Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

New Battlestar Galactica Series Greenlighted 328

Trunks writes "A few days ago the Sci Fi Channel officially announced a 13 episode season for Ronald Moore's Battlestar Galactica remake. Looks like they'll be bringing back most of the cast members, including Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell. The new series will begin a few days after the miniseries that aired a few months back. Production commences next month in Vancouver, B.C." This had been speculated previously, and the rumors are indeed true.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Battlestar Galactica Series Greenlighted

Comments Filter:
  • by Talez ( 468021 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @04:33AM (#8267782)
    Lucite hardening ... must end life in classic Lorne Greene pose from "Battlestar Galactica." Best ... death ... ever!
  • Vancouver! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Dumbush ( 676200 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @04:35AM (#8267791)
    I live in Vancouver
    where are they shooting the movie?

    side note: A lot of X-Files eps were shot in Simon Fraser University. The central university building is Academic Quadrangle, name after its quadrangular shape. Whenever the X-Files team needs a shot of the pentagon, they just "cheat" their way out by shooting a section of AQ...
  • Good news (Score:5, Funny)

    by Xoro ( 201854 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @04:36AM (#8267795)
    I watched that show thinking it would be laughable, but I wound up enjoying it.

    Ballistic missiles over beam weapons. Mmmm.

    But they have to bring back the original theme song.
    • by Jetson ( 176002 )
      they have to bring back the original theme song.

      They played it during the "fly past" scene in the recent series when the Galactica was being officially decommissioned.

    • Re:Good news (Score:5, Interesting)

      by nimblebrain ( 683478 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @04:57AM (#8267865) Homepage Journal

      There sure were a lot of drumbeats in the pilot episodes, although we caught strains of it during the ceremony.

      I surmise that they may get their own music once the go-ahead is on. It might take a little while to get some decent music unless they prepare well in advance; Stargate hobbled along with snippets of the original movie's music in a not-quite-audio-balanced form for a while until they managed to work in new arrangements more suited to a TV series :)

      • Re:Good news (Score:3, Informative)

        by delus10n0 ( 524126 )
        Yes, one of the most overused pieces of movie music in history. The "Battle at the Pyramid" track from the Stargate soundtrack is used in countless movie trailers, not to mention all over the TV show. Heh. Like you said, they finally have some newer music based on David Arnold's original score for the film. I like the "sad" version of the theme; it's almost piano-y.
  • by MagerValp ( 246718 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @04:54AM (#8267854) Homepage
    I watched the mini series and I really liked it. But what really bugged me was the stupid plot surrounding the android Number 6. The Cylons have vastly superior technology and a huge army, but to destroy the human race they create a sexy blonde android that seduces our best programmer. Sheesh. Almost made me stop watching there and then.
    • by AresTheImpaler ( 570208 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:08AM (#8267899)
      what are you talking about? that made the plot much more real.. [slashdot.org]
    • by starX ( 306011 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @06:17AM (#8268089) Homepage
      Remember, the Cylons won because the humans basically couldn't shoot back. Hell yeah you have superior power when you've sent in a spy to obtain access to the defense mainframe and figure out how to turn off all of your enemy's defensive/offensive capabilities.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 13, 2004 @06:18AM (#8268092)
      The statement about superior technology is not born out. Since the colonials built the cylons in this version of the series they start out with baseline colonial tech as their starting point. Then following the storyline they move offworld to their own little planet. And then in a VERY short period of time they come back to attack. That leaves very little time to develop, test, build and deploy anything much better then what they started out with.

      To many resources would be devoted to building infrastructure for their war machine, so at best you could state that they have marginally better technology (although we really did not see the "best" colonial toys). And that is not truly enough to defeat prepared defenses on a multi planetary scale.

      Number 6 is a logical infiltration unit. Most people in power are Male and most males can be lead around by their gonads....
      • You are forgetting one thing - they are machines !!!

        They dont have to eat

        They dont have to sleep

        They dont get sick

        They dont take vacations

        They remember everything they ever did

        They remember everything that any other cylon ever did.

        They dont have to worry about the safety/survivability of test-pilots etc

        And they can form beowulf clusters to work stuff
        out :)

    • by sundling ( 92926 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @06:29AM (#8268120)
      There are two main ways to get a programmer's attention. Sexy blond works and the other is really awesome hardware. Hell, I'm not a dog like he was and I'd probably have fallen for the andriod, which is a whole different dimension. Then would come the difficult choice of living with the android you live or mankind... Baltar could have been a tragic romantic figure if they had tried that.

      The problem with giving the programmer access to really advanced hardware is it's a bit difficult to explain, even if you say it's a prototype. Um, where did I get this 2 billion Ghz machine? Well, um....
    • by Merry_B.Buck ( 539837 ) <MeriadocB_Buck2@@@yahoo...com> on Friday February 13, 2004 @06:50AM (#8268179) Homepage Journal
      to destroy the human race they create a sexy blonde android that seduces our best programmer
      Agreed. It would have been much more realistic if the Cylons had created a middle-aged suit-wearing Business Consultant who outsources Boltar's job to a distant planet.
    • by HarveyBirdman ( 627248 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @09:09AM (#8268768) Journal
      There's nothing stupid about it at all. It's called a covert operation. It was done during the Cold War all the time. Someone is seduced into giving away the crown jewels. Yes, people in real life have done that.
    • by shmigget ( 459421 ) <dellario@comcast.net> on Friday February 13, 2004 @09:39AM (#8268975)
      Well, she made a great covert operative. It's actually, in a strange way, realistic, as epsionage agencies regularly resort to sex as a means of obtaining access to sensitive data.

      I'm a programmer. Can a sexy blonde android seduce me? :)
  • by MMHere ( 145618 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @04:56AM (#8267859)
    I enjoyed Galactica as a kid (yeah, I'm old now), and am looking forward to this new series.

    Where, however, is the "buzz" over cool new ideas yet unseen? Many people buzz over remakes of old ideas, but are they done any better?

    Star Wars lumbers on with dialogue-ridden prequels (and yet unseen postquels), Gilligan's Island is probably in production for the silver screen by now, I-Spy has been dubiously remade.

    Firefly was/is a cool idea and at least got an airing. Star Trek is still a cool franchise, but has been pretty commodotized.

    Where's the new, cool stuff.

    I'm not a huge Anime fan, but Cowboy Bepop seems pretty cool to me. If there aren't new ideas, why not bring this one from one format to another?

    Still; Where's the cool, new stuff?
    • by SgtSnorkel ( 704106 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:22AM (#8267941)

      I think the real driver behind all the remakes is available bandwidth. The number of channels available on a modern direct-broadcast satellite system is astounding! The programmers (in the TV sense of the word) just can't generate enough content or come up with enough new ideas.

      There's a glut of video bnadwidth, viewers get spread thin, advertising dollars per channel plummets -- thus we have remakes, re-runs, and 'reality' shows ad nauseum.

      (BTW: I thought the miniseries was pretty good! Especially compared to the campy original.)

    • Star Wars lumbers on with dialogue-ridden prequels (and yet unseen postquels)

      I see you are taking a dim view and assuming that even theoretically speaking, Episodes VII-IX will be unworthy of the title "sequels."
    • by tekrat ( 242117 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @06:14AM (#8268081) Homepage Journal
      The problem is that totally unimaginative people are holding the purse-strings. They don't want to gamble on something they haven't seen before. They want to sell something they know has already sold once before.

      That's why you don't get big budget "new" movies, you get sequel after sequel of The Matrix 6, Charlies Angles 3, Scooby Doo 2, etc., and the crap just gets churned out, but they know they can market it because the auideince for that crap is pre-existing.

      Lord of the Rings was such a fluke because there's no way that should have gotten done, or done as well as it was, via the Hollywood system. Because Hollywood crushes creativity, it eschews original thought, and it despises anything it can't reference as something else.

      When you're committing millions of dollars before even a frame of film is shot, the boardroom people want to be comfortable about it by knowing it's really something they can already relate to. That's why Gene Roddenbury had to "sell" Star Trek as "Wagon Train to the Stars", and couch it in relation to a Western, which was the TV staple of the 60's.

      Unless you can make your "new idea" seem like *exactly* something everyone has seen before, you'll never get funding for your production. You've got a better chance of winning the lottery and self-producing it.

      And that, my friend, is why there's only crap on TV and Movies. Because Hollywood hates "new ideas".
      • by bakes ( 87194 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @07:27AM (#8268266) Journal
        This is spot on. It reminds me of a quote from Ben Elton in his book 'This Other Eden' where he describes Hollywood as "The place where ideas went to die".

        Television is slightly better, but only because some production companies are still willing to gamble the relatively small amounts it takes to make a pilot or even a one-off show.

        Sometimes the sequels can be done very well, for example I personally consider Rocky II to be the best of that series, although after that they should have stopped. Others, although not as good as the first, can still be well written and entertaining (Toy Story 2 was pretty good). Others they should have stopped after the first movie instead of turning the story into a joke. (I keep telling myself that "there is no sequel")

        But some more originality on the big screen would be nice.
      • by Elbelow ( 176227 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @08:07AM (#8268410) Homepage
        ... The Matrix 6, Charlies Angles 3, Scooby Doo 2, ...

        ... Ocean's Twelve [imdb.com]!
      • I agree with you that most good ideas in Hollywood tend to die out in the boardroom, but I think your spin on their motivation might be a little unfair.

        It is easy to vilify the boards and execs of movie houses, but they have a job to do: make money. If you are looking for an investment for yourself, say a new stock you heard about, are you going to pour in your hard-earned money if you have absolutely no proof that it will work? If there is no other company doing what this stock's company is doing? No,
        • by Illserve ( 56215 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @10:42AM (#8269691)
          There was a day when hollywood was populated by people's who's job was to make good movies, not money. So I'll villify them all day long because they're not there to do art, they're there because they smell a fast way to a cozy lifestyle.
          • by jmoriarty ( 179788 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @11:46AM (#8270412)
            There was a day when hollywood was populated by people's who's job was to make good movies, not money. So I'll villify them all day long because they're not there to do art, they're there because they smell a fast way to a cozy lifestyle.

            Okay, I'll take the bait. When was this ever the case? Please show me the specific years and movies around which making "good movies" rather than money was the norm and not the exception?

            Look at the problems that surrounded getting Citizen Kane, Casablanca, or even Star Wars made and I think you might find that good movies have always emerged from a fortunate confluence of events rather than an altrusitic streak in the studios.

            But I'm not a movie historian, so prove me wrong.
    • by cubicledrone ( 681598 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @06:24AM (#8268111)
      Where's the new, cool stuff.

      From Hollywood? There is no new stuff. Studios cannot green-light something original. It simply will not happen, ever, no matter how "cool" it might be.

      Same story for game companies, publishers, whatever. Original, new material is too "risky." (People who run companies like this who bitch about risk should have invested in bonds).

      Unless it is already $100 million franchise (purchased for $100,000) with worldwide merchandising rights available in at least five major cross-industry categories, it gets shitcanned. It's that simple.

      Anime is about the only category where there is cool new stuff. The entertainment industry of today is exactly like the auto industry of the 1970s, and the Japanese are about to buy the whole thing for about 4c on the dollar. Anime is a diamond mine of originality and creativity. There are anime series that are masterpieces of contemporary thought and literature, as well as fantastically capable demonstrations of state-of-the-art animation. Nothing else can even begin to compete.

      If the anime and manga shelves at Suncoast continue to expand at their current rate, there will be no Hollywood DVDs for sale there in five years.
      • by RESPAWN ( 153636 ) <caldwell.tulanealumni@net> on Friday February 13, 2004 @07:52AM (#8268353) Homepage Journal
        Anime is about the only category where there is cool new stuff. The entertainment industry of today is exactly like the auto industry of the 1970s, and the Japanese are about to buy the whole thing for about 4c on the dollar. Anime is a diamond mine of originality and creativity. There are anime series that are masterpieces of contemporary thought and literature, as well as fantastically capable demonstrations of state-of-the-art animation. Nothing else can even begin to compete.

        If the anime and manga shelves at Suncoast continue to expand at their current rate, there will be no Hollywood DVDs for sale there in five years.


        While I will conceed that there is plenty of creativity in anime and even more room for it to expand, I don't feel that it will ever become quite as popular as you are describing. We, as geeks, tend to be more open about "alternative" forms of entertainment. However, Average Joe over there has a hard time overcoming his preconceptions about animated shows -- the preconception that they are for kids.

        I don't know how many times my friends, parents, etc. have asked me why, at my age, I was watching "a cartoon." The Simpsons seems to be an exception, but despite the fact that it's been around for 15 seasons (is that right?) I still know some older people who don't want to watch it because "it's a cartoon."

        Anime won't really become mainstream over here until the average American is able to look at it as more than just a cartoon for kids.
      • Anime is about the only category where there is cool new stuff. The entertainment industry of today is exactly like the auto industry of the 1970s, and the Japanese are about to buy the whole thing for about 4c on the dollar. Anime is a diamond mine of originality and creativity. There are anime series that are masterpieces of contemporary thought and literature, as well as fantastically capable demonstrations of state-of-the-art animation. Nothing else can even begin to compete.
        If the anime and manga shelv
      • Anime is about the only category where there is cool new stuff.

        Yeah, like Tenchi Muyo, Shin Tenchi Muyo, Tenchi in Tokyo, etc. There's also Bubblegum Crisis 2040. Dirty Pair, and Dirty Pair Flash. El Hazard, and El Hazard The Alternative World. And that really great new program with that great, brand new original character, Captain Harlock. Sorry, pal, but anime, as much as I love it, has its share of derivative content. Nobody refuses to milk the cash cow. The only difference is that the Japanese
    • by juuri ( 7678 )
      While it does hit some formulaic parts, Andromeda, is a pretty good sci-fi series, especially when compared to a lot of the swill out there.

      The setup: Hunt, commander of a high guard star ship, one of the most powerful in the Commonwealth screws up and gets to close to a black hole. A few hundred years (500?) later, thanks to an event that took place hundreds of years ago, his ship finally breaks free of the pull of the black hole and he emerges into a universe where the Commonwealth no longer exists anymo
      • And oddly enough - the origional concept from Gene Roddenberry himself (apparently his wife / estate selling off old tidbits that never made it out while he was alive). The origional description I read sounded much like the fall of the Star Trek's Federation.
  • by icebike ( 68054 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @04:56AM (#8267860)
    "The new series will begin a few days after the miniseries that aired a few months back."

    That would either qualify this as OLD news, or
    one of the most tortured sentences I've seen in a while....

  • by will_die ( 586523 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:02AM (#8267882) Homepage
    Has anyone seen any info on when the Sci-fi channel will be releasing thier mini-series on DVD?
  • by BobSutan ( 467781 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:05AM (#8267893)
    To be honest I had serious reservations about them bringing this one back. However, once I actually sat down and watched it I was blown away. Personally I think they hit a homerun with the pilot and can't wait to watch the new series. They did so many thing right IMO: the Sci-Fi wasn't so much "Fi" as I thought they'd throw at a show of this type. For example: Ballistic weapons, somewhat realistic space flight (thrusters), and the cinematic zooms all help add some realism to the space scenes.

    On top of all that they nailed the human side of the story. Family ties, personal relationships, etc all played a huge role in the pilot (perhaps even more so than in the original series). For me, this is the element that makes the show so good.

    My only fear is that they change the characters or take away from the dynamics of what they were building.
    • I'm not so sure if I'm a big fan of Ballistic Weapons in space.

      First off, there's the effectiveness issue.
      If you're talking about explosive devices, you need hit-to-kill accuracy anyway, because shock-waves do not propagate in a vacuum. Although I don't discount the effectiveness of nuclear weapons in space. (Personally, I would design a nuclear warhead to take a more directed approach in nuclear detonation - using neutron reflectors and such, you don't want a 360-degree nuclear blast, you want your warh
  • Finally! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by zakezuke ( 229119 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:07AM (#8267898)
    I have always had a soft spot for "Wagon Train in Space"... and look forward to someone doing something with this highly popular short lived series. I could care less about the lack of beam weapons, or stupid mechanical dog. Give me exploration off the map, cultrual satire, and a cigar smoking hot shot piolt. If you must do that pan and zoom style for battle sequences... so be it.

    Battlestar Galactica was, and always will be pulp fiction for the masses, where demographical studies were paramount! I'm looking forward to being exploited.
    • Re:Finally! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mbourgon ( 186257 )
      I have always had a soft spot for "Wagon Train in Space"

      I like them too. Fortunately, Firefly filled that void for 13 episodes.
  • But it sucks (Score:4, Interesting)

    by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:09AM (#8267904) Journal
    Lets see - Every single character is a total stereotypes. We have a tough as nails, always in trouble ace pilot, a father and son who don't talk anymore, an acerbic commander who doesn't take stick from anyone, and a cowardly scientist who refuses to take responsibility for his actions (Did they get mixed up and think it was a Lost in Space revival?).

    Then they take out the few bits that were remotely imaginative from the original series. Rather than having an ancient society with their own political structure, they have a carbon copy of the US political system. All the ancient Egyptian styling has been axed, and the Galactica is simply way too new. Galactica was 500 years old in the original series. It made it seem like it was worth caring about.

    Finally, we have the actual script. It's not enough just to throw in random emotive scenes. Yes, they have to leave some people behind. Yes, it's a tragedy. But come-on; three times!?. Talk about rubbing it in. And even though we're meant to believe that it's such a disaster, people make these life or death decisions with hardly a flicker of anxiety.
    • Re:But it sucks (Score:3, Insightful)

      by iamplasma ( 189832 )
      Yes, they have to leave some people behind. Yes, it's a tragedy. But come-on; three times!?. Talk about rubbing it in. And even though we're meant to believe that it's such a disaster, people make these life or death decisions with hardly a flicker of anxiety.

      Umm... not really, heck, it was a key decision near the start of the second part of the miniseries, where the president and apollo are arguing over if they should run right away, or wait to transfer civlians off non-jump capable ships. Then you have
    • Re:But it sucks (Score:5, Interesting)

      by blincoln ( 592401 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @06:10AM (#8268076) Homepage Journal
      I've got to agree.

      I watched the miniseries when it came out and thought it was okay, if a bit cliched.

      Then I bought the original series DVD set, and watched the whole thing. It does have a noticeable fromage factor in places (e.g. Muffit, reusing a lot of the space footage in *every* episode, the robots in "Greetings from Earth"), but it's obvious to me that the creators really cared about telling an interesting story of their own.

      There was so much about the original that had its own feel - the design of the costumes, the sets, the ships, the Cylons - and in the remake they've all been replaced by generic sci-fi designs.

      90% or more of the elements in the remake could have been designed for any space action film - Wing Commander in particular comes to mind. I was *especially* disappointed with the new Cylons. It's obvious that they only make an appearance for a few seconds because the CG is so poorly animated. I also thought the new Raiders with the scanning eye on the front were incredibly cheesy.

      That having been said, there were a few things I thought were clever - particularly one of the plot twists near the end that I will not explain to avoid spoiling anyone.

      I also liked that "Caprica" was actually the university in Canada that I went to [www.sfu.ca] (BG is higher class than The Sixth Day or The Fly II, both of which also filmed there).

      Basically I feel like the creators of the new series started changing things not because it was a good idea, but just for the sake of doing it, Rick Berman-style.

      I guess a new series could turn out well, but I get the impression that it won't. Sci-fi should have let Richard Hatch do his follow-up idea instead of "reimagining" the story.
    • Every single character is a total stereotypes. We have a tough as nails, always in trouble ace pilot, a father and son who don't talk anymore, an acerbic commander who doesn't take stick from anyone, and a cowardly scientist who refuses to take responsibility for his actions

      Yeah, and while our heroes are good ol' poker-playin' whiskey-sippin' American pilots, the villain of the piece is a foppish Brit. Probably because we're the one group in the world who won't threaten to sue over defamation, we're too p
  • They are getting into nostalgica - right ?
    There just was a movie made from the german series "Raumpatroullie Orion" - here a fan site [orionspace.de] (I don't know the english series name), where all of the seven episodes were assembled to a movie, completed by new filmed "News Show" (still in B/W)
  • I really liked the pilot (miniseries my ash). As scifi goes, it was pretty damn good, despite the gaping holes. The ones like how the cylons have all those special communication abilities and glow-in-the-dark spinal cords when they are indistinguishable from us "down to our blood".

    Also Starbuck is incredibly annoying and ugly to boot. As much as I liked the pilot, I don't know if I could stand watching her so much. They really should have left her as a man. Or, if they are going to leave her female, at lea
  • Sci-Fi Channel (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Matrix2110 ( 190829 ) * on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:35AM (#8267968) Journal
    Excellent!

    The Sci-Fi Channel had the guts to air Lexx as well as a host of other ventures. I have caught my co-workers on many a time watching Outer Limits or Twilight Zone.

    Has much less commercials than TNT. (Anybody been through the painfull IGEA pore sucker commercial?)

    I wish these guys well, and I think they are on course so far.

    • Re:Sci-Fi Channel (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dreamchaser ( 49529 )
      Lexx was one of the worst...shows...ever! This is the same network that cancelled Farscape too, which was light years better than anything else they've produced.

      Of course, to pubescent living-in-mom's-basement pasty faced geeks, Lexx was cool because it had a hot chick.

      Go ahead and mod me off topic or whatever. I just had to respond and at least I have the gonads to not post this as an AC :)
  • I liked the cylons (Score:3, Interesting)

    by robnauta ( 716284 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:41AM (#8267981)
    That's good news. I liked the cylons, they looked more realistic than other robots of that era. Their 'by your command' was impressive. At least they used some kind of voice encoder device to make it sound real, as opposed to actors trying to talk metallic in other series.
  • by __aahlyu4518 ( 74832 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:44AM (#8267989)
    The new series will begin a few days after the miniseries that aired a few months back

    Now THAT is Sci-Fi... Giving the green light NOW and have it begin a few months back...
  • by Shivetya ( 243324 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @05:56AM (#8268036) Homepage Journal
    When I first watched this, taped to my VCR, I was not impressed. However I later downloaded a bittorrent of it, captured from satellite or similar, and after watching it a few times where I could back up and such I found I enjoyed many aspects of it.

    Watching it without the commercials really improved it. Anyone else find otherwise decent programs on Sci-Fi ruined by the deluge of commercials?
  • Easier Remake? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Surak_Prime ( 160061 )
    I was really impressed with the quality of the mini-series, and how it stayed true to the original without just being a straight remake. It makes me wonder, though, if its easier to make a new series when there's only 22 original episodes to follow, as opposed to the 4 series and couple of hundred episodes that result in a follow up like Enterprise, where continuity is raped on a regular basis. Mr. Moore can probably keep 'em all in his head.
  • The original series (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dotwaffle ( 610149 ) <slashdot@walsTEAter.org minus caffeine> on Friday February 13, 2004 @06:52AM (#8268183) Homepage
    I just bought the original series, all 24 epsidoes (not 22 like the article says!) and I'm loving every minute! Not only do they go through all the normal rigmarole of launching etc, but they deal with problems like humans would, rather than like other programmes would (like suddenly finding the obvious answer, like why not use antiflasmagron drive...) and so it's always been a favourite. Hopefully, when the new series comes to the UK, it's not on Sky(^H^Hhite) and instead either Ch4 or the BBC get it. Here's to the new series being any good!
  • by It's the tripnaut! ( 687402 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @07:05AM (#8268214) Homepage
    ...shouldn't it be "New Battlestar Galactica Series Greenlit?"
  • from all the negative press the show got before and after airing i had some pretty low expectations, but couldn't check it out for myself until it played in canada. frankly, while i grew up at just the right age to adore the original and forgive it's shortcomings, the remake far outstripped the old one by a long mile. the combat sequences were shot in a handheld style that i loved in attack of the clones and loved just as much here. the story itself was pretty solid, but with a few, ahem, issues. i did find
    • it got you to watch.. that pilot (other than ads on the sci-fi channel ads itself> was marketed using reverse psych.. EJOlmos was deliberately quoted as telling purist fans of the original "don't watch this"
      why? 'cause he gave a rats ass about the viewers?
      no-- because it got them more news air time about the show than paid advertising
  • I figured the 13th episode would be the "lost" one.
  • by invid ( 163714 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @07:48AM (#8268338)

    I'll admit it, I watched the original series back in the 80s, and I liked it. It's no excuse that I was a kid at the time, I should have known better. It was crap and I liked it. I also liked Buck Rogers, which was an even bigger load of crap. I was so starved for science fiction entertainment I religiously watched what the tv execs threw out at us.

    So I watched this latest version of Battlestar Galactica, and you know what? I liked it. I really should know better...

    • I dunno, the latest BG actually seemed pretty good. I could tolerate the original BG also. But Buck Rogers has always made me think of something the local high school would put together. It always seemed cheesy.

      Since BtVS has gone, there's not much science fiction/fantasy that I can watch. I've been getting by with some Sliders reruns and one or two Highlander episodes, but I'm dying here man.

      Anyway, I thought I'd post a list of things I hate in SF shows:

      1) Time travel -- Any episode where you can go bac
  • by Doug Neal ( 195160 ) on Friday February 13, 2004 @08:34AM (#8268539)
    New series greenlighted. New nouns verbed. Here's Tom with the weather!
    • Re:Greenlighted? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by danimal ( 1712 )
      well, you know something that's for sure. however in the entertainment industry (yes, I've worked on movies) we generally say "greenlit" not "greenlighted."
  • Yuk (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 )
    It's too bad its going to become a series. It wasn't true enough to the original, I saw several technical inconstancies..

    Show was slow, poorly acted and generally dull as well, seemed like just another B5 to me.. Perhaps it can improve, but its got a long way to go in order to be taken seriously as a show as far as im concerned.....

    Yes I expect to be moderated into oblivion, but its what my impression was after the pilot 'mini series' ( if any one actually thought it wouldnt become a series, they were b
    • Re:Yuk (Score:2, Insightful)

      by shmigget ( 459421 )
      Dude, I'm really sorry, but your taste is in your ass. The acting was fantastic. Mary McDonnell's performance alone was worthy of an Emmy nomination.

      And, when you write things like, "It wasn't true enough to the original, I saw several technical inconstancies," we must all collectively reply, "Don't be such a freakin' geek."
      • I'm sorry, but If a show is supposed to be a continuation or a 'remake' of an existing show it SHOULD be true to the original..

        If it isn't, then it should be a DIFFERENT show.. Regardless of the quality of the actual show.. Pretty simple viewpoint.

        And as far as their acting, everyone has their own view, my view is that it sucked, it was too 'forced'.. I guess I expect higher standards then you.. Doesn't make either of us right or wrong.

        But hey, many people liked 'survivor' so there isn't any accounting
  • Have they changed Starbuck's name to avoid and law suits?
  • The new series will begin a few days after the miniseries that aired a few months back.
    Oh no! I've already missed the first several episodes then!
  • Starbuck (Score:2, Funny)

    by momboman4 ( 624482 )
    Where else would you film a show with a character named Starbuck but in Vancouver. There has to be about a thousand Starbucks in Downtown alone. (I've never been to Seattle but I can't imagine they have more Starbucks then Vancouver.)

The price one pays for pursuing any profession, or calling, is an intimate knowledge of its ugly side. -- James Baldwin

Working...