The Shadows Lengthen
By
Susan
J. Paxton
[
Reprinted with permission from Susan J. Paxton. Originally appeared on BattlestarFanClub.com. ]
It
is my belief that Leslie Stevens, not Glen Larson, is the actual creator of
Battlestar Galactica. Why is this important? After all, it's been over 22
years since Battlestar Galactica was canceled. Stevens is dead. The show
remains in limbo. I believe it's important for several reasons. One involves
simple justice. But another has more immediacy. Over the past several years,
there have been movements to revive the series in some form, as a film, TV film,
or even as a TV series, probably syndicated. One movement has been led by actor
Richard Hatch and has taken the form of novels, a web site, and a
professional-quality trailer proposal that has been widely hailed by BG
fans wherever it has been shown. Whatever
ones' personal views on Richard's novels, his revival plans feature the
surviving original actors back in their original roles in a production set after
the time of the series and ignoring the events of Galactica 1980
completely. He has backed this effort with his own time and money, showing real
courage.
Richard's
revival effort has attracted the support of a growing number, perhaps even a
majority of BG fans. Executive Producer Glen A. Larson has spearheaded
the other, predominantly reactive revival effort, originally in conjunction with
Todd Moyer, director of the horrible film based on the game Wing
Commander. Several years ago, BG composer Stu Phillips told me that
Larson's reason for not producing a BG revival hinged on Larson's lack of
ideas on how to handle the Galactica 1980 issue. It's obvious from
Larson's proposals that he still lacks ideas. He's suggested basing a new
BG production around the battlestar Pegasus and Commander Cain or,
more recently, around a battlestar Atlantis, set thousands of years after
or before the time of the original series, depending on which version you hear.
Larson's claim to primacy in the BG revival stakes revolves around his
claim to be the creator of the series. As creator, he believes it is his right
to decide what form a revival should take. As creator, many fans would agree
with him. But what if he isn't the creator?
When
Battlestar Galactica was launched, Larson was the subject of many
interviews. Over and over he told the same story of BG's origins. His
original idea, he said, was for a series called Adam's Ark. Adam's
Ark, Larson said, was "sort of about the origins of mankind in the universe,
taking some of the Biblical stories and moving them off into space as if by the
time we get to Earth they're really not about things that happened here but
things that might have happened somewhere else in space." Note this carefully:
"by the time we get to Earth." Larson told this story over and over, how he had
approached the networks with this idea and been rejected.
Then,
in the summer of 1977, when the success of Star Wars made the words
"science fiction" once again safe to utter within network sanctums, Larson
claimed he dusted this idea off, took it to Universal and ABC, and Adam's Ark
then formed the basis of Battlestar Galactica. After all,
Battlestar Galactica did touch on and suggest legends, Biblical and
otherwise, and the fleet was indeed heading to Earth. Adam's Ark became
part of the legend of BG's beginnings in spite of the fact that Larson
never released a script or proposal to public view. More recently, Larson's
story has changed, in interviews and most recently on the Sci-Fi Channel's
Sciography special on BG. Adam's Ark is now, according to
Larson, about a "Howard Hughes-like" character, a billionaire named Adam who
believes Earth to be doomed and tricks Earth's best and brightest onto a
spaceship and launches them to discover new worlds.
In
other words, leaving Earth, not coming to Earth, and suddenly no hint of
Biblical legends. Why the change? Did Larson just forget what his proposal was
about? Is there a loose copy floating around somewhere he's afraid will get into
fandom? Whatever the reason for Larson's sudden reversal on Adam's Ark,
one thing is brutally certain. This later concept has absolutely no resemblance
whatsoever to Battlestar Galactica. Probably it is Larson's original
concept. It's enough of a brainless cartoon to fit with his normal line of
programming.
Frankly,
it's a really stupid idea. Enter
director Alan J. Levi. Levi is known to BG fans as the director of "Gun
on Ice Planet Zero," but he also directed half of the premiere after Richard
Colla was let go by Larson. Levi was a good friend of the late Leslie Stevens,
the producer best known for the famous science fiction series The Outer
Limits. Recently I interviewed Alan Levi. I had not planned to ask him any
questions about the origins of Battlestar Galactica because he had not
been involved early enough in the process to know about it. But, out of the
blue, with no prompting from me whatsoever, he said,
"Well, Leslie Stevens wrote the original script. Leslie was one of my best
friends. I do know that Leslie had told me at one time way before he ever got
into the script that he had this great idea for a script that he was going to
take to Glen Larson and talk about."
In other words, sometime in 1977, Stevens had told Levi about
an idea for a series he was going to discuss with Glen Larson, an idea that recognizably was Battlestar Galactica.
Now before people start running around screaming that Larson "stole" BG
from Stevens, it's clear that whatever happened, Stevens must have agreed
with it, though for what reason we cannot at this time know. Perhaps Larson had
more pull at Universal than Stevens did. If Stevens was for some reason out of
favor at the time, his idea might have been discarded by Universal while the
same idea with Glen Larson's name on it would have been viewed favorably.
Stevens
also was working on what became the Buck Rogers TV series at this same
time and may not have had enough time to spearhead both efforts. Whatever kind
of agreement Larson and Stevens came to, it evidently was amicable. Stevens
never publicly said a thing about it. With Leslie Stevens dead, there are only a
few people who could confirm, amplify or deny Levi's version of events. The most
obvious is, of course, Glen Larson himself. And we can be assured, I believe,
that he will never do so. He has little else to his credit of the quality of
BG, and he will continue to claim it as his own for that and other
reasons. The first three people hired by Larson to work on BG might also
know: John Dykstra, Joe Johnston, and Ralph McQuarrie. Two others possibly able
to shed light on the situation are Don Bellisario and Michael Sloan. They must
be interviewed and asked what they know.
And,
of course, there is the matter of Leslie Stevens' papers. Whether these are
still held by his family or were donated to a library or university or other
institution after his death, they could very well contain the truth and, most
precious of all, Stevens' first draft of the BG premiere. More
investigation must follow to pin down the elusive truth of the origins of
Battlestar Galactica. But for Glen Larson and his claim to be the series'
creator, the shadows have begun to lengthen.
________________________________________
Read the books Universal
Studios has tried and failed to censor on Amazon.com...
http://languatron.freeforums.org/viewforum.php?f=60
And read these books at another location where Universal Studios executives and its stealth marketers won't be able to post negative, misleading (stealth marketed) reviews of the books via them purchasing candy and Rogaine Foam on Amazon.com (allowing them access to the Amazon book review section) and not actually buying and reading the books. I'll leave the other 150 global locations under wraps for now.
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/fullen1264
