Captain Scarlett

> Actually the new UFO will most likely be made in Canada. Where it will be
> set is another matter entirely. But mostly likely not in England. SHADO HQ
> under the the Tower in Toronto perhaps or a Hockey Rink in Alberta or perhaps a
> Starbucks in Seattle.

Personally, I think Alec Freeman would favour a location underneath a distillery in
Scotland :-)

Dave.

That's assuming that he can be released from his undercover assignment as the Guvnor to Bob Louis and Dave Briggs - if they haven't already driven him round the bend!



Personally, I think Alec Freeman would favour a location underneath a distillery in
Scotland :-)

Dave.


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I've heard some VERY bad things about the BG re-make - including the fact
they made Starbuck a woman. Most of websites I've visited about it pretty
PO'ed and the original BG fans are screaming big time. This doesn't auger
well as far as UFO is concerned in my books, not to mention all the
shreiking about the new Thunderbirds and it hasn't even hit the theatres
yet...

Pam

I was kinda expecting people to question my reference to Briggs and
Louis - aka Jasper Carott and Robert Powell in the 90s series "The
Detectives". So they've been seen over in America, I take it?

--- In [hidden email], MICK DICKENS <docmed03@y...> wrote:
> That's assuming that he can be released from his undercover
assignment as the Guvnor to Bob Louis and Dave Briggs - if they
haven't already driven him round the bend!

> Personally, I think Alec Freeman would favour a location underneath
a distillery in
> Scotland :-)
>
> Dave.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pamela McCaughey" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 2:31 AM
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: Captain Scarlett


-------------------------------------------------------

Think you all might better just get used to the idea right now that
you're not going to like the remake, if they make it. After all, they are in
this to appeal to the new crowd and make money, not please the origional
diehard fans, as few of us as we are. They do market research to find out
how to make it and please the biggest audience of the present day, so you
can bet there will be extensive re-design of both the characters and the
concept to reflect the current day.

I don't watch much television shows these days, but I did see the
Battlestar Galactica remake, which I was a fan of as a kid. It wasn't bad,
and I think they did a good casting of Edward James Olmos as the new Adama,
giving it a more adult and modern "edge", but some of the character changes
were sickening, like Starbuck being made a woman. That's just unacceptable,
especially when they kind of toyed with the idea of Starbuck and Apollo
eventually getting it on.... eeew....

BG was originally a kind of childish program, so such an overhaul could
work on fans now grown older. UFO, however, was (at least intended, if not
always pulled off properly) a more serious show, meant to be rather dark,
stark, and gritty. Any "improvements" other than repaired acting and
direction, would therefore be lost on a nostalgic fan such as myself.

Maybe it's just my rigid bias from growing up with the show, or maybe
I'm just too crusty with old age, but I just couldn't accept changes like
that done to UFO.

They would have to faithfully copy the original look and feel to it
(basically impossible, since the original actors are now geriatrics), or
else so radically change the concept as to totally divorce it from the
original show in order to make me, personally, be able to accept it as a new
and different show. While this might alienate me, it might earn the new show
legions of new modern day fans.

My biggest attraction to all of GA's works was that 60's look, trying to
predict what the future would be like in the 80's. It worked in
"Doppleganger/JTFSS", and it worked in UFO. Any remake nowadays would have
that new generation CGI painted look to it, and that removes the charm of
UFO, in my humble O.

UFO, in it's simplistic original form, would be very difficult to make
fly in the modern world. It was made to appeal to people watching the space
program of the 60's and 70's. The kids and target audience of today don't
remember that stuff, they're used to CGI, like in Star Trek New Generation
and that other new Sci Fi channel dribble.

In order to be successful, this new UFO would have to be different that
the original, and more like those other remakes that are constantly being
panned on this discussion group. We might not like it, but the new audience
will, so that's the way it's got to be.... The new producers are not going
to dump a lot of money into an old format and a certain failure, just to
please a tiny former audience like us. They are going for the bigger market
share.

was that just a rant?????
Dave H.

>It was made to appeal to people watching the space
> program of the 60's and 70's. The kids and target audience of today
don't
> remember that stuff, they're used to CGI, like in Star Trek New
Generation
> and that other new Sci Fi channel dribble.


Good points Dave but I'm not sure your reading of what made the
original shows work is quite right.

Remember that Thunderbirds, Captain Scarlet and Stingray have been
sucessfully relaunched several times and very recently too. They have
also brought in oodles of cash in merchandising with each relaunch.

Most kids I know absolutely adore the series,much more than current
series, precisely because they used models rather than CGI. When
things were blown up they were REALLY blown up.

I remember whatching that lousy CGI parasailing sequence in Die
Another Day at the cinema. The kids alongside me, about seven years
old, were saying how fake it looked.

UFO hasn't reached a younger audience yet because it hasn't been put
in a decent enough time slot. And I still think that Secret Service
could be resurrected. Kids would love that gobbledygook of Stanley
Unwin.

LL

I thought long and hard about the concept of a UFO remake. It's my
heartfelt opinion that the program would never be as good, stylish,
or fresh as the original.

A repro might be slicker, higher tech and bigger budget, but it won't
be the same.

Cheers,

Bob

--- In [hidden email], tryptych@y... wrote:
> You might be interested to know that as well as the new
Thunderbirds
> movie coming soon, there is a British made, 26 part TV series of
> Captain Scarlet in the making. Anyone care to work on a bid for UFO?

I would hate to think that they were planing to do it "Just the same" as before. There has to have been some growth, not to mention time passing or why bother? If you want exactly the same thing, get the DVDs and enjoy.
I remember hearing the same sort of comments when ST Next Gen first came out. It won't be Trek, theres no Kirk and Spock,ect,ect. They were right but it wasn't supposed to be the old Trek, it wwas a new time and new people who grew on you.
I'm not saying that the the new UFO will go that way, but it is a possibility. We should leave ourselves open to the concept of actually seeing a show or two.... Then we can throw things at it.

TheLynx <[hidden email]> wrote:
I thought long and hard about the concept of a UFO remake. It's my
heartfelt opinion that the program would never be as good, stylish,
or fresh as the original.

A repro might be slicker, higher tech and bigger budget, but it won't
be the same.

Cheers,

Bob

--- In [hidden email], tryptych@y... wrote:
> You might be interested to know that as well as the new
Thunderbirds
> movie coming soon, there is a British made, 26 part TV series of
> Captain Scarlet in the making. Anyone care to work on a bid for UFO?





Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SHADO/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[hidden email]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]