Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Archive for discussions from 2009. Please post new discussions in the appropriate forum.

Moderators: Matthew, neps, Michael Pajaro

flemmo
Rookie
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 12:01 pm

Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by flemmo » Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:23 pm

Slightly old news this, but here is a quote from DigitalSpy.co.uk
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/cult/a14754 ... ctica.html

Universal has reportedly started discussions with Glen A. Larson to make a film version of hit science fiction TV show Battlestar Galactica.

The movie script would not be related to the revived show in its final episodes on the Sci Fi Channel, but instead be based on the 1978 original that aired on ABC, The Hollywood Reporter claims.

It is believed that the adaptation from writer-producer Larson will still include major characters Adama, Starbuck, and Baltar.

Universal refused to comment on the rumours.

Last year, the Sci Fi Channel confirmed the commissioning of Caprica, a prequel series set around 50 years before the start of its version of Battlestar Galactica.


Does anyone know if there is any truth in this? If Glen is focusing on Battlestar Galactica, does that mean Knight Rider isn't going to happen at all now?

User avatar
Victor Kros
FLAG Operative
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:10 am
antispam: No
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 1982
Location: Knight Manor

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by Victor Kros » Wed Mar 18, 2009 6:14 am

Yes the article is true,

Both Knight Rider: The Motion Picture and Battlestar Galactica: The Motion Picture are in development by Glen. Knight Rider is further along at the moment. It is believed scripts for both projects will also be written by him and will involve multi-picture deals.

=VK=
:dash:

User avatar
rwmu
Operative
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:44 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: City of Wulfruna

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by rwmu » Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:42 pm

I'm guessing it will rely on the money men as too which comes first, and since the reimagined version of Galactica has been huge I'm of the opinin Battlestar is more likely to be their sights than Knight Rider for now.

Shame really but even more so the usual money makes the world go round, and the cameras too.
Είναι καλύτερο να θεωρηθεί ως ανόητος, από να ανοιχτεί το στόμα σας και να αφαιρεθεί όλη η αμφιβολία.

User avatar
DavidKnight
Rookie
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:02 pm

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by DavidKnight » Wed Mar 18, 2009 4:43 pm

Victor Kros wrote:Yes the article is true,

Both Knight Rider: The Motion Picture and Battlestar Galactica: The Motion Picture are in development by Glen. Knight Rider is further along at the moment. It is believed scripts for both projects will also be written by him and will involve multi-picture deals.

=VK=
:dash:


I thaught that the KR movie's script is already written. Glen sent a video message at KnightCon07 and showed the copy of the script. Or did he decide to write a new one because of the new series?

User avatar
Victor Kros
FLAG Operative
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:10 am
antispam: No
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 1982
Location: Knight Manor

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by Victor Kros » Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:54 pm

DavidKnight wrote:
Victor Kros wrote:Yes the article is true,

Both Knight Rider: The Motion Picture and Battlestar Galactica: The Motion Picture are in development by Glen. Knight Rider is further along at the moment. It is believed scripts for both projects will also be written by him and will involve multi-picture deals.

=VK=
:dash:


I thaught that the KR movie's script is already written. Glen sent a video message at KnightCon07 and showed the copy of the script. Or did he decide to write a new one because of the new series?


- Glen did write the first complete draft of the KR movie script before the WGA strike. Since the airing of the new series, things had to be changed in order to keep the motion picture seperate from what NBC is doing with the television show - Glen is currently working on the third revision of the motion picture script.

I can tell you the story gets even better with every new pass.

=VK=
:dash:

User avatar
rwmu
Operative
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:44 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: City of Wulfruna

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by rwmu » Thu Mar 19, 2009 3:55 pm

I think the run away success of Battlestar will give the money to the Battlestar Movie, shame really its about time a decent version of Knight Rider was done. But like the other versions it will die a death. Well at least we have the original and best, they can't take that off us.
Είναι καλύτερο να θεωρηθεί ως ανόητος, από να ανοιχτεί το στόμα σας και να αφαιρεθεί όλη η αμφιβολία.

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by FuzzieDice » Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:09 pm

The '78 Cylons (not the CGI Razor ones) ROCKED!!! :)

User avatar
knightendo77
Operative
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:10 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by knightendo77 » Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:11 pm

I actually think KR would come first, as BSG has enjoyed much more success around the world in its new form and with a new series about to start (Caprica) I don't think Universal will be in any rush to make a film based on the older BSG which failed to make it to a second season. If these rumours are true and we could have a version of KR on TV and a different one in the cinema, and the same with BSG... well, personally, I think Universal would be silly to do so. They should capitalise on the success of the two series (KR and BSG) and run with them. Once they're both over and no more spin-offs are being made then concentrate on movie versions of the older shows.

It'd be like releasing a cinema movie sequel to the original Stargate film a few years into the TV series' life. The TV series ended up being phenomenally successful (TEN YEARS!! :D) and has produced one spin-off already and another is on the way, to have released a cinema sequel of the original film during those 10 years and have had nothing to do with the series would have been stupid in my book. I know the Terminator series might get away with it, but with the way the TV series is going, having two different versions of the franchise going at once isn't turning out so good for them and I think the cinema films will continue for a long time to come. Of course, I feel it's vice versa with the TV series of KR and BSG, but this is all just my opinion, let's see what the future holds.

Personally, they should wait.
knightendo77
"I'm a Goofy Goober."

I'm on Bebo - knightendo_phil

User avatar
rwmu
Operative
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:44 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: City of Wulfruna

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by rwmu » Wed Mar 25, 2009 4:10 pm

Lets see

Majorly Succesful TV show vs Entertainly but in all honestly a failure TV Show

Hypothetically Speaking I'm a producer with a multi-million pound budget where am I going to put the money...

As I've said I'd love to see KITT driving majestically across the big screen but its not going to happen right now, BSG is going to come first simple matter of money.
Είναι καλύτερο να θεωρηθεί ως ανόητος, από να ανοιχτεί το στόμα σας και να αφαιρεθεί όλη η αμφιβολία.

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by FuzzieDice » Wed Mar 25, 2009 5:55 pm

It would be nice to get a KR first. Especially now. I do remember some time ago that Richard Hatch wanted to make a BSG movie and Eric Meltson (sp?) created a new Cylon Centurion for the project (similar to the original but with some differences, nothing CGI though - again all costumed). I don't know why that never happened though.

But anyway, I think we'll get whatever Glen gives us and I for one will be happy either way, being I enjoyed both shows.

User avatar
knightendo77
Operative
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:10 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by knightendo77 » Wed Mar 25, 2009 7:47 pm

FuzzieDice wrote:It would be nice to get a KR first. Especially now. I do remember some time ago that Richard Hatch wanted to make a BSG movie and Eric Meltson (sp?) created a new Cylon Centurion for the project (similar to the original but with some differences, nothing CGI though - again all costumed). I don't know why that never happened though.

But anyway, I think we'll get whatever Glen gives us and I for one will be happy either way, being I enjoyed both shows.


Richard was originally wanting to do a continuation of the original show before the new reimagining, but once he saw the quality of the finished product he became involved with it, becoming a regular on the new show.

New BSG is one of my all-time fave shows, looking back on the 70's one is difficult as we're talking about the genocide of an entire race and yet it was still campy and daft. Just didn't sit well with me and I can see why it only lasted one season. After the sucess of the new show, to do a movie based on the original is daft in itself, in my opinion.
knightendo77
"I'm a Goofy Goober."

I'm on Bebo - knightendo_phil

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by FuzzieDice » Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:43 pm

Well, I loved the Cylons, and missed them, especially Lucifer in the new series.

As for the seasons, there actually was technically 2 seasons because they brought it back as "Galactica 1980" in 1980 but that didn't only last a few episodes anyway. So you could say 1.5 seasons, maybe.

TRIVIA: William Daniels was in the Galactica 1980 2-part episode "The Night the Cylons Landed" and played the radio station manager dressed as a clown for Halloween! His reaction to first seeing the Cylon is priceless! Especially since knowing 2 years later he'd be playing KITT! LOL!

BSG (even the old version) still has a large following. And folks making old school Cylon costumes. Me being into robots, I'd love to make a bi-pedal Cylon Centurion! But that would take a LOT of work. LOL! I still have ideas though... :)

As for a KR movie, I was under the impression the movie was to be a retelling of the original? With a different car for KITT? I forgot now. LOL! But it'd be nice to see a KR movie. My concern is that now with the Mustang being thought of as KITT as well, adding a third car might be a bit confusing? Dunno. Maybe, maybe not.

Funny thing happened to me today. One of my neighbors in my building has a friend/visitor who has a Mustang and it LOOKS like a Shelby GT500. But I didn't get too close a look as I walked past as I didn't want to look like a dweeb. :) The car was all red and I swear if they painted it black and put stripes on it, it'd be KITT! Idle of the engine sounded cool, too. Though I don't think it's the high-performance engine but couldn't really tell from a warmed up idle.

User avatar
Victor Kros
FLAG Operative
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:10 am
antispam: No
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 1982
Location: Knight Manor

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by Victor Kros » Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:43 am

I can say this much. Knight Rider: The Motion Picture is in its 3rd script revision now. There is no script for BSG as of yet so when it comes to which movie is going to be made first, I would wager Knight Rider is further along. Studios however can also be the great equalizer and when it comes to motion pictures, Universal gets things done faster than The Weinstein Company.

Another project on the fast track to the silver screen is The Fall Guy - casting is already being considered but I can't tell you who is in the lead for Colt Stevens. ;)

=VK=
:dash:

User avatar
knightendo77
Operative
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:10 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by knightendo77 » Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:38 am

FuzzieDice wrote:Funny thing happened to me today. One of my neighbors in my building has a friend/visitor who has a Mustang and it LOOKS like a Shelby GT500. But I didn't get too close a look as I walked past as I didn't want to look like a dweeb. :) The car was all red and I swear if they painted it black and put stripes on it, it'd be KITT! Idle of the engine sounded cool, too. Though I don't think it's the high-performance engine but couldn't really tell from a warmed up idle.


I'm not really a "car" person (or "petrolhead" as Top Gear puts it lol), but the Ford Mustang does sound absolutely fantastic doesn't it? :) I don't know what it is about it that gets me excited but that car is just awesome and will forever be KITT to me now :)

Victor Kros wrote:Another project on the fast track to the silver screen is The Fall Guy - casting is already being considered but I can't tell you who is in the lead for Colt Stevens. ;)


As long as they have the theme tune (and not some daft new rock or dance version of it lol) I'll be a happy bunny :)
knightendo77
"I'm a Goofy Goober."

I'm on Bebo - knightendo_phil

User avatar
rwmu
Operative
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:44 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: City of Wulfruna

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by rwmu » Thu Mar 26, 2009 4:35 pm

Studios are the only equaliser, without them nothing will get made unless they think money can be made from the product, and unless something astouding happens we are going to be deprived of the chance of a Knight Rider movie for at least 5 years. Battlestar on the other hand is riding high due to the success of the TV version so it will look good to the studios for a sale certainty.

Fall Gut The Movie? Scraping the barrel comes to mind, I assume its going to be a comedy like Starsky and Hutch.
Είναι καλύτερο να θεωρηθεί ως ανόητος, από να ανοιχτεί το στόμα σας και να αφαιρεθεί όλη η αμφιβολία.

User avatar
knightendo77
Operative
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:10 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by knightendo77 » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:30 pm

rwmu wrote:Studios are the only equaliser, without them nothing will get made unless they think money can be made from the product, and unless something astouding happens we are going to be deprived of the chance of a Knight Rider movie for at least 5 years. Battlestar on the other hand is riding high due to the success of the TV version so it will look good to the studios for a sale certainty.

Fall Gut The Movie? Scraping the barrel comes to mind, I assume its going to be a comedy like Starsky and Hutch.


Yes the reimagining of BSG is riding high (and so it should, it's fantastic!) so a movie based on that makes sense... a movie based on the failed version, well.... no thanks.
knightendo77
"I'm a Goofy Goober."

I'm on Bebo - knightendo_phil

User avatar
Victor Kros
FLAG Operative
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:10 am
antispam: No
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 1982
Location: Knight Manor

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by Victor Kros » Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:56 am

I'm going to state this one more time. The BSG motion picture WILL NOT be based on the Moore/Eick television version of Battlestar Galactica. It will be a re-imagining of the original classic series Glen created. This is what Glen has chosen to do with his motion picture rights and quite frankly I find the original "cheesy" Battlestar Galactica a lot more entertaining than the dead end drama heavy predecessor that followed.

I like Starbuck being a ladies man, not a lady turned into a man. I like to laugh, I like to see walking toasters shimmering and clanking across the screen. I like seeing real relationships based on trust and honor, not being stuck in a frame of mind where no one can be trusted and every hero has to have a dark side to them.

I like liner storytelling. I like to explore a world where clones aren't a focal point. I like my Cylons to be evil and my heroes to be heroic. I love seeing blazing space battles over courtroom/barracks drama. I like HUMOR, I like HEART. I like my heroes on Galactica to be in unique UNIFORMS not Brooks Brother's suits. I like the technology to be otherworldly, not common place.

Clearly there are people out there who liked what Moore created but to consistantly condemn the original series is disrespectful. Glen did what he desired to do at the time and worked with tools he had to work with and he will do it again. People need to have more respect for the original source material and stop fixating on what they are told is a definative vision.

Moore and Eick are out of ideas, they can't go forward they can only cling to going back with Caprica. In the end for all their talk about how much they expanded Galactica and whatnot, in the end moving forward they resorted to using Glen's original ideas and that continues to be a testament to how much of a visionary Glen is.

They had their run and a successful one it was. Clearly they didn't hurt the property and kept it strong but Battlestar Galactica does not begin and end with them. Not to mention that most of their ideas were stolen from another friend of Glen, Tom DeSanto...a man who has created two of the top grossing movie franchises of our time - X-Men and Transformers.

Glen A. Larson created Battlestar Galactica, not Ronald Moore or Eick.

I look forward to seeing what the future holds where humor and heart return to a galaxy in turmoil that desperately needs it.

=VK=
:dash:

User avatar
rwmu
Operative
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:44 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: City of Wulfruna

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by rwmu » Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:43 am

I like both versions they sit happily side by side on the DVD shelf as do the novels relating all three versions (Original, Richards Continuation and Reimagined).

I think the touble is we have had so much reality TV and gritty soaps shoved down our necks over the recent years all TV has become like it even when its drama. For now I'm afraid the idea of Heroic Good guys and Evil Villians is on the decline.

Hopefully either the BSG Movie or the KR Movie can change that and put real heros and real villians on the screen. I think a new BSG will effects and camera work like the new version and the story and heart of the original would be amazing up on the big screen.

Just out of curiosity what ideas did the New BSG team steal from Tom DeSanto? I've seen the movies he's produced but don't see the connections, then again I might be just been a bit thick.
Είναι καλύτερο να θεωρηθεί ως ανόητος, από να ανοιχτεί το στόμα σας και να αφαιρεθεί όλη η αμφιβολία.

User avatar
knightendo77
Operative
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:10 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by knightendo77 » Sat Mar 28, 2009 10:20 am

If the movie proves me wrong I'll be a happy chicken Victor ;) I just didn't really like the original, but that's just my personal opinion. The makers of the new series have always stated their love of the original and how it was Glen's story. For the mini-series they even put up one of his alias names alongside Moore's, as Moore said himself it was Glen's story.

Basically, please don't think that I'm saying the ones who made the new series disrespect the old one, it's the exact opposite. Nor am I saying people have to choose one of the other, my girlfriend's mum's fiance (lol) loves both versions and owns both versions.

I loved the way the new series treated the story, making it a very real situation. This, and the way it was filmed (CGI included) helped bring in people who don't like sci-fi, as they saw it as a very real drama instead, and it had plenty of light moments because the characters were so 3-dimensional you felt like you knew them and so it was very easy for them to make us laugh with very little. Stargate managed that very well too, as did the War Of The Worlds series. Again, just my opinion.

A lot of prequels have been made in both movie-form and on the TV (Babylon 5 did it a long time ago and seemed to start a trend, on the TV anyway) and I believe Caprica shall continue to expand upon the universe created in fascinating ways.

Even if the new show didn't exist, I just didn't like the original personally, I tried but it didn't appeal.
knightendo77
"I'm a Goofy Goober."

I'm on Bebo - knightendo_phil

User avatar
Victor Kros
FLAG Operative
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:10 am
antispam: No
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 1982
Location: Knight Manor

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by Victor Kros » Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:12 pm

rwmu wrote:I like both versions they sit happily side by side on the DVD shelf as do the novels relating all three versions (Original, Richards Continuation and Reimagined).

I think the touble is we have had so much reality TV and gritty soaps shoved down our necks over the recent years all TV has become like it even when its drama. For now I'm afraid the idea of Heroic Good guys and Evil Villians is on the decline.

Hopefully either the BSG Movie or the KR Movie can change that and put real heros and real villians on the screen. I think a new BSG will effects and camera work like the new version and the story and heart of the original would be amazing up on the big screen.

Just out of curiosity what ideas did the New BSG team steal from Tom DeSanto? I've seen the movies he's produced but don't see the connections, then again I might be just been a bit thick.


It's all right here

http://john_larocque.tripod.com/tns/desantordm.html

http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/SDS

http://www.galacticabbs.com/index.php?s ... entry33245

http://blog.newsok.com/nerdage/2008/07/ ... have-been/

=VK=
:dash:

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by FuzzieDice » Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:32 pm

knightendo77 wrote:I'm not really a "car" person (or "petrolhead" as Top Gear puts it lol), but the Ford Mustang does sound absolutely fantastic doesn't it? :) I don't know what it is about it that gets me excited but that car is just awesome and will forever be KITT to me now :)


I've heard the Mustang engine in videos while it was taking off. But this particular one that was at the building, it was just idling and sounded not much different (in fact very much nearly the same) as my Ford Taurus' Duratec engine does at idle. So by idle, one can never really tell.

Then again, my car sounds vaguely (note I said vaguely :) ) like KITT when she's taking off. I don't take off too fast as I live in a very urban area, though. Engine does sound cool!

User avatar
knightendo77
Operative
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:10 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by knightendo77 » Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:35 pm

Sorry Victor, I respect you a lot, I really do, but reading through those links it feels like a lot of personal opinion stated as fact. Or sometimes just a very determined attempt to discredit the new series. Of course this is just my take on these, my own personal opinion of them. But I can also see why Victor has drawn his conclusions and I respect Victor here for showing such passion for what he believes is the better BSG.

Couple of examples of what doesn't sit well with me are that they stole the idea of having CGI Cylons and human Cylons but seriously this would happen anyway (CGI ones because that's obvious, and human ones to save budget - something War of the Worlds did too) and to say they stole the idea of going darker is clasping at straws. And to say Moore "didn't bother" to watch the whole of TOS is just trying to stir up an argument for those opposed to the new series. He did watch it all, but felt retelling the story as machines turning against their masters was better. I for one agree.

It's personal opinion over which is better, I personally love the new one and hate the old one. I'm not taking anything away from it, or from those who like it, it's just my opinion. As is the previous paragraph just my opinion on the articles Victor linked to.

But there are camps out there that would do anything to bad-mouth the new series, we've seen the same with Knight Rider over and over and over again across the internet and the press.

It's all relative. The amount of praise for the new series vastly outways the opposing views, the acclaim it's received is evidence of this, as is the fact that it has last for four seasons and has a spin-off on the way. What I mean by "relative" is that we can all amass enough articles from the net to back up our own opinion and that's fine, but it really is just that.

Let's all just get along, I'm happy for people to like the old one and not the new one, even if it's the other way around for me. There's plenty of BSG to go around thanks to two very different takes on the story :)
knightendo77
"I'm a Goofy Goober."

I'm on Bebo - knightendo_phil

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by FuzzieDice » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:39 pm

Victor - I too was not happy with the reimagined series. Especially the character changes and the changes to the Cylons. However, I did give it a try and actually got to like it (after catching up on Netflix and then keeping up via Amazon.com and later Hulu). I got rather caught up in the whole story, much like a soap opera after one gets used to the characters. It was interesting, and sometimes brought up some interesting social, religious and political topics. It's over now, but I'm glad I saw it. It's not something I'd buy the DVD set to and view it over and over, I don't think. And I didn't like the CGI centurions (not even the old skool CGI ones). I prefer the original BSG overall, still, as well as the original Cylon Centurions and raider. I also missed the presence of the IL series cylons, which would have been really neat since they tended to be so devious.

If Mr. Larson does a BSG movie, I'm hoping he'll at least keep the Cylons designed basically the same and bring the IL series back too. While John Calicos and Loren Greene are no longer with us, I'm thinking they'll find good actors to fill those roles. At least with Mr. Larson's version, I'm thinking he won't make Starbuck and Boomer girl Cylons and angels and stuff like that! LOL!

User avatar
rwmu
Operative
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:44 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: City of Wulfruna

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by rwmu » Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:14 am

Thanks for the links, they made for intresting reading.

Questions rising

Did Singer/DeSanto have to give Eick/Moore the work they had done so far when Eick/Moore took over?

These seem to be blog and forum entires do you have primary sources for this material?

This seems more of a case of convergent evolution than plagerism.

Sorry to be picky but when I arrived on this bored I took your reputation at face value, Victor. I was left with a large amount of egg on my face when I took something you said as the truth and when I went to investigate to prove you right, since you'd had a hard time on the thread, found out you were wrong.
Είναι καλύτερο να θεωρηθεί ως ανόητος, από να ανοιχτεί το στόμα σας και να αφαιρεθεί όλη η αμφιβολία.

User avatar
Victor Kros
FLAG Operative
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:10 am
antispam: No
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 1982
Location: Knight Manor

Re: Does Battlestar Galactica Movie mean no KR Movie?

Post by Victor Kros » Sun Apr 05, 2009 4:41 pm

rwmu wrote:Thanks for the links, they made for intresting reading.

Questions rising

Did Singer/DeSanto have to give Eick/Moore the work they had done so far when Eick/Moore took over?

These seem to be blog and forum entires do you have primary sources for this material?

This seems more of a case of convergent evolution than plagerism.

Sorry to be picky but when I arrived on this bored I took your reputation at face value, Victor. I was left with a large amount of egg on my face when I took something you said as the truth and when I went to investigate to prove you right, since you'd had a hard time on the thread, found out you were wrong.


My sources come from Tom DeSanto himself who has all the concept art and reference material that was generated for the updated series and its direction prior to Moore and Eick's involvment - designs that mirror what Moore and Eick claimed to have created themselves. As for being"wrong" about something, I would appreciate you clarifying what you investigated further - perhaps there was a misunderstanding.

As far as I know said designs were not given to Moore or Eick but Tom decided to release them sometime after their series was on the air because he felt the artwork belonged to the fans more than himself and gave some of the material to a BGS.site (originally cylon.org I belive) where said material did not appear online previous to his decision to do so.

http://www.colonialfleets.com/gallery/c ... p?cat_id=7

=VK=
:dash:

Locked