Re: UFO 2 ideas.....

--- In SHADO@y..., Lieve <shado@g...> wrote:

> Henderson worried about the commission and the budget etc (he must
> have been stuck with the same civil servants that ruled Jim Hacker,

There's a thought. Straker's new nemesis on the comission is Sir
Humphrey Appleby. (LOL!)

> wasn't the Yes Minister series made around the same time? :-)

More that 15 years later, I'm afraid.

> Maybe Straker goes on to run the film company for real,
> makes a huge profit, and they use that to keep SHADO running?

You mean like Jeff Tracy and International Rescue? I like.

<snipped reference to Shatner in Kirk's clothing>
Don't *even* go there...

ttfn,
Teresa

[hidden email] wrote:

>
> There's a thought. Straker's new nemesis on the comission is Sir
> Humphrey Appleby. (LOL!)
>
> > wasn't the Yes Minister series made around the same time? :-)
>
> More that 15 years later, I'm afraid.
>

Actually Yes Minister was first shown in 1980, and set in the
present - and of course, UFO, although made in 1969/70 was set
in 1980 .. so there you go! They are actually based in the same
time.

Perhaps you're thinking of Yes Prime Minister, the first of
which was made in 1984.

Cheers
James

--- In SHADO@y..., James Gibbon <james.gibbon@v...> wrote:

>
> Perhaps you're thinking of Yes Prime Minister, the first of
> which was made in 1984.

Actually I was. I was not aware there was a difference btwn YM
and YPM. (same characters though?) My ex boyfriend used to bring
YPM video episodes to watch.

--- In SHADO@y..., James Gibbon <james.gibbon@v...> wrote:

>
> Perhaps you're thinking of Yes Prime Minister, the first of
> which was made in 1984.

Actually I was. I was not aware there was a difference btwn YM
and YPM. (same characters though?) My ex boyfriend used to bring
YPM video episodes over to watch.

CONTENTS DELETED

[hidden email] wrote:

> I'm inclined to think Straker might go that route, because I don't think
> that the studios income would be enough to run Shado no matter how well they
> were doing. I may be wrong however.
>

I'm pretty sure you're dead right! Imagine the budget required
to have their very own submarine/amphibious jet fighter combination,
missile launching spacecraft, base on the moon etc designed and
built, let alone the cost of keeping them run and maintained.
Harlington-Straker would have to make some staggeringly successful
movies to stay on top of that lot.

> I hope they keep the UFO theme, or at least do a updated version of it.
>

Me too. I've now agreed with Amelia twice in the same email -
I'm going to go and lie down.

James

CONTENTS DELETED

[hidden email] wrote: Actually, with the budgets of current films made nowadays, maybe there
IS a covert anti-Alien operation happening...

Hi Simon and all - welcome Simon to our egroup! As you've dedeuced, there is
a great deal of concern on how a UFO2 could be created to retain the
original flavour, and yet market it to a new generation of fans to be.

I cannot help but agree fully with you on the recent efforts to ressurrect
other former TV shows and and how SF/X et al have been the "stars" of the
show as opposed to good stories. Even my hubbie the other day commented that
the real star of James Cameron's Titanic movie was the ship!

There alot of factors to consider when updating UFO, and you've come up with
some good ones. I didn't paste your posting 'cause Marc likes us to keep 'em
brief and to the point if possible. But, the cross-breeding idea is one I
utilized in my novella Orion (available on the SHADO Library) and while it's
an idea that's definitely seen the light of day before, it's a distinct
possibility for any number of reasons, even down to the cloning of hybrids
for organ replcement, et al. As you suggested, desperation yields all kinds
of interesting action!

Pam