Tuesday, January 31, 2012

What We Will Never See From Universal Studios And Bryan Singer





http://www.amazon.com/Universal-Studios-1978-Battlestar-Galactica/dp/1434895408/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1328031321&sr=1-2

An announcement that principal photography has begun on a "Battlestar Galactica" movie. Because aside from the decades long conspiracy going on at Universal Studios against the "Battlestar Galactica" property preventing any "Galactica" movie from being made, Paramount Pictures and J.J. Abrams always have their shit together whereas Universal Studios and Bryan Singer never will. Paramount and Abrams are already working on their second "Star Trek" re-boot film (within 3 years) whereas Universal Studios and Bryan Singer haven't even made their first "Galactica" movie after 12 years. (9/11 as an excuse my ass for the 2001 alleged movie not being made. What was the excuse for the alleged 2009 movie not being made?)

http://www.deadline.com/2012/01/production-begins-on-j-j-abrams-star-trek-sequel/

Universal Studios and Bryan Singer are always too busy not doing anything at all with the "Battlestar Galactica" property, or they immerse themselves in nonsensical projects such as a dramatic and boring (doomed to fail) re-boot of the "Munsters" situation comedy from the 1960s.

Monday, January 30, 2012

The Worst Television Show in The History of Broadcasting is Produced By NBC-Universal



What goes on behind the scenes in the production of every episode of the Maury Povich Show? Could I make an educated guess?

1. The professional actors and actresses posing as "Trailer Park Trash" guests arrive at the studio to begin the preparations for taping an episode.

2. The professional actors and actresses are instructed by the producers as to what their roles will be in this particular episode: Actor 1 will be the dead beat daddy. Actress 2 will be the abandoned single mother.

3. The professional actors and actresses have a table read of the script along with the producers and Maury.

4. Everyone then moves to the stage for rehearsals, script run-throughs, primary camera blocking, and mini-cam camera blocking.

5. Professional acting coaches who have made careers out of working on all of these types of shows for the past 25 years instruct the professional actors and actresses to either heighten or diminish emotionalism in key scenes.

6. The script is then acted out and run through multiple times coordinating movements with all of the camera people.

7. The professional actors and actresses then demonstrate their key acting skill taught to them. Never look directly into the camera when the camera lens zooms in on their faces with tears ever so strategically dripping from their eyes just as the "Zoom-In" occurs.

8. The studio audience is brought in and is instructed to "Hoot & Hollar" on cue during key moments in the acting out of the script.

9. The host has some closing thoughts on the nonsense just performed.

10. Everyone gets a paycheck from NBC-Universal.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Quite Simply, The SyFy Channel Believed in This Project And The Viewing Public Didn't. That In itself Should Have Been a Red Flag

 
 
The viewing public did not want this project. Mass market audiences unanimously rejected this project. The mini-series of this project received the lowest audience test scores in television history. Bonnie Hammer put this project on the air anyway.

This isn't how you run a business. This isn't how you run a television network, cable or broadcast. The low audience test scores for this inappropriately named "Battlestar Galactica" mini-series should have been a red flag unto itself that this production was unattractive and repulsive to mass market television audiences.

Decades will come and go, trends in television entertainment will come and go. But the one reality of mass market television audiences will never change. They will always want to see upbeat premises in television series with physically attractive cast members being kind to one another. It doesn't matter if the year is 1980, 1995, or 2012. This reality will never change because people never change. From one generation to the next, mass market audiences are identically wired psychologically, and therefore will always want to watch a television series that will make them feel good.

With the nonsense depicted in the above photo, mass market audiences unanimously rejected what the SyFy Channel and Ronald D. Moore had to  offer.

In The Final Analysis, This is What Ronald D. Moore Brought to Televised Science Fiction






Contemporary business suits and an eternally frowning Edward James Olmos. Let both financially unsuccessful ingredients be a blueprint to avoid in the future for all Science Fiction television producers.

The moral of the story is...there never is any excuse for lazy producing, a lazy wardrobe, lazy scriptwriting, and lazy acting...Even if the SyFy Channel and Ronald D. Moore try to tell you otherwise.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Two Careers Running Parallel With One Another, Quite Frankly Accomplishing Nothing

 
 
Yes, both lines represent the careers of Bryan Singer and Ronald D. Moore. Both lines also represent little to no productivity between the two of them in either Science Fiction cinema or Science Fiction television. Projects are announced supposedly coming from one or the other, and none of the projects arrive at completion.

I think a number of things are going on here as the causes of this lack of productivity:

1. Bryan Singer and Ronald D. Moore are vastly over rated as "supposed maestros" of Science Fiction media. Quite frankly, the two of them aren't very good at all at producing or directing anything in the genre.

2. Bryan Singer and Ronald D. Moore have had serious mis-steps in their handling of Science Fiction and Fantasy. Bryan Singer's serious mis-step was of course "Superman Returns" in 2006, which I believe led to Hollywood having a permanent "chilly reception" for Bryan Singer in any of his future desires to tackle Science Fiction and Fantasy. Ronald D. Moore's serious mis-step of course, was his handling of a project called "Battlestar Galactica" and its sequel series after that, "Caprica." You can't produce and write a television series which was really "Retaliatory First-Aid" on the "Star Trek: Voyager" television series and expect people to accept it as "Battlestar Galactica." The public didn't accept it and the rest is abysmal history. I also believe that Hollywood has had a similar "chilly reception" for Ronald D. Moore towards any of his future projects.

3. Since Bryan Singer and Ronald D. Moore both have an aversion towards producing and directing original material of their own invention, there are only so many Hollywood projects left that can be re-made in the Science Fiction / Fantasy category that any "Powers That Be" would be willing to give to either one of them.

Both lines above will no doubt continue running parallel with one another.

Remember This Nonsense From The New "SyFy Channel" in 2009?



I guess the reason why this "weirdo" cable network never reached the eccentric visions depicted in this promo and has never gotten better in any sense since this promo aired three years ago is because the same management team remained at the channel despite the name change. Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern have done absolutely nothing constructive for this channel and have done nothing to improve its schedule since this promo aired three years ago.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

The SyFy Channel Reminds Me of the "Cracker Barrel" Restaurant

 

Have you ever been to a "Cracker Barrel" restaurant? After you walk in the front door, you aren't sure what you just walked into. The first thing you see is not a restaurant with people sitting down and eating, but rather a mini-retail store of some sort that sells the funkiest junk you can possibly imagine. They sell packaged candy bars and candies from the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. They sell calenders, mugs, t-shirts, VHS tapes, and DVDs. Books, stuffed animals, and the list goes on and on. In short, this mini-retail store inside of every "Cracker Barrel" restaurant has no central theme to the types of junk it sells. If you can navigate your way past the odd smell of this mini-retail store, you reach the entrance to the restaurant where you do see people sitting down and eating. After the hostess sits you down at your table, you're still not sure what you just stumbled into.

This in a nutshell...in every sense of the word....is the SyFy Channel. Like "Cracker Barrel" restaurants, you can't help asking..."What the hell is the SyFy Channel?"

Monday, January 23, 2012

Not Only Are Bryan Singer's Projects Attached to Universal Studios Not Coming to Fruition, But Neither Are Any of His Other Projects



Pick a card, any card. Pick any project Bryan Singer is associated with either through Universal Studios or anywhere else, and you either haven't seen it or won't see it.

Take Universal Studios for example. Bryan Singer has been associated with this studio since 2001, and not one project has come from him and Universal Studios for the past 11 years. Certainly worthy of mention in the "Guinness Book of World Records" wouldn't you say? And I'm not just talking any sort of "Battlestar Galactica" project either. You would think that at the very least during the past 11 years, Bryan Singer and Universal Studios would have occupied their time together by even doing a few intimate, low budget movies with lesser known actors until the kinks could be worked out preventing "Battlestar Galactica" from reaching cinema screens. "Kinks" - (Universal Studios conspiracy against the property.)

"The Munsters." We've heard about it but will we see it? NBC-TV had two genre series in production and abandoned both after the pilots were shot. "Wonder Woman" and that "Precinct 17" nonsense from Ronald D. Moore. Bryan Singer isn't anymore talented than Ronald D. Moore so why would "The Munsters" survive when "Wonder Woman" and "Precinct 17" didn't?

Over at other studios, Bryan Singer's "Excalibur" was shut down and his "Jack The Giant Killer" seems to have gone into "Indefinite Post-Production." Translation: "Eternal Limbo."

Bryan Singer and Ronald D. Moore must be related in some way. Distant fourth cousins? Closer in relation than that?

Sunday, January 22, 2012

Universal Studios Chief Ron Meyer Admits That His Studio Makes Crap


http://www.movieline.com/2011/11/03/universal-chief-ron-meyer-addresses-tower-heist-vod-fiasco-admits-cowboys-aliens-land-of-the-lost-wo/

Let's focus on two of the crappy movies green-lit by Ron Meyer:

Cowboys & Aliens

Yes, the movie could have been much, much better than it was. But what astonishes me the most about this movie is how Steven Spielberg and Ron Howard both erroneously believed that it was an incredibly unique idea.

Executive Producer Michael Garrison and his stars Robert Conrad and Ross Martin had already done this sort of stuff in the 1960s television series "Wild, Wild West." Stuff as in Science Fiction concepts taking place in the wild west of 1870. Arch enemy Dr. Miguelito Lovelace subjected James West and Artemus Gordon to atomic bombs, the miniaturization of people, mutant plants, and other futuristic stuff all in 1870s America while West and Gordon traveled cross country in their cool train working for President Grant.

The difference here is, is that "Wild, Wild West" was extremely well written while "Cowboys & Aliens" wasn't. "Cowboys & Aliens" came across as a mundane episode of the "Wild, Wild West" (without West, Gordon, and Lovelace) if there is such a thing.

Land of the Lost

Remember that nonsense from the early 2000s when Universal Studios actually said that one of the reasons why they didn't want to revive the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" series is because they didn't think anyone would remember the series?

Yet they went ahead and green-lit a multi-million dollar movie based upon an obscure Saturday morning television series ("Land of the Lost") from the year 1974 sandwiched in between "Dick Clark's American Bandstand" and "Multiplication Rock."

According to Universal Studios logic, a heavily promoted prime time series from 1978 wouldn't be remembered while an obscure, low budget Saturday morning kids show from four years earlier would be remembered.

I think one of the reasons why Universal Studios makes crappy movies as frequently as they do is that they have really crappy research analysts in their employ. And their logic is all topsy-turvy.

Getting back to the movie itself, "Land of the Lost" sucked as much as it did because:

1. Will Ferrell isn't funny in anything he does.

2. No one knew that the movie was based upon an obscure kids show from 1974.

3. What marginally worked on snowy television screens in 1974 on Saturday mornings is not going to work on multiplex movie screens in the 21st Century.

4. Without any knowledge of the 1974 television series, the general public assessed this Will Ferrell movie as being a stupid ass, misfire of a "wannabe tent pole movie."

Ron Meyer states more than once that yes, his studio "makes crappy movies." Yet Meyer himself could have stopped these movies from being made by not greenlighting them.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

People Will Soon Be Asking This of Bryan Singer's October 2011 "Galactica" Movie Attempt



http://www.amazon.com/Universal-Studios-1978-Battlestar-Galactica/dp/1434895408/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1327188674&sr=1-2

http://forums.syfy.com/index.php?showtopic=2346292

Isn't it amazing how the above book is beginning to endure throughout the ages as to why one "Galactica" movie attempt after another continues to fall apart?

The above link to the syfy.com forums references of course, the "Bryan Singer Galactica Movie" announced in 2009 that ever so conveniently fell apart a short time later. There was no "9/11 excuse" to blame for the 2009 movie falling apart, just as there won't be a "9/11 excuse" to blame for the October 2011 movie eventually falling apart if it hasn't fallen apart already.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

The Argument Against Film Directors Being Independent Contractors



Film directors such as Bryan Singer need to be working for some sort of agency that has a pool of directors in its employ. It would be the job of this agency to decide what project their directors get assigned to based upon their availability.

For example, NBC-Universal would call up this agency and ask which of its directors are presently available to begin working on their "Munsters" reboot project. This agency would know moment to moment what projects their directors are working on, and how long it would take each of their directors to finish the projects they are on.

At the risk of sounding unprecedented, it would be the agency (and not Bryan Singer for example) that would decide what his next project would be based upon the needs of their clients (the movie studios) calling with their film director needs. This agency would also, never...ever...assign more than one project to its film directors at one time. The agency would assign one project and one project only to each of its individual film directors with the full understanding that once the project is assigned, that director would be devoting his / her full attention to that one project (and nothing else) for the next 18 months or however it long it takes that film director to direct and film that movie.

Because I gotta tell ya'...I gotta' tell ya'...Bryan Singer has been all over the map with conflicting and overlapping potential directorial assignments crushing his work load with enough work to fan out to a dozen or more film directors at one time. This in itself is an argument against film directors being independent contractors (their own bosses.) At the risk of sounding unprecedented, Bryan Singer needs a corporate boss (not an agent) to assign directorial assignments to him one movie at a time. And he wouldn't get another movie assignment until the previous assignment is completed. This would bring some organization to Bryan Singer's professional life. It would also remedy the all too frequent problem in Bryan Singer's career of multiple potential film projects overlapping onto his schedule at one time:

1. Six Billion Dollar Man
2. Battlestar Galactica
3. Munsters
4. Excalibur
5. Jack The Giant Peach
6. X-Men 4
7. X-Men 5

In short, Bryan Singer needs to be thrown into a pool of film directors all working for this agency, and he would get a mandatory directing assignment as long as he completed his previous, mandatory directing assignment.

Careful, Bryan. Your Plate is Really Full Now. Would You Like a Dozen Extra "Film Directors" to Relieve Your Work Load?


http://borg.com/2012/01/15/singer-to-direct-dicaprio-in-big-screen-bionic-man/

I think what Bryan Singer needs to do is...retire from show business and spend the rest of his life relaxing with his family, read all of the books he has always wanted to read, go on endless vacations, and never announce another film project ever again.

Metaphorically speaking, his professional bowels are clogged with all of these projects he is announcing at one time.

"Whoa...What?" Bryan Singer Already Did a Mini Series For The SyFy Channel?



http://www.dreadcentral.com/news/32903/bryan-singer-and-syfy-get-2012-bandwagon

Good lord. The ever growing list of projects Bryan Singer is attached to never coming to fruition is staggering. Bryan Singer might as well be blood brothers with Ronald D. Moore, because the parallel trajectories of both their careers has been staggering.

To my knowledge, this thing never aired. And to my knowledge no excuse was ever given as to why the project was shut down. I guess the only thing we need to know is...

Because Bryan Singer was attached to the project, it was shut down.

A couple years from now, everyone will be asking...

"Remember that 'Battlestar Galactica' movie announced by Bryan Singer in October 2011, and that 'Munsters' remake he was attached to? Whatever happened to those two projects?"

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

The SyFy Channel Never Did Shed its Geeky Image, And its Programming is Still Rotten



http://www.amazon.com/Caprica-Sucks-Channel-Misfires-Ronald/dp/1451556225/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1326854687&sr=1-1

What was that we heard from Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern back in 2009? That they wanted to shed their perceived "geeky image" with "cough" exciting new programming such as "Warehouse 13?" I've got news for the three of them. When you put schlock on the air such as "Marcel's Quantum Kitchen", "Smackdown", and a bunch of roto-rooter guys moonlighting as fake ghost hunters, not only are you going to retain your "geeky image", but you're also going to excel way beyond it at warp speed. Not only is the SyFy Channel presently the home of "Corporate Geeks", but it's also the home of "Corporate Dorks."

Television reflects society. Nowhere is that more evident than at the SyFy Channel. But the SyFy Channel doesn't reflect all of society, it instead reflects its little dysfunctional corner of it where creative bankruptcy is the name of the game. Where Science Fiction television programming and the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" series are the mortal enemies of corporate bureaucracy. Where technological advances such as "Green Screen" having already been with us for decades are unsuccessfully put forth as new ideas of the SyFy Channel. Where "dark and gritty Science Fiction" already pioneered by director Ridley Scott in the 1979 movie "Alien", is unsuccessfully put forth as an sparkling new invention of Ronald D. Moore. Where Ronald D. Moore was erroneously labeled as the "creator of Battlestar Galactica" when in fact that honor falls to the late Leslie Stevens with some input from Glen A. Larson.

SyFy Channel has become the worst nightmare of Science Fiction fans. Where the interests of Science Fiction fans are not being represented by the SyFy Channel. Where hustling bland television programming and trying to pass it off as "Science Fiction" is the name of the game.

The worst nightmare for sports fans would be if ESPN were suddenly bought by a corporate entity knowing nothing about sports, and then staffing ESPN with employees they hired away from the "Food Network."

This is what happened to the once great Sci-Fi Channel when it was bought by corporate entity Universal Studios. They knew nothing about Science Fiction and then staffed the channel with refugees from the "Lifetime Network."

Monday, January 16, 2012

23 Years Ago, The "Brady Bunch" Was Given The Serious Treatment. It Failed Miserably



Remember that "Very Brady Christmas" nonsense from 23 years ago? When papa Mike Brady was trapped in a mine shaft cave-in and the cast members above were singing Christmas carols outside the mine in the hopes that papa Mike Brady would emerge alive? Critics rightfully slammed this attempted serious take on the sitcom "Brady Bunch" and labeled it "Brady Something" in tribute to the popular drama at the time..."Thirty Something."

So, what does all of this have to do with Bryan Singer, NBC-TV, and their attempted remake of the "Munsters?" Like the "Brady Bunch", the "Munsters" is a ludicrous situation comedy. Like the "Brady Bunch", the "Munsters" is being remade into an intended serious drama. Like the "Brady Bunch", the "Munsters" will fail as an intended serious drama because no matter how hard you try, you can't wipe away the fact that just like the "Brady Bunch", the "Munsters" will forever shall be...a ludicrous situation comedy.

What Bryan Singer and NBC-TV have gotten themselves into is this...

Their remake of the "Munsters" will have unintentional humor in it. No matter how hard they try to make the "Munsters" serious, the audience will be laughing at Bryan Singer and NBC-TV, not digesting the "Munsters" as serious drama. In their miscalculation in revamping the "Munsters" as a serious drama, Bryan Singer and NBC-TV neglected to realize that the world still remembers the "Munsters" sitcom from the 1960s.

I want this piece of schlock to get made, because I want to see Bryan Singer and NBC-TV get laughed right out of their professions for good.

Sometimes Radical Change is Necessary For a Cable Channel to Survive



http://www.amazon.com/Bonnie-Hammers-Sci-Fi-Channel-Backwater/dp/1441407286/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1326737564&sr=1-1

As a member of the general public who has witnessed the creative gutting of the once great Sci-Fi Channel of the mid-late 1990s (by corporate owners Universal Studios) to what it is today, a languishing cable entity consisting of solely sub-standard, nonsensical, and really stupid programming ideas having nothing to do with Science Fiction, it's safe to say that radical change is long overdue for the current, bafflingly named "SyFy Channel."

Any sort of radical change would benefit the current "SyFy Channel." A new corporate owner, new people to take the place of Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern, and perhaps most importantly...a restoration of the cable channel's original mission of being a pure Science Fiction channel. This would require "First Aid Treatment" for the SyFy Channel's current on-air status of "Identity Ambiguity."

As a business experiment, the gutting of the once great Sci-Fi Channel of the 1990s in favor of an "Identity-less" cable channel just hasn't worked. It has been an unprecedented failure from every conceivable standpoint. Who has benefitted from this? The shareholders of the "SyFy Channel?" Doubtful. There always has been a vast Science Fiction television audience out there that Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern have repeatedly shoved to the curb in favor of their ambiguous and quite frankly..."rotten"...television programming.

The problem here is, corporate owners Universal Studios as well as Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern are not Science Fiction scholars or fans. Thus, the once great Sci-Fi Channel was and is owned and operated by the wrong people. They knew going into the owning and operating of this cable channel that they would never, ever, be able to manufacture and sustain Science Fiction television programming 365 days a year (the can't even do it 7 days out of a year) in no small part due to the fact that none of them are Science Fiction scholars or fans. So, they mutated the once great Sci-Fi Channel into something they knew they could easily own and operate. A nebulous cable channel without a laser sharp, on-air identity. This gave them an excuse to engage in lazy programming habits. Raiding the USA Network film vaults for movies of any subject matter to air..."Cape Fear" anyone? Putting wrestling and a cooking show on the air. Putting a staged and scripted ghost hunting show on the air. This is all easy stuff to manage if you're a television programmer. Even a child and Sarah Palin could do this job at the SyFy Channel.

I have always loved how Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern would periodically say that it was a good thing all around that they were trying to appeal to the widest possible audience by expanding the subject matter of this cable channel. They weren't expanding the subject matter of the SyFy Channel, they were making their programming as nebulous as possible instead. That's not how you grow an audience, it's how you diminish what little audience you have. It did however, turn out to be good thing for Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern...because it allowed them to manage the SyFy Channel on "Lazy Cruise Control." How hard is it to raid the USA Network film vaults for a periodic movie of any subject matter,  or put a cooking show on the air, or put wrestling on the air, or put a fake and scripted ghost hunting show on the air?

Radical change is long overdue at the SyFy Channel.

Saturday, January 14, 2012

SyFy Channel Began Production on "The Philadelphia Experiment" Remake in August 2011



http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/syfy-begins-production-on-the-philadelphia-experiment-tv-movie-1025303.php


If any corporate entity on the face of this Earth other than the SyFy Channel were remaking this movie, I would be alot more enthusiastic. The original movie from 1984 was a "so-so", moderately interesting, fictional account of the supposed, top secret naval experiment in the 1940s. "Murphy's Law" dictates that in the hands of Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern, this remake movie should reliably be worse than the 1984 original. Add to this the sad fact that the SyFy Channel is filming this remake in their "low budget stomping grounds" of "beautiful downtown Vancouver."

Now, the SyFy Channel is always, notoriously unfriendly towards any original movie or television series they remake. Their remakes are always poorly conceived ("Battlestar Galactica", "Flash Gordon"), poorly produced ("Battlestar Galactica", "Flash Gordon"), and poorly written ("Battlestar Galactica", "Flash Gordon.") Because of this, I have no faith in their remake of "The Philadelphia Experiment" because quite frankly, of all the Science Fiction elements Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern should stay away from (aside from "Battlestar Galactica")...it is "Time Travel." And to be perfectly fair, all other corporate executives / marketers working for a cable network should stay clear of  "Time Travel" as well.

"Time Travel" is exclusively the domain of experienced Science Fiction writers who know what the hell they are doing...such as David Gerrold, the young Harlan Ellison, and D.C. Fontana. You really have to know what you are doing when producing and writing in this genre. Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern do not. And neither would the producers and writers the three of them assigned to work on this remake movie.

This is the same cable network with Bonnie Hammer at the helm that tried to turn "Flash Gordon" into a "worm hole romp" instead of the rocketship fun stuff on another world we still fondly remember with Buster Crabbe. The results were disastrous. The only saving grace is that the original movie starring Michael Pare wasn't that great to begin with, so how much worse could the SyFy Channel make the story?

What am I saying?? I'm underestimating Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern.

Friday, January 13, 2012

Bonnie Hammer, David Howe, and Mark Stern Aren't Very Good Post-Production Executives




http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Chrome-Interpretation-Battlestar-Galactica/dp/1456493604/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1326487747&sr=1-1

http://airlockalpha.com/node/8875/blood-chrome-may-not-premiere-until-2013.html

All of this post-production time for a television movie that no one particularly wants to see in the first place? Cecil B. DeMille could have directed and post-produced "The Ten Commandments" in less time.

And have you noticed that Mark Stern is always the only person on this Earth to ever get excited about what the SyFy Channel is doing? In this instance, he is getting all excited about "green screen" as if audiences have never seen "green screen" before. Audiences have seen "green screen" thousands of times before in the "V" remake television series on ABC-TV, in all of the Star Wars prequels, and in scores of smaller and bigger theatrical films. Mark Stern is acting as though "green screen" is a new invention of the SyFy Channel.

While "Blood & Chrome" continues to rot in "Post-Production Development Hell", Mark Stern still doesn't know if it will be a web-series, television movie, or bubble gum card curiosity after the aborted fact. In other words, the SyFy Channel continues to forge forward with a project that will be about as successful for them as Ronald D. Moore's "GINO" series (a flop)...with no clue as to how it will be presented to a public not waiting for its debut by any means.

I think just about every business professional and college business major would call this entire mess...

BAD MANAGEMENT

Thursday, January 12, 2012

In Hindsight, I think it's Safe to Say That Chris Abraham And His Team Went Too Far

Overcoming Bad Online Influencers for Battlestar

http://chrisabraham.com/2009/04/13/overcoming-bad-online-influencers-for-battlestar/

by Chris Abraham on 13/04/2009


quote - I was a member of the online promotion and response team for the Battlestar Galactica miniseries on Sci-Fi Channel back in the day, before they became SyFy.

The USENET Newsgroups (alt.battlestar-galactica for one) were pissed off. It was partly my job to circulate amongst the online communities, circa 2003, to convince a vocal online population of 40-something men that the Sci-Fi Channel interpretation was the last place that the Battlestar fans were ever going to get — the last opportunity — and that they would never get another go, unlike the Star Trek franchise, at reviving the campy 1978-1980 series with original cast.

Part of my argument with the online Original Battlestar Galactica influencers was that Sci-Fi had pushed through the reissuing of the original Battlestar Galactica series into DVD and by offering a Cylon box set.

cylon battlestar gallatica Overcoming Bad Online Influencers for BattlestarAnother part was that both Ronald D. Moore and David Eice were completely committed to the brand and that Sci-Fi was committed to a vision that may have been different in its interpretation but was, surely, as true in its ultimate morals and vision.

In the end, though, my argument came down to, “it has been 23-years since the series was canceled and it hasn’t been picked up by now? Well, you had better get behind this project because this is probably the last — your last — chance at reviving Battlestar — plus, did I mention the cool reissue and remastered Cylon box set?”

It was fascinating to be able to work around the community online, not only on USENET, but wherever the conversation was happening. It was particularly challenging to appeal to the old guard over the sex change of Starbuck.

apollo richard hatch Overcoming Bad Online Influencers for BattlestarI even had authority to leak the fact that Executive Producers Ronald D. Moore and David Eick were totally into hiring original cast members, including the fly-in-the-ointment-at-the-time Richard Hatch — none of it rang true, it was such a tough crowd. Moore and Eick even promised to tip the hat all the time to the old gang, including cheeky references to the old theme, the old Cylons, and any number of playful homages (which they surely did in spades over the course of the series).

Instead of really embracing the idea of a darker, stranger, more brutal BSG, the only argument that rang true was that this Battlestar Galactica miniseries was the last opportunity that these true blue OBSG fans had to any of the above. They homages would not have time to play out, the guest appearances would not come to pass, and if the miniseries never got picked up, it would be bad for everyone involved, especially Richard Hatch himself (who ended up rocking the role of Vice-President Tom Zarek, by the way!)

How did I end up on this memory lane? Well, I was inspired by this exerpt of Augie Ray’s article, Can Influencers Be a Bad Influence?

battlestargalactica Overcoming Bad Online Influencers for BattlestarI just wanted to mention that the Battlestar Galactica project was not just left to chance and to the passion of the project and the strength of the vision. My team and I worked our asses off to make sure we turned the tide of disapproval online well before the airing date of the miniseries. We stacked the deck, we worked on getting hearts and minds well before, and we at the very least made sure these true blue committed fans of the originale series gave the week-long miniseries a try — we kept up their curiosity and stoked the fire of their interest.

Can I call Viral and Buzz Marketing AKA Social Media Marketing circa 2003 the old days or the glory days? Well, here the excerpt I spoke about above, Can Influencers Be a Bad Influence?:

Executive Producers Ronald D. Moore and David Eick specifically set out to deconstruct [Battlestar Galactica]. Cylons looked like humans, capes and lasers were replaced with military uniforms and bullets, and Starbuck was turned into a woman. In the words of Bonnie Hammer, then the president of the SciFi Network, “It was no longer your father’s Battlestar Galactica. It was provocative, it was edgy, it was dark.”
But what if a certain group of influencers had gotten their way? As Entertainment Weekly reports, Moore got a rocky reception when he showed preview clips at Galacticon, a Battlestar Galactica fan convention. “The clips ended and they booed and they hissed,” he reports. Richard Hatch, star of the original series, agrees, “It was icy-cold in there. It was obvious that no one liked it.” In the end, a Galacticon attendee stood up and asked Moore, “Now that you’ve heard all of this, will you take a pledge now that if this show goes to series, you will make sure it’s more in keeping with what we would like to see?”
Moore could very well have treated the attendees of Galacticon as influencers; after all, this was a bunch of people so in love with the mythology of the show that 25 years later they still traveled across the country to gather. So what was the Executive Producer’s response to the fan’s question? Moore didn’t promise changes to appease the existing fan base. He didn’t even tell the Galacticon fans he’d give consideration to their concerns. Instead, Moore stood before the only group of consumers who gave a damn about the Battlestar Galactica franchise and said, “This is the show. You may not like the show, you don’t have to watch the show, but this is the show that we’re making.”
Rather than listen to the fans of the campy 80s series, the SciFi Channel instead turned to other science fiction fans, many of whom appreciated darker and more serious fare such as the “Matrix” series and cult flick “Blade Runner.” In doing so, they rejected the easy and obvious choice for a group of influencers and instead found the ones that really mattered. At a subsequent Comic-Con convention, the stars of the new show were “pleasantly surprised at the positive fan response.”
Moore and his crew might have been tempted to take same course as the makers “Snakes on a Plane,” opting to involve the existing fan base, turning to them for scripts, and allowing the BSG fans to set a different direction. But they didn’t. Why? Bonnie Hammer summed it up best when she said that fans “can’t drive the creative process.” - unquote

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

A Blast From The Past: Bryan Singer's Second to The Last Aborted Attempt at Reviving "Battlestar Galactica"



With Justin Timberlake as a casting option

http://justjared.buzznet.com/2009/08/14/bryan-singer-justin-timberlake-battlestar-galactica/

I think Universal Studios executives and Bryan Singer are alot like Republican politicians. They are completely oblivious to the fact that their promises, claims, and declarations involving "Battlestar Galactica" (for example) are being logged on the Internet as we go. Take note of the date of this article:

August 14, 2009

This of course, was the "Battlestar" project Bryan Singer abandoned prior to the most recent "Battlestar" project he abandoned in...

October 2011

And do we really need to mention the "Battlestar" project Bryan Singer abandoned prior to the "Battlestar" project he abandoned in the year 2009? None other than the "Battlestar" project he abandoned in the year 2000?

Those of us in the public domain who notice such overwhelming manifestations of a "pattern of behavior" with Universal Studios and Bryan Singer aren't supposed to be noticing such overwhelming manifestations of a "pattern of behavior" with Universal Studios and Bryan Singer because when we do so and mention it...it makes Universal Studios and Bryan Singer look really, really bad from a professional competency standpoint. Thus, the Universal Studios stealth marketers swoop in and begin calling anybody names who notice such "patterns of behavior" with Universal Studios and Bryan Singer.

Stay tuned for the next "Battlestar" movie announcement coming your way from Universal Studios and Bryan Singer in the year 2013...

Same bat time....Same bat channel.....

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Bryan Singer's IMDB Page Changes Less Frequently Than The Melting of The Polar Ice Caps




http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001741/

Yes, we all know why the "Battlestar Galactica" movie Bryan Singer announced his intention of directing in October 2011 isn't listed on his IMDB page (and never will be listed.) Because he has no intention of actually directing such a movie. He just likes to make such announcements every 24 months.

But, wait!! "The Munsters" remake crap fest Bryan Singer is supposed to be directing isn't listed on his IMDB page either?? What's going on?? Isn't this supposed to be the "Holy Grail" of all recently announced projects that NBC-TV / Universal Studios have banked their reputations on (if there is anything left for them to bank in that department??) After all, "The Munsters" television pilot is this prestige project (as far as NBC-TV / Universal Studios is concerned) worth dumping the "Battlestar Galactica" theatrical film for. It's certainly worth a mention on Bryan Singer's IMDB page in that light, isn't it?

More than likely, the "Battlestar Galactica" theatrical film announced by Bryan Singer in October 2011 will not only never be mentioned on IMDB under his name, but also never be mentioned on IMDB period. After all, Universal Studios always gambles on the assumption that the public has a short memory. That the public would never, ever remember the "Galactica" theatrical film announced in October 2011. Or never, ever remember a similar "Galactica" theatrical film announced in August 2009. Or the "Galactica" theatrical film announced in 2000. All projects Bryan Singer has been associated with.What a remarkable track record of not getting things done he has!! Of course, Universal Studios has helped him every step of the way.

Sunday, January 8, 2012

Universal Studios is Experimenting With a New Concept in Merchandising



http://www.amazon.com/Universal-Studios-1978-Battlestar-Galactica/dp/1434895408/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1326069391&sr=1-2

http://www.bifbangpow.com/2011/12/by-your-command.html

New merchandise based upon the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" series without a new movie to go along with it. They need to let us all know how that works out for them.

Does Anyone Even Care Anymore?



http://communityvoices.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/arts-entertainment-living/tuned-in-journal/31441-press-tour-update-on-battlestar-galactica-blood-a-chrome

"Blood & Chrome" has been one of those projects just begging to be put to rest once and for all. First it was planned to be a web series, then a television series, then back to a web series, to what now?

SyFy Channel's biggest problem is not knowing when to quit and put a project to rest. They should have cancelled Ronald D. Moore's low rated and flop "GINO" series long before the fourth season. They shouldn't have put "Caprica" on the air at all, and "Blood & Chrome" should have the plug pulled on it long before its intended air date.

The air date of this thing is projected to be a year from now. Why doesn't the SyFy Channel just put the whole project to rest once and for all?

Saturday, January 7, 2012

Whatever Happened to This Guy?



David Eick has had about as much luck in his post-"GINO" career as Ronald D. Moore, Aaron Douglass, Tricia Helfer and Katee Sackhoff have had. He is supposedly working on a new UFO themed series for the AMC Channel called "Thunderstruck", along with another fairly boring reality show starring Kevin Sorbo. It's safe to say that both projects will vanish about as quickly as they first appeared due to low ratings and that ever reliable "boredom factor" that always seems to touch everything that Ronald D. Moore and David Eick do.

Friday, January 6, 2012

The SyFy Channel Hit Rock Bottom Ages Ago In Terms of its Lack of Imagination




Drug addicts and alcoholics often hit rock bottom in terms of not being able to sink any lower from their self indulgent orgy of abusing their bodies and minds.

The SyFy Channel (and when it was still called Sci-Fi Channel) is exactly like that. They hit rock bottom ages ago in terms of not being able to sink any lower in its lack of imagination, its blatant hostility towards anything that is imaginative (the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" series), and its corporate embrace of garbage television programming in general.

Much the same way drug addicts and alcoholics (sick people) fight for their right to remain sick, the SyFy Channel (and when it was still called Sci-Fi Channel) has fought for its right to remain sick (if you can call it a right) by broadcasting their weekly monster movies, Smackdown Wrestling, a cooking show, and anything else non-imagination related. It has been a never ending orgy of non-imagination at the SyFy Channel for years now. An orgy the SyFy Channel has fought long and hard to remain in via its relentless stealth marketing supplied to them by "Abraham & Harrison."

The SyFy Channel is owned by the same corporation that has created and put on the air the worst television program in the history of broadcasting..."The Maury Povich Show." No suprise there as to why the SyFy Channel is as bad as it is.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Is Destiny Beckoning Director Bryan Singer in Another Direction?

 

Director Bryan Singer has recently abandoned a "Battlestar Galactica" theatrical film for a third time. (The first time in 2001, the second time in 2009, and the third time in 2011.) If I were a career counselor, I would note that Bryan Singer seems to no longer have the energy to direct theatrical films, and is instead beginning to aim his fledgling self in the direction of the "made for television movie."

Did the "Battlestar Galactica" theatrical film (he announced his intentions to do in October 2011) scare him? Did the scope of such a production scare him away? Whatever the reasons, his full attention is now focused exclusively on "The Munsters" television movie for NBC-TV. The physical appearance of this situation looks like he abandoned a much more elaborate, epic in scope, and daunting project ("Battlestar Galactica")...for a much smaller, more intimate, easier to deal with, and less headache induced project ("The Munsters".)

Now, there is nothing wrong with this. There is nothing wrong with being a "television movie director." I'm not knocking it. Some of my favorite television movies were directed by Brian Levant (the live action Scooby Doo movies) or starred actress Gail O'Grady (I just love her to pieces.) But, maybe it's time for Bryan Singer to admit that this is the direction he would prefer to go in after abandoning the daunting "Battlestar Galactica" film for the easier to deal with "The Munsters" remake.

"ABC Family" and "Nickelodeon" are always making "television movies" for children. They primarily make television movies during the Halloween and Christmas seasons. I really believe that Bryan Singer's calling in life (and is better suited) to ultimately direct children's movies for both of these fine channels. Because when you think about it, after directing "The Munsters" for NBC-TV, it wouldn't be a career stretch for Bryan Singer at all to move on over to "ABC Family" and "Nickelodeon."

The television movie has a faster and tighter production schedule, a smaller budget, and would probably be better suited to handle Bryan Singer's ever wandering attention span and keep it in check because the television movie demands the immediate attention of directors right now, not the attention of theatrical directors nine months from now while a script is being written. Which seems to have been Bryan Singer's problem with "Battlestar Galactica."

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Directing "The Munsters" For NBC-TV Will Not Be a Career Builder For Bryan Singer




http://www.movieweb.com/news/bryan-singer-directing-nbcs-the-munsters

I finally figured it out. Directors like Bryan Singer have been setting their career prospects extremely low lately because the DVD market will sustain any "hunk of junk" directors like Bryan Singer choose to waste their filmmaking educations on. "The Munsters" will be one of those "quickie" television projects for Bryan Singer with the ultimate destination for such a project being...right next to the "Spongebob" and "Family Guy" DVDs in your local department stores such as "Wal-Mart" and "Target"...(or do you pronounce it..."Tar-jay?")

Bryan Singer is one of those directors of the "DVD Generation." Where television and certain movie projects are made at lightning speed for the specific purpose of eventually rotting indefinitely on DVD discs. Gone are the glory days of the great Richard Donner directing the magnificent "Superman-The Movie" and that film unto itself being a "global event" for all to enjoy. Bryan Singer is whipping up "fast food" junk for eventual DVD release at lightning speed.

Bryan Singer is limiting his employment opportunities by offering his services solely to NBC-Universal. The "ABC-Family Channel", and "Nickelodeon" are also...always looking for those "Cheap-o"..."leave your intelligence at the door" juvenile type movies such as "The Munsters." Movies that can be whipped up in nine months and broadcast three months later. Bryan Singer could also make a killing directing "Halloween" themed movies for both channels every October.

Monday, January 2, 2012

"Poetic Justice" Has Been Gradually Compensating Fans of The "1978 Battlestar Galactica" Series





Those who have treated the "Battlestar Galactica" property poorly (primarily in the decade of the 2000s) are now having career difficulties and slipping even further into professional obscurity and oblivion.

Yes, fans of the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" series never got their revival movie of the series (and most likely never will), but something else has been happening which is suitable, substitute compensation on an intangible level.

Those involved in the deliberate trashing of the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" series, (primarily in the decade of the 2000s) have been seeing their careers taking an irreversible nose dive into oblivion.

Ronald D. Moore -

The year 2003 was supposed to have been the year that "Ronald D. Moore's shot at stardom had arrived." It was supposed to have been the year that Ronald D. Moore had emerged from the "Star Trek Staff Writer's Circle" of Rick Berman with a genius take on "Battlestar Galactica" that was supposed to propel Moore into the same stature as George Lucas and Steven Spielberg.

It didn't happen. The stealth marketing con game orchestrated by the Sci-Fi Channel (and implemented by "Abraham & Harrison") at the time kept Ronald D. Moore's name pumped up on "bulls**t steroids" as best it could and for as long as it could until Moore's take on "Galactica" might finally catch on with the public.

It didn't happen. Ronald D. Moore's sham take on "Battlestar Galactica" was a severe, strategic misfire and the public just didn't warm to it and embrace it. It also didn't help matters any that Ronald D. Moore along with Bonnie Hammer, David Eick, and the stealth marketing thugs at "Abraham & Harrison" were publicly trashing the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" series in some deranged hope of pumping up Ronald D. Moore's ratings in such a deranged manner. "GINO" took a swift nosedive along with "Caprica", and Ronald D. Moore's sham take on "Battlestar Galactica" (really an unpleasant take on "Star Trek: Voyager") was soon history.

What is Ronald D. Moore doing now? Some ambiguous Science Fiction pilot involving homosexual characters. This after all of his post-"GINO" projects were rejected by....everyone.

1. A Science Fiction project with Tom Cruise.
2. A supernatural pilot for NBC-TV.
3. "Virtuosity"
4. "The Thing" remake script

Ronald D. Moore, who paid no respect whatsoever to the source material of the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" or its fanbase (he quite frankly ridiculed both) at the time his "GINO" series was on the air, now finds literally every project he submits to anyone and everyone in Hollywood being rejected. Now that is "Poetic Justice."


Ronald D. Moore's Hollywood prospects have nose dived because he was never a hot property to begin with. His most fruitful days at the Sci-Fi Channel existed in the first place because as a would be hot commodity, he was being artificially sustained by the ruthless, on-line stealth marketing of the stealth marketing firm "Abraham & Harrison." 


Bryan Singer -

Bryan Singer has bailed out on directing a "Battlestar Galactica" feature film a total of three times now. In 2001, 2009, and 2011. His career seems to be set on an irreversible negative trajectory much the same way Ronald D. Moore's is. He periodically announces a truckload of new projects he is interested in and very few of them (if any) ever become reality. Now that is "Poetic Justice."

Bonnie Hammer -

Bonnie Hammer has done everything she can do to try and turn the SyFy Channel into a hot, money making "hip" commodity. Unfortunately, she has trashed the "Battlestar Galactica" property along the way with both public statements of dislike for the original series airing in 1978 and its fanbase. The result? Her SyFy Channel chugs along as a typical, underwhelming cable channel that is not appointment viewing by any means. Now that is "Poetic Justice."

Universal Studios -

Their continued hostility and lack of vision towards the "1978 Battlestar Galactica" series, the property overall, and its fanbase has resulted in the property not being a spectacular money maker for the studio. Now that is "Poetic Justice."






Sunday, January 1, 2012

The Status, Location, and Condition of "Blood & Chrome" is Anyone's Guess





Although the "Blood & Chrome" pilot movie has been yet another one of those "Galactica in Name Only" gimmick projects of the SyFy Channel (right behind "GINO" and "Caprica") that no one in the mass market domain ever wanted or asked for (just like "GINO" and "Caprica"), it's still noteworthy to analyze the outrageousness of the ever spiraling genesis and mutation of this project.

Originally conceived as a web series, it went from that to a 2-hour pilot movie and back again to a web series. Its status right now is anyone's guess, but the fact remains that no mass market audience anywhere in the world has rolled out the red carpet waiting for "Blood & Chrome's" arrival, if it is ever seen at all.

I see "Blood & Chrome" as nothing more than an unfortunate, left over remnant of an ill-conceived and severely flawed conception of the "Battlestar Galactica" property compliments and courtesy of Ronald D. Moore and the SyFy Channel. The best for all concerned would be (including mass market audiences not looking forward to "Blood & Chrome") for this 2-hour pilot movie to remain in limbo never to be seen by anyone. In addition to never having a grasp on what "Battlestar Galactica" really is, Ronald D. Moore and SyFy Channel never had what it takes to appeal in general to mass market audiences. It takes original and inspired thinking, concepts for television series that are original and genuinely good ideas, and the ability to execute those ideas in vibrant and compelling manners that attract mass masket audiences. SyFy Channel and Ronald D. Moore have always lacked all of the above.

So I suggest to all of those concerned to keep "Blood & Chrome" in limbo forever, because nobody wants to see it. Nobody wants to see more of the same already sampled in "GINO" and "Caprica."