PBS Films. (Ended due to much better reboot being made)

March 7, 1977
March 7, 1977
Superman the Movie beings filming. Superman the Movie began filming yesterday, and we have info on who are the actors.
Clark Kent/ Superman: Christopher Reeve
Lois Lane: Margot Kidder
Lex Luthor: Sidney Poitier
Jor-El: Christopher Lee
Otis: Ned Batty

these are the cast so far.

Batman: Gotham Knight will come out Late 77
 
Last edited:
October 31, 1977
October 31, 1977
Batman: Gotham Knight released.
Cast:

Batman/Bruce Wayne: Bruce Lee
Commissioner Gordon: Sebastian Shaw
Joker: Richard Pryor
Vicky Vale: Julie Andrews
Alfred Pennyworth: Sean Connery
Harvey Dent: Sylvester Stallone

Directed by: Stanley Kubrick

Plot: its very similar to Batman 89, except the Joker sprays Batman during their first fight, which causes Batman to have hallucinations through out the film.

Batman: Gotham Knight: Cost 70,000,000 It grossed 240,000,000 (USA) 100,000,000 (UK) 90,000,000 (International). Distributor: Columbia Pictures (USA), Warner Bros. (International), Golden Harvest British (UK). Production Companies PBS Films, Concord Productions, Toei Animation. Rating PG: Violence and Language (it was original R Rated but Columbia and Warner cut the film, though when reissued the film's full cut will get a PG-13
 
Last edited:
January 30, 1978
January 30, 1978
Some entertainment news. Superman The Movie will be released December 1978. Peter Tosh's Strange Warriors will be released Summer 1978 it will be Embassy Pictures first film in 4 years, Hanna Barbara's Death on the Nile will be released summer this year it will be Hanna Barbara's first film in 4 years, Lord of The Rings will be released fall 1978. CTW to sell syndie rights to Electric Company to Viacom. CBS might be acquired by Warner Communications. Hanna Barbara and Paramount signed a 10 picture deal, this means Hanna Barbara will produce 10 films for Paramount with a cut off date of June 1995. The first film uner this deal is Death on the Nile staring Albert Finney, Bette Davis, and Maggie Smith.

Death on the Nile wasn't animated OTL. OTL Peter Ustinov was Poirot in Death on the Nile but at first Finney was to reprise his role, source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077413/trivia?ref_=tt_ql_2

 
Last edited:
July 10, 1978
July 10, 1978
Peter Tosh's Strange Warriors was released 6 days ago and its a hit. Plot: The film focuses on two fighters in tournament, both are friends from rival cities but with differing reasons as to why they fight. they eventually have to fight each other in the semi-final to move up, with both coaches talking about ruthlessness, who will move on? The same can't be said for Death on the Nile. The sequel to Murder on the Orient Express was given mixed reviews. Despite good performances from Finney, Lansbury, and Smith the film's animation is terrible and models are reused from Hanna Barbara's other shows. Film is peppered with bad acting. however the story is good

Strange Warriors Cost 7,500,000 it grossed 32,000,000 USA, 10,000,008 UK, 8,000,000 International. Distributor: Embassy Pictures (USA) Warner Bros. (International). Production companies Embassy Pictures, AIP.Rating R: for Violence

Death on the Nile cost 12,000,000 it grossed 6,000,000 USA, 20,000,000 UK, 13,000,000 International. Distributor: Paramount (USA), EMI (UK), CIC (International). Production companies Hanna Barbara, Paramount, EMI
 
PBS is a NON-PROFIT corporation. It's funding charter includes standards to ensure lack of influence by donors (beyond local fundraiser in which the locals are allowed to program a certain portion of the programming - after the mainline PBS show)s. Getting into movies means it loses that status and government subsidies, cannot access the Corporation for Public Broadcasting funds (must return them to their sources), and loses most of it's private funding/donations (they will no longer be allowed to do fund-raisers). And so totally lose PBS TV.


Don't see this as remotely possible.
 
PBS is a NON-PROFIT corporation. It's funding charter includes standards to ensure lack of influence by donors (beyond local fundraiser in which the locals are allowed to program a certain portion of the programming - after the mainline PBS show)s. Getting into movies means it loses that status and government subsidies, cannot access the Corporation for Public Broadcasting funds (must return them to their sources), and loses most of it's private funding/donations (they will no longer be allowed to do fund-raisers). And so totally lose PBS TV.


Don't see this as remotely possible.

Please explain how the BBC has its own film arm. Aside from that ITTL only PBS TV get Federal Funding, the film arm is private
 
Last edited:
I would know squat about the BBC and how they fund and their directives about conflicts of interest. I do know a little about PBS and it's funding. We're going to lose PBS TV because you can't be profiting with one hand and be non-profit with the other IN THE USA, which is the premise here. PBS TV not only gets federal funding, it gets state funding and private donations/grants. If the two are not related (PBS TV & PBS Films), what the hell does PBS stand for in the films? And what's the point of the TL? Congress and NO states are going to be funding PBS if it's sister company is making money, you're now contradicting yourself. It's PBS, but it's not really?

Still don't see how this can be remotely possible if we're to keep PBS TV. My opinion. That and $10 will get you a small coffee at Starbucks. Your TL, do what you want.
 
I would know squat about the BBC and how they fund and their directives about conflicts of interest. I do know a little about PBS and it's funding. We're going to lose PBS TV because you can't be profiting with one hand and be non-profit with the other IN THE USA, which is the premise here. PBS TV not only gets federal funding, it gets state funding and private donations/grants. If the two are not related (PBS TV & PBS Films), what the hell does PBS stand for in the films? And what's the point of the TL? Congress and NO states are going to be funding PBS if it's sister company is making money, you're now contradicting yourself. It's PBS, but it's not really?

Still don't see how this can be remotely possible if we're to keep PBS TV. My opinion. That and $10 will get you a small coffee at Starbucks. Your TL, do what you want.

OK, here's how its explained. PBS made a deal with Congress in 1971 that the film arm would make money and not receive CPB funding whilst giving 58% of their profits back to the government. Essentially keeping both arms separate
 
Top