Battlestar Galactica
- Thread starter Dragon1
- Start date
NinjaLA
Alex Von T.
Pedro said:
Except that its not an original idea, in fact, every idea presented so far in BSG has been a rehash of concepts done dozens of times over in a great many scifi movies and book series. (Asimov, anyone?) The "Deep" interaction and human emotion seems to play out to me as Melrose Place in space.
I like the new BSG, but it is by no means some sort of life affirming revalation. Its a simple story with decent character interaction and some very nice special effects.
Beats the hell out of starship troopers
I watched B5 almost solely for the interaction of G'kar and Londo. They had some amazingly funny moments of interaction.
IMO the new Battlestar Galactica is very good and it keeps getting better as the series progress.
Compared to the original series it is really mature. I loved the original series when I was 10, but when I look at it now, I find it mostly too childish. (heroes versus villans)
In one aspect though, they could make more of an effort :
I can accept cars could exist on the colonies but what the "frack" are hum-vees(Starbuck's car) & VW Beetles (last episode) doing on Caprica?
Compared to the original series it is really mature. I loved the original series when I was 10, but when I look at it now, I find it mostly too childish. (heroes versus villans)
In one aspect though, they could make more of an effort :
I can accept cars could exist on the colonies but what the "frack" are hum-vees(Starbuck's car) & VW Beetles (last episode) doing on Caprica?
Delance
Victory, you say?
Oh, come on, B5 is fun. It has its problems here and there, but the whole is more than the sum of its parts. They did make an effort to avoid the 'alien of the week' and the 'cute robots' things. The Lincon thing can gets tiresome.
But JMS keep things generic enought. For all I know, the battle between the shadows and vorlons might is simply a very, very complicated way of debating intelligent design. It was not designed that way (heh, designed), but it can fit right in there. One side wants to design things orderly, the other wants to use chaos, each side with their own ideology. The good part is that the show got over the debate around season 4.
I liked that, the fact that the show was able to completely abandon the whole setup of the shadow wars. It was probably done becuse it was on the risk of being cancelled and they wanted to finisht the story, but it was still interesting.
I never saw a lot of Battlestar Galatica, but I did like what I saw. In part it was LOAF's fault, becasue he made the pilot sound so bad. A lot of ideas sound stupid, a religious war between robots and people, robots that look like people, don't even know they are robot and can inter-breed, that doesn't make a lot of sense, and still, the end result is good.
But JMS keep things generic enought. For all I know, the battle between the shadows and vorlons might is simply a very, very complicated way of debating intelligent design. It was not designed that way (heh, designed), but it can fit right in there. One side wants to design things orderly, the other wants to use chaos, each side with their own ideology. The good part is that the show got over the debate around season 4.
I liked that, the fact that the show was able to completely abandon the whole setup of the shadow wars. It was probably done becuse it was on the risk of being cancelled and they wanted to finisht the story, but it was still interesting.
I never saw a lot of Battlestar Galatica, but I did like what I saw. In part it was LOAF's fault, becasue he made the pilot sound so bad. A lot of ideas sound stupid, a religious war between robots and people, robots that look like people, don't even know they are robot and can inter-breed, that doesn't make a lot of sense, and still, the end result is good.
*having read only the original post* Really? It's good? I downloaded the entire season once, skimmed through the first episode looking for the CGI space battles (the only reason I watch any sci-fi) and didn't see more than one brief scene. Most of it looked like it was a "standing around and talking" kind of a show. So I deleted all of it. Seriously, if it's good though, could someone direct me to an episode with a lot of impressive space battle action in it?
. . .
BigsWickDagger
Spaceman
I think the new BSG series is really good. Sure, there have been some "eh" episodes. All series have them, but on the whole I like what I've seen thus far. For me, it has rejuvenated a mostly bland Sci-Fi network lineup of so-so entertainment.
It is interesting to talk with non sci-fi fans that watch the series. I work with several. They are the same types of people who make fun of guys like us because we enjoy science fiction (it happens to everyone), but they tune into BSG every Friday or Monday night to catch the latest episode. Isn’t it good for sci-fi when the traditionally not-interested-in-the-sort folks take notice? Isn’t this how something gains a wider acceptance? Couldn’t it lead to other, bigger, and even better things for science fiction? Maybe in that way BSG has broken new ground.
Rolling Stone, Newsweek, TV Guide and other publications have given the series high marks, but there can be a reflexive sort of reaction to that as well. I know there is a tendency amongst fans of the genre to kind of think of ourselves as members of a “club,” guys who have stood their ground, taken several on the collective chin, and defended Star Wars, Star Trek, Wing Commander, etc., when it was so easy for others to take pot-shots at us because it was “cool” to rag on the sci-fi “geeks.” Accordingly, I think there is a propensity for some, myself included, to resist inclusion of those same folks when they take notice of something sci-fi and actually give it the time of day. If they like it could there possibly be something wrong with it? Why the sudden change of heart? That is a matter of opinion, but it has meant good things for BSG from a popularity standpoint and, in turn, science fiction in the main.
Alcoholism, rape, abortion, murder, politics and religion are but a few of the topics explored in the series. Yes, they over did the sex thing in season one, granted. But, as trite as it might sound, they are all part of the human condition, universals, things we have all struggled with in our lives, experienced, and have strong opinions about. So, the creators of the show took these not so new realities and have/are exploring them in a sci-fi setting. Is that really bad? I think it is a large part of what has contributed to the success of the show this far, particularly in regards to that fact that it doesn’t seem to be losing steam. Yeah, you can pick anything apart, but many of you have pointed out the lack of seriousness with which most sci-fi is treated. Could BSG be a step in the right direction? I guess that remains to be seen, but when sci-fi gets a wider exposure to a broader audience it is a good thing for all of us, especially the fans of the genre. That is how, if ever, it will achieve a greater level of acceptance.
BSG isn’t perfect. But, I remember reading a post by Loaf once that basically said he was glad that we were finally taking back Friday nights and getting something from the Sci-Fi network other than another movie about Captain X fighting the evil land-fish. I hope I didn’t take that too far out of context, but I saw his point then and still agree with it. So for now, I’ll continue to tune in on Fridays and enjoy the best new sci-fi show on television.
It is interesting to talk with non sci-fi fans that watch the series. I work with several. They are the same types of people who make fun of guys like us because we enjoy science fiction (it happens to everyone), but they tune into BSG every Friday or Monday night to catch the latest episode. Isn’t it good for sci-fi when the traditionally not-interested-in-the-sort folks take notice? Isn’t this how something gains a wider acceptance? Couldn’t it lead to other, bigger, and even better things for science fiction? Maybe in that way BSG has broken new ground.
Rolling Stone, Newsweek, TV Guide and other publications have given the series high marks, but there can be a reflexive sort of reaction to that as well. I know there is a tendency amongst fans of the genre to kind of think of ourselves as members of a “club,” guys who have stood their ground, taken several on the collective chin, and defended Star Wars, Star Trek, Wing Commander, etc., when it was so easy for others to take pot-shots at us because it was “cool” to rag on the sci-fi “geeks.” Accordingly, I think there is a propensity for some, myself included, to resist inclusion of those same folks when they take notice of something sci-fi and actually give it the time of day. If they like it could there possibly be something wrong with it? Why the sudden change of heart? That is a matter of opinion, but it has meant good things for BSG from a popularity standpoint and, in turn, science fiction in the main.
Alcoholism, rape, abortion, murder, politics and religion are but a few of the topics explored in the series. Yes, they over did the sex thing in season one, granted. But, as trite as it might sound, they are all part of the human condition, universals, things we have all struggled with in our lives, experienced, and have strong opinions about. So, the creators of the show took these not so new realities and have/are exploring them in a sci-fi setting. Is that really bad? I think it is a large part of what has contributed to the success of the show this far, particularly in regards to that fact that it doesn’t seem to be losing steam. Yeah, you can pick anything apart, but many of you have pointed out the lack of seriousness with which most sci-fi is treated. Could BSG be a step in the right direction? I guess that remains to be seen, but when sci-fi gets a wider exposure to a broader audience it is a good thing for all of us, especially the fans of the genre. That is how, if ever, it will achieve a greater level of acceptance.
BSG isn’t perfect. But, I remember reading a post by Loaf once that basically said he was glad that we were finally taking back Friday nights and getting something from the Sci-Fi network other than another movie about Captain X fighting the evil land-fish. I hope I didn’t take that too far out of context, but I saw his point then and still agree with it. So for now, I’ll continue to tune in on Fridays and enjoy the best new sci-fi show on television.
t.c.cgi
Vice Admiral
BigsWickDagger said:
This is not new at all. The original Star Trek did fairly well, and laid groundwork for *six* feature films and a sequel series, 'The Next Generation'. This wasn't some fanservice, it was done because more than just the nerds watched it. In this light, BSG has not broken any ground at all. Sci-Fi is only a cult closet item when the makers want it to be that.
TopGun
Vampire Ace
I too love Babylon 5, been a fan since Season 1 came to channel 4 way back in 93/94. OMG was it really that long ago
I will continue to watch BSG each week, that is my choice. Am I following a trend, I don't think so. I bought the miniseries on DVD becuase I wanted to see what it was like, I liked what I saw so bought Season 1 and have been watching Season 2
I will continue to watch BSG each week, that is my choice. Am I following a trend, I don't think so. I bought the miniseries on DVD becuase I wanted to see what it was like, I liked what I saw so bought Season 1 and have been watching Season 2
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
No, it isn't good - it's irrelevant. How the heck could it ever be important? People who don't matter who we've never cared about? Fine... doesn't effect us -- except, like here, where we dramatically lower our expectations because we suddenly decide we want to be popular. That's sad.
It's also completely inaccurate. Star Trek: The Next Generation - the ideal held up earlier in this thread for just this reason - was incredibly, incredibly popular with non-fans. Battlestar Galactica comes nowhere near its ratings, its name recognition or its market saturation. But, of course, it never tried-so-hard to be edgy...
People agree with me! I must be cool now!
That's so stupid -- why would these opinions suddenly matter? These are the people who've been shooting down every other genre show that you've loved for your entire life... and now the one time you agree with them it makes them credible sources? To acknowledge that Rolling Stone has any legitimate say is also a tacit admission that the likes of Star Trek, Wing Commander, seaQuest, Xena, insert-90s-sci-fi-franchise here are worthless. That's stupid revisionism -- we were entirely happy to rage against this machine when they were panning WCIV... and in so doing we certainly made the case that they were simply ignorant. Now they agree with you so they're great? Come off it.
What a terrible question! What awful logic! Apply the same line of thinking to whatever the latest hip reality TV show is. Apply it to whichever politician is in power! There is no inherent value in the thinking of the majority simply because it is a majority.
How can you people possibly come into a thread that started off by making fun of how incredibly dumb people who parrot this kind of crap are? How do you not feel terrible after having written something like this? Do you seriously believe that repeating the same thing we've been mocking - that we've already yelled at one person for - is going to bring new light to the idea? You are a big part of the problem: the attempt to make the fun explosion sex show into something brilliant which it *absolutely is not*.
Battlestar Galactica deals with these 'issues' (nay: the human condition! that sound intellectual in its vaugness!) in excatly the same manner as does an afternoon soap opera or an hour of 90210. The difference is that 90210 is lots of easy fun and you don't have to deal with insufferable 90210 fans insisting that the show is carefully crafting a brilliant symbol with its treatment of Dylan's father issues. Robots having sex, robots having abortions, robots arguing about religion are not clever issues and the discussion adds nothing to any of these topics - they're the same cheap, easy, common issues that every sagging drama in the universe brings out for sweeps. But here they're *in space*, so they're brilliant and subtle and clever!
That was not my point at all. We were talking about the idea of Enterprise at the start of primetime followed by Battlestar Galactica. I think, I still think, that was ideal -- but our generation ruined Enterprise for exactly the reasons outlined in my initial post. We *only* want our little mutual masturbatory experience and will not let anyone else encroach on its territory. Without the counter balance of something we can watch with the next generation, our private little explosion show is terrible.
powell99
Aviation Junkie
Same 3d Studio.TopGun said:
Anyways. I like the show. Honestly I have no clue why. I hate the majority of the characters. (Sexbots? Oh real original...
) I also hate how the camera moves around alot on screen. I also don't view the show as ground-breaking. (Though it is nice to see ships rely on thrusters to move around) Its probably because I think the ships look cool (when rendered in 3d) I also like it because it is a shitload better than the majority of Scifi Channel programming. It is easy as hell to see why people don't like it. Frankly I go back and forth on it. At the moment its the only show that has some traces of quality. I would definatley preferr some sort of Star Trek over it. (Not Enterprise, I have my own reasons for it) Still we deal with what we have. Thats BSG, Frankly I'm okay with it. There could be stuff infinatley worse.
Dragon1
Rear Admiral
I would say the thing I don't like the most about the miniseries is all of the little in-conflicts that the producer thought were required to make the show *real*. For example, the Coriolis wanna be chief was having a semi-secret affair with one of the pilots; the XO and Starbuck got into a fist fight and hated eachother for some non-descript reason; the father and son had to be estranged.......I can continue, but I think everyone gets my point. Well, I have attended school now for 18 years of my 26 year life. I have worked numerous jobs- from the 'minimum wage' class to the professional level. We all encounter *drama* occasionally in our lives, but this seems to be a show that says life can't be *real* unless everyone is having sex with eachother, fighting with one another, or has secret grudges.
The Starbuck character especially erks me. She is supposed to be a badass female fighter pilot. The miniseries starts off with her running down the corridors of the ships showing everyone (audience) just how hardcore she is. Within 10 minutes of the show start, she makes a jab at the XO's marital issue and then punches him in the face after he kicked over the table.
Later, near the end of the show, after Starbuck's heroic piloting saves the CO's son; the XO has enough class to go and tell Starbuck that she is one of the best pilots he has ever seen and wants to clean the slate between themselves. She responds by calling him a bastard and weak.
Well, to me, that isn't hardcore. It is weak. The XO showed a lot of courage and class and was countered by an immature, brat who sounds like she always got here way too much. If the producers were trying to create an Ellen Ripley type character for Starbuck, they really missed the mark.
The point is is that in the *real* world where *drama* does happen, there is also proffessionalism. If the crew chief and a pilot had a relationship with eachother, it had better be secret (like so secret the audience wouldn't really know about it), because real life responsibility and proffessionalism would create quick consequences for those actions.
The Starbuck character especially erks me. She is supposed to be a badass female fighter pilot. The miniseries starts off with her running down the corridors of the ships showing everyone (audience) just how hardcore she is. Within 10 minutes of the show start, she makes a jab at the XO's marital issue and then punches him in the face after he kicked over the table.
Later, near the end of the show, after Starbuck's heroic piloting saves the CO's son; the XO has enough class to go and tell Starbuck that she is one of the best pilots he has ever seen and wants to clean the slate between themselves. She responds by calling him a bastard and weak.
Well, to me, that isn't hardcore. It is weak. The XO showed a lot of courage and class and was countered by an immature, brat who sounds like she always got here way too much. If the producers were trying to create an Ellen Ripley type character for Starbuck, they really missed the mark.
The point is is that in the *real* world where *drama* does happen, there is also proffessionalism. If the crew chief and a pilot had a relationship with eachother, it had better be secret (like so secret the audience wouldn't really know about it), because real life responsibility and proffessionalism would create quick consequences for those actions.