|
Post by MelMac on Dec 14, 2007 15:27:15 GMT -5
Did do some thinking about this and felt that if she did continue with the project or reconsidered, Erin White would've been great as Morgan or the new GAHeroine. She had the right looks, voice and demeanor I think to play the role well. Of course, the only time we hear her talk is the chat about sex on the YouTube clips.
Actresses on TV right now - I don't know, as a lot would try to demand the suit be sexy (if kept the same way Ralph's looked like or even as the one Holly wore) or would want the character to be perfect and have everything work properly. That's not what this type of superhero show was about - everything perfect about it is it's imperfections. Things such as the silliness of the suit (though the brown idea would've been sillier), the suit not protecting Ralph's head well, the suit doing odd things at a moments notice, etc., is what makes it fun.
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Dec 17, 2007 10:39:07 GMT -5
I don't think Erin would have worked right.
I am not sure HEROINE would work. It might, but it might be tough to find. BIONIC WOMAN is doing well overall, but it was remade like the original: With a WOMAN. A feature or new series would probably have to feature a man.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 10:47:30 GMT -5
I don't think Erin would have worked right. I am not sure HEROINE would work. It might, but it might be tough to find. BIONIC WOMAN is doing well overall, but it was remade like the original: With a WOMAN. A feature or new series would probably have to feature a man. I'm iffy on it. If it's done properly, then it can work, if not, it'll fall into the pits of the original "GAHeroine" attempt. It's possible to make it work with a woman, but as you say... it would be tough.
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Dec 17, 2007 10:49:10 GMT -5
I don't see it happening or more shows would be remade differently. Even the A-TEAM remake is sticking with men in the four major roles. I think that the mindset is: If you are remaking something, keep close to the originals in format if not story.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 10:52:30 GMT -5
I don't see it happening or more shows would be remade differently. Even the A-TEAM remake is sticking with men in the four major roles. I think that the mindset is: If you are remaking something, keep close to the originals in format if not story. Didn't work for "The Wild Wild West" and about half of the current remakes of things. Worst two offenders for me are the above and "I, Spy." Irony is that "The Avengers" stayed very close to the original (save Steed kissing Peel - never happened in the series), made top three one week and then dropped quickly for that very reason. Only ones I've felt overall that fit the original in all aspects that you list are "Maverick" and "Charlie's Angels." But, what also gets me - going by this, you would have to say "GAHeroine" is not canon to ignore it completely because the only way you can get around that aspect is to say that it was either a dream or she dies/quits the suit so it can be handed off to a male. While I might not like the show, I do consider "Heroine" canon enough to include it as a dream to set up the Aidan series.
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Dec 17, 2007 10:54:17 GMT -5
A lot of remakes may not work, but they rarely change the character's gender. And you can keep HEROINE canon and still have it as a male. As Doc Brown would say: "You're just not thinking fourth dimensionally."
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 11:01:43 GMT -5
A lot of remakes may not work, but they rarely change the character's gender. And you can keep HEROINE canon and still have it as a male. As Doc Brown would say: "You're just not thinking fourth dimensionally." No, because if it is canon, in order to continue with canon - you'd have to continue it where "GAHeroine" left off. Ralph's ego trip has set him off to Loserville (Hinkley Honeys - based on the ep guys - not IMHO ), Bill, despite the contradiction to what is implied in "Vanity" (Where Ralph could've been stripped of the suit for Bill's antics) is Holly's teammate, and Holly and Sarah are the perfect example of a foster family. I'd like to see the Fourth Dimension theory, because even I had to consider the story canon in order for the spinoff to work at all.
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Dec 17, 2007 11:03:41 GMT -5
You are too focused on how much you hate something. You CAN write a new series and include the HEROINE situation without ever having to bring them in. It does not have to be a dream, the death of Holly, or a mistake. Just because you don't believe HEROINE is canon does not mean that someone who does consider it canon cannot write around it while including it.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 11:13:39 GMT -5
You are too focused on how much you hate something. You CAN write a new series and include the HEROINE situation without ever having to bring them in. It does not have to be a dream, the death of Holly, or a mistake. Just because you don't believe HEROINE is canon does not mean that someone who does consider it canon cannot write around it while including it. For starters - I DO NOT HATE "Heroine." I am not fond of it because of what they did to Ralph and the "Vanity" contradiction (that is not the same), but there are aspects that I do like about the show. Examples - I like how Holly is not told exactly everything about the suit - and ironically it is the most commonly used suit power (holographs); how Holly is willing to work with Bill as well in spite of his terseness at the fact she's a woman; and how they give Katt some courtesy and at least make it where Ralph is found out doing something heroic... how he digresses is out of character though. Saying I hate "GAHeroine" is saying I am a Bill-basher (though I will admit I'm not said this anymore), despite the fact I speak pro and con about the character as I do Ralph and Pam. That said, you would have to have Holly, et. al. be in there somehow - and in more detail than a passing reference, which is what I'm getting here from your post (as you would have to say more than "Holly wore the suit") in order to have it make sense, therefore you have to consider it canon. Even I consider it canon in that regard, and if the series was brought back - regardless of gender of the wearer - why Holly was chosen and why she was no longer the wearer would have to be mentioned unless not at all - and if not, she would not be considered canon.
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Dec 17, 2007 11:22:18 GMT -5
*Sigh*
No...you wouldn't. *Shakes head and leaves thread for now*
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 11:30:56 GMT -5
*Sigh* No...you wouldn't. *Shakes head and leaves thread for now* I do see your point in that you can continue the series without mentioning Holly, however, by your argument she still is canon... even if I do not like it. She was filmed and put on TV, so the canon issue that she exists in some form or fashion is fact. That said, IMHO, I feel that if you do not mention Holly in a continuation, it is automatically assumed that the last wearer is Ralph, based on the fact he was the one who appeared all three seasons therefore, she would not be considered canon anymore. So, outside of the fact my series is fanfic, then why do you consider my series to be non-canon because I consider Holly a dream, but if something was done similarly (which would include not mentioning/ignoring Holly) there would be no problem? This might help me understand better in what you are implying, as the way I see it, you'd have to either declare Holly a mistake or overlook the fact she is the wearer, or mention why she doesn't have the suit anymore in order to remind people that Ralph was not the last one on TV to wear the suit. As much as I think she was a ditz, she was the wearer and did an adequate job. People would remember the character as well... even if they researched the show online.
|
|
|
Post by mmderdekea on Dec 17, 2007 13:47:09 GMT -5
I don't see it happening or more shows would be remade differently. Even the A-TEAM remake is sticking with men in the four major roles. I think that the mindset is: If you are remaking something, keep close to the originals in format if not story. Didn't work for "The Wild Wild West" and about half of the current remakes of things. Worst two offenders for me are the above and "I, Spy." Irony is that "The Avengers" stayed very close to the original (save Steed kissing Peel - never happened in the series), made top three one week and then dropped quickly for that very reason. Only ones I've felt overall that fit the original in all aspects that you list are "Maverick" and "Charlie's Angels." But, what also gets me - going by this, you would have to say "GAHeroine" is not canon to ignore it completely because the only way you can get around that aspect is to say that it was either a dream or she dies/quits the suit so it can be handed off to a male. While I might not like the show, I do consider "Heroine" canon enough to include it as a dream to set up the Aidan series. Melmac, Just stopped into this thread to read you and HD going at it again. That's always mildy amusing..... But, as a huge "Avengers" fan, having been in numerous Avengers email lists, having met Patrick Macnee 8-9 times, having written a huge mass of Avengers fan fiction, having been in Macnee's house, bought him lunch, etc. let me assure you that EVERY Avengers fan I've ever known (but one, who was a big Fiennes fan, too) hated the movie and thought it was complete and utter trash and had NOTHING to do with the original. The only decent part in it was the scene with Invisible Jones, who was, of course, "played" by Patrick Macnee. So, movie adaptations in general, yes, are hard to match with the original TV series. Mona
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 13:58:45 GMT -5
I like "The Avengers" too, and have watched several of the stories from Honor Blackman to the woman who played Tara King (not Lumley), and just because again I state my OPINION on many things, I'm deemed as being oblivious of things - or worse, that I am making a statement of fact. (I will admit I do not state in this particular post that it is my opinion - which I apologize, but in the past I have said that I felt that it was closer to the original, which is an opinion). You may have had the honor of doing what you've said, but that doesn't negate my opinion, nor does it negate yours. (ETA: I was harsh here, so I apologize and have modified it, but the point remains the same): Please understand, while I read too literal or am read as though giving a statment of fact instead of an opinion (which BTW is rare here), I am blonde, but that does not equate dumb. I might not understand things, but that's not a reason to be dressed down or at least implied I'm an idiot by anyone anywhere for giving my opinion, which has been the case recently. If you wish to imply such or if anyone would like to address any issues with this further, please feel free to PM me, and we can address it from there. (This goes for everyone) My opinion, however remains the same, regardless of "The Avengers" fandom, visiting or such. The movie "The Avengers" is still a heck of a lot closer to the original one (in a few cases) than "The Wild Wild West" was to the original. I could list what I mean by this, but I will not. My point was that "GAHeroine" did not follow the traditional format of "GAH," at least in my opinion. It's also a reason I've been as skeptical as I've been about Morgan Hathaway in the (right now apparently sunk) TGAH 2008 project. I will see things differently and will make opinions based on it - even if I get it lost in translation. Thanks for understanding.
|
|
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Dec 17, 2007 17:50:47 GMT -5
*Sigh* No...you wouldn't. *Shakes head and leaves thread for now* I do see your point in that you can continue the series without mentioning Holly, however, by your argument she still is canon... even if I do not like it. She was filmed and put on TV, so the canon issue that she exists in some form or fashion is fact. That said, IMHO, I feel that if you do not mention Holly in a continuation, it is automatically assumed that the last wearer is Ralph, based on the fact he was the one who appeared all three seasons therefore, she would not be considered canon anymore. Why? That makes no sense. I didn't say that you don't mention Holly (although you could), but you do not have to have the whole story hinge on it. Plus, let's assume that GAH had gotten enough votes to bring it back someway somehow. They would show HEROINE as part of the original and that would make Holly the last wearer over Ralph. That part makes no sense to me, Mel. Mel, that is WHY I don't see your series as canon: It's fanfic. If it was made into a TV series or something, I would not like the fact that someone was ripping off BOB NEWHART and DALLAS and such because they didn't like Holly, but I would be less likely to not consider it canon at that point. You are missing several ways to make the story new and different while keeping it in touch with the original storyline. I don't want to tell you the way because my script from 10 years ago might get sold one day and then I would have too much competition. And thanks for stopping by, Mona. At least someone likes to read us banter.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 18:01:21 GMT -5
They could skip "GAHeroine" like they did the last four shows of the original run. Plus, IF the wearer were female, they would remove "Heroine" for the lineup for the sole fact they don't want to confuse viewers. This is one reason when I worked at Fiesta Texas the Justice League didn't have Superman. I was there the same year as the "Superman Returns" movie and they didn't have Superman there because of the facial identity issue. Had "Wonder Woman" actually been produced - the same problem. The only character they can get away with doing variations on is Green Lantern because they still show both gold and silver age versions (meaning the wearer can be black or white). Dreams bit has been around a hell of a lot longer than "Bob Newhart" and "Dallas," so if anything they're ripping off from them. And... I do have another way around as to the suit issue and possibly losing it and having the wearer forget, but it's the next story I have.
|
|
|
Post by jopierce on Dec 17, 2007 18:55:46 GMT -5
**sigh**
Heroine was not canon.
There was never a woman suit wearer in the Greatest American Hero.
However, there was a woman suit wearer in a different show called GA Heroine. It was a different show. Maybe it was the same "universe" - but it was not the same show.
I do not like that different show. I ignore it.
Just like fan fic is based on the same universe. But it is not the same show.
To me, this is a non-issue.
Ok. I'll shut up now.
|
|
|
Post by MyTatuo on Dec 17, 2007 19:05:51 GMT -5
Well, Pam did wear the cape once... does that count?
Out of all the arguments against tGAH-ine being canon, I'd be willing to accept "It's a whole different show" since that WAS the original intent. The addition of it to "Hero" syndication was, I'm sure, just a matter of increasing the episode count and therefore revenue (just as subtraction of original songs equals diminished expense).
I will not, however, ever think any fan-fic (expensively filmed or otherwise) is canon. The two terms cointradict each other. Asking to determine if a fan-fic is canon aside from the fact that it IS fan-fic is like asking if William Katt was actually the first female to wear the suit, aside from the fact that he has male genitalia.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 19:10:51 GMT -5
Sheesh, the canon and fanfic debate is a la HD and my debate over (in my error) if Holly were to be ignored, then she wouldn't be canon anymore. I know fanfic isn't unless by some miracle SJC liked Morgan or whomever and bought the rights to the character and wrote his own stories. Only then could they be considered such - though even there it's debatable.
|
|
|
Post by Videofox on Dec 17, 2007 21:15:07 GMT -5
Sheesh, the canon and fanfic debate is a la HD and my debate over (in my error) if Holly were to be ignored, then she wouldn't be canon anymore. I know fanfic isn't unless by some miracle SJC liked Morgan or whomever and bought the rights to the character and wrote his own stories. Only then could they be considered such - though even there it's debatable. Wouldn't have to worry about that... if it were a hit online and studio execs liked the idea behind the TGAH 2008 project, they would just create a female suit wearer, change the name, the backstory, and make a new suit for her just to avoid having to pay a "fan" for *anything.* That's Hollywood for ya.
|
|
|
Post by MelMac on Dec 17, 2007 21:19:15 GMT -5
Sheesh, the canon and fanfic debate is a la HD and my debate over (in my error) if Holly were to be ignored, then she wouldn't be canon anymore. I know fanfic isn't unless by some miracle SJC liked Morgan or whomever and bought the rights to the character and wrote his own stories. Only then could they be considered such - though even there it's debatable. Wouldn't have to worry about that... if it were a hit online and studio execs liked the idea behind the TGAH 2008 project, they would just create a female suit wearer, change the name, the backstory, and make a new suit for her just to avoid having to pay a "fan" for *anything.* That's Hollywood for ya. Yeah, and this is IMHO only, you can have a female wear the suit and it still work. Now the TGAH 2008 project I'm skeptical about given they've gone on an over a month hiatus in saying anything about the event. The countdown's there, but I wish they'd say something or I'll go with "It isn't happening." (Plus side, they'd have to contend with two - three including Aidan, who will probably never be on film - female wearers to differentiate the new wearer from if that happened. )
|
|