PDA

View Full Version : Was Olmos uninvited from ComicCon?


Antrobus
07-22-2003, 08:33 PM
I thought that in the ComicCon promos I read that Olmos was going to be at the BSG meeting. It appears that he wasn't - and this was in SciFi's news.
------------------------------------------------
Fans Surprise Galactica Star

Jamie Bamber, who plays Apollo in the SCI FI Channel's upcoming Battlestar Galactica miniseries, told SCI FI Wire that he was pleasantly suprised at the positive fan response to a preview at Comic-Con International in San Diego over the weekend. Bamber and fellow cast members Katee Sackhoff (Starbuck) and Tricia Helfer (Number Six) joined executive producers Ronald D. Moore and David Eick to answer fan questions and screen footage from the upcoming miniseries, which re-imagines the original 1970s TV series.

For Bamber, the 1,000-strong Comic-Con audience proved an antidote to months of Internet discussion about the miniseries, much of which has focused on the miniseries' differences from the original show. Those include making Starbuck a woman and changing the Cylons into humanoid beings. "There's obviously been a lot of action on the Internet," the British actor said in an interview. "But it's much more constructive to actually meet people. And people are always much more interesting. And I think I was surprised pleasantly by the response and by the dialogue that's actually there. And they can understand some of the issues that Ron and David were facing when they conceived of the project. And I think, hopefully, that everyone who was there will be one step closer to being on board with us."

Last week, during a preview of the miniseries to television critics, star Edward James Olmos (Adama) suggested that ardent fans of the original series should avoid the new miniseries. "I'd tell them straightforward, please, don't watch this program," Olmos said. "Buy yourself the new DVDs that came out of the old episodes, and whenever we come on, just put that in. ... I know that SCI FI Channel wants to say that everybody's going to enjoy it. They're not. They're not going to like it. I want to be the first one to say it very clearly. Please, tell your readers, do not watch this program."

But Bamber politely disagreed with his castmate. "I think there's a lot of truth in what Eddie says, in that if you absolutely are besotted with what was made in the '70s, then maybe the relationship is so founded between you and that show, that any re-imagining is going to be strange for you," he said. "But at the same time, I disagree with Eddie. ... I understand what he was trying to say. He wasn't saying that our show is bad or that he doesn't believe in it. He was saying, if that's what you love, then stick with it. That's obviously working for you. But I disagree with him, because I think our show can complement the other show. It takes things in different directions. It's much more of a human story. It's much, I think, more plausible, in the sense of the situation that they're in. And as a result, I think it's much more dramatically interesting." The four-hour Battlestar Galactica premieres Dec. 7.
------------------------------------------------------

Looks like SciFi sent out Bamber to do damage control. Did they ask Olmos to stay home?:whip:

Shipscat
07-22-2003, 09:16 PM
I don't know. Olmos was advertised as a guest, and after the television critics tour, he was removed from the list of people attending at Scifi's BSG page.

dktigger
07-22-2003, 09:37 PM
It could just be that an attempt at revese psychology by Olmos was not picked up on by the "network brains"

DangerWillRobinson
07-22-2003, 11:45 PM
I think what this means is big ratings for BSG.

MediaSavant
07-23-2003, 04:53 AM
Originally posted by Antrobus
Looks like SciFi sent out Bamber to do damage control. Did they ask Olmos to stay home?

Bamber was scheduled to be there all along.

As someone who attended the session, his account is essentially correct.

As for Olmos, you essentially have to speak to him or speak to those in the know at SciFi to know the true story.

Shipscat
07-23-2003, 08:04 AM
Well, this is true-it's possible that Olmos didn't want to be associated with them anymore. Or that he couldn't make it for some innocuous reason.

MediaSavant
07-23-2003, 01:10 PM
Well, I actually spoke to someone from SciFi about it and there is no juicy story behind it and no controversy. I'd call it "shrug-worthy" based on the level of unconcern I detected from the person asked.

Of course, people will likely create some background intrigue regardless.

Stoker
07-23-2003, 09:17 PM
I would not believe anything Sci-fi says. It's just damage control. And I find that Starbuck being a woman- absurd. If the main character is to be a woman, don't call her Starbuck. Give her a nickname of...... Stardust. (Unless she's a manly kind of gal. I almost said something that someone may have found demeaning, and I don't want to do that.)

Antrobus
07-23-2003, 09:32 PM
But I disagree with him, because I think our show can complement the other show. It takes things in different directions. It's much more of a human story. It's much, I think, more plausible, in the sense of the situation that they're in. And as a result, I think it's much more dramatically interesting."

This is kind of straying away from the original topic that I posted, but given the above quote, one wonders why the "new " show wasn't simply given a different name with different character names along with a footnote saying - loosely based on Battlestar Galactica. This kind of thing is done all the time in certain types of art/movies. It seems like SciFi wanted (and/or needed) to use the name Battlestar Galactica as a promotional tool.

....and I still find it strange that Olmos was not at the panel. I'm not losing sleep over this, believe me. It's just a curiosity. It will be interesting to see what transpires between Olmos and SciFi down the road.

Shipscat
07-23-2003, 09:47 PM
(is there a snorting in disbelief smilie?) Like I'd believe anything Scifi had to say.


Stardoe.

Actually, that part ticks me off because there were perfectly good female characters they could have used-it's not like there weren't any.

Tiriel
07-23-2003, 10:04 PM
Wow! Over 1,000 people! Damn! They must have been three stories high in audience! Because the room was less than half the size of that of the Farscape panel and the Farscape panel-room reputedly seated 630 people... I guess when Musicalgal mentioned the room wasn't particularly full when she dropped by before the Farscape panel, it was because the ceiling is high and they could and should have fit a fourth and fifth layer in.

I'm glad that SFC never spins or doctors the numbers in their press-releases to suit their own agenda, but Hell!!! That MUST have been uncomfortable for those on the lower levels...

Well, if people go through so much pain just to attend the panel, then it must be a fantastic show. I guess that means I will have to watch.

Love and Peace and :D

Tiriel :bounce:

Antrobus
07-23-2003, 10:15 PM
Let's ask MediaSavant. She said that she was at the panel. MS, were there 1,000 - strong people at SciFi's BSG ComicCon panel?
Let's see if SciFi can count!

uisceboo
07-23-2003, 10:57 PM
Gee, I really hope there weren't 1000 people in aroom designed for a third of that. That would have been a fire hazard. Either SciFi does not care about their fans, or they are lying.

:puppy:

This is the kind of conundrum you see in old science fiction, the kind that melts computers and robots!

uisceboo
___________
Science fiction does not mean you make up your data.

SabaceanBabe
07-24-2003, 06:08 AM
Either SciFi does not care about their fans, or they are lying.

Either or? Isn't it both?

:kitty:

Tiriel
07-24-2003, 12:22 PM
Well, I talked to a couple of people who were both at the Farscape panel and had a look at the BSG panel and we now have a new estimate as to how many people there were at the Farscape panel.
Comparing the crowds and knowing there were a thousand at the BSG panel we can proudly announce that there were almost 10,000 people at the Farscape panel!!! Ladies and gentlemen! WE ARE LEGION!!!! :bounce: :bounce:

Love and Peace and Comparative Mathematics :D

Tiriel :bounce:

SabaceanBabe
07-24-2003, 12:41 PM
:rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin:
:kitty:

Deanna T
07-25-2003, 06:03 AM
HAHAHAHA!

Well, of course I'm don't know why Olmos was there, but if I were Bonnie (heaven forbid!), I wouldn't take Olmos anywhere after the press release, unless I had a promise from him that he would go back on his word and try to patch things up for the Channel. I don't think Olmos would buy into that idea, and for that he stays home. After the Press Conference, it's a certainty that the question about old fans liking the series is going to come up again at ComicCon (and it did!), and if Olmos was there, he would repeat his opinions again, and the SciFi channel would have set themselves up for another embarassing fall. For that reason, I don't think SciFi will be taking him to places where he has to answer audience questions anymore. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's common business sense.

What I don't understand is why Skiffy seems intent on holding onto old BSG fans. They seemed perfectly happy to shaft Farscape fans. Yet if you check out http://www.battlestargalacticaclub.com/ , they only have 243 members! Why doesn't Skiffy just cut their losses with the old fans, agree with Olmos' standpoint, support their neighbours at Universal by persuading old fans to buy the DVDs, and advertise the new BSG as "New Ideas for the New Generation" or something (Bad slogan, but you get the idea :)). SciFi are good at spin, they could pull it off gracefully quite easily.

As a young scifi fan, I think Antrobus' idea of renaming the series would be a smart one also. To me, the name "Battlestar Galactica" seems like "my Father's scifi". Considering the latest shows on Skiffy, and their "reimagining" of BSG, I think they are aiming for my demographic quite heavily. Giving the series another name, and then advertising it as being "based on Battlestar Galactica", would probably do a better job at attracting younger people, as well as casual viewers who enjoyed the original. And it would probably annoy the fans a lot less also.

Anyway, I'm not in marketing or advertising or anything. But that's just my viewer's perspective.

Digger
07-25-2003, 06:42 AM
I like the way you think Deanna. As someone who watched (and liked but did not love) the original BSG when it was on in the 70's I have not so much been opposed to the updating (or reimagining as they call it) as I have been appalled at skiffy's arrogance. In other words it's not what they are doing that bothers me but the way they are presenting it. Saying that "everyone wanted the reimagining" is insulting to the fans. Had they simply said "we thought it needed an updating to be relevant some 25 years after the original. We know there are some who won't appreciate it, but we can't please everyone, as much as we'd like to" or something to that effect would have mollified a lot of people. When I first heard about it I was interested in watching, but after reading Bonnie Dearest's spin on the situation I am leaning towards not watching. Every time she opens her mouth she says something that ticks me off. At this point skiffy could broadcast the first contact with aliens and I may not watch.

Stoker
07-25-2003, 09:19 AM
I could understand updating an idea, after all, that's what they did with "Enterprise". It would have looked pretty stupid to use 60's style buttons and monitors knowing that we have surpassed that appearence of technology today. The cylons being humanoid in BSG does make sense, but they need to have a few "relics" to show their evolution.

But let's look at another "remake" I found to be dissappointing. The movie "Lost in Space". They were out to change everything, and leave the original out of it. At least they had- a family, an unmarried navigator, a bad guy, and a robot. They overtook the robot though. (No keeping the robot "as it was" would have been stupid, but still.)

PicassosLaughing
07-25-2003, 10:30 AM
I'm still laughing about "Star-doe".:rollin: