by the fans for the fans

Zen72 wrote:

Also there ARE uses for the word Robotech that isn't about the Robotech we are fans of.

Thought you knew.....but I GUESS NOT.

SO CARY WAS NOT TALKING ABOUT ROBOTECH THE MOVIE? HE JUST A CASUAL FAN....OOOOKAY.

NOT WARNER BROTHERS. HE DOES MENTION ROBOTECH. SAME THING.

You never answered my original question;

"Do YOU have a link that says Warner Brothers approached him or that Cary was given a script DRAFT like Sylvain White?"

NO. JUST A LINK TO WHERE HE SAY ROBOTECH. IS THERE ANOTHER ROBOTECH TITLED MOVIE OUT THERE?

"I think they’re surprised I don’t want to do robo-tech..."

Do you know who THEY are? Could be friends that suggested it to him.


Like you DON"T KNOW who approached Cary...IF someone actually approached him.

IN AN INTERVIEW YOU JUST DON'T BLURP OUT COMMENT LIKE THAT NOT LIKE HIS "FRIENDS" ARE IN THE KNOW THAT THE ROBOTECH LAM WILL BE/IS GOING TO BE "it’s like they want me to have a long career. And be prolific and make big movies."

If I put my money to invest....I'd like to see a return on my investment...or perhaps just cut my losses and move on. Maybe that's why he's not talking.

TO BAD YOU DON'T KNOW HOLLYWOOD. THEY INVEST IN LONG TERM. ARE THERE NEWS THAT TOBEY PULLED OUT?

Mr Pot....meet Mr. Kettle.

It's been a slice Mems...and if you'd like the last word it's ALL YOURS....(too bad I'm not in Vegas, because I'd be betting on a SURE THING.).....

But HEY....I'm just speculating here....

NITE NITE![/b]

VEGAS IS A SURE THING? WOW...

LUCKY ME YOU ARE A RICH MAN NOW. HOPE EVERYTHING PAYED OFF

I will leave it up to others to provide you their thoughts on this subject....

I JUST HOPE THEY DO A BETTER JOB THAN YOU.

Memo, why did you change robo-tech into Robotech? This site's (robotechx) spell check doesn't even offer "Robotech" as a correction for "robo-tech". You can't blame anyone else since you posted the copy and paste WITH a link to the original article. Your behavior in this thread just makes you seem desperate, its sad actually

I think the fact that Memo is latent or unwilling to post this 'news' on Robotech.com, the official headquarters of Robotech, or, none of the other info whoring members on rt.com have yet to find/post a creadable suppliment to this peice of news Memo has provided us speaks for itself.

rtsurfer wrote:

Memo, why did you change robo-tech into Robotech? This site's (robotechx) spell check doesn't even offer "Robotech" as a correction for "robo-tech". You can't blame anyone else since you posted the copy and paste WITH a link to the original article. Your behavior in this thread just makes you seem desperate, its sad actually

McKeeverism hits RTx.

khoroshen wrote:

I think the fact that Memo is latent or unwilling to post this 'news' on Robotech.com, the official headquarters of Robotech, or, none of the other info whoring members on rt.com have yet to find/post a creadable suppliment to this peice of news Memo has provided us speaks for itself.

I'm actually surprised it hasn't hit rt.com yet either though it's probably more likely due to the fact that there isn't much traffic on the site and certain HG employees want to keep it free of any negative publicity.

rtsurfer wrote:

Memo, why did you change robo-tech into Robotech? This site's (robotechx) spell check doesn't even offer "Robotech" as a correction for "robo-tech". You can't blame anyone else since you posted the copy and paste WITH a link to the original article. Your behavior in this thread just makes you seem desperate, its sad actually

JUST CORRECTING THE WORD ROBOTECH. NOTHING DESPERATE ABOUT THAT. EVEN ADDED THE REFERENCE OF THE ARTICLE FOR YOU GUYS TO CHECK YOURSELF.


khoroshen wrote:

I think the fact that Memo is latent or unwilling to post this 'news' on Robotech.com, the official headquarters of Robotech, or, none of the other info whoring members on rt.com have yet to find/post a creadable suppliment to this peice of news Memo has provided us speaks for itself.

ps99041 wrote:

I'm actually surprised it hasn't hit rt.com yet either though it's probably more likely due to the fact that there isn't much traffic on the site and certain HG employees want to keep it free of any negative publicity.

I COULD SAY THE SAME ABOUT YOU GUYS. YOU GUYS WORRIED ABOUT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS HAVE NOT POSTED OVER THERE ABOUT IT?

NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ARTICLE, NOT BRAKING ANY RULES

COME ON... WHO GOING TO DO IT? SEE WHAT HAPPENS? MAKING ALL THESE CLAIMS BUT NO ONE DOING IT TO VERIFY..

MEMO1DOMINION wrote:

I COULD SAY THE SAME ABOUT YOU GUYS. YOU GUYS WORRIED ABOUT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS HAVE NOT POSTED OVER THERE ABOUT IT?

Simply put. I'm not in a habbit of posting non-credited news on RT.com. I couldn't care less about the ins and outs of the article. Its a simple fact that Warner would not approach a classics Dir. to do sci fi. You won't see the likes of James Cameron doing 18/19thC. era movies, which Cary has done and wants to continue to do.

The onus is on you to make sure the facts of the article are correct, for you to post this on rt.com, or to deligate this to MaverickLSC. The reluctance on your part speaks a higher volume then the article content itself.

rtsurfer wrote:

Memo, why did you change robo-tech into Robotech? This site's (robotechx) spell check doesn't even offer "Robotech" as a correction for "robo-tech". (

Last I remember the site doesn't have a "spell check" function. Its your browser that corrects spelling errors. I could be wrong though.

SIGHUP wrote:

rtsurfer wrote:

Memo, why did you change robo-tech into Robotech? This site's (robotechx) spell check doesn't even offer "Robotech" as a correction for "robo-tech". (

Last I remember the site doesn't have a "spell check" function. Its your browser that corrects spelling errors. I could be wrong though.

SIGHUP, you are probably correct, my bad.

It was still at the very least careless for Memo to correct "robo-tech" when there was nothing else in the article nor a second source supporting/confirming it was our "Robotech".

khoroshen wrote:

Simply put. I'm not in a habbit of posting non-credited news on RT.com. I couldn't care less about the ins and outs of the article. Its a simple fact that Warner would not approach a classics Dir. to do sci fi. You won't see the likes of James Cameron doing 18/19thC. era movies, which Cary has done and wants to continue to do.

The onus is on you to make sure the facts of the article are correct, for you to post this on rt.com, or to deligate this to MaverickLSC. The reluctance on your part speaks a higher volume then the article content itself.

YOU DO CARE. WHY YOU KEEP POSTING HERE. CREDIT OR NON CREDIT IS NOT ME TO DECIDE. BUT THE READER. IF YOU SUGGESTING IT GO IN RT.COM I SAY THEN PUT IT THERE YOURSELF.

YOU CAN COME TO YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS OF WHAT THE ARTICLE SAYS OR IS. IF IT MEANS NOTHING, THEN MOVE ON.




rtsurfer wrote:

It was still at the very least careless for Memo to correct "robo-tech" when there was nothing else in the article nor a second source supporting/confirming it was our "Robotech".

NOPE. DID IT ON PURPOSE. ONLY ONE ROBOTECH MOVIE OUT THERE THAT IS BEING MADE. UNLESS YOU CAN NAME ANOTHER. ESPECIALLY WHEN ROBO-TECH IS USED ALL THE TIME IN ARTICLES WHEN REFERRING TO "OUR" ROBOTECH.