Signed Copy of Shane Rimmer Book

Signed Copy of Shane Rimmer Book

We have the "From Thunderbirds to Pterodactyls" In stock now.

The first 15 people to order will get one that is signed by Shane himself.

We only have 15 signed copies

http://www.fabgearusa.com/from_thunderbirds_to_pterodactyls_my_autobiography_hardcover_.html

Thanks as always
Rob
Fabgearusa.com
770-860-1412

Hmm ..that is quite interesting.. I thought that the blue cover that Fabgearusa are showing was only going to be used for the release at the Convention!

I did however,  get Shane to sign a copy of his  book for me, and also one of my sketches  of Scott Tracy...

But mine is not for sale!


--- In [hidden email], "Fabgearusa.com" <fabgearusa@...> wrote:

Hi All,
I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I notice that IMDB are listing the movie as 2012 release and I am sure this had been listed as 2011 previously

Regards
Howard

> I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I notice that IMDB are
> listing the movie as 2012 release and I am sure this had been listed as
> 2011 previously

I don't know if that's been mentioned here, but someone pointed out that
change to me months ago.

Marc

Marc,
and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the IMDB site for
the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also noticed the supposed
budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars.  That sort of on the low side in
this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast will take a good deal of that leaving very
little for anything in the way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do
a good film on this kind of money?
    James K.




________________________________
From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Wed, November 17, 2010 2:09:46 PM
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !

 
> I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I notice that IMDB are
> listing the movie as 2012 release and I am sure this had been listed as
> 2011 previously

I don't know if that's been mentioned here, but someone pointed out that
change to me months ago.

Marc



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

> Marc, and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the
> IMDB site for the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also
> noticed the supposed budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars. 
> That sort of on the low side in this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast
> will take a good deal of that leaving very little for anything in the
> way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do a good film on
> this kind of money?

I think earlier articles had the budget at $130 million.  Who knows
what's correct, or even if this film will ever be made?

Frankly, I see a limited budget as a potential good thing.  The original
series did NOT have an infinite amount of money at their disposal, and
some of the episodes were pretty low budget.

Marc

I could make my comedy  sci-fi trilogy (very loosely based upon UFO) for a tenth of that!
--- On Thu, 11/18/10, Billy Killian <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Billy Killian <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO  2012 !
To: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 2:12 AM







 



 


   
     
     
      Marc,

and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the IMDB site for

the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also noticed the supposed

budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars.  That sort of on the low side in

this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast will take a good deal of that leaving very

little for anything in the way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do

a good film on this kind of money?

    James K.



________________________________

From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>

To: [hidden email]

Sent: Wed, November 17, 2010 2:09:46 PM

Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !



 

> I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I notice that IMDB are

> listing the movie as 2012 release and I am sure this had been listed as

> 2011 previously



I don't know if that's been mentioned here, but someone pointed out that

change to me months ago.



Marc



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





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

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

Well Stevan given what has happen with remakes of other classic TV series of
late this cut budget could very well mean just that, they plan to go the comedy
route heaven help us.
    But good luck with yours,
    James Killian



 



________________________________
From: Stevan Warburton <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]
Sent: Thu, November 18, 2010 11:43:13 AM
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !

 

I could make my comedy  sci-fi trilogy (very loosely based upon UFO) for a tenth
of that!
--- On Thu, 11/18/10, Billy Killian <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Billy Killian <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !
To: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 2:12 AM

 

Marc,

and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the IMDB site for

the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also noticed the supposed

budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars.  That sort of on the low side in

this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast will take a good deal of that leaving very


little for anything in the way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do

a good film on this kind of money?

    James K.

________________________________

From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>

To: [hidden email]

Sent: Wed, November 17, 2010 2:09:46 PM

Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !

 

> I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I notice that IMDB are

> listing the movie as 2012 release and I am sure this had been listed as

> 2011 previously

I don't know if that's been mentioned here, but someone pointed out that

change to me months ago.

Marc

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

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




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

I agree, but comedy is the only writing medium I know and it would NEVER be a comedy version of the series just heavily influenced as it has had an impact on my life both in  fiction and fact :-)

--- On Fri, 11/19/10, Billy Killian <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Billy Killian <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO  2012 !
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, November 19, 2010, 4:18 AM







 



 


   
     
     
      Well Stevan given what has happen with remakes of other classic TV series of

late this cut budget could very well mean just that, they plan to go the comedy

route heaven help us.

    But good luck with yours,

    James Killian



 



________________________________

From: Stevan Warburton <[hidden email]>

To: [hidden email]

Cc: [hidden email]

Sent: Thu, November 18, 2010 11:43:13 AM

Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !



 



I could make my comedy  sci-fi trilogy (very loosely based upon UFO) for a tenth

of that!

--- On Thu, 11/18/10, Billy Killian <[hidden email]> wrote:



From: Billy Killian <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !

To: [hidden email]

Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 2:12 AM



 



Marc,



and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the IMDB site for



the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also noticed the supposed



budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars.  That sort of on the low side in



this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast will take a good deal of that leaving very



little for anything in the way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do



a good film on this kind of money?



    James K.



________________________________



From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>



To: [hidden email]



Sent: Wed, November 17, 2010 2:09:46 PM



Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !



 



> I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I notice that IMDB are



> listing the movie as 2012 release and I am sure this had been listed as



> 2011 previously



I don't know if that's been mentioned here, but someone pointed out that



change to me months ago.



Marc



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



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



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





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

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

A lower budget forces greater creativity & stronger acting.
I'm all for lower budget, if it means I get a movie, and not watch a 2 hour video game (cough-Transformers)(cough-GI-Joe-cough)

Look at Star Wars.  The larger the budget, the worse the move.

Matt

--- In [hidden email], Billy Killian <sumitonjd@...> wrote:

I have grown up with U.F.O., and Space 1999.  I have always felt that both U.F.O., and Space 1999 were/are both series way ahead of its/their time.  Both truly the best Special FX series of their time!  With that said.  I would enjoy seeing a new U.F.O. movie based on the same principle.  Just imagine!  Leave the "COMEDY" where it belongs!  "NOT HERE!"

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: Stevan Warburton <[hidden email]>
Sender: [hidden email]
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 04:19:43
To: <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: [hidden email]
Cc: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO  2012 !

I agree, but comedy is the only writing medium I know and it would NEVER be a comedy version of the series just heavily influenced as it has had an impact on my life both in  fiction and fact :-)

--- On Fri, 11/19/10, Billy Killian <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Billy Killian <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO  2012 !
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, November 19, 2010, 4:18 AM







 



 


   
     
     
      Well Stevan given what has happen with remakes of other classic TV series of

late this cut budget could very well mean just that, they plan to go the comedy

route heaven help us.

    But good luck with yours,

    James Killian



 



________________________________

From: Stevan Warburton <[hidden email]>

To: [hidden email]

Cc: [hidden email]

Sent: Thu, November 18, 2010 11:43:13 AM

Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !



 



I could make my comedy  sci-fi trilogy (very loosely based upon UFO) for a tenth

of that!

--- On Thu, 11/18/10, Billy Killian <[hidden email]> wrote:



From: Billy Killian <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !

To: [hidden email]

Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 2:12 AM



 



Marc,



and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the IMDB site for



the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also noticed the supposed



budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars.  That sort of on the low side in



this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast will take a good deal of that leaving very



little for anything in the way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do



a good film on this kind of money?



    James K.



________________________________



From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>



To: [hidden email]



Sent: Wed, November 17, 2010 2:09:46 PM



Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !



 



> I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I notice that IMDB are



> listing the movie as 2012 release and I am sure this had been listed as



> 2011 previously



I don't know if that's been mentioned here, but someone pointed out that



change to me months ago.



Marc



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



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



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





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

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




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

--- In [hidden email], Billy Killian <sumitonjd@...> wrote:
I also noticed the supposed budget for the film. Only 95 million dollars. That sort of on the low side in this day for a Sci-Fi film.

Only if you are making a crap American sciFi with no decent script that they have to hurl big effects at to make it sell. ie: Avatar or Skyline. Check out the excellent District 9. They made that on only $30m.

Rob

CONTENTS DELETED

Well first off there is a lot of difference in money from 1980's Alien 35
million to 95 million today.  Back then the average budget for a film was 20 to
40 million.  Now days its more like 200 million.  Which make budget of something
like District 9 seems like something done by Roger Corman for a million back in
the 70's.
    There are a few FX people who can still do old school miniture effects but
now days everyone is so caught up in doing CGI works its almost forgotten.
    And the other big problem is what you mention which instead of a good plot
feeling the screen with explosions every few minutes to make up for it.
    James Killian




________________________________
From: "Hemmings, Rob K." <[hidden email]>
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Fri, November 19, 2010 10:03:14 AM
Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !

 
Agreed.

Ridley Scott didn't do bad with only 14/28 million for Blade Runner. :o)
(well, as long as you view the seminal Directors Cut version, rather
than the dumbbed-down original release.)

Little models, painted scenery, but you can't tell that in the film -
those Blade Runner scenes look more realistic than any made using CGI
and costing megabucks, as in more recent films (which others have
already mentioned.)

One (rhet.) question though: Are there still the skills out there to
do stuff like this based on models?..

Best,
--
Rob




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

Yeah! Everything he just said!

--- On Fri, 11/19/10, ben_the_bear <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: ben_the_bear <[hidden email]>
Subject: [SHADO] Re: UFO  2012 !
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, November 19, 2010, 2:29 PM







 



 


   
     
     
      A lower budget forces greater creativity & stronger acting.

I'm all for lower budget, if it means I get a movie, and not watch a 2 hour video game (cough-Transformers)(cough-GI-Joe-cough)



Look at Star Wars.  The larger the budget, the worse the move.



Matt



--- In [hidden email], Billy Killian <sumitonjd@...> wrote:

>

> Marc,

> and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the IMDB site for

> the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also noticed the supposed

> budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars.  That sort of on the low side in

> this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast will take a good deal of that leaving very

> little for anything in the way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do

> a good film on this kind of money?

>     James K.

>

>

>





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

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

My sentiments exactly. I was TRYING to demonstate (rather badly) the effect UFO had on me and the experiences I had at the time of inception of my lightbulb idea all those years ago. The whole story goes away from anything UFO SHADO related and comes back on itself as it transmoglified into a timetravel trilogy. I would absolutely NOT besmirch the good name of UFO; it would be my homage to it if anything else.

--- On Fri, 11/19/10, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO  2012 !
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, November 19, 2010, 3:09 PM







 



 


   
     
     
      I have grown up with U.F.O., and Space 1999.  I have always felt that both U.F.O., and Space 1999 were/are both series way ahead of its/their time.  Both truly the best Special FX series of their time!  With that said.  I would enjoy seeing a new U.F.O. movie based on the same principle.  Just imagine!  Leave the "COMEDY" where it belongs!  "NOT HERE!"





Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T





-----Original Message-----


From: Stevan Warburton <[hidden email]>


Sender: [hidden email]


Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 04:19:43


To: <[hidden email]>


Reply-To: [hidden email]


Cc: <[hidden email]>


Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO  2012 !





I agree, but comedy is the only writing medium I know and it would NEVER be a comedy version of the series just heavily influenced as it has had an impact on my life both in  fiction and fact :-)





--- On Fri, 11/19/10, Billy Killian <[hidden email]> wrote:





From: Billy Killian <[hidden email]>


Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO  2012 !


To: [hidden email]


Date: Friday, November 19, 2010, 4:18 AM























 











 








   


     


     


      Well Stevan given what has happen with remakes of other classic TV series of





late this cut budget could very well mean just that, they plan to go the comedy





route heaven help us.





    But good luck with yours,





    James Killian











 











________________________________





From: Stevan Warburton <[hidden email]>





To: [hidden email]





Cc: [hidden email]





Sent: Thu, November 18, 2010 11:43:13 AM





Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !











 











I could make my comedy  sci-fi trilogy (very loosely based upon UFO) for a tenth





of that!





--- On Thu, 11/18/10, Billy Killian <[hidden email]> wrote:











From: Billy Killian <[hidden email]>





Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !





To: [hidden email]





Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 2:12 AM











 











Marc,











and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the IMDB site for











the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also noticed the supposed











budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars.  That sort of on the low side in











this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast will take a good deal of that leaving very











little for anything in the way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do











a good film on this kind of money?











    James K.











________________________________











From: Marc Martin <[hidden email]>











To: [hidden email]











Sent: Wed, November 17, 2010 2:09:46 PM











Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !











 











> I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I notice that IMDB are











> listing the movie as 2012 release and I am sure this had been listed as











> 2011 previously











I don't know if that's been mentioned here, but someone pointed out that











change to me months ago.











Marc











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











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











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

















   


     





   


   








 











 




















     





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










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





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

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

I for one really morn the loss of traditional model makers on film and TV; you know the object you are looking at on a 2 dimensional screen is 3 dimensional  and is tangible; unlike millions of CG Pixels..

--- On Fri, 11/19/10, Hemmings, Rob K. <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Hemmings, Rob K. <[hidden email]>
Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO  2012 !
To: "'[hidden email]'" <[hidden email]>
Date: Friday, November 19, 2010, 4:03 PM







 



 


   
     
     
      Agreed.





Ridley Scott didn't do bad with only 14/28 million for Blade Runner. :o)


(well, as long as you view the seminal Directors Cut version, rather


than the dumbbed-down original release.)





Little models, painted scenery, but you can't tell that in the film -


those Blade Runner scenes look more realistic than any made using CGI


and costing megabucks, as in more recent films (which others have


already mentioned.)





One (rhet.) question though:  Are there still the skills out there to


do stuff like this based on models?..





Best,


--


Rob








>-----Original Message-----


>From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of


>Marc Martin


>Sent: 18 November 2010 03:08


>To: [hidden email]


>Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !


>


>> Marc, and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the


>> IMDB site for the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also


>> noticed the supposed budget for the film.  Only 95 million dollars.


>> That sort of on the low side in this day for a Sci-Fi film.  The cast


>> will take a good deal of that leaving very little for anything in the


>> way of FX work or extras.  Anybody think they can do a good film on


>> this kind of money?


>


>I think earlier articles had the budget at $130 million.  Who knows


>what's correct, or even if this film will ever be made?


>


>Frankly, I see a limited budget as a potential good thing.  The original


>series did NOT have an infinite amount of money at their disposal, and


>some of the episodes were pretty low budget.


>


>Marc


>


>


>------------------------------------


>


>Yahoo! Groups Links


>


>


>




   
     

   
   


 



 






     

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

Yeah, that's more like it

--- On Fri, 11/19/10, Rob <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Rob <[hidden email]>
Subject: [SHADO] Re: UFO  2012 !
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, November 19, 2010, 3:51 PM







 



 


   
     
     
     



--- In [hidden email], Billy Killian <sumitonjd@...> wrote:

I also noticed the supposed budget for the film. Only 95 million dollars. That sort of on the low side in this day for a Sci-Fi film.



Only if you are making a crap American sciFi with no decent script that they have to hurl big effects at to make it sell. ie: Avatar or Skyline. Check out the excellent District 9. They made that on only $30m.



Rob





   
     

   
   


 



 






     

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

Alien cost $11 million in 1978...

Bestest,

John Ellis

On Nov 19, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Billy Killian wrote:



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



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

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SHADO/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [hidden email]
    [hidden email]

<*> 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/

Hey Rob,

Note that Matt Gratzner has been a great miniature FX Supervisor  
since the mid 90's...and has owned his own highly lauded miniature FX  
shop. I admire this man and his work and that is the only reason I  
hold out any hope for this movie to be something we'll enjoy. That  
they are taking their time is also a good sign (not rushing to get it  
in the theatres). I am quite sure Gratzner doesn't want another  
Thunderbirds movie fiasco.

The industry miniature FX skills are all still there...at this  
juncture anyway. CGI is a great tool but overused by lazy Producers  
and Directors. I know, I've done enough of it over the years and am  
just about burned out. I've done a lot of miniatures over the years  
too, but the last time was in about 2005 (which is a pity).

The "fix-it-all-in-Post-Production-with-CGI" attitude is a sign of  
lazy talentless hack filmmakers that should be selling tires at  
Sears...IMHO ;-)

Bestest,

John Ellis

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0254918/

http://homepage.mac.com/twonky/LSFX/John_Ellis_Bio.html

On Nov 19, 2010, at 8:03 AM, Hemmings, Rob K. wrote:



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



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

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SHADO/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [hidden email]
    [hidden email]

<*> 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/