Battlestar Galactica Forums

Syfy (ended 2010)

Hollywood Reporter: Larson "BG" Movie in the Works

  • Avatar of dad1153

    dad1153

    [1]Feb 20, 2009
    • member since: 06/14/05
    • level: 11
    • rank: Red Shirted Lt.
    • posts: 1,019

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3i6c21c5456af55219869af6584aeaa0c0

    Just as the acclaimed Sci Fi Channel series "Battlestar Galactica" enters its final episodes, Universal has quietly entered into negotiations with Glen A. Larson to write and produce a big-screen version of the property he created.

    The movie effort would have no connection to the series and would relaunch the story in a new medium. However, staples such as the characters Adama, Starbuck, and Baltar will remain.

    Universal had no comment.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of martymcflyjb

    martymcflyjb

    [2]Feb 20, 2009
    • member since: 06/17/05
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 318
    If it's from Larson, it will be crap. What a stupid idea. Do they really think they can top RDM's version?
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of BHSWorkstation

    BHSWorkstation

    [3]Feb 20, 2009
    • member since: 01/17/09
    • level: 4
    • rank: Thighmaster
    • posts: 35
    To quote my third favorite talking dog, "The sign says danger, Davey!"
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of scififan12921

    scififan12921

    [4]Feb 20, 2009
    • member since: 09/29/08
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 131
    This would be strange, especially since Larson has been a consultant on this series. Why oh why must the execs in Tinsletown mess with things? They will not be able to do a better job than this series!
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of martymcflyjb

    martymcflyjb

    [5]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 06/17/05
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 318

    As i understand it, Larson has not been involved with the show in any capacity, and actually doesn't care for it. The Consulting Producer credit is just a legal thing.

    So it makes sense that Larson would want his own shot, but I think it's a dumb idea destined for failure. The Knight Rider remake isn't exactly a hit. Larson's a hack.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of 123home123

    123home123

    [6]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 05/24/02
    • level: 55
    • rank: Bounty Dog
    • posts: 11,760
    Yeah, Glen Larson has not actively worked on the Sci Fi series. He was only given a "consulting producer" credit because Ronald Moore felt he deserved some notice for his work on the original series and the general outlines of some of the characters.

    Larson retained the rights to any BSG feature movies, which is why he could undertake such a project. This is also why both "Razor" and "The Plan" have to be shown on the Sci Fi Channel before they are released on DVD. Otherwise they could be considered straight-to-video "movie" releases that could be blocked by Larson. Caprica is a separate series, which is why the pilot can be released as a DVD before its television premiere.

    I'm not sure how much of an audience there will be for another Larson BSG. The Ronald Moore version (RDM) has now lasted for over 5 years, with a prequel on the way. It'll be tough for Larson to overcome the Emmy Awards, the Peabody Award, the Top Ten rating by the American Film Institute, and the no. 2 spot on Entertainment Weekly's list of the top 25 sci-fi movies or TV shows of the past 25 years. There are still a few diehard fans who still don't like the RDM version but many came around to the new show. Some of the people behind the Battlestar Wiki site were vocal critics of RDM before the new show had even aired, but obviously they changed their minds. Likewise, Richard Hatch had criticized the "reimagining" before signing on for the major role of Tom Zarek.

    Another handicap for Larson is working around the original sequel to the 1978 series, Galactica 1980. That poorly received and unsuccessful show was supposed to be a continuation of the original series, featuring some of the original actors (Lorne Greene, Dirk Benedict in one episode) and other characters (Boxey as a grown-up). Are they going to include the Super Scouts in the new Larson project? Or that child Dr. Z? The daggit? Or will they redo the pilot of the original series? I'm not sure what would be accomplished by copying the style and format of the original series. There have been many remakes in recent years that haven't gone so well because the new writers and producers didn't really bring much to the new projects (Lost in Space, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Knight Rider).

    I've also read about rumors that the producers of the original Stargate feature movie want to do a sequel that ignores the TV series completely. Now that really makes no sense at all. The vast majority of sci-fi fans think of the TV shows when they think about the Stargate franchise, not the original movie. I think the same goes for Battlestar Galactica. If Larson wants to go ahead with his project, more power to him. I won't flip out like some of the fans of the old series did when they started sending hate mail and even death threats to Katee Sackhoff just because she was playing a female Starbuck. That response sort of turned me off to the original series, even though I used to like it when I was younger. It's just a TV show, not a life-and-death crusade or a fundamentalist religion.

    If the movie does get released, I'll check out the reviews before deciding whether to watch it. Even if I end up enjoying it, it wouldn't mean that I would change my mind about the RDM version. The new BSG would still be a tremendous accomplishment and milestone in the history of modern sci-fi. A Larson BSG movie probably wouldn't have the budget of a Star Wars movie so I imagine it would probably turn out to be something like one of the Star Trek movies. Some of them were entertaining but a couple were mind-numbing or very mediocre. None of the Star Trek movies stand out as major achievements in the history of science fiction of the past 40 years. Nor did they have the popular impact that the Star Wars movies did, or even the Star Trek TV shows. Larson would probably avoid some of the harsher elements of his own story (the massacre and genocide at the hands of the Cylons, which lies at the very heart of even the original version), giving it the lighter feel of the Star Trek movies. It could be a moderate success, depending on the special effects budget but not a game-changing blockbuster.
    Edited on 02/21/2009 1:37am
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of ScnJedi

    ScnJedi

    [7]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 03/28/04
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 68

    Or it could be a fun Sunday afternoon popcorn movie. Until we see anything, we can't know for sure.

    Also, as much as it's hated, the best of the Trek movies so far is easily Generations.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of guyroy1971

    guyroy1971

    [8]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 04/18/08
    • level: 12
    • rank: Evil Bert
    • posts: 87
    sadly predictible. Movie industry always does this sort of thing. They are milking the success of BSG for all its worth, just like star trek. They will turn out a movie with ten sequels if people buy a ticket. Then when people are sick of it, they will move on like locust to the next idea.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of psychickiller

    psychickiller

    [9]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 07/30/04
    • level: 9
    • rank: Door Number 2
    • posts: 121
    Sounds like a stupid idea to me. Larson, go ahead and make something of your own, you non-creative bastard.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Daxx00004

    Daxx00004

    [10]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 02/05/07
    • level: 9
    • rank: Door Number 2
    • posts: 1,263
    psychickiller wrote:
    Sounds like a stupid idea to me. Larson, go ahead and make something of your own, you non-creative bastard.

    No offense but BSG is his own. Unless you were being sarcastic.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of my1sunshine

    my1sunshine

    [11]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 09/15/07
    • level: 12
    • rank: Evil Bert
    • posts: 349

    martymcflyjb wrote:
    If it's from Larson, it will be crap. What a stupid idea. Do they really think they can top RDM's version?

    I get the spirit of what you're saying, and to some extent I agree, but I don't really think it's neccesary to be THAT disrespectful, considering you're talking about the creator of Battlestar Galactica himself. We wouldn't even have this show if it wasn't for him.

    I was a big fan of the original, and they had some great storys. But you gotta take it for what it was, a product of the times. Everything was formulaic in the 70's... (Let's do a Western.. a disaster movie... a mystery, etc). And the people who gripe about the limited effects shots don't realise that it was the studio moneyhands that put a stop on the production of any new F/X. But some of the story ideas were great.. really groudbreaking for the time.

    Who knows what could happen now.

    Look, if people don't like the idea, they don't have to watch. But there's still a lot of people who want to see a resolution to the original. We're getting our ending. There never was one for the original. (Let's face it, Galactica 1980? Non Sequitor.)

    The smartest thing he can do is to have Richard Hatch in on the writing of the screenplay.

    I'll admit, Glen had trouble for a long time getting his writing pen out of the Seventies. We're a lot smarter, storytelling wise. Maybe Glen is too. And people who doubt his talent as a whole would do well to remember the Glen wrote the outline for Galactica in the 60's.

    Yeah. It was called Adam's Ark back then. Based on concepts postulated in the world famous book "Chariots Of The Gods?" In the 60's, man! Who else was thinking about ideas like that in the sixties? (Well, with the chemicals going around back then, probably a lot of people actually, lol). But how many people would actually try to get it sold during the time of the original Star Trek. That's balls.

    So, given what Ron Moore and David have achieved, maybe it isn't the smartest idea.. but then again.. maybe it's very smart. And it's funny getting a lot of deja vu reading these comments. Seem to remember a lot of the same additude round about 2003. Hmmm.

    Edited on 02/21/2009 10:23am
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of MyManD

    MyManD

    [12]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 10/24/04
    • level: 5
    • rank: Caveman Lawyer
    • posts: 210
    I've said this elsewhere, but this is akin to WB taking the Batman franchise away from Nolan after Dark Knight and giving it back to Joel Schumacher.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Hungry_Homer111

    Hungry_Homer111

    [13]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 11/22/05
    • level: 26
    • rank: Bow Flex
    • posts: 5,528
    I thought that the original series, while nowhere near as amazing as this show is, was pretty good for its time. It did have the same kind of cheesy feeling that was in the original Star Trek, but had some good moments, and was better than I had expected. I don't know about a new movie though. I mean, it could work, but now I'm so used to this show that it's hard to think of taking BSG back to its roots, and forgetting everything that has happened in the new series. It would be interesting to see, and I may give it a chance if it happens, but I wouldn't be as excited for it as I would for something based around the new BSG (like the announced movie or Caprica).
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of my1sunshine

    my1sunshine

    [14]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 09/15/07
    • level: 12
    • rank: Evil Bert
    • posts: 349
    Homer, I absolutely agree with you, on all points.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of martymcflyjb

    martymcflyjb

    [15]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 06/17/05
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 318
    ScnJedi wrote:

    Also, as much as it's hated, the best of the Trek movies so far is easily Generations.

    I'm surprised to see you say that. I thought I was the only one who liked Generations. I'd place it 2nd after Wrath of Khan.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of MrBovineOrdure

    MrBovineOrdure

    [16]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 06/03/07
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 411

    I must be alone in thinking "Undiscovered Country" was the best Trek movie.

    I wonder though how many TV shows of the Original BSG's era were packaged as movies released to the theaters and did as well.

    The original version's primary limitations were the same as any other great SCI-FI show of any era. Budget and the narrow-minded studio heads.

    Mr BO

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of psychickiller

    psychickiller

    [17]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 07/30/04
    • level: 9
    • rank: Door Number 2
    • posts: 121
    Daxx00004 wrote:
    psychickiller wrote:
    Sounds like a stupid idea to me. Larson, go ahead and make something of your own, you non-creative bastard.

    No offense but BSG is his own. Unless you were being sarcastic.


    I wasn't aware he's the one who created the BSG universe in the first place. I take back my words, and I'll put now my invisible hat of shame.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of 123home123

    123home123

    [18]Feb 21, 2009
    • member since: 05/24/02
    • level: 55
    • rank: Bounty Dog
    • posts: 11,760
    I thought maybe you were referring to the legal dispute between George Lucas and Larson over the supposed similarities between Star Wars and the original BSG. I think Larson prevailed in that suit.

    Others noted the similarities between BJ and the Bear (1979) and the Clint Eastwood movie Every Which Way But Loose (1978). But Larson isn't the only person in Hollywood to follow trends and "influences" too closely.

    I don't want to turn this into a Star Trek movie thread but I thought Generations was pretty mediocre. Khan, The Voyage Home, The Undiscovered Country and First Contact were much better.

    Anyway, I'm not going to pre-judge any Larson movie. I have a pretty good idea of what his approach is going to be, based on all of his television work and his statements about the new BSG. His movie is likely to be far more "family friendly" even though it will be on the big screen where he could actually go further with the material. Larson generally doesn't like to go into extreme violence, heavy dramatic situations or moral ambiguities. This is not a criticism, just an observation. I certainly don't think every movie or TV show needs violence, intense drama, political intrigue, personal conflict or moral ambiguity. It's just that I think the approach worked pretty well with the new BSG, particularly because of the violent event at the center of the BSG franchise, the Cylon-led genocide.

    Some sci-fi movies have done very well with a lighter approach to serious issues like murder and tyranny like the Star Wars series (Darth Vader and the oppressive Empire). The Terminator movies focused on action but there was also a depressing story at its center and those did extremely well. Other successful sci-fi movies have followed a dark approach, like the Alien movies and Blade Runner. Larson is pretty old these days so it remains to be seen how hands on he will be or whether some "assistant" will be the true creative force behind any new movie.
    Edited on 02/21/2009 6:40pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Hungry_Homer111

    Hungry_Homer111

    [19]Feb 22, 2009
    • member since: 11/22/05
    • level: 26
    • rank: Bow Flex
    • posts: 5,528
    my1sunshine wrote:
    The smartest thing he can do is to have Richard Hatch in on the writing of the screenplay.


    I was just going to post this same thing, without realizing that somebody said it already.

    I agree though, because Richard Hatch is one of the few things that connects the two shows. And he would be a very good addition based on what I've seen of his work on this show. If they do have him in the movie, I wonder what role he would play. Right now, I'm thinking Baltar, partly because he does a great job at playing that kind of evil character (again, as seen on here), and I think that he kind of looks similar (in that "it's a movie remake of an old show, so you'll never get an exact match for the original actor so you'll have to settle" sort of way).

    I am curious to see if this would be like a continuation/conclusion to the original series, but with different actors playing the roles, or if it will be like another reimagining of the show, but more in the spirit of the original series.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of my1sunshine

    my1sunshine

    [20]Feb 22, 2009
    • member since: 09/15/07
    • level: 12
    • rank: Evil Bert
    • posts: 349

    To tell you the truth, Homer.. if you're gonna do it, then do it.

    Confirm which of the actors are available and willing, and assemble as many members of the original as possible, act like G1980 dosent exist, and do the best damned story you can, continuing the original series.

    I won't watch it otherwise. It MUST be a continuation.

    The re-make has been D.U.N. done! Period. No one could do it better. And he's an idiot if he even tries.

    It has to be a continuation of the original, or there's no reason to do it.

    Edited on 02/22/2009 5:58pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.