In Other News

In addition to the exciting news of Ron Moore's film trilogy deal, this piece of good tidings was in the trades last night:

Battlestar Galactica exec producer David Eick is expanding his role in the NBC universe, inking a two-year overall deal with the Peacock’s studio arm. While Eick has spent most of his career at either NBC or predecessor Universal working as a producer or exec, this seven-figure pact reps the first time he’s signed an overall for his work as a scribe. Deal kicks in June 1.

Even as he continues to work as a nonwriting producer shepherding various projects -- including the long-in-the-works BSG prequel Caprica for Sci Fi Channel -- Eick has begun penning projects by himself and with partners.

"My focus now is probably going to be a little less about casting a wide net and a little more on focusing on one, two or maybe three projects a year, maybe writing one myself," Eick said.

Here is a recent Pop Candy interview with David Eick.


This morning Matt Roush at TV Guide answered some reader questions about BSG's Emmy chances, and genre fandom's fears about the Fox network:

Question: Do you think that, in a season so utterly frakked up by the writer's strike, the Emmy voters might finally change channels over to Sci Fi and watch Battlestar Galactica? Of course, the season is only two episodes deep at this point, and one would have to be living in a fantasy land to think the voters would actually bring due celebration to this show, but these two episodes have been as good as anything the cast and crew have done so far. I'm particularly struck by "Six of One" and the performances of Katee Sackhoff and the irreplaceable Mary McConnell. Do you think the continuity of shows like BSG take away their chances at major awards? I've seen every episode, which qualifies me to recognize how fantastic these two actors (and the rest of the cast) have been so far, but it also puts me at the advantage of having four years of context to draw from that the voters likely would not. The awards-show success of series like 24, Lost and to a much lesser extent The Shield, make me think there is hope that dramas that use complex continuous story arcs have hope for that kind of recognition, yet I still can't see it happening. Please tell me I'm wrong. — Adam S.

Matt Roush: You're not wrong, but it's not an altogether hopeless battle for attention. Battlestar Galactica not only has the disadvantage of a dense and mystifying mythology, but its title and genre also work against it getting serious consideration among the more mainstream dramas. And yet it did get writing and direction nominations a year ago, which is pretty significant. Keep in mind that while Lost won for best drama for its first season and The Shield also broke through in its first season with a win for Michael Chiklis and writing and directing nominations, it gets tougher for these shows to be recognized the longer they stay on the air and their storylines become more challenging for the non-hooked to follow and appreciate. Lost and some of its stars still get recognition, but it hasn't been nominated for best drama since its first-year win. (24 is in a somewhat different situation since it starts somewhat from scratch each season with a new adventure, albeit with baggage from past years.) But you're right in one respect. Anyone watching the emotional workout Katee Sackhoff went through last week in particular would have to think she'd be Emmy bait if she were doing this work on HBO or on a more accessible franchise drama. As if I've often said, if you look to the Emmys for validation, you're going to be cruelly disappointed.

[snip]

Question: I am rather excited for J.J. Abrams' Fringe and Joss Whedon's Dollhouse this fall on Fox, but now I read that Battlestar Galactica's Ronald D. Moore is developing Virtuality, a back-door pilot for Fox based on an idea from Lloyd Braun, one of the instigators of Lost. I'm amazed at the pedigree of talent Fox is attracting right now from the sci-fi genre. Abrams, Whedon and Moore must be among the most prestigious names in modern science-fiction television. I remember you writing a while back that Fox seems to be looking for a sci-fi/fantasy hit to fill the void The X-Files left. Might this be an example of throwing various things at the wall and seeing what sticks? Hopefully, the least this forebodes is a solid night of sci-fi on network television in the near future. — Brendan B.

Matt Roush: It all sounds very tempting, doesn't it? We just have to hope Fox stands behind these shows — if they live up to their potential — and gives them time and decent time periods to grow. Fox's recent track record isn't very promising in that regard, but the new regime (including Kevin Reilly, who gave NBC Heroes before he was dumped) obviously is pouring a lot of money into the fantasy genre in hopes of landing a winner or two or three. Everyone just needs to remember that it took a while for The X-Files to catch on. The scary part here is that expectations will be very high for these shows, not just at the network but in media and online coverage, precisely because of the creators' pedigrees. They may not be allowed to grow on us slowly, the way The X-Files, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and even the new Battlestar did.

As mentioned earlier this week, I too am excited to hear about all these Fox genre shows...not to mention the news that, despite no renewal announcement, the head of Fox Entertainment himself has stated that Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles is already being allowed to hire staff for its next season. Sweet. ETA: the show is renewed! *pumps fist in air*

Meanwhile, a tidbit on one of my other pet topics: Hulu may be spiffy, but there is still hope for a new NBC/iTunes deal. Cross your fingers. Again.