Battlestar Galactica: The Motion Picture

[kryptosmaster]

It's funny how a show (or shows) like this can stoke so much discourse among us mego-collectors/sci-fi nuts.

'Guess it's what makes this Forum fun..

Thanks all ~

david_b

I was just thinking the same thing when I looked at the post count and number of views approaching 100 & 900 respectively.
Rich

[david_b]

It's funny how a show (or shows) like this can stoke so much discourse among us mego-collectors/sci-fi nuts.

'Guess it's what makes this Forum fun..

Thanks all ~

david_b

[kryptosmaster]

>you'd want to see what happens after they get to Earth and start to assimilate (or whatever may happen).

Or not, if you remember Galactica 1980....

Faculty meeting at an Earth school, circa Galactica 2009: "Wow, those are some BITTER kids"

Don C.

I was fully aware of Galactica 1980 when I wrote that comment but to be honest I didn't really watch that much of it. The only episode I recall was the one stating Starbuck's fate.
Most fans dismiss G1980 as not in continuity anyway.

Rich

[ctc]

>you'd want to see what happens after they get to Earth and start to assimilate (or whatever may happen).

Or not, if you remember Galactica 1980....

Faculty meeting at an Earth school, circa Galactica 2009: "Wow, those are some BITTER kids"

Don C.

[david_b]

You misspelled both agnostics and atheists.

digress.. digress.. digress..

[kryptosmaster]

I just had a thought which would be a downer for the end of the new series. Do you think that Universal is going back to the original version of Galactica for a movie because there won't be any character left alive at the end of the series of new BSG? That would be a bad way to finish up, but might explain why they are going backwards with the Caprica series rather than doing some sort of spin-off.

I always just assumed that the last episode of BSG (original and new) would be them finding Earth since that is the whole premise of the series. Never really thought much past that. It was unusual for a series to last more than 4 or 5 years (way back) so I'm sure by that time they would be ready to wrap things up and finally allow Galactica to find Earth. Of course if you've watched a show for that long, and assuming it was still getting good ratings, you'd want to see what happens after they get to Earth and start to assimilate (or whatever may happen). I always figured it would go one of two ways: they would be welcomed with open arms as long-lost brothers or would end up shunned like the aliens in AlieNation.
I don't think the new series ever planned on continuing stories after they found Earth or if you believe what's already been revealed, they have found Earth(which is a big let-down to me if this is true).

Rich

[UnderdogDJLSW]

I just had a thought which would be a downer for the end of the new series. Do you think that Universal is going back to the original version of Galactica for a movie because there won't be any character left alive at the end of the series of new BSG? That would be a bad way to finish up, but might explain why they are going backwards with the Caprica series rather than doing some sort of spin-off.

[UnderdogDJLSW]

Actually, I think my preferences for things run from about 1978 to 1987. My teen years. I think my preferences for entertainment and such formed during those years, so that is what I like the most. Doesn't mean I can't enjoy today's stuff. I don't think anyone can shut themselves in a box (well some do, but most don't) and ignore change.

[EMCE Hammer]

I think the new BSG has characters with more depth than I've seen in an SF show. Just slapping an adjective or two on any of them for a label really oversimplifies. I don't think the series is fashionably grungy; it's exactly the way I'd imagine a group of refugees being hunted to extinction to be portrayed. People die, hope is fleeting. I don't find the show overly sexed either. The situation between Baltar and the six is seductive and complex, but it's not overly dirty to me. I like it every bit as much as Firefly, and way more than any of the new Trek or new SW.

Back to the original subject. The new movie will basically be the 4th incarnation of BSG. It's got awfully big shoes to fill if it's going to be more than a 21st century Galactica 1980.

[ctc]

>I would rather have the 78 shows style than today's style.

That's kind of an interesting statement.... I think part of the problem with "now" style stuff is that we're innundated with it. Y'know.... it being "now" and all.... So the older stuff is actually somewhat fresh, 'cos we haven't been swamped with it for a while. Conversely, a lot of old shows I hated I can "meh" now 'cos I don't feel suffocated by them. And one of the reasons I like so many old shows is 'cos they're so different from what I see now. (Same with foreign shows; any rut that isn't your own is novel.)

Don C.

[Hector]

Careful here, Hector..: It's really a 'to-each-his-own' type viewpoint. Even ignostics and athesists don't necessarily care for what some shows throw in to grab the 'lowest-common-denominator' audience.

It's simply a matter of taste. Thanks for the input though. I do agree on the Starbuck character. This new series is simply 'just another show'.

And it's not just a old classic show vs. new show thing: I thought Firefly was outstanding.., and loved the female characters..!

david_b

You misspelled both agnostics and atheists.

[Hector]

That's it. I'm changing my avatar.

[kryptosmaster]

I would rather have the 78 shows style than today's style. But that can be said for almost everything I grew up with: music, toys, even some of the clothing!

Sir, calmly step away from the leisure suit!
We don't want to hurt you!



Rich

[UnderdogDJLSW]

I wonder if in 5 years we'll be talking about Star Trek in this way? (Roddenberry v. Abrams)

As Brian mentioned, both shows are a sign of their times. Back in '78 some of the cringe worthy stuff wasn't as "cringe-full" as we see it today. Other shows like Love Boat, Fantasy Island, etc. had the same feel. Look at today and you have 24, Lost, etc. All shaky camera cinema, angst, etc. 30 years from now who knows how we'll think of those shows?

To be honest, I would rather have the 78 shows style than today's style. But that can be said for almost everything I grew up with: music, toys, even some of the clothing!

[ctc]

>It could be worse, what if it was?

I'm seein' Will Ferell in that viper helmet again....

>People do have sex and they have messed up relationships, it's less far fetched than other shows.

I gotta give you that one; but I don't think it's 'cos new Galactica is particularly well written; just less badly written as a lot of other shows. I find relationships; even in straight up dramas, are generally poorly done since they happen strictly for plot convenience. We can never really figure out WHY two characters are attracted to each other, except 'cos of proximity.

>It’s like they lacked the either the knowledge or skill or both to write convincing female characters.

I think the same problems afflict the MALE characters as well. They're all pretty stock.

>the character of Starbuk is not this so called "butch" stereotype,

See.... that's kind of what I was getting at. She's angry; like everyone else. I wouldn't call her butch, 'cos she's not really different enough from everyone else to fit a category. (Well, maybe she's angrier.... but that just made me think of the "tank" guy from "Space.")

>it looks that way but it goes far deeper then a simple "****" character.

I sort of agree here; but from the other direction. (That it goes LESS deeper....) She wasn't the "****" character so much as she was a plot device. They hired an attractive woman for the part as eye candy 'cos you're gonna be staring at her a LOT 'cos they have a lot of explaining to do.

>It's along the lines of Voyager's '7of9' excess..

Sort of, but I think in Voyager's defense (I can't believe I typed that....) 7of9 was really the only CHARACTER on that show. She was the only one who developed as the series went on, the only one that had any kind of goal, and the only one that had any tangible interests outside of the plot. So it's only natural that the audience would gravitate towards her.

....'course; keeping with an earlier point, they felt the need to include her in not one, but TWO bizarre love subplots that came out of nowhere.

Don C.