Check out the Latest Articles:

Why Bryan Singer doing a Battlestar Galactica Redux Is A Bad Idea

By D Shipway Friday August 14, 2009

Why Bryan Singer doing a Battlestar Galactica Redux Is A Bad Idea

Bryan Singer is attached to direct and produce Universal’s big-screen version of “Battlestar Galactica.”

What ‘other interpretation’ could there be?

There have already been two runs of the original series that ultimately ended in the early 1980s. Then in 2004 we saw the complete redo by Ronald Moore and David Eick leading to a complete, critically acclaimed 4 season run of the series, a TV movie special (BSG:Razor) and another in the can coming soon (BSG:The Plan), and even an entire TV series spin-off in Caprica. There have been volumes of books and comics, by Richard Hatch and Greg Pak amongst others, extending both the classic and new series universes.

I’m a fan of Glen A Larson‘s original Battlestar, but it is sorely dated and just wouldn’t work today. The heavy christian overtones, the specifics of the overall story make little sense in retrospect, and the character archetypes aren’t exactly anything special anymore. I know Singer was planning on doing a big screen treatment of BSG a decade ago (stopped by the events of 9/11), but that was before the entire new series and its spin-offs. What other story could there be to tell?

Apparently this one.

Who exactly are they making this for?

Fans of the original 1970s series have either already been won over by Moore & Eick’s BSG, or have been so set in their ways that they never accepted it. Doing another remake or reboot is bound to deter fans of the original 70s series (as they vocally expressed when the new series was announced), at the same time it would alienate fans of the new series for doing something completely different unnecessarily.

This isn’t Star Trek; an almost dead franchise begging for a reboot. If you are going to attempt something like this, why not any of the other science-fiction franchises that have either never been made, or been done poorly? Lost in Space, Time Tunnel, Andromeda, and countless others have wonderful premises and stories that have yet to be given the attention they deserve.

bsg-last-sup-update

Singer’s Track Record

I really am a huge fan of Bryan Singer, but he has shown that his reverence for the source material can overshadow his good sense of what makes a good movie. Superman Returns, the sequel to Richard Donner’s cut of Superman 2 (that nobody really saw until after Superman Returns came out) was a franchise killer. What could have been a new series of Superman movies (much like Christopher Nolan’s epic reboot of the Batman franchise) was stopped dead in its tracks by a campy Lex Luthor and his maniacal real estate scheme, Brandon Routh doing his best Reeve as Clark Kent impression but an unimpressive Supes, and an anti-climactic end fight of the Man of Steel vs a giant rock.

Superman Returns was a well-made flick. It looked great and was well shot, overall the performances were good, and the effects were amazing (especially the 13minutes in IMAX 3D), the problem is that the premise was so fundamentally flawed it was doomed before it even began. For whatever reason his non-involvement in X3:X-Men – The Last Stand let Brett Ratner completely kill that series, and forced us into bad spin-offs instead of a lucrative X-franchise. Choosing instead to do not his version of Superman, but a flawed addition to Donner’s franchise (which had already killed itself off 2 decades ago thanks to Superman 4: The Quest for Peace).

A Better Plan

Give that fat Hollywood cash to Moore, Eick, writer Jane Espenson, and director & star Edward James Olmos to continue that series or make a full feature length movie. They’ve already expressed interest and intent to do more specials and TV movies on their series as recently as San Diego Comic-Con 2009. If you doubt their credibility, their fantastic work on the human condition and struggles with racism, resource scarcity and class struggles led to them being invited to speak to the United Nations. This meeting brought about change in the frakking UN charter because of their moving sentiments.

It would make more sense to reunite Singer with writer Chris McQuarrie who has been hired to write the next Wolverine pic, a mythic team-up that brought us the immortal Usual Suspects. Thus putting the guy who established the amazing X-Men franchise back into something he’s already proven he can do so very well, and that there is a significant demand for.

bc

Bottom Line

I just worry that this could be another franchise killer and just an all-around bad move. If it fails at the box office it would send the wrong message that the whole Battlestar Galactica franchise isn’t in demand and effectively quelling future works on Moore & Eick’s BSG. While Bryan Singer is an incredible director, I doubt his reputation would be able to sustain another big budget box office flop. This isn’t guaranteed to be bad, it just doesn’t make any sense to me at all.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Spread the Word:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter

Similar Geekitude


  • http://flimgeeks.com reznik360

    Slight clarification: I wasn't slamming it for religious overtones, I was pointing out what could be a flaw in the more decidedly 'christian' themes.
    I like the original series, but it was pretty heavy-handed. Religion & Love,
    as cheesy as they can be when done poorly, are the central themes in RDM BSG
    and handled brilliantly, in my humble opinion.

    I do sincerely hope that I'm
    wrong, and it turns out to be great. I have faith that Bryan Singer would do
    an excellent film, however I don't see it being the huge blockbuster success
    that big studio money and attention would seem to require. There's just a
    multitude of other films based on other sci-fi franchises that I'd rather
    see Singer do instead.

  • Jamais

    First off, the new version has even more religious overtones than the old. Religious elements were backgrounded in the old, but were in the foreground in the new; Baltar was a religious leader, the president had visions, and Kara Thrace was an angel, after all. If you're slamming the original for religious overtones, then why give the new one a pass?

    That said, it's unlikely to be a franchise-killer; as fans of the old series and the new series tend to be mutually exclusive. At the same time, I agree that the movie itself is likely to bomb because the old series was a product of its times. It's definitely a bad idea, but mostly due to timing than anything else…

  • Jamais

    In the original, you had religious rarely touched on; pretty much the sole exception was an arc where they had to deal with advanced beings posing as gods. Sure the Lords of Cobol were mentioned frequently, but mostly as a mild oath. This is opposed to the new one, where you couldn't escape religion: Baltar ended up leading a messianic cult based on himself, President Rosalyn virtually depended on her visions to run things, Adama faced several crises of faith, Kara Thrace was a virtual angel (dying on the homeworld and then disappearing in the finale when her job was done), and the journey to Earth was cached in their mythology. There was a lot of religion in the New BSG, and Moore even pointed it out in interviews a lot. Just…weird…..

  • Jamais

    First off, the new version has even more religious overtones than the old. Religious elements were backgrounded in the old, but were in the foreground in the new; Baltar was a religious leader, the president had visions, and Kara Thrace was an angel, after all. If you're slamming the original for religious overtones, then why give the new one a pass?

    That said, it's unlikely to be a franchise-killer; as fans of the old series and the new series tend to be mutually exclusive. At the same time, I agree that the movie itself is likely to bomb because the old series was a product of its times. It's definitely a bad idea, but mostly due to timing than anything else…

  • http://flimgeeks.com reznik360

    Slight clarification: I wasn't slamming it for religious overtones, I was
    pointing out what could be a flaw in the more decidedly 'christian' themes.
    I like the original series, but it was pretty heavy-handed. Religion & Love,
    as cheesy as they can be when done poorly, are the central themes in RDM BSG
    and handled brilliantly, in my humble opinion.I do sincerely hope that I'm
    wrong, and it turns out to be great. I have faith that Bryan Singer would do
    an excellent film, however I don't see it being the huge blockbuster success
    that big studio money and attention would seem to require. There's just a
    multitude of other films based on other sci-fi franchises that I'd rather
    see Singer do instead.

  • Jamais

    In the original, you had religious rarely touched on; pretty much the sole exception was an arc where they had to deal with advanced beings posing as gods. Sure the Lords of Cobol were mentioned frequently, but mostly as a mild oath. This is opposed to the new one, where you couldn't escape religion: Baltar ended up leading a messianic cult based on himself, President Rosalyn virtually depended on her visions to run things, Adama faced several crises of faith, Kara Thrace was a virtual angel (dying on the homeworld and then disappearing in the finale when her job was done), and the journey to Earth was cached in their mythology. There was a lot of religion in the New BSG, and Moore even pointed it out in interviews a lot. Just…weird…..

blog comments powered by Disqus