• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

The new Battlestar

jdavis said:
For those that missed any of it they are showing the whole thing again Sunday night.

Wasn't going, but I wanna see this Tigh scene where there is Number 6 in his picture. Can anyone identify roundabout that was?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I find it interesting that the main complaint everyone has about virtually every movie or show out there (unless it happens to be one they actually liked) is bad acting. I mean, could you find a more subjective thing to slam something for?

Well, I'd like to point out that bad acting seems to be the number one complaint of those who are slamming the original. :) I rather liked the acting and characters in the original.

Speaking for myself, I am criticizing/expressing my distaste for the writing decisions made. It's too dark, and too many things are too overplayed. It seems to be all in vogue now to be dark and gritty, and I can see the heroes not being perfect, but I think that the baby scene and the fade to white girl scene were too much, and the "character flaws" made it seem like a soap opera at times.

It was enlightening to read a Moore interview over on RPGnet, and I can sort of see where the darkness comes from (it seems to me an overreaction from being held back during the ST:TNG era).
 
Last edited:

jdavis said:
That's why I liked Farscape so much, it was full of character interaction, they were all full characters with enough flaws to make them believable. It wasn't dark and gritty, but I don't care for dark and gritty in my Science Fiction.

I think Farscape is pretty dark and gritty. I just watched the episode where the crew were captured by Nebari. That's a pretty dark episode. But I liked it -- it was a great episode.

For some reason, Farscape's dark works for me and BSG's didn't. I can't put my finger on it, but I am guessing its because BSGs dark and gritty moments are to obviously set peices. You can see the screenwriter's hand.
 

My girlfriend wondered aloud of the producers couldn't find a basket of kittens for her to play with just before the nukes dropped. Maybe a Nun could have thrown her body in front to the blast?

We really need a LOL icon here. :)

*Depressurize the burning part of Galactica - Pretty harsh, but the right thing to do.

But we don't see that. We don't see that he knows that it is the right thing to do. It looks rather arbitrary on screen, which makes it come off a little flat. I don't get that "tough but necessary" vibe from it.

I don't know, however, if this was inadequate writing or the fact that it was cut to ribbons to get it down to 4 hours from 6. It seems like they are missing a few facts. The whole how Baltar caused the doom of the human race never seemed entirely clear to me. Others have mentioned (though I forget if it was here or RPGnet or NKL) that Adama's deception about Earth seemed rather out-of-nowhere, and I mention that the tip left in Adama's stateroom before the end seems to come from nowhere.
 
Last edited:

Hmm.

I've been reading the thread with much interest, and have enjoyed it.

That being said, I am a fan of the original series, but went into the viewing of the new one with no preconceived notions and not concerned at all that it was new. I rather enjoyed it, and can appreciate the fact that it is different. A very fresh perspective. I am most likely in the minority, I like both versions, they both have their merits.

The one thing that I did not want was a 24 year break in the action. That would have just been plain silly.
 

Star Trek is its own little ghetto these days. Oh by the way, have you caught the announcement that Enterprise is cutting 2 shows this season and may be getting cancelled?

Yes, I caught that. Sweet mercy.

Ever since Voyager (and late Braga-dominated DS9, really), Trek has been dead to me anyways.
 

jdavis said:
That's why I liked Farscape so much, it was full of character interaction, they were all full characters with enough flaws to make them believable.

You had an issue with the acting with BSG.

And yet you hold Farscape up as having "full characters...believable".

PUPPETS. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT PUPPETS AS BELIEVABLE, FULL CHARACTERS, OVER REAL ACTUAL HUMAN ACTORS?

Good lord you have a confused sense of reality sometimes Jdavis...that's why we love you.
 

My opinion of the new BSG?

Fan Friggen Tastic!

I loved it. I hope and pray they turn it into a series.

It reminded me a lot of Space: Above & Beyond, which is a series I also loved (and I think it was cancelled for having a crappy name more than anything else).

My fiancee' also loved it, and that is saying a lot (since she is an actress, and fairly critical of people's acting ability).

I was a fan of the old show, and surprised at just how much of the old show they did actually keep in the new show. Just the right balance of nostalgic references and new stuff.
 

Mistwell said:
You had an issue with the acting with BSG.

And yet you hold Farscape up as having "full characters...believable".

PUPPETS. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT PUPPETS AS BELIEVABLE, FULL CHARACTERS, OVER REAL ACTUAL HUMAN ACTORS?

Good lord you have a confused sense of reality sometimes Jdavis...that's why we love you.
You sure everyone in Galactica was a human actor? The puppets on Farscape acted circles around most of them. (there were two puppet cast members, the rest were actual people.) They hit a whole range of emotions not just angry and depressed. Everyone in Galactica was dark and depressed before the Cylons attacked even, well except for Baltar (maybe why I liked him so much). You would think a society that invented space travel and AI powered robots would of come up with some Prozac at some point. Some of these characters were so freaking flawed they wouldn't even fit in on Days of Our Lives.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top