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


Forgot your password?

Battlestar Galactica Resurrection Effort Described 321

MistGhost writes "A background story of the effort, both by Richard Hatch, and Ron Moore to resurrect Battlestar Galactica (NYT link so remember to lie on their free registration). Now that the show has started it's second season (at least here in the States) this article appears. " I sat down with the Tivo last night and really enjoyed the premiere. I think the SG-1 retooling as real potential too- that show has been stale for a long time.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Battlestar Galactica Resurrection Effort Described

Comments Filter:
  • by matt21811 ( 830841 ) *
    From the article "The most expensive-to-produce program of its day, at $1 million per episode" Thats funny. My strongest memory of the original BSG was how, in nearly every episode, there was a fire on board the ship and they reused the exact same footage of firefighters putting it out every week. Even at 8 years old I knew that was the producers being cheap. The only other program that I recall doing this so much was Astro Boy. I think there was a Simpsons episode that satirized the technique. Anyone kno
    • by OS24Ever ( 245667 ) * <trekkie@nomorestars.com> on Sunday July 17, 2005 @10:29AM (#13086479) Homepage Journal
      Or the same viper shot peeling away to the left or right just by reversing the footage.

      Or the uses of the Apollo command module seperating from the third stage as a missle launch

      My Dad insisted there was some footage from an old disaster movie or two tossed in there
      • by Savage650 ( 654684 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:26AM (#13086747)
        My Dad insisted there was some footage from an old disaster movie or two tossed in there

        Yep. There is (among other things) footage from the movie Silent Running [imdb.com]. Watch for the colony ship with the Eco-Domes .. it looks a lot like the Valley Forge [lunadude.com].

        And, regrettably, there is the re-re-re-reused shot of a jettisoned dome being blown up. Unfortunately, that particular shot isn't just "random spare footage" but one of the key scenes of Silent Running. It makes me cringe every time ;-(

      • by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:51AM (#13086853)
        John Dykstra (of the original Star Wars fame) was responsible for those Viper shots. Supposedly, he did a ton of footage of Vipers in various situations before getting burned out with the show and going on to other things. The stuff he did shoot was recycled for the duration of the series.

        And yeah, I'm pretty sure some of the scenes of panicked people running for their lives were recycled from older movies, since the clothing seemed remarkably Terrestrial.
    • by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @10:29AM (#13086480) Homepage
      Or the original BSG dogfights. The Cylons never once figured out that if they had seat-belts, they too could reverse thrusters and not get shot from the rear like they did every episode.
    • Worse! What movie was it I saw (it was MST2K show) that recycles BSG footage for the movie? And the movie was NOT related at all to BSG!
    • by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @10:44AM (#13086545)
      I think there was a Simpsons episode that satirized the technique. Anyone know which one?

      There was a Simpsons where they satirized reuse of cartoon backgrounds. I think it was the one where Bart and Lisa became writers for Itchy and Scratchy. They put Grandpa Simpson's name on the episodes because the producers outright dismissed ideas from children. In it, Lisa and Bart and Grandpa walk past the same doors and the same janitor over and over discussing how studios reuse things to save money.

      • Ha, I just watched that episode on DVD a few days ago. The funny thing is, they used that technique (unironically) earlier in the episode when the head producer throws his name plate at the Harvard guy.
    • Hey, $1 million dollars was alot of money back then. Winning $1M back then you could retire and still splurge without blowing all of it. Nowadays it cuts your retirement down by 10 years.

      I was around the same age and I remember the same scenes being used over and over also:the same shot of Galactica burning in space after a cylon attack, the same cylon attack force, the same explosions, the same cylon mothership, and so on.

      Even so, back then at that age that show still looked way cool!

      I think there w
      • Where do you live? If $1mil fell into my lap today I would own, outright, four 8-unit apartment buildings (2bed/1bath) next month with an income in the neighborhood of $4800/mo (conservative estimate: half occupancy, $400/mo, 1/4 of income to maintenance). 6% gains on $1mil isnt awesome, but it would be reliable and liquid for the next 20 years, and I could live in one or two of the apartments.
    • But consider how much more they had to do than other TV shows. A typical TV show didn't have any fires on set, or motion shots of detailed spaceship models. And the furniture, costumes and props could be borrowed from Universal's warehouse instead of buying or making everything especially for the show.
    • Ah, so then the new series is just carrying on the tradition... (I'm a little young to have known the originals.)

      The new series reuses lots of footage. Viper combat landings are always the same. That's the most obvious one, because it happens very often. A lot of other space battle stuff is reused too. I know I've seen the same shots of missiles flying at the Galactica more than once, and certainly the same shots of the Galactica's guns coming to bear. I can think of others, but I think I've made the point
      • Very true. They do need to have a couple of different landing scenes, and they keep using the same one. And the same holds true for the Flack guns coming to bear. But in the new season, they had some new shots of Cylons coming out of the Base Star. That was damn cool. Plus, there was a lot of new battle footage.

        Looking forward to next weeks episode. Cylons aboard Galactica! Woohoo!

  • by Monte ( 48723 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @10:26AM (#13086465)
    Am I the only person on the planet who remembers the original Battlestar Galactica as being a steaming pile of crap? Aside from being a rather blatant attempt by Glen Larceny (who also brought us Tron^w Automan and American Werewolf^w Manimal), the plots were the utmost juvenile tripe.

    My theory is that you had to be about ten at the time to think BG was actually cool. Once you're past the nostalgia, does it really stand up? There was an awful lot of silliness involved. For example, the man who single handedly sold the humans out to the Cylons got what ammounted to kitchen duty. That'll teach him!

    While I haven't seen all of the new BG, what I have seen I've liked very much.

    And one thing I will say for Glen Larson: putting Erin Gray in spandex ("Buck Rogers") was, indeed, friggin' genius. Kudos for that.
    • Battlestar Galactica had it's moments that do stand up to the test of nostalgia (I was 7 and 8 in 1979), however Battlestar Galactica 1980 was a steaming pile of crap then, and even more so now. I was so glad 1980 aired while my mom was in the 'TV IS BAD FOR YOU!' stage and wouldn't let us watch television.
    • I do rememeber the original BSG. Although it had some "cheap" production shortcuts and somewhat sloppy story line, I enjoyed it back then, I still rememebr having nightmeres about the Cylons (remember the old Cylon roboots, they were cool :P) attacking me!.

      The new series is AMAZING, it's the best show on TV today. I watched season one like 1000 time (I have downloaded the episodes after giving up on the DVD release anytime soon) on laptop on my daily commute, and still can watch it more.

      season 2 seems
    • I still remember BG fondly, though I too was just a kid so I guess it was at the right level! ;-) But BG 1980 was horrible, even from a juvenile perspective and I have categorically deleted most of it from memory!

      The new series though, I think is the best SF on TV right now. Indeed, I'd say it's one of the best action dramas period. If they keep up the good work, I think they've a shot at the best SF TV series of all time, which I currently would award to Babylon 5. But the new BG is much better much earli
    • by master_p ( 608214 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:23AM (#13086726)
      I don't know if BS was crap, but Starbuck was (and still is) one of the coolest space pilots ever, and that includes Han Solo.

      And the guy blew off Cylons while smoking a cigar! in space! how much cooler can one get???
    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:30AM (#13086761)

      And one thing I will say for Glen Larson: putting Erin Gray in spandex ("Buck Rogers") was, indeed, friggin' genius. Kudos for that.

      I was just a wee tyke when that show was on. I remember I was a confused little boy and couldn't figure out why my wee-wee got big and swollen whenever Erin came onscreen. So I asked my dad about it and he explained what was going on. If it hadn't been for Buck Rodgers in the 25th Century, my sex education probably wouldn't have happened for many years.

    • It was heavily criticized at the time. Earth is under attack, the Captain has the last powerful military force, and he parks the ship and goes AWOL looking for his wife. That's cowardice in the face of the enemy. They shoot officers for that.
    • The original series had 65 million viewers during it's first episode. The new series had about 4 million. The original series was far from crap and the numbers say it all. Maybe when you look back on it now it seems that way, but at the time it was an amazing tv show.
      • by Monte ( 48723 )
        The original series had 65 million viewers during it's first episode. The new series had about 4 million.

        That was then. This is now. Back then the primary video delivery system for most people was a set of rabbit ears (or, if you were really upscale, a Rota-Tenna on the roof). When your channel lineup consists of 6 stations, a friggin' test pattern will get ratings.

        Plus the network hyped the living begeesus out of the series. What was it up against, Mork and Mindy? Three's Company? The Star Wars Holiday
        • by 0111 1110 ( 518466 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @07:31PM (#13089243)
          Having lived through the 70's I can tell you with onitoligical certitude that US television at the time was a vast, vile, steaming heap of crap.

          Got your back on that one. I wish my young brain had not been subjected to Charlies Angels, The Love Boat (ouch), Fantasy Island, Wonder Woman, The Bionic Woman, or The 6 Million Dollar Man. And what was with that whole 70s Bigfoot obsession? Lots of movies and TV shows about it including an episode from The 6 Million Dollar Man and The Night Stalker. Maybe it had something to do with the 70s fascination with supernatural horror (based on Christian mythology). Remember In Search Of [imdb.com] with Leonard Nimoy? For me that symbolizes that decades fascination with stuff like that.

          Doctor Who with Tom Baker, ST:TOS, and those campy Roger Corman-esque and Japanese (Toho Studios etc.) guy-in-rubber-suit Saturday afternoon monster movies (late 70s) were the high points of that TV era for me. Even cartoons like Speed Racer and Felix the Cat seem less embarrassing than 70s network TV. And the 'good' shows like Night Gallery and Night Stalker would be considered unwatcheable by modern standards. I have heard that there is one TV movie from that era, an ABC Movie of the Week about witches called Crowhaven Farm that stands out as the best television of that era. But it is impossible to find a copy. So I can't confirm it.

          I can still remember coming home from school and flipping on my old telly that took more than a minute to 'warm up'. The so called remote had big rectangular buttons that seemed to use a loud clicking sound to turn it on and change the channels. I think simulating the clicking sound could shut the TV off.

          Luckily I had a friend with a DEC PDP-11 by the late 70s. So that offered some degree of entertainment in the form of early computer games like Super Star Trek and Adventure (Collosal Cave).

          Perhaps the biggest mind-rape of that era was the music and the hideous clothes (which ironically young girls of the current era seem to have copied). A decade that includes the Bee Gees and Barry Manilow playing on 8-track tapes, The Hardy Boys, platform shoes, bell bottoms, velour v-neck and button down shirts with those long pointy lapels, truly is (or should be) an embarrassment for everyone who had to live through it.

          Even the feathered hair, skin-tight Jordache jeans, leg warmers (remember Flash Dance?) and synth-pop of the early 80s were a huge step up the evolutionary ladder for western culture. I don't know if it was a worldwide phenomenon or just in North America and Western Europe. I have to wonder what East Asian or South American culture, for instance, was like at that time.
  • nytimes login (Score:2, Informative)

    by Warp! ( 13529 )
    Courtesy of http://www.bugmenot.com/ [bugmenot.com]

    username: debater20057
    password: antimatter
  • by Turn-X Alphonse ( 789240 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @10:32AM (#13086489) Journal
    Sci fi has been stale for a long time. We're looking for the next big fix to kick it off. In the past we had "flying cars and silver panties for clothes in the year 2000". Now all we have is special effects and soaps in space.

    When the next big thing comes along we'll see sci fi pick up, but untill then people will keep trying and failing to make anything but Star trek Mark 12 or the latest "lets hop planets" type fodder.
    • Now we've got the mass infantry and space battles with overdone CGI. Boring! (And the attempts to make it unboring are worse.)
      Bot #1138: "Sir, why are firing missles with little droids that slowly disect fighters? Why don't we just, like, blow them up?"
      General Grabass: "Count Dorkula thinks it's more cinematic. Shut up! *cough*cough*"
      Bot #1138: "Roger roger!"
      Strong in the Plot, they are not.
    • I agree that Sci fi _on tv_ has been stale for a long time. But I don't understand why. I have been reading a lot of modern sci fi and I think the genre has come really far and is growing and maturing at an ever increasing pace. There are a lot of amazing stories out there. Fresh, modern, witty and full of edgy ideas about possible futures.
    • The problem is there are only a few sub-genres of Science Fiction to choose from; Gadget Stories (Techology/SFX), B.E.M. (Bug-Eyed Monsters/Aliens), Time Travel/Parallel Worlds, and a few other "borrowed" genres like detective stories, etc.

      All you have left then to work with is to mix in the "Human Experience" into these stories (The Soaps, The Planet-Hopping).

      There's not a whole lot left in the fairly narrow field that hasn't been 1) thought of in the 1930-1950's and 2) covered and re-covered.
    • I've said it several times, once the Star Wars saga is over and the Studio have finished their soul searching (seeing as they can't effectively go directly to the bank with past brands) we'll start getting amazing sci-fi.

      Blockbuster sci-fi has gone the "more realistic special effects" direction for some time now at the expense of storylines and actual character development. (As a side, am I the only one to have been completely blown away at the initial scene of the latest Star Wars?) Spielberg has done a

    • I think one of the problems that Sci-Fi is running into is that viewers better understand what is fantasy and what is realistic. Sci-fi can take one of two directions. You can either go in the Star Wars direction where you basically throw realism to the wind and have World War II fighters dog fighting each other in space, or you go the 2001 a Space Odyssey rout. Going the 'realistic' rout is hard. How do you deal with the fact that given just another 100 years computers are going to be significantly sma
    • 99% of TV is crap, and always has been. The only reason SciFi gets this special treatment from us is because this is a nerd forum.
  • by l3v1 ( 787564 )
    I'll probably be OT for this but: I think the SG-1 retooling as real potential too... now, you really think SG-1 transformed into Farscape-1 can make the sometimes rockingly good [and soemtimes dullish] SG series "better" ? I, for one, am happy that it lasted 8 seasons long, and I'm done with it. If I want to watch Farscape, I watch it. Now there's only two more things missing from the new SG-1: a little fella resembling a numb duck and a large pinkish fella with tentacles.

    As for the BG2k season 2, I was
    • I was a bit offput by the first episode of the new series. I didn't think it had the feel of Farscape, definitely not. The actors are just actors (Claudia Black's characters are ever so slightly different...)

      I was actually bothered by how much it felt like Battlestar Galactica. Don't get me wrong, I like Battlestar Galactica, but Stargate should be Stargate, that's why I watch it. Obviously CmdrTaco loves BG, but unlike him I don't want every show to feel the same.
      • What? How did it "feel" like Battlestar? I thought the new season felt like typical Stargate, except that Ben and Claudia injected some life to it. The dialogue was great. It has extreme potential. I'm excited.
      • It "felt" like Battlestar Galactica? WTF? Where was the shakycam? The holocaust of humanity and the desparate clawing of the few survivors to exist?

        Claudia Black's characters are ever so slightly different...

        Well, one was a straight-laced, take-no-crap ex-military warrior type (Aeryn Sun on Farscape), and the other is an irreverent, joking, good-life loving con woman (Vala on SG-1). Yeah. Exactly alike. Carbon copies! I mean, they both have black hair and all, how different can they be?

    • Claudia Black will be a hard sell for me. She hasn't played a character I've seen that I'd want staying around on a Sunday afternoon.

      Samantha Carter, on the other hand, is one of TVs archtypal nerds. How many SG-1 episodes _aren't_ outlined as:

      Field research
      Analysis (often by Samatha Carter)
      Decision-making conference

      With Doc long gone, Samantha effectively gone, the nerd factor rests on Daniel. Unless Black's character turns out to be a closet quantum physist, the central structure of the progra
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Have you looked at your site? Hello, 1999 called.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Hello called, it wants its world back

      Sorry, programmer at the helm. (comma optional)

    • Actually...

      I was thinking it really more like Farscape meets SG-1. So "Farscape: SG-1"

      I'm kinda digging it. Although I would prefer the original crew... I'll settle for this twisted surprise.
  • by MtViewGuy ( 197597 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @10:41AM (#13086532)
    Let's face it folks.

    The BIGGEST reason why the new version of Battlestar Galactica is so good is that one of its creators (Ronald D. Moore) has strong experience doing excellent work with a sci-fi TV series. After all, some of very best episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space 9 was done with his assistance.

    That's why Enterprise sorely missed Moore's presence. If Ron Moore had been Enterprise Executive Producer I guarantee that we would be waiting with baited breath for the upcoming season, that's to be sure.

    In personally think years from now, the Ron Moore-created version of Battlestar Galactica will go down as one of the truly great sci-fi TV series of all time
    • After all, some of very best episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space 9 was done with his assistance.

      One could very easily consider that "damning with faint praise". But then [o! Blasphemy!] I'm not a Trek fan.
    • Yup...you are exactly right. Ron Moore was the best thing to happen to Trek...and the worst thing when he left.

  • The article had a picture of the robot dog that used to follow Boxy around. Come to think of it, I haven't seen Boxy in the new series since an early episode in Season 1. From the very beginning, I thought the storyline would eventually have Boomer, the Chief, and Boxy as a family unit. I guess that scenario is out the window since Boomer is a Cylon, the Chief has to keep his pants zipped, and Boxy disappeared.
    • Boxey will come back... he apparently, um, grew a bit. "Shot up like a weed" was the term used IIRC.

      I did like the one line he was given in the new show.

      Colonel Tigh: Hey kid, where's your mother?
      Boxey: She's dead. Where's yours?
  • by strider44 ( 650833 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:03AM (#13086637)
    The one thing I love about BG is that the spaceships are physically accurate. They have thrusters all over the ships in different directions to subtly change course and they conserve momentum. When an enemy is behind them they just use the thrusters to flip around and shoot backwards.

    I remember cringing in Stargate when they expressed a ship's top speed in miles per hour.
    • The thrusters my be realistic, however, any pilot with those bright lights shining in their face would be blind to the dog fight! Also, how many vipers can they lose from week to week before they start having a major resource issue?
      • In the Podcast commentary the producer said they keep close track of how many Vipers still exist. He said they would work some sort of Viper reproduction in the second season.
      • Also, how many vipers can they lose from week to week before they start having a major resource issue?

        This is actually taken into account by the show. If you read the blog/listen to the podcasts, they mention that there are n many ships available, and no replacements magically appear. At some point, they will have to find a way to replenish them.

  • by jockm ( 233372 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:09AM (#13086670) Homepage
    And for that matter Carnivale (one of Moore's other recent efforts). But if left with a free hand, do Moore's projects always have to have a messiah?
  • by Danathar ( 267989 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:19AM (#13086705) Journal
    After being disappointed when Babylon-5 and Farscape went away I remember wondering if there was EVER going to be another Sci-fi series like those two.

    The BEST scifi (and fantasy) explores the human condition in situations that cannot or do not exist today. In this way an author is able to explore aspects of emotion and dichotomy by creating situations which bring seemingly unrelated ideas into conflict. Even in sci-fi with Aliens there will always be a "human" anthromorphic undertone or the Alien will have characteristics of Terran life (mental or physical since currently humans have no real evidence of what a REAL alien would look or think like). Ron Moore Understands this.

    If you take out exploring the human condition...then you get a show with lots of cool equipment and places but is easily forgettable.

    This is why I think sci-fi/fantasy is a VERY interesting genre. They are limited only by imagination...but are ALWAYS about humans (US) because they come from human imagination.

    On a different track....I'm particularly impressed with SG Atlantis. Usually it takes a season or two for me to become "comfortable" with the characters (case in point...Voyager took 3 seasons)..but after just one season the characters on Atlantis have "jelled" and are interesting. This is a GOOD thing! I'm conflicted about them contacting earth so soon though it might have been more interesting if they had kept them back for a couple of seasons.

    Its to be seen if the addition of the stars from Farscape will breath new life into Stargate SG-1...but I'm hopeful since both actors have shown they know their craft from Farscape. Remember that Law and Order has shown that a show can go on indefinitely if you rotate actors in over time that are good. I would not be surprised if SG-1 tries for this (or Atlantis).
    • by FullCircle ( 643323 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:57AM (#13086876)
      When I heard about Atlantis, I didn't understand how they could spin off so late in the game. Now it looks like an attempt to build a safety net for the franchise knowing that RDA was leaving the show.

      Finding a replacement for RDA had to be the worst job ever. He was the face and personality of the show. Bringing in Ben Browder seems like a good decision based on his acting personality. His cocky, slightly confused John Chriton character always reminded me of a younger, more tormented version of Jack from SG-1. Not having the rest of the cast immediately want to follow him was perfect. He will have to prove himself worthy of trust and friendship. As long as he is given a chance to grow his character on SG-1 like he did on Farscape and the SG-1 and Farscape fans can keep the shows separate I think it could work.

      Bringing in Claudia Black might break the mix. Her character is vastly different than her Farscape character (other than the leather, not that I'm complaining). She's more like a smarter version of the Chianna(sp?) character, without the ticks. She's a loner who will do anything (legal or not, uses her sex appeal) to get what she wants or needs as opposed to a outwardly stern, inwardly insecure moral soldier. It's hard to pass up excellent acting tallent when it comes along, especially for a scifi show. Making her a supporting character was a good idea. Possibly after Browder is accepted she could join the main cast to ween in the Farscape actors a little at a time. There are plenty of good actors left from Farscape so I wouldn't be suprised to see more of them pop up on Atlantis or SG-1 in the future just as they have borrowed actors from Star Trek from time to time.

      I have to say that the spin off idaea worked very well. Atlantis turned out different enough to allow unique story lines while still keeping the Stargate feel. The choice of actors was done well too. All of the primary cast are convincing, interesting and work well together. The male lead in Atlantis (sorry, don't know his name) could have been a viable replacement for RDA instead of Browder.

      Overall, I think that both strategies will be successful. Not an easy thing to pull off.
  • by Dozix007 ( 690662 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:43AM (#13086812)
    As an avid Stargate fan (yes, that is right, I could probably retell every episode, and yes... I am probably bias) I have to defend my favorite series from the little "stale" quip by CmdrTaco.

    The view of SG-1 as stale is ridiculous... I think most viewers don't find appeal with it because the show WAS not turning into the next generation MTV\OC\BS crap. I personally am a big fan of Season 5-8, unlike some others. I think the sarcastic humor and Sci-Fi mix is awsome. I am not a fan, however, of the attempted OCafication (a word, which means teeny-bopperafication) of Stargate with the perpetual appeasement of 16 year old pale boys who won't watch a show if it doesn't have some reference to sex every sixty-nine seconds.
    • I have to agree. I think SG-1 is missing something now that I have seen the first ep of the 9th season (missing a lot, actually). One glaring omission is the theme music! I am all for change, but using that "theme" after having the beautiful theme it had for eight years is just lame.

      Since Richard Dean Anderson is pretty much leaving SG-1, Amanda Tapping off for a while having a baby, they had to bring in people to fill the gap. Beau Bridges doesn't do it for me. His brother Jeff would have been a bette

    • I agree with most of your comments, but I have to admit (as another rabid fan who owns and knows every eppisode) that parts of season 7 and most of 8 got a little more off track with each try. The end of season 8 was a train-wreck. It was corny and should have been done as a one-parter goof eppisode.

      Possibly this was due to RDAs being pregressively MIA and seeming onset of alzheimer? Tealcs(sp?) jive turkey hair and sudden personality change?

      The earlier seasons were far smarter. I never put my finger
    • I'm an avid SG-1 fan and I think you're on crack. Season 8 was desperately trying to figure out what it was trying to do. I thought the Claudia Black ep in season 8 was the single worst hour of scifi I'd seen in a while (but then I gave up on Voyager and Enterprise fairly early).

      I tried to watch Farscape a few times but couldn't get interested. I only know Black's name because someone else mentioned it, and I find her character intensely irritating. The entire character seems to be pandering to the sa

      • Not that I dislike Claudia's character at all, but I'm 99% sure that Claudia will only be on the show for the first half of the season. She's mainly there because Amanda is out on maternity leave.

        Also, Farscape was probably the best Sci-Fi show ever. The problem was that it turned out to be almost one big story, so you have to watch it straight through from the beginning to understand what's going on.
  • by Quack1701 ( 26159 ) on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:48AM (#13086842) Homepage
    Thus far I am enjoying the BSG series, but I wonder why they feel the need to put bright lights in the helmets of the pilots. They would not be able to see a thing and the cylons would easily destroy every viper.
  • SG-1 Stale? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Blitzenn ( 554788 ) * on Sunday July 17, 2005 @11:56AM (#13086873) Homepage Journal
    I loved Richard Dean Anderson in Star Gate. If anything, I think they are going to have to pull off some briliant writing to save the show now. I do like that they stole the Farscape cast for the sho and that is a plus, but without that Anderson humor, well, it won't be the same.

    I also don't put an once of credit into anything that blowhard Richard Hatch has to say. What a dork he is.
  • I'm not sure anyone remembers the Starlost [wikipedia.org] series - only about 16 episodes. Poorlyl imlemented unfortunately, but the concept was really great. It would be nice to see a revival of the Starlost, done properly.
  • Speaking of re-use, is anyone else starting to cringe at the number of times they use the word "frackin'"? (for those not watching the show, apparently in place of the f--- word)
    • Apparently you don't know any sailors. Ever hear the term "swear like a sailor?" While Sci-Fi doesn't want to ruin its chances of advertizing or syndication to broadcast (where they can't say "fuck"), I think its a pretty cool way to keep the language "realistic" (Yes, people swear, OMG! Especially soldiers! Heavens to betsy! We can show people blowing themselves up, but don't say a naughty word!) and pays hommage to the original series.
      • Yes, I'm a bible thumpin' ninny offended by the use of the word "frackin'" on Battlestar Galactica and hanging around on slashdot!

        I meant that it's the lameness of the word "frackin" that bugs me. The word frackin' just doesn't have anything near the power of good, old-fashioned "fuckin'" I think it would be more powerful if they just left that word out altogether. "Damn it, Jim!" sounds more profane. Frackin' seems more appropriate for, say, a Scooby Doo cartoon.
  • Many people seem to have missed a critical fact. Amanda Tapping was pregnant and was unavailable for filming for the first five episodes of this season.

    She was starting to show at the end of the last season. That's why "nerd Sam" was always wearing a loose sweater and even seemed a little chunky. It was to cover her belly, not (just) characterization.

    Claudia Black will be around at the start of the season, but she's not a permanent addition. At least not yet. She would make an interesting addition si

Loose bits sink chips.