Stargate Refuge Michael Shanks for Apollo

[ray gower]

Stargate Refuge Micheal Shanks for Apollo

From Gateworld

Shanks in Battlestar Galactica?
FEBRUARY 6, 2003

Is Michael Shanks the next Lee "Apollo" Adama?

Insider Michael Faires reports via the SciFi.com bulletin board that Shanks ("Dr. Daniel Jackson") is being strongly considered for the part, a major role in The Sci-Fi Channel's upcoming Battlestar Galactica mini-series. The mini-series is set to air later this year, and will serve as a back-door pilot for a possible on-going series.

Should the mini-series merit the commissioning of a series, and SG-1 ends after the upcoming Season Seven, Shanks should be available. Filming on Stargate SG-1 concludes in October.

Farscape's Ben Browder ("John Crichton") was also being considered for the role of Apollo, Faires said, but "things didn't work out."

Apollo was portrayed by actor Richard Hatch in the original 1978 series, which ran on ABC for one year. Sci-Fi's "reimagining" of the series retells the fateful story of the fall of the Twelve Colonies of Man, and the escape of a "rag-tag, fugitive fleet" that sets out across space after their world is betrayed by one of their own and wiped out by the robotic Cylons. It is written by long-time Star Trek veteran (and generally brilliant guy) Ronald D. Moore.

Also of note to Stargate fans: "Ronny Cox ["Senator Kinsey"] is on the short list to become William 'Husker' Adama, if he hasn't already been signed," Faires said. Commander Adama was portrayed by Lorne Greene in the original series.

"There was also a rumor circulating that Stargate SG-1's Richard Dean Anderson ["Jack O'Neill"] was considered as Baltar. That is not happening, though."

 

[Krystal]

As I say in other bulletin board, this show how desperates they are, since they know they don't have the fan base approval they looking for big scifi stars that already have fan base to make it. First Ben Browder, surely will give them the Farscape fans. And know Michael Shanks, will gave them Stargate fans. I only have to say that they will need more than a big name to make it. Because you have to maintain the interest of the fans and with their script I don't think they will have much luck.

Krystal

 

[Status]

Originally posted by Krystal
As I say in other bulletin board, this show how desperates they are, since they know they don't have the fan base approval they looking for big scifi stars that already have fan base to make it. First Ben Browder, surely will give them the Farscape fans. And know Michael Shanks, will gave them Stargate fans. I only have to say that they will need more than a big name to make it. Because you have to maintain the interest of the fans and with their script I don't think they will have much luck.

Krystal

It has been years since I've gotten to see any BG shows. Because of this I'm hoping this outlook to be wrong because I really would enjoy seeing something new, even if it is a remake of an older theme. Isn't that how the newer series of ST started out and each one is good in it's own right?

In my opinion it could be a good thing too! After all, if you can get the fans of the previous shows to start viewing it, and get good enough writers, you just might have a good show

 

[Tabitha]

Is it bad that I would watch this ONLY because of the involvement of Shanks or Browder?

I am only partly kidding, I would probably check it out anyway, but it would be scribbled into my diary in indelible (sp?) ink if either of these two (or both *sigh* ) were involved.

 

[ray gower]

Owning an awful memory for names, not suffering female hormones, or being a great follower of either Stargate or Farscape. I think I can safely say the size of the stars so far announced mean very little as to whether I will watch the New BG.

Perhaps T'Pot or Ms Ryan?

Seriously, if the show is going to be a turkey, it is going to be a turkey no matter who is starring, or whose fans it tries to poach.

All I would like to see is a Sci/Fi show with a real story to it and relies upon the actors to tell the story not the gosh wow effects. If it needs known actors to do this and tip the balance from good to great, then fine.

As for the much rumoured scripts and plot bunnies all I will observe here is that Shakespear is an awful read. Yet the plays in the hands of a good production team; adaptor, producer etc. They become superb things to watch. No matter how often they are recreated

 

[Krystal]

I think after reading the reviews of people that have read the script that probably Ben and Michael wouldn't want to be involved in it. Of course I love both of them and probably see it to see them but after both of them been so popular with two great series they probably do a step back getting into this. So I rather see both of them in something more interesting and with more possibilities, and of course something scifi.

As why? I really don't see this getting somewhere probably for two reasons although I know there are many more.
My two basics as a fan of BG are:

1) The famous script is totally contrary to anything BG, it change radically so many things we love about the original. I will love to see something new about BG but I prefer to see something that respect the original and continue to is true core. Of course, it have to change many things but follow the story and the true concept. I would love to see a story that uses the new technology on tv to make BG great again. But that the story we fans love don't suffer from it.

2) The famous change of sex, how could I put it. It definitely is a change but I think is completely innecesary. You want a new female strong figure make one new character and introduce it in the story. Why change main characters and make it something completely different from their original version? To fans of other scifi I put it this way. Is like taking in SG-1 and making Teal'c a woman and Carter a man. In Farscape, take Aeryn an make it a man. In Andromeda take Tyr an make it a woman. Take Star Trek an make Kirk a woman. It totally innecesary and change the perspective of the original story the fans love and follow. This will not mean much for a new series based in the original series. Because generally involves new characters, but for a new series or mini series to take the original characters and change it, I find it unnecessary and an insult to the original fans that love that series. To the BG fans, all know that the interaction between Apollo and Starbuck was one of the main factors of the series. This two were a great team and that was one of the things we love of BG. Like so many teams in other series. Someone put it like they are like Mel Gibson and Danny Glover on the movies they do together, then change one of the characters and make it a woman. Remember that is not a new character, is the same character as a woman. The story have to change because you couldn't have the same interaction you have before and to the fans will be a shock.

So my point is why don't change it to something else, called it something else and don't try to put it like a BG follow up. Make them new characters and is more logic. Probably as a new scifi show will have more luck. Star Trek have do many new programs but have you seen them changing any of the original characters sex or trying to change the basic of the story. No, on the contrary it have live so long because they have carry on with the story and expanded to new things. And even recognize their old characters from time to time in the new stories. Why BG fans can't have the same and have to settle with the travesty their trying to make?

Sorry for the long post, but I really feel very strong about this. I just totally love Ballestar Galactica and was looking forward to see it again before this.

Krystal

 

[jawa]

I don't mind Michael Shanks as Apollo. However, what is EXTREMELY upsetting is that Starbuck is being played by a female....Katee Sackhoff.... no offense to the actress, but how could they do that????
Starbuck is my FAVORITE!! What would have been perfect is having both Michael and Ben play Apollo and Starbuck. That would have been a nice treat. :rolly2:

 

[Krystal]

Originally posted by jawa
What would have been perfect is having both Michael and Ben play Apollo and Starbuck. That would have been a nice treat. :rolly2:

Cool idea!

Krystal

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by ray gower
all I will observe here is that Shakespear is an awful read. Yet the plays in the hands of a good production team; adaptor, producer etc. They become superb things to watch. No matter how often they are recreated

What an outrageous comment Ray!

Are you saying that Shakespear's content is ****, but that the producers, actors and directors make it work?

I think the opposite is clearly the case. The stories are great, and they work on a very basic fundamental level. That's why they can be re-invented frequently and still work -- Taming of the Shrew, West Side Story, Forbidden Planet -- need I say more??

Maybe the problem with BattleStar Galatica is that the original material is too weak. Please don't flame me, but it was never intended to be as popular as it became. It was just a TV version of Star Wars that had a different spin that people liked.

I absolutely agree with the die-hard fans that the way forward should be to capitalise on it's strengths -- and investigate the mythology already described -- not to re-image it as something totally different in character.

 

[ray gower]

I would not disagree that Bill the Quill produced good stories. You really CAN'T make a silk purse from a sows ear. It has been said he invented all of the plots that are used today and that all we do is recreate them, be it in Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica or anything else.

But to make them good requires good presentation, and that is missing in the dry play as presented in the book.

I think there is a decent story behind BG. But it will only work if it is presented well. If BG is presented well, then the series will be a success. And I think that was my point. It will take more than stars and/or redredging a tired format to make it a success.

The script is only a small part of the process. It requires a whole lot more in how it is presented. Perhaps they will suceed with the reinterpretation, perhaps they won't. But at least they are trying!

 

[Krystal]

Originally posted by ray gower

I think there is a decent story behind BG. But it will only work if it is presented well. If BG is presented well, then the series will be a success. And I think that was my point. It will take more than stars and/or redredging a tired format to make it a success.

I agree with this statement. But that is exactly what looks wrong with this remake. So far as an BG fan they haven't show me they have a work presented well. It looks to me they're only counting as a well presented program their FX effects and modern things they could do with the production. I love FX well done, and of course any one could do better with the FX now than the ones they have in the original time. But as a fan I would love to see that back up with a great story that continue the original. The thing with the original actors is more an BG fan desire, the production could be a bigger success is they follow the original story with respect and ask the original actors that can still participate to be in the production as the mature generation of the story. Is not, well, at least give the story the respect and don't change the characters like they do. They also could make something like the Star Trek different versions. New characters involved in a new story of BG. I think that also would be a bigger sucess and I'm as a fan probably would look into it because it doesn't affect the BG I love and admire.

The principal problem with the production is that they simple take the BG name and do with it whatever they want. I know that is why is a remake and that is why the BG original fans are against a remake. We prefer a continuation or if they want to make it, do it like something separate from the original. Don't use the characters and change them.

Dave, as a fan of BG I wouldn't flame you, you give good points. And that is one of the things I love about Ascifi.com we could agree and disagree talking or should I say writing. Definitely have to agree, that is the shame they could do so many great things with BG right now. Things that sadly aren't going to happen.

I personally think the people in charge of this production aren't seeing the big picture. New fans + BG original fans = Bigger Success. I personally have read part of the two script versions out there(Moores and De Santos) and have to say that I totally like De Santos view because he mix new things with old things and stays true to the BG vision. Is a shame that his work doesn't have the green light because I think he's vision is way better than the one we are getting.

Krystal

 

[ray gower]

Sadly, I think opinion over BG is too polarised, not just with fans, but with those that are championing the two possibilities. With all the agitation I would be surprised if Santos is allowed in the same corporation studio. It is going to limit what we get.

Simply picking up from the original and continuing with the same will not work, ala Santos (from what I have seen). Reinventing the wheel, ala Moore? is going to have a lot of inertia to overcome.

The best solution would have been a coming together of the two scripts. Which I think is now going to be impossible.

As I have observed, I am ambivalent about the sex of Starbuck, Boomer and co. Everybody agrees that the the original actors are getting too long in the tooth to play their original parts so there can be no complaint on the handles moving on.

That it would be good to see a 'grown up' version of Starbuck and Apollo, now in charge, would bode well for a continuation from the original.

 

[Krystal]

Originally posted by ray gower

The best solution would have been a coming together of the two scripts. Which I think is now going to be impossible.

That is an interesting way, I would love to see a coming together of the two scrips but the good points. Definitely I think that would make an interesting and probably more strong vision.

Originally posted by ray gower

That it would be good to see a 'grown up' version of Starbuck and Apollo, now in charge, would bode well for a continuation from the original.

That is one of the things I love of De Santos script, he brings the characters as "grown up" and mix them with new and young characters. That is one of the points I totally enjoy of his script because it gives the opportunity to see a continuation that way.

Krystal

 

[HeyLynny]

Yeah

Shanks would be GREAT in Gallactica! I'm keeping my fingers crossed!

 

[libelula]

I'm happy they got shanks he's a decent acter. WHat makes me mad is that John didn't work out. As a Farscape fan I would have died when I saw him up there since it would be a total surprise.

 

[ray gower]

It will depend upon more than just Shanks to make it a success.

Anybody say who else will appear beside him?

Like the new series itself, it all seems to be rumour and speculation so far.

 

[Krystal]

When they announce Shanks in Galactica?
Last thing I know the actor who will play Apollo in the mini-series is other actor. And a series based in Galactica will only happen is the mini-series in December is a sucess.

I have been three weeks out, things change so much.

Krystal

 

[dvo47p]

Accurate casting news

Here ya go,< http://www.scifi.com/battlestar/cast/ >

That Shanks post was pure speculation by bored fans without any real news.

Here is a true tidbit, when Brian Singer and Tom DeSanto were helming Battlestar Galactica, Ian McKellan was to be Adama. This was in '01.

JAMIE BAMBER was Lt. Kennedy in the very good A&E Hornblower series.

Krystal get thee bacK to Colonial Fleets, !NOW!

 

[Tabitha]

Yeah, I think the Shanks rumour was debunked quite some time ago, surprised no one weighed in here a bit earlier!

 

[libelula]

That stinks now whats going to make the mini series worth watching.