req: crusade on another network
Ed Kemo
I'd like to see another network, like the Sci-fi channel, pick up
Crusade and really make an attempt to make it a great show. Unfortunately,
Crusade was doomed from the start on tNT.
--
Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth,
but supreme beauty -- a beauty cold and austere, like
that of a sculpture.
Bertrand Russell (1872 -1970), Mysticism and Logic (1918)
Robert Halloran
> Just my $0.02
>
> I'd like to see another network, like the Sci-fi channel, pick up
> Crusade and really make an attempt to make it a great show. Unfortunately,
> Crusade was doomed from the start on tNT.
Unfortunately, Turner Inc has made it clear that any other network
that wants Crusade has to pay them for *production* cost of the existing
episodes, not just a syndication fee.
This came up when it became clear that Crusade's lifespan on TNT
was limited, and the Skiffy Channel was a possibility then, but the
gotcha above prevented it. Of course, now they've apparently blown
this season's budget on picking up LEXX (retch-heave-puke) for
their Sci-Fi Prime block......
Bob Halloran
Jacksonville FL
Mac Breck
news:3883B6B4...@mediaone.net...
> Ed Kemo wrote:
>
> > Just my $0.02
> >
> > I'd like to see another network, like the Sci-fi channel, pick up
> > Crusade and really make an attempt to make it a great show.
Unfortunately,
> > Crusade was doomed from the start on tNT.
>
> Unfortunately, Turner Inc has made it clear that any other network
> that wants Crusade has to pay them for *production* cost of the existing
> episodes, not just a syndication fee.
Yes, who would have wanted to pay for the whole thing (which includes TNT's
sabotage and ham-handed mistakes)?
> This came up when it became clear that Crusade's lifespan on TNT
> was limited, and the Skiffy Channel was a possibility then, but the
> gotcha above prevented it. Of course, now they've apparently blown
> this season's budget on picking up LEXX (retch-heave-puke) for
> their Sci-Fi Prime block......
How about this? Have Sci-Fi Channel, JMS, and the Crusade cast re-shoot
Crusade from scratch, but this time as JMS had intended? Since WB owns the
characters, this could probably be done if the finances were there.
However, the Sci-Fi Channel would never ante up for this either.
Mac
John W. Kennedy
> Unfortunately, Turner Inc has made it clear that any other network
> that wants Crusade has to pay them for *production* cost of the existing
> episodes, not just a syndication fee.
That may have been true a year ago, but those 13 episodes have been
shown, now. That makes them "used goods" as far as the market goes,
doesn't it?
--
-John W. Kennedy
-rri...@ibm.net
Compact is becoming contract
Man only earns and pays. -- Charles Williams
Iain Reid
"Mac Breck" <macb...@timesnet.net> wrote in message
news:aNqh4.15503$pb2.1...@tw11.nn.bcandid.com...
> Robert Halloran <r...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
> news:3883B6B4...@mediaone.net...
> > Ed Kemo wrote:
> >
> > > Just my $0.02
> > >
> > > I'd like to see another network, like the Sci-fi channel, pick up
> > > Crusade and really make an attempt to make it a great show.
> Unfortunately,
> > > Crusade was doomed from the start on tNT.
> >
> > that wants Crusade has to pay them for *production* cost of the existing
> > episodes, not just a syndication fee.
>
TNT's
> sabotage and ham-handed mistakes)?
>
> > This came up when it became clear that Crusade's lifespan on TNT
> > was limited, and the Skiffy Channel was a possibility then, but the
> > gotcha above prevented it. Of course, now they've apparently blown
> > this season's budget on picking up LEXX (retch-heave-puke) for
> > their Sci-Fi Prime block......
>
> How about this? Have Sci-Fi Channel, JMS, and the Crusade cast re-shoot
> Crusade from scratch, but this time as JMS had intended? Since WB owns
the
> characters, this could probably be done if the finances were there.
> However, the Sci-Fi Channel would never ante up for this either.
>
> Mac
A wise man said that sometimes the solution to a problem is right in front
of your nose. An even wiser one said that sometimes you have to look a lot
further than that.
I doubt Sci-Fi would pay for an entire run of Crusafe - but if JMS and Co
were still going to go down this route, of salvaging Crusade, couldn't they
look for an international partnership. I noticed at the end of this week's
Farscape that it is produced with a US/AUS partnership. Babylon 5 is very
popular in other countries (for example, in the UK we seen the episode
Z'ha'Dum before the Americans as Channel 4 stumped up extra money to help
with the production). Surely the same could be done with Crusade (though
this may be too late) or even another B5 spin-off. You could even combine
this with my telefilm ideas in RE:New Film? to have internationally funded
B5 TV Movies.
I seem to remember that JMS has stated before that many international fans
"get" B5 more than a lot of American ones. Mightn't this be the same for
international production companies?
--------------------------------------------------
You Have Been Listening to the One who Wasn't:
Iain Reid
ia...@greysector.freeserve.co.uk
Diane K De
>Date: Wed, 19 January 2000 06:30 PM EST
>Message-id: <3886422C...@bellatlantic.net>
>
>Robert Halloran wrote:
>> Unfortunately, Turner Inc has made it clear that any other network
>> that wants Crusade has to pay them for *production* cost of the existing
>> episodes, not just a syndication fee.
>
>shown, now. That makes them "used goods" as far as the market goes,
>doesn't it?
>
>--
>-John W. Kennedy
>-rri...@ibm.net
I believe John is right. That was applicable to last February when TNT hadn't
shown the episodes yet. If Sci-Fi had picked it up they would have been the
sole broadcasters and would have been liable to the full price.
I doubt WB would charge that high a license fee now. Many people have said
TNT's rights have expired to Crusade. It's up to WB what they charge any
outlet to pick up the broadcast rights. I don't believe TNT has any say in it.
(JMS can correct this if any of it is incorrect)
DD
Mac Breck
news:20000119223930...@ng-cr1.aol.com...
> Many people have said
> TNT's rights have expired to Crusade. It's up to WB what they charge any
> outlet to pick up the broadcast rights. I don't believe TNT has any say
in it.
If that's true, great! I'm always glad to hear of TNT not having any say in
something. :-)
Mac
ear...@hotmail.com
>I doubt Sci-Fi would pay for an entire run of Crusafe - but if JMS and Co
>were still going to go down this route, of salvaging Crusade, couldn't they
>look for an international partnership. I noticed at the end of this week's
>Farscape that it is produced with a US/AUS partnership. Babylon 5 is very
Partnerships have been very popular - LEXX is a Canadian/German
coproduction. The movies were the best, and although I like the
series, I'll be the first to admiot that the series does not hold a
candle to the movies (particularly the first and the fourth).
Farscape is another terrific example. I didn' know it was a
partnership - I didn't study the credits that closely, but it is a
territic series. I knew it was going to be a keeper the first time I
watched it, and I'm pleased to say that I'm only missing two eps,
which, like B5 the 2-3 B5 eps I need to rerecord in my SVHS
collection, I keep missing in reruns. :)
Perhaps JMS should contact the CHUM network in Canada, and see what
kinda of help he can get from them. They seem quite favourable toward
SF, and they have a bit of money in their banks - I wonder if
something might be possible?
---
"Cannot run out of time. There is infinite time. You are finite.
Zathras is finite. This.. is wrong tool." -Zathras
Jms at B5
>kinda of help he can get from them.
What y'all have to understand is that *I* cannot approach anyone. The show is
owned lock, stock and PPG by Warner Bros., and I can't even start to get into
any kind of brokering, 'cause it would massively tread on toes and be beyond my
legal purview.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
Dwight Williams
You can -- and I suspect and hope, already have -- approach WB and
suggest that *they* contact CHUM/CITY in due course when the current
legal straight-jacketing becomes dissolved, however...
Probably to no avail, I suppose, but one remains hopeful.
In the meantime, I hope your other, newer TV projects are still moving
forward?
--
Dwight Williams(ad...@freenet.carleton.ca) -- Orleans, Ontario, Canada
Maintainer/Founder - DEOList for _Chase_ Fandom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Diane K De
>Date: Fri, 21 January 2000 09:45 AM EST
>
>Jms at B5 wrote:
>>
>> >Perhaps JMS should contact the CHUM network in Canada, and see what
>> >kinda of help he can get from them.
>>
>> What y'all have to understand is that *I* cannot approach anyone. The show
>is
>> owned lock, stock and PPG by Warner Bros., and I can't even start to get
>into
>> any kind of brokering, 'cause it would massively tread on toes and be
>beyond my
>> legal purview.
>>
>> jms
>>
>> (jms...@aol.com)
>> B5 Official Fan Club at:
>> http://www.thestation.com
>> (all message content (c) 2000 by
>> synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
>> to reprint specifically denied to
>> SFX Magazine)
>
>You can -- and I suspect and hope, already have -- approach WB and
>suggest that *they* contact CHUM/CITY in due course when the current
>legal straight-jacketing becomes dissolved, however...
>
1.) Dwight, what "legal straight-jacketing" are you referring to that would be
dissolved? The way I read his note, his reference to "legal" was to the
ownership of the show.
2.) You realize that between February when TNT canceled the show and July 15,
1999, when the actors' contracts expired, was the time for WB to investigate
co-production deals. We know that they pitched the Sci-Fi Channel during that
period. Since they own the show and they can't make money off of a canceled
show, wouldn't the "money guys" explore any way to do that which was feasible,
consistent with their corporate structure, and had the potential for
profitability in the future?
In these explorations, wouldn't they have information about the show that the
average fan doesn't have, e.g.: the actual production cost, the level of
interest by foreign buyers, the level of interest that they met when they
shopped the show around domestically, income projections for the show, the
value of the license fees they were able to negotiate with SPACE and other
foreign outlets.
I wouldn't dare second-guess anyone's business decisions unless I was in
possession the same information they had. We just don't know what they thought
of and what they didn't.
I'm assuming the WB Production execs' jobs are dependent on how many shows they
keep in production and the P&L they deliver to parent Time-Warner. I believe
there was a change in management last year due to the old boss's poor
performance in that regard.
DD
Mac Breck
Mac
Jms at B5 <jms...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000120225402...@ng-fp1.aol.com...
J. Potts
ad...@freenet.carleton.ca (Dwight Williams) wrote:
>You can -- and I suspect and hope, already have -- approach WB and
>suggest that *they* contact CHUM/CITY in due course when the current
>legal straight-jacketing becomes dissolved, however...
>
In article <20000121132308...@ng-cb1.aol.com>,
Diane K De <dian...@aol.com> wrote:
>You realize that between February when TNT canceled the show and July 15,
>1999, when the actors' contracts expired, was the time for WB to investigate
>co-production deals. We know that they pitched the Sci-Fi Channel during that
>period. Since they own the show and they can't make money off of a canceled
>show, wouldn't the "money guys" explore any way to do that which was feasible,
>consistent with their corporate structure, and had the potential for
>profitability in the future?
>
>In these explorations, wouldn't they have information about the show that the
>average fan doesn't have, e.g.: the actual production cost, the level of
>interest by foreign buyers, the level of interest that they met when they
>shopped the show around domestically, income projections for the show, the
>value of the license fees they were able to negotiate with SPACE and other
>foreign outlets.
The other thing you have to take into consideration is that generally,
if you make a deal with a group in say Canada or Australia/New Zealand,
chances are, that means having to move the production to one of those
countries. I don't know that any regular U.S. television show, that has
non-U.S. backers, is being filmed in the U.S.
I imagine there's an awful lot of expense in that (either shipping sets, etc.
or making all new ones, for example). Plus it would mean JMS and cast would
have to relocate to another country for filming. IIRC Canada also has a
stipulation that a certain percent of cast and or crew has to be Canadian.
JMS might not be able to bring in the folks he wants to handle things.
There's a whole 'nother can of worms that gets opened up when you do multi-
country ventures. (Not to say that this can't be done, but it does add
another layer of complexity to things).
--
JRP
"How many slime-trailing, sleepless, slimy, slobbering things do you know
that will *run and hide* from your Eveready?"
--Maureen Birnbaum, Barbarian Swordsperson
ear...@hotmail.com
>>Perhaps JMS should contact the CHUM network in Canada, and see what
>>kinda of help he can get from them.
>
>What y'all have to understand is that *I* cannot approach anyone. The show is
>owned lock, stock and PPG by Warner Bros., and I can't even start to get into
>any kind of brokering, 'cause it would massively tread on toes and be beyond my
>legal purview.
Perhaps the folks at Warner could be persuaded by Yours Truly to talk
to CHUM? Whatever the mechanism by which things must properly be done
at WB, surely there must be a way to suggest "Hey, call these guys,
they might be able to help us out."
It may lead nowhere, but it's a possible avenue.
Mezzio
wrote:
>Ed Kemo wrote:
>
>> Just my $0.02
>>
>Unfortunately, Turner Inc has made it clear that any other network
>that wants Crusade has to pay them for *production* cost of the existing
>episodes, not just a syndication fee.
>
Can't we just bundle a copy of AOL 5.0 with every episode to defray
the costs???????
Mezzio