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.