SciFi Weekly published my letter!

[sdoziernc1]

I was shocked!

https://www.scifi.com/sfw/current/letters.html

It's at the very bottom of the page. If I had sent it to the BG BBoard Forum, it probably wouldn't have been posted. And I've gotten a lot of emails in response, all basically saying the same thing: NO ONE is in favor of this reimagining.

Please check it out and tell me what you think.

[newt]

BRAVO!!!

[repcisg]

Well done!

[kingfish]

Well done. I have been published a few times as well.

[KJ]

Hey Sdoziernc1 fantastic letter man. Hope you don't mind i'll put your great post here to be more idolized.

Last weekend, X2 opened to crowded movie houses worldwide. It ended up with a total three-day gross of close to $155 million, $85 million of it coming from movie-goers in this country.

This sci-fi/adventure film was written by the talented team of producer Tom DeSanto and producer/director Bryan Singer. It is based on the Marvel Comics' X-Men characters. Both Singer and DeSanto are huge fans of this comic series, and both have been hailed by both fans of the series and film critics for remaining faithful to the comic series ideas to draw their inspiration.

Two years ago, both men were planning the same treatment for the 1978-80 TV series Battlestar Galactica, which has a huge cult following to this day, similar to Star Trek. Both Singer and DeSanto were planning a continuation of the original ideas of the series, featuring some of the characters (notably Lt. Starbuck, the series' most popular) from the original show, and feature state-of-the-art special effects and sets for a television series production that were worthy of a theatrical feature.

But alas, it was not to be: when Bryan Singer left the production to focus his attention on the production of X2, the television network Fox (which had agreed to air a two-hour pilot produced by Singer/DeSanto) withdrew their support, leaving DeSanto with no network and no funding for the project. At this point, the president of the SCI FI Channel, Bonnie Hammer, stole the production rights out from underneath DeSanto and commissioned a Battlestar project of her own. DeSanto had sets built, actors hired and was just a few days from production. Hammer hired television writer Ronald D. Moore to write a "re-imagined" concept of the series, complete with foul language, sexual assaults, soap-opera elements and humanoid Cylons (the robotic bad guys of the original). This has outraged fans around the world, who had been hoping for a continuation of the original series, which is what Singer and DeSanto intended to do.

My point is this: There is a difference between what Universal Pictures could have had and now what they're going to get from this now-lost potential franchise. They could've had a lavishly produced, top-quality science-fiction series produced by two of the top filmmakers in the world, which honored the original series for which it was based, therefore bringing an established fanbase to it. Instead, they now have a cheap, violent, hokey, cheaply-produced soap opera written by a former disgruntled Star Trek writer (Moore), which was commissioned by a woman (Hammer) who knows absolutely nothing about science fiction or what makes it so special. She cancels the critically acclaimed Farscape to show rubbish like Tremors and Scare Tactics? A reality show on the Science Fiction network? Please ... how insulting.

If you get a chance to see X2 in the theatre, just watch the movie, the reactions of the fans in the movie theatre and keep track of how much money the movie grosses. Read the reviews as to why the movie is doing so well. Then say to yourself, "Wow, those guys (Singer/DeSanto) are really talented ... Universal could've had the same thing with Battlestar Galactica".

I, as a longtime Battlestar Galactica fan, will not watch the re-imagined Galactica when it airs in December on the SCI FI Channel because it is not Battlestar Galactica. It is another writer's work with the name Galactica slapped on it. I support any effort by Bryan Singer, Tom DeSanto, original series creator Glen Larson or even original series star Richard Hatch ("Apollo") to bring Galactica back with the original cast and original concepts of the show, updated for today's audiences with the same values that made it so special those many years ago.

Steven Dozier

Shame sci-fi puts people's e-mails up i removed yours case you don' want it to be known too much to everyone.

Once again great posted letter

KJ

[LadyImmortal]

I said it in the other thread but I'll say it here.

WTG!!!!!!!! You said it all - and very well too!

--Rhonda

[BST]

OUTSTANDING!!!

What a Day Brightener!!!!!!!

It's nice to know that freedom of speech does exist somewhere!

BST

[Muffit]

Great job! Every time a good word gets out, this bad idea of a remake gets more forgotten.

[viperman]

Great letter! I sent a similar message to the SciFi Galactica BB a few days ago, but it never was posted. It was Censored! Just goes to show you something about those folks at SciFi.com, the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.

[LadyImmortal]

I appreciate this note even more because we have a troll over on the BGC board......

[LucianG]

Well said, sdoziernc1! Way to spread the word.

Lucian

[dah66]

Good work.

Dave

[dvo47p]

continuation letter across a broad spectum of fandom, from pro Hatch to anti Ron D. Moore almost all supporting something other than what we are going to get.

Hello people write to a letter to: scifiweekly@scifi.com

I bet ya that more than just the letters to the editor guy @ ‘The Science Fiction Weekly’ must like Battlestar Galactica. We have had dozens of letters posted since the Singer and DeSanto show was canceled. I know I have missed a few because I had two letters published.

******************************************

Find True Love On Battlestar Galactica

This is in response to Ronald Garrett's letter in Issue No. 124, "Battlestar Galactica Should Stay Dead." Garrett is very right to be nervous over the remake of BSG. I am terrified at the prospect of seeing Battlestar being translated to the silver screen. How many times have we seen TV SF classics go down the big screen toilet? Especially in the 1990s! But I take issue with Garrett's dismissal of the BSG television series as not even being worthy of a big screen try-out: Mormon theology disguised as SF? Quite frankly, Mr. Garrett, if you're going to take offense with SF shows because they borrow from our present-day religions, then you'd better get in line with all the critics who are taking their shots at the reigning SF film champ: Star Wars.
But I'm not writing this in order to delve into the merits of BSG's more esoteric philosophies. I'm writing this letter as a young child who, in the late '70s, thought BSG was a marvelous program. I'm writing this letter as a person who, 20 years after the fact, has recently rediscovered BSG on the SCI FI Channel and is happily re-screening all the old episodes. Sure, the props look a little cheap, the hair is patent late-'70s, and some of the "rubber science" is more rubber than science. But BSG was perhaps my first big SF screen love. Before Star Trek, before Star Wars, BSG beat them all to the punch, and paved the way for my eventual exploration into other universes and other stories. I think every SF fan has a "first love," and I dare say BSG might be mine. There are SF shows that have done it better, there are SF shows that have done it smarter, there are SF shows that have done it bigger, but BSG survives on the strength of its fandom. Having just explored the Web, I am astounded at the numerous and well-done fan web sites revolving around BSG. All these fans can't be excited over nothing! BSG has touched them in some way, and has managed to make itself matter to them. Isn't that all we can ask of any television program? Especially SF?
Battlestar Galactica has endured horrendous criticism for two decades now. But the fans and the show survive. I'm guardedly optimistic about the new movie(s). Mr. Hatch and Mr. Larson obviously have their own interpretations of the show. It would seem that Mr. Hatch's version is steeped in fandom while Mr. Larson is more concerned with "modernizing" the premise for the 21st century. As both parties compete for Universal's favor, I hope that both of them keep one thing in mind: BSG is a true SF classic. The fans are watching! Don't let us down!
Brad Torgersen
subodeon@cio.net

Hatch Will Continue Galactica's Story

Read Ronald Garrett's comments in his Issue No. 124 letter, "Battlestar Galactica Should Stay Dead" that I had to respond to. True, remakes don't fly very well, but what Richard Hatch seeks to do is not a remake. It is a continuation of the story. Sequels do at times make it. Need I remind you that The Phantom Menace is the fourth in what we all hope will be a long line of movies? Richard Hatch would like to do a TV movie or series. I for one wish him the best of luck and am looking forward to seeing it. Anyone interested in this project should visit his Web site. From it I got a link to a list of people to e-mail my support of this project. If all the fans get involved, hopefully someone will listen.
Sharon Marks
smokehousecreek@msn.com

Galactica Is Just Trying To Survive

In his Issue No. 124 letter "Battlestar Galactica Should Stay Dead," Ron Garrett says that Gattaca is superior--it was really bad as far as I am concerned. Does he know the works of Arthur C. Clarke, Robert Heinlein, Issac Asimov and even Anne McCaffrey? Battlestar Galactica is like Star Wars--it gave a downtrodden civilization hope that it can survive under any circumstances. I applaud Richard Hatch for trying to bring back Battlestar Galactica for the simple reason that it is trying to survive against all odds. And in the long run--isn't that exactly what we are trying to do?
Donna King
nascar_chick_24@yahoo.com

[dvo47p]

Galactica Skeptic Becomes A Believer

was 12 years old when Battlestar Galactica first aired in 1978. Though it only lasted one season, it quickly became a show near and dear to me. News and rumors of a revival by either Glen Larson or Richard Hatch left me skeptical. Leave it alone, and let the fans remember just how good it was.
When Richard Hatch first published his books, I read them. There were parts I liked, and parts I didn't like. I did not think he could do justice to the fond memories I had of Galactica, and was truly believing that Galactica should probably be left alone.
Last weekend I had the opportunity to go to a convention in Ft. Washington, Pa., where Hatch would be showing his trailer. All I can say is that I walked in skeptical and walked out completely blown away. Universal will be missing out on what could be one of the most successful resurrections of a TV show if they don't work with Hatch. Anyone who has the opportunity should see this trailer before making any negative comments. The effects were awesome, the plot that you could grasp from the 3-1/2 minutes was good, and you could see there was an effort to embrace the history of Galactica.
Hatch answered questions at the convention, and he would like to do another show. I always thought Galactica worked better on the small screen anyway, and I would love to see a new series based on this concept.
Patti Aliventi
AliventiAsylum@worldnet.att.net

Battlestar Galactica Never Died

In his Issue No. 124 letter "Battlestar Galactica Should Stay Dead," Ronald Garrett stated that Battlestar Galactica should stay dead. That would be very difficult, since it never really died in the first place. True, it was cancelled after one season, but it has continued on all these years in novels, comics, collectable cards, toys, Web sites, fan fiction, and most importantly in the hearts of millions of fans.
Garrett questions Richard Hatch's motives. Richard Hatch started working on his Battlestar Galactica revival because the fans want it to come back. As far as billing himself as "the star of Battlestar Galactica," that's true, that's what he is. Actors are associated with their best remembered roles, and the character of Apollo made quite an impact on people. It doesn't mean that it's the only role he's ever had. People will always think of him as Apollo.
On the question of money, Richard Hatch has financed his trailer out of his own pocket. A lot of people donated their time, because they believe in what he's doing. He has backers as well, having raised between $40 and $60 million for his version of the revival.
If Garrett doesn't like space battles, he doesn't have to watch the new project. If he doesn't like theology he can stay home on Sundays. I've seen Richard Hatch's trailer, and I support him in the revival. Long live Battlestar Galactica!
Paula Kennedy
galacticafan@hotmail.com

A New Galactica Is Worth the Battle

I was very disappointed to read Tim Dykema's words in his letter ("Battlestar Should Not Be Reborn").
Battlestar Galactica was one of those things that I just missed growing up, though I'd heard people talk about it, I never got into it. Even after I got older and was more interested in the classic sci-fi of my youth, I still did not look up Galactica.
Two years ago, I attended a local convention whose guests included several people from the Galactica cast. That was when I discovered how much one of my friends was into it. I made a vague promise that I would maybe watch it, and kept an eye out for news on the series. Last year, we attended the same convention again, and she dragged me to meet the guest of honor, Richard Hatch.
I had not watched a single episode of Galactica, nor did I really even know the plot. But then a huge screen showed me all I needed: Hatch's trailer for his proposed remake/revival. I was hooked, and Hatch himself only helped me along. He was a funny, inviting, interesting and an extremely friendly guy. I had a chance to talk to him afterwards about what he went through to make the trailer, and he was more than willing to help a simple film student.
It was at this convention that I noticed something that is common before a revival: adamant fans. Dozens of people hung around after the talk to simply offer Hatch their support, saying they would love to see more of Galactica. They would love to see more of the premise that grabbed their attention in the late '70s. They wanted something that wasn't Galactica 1980.
Since that day, I have watched plenty of Battlestar Galactica, and gotten involved with a lot more people who loved it. I don't understand how someone could call it a blatant rip-off of Star Wars. There was no force, no Jedi Knights ... the only thing they seemed to have in common were space fighters, maybe the dog fights if you wanted to stretch. How could you have a science-fiction show that takes place in outer space which focuses on a last-ditch effort to save mankind and not have dog-fights and fighter pilots?
Battlestar Galactica is likely being brought back for two reasons: yes, there is a market for science fiction and for remakes and revivals. They're making a live action Scooby Doo movie, for goodness sakes. There's money to be made and somebody is going to want to make it.
The second reason is the most important one: Fans. The fans have brought back shows on the verge of cancellation, have caused shows to go into syndication so that they can rewatch their favorite episodes over and over again. Fans came to Richard Hatch in droves to appear as extras, provide props and costumes and offer support. They wanted the remake, they wanted more Galactica.
And I for one am ecstatic they are going to get it, because it means I'll be getting more myself. They deserve their shot.
Chang Meiran
chang_meiran@hotmail.com


The Golden Age of SF TV is Now

With Battlestar Galactica now in preproduction for a return to the screen, both sides are starting to come out of the wall: Side One saying, "Great! We've been waiting over 20 years!" and Side Two saying, "Why?"
Battlestar Galactica sits in a rather unique spot in the history of sci-fi television, believe it or not. If you look back the the 1960's, it was almost a golden age of televised science fiction. With The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, Voyage To The Bottom of The Sea, Lost In Space, The Invaders, Star Trek, The Time Tunnel and Land Of The Giants, not to mention the plethora of children's shows on Saturday mornings, there was plenty of sci-fi to go around the entire decade.
Move into the 1970's. Aside from reruns of the series from the 1960's, there were five sci-fi series I can remember: Gerry and Sylvia Anderson's excellent UFO, their rather more popular Space: 1999, the ill-fated NBC comedy Quark (starring Richard Benjamin), the dismal Buck Rogers in the 25th Century and Battlestar Galactica.
Call me dense, but aside from the special effects which were obviously cloned from Star Wars, I've never made the connection between the two. Star Wars followed the exploits of Luke, Han and Princess Leia and the Rebellion against the Evil Empire. In Battlestar Galactica, the crew of a space-going battleship/aircraft carrier combo and a fleet of mismatched, raggedy ships are fleeing extermination by a bunch of xenophobic robots who outlived their creators. Okay, the Vipers could have been prototypes for the X-wing fighters--yeah, yeah, members of Galactica's production team came from the same team that made Star Wars, but you've got to admit, it was business. Even the copyright infringement lawsuit filed against Glen Larson by Lucas didn't take Galactica off the air.
Galactica has aged badly, worse than many of the classics from the 1960's, yet when you put it next to other shows of the same period, like Starsky & Hutch or Baretta, it falls into place. The quality of the filming, the quality of the scripts are in accord with the quality the networks passed onto us, the public, during the 1970s.
Should Battlestar Galactica be brought back? I think the point is moot: It looks to be coming whether we want it or not. The question should be: Will it be done right? I had read several accounts that no one from the original series would be included, the Cylons wouldn't be included and that the Galactica would have a "different" mission this time? This filled me with dread. This past week, however; I read in "The Sci-Fi Wire" that the Cylons would be included and that Richard Hatch would at least be consulted and that Glen Larson was to be creative consultant. This is a hopeful sign. If done right, the new version of Battlestar Galactica could be what Star Trek: The Next Generation was to the Star Trek franchise. One can hope. I know that I will at least watch the pilot and one or two episodes in an attempt to give it a chance. If I like it, of course, I'll watch it as long as it's on. That only makes sense.
Still, we are in yet another golden age of sci-fi on television, one that far surpasses that of the 1960s. While a reworked version of Battlestar Galactica is coming, what we need are more ground-breaking series like Farscape and First Wave. Series that take us where we haven't been before, like when we first walked onto the bridge of the Enterprise or watched the Jupiter 2 lift off. That is where the adventure is.
Keith Kitchen
BoyoKlaatu@aol.com

[dvo47p]

Moore's Galactica is Still Less

To say that the road to a Battlestar Galactica revival has been very rocky is underestimating it, to say the least. It has been full of so many ups and downs, twists and turns, that the frustration is now at an all-time high. Especially for a fan base that is still so unbelievably vocal for a 24-year-old show that only lasted one season! (Not counting the cheap, six-episode imitation, Galactica: 1980.)
Amongst the high points of the revival was Battlestar Galactica series star Richard (Apollo) Hatch listening to the fans by writing four books to continue the story (with the fifth due in 2003) and even mortgaging his own home to produce a four-and-a-half minute trailer for both the fans and showing The Powers That Be what the fans wanted. (And fans applauded the efforts!) He even secured a large backing of funds for a movie or series ... all of this because he believes in the show, just as the fans do.
When Bryan Singer and Tom DeSanto (of the X-Men and X2 movie fame) jumped into the game with their own production, the fans were a little reluctant. We weren't sure of their intentions. Up to that point, fans were hoping for Richard's efforts to evolve into a movie or series. But as their plans emerged, even Richard himself got behind their efforts, as did many fans.
Unfortunately, Bryan Singer focused 100 percent on X2 and Tom DeSanto had the rug pulled from beneath him in April 2002 when the SCI FI Channel seized the project. (DeSanto was said to be three weeks from production!) Star Trek's and Roswell's Ronald D. Moore was brought aboard to "remake/reimagine" the original series. While the man is a talented writer/producer, fans were slapped in their collective faces by this.
Since the announcement, Moore has found little Internet support for his planned Battlestar Galactica mini-series ... and most fans have been outright rejecting his plans. Yes, he has spoken to fans first-hand, answering a Q&A session on BattlestarGalactica.com. We appreciate and respect that, but the bottom line is: Fans keep speaking up for what they want ... and it isn't Moore's remake concept. Just look around the Internet, or ask Battlestar Galactica fandom. People want a continuation with members of the original cast (characters), themes, ships and concepts, plus the addition of new actors/characters, technologies and story elements.
(Again: Richard Hatch's "The Second Coming" trailer demonstrated the potential, as does his book series. And Internet Web sites worldwide are supportive of a continuation, not a remake. That includes a petition supporting Tom DeSanto which has over 16,000 signatures!)
Ronald D. Moore has said many times that he has to follow what he believes to be right ... and that is why he is doing a remake. This has left a very bitter taste in the mouths of us fans. Business-wise, he is ignoring what the fanbase (and potential viewers) want ... and have clamored for in recent years. This is disappointing, given license-holder Vivendi Universal's financial situation ... and need for a strong franchise opportunity, i.e., Battlestar Galactica.
It has been many months now since we have heard from Ronald D. Moore. Many of us pray the entire re-imagining/remake idea is gone.
We are announcing our writing campaign to Mr. Barry Diller, head of Vivendi Universal/Universal Television. This letter writing campaign will take place on November 22, 2002. It will reconfirm that we fans are still here, still upset about a "remake" idea, and still wanting a continuation of the original Battlestar Galactica series.
I thank you very much for your time.
T. Shawn Hardy
tshawnhardy@hotmail.com

[kingfish]

Thanks for the e-mail address. I plan on writing mine tomorrow. I am also glad they published OWD's. Shawn this one is on me brother.

[dvo47p]

Galactica Could Be So Much More

As a long-time fan of Battlestar Galactica (the original series, not Galactica 1980) I was overjoyed when I heard that Richard Hatch was working on a cinematic return to the Galactica Universe. I watched Galactica as a kid, and enjoyed it very much at the time. I still occasionally watch it now on the SCI FI Channel here in the United Kingdom, but clearly it is dated and cannot compete with the more sophisticated SF shows on TV in the late 1990s. I think the main reason why Galactica needs to return is to fulfill the potential that it had in the original show, but never really made use of. The basic premise of Galactica was an interesting one--human survivors fleeing an inhuman enemy, looking for a mythical planet called Earth. Here was the horror of war, human tragedy, survival against the odds, relationships developing in a closed society, the quest for knowledge and a need to explore the cosmos. The main problem was that executive producer Glen Larson did not really aim the show at an adult audience--like Lost in Space and Irwin Allen in the 1960s, Glen Larson and Galactica made the same mistake of assuming an immature, unsophisticated audience, when in actual fact the kids of the 1970s and 1980s had grown up with Star Trek and demanded more intelligent scripts, more dynamic, deeper characters, and a message underlying the whole show. Thus Galactica could have been so much more. Instead, Larson assumed that what counted were special effects. Special effects were not enough then, and too many producers today just assume special effects are enough, without listening to an audience that demands more.
A return to Galactica would allow the show to really exploit the potential offered by intelligent audiences. Have many of the original cast members reprise their original roles--Apollo, Starbuck, Boomer, Tigh, Cassiopeia, etc.--but show how they have dealt with years of conflict with the Cylons, and the loss of comrades and family, including Adama. There is huge potential here to give the original cast some great opportunities to really demonstrate that they can do more than take a back seat to space battle sequences. How does Apollo handle command? Explore the relationship between Starbuck and Cassiopeia more. Have new cast members playing significant roles, and laying the basis for future Galactica movies or a series. Make the Cylons darker, more threatening, more inhuman. Obviously update the special effects with modern CGI, but don't make the special effects the focus of the movie. Above all, the new Galactica needs to be dramatic, intelligent, and meaningful. It needs to be more like Star Trek or Babylon 5, rather than Lost in Space (that is not to criticize Lost in Space--I loved that series too, but it had its unfortunate faults).
Those fans who argue that Galactica should remain dead ignore the potential to really create some good science fiction. Many said the same thing about Star Trek--yet the release of Star Trek: the Next Generation, followed by Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Voyager has really rejuvenated the whole Trek scene. Lost in Space could have enjoyed the same result, had the producers of the movie been faithful to the fans of the original series. Alas, I fear an attempt to re-launch Lost in Space may have gone nowhere as a result of a mediocre movie. Richard Hatch has the opportunity to achieve what the producers of Star Trek achieved, and what the producers of Lost in Space probably failed to achieve--bring back a classic SF show, and turn it into truly superb SF entertainment that has potential to go into a new show, or more movies. He should have the chance to prove that Battlestar Galactica is more than space battles.
Malcolm Davis
M.R.Davis@pol-as.hull.ac.uk

Continuing Galactica Is The Key


he difference between the two Battlestar Galactica sequels and the numerous re-makes of various TV series is that the proposed Galactica movies are sequels to the series, not re-makes. In the examples of TV series turned into movies, they were all re-makes of their respective shows. Often, the only things they had in common with the original shows were the trademarked name and the generalized premise.
Most of the movie re-makes/sequels disregard or openly mock their source material. For example, The Brady Bunch movie's main premise was to ridicule its source material. Mission Impossible's premise was offensive to fans of the original series, because the whole point of the story was to discredit or kill the characters from the original show. Most movie adaptations or re-makes of series are done by people who weren't involved in the original series. Many of them would rather re-create the show and make it completely their own rather than continue someone else's work. I have to believe that many of the film makers responsible for the re-makes are not fans of the original series. Why else would someone secure rights to a well established series with all its carefully crafted characters and plot lines, and then discard almost everything from the original show except for the names of the characters?
This is what makes the Galactica movies different. Both competing projects underway have people who were involved with the original show. They both continue the storyline, not replace it. As a fan of the original show, I look forward to seeing the original cast together again. It'll be great to see stuff that they could never show us due to budgetary constraints, like the huge landing bays on both the Galactica and the Cylon ship, or even just shots of the Vipers landing or taking off from anywhere but the Galactica.
Mike Ling
zenzmurfy@mikeling.com

Judge Galactica After You See It


n response to the recent flack given to Richard Hatch's big screen Battlestar Galactica, Galactica was my first introduction to television SF so I feel I must a least defend the big screen production of it for the time being. A while ago I commented on the flack given the new Sliders cast and I shall repeat that phrase for this cause: please don't knock it until you've seen it.
Regarding the comparison of Lost in Space and its big screen remake to Galactica, I liked the big screen version of Lost in Space a lot. Enough to see it twice in the movie theater. The special effects and overall update of the scenario, costumes, and script were fantastic and I dare say, original. The powers that be knew that the old sixties special effects would not grab the attention of the generation that grew up with such visionaries as George Lucas and Steven Spielberg. I think that if the same attention and care given to Lost in Space is applied to Galactica (i.e., the talk of upgrading the Vipers) it could be an excellent movie with spectacular special effects.
J.S. Slusher
Jennifer@clarb.org

Galactica's Revival Thrives On The Net

I support Richard Hatch's project and I run the Battlestar Galactica Revival Homepage (https://battlestar.homepage.com) Web site, devoted to assisting in the revival of the series. The majority of Battlestar fans support Mr. Hatch's effort, not the Glen A. Larson/Todd Moyer project. Todd Moyer has made comments about the direction that he and Larson intend to take the show; these comments have enraged most of the devoted fans of the series. There are thousands of fans on the net who are trying to convince Universal Pictures to give Mr. Hatch the rights to proceed with his proposed project. There is a massive letter writing campaign under way by snail mail and email, as well as hundreds of sites devoted to the show and the revival effort.
Chris Feehan
CureMode@curemode.com