Re: Frakes and Thunderbirds

I know this has nothing to do with fake items on eBay, but I presume the
folks here on the site know that Jonathan Frakes (aka Will Ryker - TNG) has
stated publicly that he wants to do a "big screen" treatment of GA's
Thunderbirds. Now, I ask you, why the *&%$#@! didn't he opt to do UFO
instead? Surely UFO would be far more interesting, given the recent interest
in UFOs, alien abduction, and evil alien bad dudes, rather than
Thunderbirds. Surely Carleton International holds the rights to Thunderbirds
as it does UFO, and it would not cost any more $$ to purchase the rights of
one as opposed to the other. I just do not understand Frakes' decision at
all. Pam


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

Pam McCaughey wrote:
One is a world-wide entertainment phenomenon, a veritable license to
print money, and the other one is UFO.
Doesn't seem like too hard a decision to me. Nothing against UFO,
obviously, Thunderbirds just makes more sense financially.
AT

"Pam McCaughey" wrote:

> Jonathan Frakes (aka Will Ryker - TNG) has stated publicly that he
> wants to do a "big screen" treatment of GA's Thunderbirds. Now, I
> ask you, why the *&%$#@! didn't he opt to do UFO instead? Surely
> UFO would be far more interesting, given the recent interest in
> UFOs, alien abduction, and evil alien bad dudes, rather than
> Thunderbirds.

Hi Pam,

Well, for one thing, Thunderbirds has a lot more commercial
potential - it's a household name, whereas UFO, in the Gerry
Anderson sense anyway, isn't.

Secondly UFO has been done with live actors, Thunderbirds hasn't.

But mainly I would say I suppose it's a matter of taste! It's
almost as if you think UFO would be an automatic choice! Has
there been a recent interest in UFOs and alien abduction?

Actually one other point - I think that the events of September
11th led to a general interest, enthusiasm and support for rescue
services in general, and a Thunderbirds film would capitalise on
that. They might even get a Saudi-Arabian bloke with a beard to
play the Hood.

James

--- In SHADO@y..., highcotton51@m... wrote:
> Pam McCaughey wrote:
> > one as opposed to the other. I just do not understand Frakes'
decision at
> > all. Pam
>
> Doesn't seem like too hard a decision to me. Nothing against UFO,
> obviously, Thunderbirds just makes more sense financially.
> AT

Well, IMHO, MIB and MIB II I think have sunk any chances for a UFO
theatrical film. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love UFO. I
remember trying to watch it in CT from a channel in MA, playing
with the antenna to reduce the static and ghosting. I love UFO.

However, it is a classic show from the early '70s. It was
excellent in the '70s. I still love it now, I got the DVDs.
With MIB out there, I just don't see it a 'property that is
financially viable.'

Also, it's not Frakes who decides that Thunderbirds is the way to go.
That's the financier who does that.

Dan

Sorry, I should have specified that in here in the US, it has the cult
following, at least in my opinion. I know over there, it big stuff!

This is why being a Gerry Anderson fan in the states has been a profound
bummer until recently. I was thrilled when I heard about the dvd releases
(heck, even the VIDEO releases) from A&E. Finally!

Before this, it was just so hard to find stuff over here. You guys get all
the cool stuff!

Brian


_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com