That Wacky Redhead

[Nivek]

So still thinking about what to do about star wars(their legacy was titan, but here Star Trek simple take his flag more early and looks like Galactica was better in some way to keep that road of Space Opera).

I was wondering if Sony will ITTL still buy a Studio as otl, they bought paramount for not more no less that 5 Billions of Dollars in 1989(that is very much money, some people argue that was one of the reason that the japanese bubble explode as hard it was in 1991 thanks to the Zaibatsu double accounting in those big transactions), or here they will make only electronics?

 

[Falkenburg]

Interesting Update, Brainbin.

One thought that does occur is that Galactica could be the merchandising juggernaut that SW was OTL.
Action figures galore. Lots of interesting Ships. Playsets based on specific Episodes.

Might BG blaze a trail with more 'Active' roles for female characters?
It would not only greatly expand the potential market for spin-off merchandise but also be a USP for the Series, setting it apart and generate intriguing possibilities, storywise.

Millions of kids, both boys and girls, pestering parents to empty their wallets into the coffers (eventually) of Desilu.
(Assuming they've bartered their ST Merchandising experience into a nice cut of any revenues)
Kerching!

And all on account of That Wacky Redhead!

Falkenburg

 

[phx1138]

In 1970, futurist Alvin Toffler published a best-selling book titled after this phenomena which he called Future Shock. A documentary of the same name was released in 1972. It was definitely a theme running through William Gibson's Sprawl trilogy.

Haven't read it, but did know about it. I suspect Toffler underestimated the rate of change.

 

[Falkenburg]

I first came across 'Future Shock' as a feature of the Judge Dredd stories in (British Comic) 2000AD.
(Back in those distant days when 'The Year Two Thousand' resonated with the thrill of the future as yet unshaped)

Those suffering from it were known as 'Futsies', IIRC, and used to flip out for no apparent reason, inflicting mayhem on those around them.

It was only years later that I learned the concept existed outside the context of the comic.

Falkenburg

 

[e of pi]

IOne thought that does occur is that Galactica could be the merchandising juggernaut that SW was OTL. Action figures galore. Lots of interesting Ships. Playsets based on specific Episodes.

Was Galactica really aimed much at kids? And as of yet, it's not really a juggernaut, it's just managed to beat the odds and survive into a second season. Those are two very different things.

Might BG blaze a trail with more 'Active' roles for female characters?

Well, if it does, Trek will no doubt be pointed to as another precursor--IIRC this Trek has had much bigger roles for Uhura and a few other female crew. I mean, Uhura's established in canon this time around as Fourth Officer, putting her right behind Sulu and Scotty in the overall chain of comand. Then there's Angela Martine (Tactical Officer), Nurse Chapel, and Mulhall (a recurring science team member). D.C. Fontana does a bit of lobbying (which she can as the person who wrote more episodes for the show ITTL than anyone else) and they end up showing up a good bit. And then there's those forgotten women, Yeomen Rand and Tamura, who each appear in just 10 episodes. So Trek ITTL has its share of strong female characters--check the Appendices.

Millions of kids, both boys and girls, pestering parents to empty their wallets into the coffers (eventually) of Desilu. (Assuming they've bartered their ST Merchandising experience into a nice cut of any revenues)

Actually, if Trek's doing well in merch, then I think it'd be all the more likely that MGM keeps those rights--and selling them to the post-production house would be odd in any case.

 

[NCW8]

Was Galactica really aimed much at kids?

The original series included the character of Boxey - a six year-old boy. He was the owner of the robot daggit and played a significant role in some of the episodes. This is usually a sign that children are the target audience.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Barbarossa Rotbart]

And the 'second season' (Galactica 1980) was completely made for children.

BTW that happened to other TV shows: Wonder Woman was originally made for an 'adult' audience, but during its second season it turnded into a show for children.

 

[NCW8]

I like your story idea, but unfortunately, I'm not writing an ASB timeline Harlan Ellison is never going to return to Star Trek

I've just come across this Harlan Ellison quote:

Star Wars is adolescent nonsense; Close Encounters is obscurantist drivel; Star Trek can turn your brains to puree of bat guano; and the greatest science fiction series of all time is Doctor Who! And I'll take you all on, one-by-one or all in a bunch to back it up!

Given the greater American input during the Yank Years, I wonder if Ellison could be persuaded to write a script for Dr Who.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Falkenburg]

y thinking was that, even if the Series itself is not primarily pitched to a juvenile audience, the merchandise almost certainly would be.

Further, if Galactica is just squeeking by into its second series there might be more impetus to realise additional revenue from secondary sources.

In that case, teaming up with a Company with a proven track record of exploiting a similar property would seem to make sense.

If that Company also happened to be intimately involved with the Series itself (probably at least helping design the very Ships you hope to turn into 'Must Have' toys), then it seems at least plausible to explore the possibility.

Granted there might be a bit of tough negotiation over how any deal was structured but TWR is a formidable businesswomen.

Falkenburg

 

[Thande]

The original series included the character of Boxey - a six year-old boy. He was the owner of the robot daggit and played a significant role in some of the episodes. This is usually a sign that children are the target audience.

Cheers,
Nigel.

Yes, indeed. There was also a boy genius scientist character later on I believe.

Given the greater American input during the Yank Years, I wonder if Ellison could be persuaded to write a script for Dr Who.

Cheers,
Nigel.

Maybe he could collaborate on one with Douglas Adams, now there's a clash of egos I'd like to see.

 

[NCW8]

Maybe he could collaborate on one with Douglas Adams, now there's a clash of egos I'd like to see.

Best would be if Adams were script editor for the story written by Ellison. The result could well be one of the most popular episodes, but Ellison would hate it - maybe so much so that he decides Star Trek wasn't so bad after all.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Brainbin]

So many replies! Thank you all so much for your response to my latest update - obviously I can tell what butters my bread on this thread!

Will Thiokol (based in Utah) still provide the Landram? Will they try and use that for publicity?

I don't see why not. Assuming that there haven't been any technological butterflies.

There is no comparison to Ronald D. Moore's version of Galactica. There isn't.

This is definitely the wrong thread to be saying things like that. Needless to say, there would be no reboot series without the original, and you must respect the history. You seem to have a very high regard for classic Doctor Who - but there are fans of the modern version who have the exact same disdain for it that you have for the original Battlestar Galactica. That's something worth thinking about, next time you disparage it, wouldn't you say?

Well, without the original Battlestar, there never would have been a remake. So this creates the possibility of a remake, though Ron Moore's entire career is likely to be completely butterflied if there are no Trek sequel series for him to be involved with. But again, that's well after 1986, so not terribly relevant to TTL.

Not just Moore's entire career, but also his entire life - he was two years old at the POD.

Anyway, this was another interesting update for me, as I don't know too much about the original BSG IOTL--actually, most of what I've seen of it was effects footage stolen for the movie Space Mutiny--perhaps that being my first exposure to it is part of why I'm not too interested in digging up the show? Anyway, it looks like Galactica will be the series that finally proves that sci-fi can find an audience on TV beyond Trek by pulling a second season, even if it doesn't manage a third. It may have some luck in timing though--Goerge Lucas' little baby project is going to come out one of these years, even if it's not 1977, and if it survives into a third season that could help it get a fourth due to a new wave of interest in scifi properties--the one that OTL created the chance for BSG to finally make it to air, 3 years after it did ITTL.

Obviously, I can't confirm or deny if any of this is true, but I really like your very perceptive analysis here.

I've already mentioned this to e of pi elsewhere, but I'll repeat it here for the purposes of this discussion: since Space Mutiny "borrowed" the effects from Battlestar Galactica without permission, it shouldn't be held against the series, any more than the effects from Turkish Star Wars should be held against the original Star Wars.

Yet another intriguing update ! Is the cast more or less the same as OTL ? In particular, do Lorne Greene and Dirk Benedict star as Adama and Starbuck ? Presumably some of the Star Wars influences are missing. Hopefully that includes the robot dog, which I found annoying.

No cute robot dogs in this version. The "serious, adult science-fiction" prohibition against cute kids and robots, pioneered by Star Trek, will be upheld here.

In the UK, the pilot movie was first shown in cinemas while the tv series was shown on ITV. Without Star Wars, I guess that the pilot would be shown on tv rather than in the cinema. I can still see ITV picking it up as the Beeb has enough SF shows of its own.

I understand that it was shown theatrically in most of the world except for the United States (and Canada) - which was actually surprisingly common among television properties in the 1970s and 1980s IOTL; in North America they either aired on TV as a Five-Episode Pilot or went direct-to-video.

An informative update. One I find changing less in detail, which means all the things I disliked about "BSG" OTL remain.... (I do like learning what I didn't know before, even if that's true.)

Battlestar Galactica is interesting for me, because the evidence shows that Larson sat on his pitch for years before making those last-minute changes to make it more like Star Wars; other than those overt elements, at its core it's very much the same show. Most of the WWII pastiche will be direct, instead of filtered through Star Wars (in turn through Flash Gordon and 1940s serials). There's definitely going to be an attempt to diversify ship designs, to compensate for the relatively limited number of ship designs in Star Trek.

How attached was Larson to the name?

Attached enough that I don't have to think of another one!

Probably the best creative decision made in the show's origins...

Much as the Fantasy Counterpart Culture is such a cliche nowadays, it can be effective when done well. I think using Mormon trappings is particularly clever, because it creates an "uncanny valley" effect when juxtaposed with mainstream Christianity, which enhances an unsettling "alien" effect.

Here's hoping they kept the ship design, IMO one of the two best ever in SF, along with the D-7. (The Vulcan "ring-drive" ships from "Enterprise" come 3d.)

Desilu would be responsible for the ship design, with the only directive from Larson being that it not resemble any ships from Star Trek too closely.

And we all know what the best-ever spaceship design is, thank you very much (It's in the Smithsonian, too, even IOTL, which is surely where it belongs.)

Just goes to show, you can't rely on popular media... I had the impression it was twice that OTL.

You can think Electric Monk for that tidbit, which he in fact shared on this very thread! So thank you, Electric Monk! Wherever you are...

Nice update BB

Thank you, Professor

I think it's an outgrowth of pulp fiction. One of the reasons that inspired Asimov to write his robot stories with the 3 laws was all the "tech out to destroy the world".
It's probably just basic xenophobia exacerbated by war trauma

And there's also a very simple, thematic explanation: implacable and inscrutable foes are more threatening and more terrifying.

That's the only logical explanation for the popularity of zombies, anyway

Good update. I'm surprised you didn't change BG more, actually, though I suppose higher production values, special effects, etc will make a significant difference in themselves.

Thank you - there are a lot of little, subtle changes that will add up, but the broad strokes and the central themes are mostly identical, so a sweeping "big picture" summary description will look largely the same. This thread was an exercise in historical convergence, but there will obviously be greater differences as we move forward (starting with the fact that they're getting a proper second season). This show is going to look better than the OTL version, because the reused effects footage will be far less blatant.

One show I always associated with Battlestar Galactica growing up (similar styles, aesthetics etc.) was Buck Rogers in thr 25th Century, though that did not air until 1979. Very cheesy of course, but I enjoyed it. Is there a possibility of a similar revival of such properties on the back of Star Trek's success in TTL? For the sake of difference you could perhaps use Flash Gordon instead of Buck Rogers (which then of course butterflies the Flash Gordon film).

I'm afraid I can't comment on this, not before we learn of what he with the beard and the flannel and the chip on his shoulder is planning.

Personally I hate the "remake" (in name only) of Battlestar Galactica. It's very similar to the BBC's 2000s "Robin Hood" series in that it's wasting such high production values and good actors on such a blatant piece of political allegorising with all the subtlety of a political cartoon where everything's labelled in big letters. You half expect them to turn to the camera and wink periodically saying "you get that this is a clumsy metaphor for the weapons of mass destruction fiasco in the Iraq war/the gay marriage debate in the US/whatever, right?"

Mind you I hate it generally when people think the only purpose of science fiction is to reflect our own world and society through allegory, completely missing the frickin' point of escapism

This is interesting, because Star Trek (of course) frequently shined a light on (then-)modern society through allegory, but that's not why people still remember the show, and it's not why they still love it. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter, but my guess is that Star Trek worked (and works) because these are characters that we care about, and that care about each other. We relate to these people, and we like them. And we never lose sight of them, even when they do stumble into Message Territory.

WE LOVE YOU BRAINBIN!
OH YES WE DO!
WE LOVE YOU BRAINBIN,
AND WE'LL BE TRUE!
WHEN YOU'RE NOT WRITING STUFF
WE'RE BLUE!
OH BRAINBIN, WE LOVE YOU!

Thank you so much, vultan I would sig that if I could. I'm half-tempted to add it to the Wiki as a reader review

Yes, Gene Coon's involvement in the series would be very critical. He'd be able to polish it up and give it the kind of focus than the OTL series never had, especially if he wrote a couple scripts for the pitch. I'd imagine without the Star Wars influence, and making a conscious decision not to mirror Star Trek too closely, it would focus even more heavily on the "Ancient Astronauts" angle. The significance of finding Kobol here would be even more important, and it's possible many of the alien races in the show would actually be the "basis", in-universe, for mythical creatures, like minotaurs and trolls and such.

Coon lived three-and-a-half months longer ITTL, and given the rate at which he cranked out scripts, that's plenty of time to work on polishing both The Questor Tapes and Galactica (and he gets his due rewards for doing so). I don't think he'd get any teleplay credits, though - just story credits.

More seriously though, if done well that would indeed be a rather new and interesting concept for a mass audience at the time.

And all the more ammunition for people to complain about a quarter-century or so down the line

I agree. Excellent Update

Thank you

Question is John Dykstra involved with the Effect?.

Dykstra is not employed by Desilu, so no, he's not involved.

Did Stu Phililps do the Music? The Sound Track to Battlestar Galactica was a favorite of mine.

Sure, why not.

Is Donald P Bellisario involved? He was a writer on the original. In the OTL , it was one of his first big Jobs in the industry. If not, then there are some real butterflies. No Quantum Leap, No Jag, No NCIS. I have nothing to watch on Tuesday Night.

Then allow me to declare, with pleasure, that Bellisario is not involved!

Who played Starbuck and Apollo?

I like Dwight Schultz for Starbuck, actually

No, not androids... Think a more advanced (and bloodthirsty) version of Robbie the Robot, yeah.

Now that sounds like fun! Consider it canon

In 1970, futurist Alvin Toffler published a best-selling book titled after this phenomena which he called Future Shock. A documentary of the same name was released in 1972. It was definitely a theme running through William Gibson's Sprawl trilogy.

Glad you're still reading, neamathla! I don't see any reason why that book (or documentary) would not exist ITTL.

I was wondering if Sony will ITTL still buy a Studio as otl, they bought paramount for not more no less that 5 Billions of Dollars in 1989(that is very much money, some people argue that was one of the reason that the japanese bubble explode as hard it was in 1991 thanks to the Zaibatsu double accounting in those big transactions), or here they will make only electronics?

Glad you're still reading too, Nivek! One minor correction: Sony bought Columbia, not Paramount, IOTL. But Sony will not be getting involved in the American motion picture or television industry ITTL, nor will they ever start making video game consoles. This is what you get when you mess with a Nintendo Loyalist

Interesting Update, Brainbin.

Thank you, Falkenburg!

And all on account of That Wacky Redhead!

I always enjoy when people quote my slogans back at me But in response to the points you raised, e of pi did a very fine job of rebutting them, I'm afraid

Actually, if Trek's doing well in merch, then I think it'd be all the more likely that MGM keeps those rights--and selling them to the post-production house would be odd in any case.

Indeed, MGM is holding on tight to those merchandising rights, as a direct result of Desilu's success with Star Trek. Precedent is a very powerful thing in Hollywood.

BTW that happened to other TV shows: Wonder Woman was originally made for an 'adult' audience, but during its second season it turnded into a show for children.

Don't worry, we'll get to superheroes in due time

Given the greater American input during the Yank Years, I wonder if Ellison could be persuaded to write a script for Dr Who.

I wouldn't count on it. Harlan Ellison would probably loathe Doctor Who if it became popular stateside. That's just the kind of guy he is.

Also, once again, he's writing for his own show, Far Beyond the Stars, at this time.

Granted there might be a bit of tough negotiation over how any deal was structured but TWR is a formidable businesswomen.

She is, but she doesn't manufacture the playsets and toys, she has other companies do that for her. There's no point in getting Desilu involved as the middleman.

Maybe he could collaborate on one with Douglas Adams, now there's a clash of egos I'd like to see.

I'm getting a headache just thinking about that one

 

[Thande]

This is interesting, because Star Trek (of course) frequently shined a light on (then-)modern society through allegory, but that's not why people still remember the show, and it's not why they still love it. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter, but my guess is that Star Trek worked (and works) because these are characters that we care about, and that care about each other. We relate to these people, and we like them. And we never lose sight of them, even when they do stumble into Message Territory.

It's true Star Trek did that, but very rarely as clumsily as (in my view) the new BSG (or that BBC Robin Hood series) does: those are really the modern equivalent of The Omega Glory when it comes to clumsily done allegory. Part of this is down to personal view of course--some people think "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" was excessively blatant, but I never did--perhaps because I saw it as a child before I was aware of how racism worked in the USA.*

TNG and DS9 always did the allegories pretty well IMO. Bajorans vs. Cardassians, which of course was launched in TNG and then provided the background setting for DS9, draws upon lots of real life influences of colonialism, resistance and irredentism etc but is clearly not meant to be an allegory of any specific one. I remember having a discussion with my friends about this at sixth form and talking about how Star Trek doesn't always have neat counterpart cultures: the Klingons are Soviet Russians when it comes to their role as a sinister geopolitical rival, but the Borg are a metaphor for communism in its ideological sense, and so on. In this discussion my friends decided that Cardassians were closest to Nazi Germany, to which I replied "does that make the Bajorans Jews then?" and they replied "The Bajorans are Libyan Jews" (due to the way the Bajoran resistance using terrorism as a resistance tactic was portrayed) So I think Star Trek has generally done it pretty well, unless you're one of those people who dislikes how they used primarily humanoid aliens not only for budget reasons but also because it's easier to get audience empathy.




*In the sense of blacks and whites being two major groups who have lived alongside each other for generations with inequality and tensions, especially in the 1960s when the show was made. I was aware of the idea of racism against black people, but only in its British form, which is very different because they're explicitly a minority and on the whole are relatively recent immigrants--which is rather different from the kind of racism that that episode was addressing.

 

[NCW8]

No cute robot dogs in this version. The "serious, adult science-fiction" prohibition against cute kids and robots, pioneered by Star Trek, will be upheld here.

That alone is going to make it significantly different from OTL's series and probably much better.

And there's also a very simple, thematic explanation: implacable and inscrutable foes are more threatening and more terrifying.

I'd also include humanity's tendancy to write cautionary tales. Technological change is worrying and it is natural to create stories based on those fears.

I like Dwight Schultz for Starbuck, actually

At least then the robot dog would be invisible.

I wouldn't count on it. Harlan Ellison would probably loathe Doctor Who if it became popular stateside. That's just the kind of guy he is.

That's a good point - especially since ITTL it became popular on the back of Star Trek.

Also, once again, he's writing for his own show, Far Beyond the Stars, at this time.

Does he use the pseudonym Benny Russell ?

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[phx1138]

Obviously, I can't confirm or deny if any of this is true, but I really like your very perceptive analysis here.

I'm seeing another five-year mission...

No cute robot dogs in this version. The "serious, adult science-fiction" prohibition against cute kids and robots

Thank you. I'd have pushed that kid, & that stupid robot, out an airlock the first chance I got. Data & Wesley, too.

Battlestar Galactica is interesting for me, because the evidence shows that Larson sat on his pitch for years before making those last-minute changes to make it more like Star Wars; other than those overt elements, at its core it's very much the same show.

So most of what I hated most was in the original... Which makes it next to unfixable so long as Larson has creative control...or can't be persuaded.

Most of the WWII pastiche will be direct, instead of filtered through Star Wars (in turn through Flash Gordon and 1940s serials).

Too many TV writers were taken in by the flash of dogfighting & too few had a grasp of the nature of spaceflight. Battles between starships would more closely resemble battleship duels. (Leave off the fact the writers had no grasp of the technical realities of torpedoes even in the '70s. Homing torpedo, anyone?)

Those fighter battles in "BSG" & "BRit25C" OTL were a joke. Thrusters always at full power? Maneuvering as if in atmosphere? Barrel rolling in somebody's gunsights & living to tell about it? Multiple times?

Can you say "Look It Up, Stupid!"? (Sorry, bit of a pet peeve...)

Thinking of "BRit25C", does the increased attention on SF improve the writing & avoid the stupid stuff? And does Buck get on TV at all?

There's definitely going to be an attempt to diversify ship designs, to compensate for the relatively limited number of ship designs in Star Trek.

I actually didn't mind that. I took it to mean they'd found one that worked and were updating the tech we couldn't see, the same way the USN did with its wartime subs: stronger frames, thicker skins, better engines, better electronics, simplified or improved equipment layout, improved construction techniques, so forth, but no real need to change the basic design. It didn't (doesn't) trouble me NCC-1071 Constellation so resembled Enterprise. (It bugs the hell out of me, tho, when people try to claim she's in the same class...) I was prepared to believe these ships cost so damn much, they wouldn't muck about with it if they didn't have to. (Also, I was working from the Whitfield info saying there were only about 12 ships in a class with Enterprise anyhow.)

Attached enough that I don't have to think of another one!

Much as the Fantasy Counterpart Culture is such a cliche nowadays, it can be effective when done well. I think using Mormon trappings is particularly clever, because it creates an "uncanny valley" effect when juxtaposed with mainstream Christianity, which enhances an unsettling "alien" effect.

I entirely agree. Careful use of (real) foreign elements adds a "genuine" quality purely made up ones may not.

Desilu would be responsible for the ship design, with the only directive from Larson being that it not resemble any ships from Star Trek too closely.

That might influence the "pods" of TTL's Galactica so they differ more than OTL's.

And we all know what the best-ever spaceship design is, thank you very much

The most iconic, not the best. The drive pods are too SRB-like. Why is the saucer round? And on a "neck"? Why are the drive pods stuck up into nowhere? Why... (Leave off why any spacefaring vessel has a smooth hull...)

Both the Klingon battlecruisers, & Galactica, seemed more sensible. And cooler. "1999"'s Eagles were in the cool class, too: I believed they could actually work.

It's in the Smithsonian, too, even IOTL, which is surely where it belongs.

I won't argue that.

You can think Electric Monk for that tidbit, which he in fact shared on this very thread! So thank you, Electric Monk! Wherever you are...

TY from me, too, then.

implacable and inscrutable foes are more threatening and more terrifying.

That's the only logical explanation for the popularity of zombies, anyway

I've never understood the appeal. And once everybody's infected, don't they all die of starvation, or something?

This is interesting, because Star Trek (of course) frequently shined a light on (then-)modern society through allegory, but that's not why people still remember the show, and it's not why they still love it. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter, but my guess is that Star Trek worked (and works) because these are characters that we care about, and that care about each other. We relate to these people, and we like them. And we never lose sight of them, even when they do stumble into Message Territory.

OTL "ST" was (mostly...) more subtle about it. "STNG" was mostly pretty good, too, except for a couple of episodes. I found "DS9" turned it on its head, by making the message central to the characters, so the conflicts over religious issues were character conflicts, not messages. (Doubtless you've guessed, I liked "DS9" best...tho "TOS" was more entertaining: it was tighter & better paced, & it didn't pull the anachronistic dummies "DS9" did. Nor so damn many episodes with a dismal grasp of the nature of naval warfare, & modern warfare in general.)

Coon lived three-and-a-half months longer ITTL, and given the rate at which he cranked out scripts, that's plenty of time to work on polishing both The Questor Tapes and Galactica (and he gets his due rewards for doing so). I don't think he'd get any teleplay credits, though - just story credits.

The more credit he gets, the better I like it.

Then allow me to declare, with pleasure, that Bellisario is not involved!

No fan of "Quantum Leap", I liked "JAG", & I like "NCIS" a lot.

I like Dwight Schultz for Starbuck, actually

Then again...he's a better actor than Barclay might lead you to think. (Hard to be worse than the OTL choices...) What about the original Faceman (for sheer irony)? And Randy Mantooth as *Apollo? (Too old?)

Does he use the pseudonym Benny Russell ?

LOL. Short, very dark Jew?

 

[unclepatrick]

Star Trek[/I], will be upheld here.


Battlestar Galactica is interesting for me, because the evidence shows that Larson sat on his pitch for years before making those last-minute changes to make it more like Star Wars; other than those overt elements, at its core it's very much the same show. Most of the WWII pastiche will be direct, instead of filtered through Star Wars (in turn through Flash Gordon and 1940s serials). There's definitely going to be an attempt to diversify ship designs, to compensate for the relatively limited number of ship designs in Star Trek.

Desilu would be responsible for the ship design, with the only directive from Larson being that it not resemble any ships from Star Trek too closely.

And we all know what the best-ever spaceship design is, thank you very much (It's in the Smithsonian, too, even IOTL, which is surely where it belongs.)


Dykstra is not employed by Desilu, so no, he's not involved.

Sure, why not.

Then allow me to declare, with pleasure, that Bellisario is not involved!

I like Dwight Schultz for Starbuck, actually



Indeed, MGM is holding on tight to those merchandising rights, as a direct result of Desilu's success with Star Trek. Precedent is a very powerful thing in Hollywood.

Don't worry, we'll get to superheroes in due time

I wouldn't count on it. Harlan Ellison would probably loathe Doctor Who if it became popular stateside. That's just the kind of guy he is.

Also, once again, he's writing for his own show, Far Beyond the Stars, at this time.

I would say that unlike Star Trek or Doctor Who, BattleStar Galactica is a show that most of us like, but we all think could have been better.

Since Dykstra is not involved, who is handling the effects?
Since Galactica came first, do people accuses Star Wars of ripping off Galactica ship design ?

I think Dwight Schulzt as Starbuck is a Great idea.

The Question of Merchandising made me think, Does Marvel get the Comic rights as in OTL or do DC or Dell get them? ( I come up with odd question some time)

Looking forward to your take on Superhero TV in the 1970's.

Would you give us more detail on Far beyond the Stars?

Thank you for all you hard work.

 

[unclepatrick]

Two more questions about this Timeline version of Battlestar,
Did the first airing of the Pilot get interrupted with a earlier version of the Camp David Accords?
Were Boomer and Colonel Tigh play by Black actors in this time line.
I was one of the few kids in my class who parents allow to stay up to see the ending after the camp David Accords, and the next morning in school everyone wanted to know how it ended.
My friend Jason, the only other sci fiction fan in the class, was black and he ask a question that I still remember,
"Did they kill off the Black Pilot and Black first officer?"
"Why would you ask that?"
"You mean you never notice that any Science Fiction Movie that have black people in them, The Black people die before the end of the film?"

I assure Jason that both characters survived. He did not believe me. He thought I was kidding him.

Did both Boomer and Colonel Tigh survive the Pilot?

 

[e of pi]

Since Dykstra is not involved, who is handling the effects? Since Galactica came first, do people accuses Star Wars of ripping off Galactica ship design ?

Desulu Post-Production would be handling the effects, and from the sounds of it that also involves the ship designs--so the ships of the RTF including Galactica herself may look radically different, and more differentiated from Star Wars' designs--after all, here it's before that property and with a different design staff.

Two more questions about this Timeline version of Battlestar,
Did the first airing of the Pilot get interrupted with a earlier version of the Camp David Accords?

Since I doubt that international diplomatic events were scheduled just to screw over TV shows, I'd say there's no probably no conflict ITTL--well, there's the I/P conflict, but no conflict between the latest treaty in that and BSG.

Were Boomer and Colonel Tigh play by Black actors in this time line. Did both Boomer and Colonel Tigh survive the Pilot?

I dunno about the casting, but I would assume that regardless of whether they're cast with black actors, they aren't killed in the pilot. This isn't nuBSG, not everyone dies.

 

[Brainbin]

It's true Star Trek did that, but very rarely as clumsily as (in my view) the new BSG (or that BBC Robin Hood series) does: those are really the modern equivalent of The Omega Glory when it comes to clumsily done allegory. Part of this is down to personal view of course--some people think "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" was excessively blatant, but I never did--perhaps because I saw it as a child before I was aware of how racism worked in the USA.

Looking back, it's odd that most of the blatantly allegorical episodes were products of the Turd Season ("The Omega Glory" came late in the second, and was in fact a rejected pilot script, but in retrospect it seems likely that the production team believed that they would not be renewed for a third season, and chose their scripts accordingly). Star Trek could never really be described as subtle, but the show was better at integrating allegory with the plot and characters earlier on.

So I think Star Trek has generally done it pretty well, unless you're one of those people who dislikes how they used primarily humanoid aliens not only for budget reasons but also because it's easier to get audience empathy.

One wonders what might have happened if they did have a Jim Henson working for them, if that might have been what they needed to break out of the humanoid mould.

I'd also include humanity's tendancy to write cautionary tales. Technological change is worrying and it is natural to create stories based on those fears.

Very true. One must never underestimate the human drive to be able to say "I told you so."

That's a good point - especially since ITTL it became popular on the back of Star Trek.

Indeed. That's enough to poison it forever, in his mind. Perhaps UFO might be more to his liking.

Does he use the pseudonym Benny Russell ?

Herbert Rossoff

I'm seeing another five-year mission...

We'll have to see how long the search for Earth will last.

Too many TV writers were taken in by the flash of dogfighting & too few had a grasp of the nature of spaceflight. Battles between starships would more closely resemble battleship duels. (Leave off the fact the writers had no grasp of the technical realities of torpedoes even in the '70s. Homing torpedo, anyone?)

There's a certain "pulp" element to space opera that makes it palatable to the mainstream. "Hard" science-fiction can't appeal to as wide an audience, and remember that television, more than any other form of media, is absolutely driven by the need to reach as many consumers as possible (in order to sell advertising).

Thinking of "BRit25C", does the increased attention on SF improve the writing & avoid the stupid stuff? And does Buck get on TV at all?

There's only one way to find out!

I've never understood the appeal. And once everybody's infected, don't they all die of starvation, or something?

Don't even get me started...

What about the original Faceman (for sheer irony)?

Much as that tickles me, he's definitely too young (much as he was for The A-Team IOTL).

I would say that unlike Star Trek or Doctor Who, BattleStar Galactica is a show that most of us like, but we all think could have been better.

Well, Star Trek and Doctor Who both could have been better in many ways, at least if TTL is any indication

The Question of Merchandising made me think, Does Marvel get the Comic rights as in OTL or do DC or Dell get them? ( I come up with odd question some time)

Good question! I'll have to investigate that. Perhaps I can tie that into my superhero update...

Would you give us more detail on Far beyond the Stars?

There's really not much to tell. Your standard-issue science-fiction anthology series, probably "harder" than anything else in primetime. Runs for three seasons. Ellison hosts and narrates the show, writes more episodes than anyone else, and has a producer credit, but (naturally) frequently gets into fights with the studio and the network.

Thank you for all you hard work.

Thank you for your compliments!

e of pi did an excellent job of answering your other questions. Thank you, e of pi!

(And yes, they're still black.)

 

[phx1138]

Perhaps UFO

It could only help. (And I say that as somebody who liked "UFO" OTL.)

We'll have to see how long the search for Earth will last.

*sigh* TTL, the search, I suggest, can only be better than what happened OTL when they got here...

There's a certain "pulp" element to space opera that makes it palatable to the mainstream. "Hard" science-fiction can't appeal to as wide an audience, and remember that television, more than any other form of media, is absolutely driven by the need to reach as many consumers as possible (in order to sell advertising).

Don't mistake me. It's not the battles I object to. It's the ship design & the execution. The endless "transfer auxiliary power" is a PITA... &, as David points out, power should never be an issue. Beyond that, tho, are the blatant stupidities that drive me up the wall. It costs nothing to describe a maneuver, & is it really so much more expensive to shoot a model moving vertically, or around one or more of its axes, than a stationary one? Or to animate a crooked path for a notional torpedo, rather than a straight one? While the script throws out technobafflegab about all the countermeasures that aren't working just before it hits? Or the last thing works?

There's only one way to find out!

As always, just raising the issue, in case you missed it. (Yeah, fat chance.)

Don't even get me started...

I'm with you on this one. eek:)

Much as that tickles me, he's definitely too young (much as he was for The A-Team IOTL).

I hate it when that happens...

There's really not much to tell. Your standard-issue science-fiction anthology series, probably "harder" than anything else in primetime. Runs for three seasons. Ellison hosts and narrates the show, writes more episodes than anyone else, and has a producer credit, but (naturally) frequently gets into fights with the studio and the network.

The behind-the-scenes tell-all books must be epic, though.