A Decade Later, Ronald D. Moore's "GINO" (Galactica in Name Only) Series Remains Compelling Only To Those Who Made it And Starred In It

Aaahh, yes!! The "GINO" wardrobe!! "Salvation Army" rags on a low budget!!

http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?news=250605

I think the fact that Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell never went on to bigger and more fruitful things in Hollywood after starring in "GINO" (along with everyone else who made "GINO" in front of and behind the camera) speaks volumes about their endless errors in judgment (along with Ronald D. Moore's & SyFy Channel's endless errors in judgment) when deciding how to present this series and how to act in it.

1. Olmos believes that "Blade Runner" opened a door that no one stepped through? Opened a door to what? There's a reason why mass market / commercial Hollywood never stepped through any door opened by "Blade Runner." "Blade Runner" was not a mass market / commercially friendly movie. "Blade Runner" was a niche, sliver market catering to manic depressives in the audience. Coincidentally "GINO's" exact same audience. And "GINO" flopped in the ratings for four years straight. That's why Hollywood stepped through the door "Star Wars" opened. Because "Star Wars" was mass market / commercially friendly.

2. If Edward James Olmos didn't want bug-eyed monsters in this abomination of a television series known as "GINO", then he didn't understand what the "Real 1978 Battlestar Galactica Series" was and what it was supposed to be. He also wasn't an actor worth hanging on to as the lead of "GINO" if the condition of his employment was...he would leave the series if there were any bug-eyed monsters. He could have and should have been easily replaced.

3. As an objective member of the general public audience who occasionally caught moments of "GINO" off and on just to see if my eyes weren't deceiving me and the series was indeed that bad...I found the acting in "GINO" not to be good drama. Instead, I found it to be overly exaggerated melodrama even to the point of taking the incident of 9/11 too far to the point of pompous and narcissistic absurdity in its attempted (and failed) metaphorical parallel of that event.

4. There are many actors and actresses in Hollywood who I would categorize as being absolutely outstanding in their craft. Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell are not two of them. I found their performances in "GINO" to be unintentionally funny, "Zombie-esque", comatose, melodramatic on steroids, and boring as hell to watch.

5. Olmos & McDonnell are absolutely enamored with their own work in "GINO" a decade later. Unfortunately, their self love of their performances was never shared by mass market / commercial audiences who watch cable television.

6. Patterning a television series that is supposed to be "Battlestar Galactica" after the "Blade Runner" movie instead....is the most ludicrous and foolhardy business decision I have ever heard of. "Blade Runner" was a FLOP at the box office in 1982!! It was a FLOP in every re-release it ever had!! What corporation in their right mind would pattern a television series after "Blade Runner??"

NBC-Universal / SyFy Channel would!! That explains everything, doesn't it??

7. Who knows why Edward James Olmos looks upon his work (if you want to call it that) in "GINO" as something he is proud of. At the time he was filming this series, he gave the impression in his performance (if you want to call it that) that he didn't even want to be there. He acted like he didn't even like the job. He frowned, he mumbled, he sleepwalked through his role as if he was a candidate for the "Suicide Hotline."



________________________________________


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