development news - 2012

^^ Depends on the results, which are unlikely to be good at this point. And I disagree that Abrams was in any way faithful to the tone and spirit of Trek. Quite the opposite, actually.

Well there's no point to arguing about that, since its obvious to me that Abrams was true to the spirit of Trek, that Moore was not true to the spirit of original BSG, and that both decisions were the correct one. But in the end, the only thing that really matters is, were the results good?

But by "results," if you mean B7, why couldnt the results be perfectly good, regardless of whether its true to the spirit, tone, or canon of the original?

No, I don't know anything about B7. I was referring to your comment about a new ST, which is more likely to follow the tone and spirit of the movie rather than the original. By tone and spirit, I'm referring to the original being a thoughtful attempt at adult SF which dealt with social and humanistic issues, as opposed to the movie which was a shallow action-fest that only brought up the concept of ethics in order to mock them.

Yet you complained about the series well beyond the end of the first season, complained about the show for years after you stopped watching it. I even remember at one point (perhaps more than once) you referred to Edward James Olmos as "old leatherface."

I never complained about it, I criticized it and brought it up as an example of certain trends in pop culture. Obviously, I've seen more than enough of it to be able to discuss it (especially given that even its supporters agree that it is what it is even if they disagree about the quality). As for "Old Leatherface," have you seen the guy? And what does that have to do with the quality of the show? Which, by the way, I did not bring up in this thread.

How do you honestly expect people to take you seriously?

I continue to have faith in the Human species, no matter how unwarranted.