Warner Brothers will shutdown production of V on Wednesday by Haken

V THE SERIES

Warner Brothers will shutdown production of V on Wednesday

POSTED BY: HAKEN
UPDATED: Wednesday, September 2, 2009 19:14
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7361
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, August 29, 2009 11:07 PM

Likes to mess with stuffs.

Interesting article over at Airlock Alpha about Warner Brother shutting down the production of V due to a legal dispute between original "V" creator Kenneth Johnson and WB on the matter of whether "V" is a remake or not and whether Johnson should be given credit on the new series.

You can read the full details over at Airlock Alpha.

http://www.airlockalpha.com/node/6661

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 2:25 AM

FREMDFIRMA

I don't understand this - what's the harm in giving the man a bit of official credit since it was his concept in the first place ?

Or is it the money, I mean, would they have to pay him royalties, or is this just a whizzing contest over egos and stuff ?

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 2:36 AM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.

Airlock Alpha has usually been a reliable source, so it is possible there is a legal dispute.

The new BSG credited Glen Larson as Executive Producer even though he had no creative input on the series. There's no reason WB can't do the same for Johnson. I would think the compensation for that would be minimal compared to the rest of the budget.

I do question this statement by WB:

Quote:
The studio, which is looking to air "V" in November on ABC, said the two-week shutdown was nothing more than a chance to help the writers refresh themselves creatively, taking advantage of a later premiere date than normal.

The emphasis on the word later is mine, since that makes no sense in the light of the fact the original premiere date was going to be mid-season, January or February.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 2:49 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Looks like someone didn't get all their legal ducks in a row before they started the project. You don't go into something like this - calling it the same damn name, even - and think that you don't owe some debt of at least a damned mention or special thanks to the guy who created the original. And if your legal stance is that "this is a different show", then by god, call it a different name!

I don't think it's asking too much to give credit to the concept's creator, do you? How would you feel if the latest Star Trek remake were listed as "Created by JJ Abrams"? I'm sure you'd feel that Gene Roddenberry had been grossly slighted were that the case, and rightly so.

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 5:26 AM

FILLYGIRL

Operative: "Its worse than you know..." Mal: "It usually is."

JMHO, thats the least they can do, after all WB is going to MAKE money off of the franchise, how much could the person want??? If it just screen credit, then somebody's being a real prick. Why did they wait till now to address this, why wasn't it brought up before production got so far into the shows??? I don't doubt this at all, like somebody else said, they usually are right(Airlock Alpha). I guess we will have to wait and see....

Chaplain of the 76th Independant Battalion

Do not bother dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

...it's worse than you know...Operative
...it usually is.....Mal

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 6:53 AM

CYBERSNARK

Well, there is (I trust) a legal distinction between "created by" (or "based on characters created by") and "Executive Producer." I believe it has to do with not just creative control (i.e., ownership), but with royalties.

It's fully possible that the original creator got a "created by" credit and is now whinging for something else (maybe he wants more money, maybe he wants more of a say in where the show goes, maybe someone in the production is undercutting him and he needs to go over their head). Such is the kind of hijinks studios can get into.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 10:22 AM

MANGOLO

From a guy inside the biz- it is rarely just screen credit. For something like this it is usually points 1-5% up front AND back end. I don't know what their budget, but that can their whole expected margin thereby killing the project.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=86085840444

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 12:45 PM

WHOZIT

Atleast it's not because ABC thinks the storys suck, they'll just throw Johnson a few $ and put his name in the credits. No reason to panic.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 1:21 PM

KWICKO

Quote:

From a guy inside the biz- it is rarely just screen credit. For something like this it is usually points 1-5% up front AND back end. I don't know what their budget, but that can their whole expected margin thereby killing the project.

Thing is, this is the kind of thing that really SHOULD be addressed before production STARTS, just to cover the studio's arse, and you not only take care of it, but you get signatures on a contract stipulating EXACTLY who's getting what. And it sounds for all the world like they didn't do this, and now the creator of the original is able to come in and say, "Hold on - I haven't been given credit here". And of course, now that they're this deep, instead of being able to just get him to sign away his monetary interest for one or two points and a line in the credits, HE is the one holding the cards. Obviously so, since this is leading to a production shutdown.

I know people always claim it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission, but that's not really true. Often, that forgiveness comes with a much higher pricetag than the permission would have had you but asked in the first place.

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 30, 2009 3:35 PM

MANGOLO

Mike, you're right. In addition, the big boys (studios) often think because they have a staff of lawyers that they can get away with murder.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=86085840444

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 2, 2009 7:15 AM

MER

Umm wow, this is...difficult. I hope it means we can watch it in the future without the ways of the pirate.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 2, 2009 7:40 AM

KWICKO

Oh, I have zero doubts at all that the show WILL be shown, or at the very least sold on DVD. Why? Because the studio has already sunk this much money into it, that's why. Even IF (and it absolutely won't happen this way, but I'm using the most extreme example as an illustration) a judge ruled that 100% of the net profits of the show would go to the guy they left out of the credits, they'd still show it. You know why? Because at the moment they're in the red - they've already spent the money getting it this far in the first place. The ONLY way to recoup any of that outlay is to move on with it. Even if they weren't allowed to keep any profits, they'd move ahead in the hopes of recouping their initial cash outlays and getting back to "break-even" on the money side of it.

And THAT is the A-Number-One reason why you get all that little detail-y stuff like signatures on contracts taken care of BEFORE you shoot the first scene. Otherwise, you can be held hostage when the show is 99% finished, and you can't really do or say much except, "Okay. How much?" in response to demands for points.

At least, that's how I see it from way over here in Central Texas... This is a minor delay, a mere hitch in the process, and won't affect the show coming out.

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 2, 2009 9:43 AM

STORYMARK

I think the delay has more to do with creative issues. They've already changed show runners once, which is usually troublesome. The last 2 seasons in a row NBC has tried to launch a sci-fi oriented relaunch of an old show (Bionic Woman and Knight Rider), both of which had rotating show runners, cost a lot, and tanked hard.

Add to that the ever-eroding ratings for Heroes - mostly due to complaints about the writing/plotlines, and this all feels like them trying to make sure not to repeat history.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 2, 2009 7:14 PM

PATCHIST

Im sorry but I just have to say this. Heroes writers needs to take their ritalin medication. The storyline is so iffy that I forget what happens days after I saw the episode. Add that to the ever changing storyline every week.

On V, it could be that the original creator wanted more $$$ than ABC is going to give him. Maybe ABC is asking to make this NOT a remake so the royalties would be less? IDK. We don't actually know the full details of this issue.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE