Battlestar Galactica commentary on Farscape

[DreadPirateMurphy]

So, I'm FINALLY watching the 1st season of Battlestar Galactica on DVD. Last night, I watched the director's commentary for the first episode, "33." One of the comments at the beginning of the commentary was that Sci-Fi didn't want a show that evolved like Farscape, where by the end of it, only "nine fans" could follow the plot. (No BG Spoilers, please.)

I thought the criticism was a little harsh, but I can see how Farscape did get somewhat self-absorbed in its own mythology. I can also see how a network executive could see that as a problem. I have a hard time seeing it as a fatal flaw, however, since other shows are equally as guilty. Buffy and the X-Files come to mind, and both of those lasted much longer than Farscape.

It is hard for me, who probably counts as one of the nine, to be totally objective, so I would be interested in the opinions of others.

 

[Umbran]

It is hard for me, who probably counts as one of the nine, to be totally objective, so I would be interested in the opinions of others.

I think Farscape's plot evolved a whole lot, and that jumping in the middle would have been difficult. But that evolution is part of what I loved about the show.

Seems to me that if the BSG people think they're making a show that folks can jump into in the middle, they're fooling themselves. You'll have accessibility problems in any show where current events depend upon previous events, and BSG has a whole lot of that.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Well, I started Angel pretty late and never had a big problem following, but I watched early eps of farscape, liked them, caught a couple of much later eps and said "What the hell?" and couldn't even begin to get into them, so I'd have to say that Farscape did take the problem to an extreme.

 

[edemaitre]

Galactica and Farscape

I and other fans of the 1970s "Battlestar Galactica" (dated, but idealistic) have had problems with a few of producer Ron Moore's comments regarding the SciFi Channel's revisionist military space opera. The new "Battlestar Galactica" isn't as original as he claims, incorporating numerous elements of the so-called cheesy original television series, "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" (whose fan-rewarding story arcs Moore worked on), and other continuity-heavy shows such as "Babylon 5" (see the recent embedded journalist ep).

While I agree that the newer "Galactica" is well-produced, written, and acted, it's disingenuous to claim that the highly-rated show is especially original. The sexy android, hot-shot pilots, philosophically torn leaders, and humanity under siege are archetypes in much speculative fiction. The darker tone does reflect a crisis in American confidence since Sept. 11, 2001, but if you liked "Farscape's" chaotic heroism, I recommend "Stargate SG1," which has managed to balance friendliness toward casual viewers with long-term character/universe development and still have fun doing so. Plus, "Farscape's" lead actors have appeared on that show, and there are D20 role-playing games for both "Farscape" and "Stargate"...

 

[DreadPirateMurphy]

The darker tone does reflect a crisis in American confidence since Sept. 11, 2001, but if you liked "Farscape's" chaotic heroism, I recommend "Stargate SG1," which has managed to balance friendliness toward casual viewers with long-term character/universe development and still have fun doing so. Plus, "Farscape's" lead actors have appeared on that show, and there are D20 role-playing games for both "Farscape" and "Stargate"...

I do follow Stargate, and I have all the D20 books for both that and Farscape -- both of which are basically dead product lines.

Something occurred to me. Farscape had another characteristic that helped hurt the ability of people to come watch in the middle. IIRC, the DVDs seemed to take a long time to come out as a set. There were big swaths of time where somebody entering in season 3 couldn't just go out and buy the first two seasons to catch up.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

My problem with Stargate is that after having not seen it for several years, I watched one new episode and it felt like the same old stuff.

There's nothing new under the sun, but BG has at least come up with a good mix of the old. And atypically for most sci-fi shows, they've avoided the 'new planet every week with a new mysterious race'.

 

[reveal]

I didn't watch Farscape almost at all when it was on TV. I tried a couple of times, but it always felt like a show where you had to follow it from the beginning or you wouldn't get references and/or in-jokes. When I bought it on DVD, I loved it but still feel that way.

 

[Storm Raven]

So, I'm FINALLY watching the 1st season of Battlestar Galactica on DVD. Last night, I watched the director's commentary for the first episode, "33." One of the comments at the beginning of the commentary was that Sci-Fi didn't want a show that evolved like Farscape, where by the end of it, only "nine fans" could follow the plot. (No BG Spoilers, please.)

I thought the criticism was a little harsh, but I can see how Farscape did get somewhat self-absorbed in its own mythology. I can also see how a network executive could see that as a problem. I have a hard time seeing it as a fatal flaw, however, since other shows are equally as guilty. Buffy and the X-Files come to mind, and both of those lasted much longer than Farscape.

It is hard for me, who probably counts as one of the nine, to be totally objective, so I would be interested in the opinions of others.

I tend to disagree that Farscape was particularly egreigious on this point. I think that this has been exagerrated by the network to justify their decision to cancel the show despite having previously committed to continue it. Really, was Farscape that much more plot intensive than Babylon 5? Or even the current Battlestar Galactica? I think not so much.

And then there is also the mainstream shows that have plot arcs like 24, and just about every soap opera in existence. I don't see a lot of people complaining about the plot continuity of All My Children, General Hospital, or even Desperate Housewives. In point of fact, most people who watch those shows seem to like the continuity (although in the case of soaps like Passions, the storylines seem to be ridiculously silly).

Farscape got accused of being too big on plot continuity, but what was really the problem was a network that abused the show, failed to market it effectively, and then flailed about for a "justification" other than it's own incompetence.

 

[Fast Learner]

I tried many times to get into Farscape over the years and found it impossible. When, as a run-up to the finale mini they played them all, I watched them and found that I loved the show.

Comparing it to other shows, its continuity elements were far more complex and semi-buried than soap operas, daytime or nighttime. I absolutely see it as a flaw, from a ratings standpoint. If you wanted to start watch Desperate Housewives right now, I could summarize the entire first season in 3 short sentences. Farscape's seasons were much more complex than that, and worse (from this perspective), even in much later seasons you still needed to know stuff from the first season. I can pretty much guarantee this won't be true of Desperate Housewives.

Still love Farscape. But dude, it's too rich for TV.

The new "Battlestar Galactica" isn't as original as he claims, incorporating numerous elements of the so-called cheesy original television series, "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" (whose fan-rewarding story arcs Moore worked on), and other continuity-heavy shows such as "Babylon 5" (see the recent embedded journalist ep).

You meant to refer to the journalist episode of M*A*S*H in the late 70s, right?

The monotheistic enemy vs. the polytheistic heroes, that's new. The richness of the "should complex machines be afforded the rights we give to humans" interaction is certainly new (an episode or two about Data pales utterly). The military vs. civilian government on a very small scale stuff has hardly been touched. Etc. Completely new? No. But richly new-feeling? Big frickin' time.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I watched Farscape, although I wasn't a hardcore fan, and it still confused me. The show was crazy. It was amazing, but it was confusing. Shows like Buffy and Angel have plot arcs that last a season or two then go onto something else, the characters having grown and changed, but the plots not relying on what happened three or four seasons ago. Farscape was a plot arc. This means that missing an episode, or even forgetting about what happened in an episode, might come back to bite you months down the line. It was brilliantly written, but I have to say that it required overly avid viewership.