Post by: Captain KoraH on September 16, 2003, 02:04:25 pm
Post by: Komodo on September 16, 2003, 02:32:29 pm
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 16, 2003, 02:51:28 pm
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 03:17:01 pm
an abomination and a rip-off of the Battlestar name.
The series DVD will be out soon and I will vote for that with my wallet.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: TalonClaw on September 16, 2003, 03:26:05 pm
Quote:
I agree with the boycott myself. What the Sci-Fi channel has done is
an abomination and a rip-off of the Battlestar name.
The series DVD will be out soon and I will vote for that with my wallet.
Thanks,
Dave
I'll be voting for the original with my wallet as well. I've been waiting for a long time to get the whole series on DVD.
IMO the new BSG should have been called something else because BSG it is not.
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 03:28:55 pm
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/entertainment/6274118.htm
Summary, if you liked the original, don't watch the new one.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 16, 2003, 03:44:11 pm
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 04:04:30 pm
Not Cylons that look human (shoot the one in the trailer looks like
a cosmo cover girl).
Starbuck and Boomer not to be women. Fine have women warriors,
but don't change the gender, of arguably, the star of the show.
There are more, but that would be a good start.
DM I suggest you familarize yourself with the changes so you know
what your talking about.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 16, 2003, 04:30:07 pm
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 04:35:37 pm
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 05:19:28 pm
To understand the new Battlestar Galactica series you have to understand who this production is meant for, or rather, who its not for. If you are under the age of 12, over the age of 25, or have spent more than 72 hours in any military service, this production might not hold much appeal for you. If you have strong conservative views, heart-felt religious views, or consider yourself a loyal fan of the original Battlestar Galactica then this show may offend you. If you're between the ages of 13-24, like MTV-level displays of sex and flashy screen tricks and don't really think through the subliminal implications of storylines, you'll probably enjoy this production quite a bit.
----
Certainly not my cup of tea.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 16, 2003, 05:27:39 pm
Do I think myself a hateful individual worthy of derision for choosing to watch it? Of course not.
Post by: Strafer on September 16, 2003, 05:29:37 pm
Been given the BayWatch spin to it... probably with a dash of Raw is War.
Count me out in advance. This is making Enterprise sound good.
Post by: Mog on September 16, 2003, 05:34:21 pm
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 16, 2003, 05:35:18 pm
Quote:
I'll watch it if it makes it over to the UK. Oh, and I'm almost 39 and I really enjoyed Firefly, yet I've heard it's cancelled after one season?
Ayep. I was bummed. I actually only got to see a coupel of the episodes, but I enjoyed the pilot quite a bit. That show had proimise.
Post by: SFC Bennie on September 16, 2003, 06:33:59 pm
Scott Bennie
Post by: CptCastrin on September 16, 2003, 07:34:23 pm
The settings and stories will probably only barely resemble the original and I for one won't miss that much. The acting was often cheezy and BSG ranked below Space1999 in my list of the best SciFi TV shows ever. But it's main problem was it was riding coat tails as soooo many scifi series did. Though the effects were great (even though they "reused" models from other movies and shows) the script writting was at times awful. But then it was only around for what ... 2 seasons? 1? Kind of says something.
The new BSG will not be made for those that remember the old BSG, I'll agree to that. But I say ... cool! SciFi is about shaking things up a bit and looking into the "future" and staying rooted to the "old BSG" is counter to that. Maybe the new one will suck, but maybe it will transend the old because it breaks new ground (a la ST:TNG) ... who knows.
In either case I'll be keeping an open mind.
Post by: Mr. Hypergol on September 16, 2003, 07:40:14 pm
Quote:
maybe it will transend the old because it breaks new ground (a la ST:TNG) ... who knows.
Ahhh but as I said above, ST:TNG didn't replace the original Star Trek....it built upon it. There's a big difference here.
I do agree that Space 1999 was awesome. Now that would be a great show to "continue"........
Post by: Mentat Jon on September 16, 2003, 07:50:06 pm
are they selling that new BSG on VHS,not all of us have those new fangled DVD players
Post by: Jim on September 16, 2003, 07:50:21 pm
Oh well...
Jim
Post by: Lieutenant_Q on September 16, 2003, 07:55:12 pm
Post by: ActiveX on September 16, 2003, 11:08:24 pm
Quote:
my 2 cents,ill watch BSG on the sci-fi channel,just to see what new spin they put on it.
are they selling that new BSG on VHS,not all of us have those new fangled DVD players
VHS? When did they stop with BetaMAX?
Post by: Aldaron on September 17, 2003, 07:25:50 am
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 17, 2003, 09:04:13 am
You and I, don't very often agree,
so this should give the whole Taldren Forums "pause"...
I agree.
Thank you for the warning.
I'm an ultra-fan of the Old BSG,
and I'm gonna vote with my wallet as well,
Its truely sad,
that after all this time (since the 1978-1979 AD, Old BSG),
they go and ruin, IMHO, what could have been a great experience for the fans,
and the Studios to make money,
I personally believe that "IQs have sharply dropped in the Studio",
I smell the "hand of Glen Larson" in this one
Quote:
<snip>
If you have strong conservative views, heart-felt religious views, or consider yourself a loyal fan of the original Battlestar Galactica then this show may offend you.
Take care ,:)
GeneralWolfe
Post by: Captain Krenn on September 17, 2003, 11:24:29 am
But then again I was never an avid BSG fan, so it probably won't offend me as much as it would if I were.
I can certainly understand the POV of fans of the original show. From what I've seen, about the only thing
this mini series is going to share with original series is the name.
The producers of the show said if you were a loyal BSG fan it would probably be a good idea not to
watch it as its only going to anger you.
That being the case, why did they even bother using the same name?
------
conversation I had with a friend's kid
Me: Wow that looks like a Cylon helmet.
Kid: What's a Cylon?
Me: OK, now I feel reaeelly old!
Post by: BortaS on September 17, 2003, 11:34:28 am
Post by: Oberon on September 17, 2003, 01:40:08 pm
Quote:
my 2 cents,ill watch BSG on the sci-fi channel,just to see what new spin they put on it.
are they selling that new BSG on VHS,not all of us have those new fangled DVD players
DVD players are pretty cheap [I got a JVC for a pretty old 2nd TV for ~$70, I've seen unknown brands for ~$50] here in TN, they cannot be that bad in Boston. Get one. If you can't afford one, then, good luck in the near future, and get one ASAP.
Post by: TobinDax on September 17, 2003, 06:18:26 pm
How many of you who are going to boycott the mini-series watched the last planet of the apes movie? Should no one have watched it because of the original? Hollywood is in the habbit of remakes to bring movies/shows up to present era standards as well as to bank on a proven product.
I ran into enough people back in 1986 who weren't going to watch that next generation crap either. It went on to succeed without them, although I know some of them changed their tune.
So if you don't want to watch a new spin on BSG, that's fine, but spend your energy more constructively on things that matter, like playing Orion Pirates on the dyna!
Post by: Tumulorum Fossor on September 17, 2003, 07:51:44 pm
Well, I guess it is the producers' perogative to take creative license and change things up a bit (see multiple threads: "SFB is not SFC."
), but what really pi$$es me off about stuff like this is the blatant pandering.I mean, let's call this what it is: the creative license that was used here, I strongly suspect, was NOT because it suddenly makes the BSG storyline much more interesting. It's to make it more marketable. Period.
That's the formula that post-Roddenberry Trek has gone by with [sarcasm/] great success [/sarcasm off].
For example, I have nothing against a strong, dominant, fighter-pilot female main character. But when it's deliberately done to replace "Starbuck" simply to make the show more palatable across more demographics, well, that just smacks of making creative changes for the wrong reasons. And I'm sure the rest of the show will do likewise.
Amazing that producers like these tap into a cult-phenomenon that's lasted 30+ years, with the goal of decimating everything that made it so appealing for 30+ years.
Then again, it's entirely likely that I'm becoming an old[er] fart. And against change for change's sake. After all, SFC3 was/is more fun than I initially gave it credit for, just a different experience than SFB/SFC/SFC2. Maybe the same will be true for BSG.
But I ain't holding my breathe.
So I WILL give BSG a chance. I'll watch as much as I can stomach. But at the first sign of blatant Demographic Pandering, the channel gets changed. I suspect that means I'll be changing the channel about 25% through the cast introduction sequence.
[more sarcasm/] Gee, I hope they change that lousy orchestral theme with a Bon Jovi vocal ballad! [/more sarcasm off].
-TF
Post by: Lepton1 on September 17, 2003, 09:01:28 pm
Post by: Parislord on September 17, 2003, 09:14:53 pm
For my own part, I'm not sure who could have filled Dirk Benedict's shoes very well. I'm just suprised SciFi didn't get some british actor with a swank accent and no talent to play to part...
Who would all of you have picked? I kind of like Richard Dean Anderson for it, but he's a little old.
Post by: La'ra on September 18, 2003, 06:29:48 am
The original Battlestar Galactica was horribly cheesy, had terrible effects and a mystic subplot, and the women were very ERA with long hair and no bras.
The new Battlestar Galactica is portraying itself as edgy and 'new' but keeping a familiar name for advertising purposes, has replaced male characters with foxy women, and added an element of 'we don't know who they are!' about the Cylons. Baltar is young and dark and handsome, his Cylon friend is a Victoria Secret model.
Say what you want to, both do reflect the times they were made it so well it's scary.
Post by: Sten on September 18, 2003, 07:53:30 am
As far as females replacing a few chareacters.
Duke Nukem said it best. "Shake it baby. Shake it."
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 18, 2003, 11:56:37 am
Quote:
BSG sucks and always has. Not that I didn't watch it and enjoy it as a KID, but give me a break, it is pretty shoddy work. And that horrible 1984 series! Whew!! Talk about a venue to sell toys to kids. It's about time they did something with it. Frankly from reading a bit of the screen play reviews it sounds a bit more substantial than the original BSG ever was. But I also am not expecting anything great from the SciFi channel. Their Dune series is a snoring bore, and they would rather air horror movies than than SciFi. We know their demographic by looking at Scare Tactics. Any thoughtful philosophical SciFi heads watching that show, not! Is StarTrek TOS to be found anywhere on their dang network even though they seem to own the rights to show it?? No! What did you expect??
Good morning, Sunshine!
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 18, 2003, 11:59:32 am
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 18, 2003, 12:05:59 pm
Post by: Sten on September 18, 2003, 12:18:29 pm
Quote:
I have nothing agsinst those who say "I'm going to give it a try, and keep an open mind", really I don't. But for me there is a time for an open mind and a time to shut the door. One of our biggest problems in America nowadays is that people feel like everything should be given a chance. That leads to good change in some cases and bad change in others. Why do we need lawsuits against MacDonalds because their coffee is too hot? Why do we even consider letting a home invader sue the home owner for shooting him? Because some people's minds are open to anything, which is NOT as good as having sound judgement to begin with. But, when the first 30 minutes of this new series is nothing but sex, pointless violence and destroyed dreams, don't come back here to say "you were right KoraH, this thing sucks" because I already know it will, weather it's true to the original or not. And I'll still be your friend despite your lack of judgement.
Whether this show sucks or not. The fact of the matter is it has already been made.
I have been watching science fiction for 42 of my 43 years I have spent on this planet. Yes I can remember the first SCI-FI movie I watched. I was alittle over 1 year old.
So yea I will give it a shot and keep an open mind. Apparently you are not. That is your choice. Don't watch the show. Go ahead and shut the door.
I happen to live in a state were it is legal to shoot someone on your property if you feel threatend. So I will not have to worry about being sued for keeping an open mind. Mind you anybody threatening me, my family or my property on my property will die.
You don't like the new twist for BSG oh well. The original was okay. I watched it all the time and was buymmed out when it was canceled. Hated the 1980s version.
So as far as a lack of judgement personally I feel you are falling into the same category.
SHAKE IT BABY SHAKE IT!
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 12:25:55 pm
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Post by: Sten on September 18, 2003, 12:43:29 pm
Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Tsk tsk. I was smart enough to delete SFC3 and retain EAW and OP.
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 18, 2003, 01:12:22 pm
Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Wow.
Post by: TalonClaw on September 18, 2003, 01:47:21 pm
Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
A rather graphic representation of how it is. The Entertainment industry has learned that they can shovel us all the poop we can eat simply because we gobble up anything that is a sequel to something we know and love.
Post by: ActiveX on September 18, 2003, 01:55:29 pm
Post by: TalonClaw on September 18, 2003, 02:06:58 pm
Quote:Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Tsk tsk. I was smart enough to delete SFC3 and retain EAW and OP.
Touché Fred. I can see where a SFB fan might have that point of view. Not being a SFBer and being a TOS and a Next Gen fan I liked SFC3 but I do wish it could have been built on EAW and OP's strengths and not been dumbed down. But it still has it's own features and I still play it.
But as for BSG they are totally making a new show based on sex and violence and putting the BSG name on it to sell it. That?s not what BSG was all about.
Sure BSG was cheesy but so was TOS. The characters, story, and messages presented is what made those series so great.
BSG and Star Trek were awsome given the budgets and technology of the time.
Post by: Sten on September 18, 2003, 02:15:41 pm
Quote:Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
A rather graphic representation of how it is. The Entertainment industry has learned that they can shovel us all the poop we can eat simply because we gobble up anything that is a sequel to something we know and love.
Actually I think the original comments are a graphic representation of what is still wrong with the Unted States.
Rather than get preachy here. Intolerance is a sad fact of life. I am quite capable of deciding for myself what I find entertaining. So if Apollo and Starbuck in the sack distrubs you don't watch it.
This thread reminds me of the Trekies who freaked out when James T Kirk took a dirt nap.
Or how about the... Its based on SFB its not SFB, its SFC.
Its a Television show for crying out load.
Post by: TalonClaw on September 18, 2003, 03:05:58 pm
Post by: Captain Krenn on September 18, 2003, 03:24:51 pm
I think Dave's having a bad day and needs to head out for a few margaritas!
Go get 1 or 2 and mail me the bill, I'll be happy to buy you a couple of rounds
Post by: Lepton1 on September 18, 2003, 03:36:44 pm
Quote:Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Tsk tsk. I was smart enough to delete SFC3 and retain EAW and OP.
Zing!!! David. Place. Put. HEHE!!!
I really don't understand Dave's reaction here. BSG was not good enough to get upset about. I suppose B9 is all that and a bag chips right and not some Shadowrun meets Oni rip off. Your moral indignation or whatever it is is ludicruous. Try banning yourself.
Post by: NannerSlug on September 18, 2003, 03:38:15 pm
i loved watching bsg when i was a kid.. the good guys were good.. and the baddies were that.. the script was forward looking at what is good in us..
this script is nothing more than an election year bush bashing pile of political mush which looks and exploits what is bad about us.
sorry if this is sappy, but i like watching things that talk about what is good and right - and how we can over come struggles.. not about how everyone is out to screw each other and how there is a lie underneath ever rock.
poor script. sorry.
Post by: TalonClaw on September 18, 2003, 03:44:18 pm
Quote:
Yikes!
I think Dave's having a bad day and needs to head out for a few margaritas!
Go get 1 or 2 and mail me the bill, I'll be happy to buy you a couple of rounds
Definately
"I burn." -- Spock
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 03:46:28 pm
mangled by people trying to make a fast buck.
This isn't the first time that it has happened, Starship Troopers is even
a worse case. No talents trading on and twisting another?s work to get their story,
that no wanted without the famous name, published.
I would say the problem with the USA is we are too tolerant. Too many people
are willing to look the other way at abhorrent behavior as long as it doesn't
directly affect them.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 03:53:23 pm
Quote:Quote:
Yikes!
I think Dave's having a bad day and needs to head out for a few margaritas!
Go get 1 or 2 and mail me the bill, I'll be happy to buy you a couple of rounds
Definately
"I burn." -- Spock
The only problem is I don't drink! Though lately I have been reconsidering
that decision.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 18, 2003, 04:02:40 pm
I do agree about the "collective we" shoveling poop into our mouths as fast as we can, which in turn causes the poop pedlers to produce more of it. That's sort of the whole point behind the boycott, to stop eating their poop.
That's a nice melodramatic speech about killing home invaders, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with my point. Go ahead and watch the show, it's your time to waste. Maybe your favorite show will be next if enough people like the new BSG, but I sure wouldn't be going into your boycott thread and telling you to keep an open mind about it.
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 18, 2003, 04:06:35 pm
Quote:
The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first and love of soft living and the get-rich-quick theory of life.--Theodore Roosevelt
Post by: Toasty0 on September 18, 2003, 04:41:08 pm
This name calling, and other inapproperiate actions over an electronic box that serves no other purpose than to engage the undereducated with product that requires no critical analysis or thought is almost ludicrous if it weren't so sad. Add to the mix the absurdity that this donnybrook is specifically over a show that was the ultimate representive of sci-fi televison camp in its time. No wonder the gallery is snickering.
I guess it is true that if you stare into the unblinking eye long enough perspective looses all reference to reality.
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 04:52:31 pm
170 or 180 BPV.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 04:58:00 pm
http://208.57.228.4/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=Black9General&Number=162202&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: Jwest on September 18, 2003, 05:05:10 pm
I don't think it's going to be all that good - first glance appraisal is that it's far to close to the same BS that's been served up before. On the other hand, the last time I just decided I wasn't going to watch a show was when Dark Angel got replaced by Firefly, which turned out to be a good show, with good writing, and I rather wish I had had the chance to see it all the way through. My ability to judge a show in advance of actually watching it is demonstrably fallible.
Perhaps no one else here possesses that particular flaw.
Post by: ActiveX on September 18, 2003, 05:06:45 pm
Or OT leaked...
Post by: Aldaron on September 18, 2003, 06:14:50 pm
Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
To each his own I guess. BSG was good when I was younger and like so many things I watch now that I used to love then it just seems cheesy. There were some good eps and lots of bad eps just like anything. I'll see the show before I judge it on it's own merits and not what was made 30 years ago.
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 18, 2003, 06:32:02 pm
Quote:
How good the original was isn't the point really, we're talking about how bad the remake is. I'm sure we could think of other bad originals that had better remakes too, but let's stick to the point.
I do agree about the "collective we" shoveling poop into our mouths as fast as we can, which in turn causes the poop pedlers to produce more of it. That's sort of the whole point behind the boycott, to stop eating their poop.
That's a nice melodramatic speech about killing home invaders, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with my point. Go ahead and watch the show, it's your time to waste. Maybe your favorite show will be next if enough people like the new BSG, but I sure wouldn't be going into your boycott thread and telling you to keep an open mind about it.
So you and some others in this thread have set yourselves up as the ones who decide what is crap and also the arbiters the quality of the people who decide to give something a chance?
I dislike most of what has been "popular music" during my lifetime. I don't liken those that do like it to eaters of feces just because I see little or no redeeming qualities in what they like. I decide what I like and what I don't and I assume others can and should do the same for themselves.
I've seen some rather disturbing insults in this thread that I feel are completely uncalled for. The mere fact that this topic has spilled into several different forums in this community is ridiculous to me.
I enjoyed Battlestar Galactica when I was a kid too. I liked a lot of shows when I was a kid...Space 1999, UFO, and Star Trek just to name a few. They were the basis for my love of sci-fi that continues to this day. What gets done in the way of a remake of any of these things is not something that would send me so far over the edge that I'd show complete and utter disdain for anyone deciding to actually watch it and decide for themselve how, under what circumstances and/or whether they like something.
Personally, I don;t hold out a lot of hope that this new BSG is going to be any good...but I certainly don't think myself a rube or devourer of fecal matter for deciding to actually watch it and judge it by it merits after actually doing so.
Contemptable of me, I know...
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 18, 2003, 06:33:15 pm
Quote:
It's certainly no worse than a bunch of grown men arguing over which to use:
170 or 180 BPV.
Thanks,
Dave
Indeed...only eaters of dog poop would do such a thing.
Post by: Toasty0 on September 18, 2003, 07:09:22 pm
Quote:
Nor any worse than getting excited over an advertising gimick for a video game:
http://208.57.228.4/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=Black9General&Number=162202&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
Thanks,
Dave
Dave,
My, that's an awful big line you just drew into the sand there pa'dner.
I'm not sure that charactizing my--and others in that thread--support for Taldren's upcoming release (you know, that thing you just called a "gimick") of Black9 is on par with what I was pointing out.
Post by: Mentat Jon on September 18, 2003, 07:41:27 pm
Starbuck:
Starbuck's a guy,a charming rouge,a womenizing hard drinking cigar smoking,cylon killing SOB.
im not the biggest cannon freak in the world,but Starbuck being a guy should be one of them.
thats kinda like remaking Starwars and Darth Vaders a women..
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 08:15:45 pm
Dave
Post by: Agent XXX on September 18, 2003, 09:20:47 pm
www.gametrailers.com
Sierra
Battlestar Galactica
Quicktime, and its kinda long...
Post by: NannerSlug on September 18, 2003, 10:01:49 pm
Post by: TheShadow on September 19, 2003, 01:34:47 am
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 19, 2003, 07:38:30 am
I completely agree with yaa my friend,
they have screwed the show,
this is NOT a sequel,
like ST: TOS then the sequel ST: TNG,
which had a bumpy start,
but then came into its own,
This new BSG, is a complete discarding of the Old BSG,
it is a pale-attempt to replace the original,
"Rise up my brothers! BOYCOTT the new BSG!"
Take care,
GeneralWolfe
Quote:
I'll not watch the show simply because they have targeted the lowest common denominator, they have screwed the premise of the show, and because I hate MTV automatons! Boycott away comrades!
Post by: Lepton1 on September 19, 2003, 06:17:03 pm
Quote:
How bout a little movie to remind you, of what was, A decent piece of flimage from ours and yours more than likely past
www.gametrailers.com
Sierra
Battlestar Galactica
Quicktime, and its kinda long...
Oh sh**!! A chick was reading the famous BSG intro instead of Lorne Greene. Boycott!! Boycott!!! How dare they replace Lorne Greene!!! What is the country coming to. Help, help conservative movement, save our country from our depravity and our civil rights!!!
Post by: AdmiralFrey_XC on September 19, 2003, 08:03:24 pm
You are a moron.
Just MHO, but anyone that decides to post like you do is just a "stirrer of thee pot", and that's just plain moronic.
I respect what the original intent was here, and I won't be a Robert about others feelings just because I don't agree with them.
Stop trolling, Lepton.
Post by: BortaS on September 19, 2003, 09:43:52 pm
Post by: Reptor7 on September 19, 2003, 10:06:05 pm
Post by: Atrahasis on September 20, 2003, 05:00:41 am
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 20, 2003, 04:24:34 pm
The Old BSG was the original,
and was based on half sci-fi/half religion,
The Twelve Colonies of Man,
The Council of the Twelve,
The 1000 Yarheen Cylon War,
The Robotic Cylons that turned on and killed off their Reptilan Cylon Creators,
The Book of Word,
The Star of Kobol,
The Mythical Lost "Mother-Civilsation",
of 13 Tribes,
the Twelve founded the "Colonies",
the Thirteen crossed the stars to colonise,
"the Shining Planet known as Earth",
What do they give us now,
Not what ST: TOS and ST: TNG were,
a sequel honouring the roots of the original,
this "New Galactica" shreads and discards the original,
How would you feel if ST: TNG discarded and replaced the ST: TOS,
I'd venture to guess that you wouldn't like it Atrahasis,
No,
not one little bit.
GeneralWolfe
Quote:
Are people so afraid of change that they demand sequels instead of a fresh new interpretation of things? Might I point out that even the Star Wars movies were re-made with a new view of things and people loved them.
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 20, 2003, 10:51:07 pm
Dogmatix!
Obviously you do not agree with the topic of my thread here, and since you're here anyway, the only reason you could possibly have for being here is to argue with people whom you dissagree with. What a loser. Nobody says they are the authority on what TV shows are crap, we said that we don't like THIS tv show, and we think THIS tv show is crap. And if you dissagree, that's ok. But in that case you have no reason for being here do you? You think this topic is rediculous, you don't like it, yet still you're here? You know, an intelligent person would just ... go away. You don't have to reply to every single thread on this forum you know. Go find something productive to do with your time.
Post by: Cleaven on September 20, 2003, 11:37:36 pm
Quote:
Lepton: Lorne Green only did the opening title dialogue in half the episodes. Patrick Macnee did the title narration in some of them too. Obviously you were not aware of this. Consider yourself enlightened.
Dogmatix!
Obviously you do not agree with the topic of my thread here, and since you're here anyway, the only reason you could possibly have for being here is to argue with people whom you dissagree with. What a loser. Nobody says they are the authority on what TV shows are crap, we said that we don't like THIS tv show, and we think THIS tv show is crap. And if you dissagree, that's ok. But in that case you have no reason for being here do you? You think this topic is rediculous, you don't like it, yet still you're here? You know, an intelligent person would just ... go away. You don't have to reply to every single thread on this forum you know. Go find something productive to do with your time.
Not very enlightened for a person who decided for his own reasons to post here and not in the Off-Topic forum where it clearly belongs. Of course I am now guilty of troll feeding again but so be it, it's not the first time.
Post by: Azrael on September 21, 2003, 10:29:31 am
The Fools.
So they're dumbing down BSG a thousandfold more than they dumbed down Star Trek with TNG.
Battle Star Galactica is cool.
Cylons are cool.
Starbuck is cool.
That show makes an impression on any generation that watches it. When my kid brother saw the original series for the first time ever in his early teens, (and some 20 years after it first aired) he thought it was excellent. He found himself surprised and entertained.
Blow away all the spectacular packaging from Star Trek and Star Wars (episodes IV - VI at least) and at their core they convey a deep and meaningful message. Like it or not, with Star Trek, Gene Roddenberry was creating "morality plays".
New Series of BSG? If the Cylons aren't their cool metallic selves that would be an unpardonable crime in it's self.
The same stories are told time and time again.
It's not the story, but how you tell it.
Thankfully, being a citizen of the UK, I won't have to worry about boycotting anything for donkey's ages.
We used to get everything first, the latest Start Trek and B-5 episodes (though our government saw fit to censor parts of these episodes it deemed improper for UK viewing - I'm not kidding) but not anymore.
The scourge of corporate television has put an end to that. Pay for Satellite Television or stay in the dark for years.
The second season of Enterprise started for us, on terrestrial television, one week ago today.
Greedy corporate vampires. I suppose in a way, I'm already actively participating in the boycott, as I refuse to subscribe to the Corporate Organ Grinders and pay for the privilege of watching them screw up some of my favourite shows.
Death to Rupert Murdock! Hang him, I say! - but flogg him first.
Azrael
Post by: Aldaron on September 21, 2003, 12:34:48 pm
Quote:
Lepton: Lorne Green only did the opening title dialogue in half the episodes. Patrick Macnee did the title narration in some of them too. Obviously you were not aware of this. Consider yourself enlightened.
Dogmatix!
Obviously you do not agree with the topic of my thread here, and since you're here anyway, the only reason you could possibly have for being here is to argue with people whom you dissagree with. What a loser. Nobody says they are the authority on what TV shows are crap, we said that we don't like THIS tv show, and we think THIS tv show is crap. And if you dissagree, that's ok. But in that case you have no reason for being here do you? You think this topic is rediculous, you don't like it, yet still you're here? You know, an intelligent person would just ... go away. You don't have to reply to every single thread on this forum you know. Go find something productive to do with your time.
(Not saying this little boycott thing will get the new BSG canceled but IF the actions of a few zealot fans do...) then it is the fan boys who determine what we are watching. If it gets pulled because enough fans convince people not to watch the show what happens to the people that happen to like it. The same as usually happens we lose a show we like becausesomeone else decided it wasn't good. Oh sure people who like could run a campaign to have it re-aired but that would only work if the show first got good ratings and established itself.
Post by: Atrahasis on September 21, 2003, 06:15:52 pm
Post by: Mentat Jon on September 21, 2003, 08:14:35 pm
It will be better than "BattleField Earth"
Post by: Gamester on September 21, 2003, 11:55:39 pm
First, a little backstory. About a year ago, I received an e-mail from Sierra asking me to participate in a customer survey about some games they had in early development. One of the most promising of these (and the only one I remember) was the new Battlestar Galactica game and I was initially VERY excited (A space combat game set in the Battlestar Galactica universe! Freakin' Awesome! Where do I pre-order?!?!?). Then they started asking some very. . . odd. . . questions. Questions such as:
What do you think about having hybrid gameplay featuring away missions with a younger Commander Adama, FPS style?
and
What about space combat missions similar to Rebel Assault (ie - a rail shooter)?
and
Would I buy it if it was NOT available on the PC?
First off, I pretty much think FPS type games suck. They give me nasty headaches and occasional nausea. The only one I actually liked was Unreal Tournament (and then only in LAN play) and I could only play that for about 30 mins at a sitting before I started reaching for the Tylenol. I also happen to find that many game forums catering to FPS players tend to be juvenile and rude in the extreme (as opposed to the overall extremely civilized Taldren forums - I wonder how many ppl are truly aware of how great the community here is?). All in all, I dislike FPS style games.
Second off, I am a HUGE fan of games like Wing Commander (1-4 & Prophecy - I never cared for the Privateer series or Armada, and Academy was interesting but it was really only a random mission generator), FreeSpace & FreeSpace 2 (FreeSpace 2 is STILL one of the best looking computer games ever made IMHO - and Volition got screwed over by Interplay just like Taldren and Bioware), Tie Fighter (I didn't care much for X-Wing, and X-Wing Alliance was OK, but Tie Fighter, FreeSpace 2, Wing Commander 2, Eye of the Beholder 2, and Lands of Lore 1 are my Top 5 favorite games of all time and in about that order, too) and I even really enjoyed StarLancer (I like FreeLancer, but I like StarLancer better). This should serve to let you know that I REALLY enjoy space combat games. They also have the added benefit of NOT making me ill watching or playing them (as opposed to Descents 1 thru 3 - puke-a-rama - and all FPS type games from Wolfenstein 3D on up). I own and have played Rebel Alliance. It is a rail shooter. This means you fly on a pre-determined path and "steer" your targeting reticle and blow stuff up. It sucked and I hated it. It had a sequel, Rebel Assault II - it wasn't any better. I mean, look at Tie Fighter (Alpha 1, Request for Reinforcements Acknowledged - Imperial Fanfare - Star Destroyer Emperor's Fist enters area at 11KM and drops off 2 additional Tie squadrons - Sweet!!!!) and then look at Rebel Assault! This certainly does not bode well.
And third off, I don't own a console game system. I will not now nor any conceivable time in the near future own a game console (unless someone gives me one and then I doubt I'd play it for more than a few mins - I can safely say this because my brother has damn near every console system ever invented by mankind and I have yet to find anything that interests me on one).
I will admit that I thought the game would be much more appealing were it more like FreeSpace 2 (or even StarLancer, a game that while not perfect, was very good and had a great atmosphere, it's downfall being primarily some drastically difficult missions - Warthog, BSG's developer, worked on that one with Digital Anvil, so they HAVE experience in the genre). I told the developers as much in my feedback, even going so far as to outline all the things about FreeSpace 2 that made me love it so much. I would even have enjoyed an RTS game based on Battlestar Galactica (except we already kinda have that - Sierra's own HomeWorld and HomeWorld 2 and they are quite awesome games. I have them both. Any official BSG RTS would have a very hard time beating these two. Pity they AREN'T official BSG RTS games.) It appears it is not to be however.
As far as the Sci-Fi channel remake is concerned, I will watch it. It can't be any worse than the Dune miniseries (I'm your Duke!). Even if it turns out to be bad, even the makers of the Dune miniseries somewhat redeemed themselves with Children of Dune (much MUCH better). There is hope. I will wait and see. If it sucks - I'll eventually give up on it, just like I did with TNG, DS9, Voyager & Enterprise. (SFC: OP rulez!)
On a related note, anyone remember the NBC remake of Dark Shadows with Ben Cross as Barnabus Collins? I thought that was freakin' fantastic. The only show I EVER made sure I was home for EVERY episode. I had seen several episodes of the original series and found it very Soap Opera-Style slow and boring, but the new series had pacing, excellent acting, good scripts, and excellent visual production values. It took the original's storyline and paced it much faster, making for one of the most enjoyable shows of my teenage years. They cancelled it after one season (on a cliff hanger, too!!!). You win some, you lose some.
Gamester
Thanking God that he has access to electrical power and water and that his house and car don't have trees sprouting from the middle of them (See Isabel thread).
Post by: Whiplash on September 22, 2003, 09:54:43 pm
Anytime a show that old gets remade, it has to be significantly redone. Society has changed drastically. The old one just can't be that relevant now. Its not enough to remake the special effects. Nobody is going to be impressed with spacefighters and robots these days.
Their concept of giving humans "flaws" and making Cylons look like people may allow them to humanize the show more and present some relevant social issues. Who knows. I'm not going to pan the show without seeing it. I will give it a chance.
Feel free to be close-minded and judge it sight unseen. I won't.
W.
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 23, 2003, 06:16:57 pm
Quote:
<snip>
Dogmatix!
Obviously you do not agree with the topic of my thread here, and since you're here anyway, the only reason you could possibly have for being here is to argue with people whom you dissagree with. What a loser. Nobody says they are the authority on what TV shows are crap, we said that we don't like THIS tv show, and we think THIS tv show is crap. And if you dissagree, that's ok. But in that case you have no reason for being here do you? You think this topic is rediculous, you don't like it, yet still you're here? You know, an intelligent person would just ... go away. You don't have to reply to every single thread on this forum you know. Go find something productive to do with your time.
I didn't think this topic was "rediculous." I thought it was "rediculous" that it (or topics like it) had been posted in three different fora (that I know of...there might be more). I think it's a great topic, otherwise. It's certainly not up to you to decide what discussion I choose to involve myself in. It's not up to you to decide my reasons for "being here."
On the other hand, you've resorted to actual name calling. Heh...I find that kind of pathetic.
I have posted because the topic interests me, nevermind the fact that it should be relegated and confined to the OT forum. Since you've chosen to personallyattack me rather than discuss the merits of my arguments, I can only assume that you've somehow taken exception to the fact that I, among others, are not eating up your call for a boycott and have taken exception to the unfavorable categorization of those willing to at least judge the new BSG miniseries on it's merits or lack thereof after actually watching it. You'll note that I am not insulting those who choose to dismiss it out of hand without watching it. That's certainly their perrogative.
I have posted on-topic in this thread. I have questioned the points of view espoused by yourself and others that I find problematic or just plain don't agree with. I sorry to find that you apparently don't have any use for differing opinions. It would seem you're only interested in the opinions of those who agree with you. If this is the case, you might want to look into confining your posts to PMs amongst your circle of "yes men."
If you're going to post something publically, it behooves you to be open to response and possible criticism of your argument/topic. Perhaps you would benefit from starting from the beginning and reading this thread all over again. You appear to have missed a great number of points. Perhaps it's all the ones that you don't agree with. Seems plausible, anyway...
Post by: Karnak on September 24, 2003, 09:00:01 am
**** WARNING!! Lotsa Potential Spoilers!! ****
http://www.galactica2003.net/archives/scripts.htm
If you go through the scripts I think you will find the new stories to be intriguing. It makes you do a lot of thinking which is a sign of a good series. I think the intellectual quotient has been expanded many times fold over the classic BSG. I like the way the Colonials are no longer idiotic dupes; especiallly, the politicians. Instead they are compromised by their own character flaws but not their intelligence. Moore uses Balter as the symbol for how intelligence can be compromised by personal character flaws like being too self-absorbed (cf. Londo Mollari in B5, Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars, Gul Duhkat in DS9). Other than looking for a reference for the head baddie of the Cylons (ie. Star Wars mentioned the Emporer 30 minutes into the film, DS9 brought in the Female Changeling early on, Borg Queen appeared in First Contact), I like what R. Moore has done with the franchise. It's kinda hard to hate the Cylon 6 model, hehe.
IMHO, I think it has a chance of meeting original B5 standards and putting Enterprise in trouble. Another thing in the new series' favor is the casting of the Apollo character. It's played by the actor that did Archie Kennedy in the Horatio Hornblower mini-series. That shows that BSG is serious about getting young, hungry, quality actors on the potential level of Patrick Stewart in the series. I'm also a Hornblower fan.
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 10:45:35 am
The main reason is that I lke the story. BSG was the first Sci-Fi series that I watched when I was a kid and since then I am a big fan of SCIFI.
Which only makes it sound more strange when I ask this, a few people mentioned Space 1999. What was that about? I have never seen it or read about it. What does it deal with?
Post by: EmeraldEdge on September 24, 2003, 10:56:45 am
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 11:06:37 am
Post by: Mr. Hypergol on September 24, 2003, 04:19:13 pm
Obviously some of the premise is bogus, for example the moon actually encountering a new planet every week or so. Boy, they must have not only been moving faster than light but also able to "steer" the moon. Totally bogus from a science perspective. Did I miss something or am I correct here?
What I loved about the show was the concept of moon base Alpha and the Eagle space craft. I saw these as in the same category as the Discovery spacecraft from 2001 A Space Osyssey.....i.e. things humanity could achieve within my lifetime given the appropriate resources allocated.
Space 1999 was good stuff indeed.
Here's some good Space 1999 links:
http://www.space1999eagle.com/an/an_home.html
http://www.space1999.uk.com/#
http://www.space1999.org/
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 04:42:51 pm
Post by: FormerDM on September 24, 2003, 04:57:16 pm
The investors became skittish after UFO ratings drooped a bit in NY and LA markets. Gerry Anderson resold it (they had done much preproduction work on sets, etc) as a new concept. Thus was Space: 1999 born.
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 09:26:02 pm
Post by: Baker on September 24, 2003, 10:58:48 pm
Well since I was born in 1981, I missed out on things like the original BSG and TOS, so I will watch it since it will be the first BSG that I come across.
Post by: FormerDM on September 24, 2003, 11:08:57 pm
Quote:
Damn! What is that UFO series?
It aired in 1970. You can get in on DVD from A&E. Good fansite at http://www.ufoseries.com/
Premise:
In the year 1980, a secret military organization named SHADO (Supreme Headquarters Alien Defence Organisation) becomes operational. Its purpose is to defend the Earth from Aliens who've been coming to Earth and kidnapping humans. It is believed that these Aliens are a dying race, and are transplanting human body parts to extend their own lifespans.
SHADO's main headquarters is hidden beneath a film studio near London England. SHADO also has a base on the moon (Moonbase) and a fleet of submarines (Skydiver). Incoming UFO's are initially detected by an Earth orbiting satellite named SID (Space Intruder Detector). An initial interception attempt is made in space with three Interceptor craft launched from Moonbase. A second attempt is made in the Earth's atmosphere with a fighter plane (Sky One) launched from Skydiver. Landed UFO's are tracked down with ground Mobiles.
The episodes are typically about SHADO's attempts to thwart the Alien invasions, and the various Alien strategies to disable SHADO or kill its commander. Recurring themes include maintaining SHADO security, keeping SHADO properly funded, and the effect that the secrecy has on the personal lives of SHADO's operatives.
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 11:30:41 pm
Post by: Cleaven on September 25, 2003, 01:44:32 am
Or maybe not, but at least I think they had a similar premise.
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 25, 2003, 08:08:07 am
Ahem ....
Quote:
<snip>
I like the way the Colonials are no longer idiotic dupes; especiallly, the politicians.
What is so unbelievable about it?
The Twelve Colonies of Man intervened in a war between the Cylon Empire,
and one of the Colonies close neighbours,
The Cylons had extreminated their Reptilan Cylon Creators,
and had resolved the exterminate non-Cylon lifeforms and extend the Cylon Empire, ad infinitium,
Thus, the Colonial intervention commenced the "1000 Yarheen War",
the Colonials were initially successful, but the Cylons just kept manufacturing Cylon Warriors around the clock,
the Colonies were eventually worn down into a "Stalemate Frontline",
After 1000 Yarheens of War ... Colonial society had incorporate "the War" into their daily lives,
the Colonial economy went on,
The foolish (last) Colonial President decided on a "Neville Chambelain" peace process,
We know the rest,
Frankly ... I find the storyline quite believable, and "timeless"...
GeneralWolfe
Quote:
BSG Early Draft scripts:
**** WARNING!! Lotsa Potential Spoilers!! ****
http://www.galactica2003.net/archives/scripts.htm
If you go through the scripts I think you will find the new stories to be intriguing. It makes you do a lot of thinking which is a sign of a good series. I think the intellectual quotient has been expanded many times fold over the classic BSG. I like the way the Colonials are no longer idiotic dupes; especiallly, the politicians. Instead they are compromised by their own character flaws but not their intelligence. Moore uses Balter as the symbol for how intelligence can be compromised by personal character flaws like being too self-absorbed (cf. Londo Mollari in B5, Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars, Gul Duhkat in DS9). Other than looking for a reference for the head baddie of the Cylons (ie. Star Wars mentioned the Emporer 30 minutes into the film, DS9 brought in the Female Changeling early on, Borg Queen appeared in First Contact), I like what R. Moore has done with the franchise. It's kinda hard to hate the Cylon 6 model, hehe.
IMHO, I think it has a chance of meeting original B5 standards and putting Enterprise in trouble. Another thing in the new series' favor is the casting of the Apollo character. It's played by the actor that did Archie Kennedy in the Horatio Hornblower mini-series. That shows that BSG is serious about getting young, hungry, quality actors on the potential level of Patrick Stewart in the series. I'm also a Hornblower fan.
Post by: FormerDM on September 25, 2003, 10:22:55 am
Quote:
Of course the UFO idea really started with Captain Scarlet.
Or maybe not, but at least I think they had a similar premise.
In a way, yes. More of an evolution really.
UFO was the first Gerry Anderson series to feature actual actors instead of puppets.
Very abridged production order:
SuperCar->Fireball XL5->Stingray->Thunderbirds->Captain Scarlet->UFO->Space 1999
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 25, 2003, 10:23:19 am
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 25, 2003, 10:29:19 am
Quote:
Space: 1999. A base is on the moon. Mostly science station, but they dispose of nuclear waste. Something goes wrong and there is a massive explosion propelling the Moon out into space. Before long they are out of range of earth and stuck on the moon. They then encounter various aliens, and stuff as Moonbase Alpha continues on it's course, they are hoping that they will be able to reach a planet that is habitable by humans before they run out of supplies, etc.
...and anyone interested in watching Space 1999 can now pick it up on DVD. I have acquired half of the episodes so far, myself. Loved the show as a kid...still very fun to watch. It's a pretty expensive series to own in its entirety, though.
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 25, 2003, 10:31:19 am
Quote:
Little known fact: Space 1999 was originally season 2 of UFO. Alpha Moonbase was intended to be SHADO HQ.
The investors became skittish after UFO ratings drooped a bit in NY and LA markets. Gerry Anderson resold it (they had done much preproduction work on sets, etc) as a new concept. Thus was Space: 1999 born.
I didn't even know that. I have all of UFO on DVD. That's a fun watch...very 60's in its sociology.
Post by: FormerDM on September 25, 2003, 10:31:37 am
SciFi.com has posted four video clips of David Eick, Ron Moore and cast-members at Comic-Con International 2003 discussing their approach to the miniseries and fan reaction.
http://www.scifi.com/battlestar/downloads/
Post by: Aldaron on September 25, 2003, 06:57:48 pm
Quote:
Oh alderon how little thou doest know about how the world turns.... "Fan Boys" have every right to effect a tv show they are fans of. And I suppose you would be called a "Fan Boy" of SFC by those who think it's an overrated game, like Gamespy does. Does that make you feel like you have less claim to ask Taldren to keep patching it? What a fool...
Try to follow me here. If I'm a fan of SFC and encourage Taldren to patch it I am not taking anything away from anyone. However if I hated the game and went on a campaign to have it removed becuase me and a few SFB fans found it offensive to what we consider SFB as sacred then I would be partly responsible in having it taken away from people who did like it. See the difference!
Having the new BSG air without interference from "fan boys" takes nothing away because you can simply not watch. However if it's taken off the air and I like it how can I watch it?!
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 28, 2003, 10:40:03 pm
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
Post by: Hertston on September 29, 2003, 02:50:05 am
Quote:
I'll watch it if it makes it over to the UK. Oh, and I'm almost 39 and I really enjoyed Firefly, yet I've heard it's cancelled after one season?
Didn't know that, pity. It was a lot better than most of the sci-fi channel rubbish.
The only thing that puzzles me about a "new" Battlestar Galactica is why anybody would want to bother.
A boycott seems pretty stupid IMHO. So they upset a few (and there can't be more than a few, can there ?) fans of the old series, who presumably have the same access to the "off" switch as anybody else. If the 12-25 year olds not lumbered with memories of the original series do enjoy it, let them, and don't try and kill the show off just because YOU don't like it.
Post by: Aldaron on September 29, 2003, 07:13:33 am
Quote:
Uhm... no, you're totally off the mark. What were talking about here is much more like Activision releasing a patch for SFC3 that totally changes the game for the worse. For instance, what if they decided that it would be cool if photon torpedoes were really just big tomatoes flying thru space? And what if they decided that the theme song from Hee-Haw would be playing instead of the SFC theme music. And what if they decided that all the ships should look like carrots with spoons tied to them using bailing wire? That's what were talking about here Alderon, someone is taking our baby and horribly mutilating it. And you know what, I bet some lunatics out there would actually like flying vegetables instead of SFC ships, but I doubt you would just sit back and play the game anyway because they said it's better to have an open mind. Come on man, stop arguing and wake up! This is bad! You don't just sit back and let something bad happen if you can prevent it:
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
You're right and you know what I would just stop playing the game, end of my problem. Just like all you have to do is not watch the show, end of your problem. Oh sure I might rant a little but I don't think I'd try to boycott Taldren to have it taken off the shelves so that those that do enjoy it wouldn't be able to get it anymore. Don't try and dictate what should and shouldn't be out there if people like flying carrots instead of ships.
I didn't like SFC3 before it came out because it went away from what I and several other people wanted and I hated the TNG direction. But you know what?! I gave it a chance and bought it anyway. It's OK but it's still not my cup of tea and I feel SFC is dead as far as I'm concerned. I still have SFC2: EAW that fit what I want just like you have the old BSG.
Post by: Eltanin on September 29, 2003, 11:42:53 am
I loved BSG and Frankly I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHAT THEY'VE DONE WITH IT!! It just opens up so many possibilities by makings some of the changes they're going ahead with. A human looking cylon...that's just a plain cool idea (and a logical strategic choice if you ask me...). Starbuck as a woman! Why not? Again, great new possibilities for character depth. EJ Olmos for Adama...the man's just a GREAT actor. The only think I've seen I don't like, and it's the same with every SF tv show it that....everything is so clean! The vidcaps I've seen are aweful, the art director should be shot. Where's the grunge? People sweat in more places than just their face!
The only thing that does kind of get me is how they torpedo'd Hatch who's been busting his hump for years.
Ah well...I'm counting the days till it's on.
Post by: EmeraldEdge on September 29, 2003, 01:38:55 pm
I agree with the clean comment as well. Everything looks very generic sci-fi, with a sterile feel to it. No character at all. I feel really bad about it too, because I like some of the actors attached. (I was always wondering who could do Adama after Lorne Greene, but I think Olmos certainly could pull it off. It's too bad it's a halfway version of BSG) Imo, they should have just made it look and sound that last little bit (since it's already away) different and called it something else.
Post by: IntgrSpin on September 29, 2003, 02:00:51 pm
Sure I watched BSG as a kid. I watched Dukes of Hazzard and Buck Rogers too. Know what? They all SUCK as high art.
Know what else? Star Trek with it's winky dink dime-store philosophy and new age preachiness sucks too. If I want philosophy, I'll read James, Nietzsche, Sartre or Kant, not watch some dopey show from the sixtes shoveling around philosophy 101, hoping people will be impressed.
What do I want in media entertainment? I want Captain Kirk fistfighting with some latex dinosaur. I want some green chick mudwrestling with some orange chick. I want big explosions and a thrilling soundtrack. I want cheap thrills and cheaper laughs.
I like things that offend people, and maybe makes them wonder why they're being offended. It is just a stupid TV show after all. Don't like it? There are about 300 other channels that aren't playing it, but that's not quite good enough is it? You also want to make sure nobody else watches it either! "Oh they changed a bad TV show from the seventies and made it into a bad TV show for today, BOYCOTT!"
Some of you guys are SO cute...
Post by: Atrahasis on September 30, 2003, 07:10:58 am
Quote:
The more people shriek "BOYCOTT!" the more I want to check it out.
Sure I watched BSG as a kid. I watched Dukes of Hazzard and Buck Rogers too. Know what? They all SUCK as high art.
Know what else? Star Trek with it's winky dink dime-store philosophy and new age preachiness sucks too. If I want philosophy, I'll read James, Nietzsche, Sartre or Kant, not watch some dopey show from the sixtes shoveling around philosophy 101, hoping people will be impressed.
What do I want in media entertainment? I want Captain Kirk fistfighting with some latex dinosaur. I want some green chick mudwrestling with some orange chick. I want big explosions and a thrilling soundtrack. I want cheap thrills and cheaper laughs.
I like things that offend people, and maybe makes them wonder why they're being offended. It is just a stupid TV show after all. Don't like it? There are about 300 other channels that aren't playing it, but that's not quite good enough is it? You also want to make sure nobody else watches it either! "Oh they changed a bad TV show from the seventies and made it into a bad TV show for today, BOYCOTT!"
Some of you guys are SO cute...
LOL I love what you say here, you are absolutely right. For myself though, good enetrtainment these days has to touch bases with a lot more topics these days, and some philosphical crap and high art (or at least a captivating vision) is what makes the difference between good and bad. Also, there's only so much jiggling and kung-fu scenes you can watch. If the new series can pull a good one in terms of taste, then I can wholeheartedly support it even if it is a complete retelling of the original.
But the people who are condemning it even before it's aired have lost some perspective, imho.
Post by: Baker on October 01, 2003, 03:14:47 am
Post by: IntgrSpin on October 01, 2003, 03:48:26 pm
Post by: Komodo on September 17, 2003, 05:28:58 pm
Quote:
DVD players are pretty cheap [I got a JVC for a pretty old 2nd TV for ~$70, I've seen unknown brands for ~$50] here in TN, they cannot be that bad in Boston. Get one. If you can't afford one, then, good luck in the near future, and get one ASAP.
LOL how good is it when the DVD's cost almost as much as the player?? I'll be using my VHS for some time yet...
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 16, 2003, 02:04:25 pm
Post by: Komodo on September 16, 2003, 02:32:29 pm
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 16, 2003, 02:51:28 pm
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 03:17:01 pm
an abomination and a rip-off of the Battlestar name.
The series DVD will be out soon and I will vote for that with my wallet.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: TalonClaw on September 16, 2003, 03:26:05 pm
Quote:
I agree with the boycott myself. What the Sci-Fi channel has done is
an abomination and a rip-off of the Battlestar name.
The series DVD will be out soon and I will vote for that with my wallet.
Thanks,
Dave
I'll be voting for the original with my wallet as well. I've been waiting for a long time to get the whole series on DVD.
IMO the new BSG should have been called something else because BSG it is not.
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 03:28:55 pm
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/entertainment/6274118.htm
Summary, if you liked the original, don't watch the new one.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 16, 2003, 03:44:11 pm
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 04:04:30 pm
Not Cylons that look human (shoot the one in the trailer looks like
a cosmo cover girl).
Starbuck and Boomer not to be women. Fine have women warriors,
but don't change the gender, of arguably, the star of the show.
There are more, but that would be a good start.
DM I suggest you familarize yourself with the changes so you know
what your talking about.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 16, 2003, 04:30:07 pm
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 04:35:37 pm
Post by: David Ferrell on September 16, 2003, 05:19:28 pm
To understand the new Battlestar Galactica series you have to understand who this production is meant for, or rather, who its not for. If you are under the age of 12, over the age of 25, or have spent more than 72 hours in any military service, this production might not hold much appeal for you. If you have strong conservative views, heart-felt religious views, or consider yourself a loyal fan of the original Battlestar Galactica then this show may offend you. If you're between the ages of 13-24, like MTV-level displays of sex and flashy screen tricks and don't really think through the subliminal implications of storylines, you'll probably enjoy this production quite a bit.
----
Certainly not my cup of tea.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 16, 2003, 05:27:39 pm
Do I think myself a hateful individual worthy of derision for choosing to watch it? Of course not.
Post by: Strafer on September 16, 2003, 05:29:37 pm
Been given the BayWatch spin to it... probably with a dash of Raw is War.
Count me out in advance. This is making Enterprise sound good.
Post by: Mog on September 16, 2003, 05:34:21 pm
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 16, 2003, 05:35:18 pm
Quote:
I'll watch it if it makes it over to the UK. Oh, and I'm almost 39 and I really enjoyed Firefly, yet I've heard it's cancelled after one season?
Ayep. I was bummed. I actually only got to see a coupel of the episodes, but I enjoyed the pilot quite a bit. That show had proimise.
Post by: SFC Bennie on September 16, 2003, 06:33:59 pm
Scott Bennie
Post by: CptCastrin on September 16, 2003, 07:34:23 pm
The settings and stories will probably only barely resemble the original and I for one won't miss that much. The acting was often cheezy and BSG ranked below Space1999 in my list of the best SciFi TV shows ever. But it's main problem was it was riding coat tails as soooo many scifi series did. Though the effects were great (even though they "reused" models from other movies and shows) the script writting was at times awful. But then it was only around for what ... 2 seasons? 1? Kind of says something.
The new BSG will not be made for those that remember the old BSG, I'll agree to that. But I say ... cool! SciFi is about shaking things up a bit and looking into the "future" and staying rooted to the "old BSG" is counter to that. Maybe the new one will suck, but maybe it will transend the old because it breaks new ground (a la ST:TNG) ... who knows.
In either case I'll be keeping an open mind.
Post by: Mr. Hypergol on September 16, 2003, 07:40:14 pm
Quote:
maybe it will transend the old because it breaks new ground (a la ST:TNG) ... who knows.
Ahhh but as I said above, ST:TNG didn't replace the original Star Trek....it built upon it. There's a big difference here.
I do agree that Space 1999 was awesome. Now that would be a great show to "continue"........
Post by: Mentat Jon on September 16, 2003, 07:50:06 pm
are they selling that new BSG on VHS,not all of us have those new fangled DVD players
Post by: Jim on September 16, 2003, 07:50:21 pm
Oh well...
Jim
Post by: Lieutenant_Q on September 16, 2003, 07:55:12 pm
Post by: ActiveX on September 16, 2003, 11:08:24 pm
Quote:
my 2 cents,ill watch BSG on the sci-fi channel,just to see what new spin they put on it.
are they selling that new BSG on VHS,not all of us have those new fangled DVD players
VHS? When did they stop with BetaMAX?
Post by: Aldaron on September 17, 2003, 07:25:50 am
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 17, 2003, 09:04:13 am
You and I, don't very often agree,
so this should give the whole Taldren Forums "pause"...
I agree.
Thank you for the warning.
I'm an ultra-fan of the Old BSG,
and I'm gonna vote with my wallet as well,
Its truely sad,
that after all this time (since the 1978-1979 AD, Old BSG),
they go and ruin, IMHO, what could have been a great experience for the fans,
and the Studios to make money,
I personally believe that "IQs have sharply dropped in the Studio",
I smell the "hand of Glen Larson" in this one
Quote:
<snip>
If you have strong conservative views, heart-felt religious views, or consider yourself a loyal fan of the original Battlestar Galactica then this show may offend you.
Take care ,:)
GeneralWolfe
Post by: Captain Krenn on September 17, 2003, 11:24:29 am
But then again I was never an avid BSG fan, so it probably won't offend me as much as it would if I were.
I can certainly understand the POV of fans of the original show. From what I've seen, about the only thing
this mini series is going to share with original series is the name.
The producers of the show said if you were a loyal BSG fan it would probably be a good idea not to
watch it as its only going to anger you.
That being the case, why did they even bother using the same name?
------
conversation I had with a friend's kid
Me: Wow that looks like a Cylon helmet.
Kid: What's a Cylon?
Me: OK, now I feel reaeelly old!
Post by: BortaS on September 17, 2003, 11:34:28 am
Post by: Oberon on September 17, 2003, 01:40:08 pm
Quote:
my 2 cents,ill watch BSG on the sci-fi channel,just to see what new spin they put on it.
are they selling that new BSG on VHS,not all of us have those new fangled DVD players
DVD players are pretty cheap [I got a JVC for a pretty old 2nd TV for ~$70, I've seen unknown brands for ~$50] here in TN, they cannot be that bad in Boston. Get one. If you can't afford one, then, good luck in the near future, and get one ASAP.
Post by: TobinDax on September 17, 2003, 06:18:26 pm
How many of you who are going to boycott the mini-series watched the last planet of the apes movie? Should no one have watched it because of the original? Hollywood is in the habbit of remakes to bring movies/shows up to present era standards as well as to bank on a proven product.
I ran into enough people back in 1986 who weren't going to watch that next generation crap either. It went on to succeed without them, although I know some of them changed their tune.
So if you don't want to watch a new spin on BSG, that's fine, but spend your energy more constructively on things that matter, like playing Orion Pirates on the dyna!
Post by: Tumulorum Fossor on September 17, 2003, 07:51:44 pm
Well, I guess it is the producers' perogative to take creative license and change things up a bit (see multiple threads: "SFB is not SFC."
), but what really pi$$es me off about stuff like this is the blatant pandering.I mean, let's call this what it is: the creative license that was used here, I strongly suspect, was NOT because it suddenly makes the BSG storyline much more interesting. It's to make it more marketable. Period.
That's the formula that post-Roddenberry Trek has gone by with [sarcasm/] great success [/sarcasm off].
For example, I have nothing against a strong, dominant, fighter-pilot female main character. But when it's deliberately done to replace "Starbuck" simply to make the show more palatable across more demographics, well, that just smacks of making creative changes for the wrong reasons. And I'm sure the rest of the show will do likewise.
Amazing that producers like these tap into a cult-phenomenon that's lasted 30+ years, with the goal of decimating everything that made it so appealing for 30+ years.
Then again, it's entirely likely that I'm becoming an old[er] fart. And against change for change's sake. After all, SFC3 was/is more fun than I initially gave it credit for, just a different experience than SFB/SFC/SFC2. Maybe the same will be true for BSG.
But I ain't holding my breathe.
So I WILL give BSG a chance. I'll watch as much as I can stomach. But at the first sign of blatant Demographic Pandering, the channel gets changed. I suspect that means I'll be changing the channel about 25% through the cast introduction sequence.
[more sarcasm/] Gee, I hope they change that lousy orchestral theme with a Bon Jovi vocal ballad! [/more sarcasm off].
-TF
Post by: Lepton1 on September 17, 2003, 09:01:28 pm
Post by: Parislord on September 17, 2003, 09:14:53 pm
For my own part, I'm not sure who could have filled Dirk Benedict's shoes very well. I'm just suprised SciFi didn't get some british actor with a swank accent and no talent to play to part...
Who would all of you have picked? I kind of like Richard Dean Anderson for it, but he's a little old.
Post by: La'ra on September 18, 2003, 06:29:48 am
The original Battlestar Galactica was horribly cheesy, had terrible effects and a mystic subplot, and the women were very ERA with long hair and no bras.
The new Battlestar Galactica is portraying itself as edgy and 'new' but keeping a familiar name for advertising purposes, has replaced male characters with foxy women, and added an element of 'we don't know who they are!' about the Cylons. Baltar is young and dark and handsome, his Cylon friend is a Victoria Secret model.
Say what you want to, both do reflect the times they were made it so well it's scary.
Post by: Sten on September 18, 2003, 07:53:30 am
As far as females replacing a few chareacters.
Duke Nukem said it best. "Shake it baby. Shake it."
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 18, 2003, 11:56:37 am
Quote:
BSG sucks and always has. Not that I didn't watch it and enjoy it as a KID, but give me a break, it is pretty shoddy work. And that horrible 1984 series! Whew!! Talk about a venue to sell toys to kids. It's about time they did something with it. Frankly from reading a bit of the screen play reviews it sounds a bit more substantial than the original BSG ever was. But I also am not expecting anything great from the SciFi channel. Their Dune series is a snoring bore, and they would rather air horror movies than than SciFi. We know their demographic by looking at Scare Tactics. Any thoughtful philosophical SciFi heads watching that show, not! Is StarTrek TOS to be found anywhere on their dang network even though they seem to own the rights to show it?? No! What did you expect??
Good morning, Sunshine!
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 18, 2003, 11:59:32 am
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 18, 2003, 12:05:59 pm
Post by: Sten on September 18, 2003, 12:18:29 pm
Quote:
I have nothing agsinst those who say "I'm going to give it a try, and keep an open mind", really I don't. But for me there is a time for an open mind and a time to shut the door. One of our biggest problems in America nowadays is that people feel like everything should be given a chance. That leads to good change in some cases and bad change in others. Why do we need lawsuits against MacDonalds because their coffee is too hot? Why do we even consider letting a home invader sue the home owner for shooting him? Because some people's minds are open to anything, which is NOT as good as having sound judgement to begin with. But, when the first 30 minutes of this new series is nothing but sex, pointless violence and destroyed dreams, don't come back here to say "you were right KoraH, this thing sucks" because I already know it will, weather it's true to the original or not. And I'll still be your friend despite your lack of judgement.
Whether this show sucks or not. The fact of the matter is it has already been made.
I have been watching science fiction for 42 of my 43 years I have spent on this planet. Yes I can remember the first SCI-FI movie I watched. I was alittle over 1 year old.
So yea I will give it a shot and keep an open mind. Apparently you are not. That is your choice. Don't watch the show. Go ahead and shut the door.
I happen to live in a state were it is legal to shoot someone on your property if you feel threatend. So I will not have to worry about being sued for keeping an open mind. Mind you anybody threatening me, my family or my property on my property will die.
You don't like the new twist for BSG oh well. The original was okay. I watched it all the time and was buymmed out when it was canceled. Hated the 1980s version.
So as far as a lack of judgement personally I feel you are falling into the same category.
SHAKE IT BABY SHAKE IT!
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 12:25:55 pm
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Post by: Sten on September 18, 2003, 12:43:29 pm
Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Tsk tsk. I was smart enough to delete SFC3 and retain EAW and OP.
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 18, 2003, 01:12:22 pm
Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Wow.
Post by: TalonClaw on September 18, 2003, 01:47:21 pm
Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
A rather graphic representation of how it is. The Entertainment industry has learned that they can shovel us all the poop we can eat simply because we gobble up anything that is a sequel to something we know and love.
Post by: ActiveX on September 18, 2003, 01:55:29 pm
Post by: TalonClaw on September 18, 2003, 02:06:58 pm
Quote:Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Tsk tsk. I was smart enough to delete SFC3 and retain EAW and OP.
Touché Fred. I can see where a SFB fan might have that point of view. Not being a SFBer and being a TOS and a Next Gen fan I liked SFC3 but I do wish it could have been built on EAW and OP's strengths and not been dumbed down. But it still has it's own features and I still play it.
But as for BSG they are totally making a new show based on sex and violence and putting the BSG name on it to sell it. That?s not what BSG was all about.
Sure BSG was cheesy but so was TOS. The characters, story, and messages presented is what made those series so great.
BSG and Star Trek were awsome given the budgets and technology of the time.
Post by: Sten on September 18, 2003, 02:15:41 pm
Quote:Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
A rather graphic representation of how it is. The Entertainment industry has learned that they can shovel us all the poop we can eat simply because we gobble up anything that is a sequel to something we know and love.
Actually I think the original comments are a graphic representation of what is still wrong with the Unted States.
Rather than get preachy here. Intolerance is a sad fact of life. I am quite capable of deciding for myself what I find entertaining. So if Apollo and Starbuck in the sack distrubs you don't watch it.
This thread reminds me of the Trekies who freaked out when James T Kirk took a dirt nap.
Or how about the... Its based on SFB its not SFB, its SFC.
Its a Television show for crying out load.
Post by: TalonClaw on September 18, 2003, 03:05:58 pm
Post by: Captain Krenn on September 18, 2003, 03:24:51 pm
I think Dave's having a bad day and needs to head out for a few margaritas!
Go get 1 or 2 and mail me the bill, I'll be happy to buy you a couple of rounds
Post by: Lepton1 on September 18, 2003, 03:36:44 pm
Quote:Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
Tsk tsk. I was smart enough to delete SFC3 and retain EAW and OP.
Zing!!! David. Place. Put. HEHE!!!
I really don't understand Dave's reaction here. BSG was not good enough to get upset about. I suppose B9 is all that and a bag chips right and not some Shadowrun meets Oni rip off. Your moral indignation or whatever it is is ludicruous. Try banning yourself.
Post by: NannerSlug on September 18, 2003, 03:38:15 pm
i loved watching bsg when i was a kid.. the good guys were good.. and the baddies were that.. the script was forward looking at what is good in us..
this script is nothing more than an election year bush bashing pile of political mush which looks and exploits what is bad about us.
sorry if this is sappy, but i like watching things that talk about what is good and right - and how we can over come struggles.. not about how everyone is out to screw each other and how there is a lie underneath ever rock.
poor script. sorry.
Post by: TalonClaw on September 18, 2003, 03:44:18 pm
Quote:
Yikes!
I think Dave's having a bad day and needs to head out for a few margaritas!
Go get 1 or 2 and mail me the bill, I'll be happy to buy you a couple of rounds
Definately
"I burn." -- Spock
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 03:46:28 pm
mangled by people trying to make a fast buck.
This isn't the first time that it has happened, Starship Troopers is even
a worse case. No talents trading on and twisting another?s work to get their story,
that no wanted without the famous name, published.
I would say the problem with the USA is we are too tolerant. Too many people
are willing to look the other way at abhorrent behavior as long as it doesn't
directly affect them.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 03:53:23 pm
Quote:Quote:
Yikes!
I think Dave's having a bad day and needs to head out for a few margaritas!
Go get 1 or 2 and mail me the bill, I'll be happy to buy you a couple of rounds
Definately
"I burn." -- Spock
The only problem is I don't drink! Though lately I have been reconsidering
that decision.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 18, 2003, 04:02:40 pm
I do agree about the "collective we" shoveling poop into our mouths as fast as we can, which in turn causes the poop pedlers to produce more of it. That's sort of the whole point behind the boycott, to stop eating their poop.
That's a nice melodramatic speech about killing home invaders, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with my point. Go ahead and watch the show, it's your time to waste. Maybe your favorite show will be next if enough people like the new BSG, but I sure wouldn't be going into your boycott thread and telling you to keep an open mind about it.
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 18, 2003, 04:06:35 pm
Quote:
The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first and love of soft living and the get-rich-quick theory of life.--Theodore Roosevelt
Post by: Toasty0 on September 18, 2003, 04:41:08 pm
This name calling, and other inapproperiate actions over an electronic box that serves no other purpose than to engage the undereducated with product that requires no critical analysis or thought is almost ludicrous if it weren't so sad. Add to the mix the absurdity that this donnybrook is specifically over a show that was the ultimate representive of sci-fi televison camp in its time. No wonder the gallery is snickering.
I guess it is true that if you stare into the unblinking eye long enough perspective looses all reference to reality.
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 04:52:31 pm
170 or 180 BPV.
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 04:58:00 pm
http://208.57.228.4/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=Black9General&Number=162202&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
Thanks,
Dave
Post by: Jwest on September 18, 2003, 05:05:10 pm
I don't think it's going to be all that good - first glance appraisal is that it's far to close to the same BS that's been served up before. On the other hand, the last time I just decided I wasn't going to watch a show was when Dark Angel got replaced by Firefly, which turned out to be a good show, with good writing, and I rather wish I had had the chance to see it all the way through. My ability to judge a show in advance of actually watching it is demonstrably fallible.
Perhaps no one else here possesses that particular flaw.
Post by: ActiveX on September 18, 2003, 05:06:45 pm
Or OT leaked...
Post by: Aldaron on September 18, 2003, 06:14:50 pm
Quote:
Some people it appears don't have the intelligence when confronted
with a pile of dog poop to not put it in their mouths. Frankly it sickens me.
Dave
To each his own I guess. BSG was good when I was younger and like so many things I watch now that I used to love then it just seems cheesy. There were some good eps and lots of bad eps just like anything. I'll see the show before I judge it on it's own merits and not what was made 30 years ago.
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 18, 2003, 06:32:02 pm
Quote:
How good the original was isn't the point really, we're talking about how bad the remake is. I'm sure we could think of other bad originals that had better remakes too, but let's stick to the point.
I do agree about the "collective we" shoveling poop into our mouths as fast as we can, which in turn causes the poop pedlers to produce more of it. That's sort of the whole point behind the boycott, to stop eating their poop.
That's a nice melodramatic speech about killing home invaders, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with my point. Go ahead and watch the show, it's your time to waste. Maybe your favorite show will be next if enough people like the new BSG, but I sure wouldn't be going into your boycott thread and telling you to keep an open mind about it.
So you and some others in this thread have set yourselves up as the ones who decide what is crap and also the arbiters the quality of the people who decide to give something a chance?
I dislike most of what has been "popular music" during my lifetime. I don't liken those that do like it to eaters of feces just because I see little or no redeeming qualities in what they like. I decide what I like and what I don't and I assume others can and should do the same for themselves.
I've seen some rather disturbing insults in this thread that I feel are completely uncalled for. The mere fact that this topic has spilled into several different forums in this community is ridiculous to me.
I enjoyed Battlestar Galactica when I was a kid too. I liked a lot of shows when I was a kid...Space 1999, UFO, and Star Trek just to name a few. They were the basis for my love of sci-fi that continues to this day. What gets done in the way of a remake of any of these things is not something that would send me so far over the edge that I'd show complete and utter disdain for anyone deciding to actually watch it and decide for themselve how, under what circumstances and/or whether they like something.
Personally, I don;t hold out a lot of hope that this new BSG is going to be any good...but I certainly don't think myself a rube or devourer of fecal matter for deciding to actually watch it and judge it by it merits after actually doing so.
Contemptable of me, I know...
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 18, 2003, 06:33:15 pm
Quote:
It's certainly no worse than a bunch of grown men arguing over which to use:
170 or 180 BPV.
Thanks,
Dave
Indeed...only eaters of dog poop would do such a thing.
Post by: Toasty0 on September 18, 2003, 07:09:22 pm
Quote:
Nor any worse than getting excited over an advertising gimick for a video game:
http://208.57.228.4/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=Black9General&Number=162202&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
Thanks,
Dave
Dave,
My, that's an awful big line you just drew into the sand there pa'dner.
I'm not sure that charactizing my--and others in that thread--support for Taldren's upcoming release (you know, that thing you just called a "gimick") of Black9 is on par with what I was pointing out.
Post by: Mentat Jon on September 18, 2003, 07:41:27 pm
Starbuck:
Starbuck's a guy,a charming rouge,a womenizing hard drinking cigar smoking,cylon killing SOB.
im not the biggest cannon freak in the world,but Starbuck being a guy should be one of them.
thats kinda like remaking Starwars and Darth Vaders a women..
Post by: David Ferrell on September 18, 2003, 08:15:45 pm
Dave
Post by: Agent XXX on September 18, 2003, 09:20:47 pm
www.gametrailers.com
Sierra
Battlestar Galactica
Quicktime, and its kinda long...
Post by: NannerSlug on September 18, 2003, 10:01:49 pm
Post by: TheShadow on September 19, 2003, 01:34:47 am
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 19, 2003, 07:38:30 am
I completely agree with yaa my friend,
they have screwed the show,
this is NOT a sequel,
like ST: TOS then the sequel ST: TNG,
which had a bumpy start,
but then came into its own,
This new BSG, is a complete discarding of the Old BSG,
it is a pale-attempt to replace the original,
"Rise up my brothers! BOYCOTT the new BSG!"
Take care,
GeneralWolfe
Quote:
I'll not watch the show simply because they have targeted the lowest common denominator, they have screwed the premise of the show, and because I hate MTV automatons! Boycott away comrades!
Post by: Lepton1 on September 19, 2003, 06:17:03 pm
Quote:
How bout a little movie to remind you, of what was, A decent piece of flimage from ours and yours more than likely past
www.gametrailers.com
Sierra
Battlestar Galactica
Quicktime, and its kinda long...
Oh sh**!! A chick was reading the famous BSG intro instead of Lorne Greene. Boycott!! Boycott!!! How dare they replace Lorne Greene!!! What is the country coming to. Help, help conservative movement, save our country from our depravity and our civil rights!!!
Post by: AdmiralFrey_XC on September 19, 2003, 08:03:24 pm
You are a moron.
Just MHO, but anyone that decides to post like you do is just a "stirrer of thee pot", and that's just plain moronic.
I respect what the original intent was here, and I won't be a Robert about others feelings just because I don't agree with them.
Stop trolling, Lepton.
Post by: BortaS on September 19, 2003, 09:43:52 pm
Post by: Reptor7 on September 19, 2003, 10:06:05 pm
Post by: Atrahasis on September 20, 2003, 05:00:41 am
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 20, 2003, 04:24:34 pm
The Old BSG was the original,
and was based on half sci-fi/half religion,
The Twelve Colonies of Man,
The Council of the Twelve,
The 1000 Yarheen Cylon War,
The Robotic Cylons that turned on and killed off their Reptilan Cylon Creators,
The Book of Word,
The Star of Kobol,
The Mythical Lost "Mother-Civilsation",
of 13 Tribes,
the Twelve founded the "Colonies",
the Thirteen crossed the stars to colonise,
"the Shining Planet known as Earth",
What do they give us now,
Not what ST: TOS and ST: TNG were,
a sequel honouring the roots of the original,
this "New Galactica" shreads and discards the original,
How would you feel if ST: TNG discarded and replaced the ST: TOS,
I'd venture to guess that you wouldn't like it Atrahasis,
No,
not one little bit.
GeneralWolfe
Quote:
Are people so afraid of change that they demand sequels instead of a fresh new interpretation of things? Might I point out that even the Star Wars movies were re-made with a new view of things and people loved them.
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 20, 2003, 10:51:07 pm
Dogmatix!
Obviously you do not agree with the topic of my thread here, and since you're here anyway, the only reason you could possibly have for being here is to argue with people whom you dissagree with. What a loser. Nobody says they are the authority on what TV shows are crap, we said that we don't like THIS tv show, and we think THIS tv show is crap. And if you dissagree, that's ok. But in that case you have no reason for being here do you? You think this topic is rediculous, you don't like it, yet still you're here? You know, an intelligent person would just ... go away. You don't have to reply to every single thread on this forum you know. Go find something productive to do with your time.
Post by: Cleaven on September 20, 2003, 11:37:36 pm
Quote:
Lepton: Lorne Green only did the opening title dialogue in half the episodes. Patrick Macnee did the title narration in some of them too. Obviously you were not aware of this. Consider yourself enlightened.
Dogmatix!
Obviously you do not agree with the topic of my thread here, and since you're here anyway, the only reason you could possibly have for being here is to argue with people whom you dissagree with. What a loser. Nobody says they are the authority on what TV shows are crap, we said that we don't like THIS tv show, and we think THIS tv show is crap. And if you dissagree, that's ok. But in that case you have no reason for being here do you? You think this topic is rediculous, you don't like it, yet still you're here? You know, an intelligent person would just ... go away. You don't have to reply to every single thread on this forum you know. Go find something productive to do with your time.
Not very enlightened for a person who decided for his own reasons to post here and not in the Off-Topic forum where it clearly belongs. Of course I am now guilty of troll feeding again but so be it, it's not the first time.
Post by: Azrael on September 21, 2003, 10:29:31 am
The Fools.
So they're dumbing down BSG a thousandfold more than they dumbed down Star Trek with TNG.
Battle Star Galactica is cool.
Cylons are cool.
Starbuck is cool.
That show makes an impression on any generation that watches it. When my kid brother saw the original series for the first time ever in his early teens, (and some 20 years after it first aired) he thought it was excellent. He found himself surprised and entertained.
Blow away all the spectacular packaging from Star Trek and Star Wars (episodes IV - VI at least) and at their core they convey a deep and meaningful message. Like it or not, with Star Trek, Gene Roddenberry was creating "morality plays".
New Series of BSG? If the Cylons aren't their cool metallic selves that would be an unpardonable crime in it's self.
The same stories are told time and time again.
It's not the story, but how you tell it.
Thankfully, being a citizen of the UK, I won't have to worry about boycotting anything for donkey's ages.
We used to get everything first, the latest Start Trek and B-5 episodes (though our government saw fit to censor parts of these episodes it deemed improper for UK viewing - I'm not kidding) but not anymore.
The scourge of corporate television has put an end to that. Pay for Satellite Television or stay in the dark for years.
The second season of Enterprise started for us, on terrestrial television, one week ago today.
Greedy corporate vampires. I suppose in a way, I'm already actively participating in the boycott, as I refuse to subscribe to the Corporate Organ Grinders and pay for the privilege of watching them screw up some of my favourite shows.
Death to Rupert Murdock! Hang him, I say! - but flogg him first.
Azrael
Post by: Aldaron on September 21, 2003, 12:34:48 pm
Quote:
Lepton: Lorne Green only did the opening title dialogue in half the episodes. Patrick Macnee did the title narration in some of them too. Obviously you were not aware of this. Consider yourself enlightened.
Dogmatix!
Obviously you do not agree with the topic of my thread here, and since you're here anyway, the only reason you could possibly have for being here is to argue with people whom you dissagree with. What a loser. Nobody says they are the authority on what TV shows are crap, we said that we don't like THIS tv show, and we think THIS tv show is crap. And if you dissagree, that's ok. But in that case you have no reason for being here do you? You think this topic is rediculous, you don't like it, yet still you're here? You know, an intelligent person would just ... go away. You don't have to reply to every single thread on this forum you know. Go find something productive to do with your time.
(Not saying this little boycott thing will get the new BSG canceled but IF the actions of a few zealot fans do...) then it is the fan boys who determine what we are watching. If it gets pulled because enough fans convince people not to watch the show what happens to the people that happen to like it. The same as usually happens we lose a show we like becausesomeone else decided it wasn't good. Oh sure people who like could run a campaign to have it re-aired but that would only work if the show first got good ratings and established itself.
Post by: Atrahasis on September 21, 2003, 06:15:52 pm
Post by: Mentat Jon on September 21, 2003, 08:14:35 pm
It will be better than "BattleField Earth"
Post by: Gamester on September 21, 2003, 11:55:39 pm
First, a little backstory. About a year ago, I received an e-mail from Sierra asking me to participate in a customer survey about some games they had in early development. One of the most promising of these (and the only one I remember) was the new Battlestar Galactica game and I was initially VERY excited (A space combat game set in the Battlestar Galactica universe! Freakin' Awesome! Where do I pre-order?!?!?). Then they started asking some very. . . odd. . . questions. Questions such as:
What do you think about having hybrid gameplay featuring away missions with a younger Commander Adama, FPS style?
and
What about space combat missions similar to Rebel Assault (ie - a rail shooter)?
and
Would I buy it if it was NOT available on the PC?
First off, I pretty much think FPS type games suck. They give me nasty headaches and occasional nausea. The only one I actually liked was Unreal Tournament (and then only in LAN play) and I could only play that for about 30 mins at a sitting before I started reaching for the Tylenol. I also happen to find that many game forums catering to FPS players tend to be juvenile and rude in the extreme (as opposed to the overall extremely civilized Taldren forums - I wonder how many ppl are truly aware of how great the community here is?). All in all, I dislike FPS style games.
Second off, I am a HUGE fan of games like Wing Commander (1-4 & Prophecy - I never cared for the Privateer series or Armada, and Academy was interesting but it was really only a random mission generator), FreeSpace & FreeSpace 2 (FreeSpace 2 is STILL one of the best looking computer games ever made IMHO - and Volition got screwed over by Interplay just like Taldren and Bioware), Tie Fighter (I didn't care much for X-Wing, and X-Wing Alliance was OK, but Tie Fighter, FreeSpace 2, Wing Commander 2, Eye of the Beholder 2, and Lands of Lore 1 are my Top 5 favorite games of all time and in about that order, too) and I even really enjoyed StarLancer (I like FreeLancer, but I like StarLancer better). This should serve to let you know that I REALLY enjoy space combat games. They also have the added benefit of NOT making me ill watching or playing them (as opposed to Descents 1 thru 3 - puke-a-rama - and all FPS type games from Wolfenstein 3D on up). I own and have played Rebel Alliance. It is a rail shooter. This means you fly on a pre-determined path and "steer" your targeting reticle and blow stuff up. It sucked and I hated it. It had a sequel, Rebel Assault II - it wasn't any better. I mean, look at Tie Fighter (Alpha 1, Request for Reinforcements Acknowledged - Imperial Fanfare - Star Destroyer Emperor's Fist enters area at 11KM and drops off 2 additional Tie squadrons - Sweet!!!!) and then look at Rebel Assault! This certainly does not bode well.
And third off, I don't own a console game system. I will not now nor any conceivable time in the near future own a game console (unless someone gives me one and then I doubt I'd play it for more than a few mins - I can safely say this because my brother has damn near every console system ever invented by mankind and I have yet to find anything that interests me on one).
I will admit that I thought the game would be much more appealing were it more like FreeSpace 2 (or even StarLancer, a game that while not perfect, was very good and had a great atmosphere, it's downfall being primarily some drastically difficult missions - Warthog, BSG's developer, worked on that one with Digital Anvil, so they HAVE experience in the genre). I told the developers as much in my feedback, even going so far as to outline all the things about FreeSpace 2 that made me love it so much. I would even have enjoyed an RTS game based on Battlestar Galactica (except we already kinda have that - Sierra's own HomeWorld and HomeWorld 2 and they are quite awesome games. I have them both. Any official BSG RTS would have a very hard time beating these two. Pity they AREN'T official BSG RTS games.) It appears it is not to be however.
As far as the Sci-Fi channel remake is concerned, I will watch it. It can't be any worse than the Dune miniseries (I'm your Duke!). Even if it turns out to be bad, even the makers of the Dune miniseries somewhat redeemed themselves with Children of Dune (much MUCH better). There is hope. I will wait and see. If it sucks - I'll eventually give up on it, just like I did with TNG, DS9, Voyager & Enterprise. (SFC: OP rulez!)
On a related note, anyone remember the NBC remake of Dark Shadows with Ben Cross as Barnabus Collins? I thought that was freakin' fantastic. The only show I EVER made sure I was home for EVERY episode. I had seen several episodes of the original series and found it very Soap Opera-Style slow and boring, but the new series had pacing, excellent acting, good scripts, and excellent visual production values. It took the original's storyline and paced it much faster, making for one of the most enjoyable shows of my teenage years. They cancelled it after one season (on a cliff hanger, too!!!). You win some, you lose some.
Gamester
Thanking God that he has access to electrical power and water and that his house and car don't have trees sprouting from the middle of them (See Isabel thread).
Post by: Whiplash on September 22, 2003, 09:54:43 pm
Anytime a show that old gets remade, it has to be significantly redone. Society has changed drastically. The old one just can't be that relevant now. Its not enough to remake the special effects. Nobody is going to be impressed with spacefighters and robots these days.
Their concept of giving humans "flaws" and making Cylons look like people may allow them to humanize the show more and present some relevant social issues. Who knows. I'm not going to pan the show without seeing it. I will give it a chance.
Feel free to be close-minded and judge it sight unseen. I won't.
W.
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 23, 2003, 06:16:57 pm
Quote:
<snip>
Dogmatix!
Obviously you do not agree with the topic of my thread here, and since you're here anyway, the only reason you could possibly have for being here is to argue with people whom you dissagree with. What a loser. Nobody says they are the authority on what TV shows are crap, we said that we don't like THIS tv show, and we think THIS tv show is crap. And if you dissagree, that's ok. But in that case you have no reason for being here do you? You think this topic is rediculous, you don't like it, yet still you're here? You know, an intelligent person would just ... go away. You don't have to reply to every single thread on this forum you know. Go find something productive to do with your time.
I didn't think this topic was "rediculous." I thought it was "rediculous" that it (or topics like it) had been posted in three different fora (that I know of...there might be more). I think it's a great topic, otherwise. It's certainly not up to you to decide what discussion I choose to involve myself in. It's not up to you to decide my reasons for "being here."
On the other hand, you've resorted to actual name calling. Heh...I find that kind of pathetic.
I have posted because the topic interests me, nevermind the fact that it should be relegated and confined to the OT forum. Since you've chosen to personallyattack me rather than discuss the merits of my arguments, I can only assume that you've somehow taken exception to the fact that I, among others, are not eating up your call for a boycott and have taken exception to the unfavorable categorization of those willing to at least judge the new BSG miniseries on it's merits or lack thereof after actually watching it. You'll note that I am not insulting those who choose to dismiss it out of hand without watching it. That's certainly their perrogative.
I have posted on-topic in this thread. I have questioned the points of view espoused by yourself and others that I find problematic or just plain don't agree with. I sorry to find that you apparently don't have any use for differing opinions. It would seem you're only interested in the opinions of those who agree with you. If this is the case, you might want to look into confining your posts to PMs amongst your circle of "yes men."
If you're going to post something publically, it behooves you to be open to response and possible criticism of your argument/topic. Perhaps you would benefit from starting from the beginning and reading this thread all over again. You appear to have missed a great number of points. Perhaps it's all the ones that you don't agree with. Seems plausible, anyway...
Post by: Karnak on September 24, 2003, 09:00:01 am
**** WARNING!! Lotsa Potential Spoilers!! ****
http://www.galactica2003.net/archives/scripts.htm
If you go through the scripts I think you will find the new stories to be intriguing. It makes you do a lot of thinking which is a sign of a good series. I think the intellectual quotient has been expanded many times fold over the classic BSG. I like the way the Colonials are no longer idiotic dupes; especiallly, the politicians. Instead they are compromised by their own character flaws but not their intelligence. Moore uses Balter as the symbol for how intelligence can be compromised by personal character flaws like being too self-absorbed (cf. Londo Mollari in B5, Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars, Gul Duhkat in DS9). Other than looking for a reference for the head baddie of the Cylons (ie. Star Wars mentioned the Emporer 30 minutes into the film, DS9 brought in the Female Changeling early on, Borg Queen appeared in First Contact), I like what R. Moore has done with the franchise. It's kinda hard to hate the Cylon 6 model, hehe.
IMHO, I think it has a chance of meeting original B5 standards and putting Enterprise in trouble. Another thing in the new series' favor is the casting of the Apollo character. It's played by the actor that did Archie Kennedy in the Horatio Hornblower mini-series. That shows that BSG is serious about getting young, hungry, quality actors on the potential level of Patrick Stewart in the series. I'm also a Hornblower fan.
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 10:45:35 am
The main reason is that I lke the story. BSG was the first Sci-Fi series that I watched when I was a kid and since then I am a big fan of SCIFI.
Which only makes it sound more strange when I ask this, a few people mentioned Space 1999. What was that about? I have never seen it or read about it. What does it deal with?
Post by: EmeraldEdge on September 24, 2003, 10:56:45 am
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 11:06:37 am
Post by: Mr. Hypergol on September 24, 2003, 04:19:13 pm
Obviously some of the premise is bogus, for example the moon actually encountering a new planet every week or so. Boy, they must have not only been moving faster than light but also able to "steer" the moon. Totally bogus from a science perspective. Did I miss something or am I correct here?
What I loved about the show was the concept of moon base Alpha and the Eagle space craft. I saw these as in the same category as the Discovery spacecraft from 2001 A Space Osyssey.....i.e. things humanity could achieve within my lifetime given the appropriate resources allocated.
Space 1999 was good stuff indeed.
Here's some good Space 1999 links:
http://www.space1999eagle.com/an/an_home.html
http://www.space1999.uk.com/#
http://www.space1999.org/
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 04:42:51 pm
Post by: FormerDM on September 24, 2003, 04:57:16 pm
The investors became skittish after UFO ratings drooped a bit in NY and LA markets. Gerry Anderson resold it (they had done much preproduction work on sets, etc) as a new concept. Thus was Space: 1999 born.
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 09:26:02 pm
Post by: Baker on September 24, 2003, 10:58:48 pm
Well since I was born in 1981, I missed out on things like the original BSG and TOS, so I will watch it since it will be the first BSG that I come across.
Post by: FormerDM on September 24, 2003, 11:08:57 pm
Quote:
Damn! What is that UFO series?
It aired in 1970. You can get in on DVD from A&E. Good fansite at http://www.ufoseries.com/
Premise:
In the year 1980, a secret military organization named SHADO (Supreme Headquarters Alien Defence Organisation) becomes operational. Its purpose is to defend the Earth from Aliens who've been coming to Earth and kidnapping humans. It is believed that these Aliens are a dying race, and are transplanting human body parts to extend their own lifespans.
SHADO's main headquarters is hidden beneath a film studio near London England. SHADO also has a base on the moon (Moonbase) and a fleet of submarines (Skydiver). Incoming UFO's are initially detected by an Earth orbiting satellite named SID (Space Intruder Detector). An initial interception attempt is made in space with three Interceptor craft launched from Moonbase. A second attempt is made in the Earth's atmosphere with a fighter plane (Sky One) launched from Skydiver. Landed UFO's are tracked down with ground Mobiles.
The episodes are typically about SHADO's attempts to thwart the Alien invasions, and the various Alien strategies to disable SHADO or kill its commander. Recurring themes include maintaining SHADO security, keeping SHADO properly funded, and the effect that the secrecy has on the personal lives of SHADO's operatives.
Post by: WDLL on September 24, 2003, 11:30:41 pm
Post by: Cleaven on September 25, 2003, 01:44:32 am
Or maybe not, but at least I think they had a similar premise.
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on September 25, 2003, 08:08:07 am
Ahem ....
Quote:
<snip>
I like the way the Colonials are no longer idiotic dupes; especiallly, the politicians.
What is so unbelievable about it?
The Twelve Colonies of Man intervened in a war between the Cylon Empire,
and one of the Colonies close neighbours,
The Cylons had extreminated their Reptilan Cylon Creators,
and had resolved the exterminate non-Cylon lifeforms and extend the Cylon Empire, ad infinitium,
Thus, the Colonial intervention commenced the "1000 Yarheen War",
the Colonials were initially successful, but the Cylons just kept manufacturing Cylon Warriors around the clock,
the Colonies were eventually worn down into a "Stalemate Frontline",
After 1000 Yarheens of War ... Colonial society had incorporate "the War" into their daily lives,
the Colonial economy went on,
The foolish (last) Colonial President decided on a "Neville Chambelain" peace process,
We know the rest,
Frankly ... I find the storyline quite believable, and "timeless"...
GeneralWolfe
Quote:
BSG Early Draft scripts:
**** WARNING!! Lotsa Potential Spoilers!! ****
http://www.galactica2003.net/archives/scripts.htm
If you go through the scripts I think you will find the new stories to be intriguing. It makes you do a lot of thinking which is a sign of a good series. I think the intellectual quotient has been expanded many times fold over the classic BSG. I like the way the Colonials are no longer idiotic dupes; especiallly, the politicians. Instead they are compromised by their own character flaws but not their intelligence. Moore uses Balter as the symbol for how intelligence can be compromised by personal character flaws like being too self-absorbed (cf. Londo Mollari in B5, Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars, Gul Duhkat in DS9). Other than looking for a reference for the head baddie of the Cylons (ie. Star Wars mentioned the Emporer 30 minutes into the film, DS9 brought in the Female Changeling early on, Borg Queen appeared in First Contact), I like what R. Moore has done with the franchise. It's kinda hard to hate the Cylon 6 model, hehe.
IMHO, I think it has a chance of meeting original B5 standards and putting Enterprise in trouble. Another thing in the new series' favor is the casting of the Apollo character. It's played by the actor that did Archie Kennedy in the Horatio Hornblower mini-series. That shows that BSG is serious about getting young, hungry, quality actors on the potential level of Patrick Stewart in the series. I'm also a Hornblower fan.
Post by: FormerDM on September 25, 2003, 10:22:55 am
Quote:
Of course the UFO idea really started with Captain Scarlet.
Or maybe not, but at least I think they had a similar premise.
In a way, yes. More of an evolution really.
UFO was the first Gerry Anderson series to feature actual actors instead of puppets.
Very abridged production order:
SuperCar->Fireball XL5->Stingray->Thunderbirds->Captain Scarlet->UFO->Space 1999
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 25, 2003, 10:23:19 am
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 25, 2003, 10:29:19 am
Quote:
Space: 1999. A base is on the moon. Mostly science station, but they dispose of nuclear waste. Something goes wrong and there is a massive explosion propelling the Moon out into space. Before long they are out of range of earth and stuck on the moon. They then encounter various aliens, and stuff as Moonbase Alpha continues on it's course, they are hoping that they will be able to reach a planet that is habitable by humans before they run out of supplies, etc.
...and anyone interested in watching Space 1999 can now pick it up on DVD. I have acquired half of the episodes so far, myself. Loved the show as a kid...still very fun to watch. It's a pretty expensive series to own in its entirety, though.
Post by: Dogmatix! on September 25, 2003, 10:31:19 am
Quote:
Little known fact: Space 1999 was originally season 2 of UFO. Alpha Moonbase was intended to be SHADO HQ.
The investors became skittish after UFO ratings drooped a bit in NY and LA markets. Gerry Anderson resold it (they had done much preproduction work on sets, etc) as a new concept. Thus was Space: 1999 born.
I didn't even know that. I have all of UFO on DVD. That's a fun watch...very 60's in its sociology.
Post by: FormerDM on September 25, 2003, 10:31:37 am
SciFi.com has posted four video clips of David Eick, Ron Moore and cast-members at Comic-Con International 2003 discussing their approach to the miniseries and fan reaction.
http://www.scifi.com/battlestar/downloads/
Post by: Aldaron on September 25, 2003, 06:57:48 pm
Quote:
Oh alderon how little thou doest know about how the world turns.... "Fan Boys" have every right to effect a tv show they are fans of. And I suppose you would be called a "Fan Boy" of SFC by those who think it's an overrated game, like Gamespy does. Does that make you feel like you have less claim to ask Taldren to keep patching it? What a fool...
Try to follow me here. If I'm a fan of SFC and encourage Taldren to patch it I am not taking anything away from anyone. However if I hated the game and went on a campaign to have it removed becuase me and a few SFB fans found it offensive to what we consider SFB as sacred then I would be partly responsible in having it taken away from people who did like it. See the difference!
Having the new BSG air without interference from "fan boys" takes nothing away because you can simply not watch. However if it's taken off the air and I like it how can I watch it?!
Post by: Captain KoraH on September 28, 2003, 10:40:03 pm
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
Post by: Hertston on September 29, 2003, 02:50:05 am
Quote:
I'll watch it if it makes it over to the UK. Oh, and I'm almost 39 and I really enjoyed Firefly, yet I've heard it's cancelled after one season?
Didn't know that, pity. It was a lot better than most of the sci-fi channel rubbish.
The only thing that puzzles me about a "new" Battlestar Galactica is why anybody would want to bother.
A boycott seems pretty stupid IMHO. So they upset a few (and there can't be more than a few, can there ?) fans of the old series, who presumably have the same access to the "off" switch as anybody else. If the 12-25 year olds not lumbered with memories of the original series do enjoy it, let them, and don't try and kill the show off just because YOU don't like it.
Post by: Aldaron on September 29, 2003, 07:13:33 am
Quote:
Uhm... no, you're totally off the mark. What were talking about here is much more like Activision releasing a patch for SFC3 that totally changes the game for the worse. For instance, what if they decided that it would be cool if photon torpedoes were really just big tomatoes flying thru space? And what if they decided that the theme song from Hee-Haw would be playing instead of the SFC theme music. And what if they decided that all the ships should look like carrots with spoons tied to them using bailing wire? That's what were talking about here Alderon, someone is taking our baby and horribly mutilating it. And you know what, I bet some lunatics out there would actually like flying vegetables instead of SFC ships, but I doubt you would just sit back and play the game anyway because they said it's better to have an open mind. Come on man, stop arguing and wake up! This is bad! You don't just sit back and let something bad happen if you can prevent it:
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
You're right and you know what I would just stop playing the game, end of my problem. Just like all you have to do is not watch the show, end of your problem. Oh sure I might rant a little but I don't think I'd try to boycott Taldren to have it taken off the shelves so that those that do enjoy it wouldn't be able to get it anymore. Don't try and dictate what should and shouldn't be out there if people like flying carrots instead of ships.
I didn't like SFC3 before it came out because it went away from what I and several other people wanted and I hated the TNG direction. But you know what?! I gave it a chance and bought it anyway. It's OK but it's still not my cup of tea and I feel SFC is dead as far as I'm concerned. I still have SFC2: EAW that fit what I want just like you have the old BSG.
Post by: Eltanin on September 29, 2003, 11:42:53 am
I loved BSG and Frankly I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHAT THEY'VE DONE WITH IT!! It just opens up so many possibilities by makings some of the changes they're going ahead with. A human looking cylon...that's just a plain cool idea (and a logical strategic choice if you ask me...). Starbuck as a woman! Why not? Again, great new possibilities for character depth. EJ Olmos for Adama...the man's just a GREAT actor. The only think I've seen I don't like, and it's the same with every SF tv show it that....everything is so clean! The vidcaps I've seen are aweful, the art director should be shot. Where's the grunge? People sweat in more places than just their face!
The only thing that does kind of get me is how they torpedo'd Hatch who's been busting his hump for years.
Ah well...I'm counting the days till it's on.
Post by: EmeraldEdge on September 29, 2003, 01:38:55 pm
I agree with the clean comment as well. Everything looks very generic sci-fi, with a sterile feel to it. No character at all. I feel really bad about it too, because I like some of the actors attached. (I was always wondering who could do Adama after Lorne Greene, but I think Olmos certainly could pull it off. It's too bad it's a halfway version of BSG) Imo, they should have just made it look and sound that last little bit (since it's already away) different and called it something else.
Post by: IntgrSpin on September 29, 2003, 02:00:51 pm
Sure I watched BSG as a kid. I watched Dukes of Hazzard and Buck Rogers too. Know what? They all SUCK as high art.
Know what else? Star Trek with it's winky dink dime-store philosophy and new age preachiness sucks too. If I want philosophy, I'll read James, Nietzsche, Sartre or Kant, not watch some dopey show from the sixtes shoveling around philosophy 101, hoping people will be impressed.
What do I want in media entertainment? I want Captain Kirk fistfighting with some latex dinosaur. I want some green chick mudwrestling with some orange chick. I want big explosions and a thrilling soundtrack. I want cheap thrills and cheaper laughs.
I like things that offend people, and maybe makes them wonder why they're being offended. It is just a stupid TV show after all. Don't like it? There are about 300 other channels that aren't playing it, but that's not quite good enough is it? You also want to make sure nobody else watches it either! "Oh they changed a bad TV show from the seventies and made it into a bad TV show for today, BOYCOTT!"
Some of you guys are SO cute...
Post by: Atrahasis on September 30, 2003, 07:10:58 am
Quote:
The more people shriek "BOYCOTT!" the more I want to check it out.
Sure I watched BSG as a kid. I watched Dukes of Hazzard and Buck Rogers too. Know what? They all SUCK as high art.
Know what else? Star Trek with it's winky dink dime-store philosophy and new age preachiness sucks too. If I want philosophy, I'll read James, Nietzsche, Sartre or Kant, not watch some dopey show from the sixtes shoveling around philosophy 101, hoping people will be impressed.
What do I want in media entertainment? I want Captain Kirk fistfighting with some latex dinosaur. I want some green chick mudwrestling with some orange chick. I want big explosions and a thrilling soundtrack. I want cheap thrills and cheaper laughs.
I like things that offend people, and maybe makes them wonder why they're being offended. It is just a stupid TV show after all. Don't like it? There are about 300 other channels that aren't playing it, but that's not quite good enough is it? You also want to make sure nobody else watches it either! "Oh they changed a bad TV show from the seventies and made it into a bad TV show for today, BOYCOTT!"
Some of you guys are SO cute...
LOL I love what you say here, you are absolutely right. For myself though, good enetrtainment these days has to touch bases with a lot more topics these days, and some philosphical crap and high art (or at least a captivating vision) is what makes the difference between good and bad. Also, there's only so much jiggling and kung-fu scenes you can watch. If the new series can pull a good one in terms of taste, then I can wholeheartedly support it even if it is a complete retelling of the original.
But the people who are condemning it even before it's aired have lost some perspective, imho.
Post by: Baker on October 01, 2003, 03:14:47 am
Post by: IntgrSpin on October 01, 2003, 03:48:26 pm