The new Battlestar

[LightPhoenix]

Another thing I noticed was a very short scene where Col. Tigh was lying on his bunk (not too long after the fight with Starbuck) and he started burning a picture of a woman who I presume was his wife. It was a picture of number 6.

Interesting, and missed.

ps: Remember when a "mini-series" was ten or twenty hours of television over several nights, not a long movie?

Roots!

"My name's Kizzy, K-I-Z-Z-Y!"

 

[Zenon]

For those that missed it in the credits, I found it interesting that Glen Larson was a consulting producer on the new BSG.

From SciFi.com's blurb about the BSG Crew:

SCI FI PICTURES, USA CABLE and ACES AND EIGHTS PRODUCTIONS

BATTLESTAR GALACTICA

Consulting Producer/Based on
Characters Created by
...
GLEN A. LARSON

Does anyone know how much input he had into the new BSG?

 

[jdavis]

Like the Star Trek Community wasn't polarised before? Come on, its been polarised since Trekkie and Trekker; TOS and TNG; and the advent of slash fiction. I mean scifi fanbases built around long running materials are by their very nature polarised because one segment of the population always thinks its more pure and knows better than the others. This mirrors a lot of religious squabbles that happen because one group just knows better or are more pure then the rest. The BSG fanbase was never "united," and neither was the Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Star trek, Space 1999, Dr. Who, Conan, Blakes 7, The Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dune, and any other program, game, book or whatnot with a cult following. Its the nature of the beast, and the pattern goes back into history for thousands and thousands of years, with science, religion, history, and whatever subject that attracts human interest. The "Franchise" is fine. The new material may not take a form you like, but hey, if we don't like it, we can go back to the original stuff and shun the new ways.

Aaron.

As far as Trek goes I never liked Star Trek all that much to begin with. But last I saw the Enterprise ratings weren't that good, was the whole temporal cold war a good idea? Was upsetting the fanatic fans (the ones who always watched no matter how bad it got) a good idea? eh, I didn't like Trek anyway. The whole Galactica thing could of been avoided so easily, just don't be rude to the fans. The Franchise will live or die (to early to say it's fine yet) and I'm fine with that, but did Sci FI channel really need another PR black eye with a group of science fiction fans? Statements were released that basically told fans of the old show to not watch the new show, how freaking retarded do you have to be to insult your most vocal fanbase like that, were they trying to get lower ratings? Give these people a little attention and maybe throw them a bone or two and your garanteed a extra 20 to 30 thousand people will tune in every week like rabid fanatics. Tell them they are unimportant and don't know what they are talking about and you not only hurt this show you hurt the entire network that is supposed to cater to Sci Fi fans. These people just wanted a new show they could watch and enjoy and they were told 6 months ago to not even bother tuning in.

 

[jdavis]

For those that missed it in the credits, I found it interesting that Glen Larson was a consulting producer on the new BSG.

From SciFi.com's blurb about the BSG Crew:

Does anyone know how much input he had into the new BSG?

By what I have seen was that he had very little to do with this (posibly nothing at all) it was just a credit for his original story. He had his own Galactica project and was unhappy with Universal not letting him go ahead with it. Of course Larson is responsible for lots of old shows that they may want to remake too (70's Buck Rodgers, Six million dollar man, and many others: http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0488991/ ). He's not listed at all on the iMDB crew list either: http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0314979/fullcredits . I could be wrong but I think that was mainly just a credit for what they were basing this on.

 

[jdavis]

some older articles on the show I ran across.
Review of the script from Filmjerk.com from last February: http://www.filmjerk.com/nuke/article354.html

Nixflix review of the show: http://www.nixflix.com/reviews/battlestar2003.htm

Edward James Olmos quote: http://us.imdb.com/SB?20030711#7

In one of the oddest promotional appearances ever before the TV Writers Summer Tour, Edward James Olmos, who is starring in a new Battlestar Galactica miniseries due to air on the Sci-Fi Channel, gave this advice to fans of the original Galactica series, which aired on ABC between 1978 and 1980: "Please don't watch this program," Olmos said. "Buy yourself the new DVDs that they're putting out of the old episodes, and whenever we come on, just put that one in. ... Trust me. Don't watch it. If you're a real, real staunch Battlestar Galactica person, please don't watch it."

IGN.com tv review: http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/444/444434p1.html?fromint=1

post.gazette.com review: http://www.post-gazette.com/tv/20031207owenp1.asp

eclipsemagazine.com: http://www.eclipsemagazine.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=806&page=0

southsound.com: http://www.tribnet.com/24hour/entertainment/v-southsound/story/1077821p-7528475c.html

Page with several links to articles on new Galactica: http://tv.surfwax.com/files/Battlestar_Galactica_TV.html

 

[Darrin Drader]

I remember that quote. It was then that I decided for sure that I was going to treat it like an entirely new show rather than expecting something that would serve as a continuation.

Last I heard Larson does have the rights to do a movie and is still moving forward with a film project. I hope this doesn't turn into New BSG (lighter and more bubbly) and BSG Classic (the same taste everyone remembers, except that they switched to a different sweetener).

 

[jdavis]

Ok I may of nailed down what happened to the Singer/DeSanto project back in Nov 2001: http://www.trektoday.com/news/161101_03.shtml

There was also a quote by Ronald Moore where he basically said his purpose was to completly reinvent how Science Fiction series in general looked (or something like that, I'll see If I can run across it again). Changing the entire genre is a pretty big task (or a pretty arrogant statement). I don't know what to think about a Larson movie (the old plotline ideas I read sounded lame, maybe it's been changed now though).

 

[trancejeremy]

I missed the first half because of the Rams game on Monday (this is also why I haven't seen many episodes of SG-1)

But I watched the second half.

I dunno.

It wasn't horribly bad, but it could have been a lot better. But admittedly, I was somewhat irked about the whole "re-imaging" thing. It's like instead of Star Trek: The Next Generation, we got a whole new Original series, with new actors playing Kirk, Spock, Bones, etc.

Battlestar Galactica was a big thing when I was a kid - I don't really like my childhood memories jerked around with. It's bad enough Lucas is #%@#%ing around with Star Wars.

So, that was actually a big problem for me.

However, beyond that, the real main problem was the bad acting/casting. Starbuck looked about 12 years old, I thought. She actually reminded me of Peri from Dr. Who. More perky than anything else. Gah.

Apollo was about as bland and dull an actor (and character) as I think I've ever seen on TV.

I like Edward James Olmos, but as I watched him, all I could think is "My god, he's gotten really fat". He was also very bad in his speeches, especially the pseudo religious stuff. Lorne Greene was much better at that in the old Battlestar. Anyway, I know he can act better than this.

The president lady seemed to be on valium or something.

I found the whole "6" character to be a complete rip off of Star Treks 7. Gah. If you're going to have a robot bimbo, why copy the robot bimbo from another SF show almost exactly, right down to her name?

Also, I don't understand the low technology level of these people. Even if a Cylon looks like a human, can't they x-ray them, or do a cat-scan, or look at their DNA? Obviously, they can't be exactly like humans, inside, otherwise they would be humans.

I also though the new cylon ships looked suspiciously like the Kilrathi ships from Wing Commander. Did they save money using clips from that movie or something?

I also miss all the female characters from the old show. And black characters. Space is apparently awfully male (except for Starbuck and the bimbo bot) and awfully white (except "Boomer", I guess). Even Edward James Olmos, while hispanic, is basically playing a white guy (unless his son Apollo is supposed to be adopted).

I also didn't like the sets and the clothing. The new Galactica has too many wide open spaces. It looked more like a cruise ship than a military vessel (though a cruise ship with 1930s technology. I kept expecting to see Hercule Poirot pop up). And the clothing - some of the people looked straight out of wall street, what with their button down shirts and neck ties.

The show was also awfully slow moving. Until today checking the TV guide, I didn't realize that this was it for the series. In something like 5 hours, they've accomplished what it took the original series to do in 1 hour (if that).

 

[Krieg]

Originally Posted by jasper
BUZZ .../snip/...

BUZZ.../snip/...

BUZZ!!

I just wanted to say it too.

 

[Skade]

I really find the various comments about Adama being hispanic, and his son being white pretty amusing. Adama probably is not supposed to be any more Hispanic with Olmos playing him, than he was with Lorne Green. It's just a character, and it happens to be a hispanic actor is playing the role. As to having a white son? I'd almost consider posting pictures of my family to give you a good indication of the variety of skin and hair tones present in many hispanic families. Even discounting this, if you saw the picture of the boys (Apollo and Zak) with their mother, you'll notice she was very anglo, with red hair.