UFO Movie

Pam,
I gotta agree on most points of yours. I'm old enough to have
watched Mission Impossible as a series and though I had to see
it...was very disappointed in the movies. I loved Star Trek TOS, I
won't watch any of the others...I've checked out an episode or two of
each...and there's just no interest. For what it was...I DID like
Lost in Space, which did have cameos of all the surviving cast.
Finally, last but not least...remaking UFO, as Charlie Brown would
put it...Arrrrggh! Hollywood is so completely out of ideas, all it's
got left to do is remake classics.

Oh yeah, whoever posted KaZaa use here...They HAVE arrested KaZaa
users for that(nailed some kid on his way home from school recently
for downloading the DareDevil movie), and not only is that software
riddled with spyware to find out who and where you are, but this is a
PUBLIC message board, where your post remains forever. Just a
warning.

J.D.

--- In [hidden email], "MCCAUG" <mccaug@n...> wrote:
Hey, I'm not going to dump on you - I think you're right on the
button. I've refused to see such re-makes as the 2 M:I flicks and
Lost in Space BECAUSE they diverged too much from the original
premises and turned some of the original characters into bad guys
(i.e. Jim Phelps in M:I) and didn't have any place for the original
actors. That made me PO'ed enough to say "no thanks" when they
appeared at my local theatre. I'm a purist. My view is that the 6
movies produced with the original Star Trek cast were fab (well, ok
the first movie wasn't so great...) and they did better at the box
office than the 4 TNG movies did. Why? Because purists like me (and
maybe some of you) know what they want and it shows in box office
receipts and attendance.

Pam

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm

I just heard a rumour about a new Doctor Who movie to be based on the first
three doctors. The movie will be called The Dead Doctors.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.465 / Virus Database: 263 - Release Date: 25/03/03

I'm with Amelia on this one folks. I was sooo PO'ed (can I say this on
Marc's site?) when I found out about them making Jim Phelps a traitor I
refused to go to the flick (not that I'm a Tom Cruise fan anyhoo).

"They dare make Straker a traitor and I'll personally go kamikaze on their
little wooden heads." Amen to that!

Hi JD - I didn't bother with the LOS movie (or the M:I movie either for that
matter). I've gotten so bored with these movie execs who as you say, are so
bankrupt of ideas, they have to resort to poor re-makes. I think the
difference with the TOS movies was that Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer, and
not the least Leonard Nimoy, were people who either LOVED the original
series, or were part of it in some way. However, having said that, Shatner
did a VERY poor #5 (Final Frontier) and should be discounted. It was the
least grossing of all the TOS films and apparently not considered "canon" by
Trek fans. I refused to see #5 in the theatre and only rented it later and
was soooo disappointed in it.....but I digress.........that's what scares me
about a UFO movie. What if the people who end up controlling the project are
cretins who are just "doing a job" and have no concern about the quality of
the story, or concern for what the fans want. UFO is over 30 yrs old - it's
only really the fans who remember it - and they remember it for what it
was - the premise, the characters, the actors, the hardware, et al. Take
away any of that (but we will need some upgrades - like no purple wigs!),
and the fan-base is lost. I rather doubt the idea would cath on with people
younger. They've seen plenty of alien attack movies (i.e. Independence Day,
MIB, Mars Attacks, etc) and UFO would be "just one more" to them. They
wouldn't have 30 yrs plus of fandom invested in the show like we do. That's
why I believe the powers that be should recognize if this flick is going to
carry any weight at the box office, is should be done to cater to the
original FANS of the show!

Pam

As the receant Dare Devil movie shows, you can have all the support in the world and still miss by a country mile if you don't have everything jell. The story was fair, the acting great and the characters were very close, yet it still seemed to be lacking something.
I would go see a UFO movie even if they said it was a bomb, because it is a show that I love, but a movie like this would need repeat buiness to show that there was a reason for another one.
By the way, I enjoyed LOS once I said "This is a seperate movie, LOSELY based on the original series" Looked at that way, it wasn't a bad way to kill an afternoon.
Also most of us "Trekkies" consider the Odds (1, 3 and 5) to have been the worst of the bunch. It seemed like they were doing this on some sort of on again , off again dedication to the original ideals of the show. I hope that UFO doesn't end up that way.

I very quickly lost interest in tonight's episode when they started talking
about deuterium being rare and valuable and being flammable. Deuterium is
simply heavy Hydrogen, and seeing as most of the universe is made of
Hydrogen - Deuterium is far from rare, even Tritium could not be considered
rare. Nor are they flammable (unless you have a solar mass or more of the
stuff and you commence a fusion reaction).

Sorry for that - I just get peeved at innacuracies of that type.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.471 / Virus Database: 269 - Release Date: 11/04/03

I realize that this was labeled as an OT post, but I'm not sure how it
managed to get posted. Enterprise discussions are lightning rods for
flame wars. Since this was allowed to get through, what happens when
people want to launch into a discussion over why this Enterprise episode
was a good one.

We all got read the riot act a few weeks back about OT posts. At that
time I thought that a lot of the posts that people were sighting I felt
were not particularly OT, but this one is.

Just my opinion
Jim Durdan

> I realize that this was labeled as an OT post, but I'm not sure how
> it managed to get posted.

This list has historically been "pseudo-moderated". Which means that
people who repeatedly fail to follow the list's rules get moderated,
while people who appear to be following the rules aren't moderated. A
few weeks ago, I made the list 100% moderated, but after things settled
down I put it back into pseudo-moderation. The only problem is when
people who are unmoderated start breaking the rules, because then those
posts get through. However, these people then become moderated. And if a
flame was is about to erupt, then I'll put the list into 100% moderation
until it's over.

It's not a perfect system, but I think (?) most people would prefer this
over 100% moderation. (I know I would, because moderation is a
time-consuming, thankless task)

Marc

Thanks Marc!


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

David Richards wrote: Sorry for that - I just get peeved at innacuracies of
that type -

Like Paul Foster dragging himself across the lunar surface in 'Survival',
straining every step and struggling to get across the crevace when the lunar
G is only one sixth of that on earth?

Jess

Sorry if I put anyone's nose out of joint by posting something off topic.

To put the previous post into a UFO context, it is to be hoped that any
possible movie/series revival/fan-fiction/"new adventures" novels/comics do
not commit similar errors of science as was cited in that post. To remove
the science component of science fiction turns it into fantasy.

As for casting in a new movie, the only person I see as Straker other than
Ed Bishop, is unfortunately a contemporary of Ed's and as such would be too
old for the role - John Woodvine. Is there anyone similar that would be the
right age for the part?

Lieutenant Ellis is another hard one to cast - as I don't think any of the
known actresses hold a candle to Gabrielle Drake as far as eye-candy goes.
Considering that they also need to have acting ability as well, it rules out
any Australian soapie cum popstars (otherwise Kylie Minogue might have come
close).

On to the Soundtrack of the movie - a few names I DON'T want to see on the
credits :

1. Wil Smith
2. Eminem
3. anyone with "hip" names like LLCoolJ
4. Georgio Moroder
5. Vangelis
6. Elton John

Hope this redeems my sin of posting off topic





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.471 / Virus Database: 269 - Release Date: 11/04/03

I LOL'ed over this listing of who shouldn't do the soundtrack for a UFO
movie - can we put Leonard Cohen on the list too? And William Shatner should
NOT sing the title track! Pam
>
> 1. Wil Smith
> 2. Eminem
> 3. anyone with "hip" names like LLCoolJ
> 4. Georgio Moroder
> 5. Vangelis
> 6. Elton John

Thou are redeemed Dave!

I think Marc had the most realistic idea for casting which is to cast
talented but known actors. However that would bring us back to casting the
the original cast again as they are still mostly known to U.S. audiences.
However I will move away from my idea of a movie using both the original cast
and big name stars to look at the idea of casting talented unknowns.
First we would be casting according to type.
We need a Straker type: This would be a American male, age late 30 to
early 40's, blonde(hair can be dyed) with intense blue eyes. Lean and fit.
A Freeman type: Australian male, mid to late 40's, dark hair. What
they used to call rugged looking.
A Foster type: Male late 20's to early 30's. Dark Hair. Handsome
and knows it. A James Bond type in a spacesuit.
A Gay Ellis type: Beautiful woman in her early 20's with big eyes and
figure that will make males heads spin.
A Virginia Lake type: Beautiful blonde late 20's to early 30's with
ice blue eyes and stunning figure.
A Nina Barry type: A beautiful black woman in her early to mid 20's.
A Joan Harrington type: A attractive brunette with a sense of humor
in her 20's with a dancers body.
A Ayshea type: A exotic looking woman in her 20's.
A Peter Carlin type: A handsome Latin male, late 20's to early 30's.

Get the picture cast it as if we were looking for the original UFO
cast but with different actors.
I have just one so far. I have found actress who would make a perfect
new Ayshea. Her name is Aishwarya Rai. She has been getting a bit of press
the past week because of a planted story about her being in the next Bond
movie. This was just a publicity stunt. But it did bring her to my
attention and she looks the part and has the talent needed according to the
article on her past works which include the coming film Bend It Like Beckham.

James K.


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

As my favourite band would say -
"Some people keep their egos in the bottom drawer, a fridge full of Leonard
Cohen, Have to get drunk to walk out the door, stay drunk to keep on going"
- Ego Is Not A Dirty Word (G. Macainsh)

As far as who I think SHOULD do the soundtrack of any new movie - there are
two theories - if you wish to set the movie in the 70s - I'd love MUD to do
it - with Chapman/Chinn producing and writing. If on the other hand you
wish to set it in the present day or the near future - I am open to
suggestions.


----- Original Message -----
From: "MCCAUG" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Apology - and thoughts on movie


> I LOL'ed over this listing of who shouldn't do the soundtrack for a UFO
> movie - can we put Leonard Cohen on the list too? And William Shatner
should

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.471 / Virus Database: 269 - Release Date: 10/04/03