Bryan Singer and Universal to reboot Galactica

Universal to reboot Galactica

Battlestar Redux ... already?

Bryan Singer

Five years ago, Bryan Singer was known as the wunderkind director who made good on the promise of 1995’s The Usual Suspects and single-handedly redirected the superhero genre with his pair of successful, acclaimed X-Men films.

But these days, his reputation has been sullied by Superman Returns (2006), the much-maligned “follow-up” to Richard Donner’s original Superman (1978) and Superman II (1981). The consensus is pretty unanimous: Singer delivered a technically super film, but was hobbled by a fatal combination: being too reverent to Donner’s tone (and thus, never making good on the promise of a Singer Superman flick) … and the story-killing insertion of Superman’s offspring. Casting the shrill Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane didn’t help.

So now comes the news that Singer has signed on to direct a big-screen version of Battlestar Galactica for Universal.

The original Battlestar Galactica, about a starship carrying the last human survivors from a distant group of planets made its debut as a television series in 1978, amid the fanfare over Star Wars. It lasted one year, produced an embarrassing spin-off, Galactica 1980, and was forgotten for two decades despite numerous attempts to revive or sequelize the show (original BSG actor Richard Hatch wrote several Galactica novels and tried desperately to launch a sequel series) in the 90’s and early 00’s.

1978 Galactica promo image.

Singer had been attached to a Galactica project prior to Ronald D. Moore’s visionary re-imagining, which just wrapped its four-year run with a perfect bow at the end of the story. Although fans of the original griped at first (Starbuck’s a girl????), there is no debating that the 2000s Galactica offered strong storytelling that dealt with sweeping human themes, a broad visual canvas, impeccable casting and powerful performances.

Many critics and fans alike consider it one of the greatest sci-fi series of all time, if not flat-out among the greatest shows, period.

So what the hell exactly are Bryan Singer and Universal thinking?

Not everyone loved the new BSG series.

For Universal, it makes total sense. After all, it’s business-as-usual - the soulless rebooting of a franchisable property. But the show only wrapped in April. The complete series DVD only dropped two weeks ago. For frak’s sake, the corpse isn’t even cold yet.

In concept, the reboot works both ways. It gives a studio a new lease on a product’s life but it also deepens the groove when it comes to cultural awareness. Whether it’s Jason Voorhees, James Bond, Freddy Krueger or Flash Gordon, everything gets a fresh coat of paint or goes upstream to die. Instead of an iconic property being representative of a particular time, continual reinterpretation allows for a work to last for all time, provided the elements are something an audience can find relevant.

The original 1978 Galactica TV show didn’t age well. As rebooted, the concept jettisoned the green cheese and featured fierce, flawed characters in a post-9/11 world, er, galaxy. It was very much a show for its time. Granted, Galactica 2004-09 wasn’t everybody’s cup of tea. Not everyone watched it and many didn’t get it. Heck, even the most ardent supporters were scratching their head of the puzzling, challenging finale. But like it or not, Galactica made a big ‘ol pop culture dent. A brand new direct-to-DVD film (BSG: The Plan) with the TV cast will premiere in October and a prequel series, Caprica, will premiere in January.

The question isn’t whether Bryan Singer can deliver a brilliant film. It’s … why this, why now?

And how can Universal simultaneously develop two canons, one honoring the timeline established on BSG and Caprica; and a new version that could be a sequel to the 1978 version (a rumor) or complete reinvention?

And honestly, we saw what Singer did with Superman’s continuity … Can he be trusted with another established property or should he stick to originals?

It can’t be worse than Galactica 1980, right?

G.I Joe New Version

Synopsis

G.I Joe: Rise Of Cobra (English)

Set approximately ten years in the near future, a special military unit known as the "G.I. Joe" arises from the Cobra Organisation, vowing to take down any crime organisation led by a notorious arms dealer. With their team operating from the headquarters known as "The Pit," the film will include stunning locations from the Arctic, Paris, Moscow, Australia and the Sahara desert.

Classification: PG13
Genre: Action
General Release Date: 06 Aug 2009
Running Time: 1 Hour 59 Minutes,
Distributor: United International Pictures
Cast: Channing Tatum, Dennis Quaid, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Marlon Wayans, Rachel Nichols
Director: Stephen Sommers

Star Rating:
Overall:
Cast:
Plot:
Effects:
Cinematography :

Watch this if you liked: "Transformers", "Fantastic Four", "Street Fighter", "X-Men" movies

Do you reckon it's fair to call "G.I. Joe: The Rise Of Cobra" the poor man's "Transformers"? They're both from the Hasbro toy line.

Just like the Michael Bay blockbuster, the toy-to-movie adaptation "G.I. Joe" boasts some high-temp and top shelf CGI, mesmerising the senses as we run through Paris and witness scenes of the Eiffel Tower collapsing due to biochemical war and scenes of the ocean bed in the North Pole.

However, this Stephen Sommers effort comes off rather soulless when considering that Michael Bay had enough story to add to action but "G.I. Joe" is mostly just senseless trashing. Some of the dialogue in the movie is ridiculously cliched, especially those between the G.I. Joe team. Worse, the lineup that backs the movie fail to leave much impact, for example Sienna Miller's Ana character is as good as a pretty puppet. Despite her star appeal and seductive persona, her acting gives you that sinking feeling, just like Destro's submarine in the story. Channing Tatum also does nothing special here but a more disappointing fact is that veterans like Dennis Quaid are made to look like fools, in this case as General Hawk. Marlon Wayans, synonymous with slapstick in the industry, may just be the only actor who comes alive, playing a joker who provides comic relief to his teammates.

Director Sommers generally fails to get the best out of the cast and this movie is inferior to his previous efforts like "The Mummy" and "The Mummy Returns". We wonder why it's not 90 minutes but almost two hours? However, as Hollywood action movies go, you probably could do a whole lot worse.

Cinema Online, 05 August 2009