Dave Knott writes "Entertainment Weekly reports that Universal Pictures has confirmed rumours of a Battlestar Galactica feature film. Directed by Bryan Singer, and co-produced by original series creator Glen Larson, the new movie will not be related to the recently concluded SyFy Network series. Rather, it will be a 'complete re-imagining of the sci-fi lore that was invented by Larson back in the '70s.'"
I never bought into any of this re-imagining crap. It's not like how Lucas was able to squeeze more story out of the Star Wars trilogy by adding in effects that brought it up to modern-day standards (and fixed the story in parts that didn't make sense). The re-imagining of BSG was almost a totally different show with only the thinnest of veneers tying it to the original series.
I liked the show, though it was definitely too dark (lighting-wise) and the overuse of 'frak' was annoying, but I felt that it could probably stand on its own as a series.
I went back and watched several Star Trek TOS episodes and found them to be clever, campy, and very forward thinking. If I were to watch TOS and DS9 back to back, I think I'd have the same reaction as I did to BSG. The difference, of course, is that there was the excellent TNG series which bridged the gap between TOS and DS9. Any re-imagining of a series that changes the fundamental aspects of the base concept is going to run into this problem.
It's not a re-imagining. It's a cashing-in on the name value of the original concept. I think it is nothing short of a rip off for those who loved the original series. It's also a rip off for those who like the new series itself but are forced to associate it with the original series.
And a whole 'nother ending, to boot. The show's ending was awful, not just for reasons of plausibility and deus ex machina storytelling but because it ended on a very idiotic "moral" that should rightly offend any technology-loving slashdot nerd. The show managed to go along the entire time without really being preachy and muddying the waters on social issues... then BAM! It hits you with "OK THE MORAL OF THE STORY IS THE BEST KIND OF LIFE IS LIVING A SHORT, BRUTAL, DISEASE-FILLED EXISTENCE, LETS GET RID OF ALL OUR TECHNOLOGY!" and everyone agrees (despite nobody agreeing on anything else in the course of the show) and everyone goes their separate ways to die their eventual brutal deaths. Also, WATCH OUT YOUR ROOMBA WILL GET YOU.
I find it rare that I ever chime in with someone using all caps in their post... but I couldn't agree more. This is exactly how I felt after seeing the finale.
Really? All 40 thousand survivors + whatever Cylons there were are just going to give up their understanding about the entire universe and not teach it to their children or leave some sort of octagonal stone/metal records behind? I can understand Lee Adama (a non-scientist soldier who was just fed up with the war and all and blamed the existence of nuclear bombs on the evil SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY) deciding to go all hermit-action. I can even understand a majority of the uneducated masses doing that. But everyone? Really? I mean, after basically insinuating that Doc Cottle was the sole physician in the fleet they pulled a frakking neurosurgeon (John Hodgman you rule) out of their ass in the final season. We have to assume there are quite a few educated others in the fleet that, even if they wouldn't be super excited about building a modern city right away, would at least be able to separate the evils of the application of technology (war and such) from the advantages that come from understanding the world around them. The Adamas can drive all their technology and records and books into the sun, but they can't take away all these people's lifetime education. Even Gaius Baltar is going to start farming... did anyone catch that? That's right, the agricultural revolution actually started 140,000 years before you think it did.
I mean, where do you draw the line at where "technology" is, anyway? What, are they going to take away the hunting spears from the native humans and say "NO! TECHNOLOGY BAD!" After really liking the whole series for four seasons, like the parent post says, they pull classic hippie / not-thinking-the-concept-through / technology-and-science-is-inferior-to-"nature"-even-though-it's-a-part-of-it crap.
It's not a re-imagining. It's a cashing-in on the name value of the original concept. I think it is nothing short of a rip off for those who loved the original series. It's also a rip off for those who like the new series itself but are forced to associate it with the original series.
Would it have been any less of a rip-off if the show and the characters had been given different names? I doubt it. I also doubt that completely rewriting the show to remove any and all allusions to the original series would have made it any better. I keep hearing on this site how no media content is completely novel, and the best content is that which builds on pre-existing ideas. The BSG re-imagining is an excellent practical example of this.
I keep hearing on this site how no media content is completely novel, and the best content is that which builds on pre-existing ideas. The BSG re-imagining is an excellent practical example of this.
AbsoFragginglutely damn it the original BSG was a re-imagining of Wagon Train which in turn was inspired by any number of Westerns. I suspect we could probably trace it all the way back to Chaucer and The Canterbury Tales but then who did he nick the idea off?
No doubt all fiction can be traced right back to a factual account of early humans' journey out of Africa... which by coincidence is exactly where the BSG re-imagined series ends.
Perhaps it can be traced right back to when the survivors of the 12 colonies landed in Africa, in which case all fiction can be traced to Battlestar Galactica.
>DS9 actually got interesting when they stopped dicking about on Bajor and had them some wars...
I found that DS9 got tedious when they stopped dealing with the political and social situation on Bajor and turned it into yet another humans vs aliens war story.
>Humans vs Aliens? You mean what Star Trek is all about? >(Granted, it's actually Aliens vs Humans with the help of Aliens).
Star Trek was never about aliens vs humans. It was a hopeful (and a bit naive) programme about the expansion of humanity into the Galaxy. For the most part the conflict was driven by human conflict, not wars with aliens.
Except that wasn't the point. Star Trek wasn't about inter-species conflict. The Klingons weren't just ridged headed aliens (and originally, they weren't). Star Trek was political allegory. The Klingons were the Soviets; the Federation was the U.S. The point of the whole "we won't fight directly but we'll both bully smaller planets to join our side to fight against their side" was the common theme. The result was that a higher being (the Organians) came in, bitchslapped their stupid asses and said "behave".
Almost every story and every alien world (save for filler episodes) were an allegory for modern-day problems. Everything form how we treat veterans to racism to ruthless imperialism (Cardassian occupation of Bajor) and the moral ambiguities of those situations.
DS9 only got good when they hired 1/2 the creative people off of B5
Which creative people would that be? There were 110 B5 episodes. Of those 92 were written by JMS. All 44 episodes of seasons 3 and 4 were scripted by him.
because fox said (You guessed it) B5 is cancelled.
That would be a peculiar thing for Fox to say, as B5 was produced by Warner Brothers and aired in syndication.
Amazingly they recanted
not quite... what happened is that TNT agreed to pick up the show.
which is why the last season of B5 was crap they had lost 1/2 their talent and squeezed the last 2 years of story arc into season 4 to finish the series.
The only person I recall leaving was Claudia Christian who played Cmdr Ivanova.
Did the new BSG go into territory the original didn't? Well yes, some. But *everything* that happened in the original series happened in the new one, which I give Sci-Fi kudos for. (Ok, excepting for the daggits or flying motorcycles...)
Or Apollo raising Boxey. Or landing on a casino planet with insect people that start sticking the crew into hive compartments. Or Baltar becoming the leader of the Cylons. Or Starbuck being stranded on a prison planet where the inmates are the descendants of the original inmates. Or Apollo being stranded on a frontier planet and having an old-west shoot out with Red-Eye. Or encountering Count Iblis. And there are probably more that I just can't think of right now.
I guess it depends on your definition of *everything*.
the new movie will not be related to the recently concluded SyFy Network series
I can only hope. The 1970's show was something I loved as a kid (I remember running to the TV when I heard the theme song come one), and it's something my little kids have enjoyed. The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)
There's an audience for this kind of fiction (as I'm sure SciFi's ratings proved), but I'd much rather have something I could take my kids to and just plain enjoy.
Are we not allowed to have adult sci-fi now? If you want to let your kids watch sci-fi theres plenty of sacharrine shit from Pixar and the like available.
"The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)"
You're coming across as just a teensy bit wet my friend.
Are we not allowed to have adult sci-fi now? If you want to let your kids watch sci-fi theres plenty of sacharrine shit from Pixar and the like available.
"The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)"
You're coming across as just a teensy bit wet my friend.
You say I should go to Pixar films. I say you should watch the Saw movies. People with your tastes have no more claim on the BSG franchise than people with my tastes.
I was just saying that I wanted my kids to be able to enjoy something that I enjoyed when I was their age. I'm sorry that's hard for you to handle.
Except that the new BSG ISN'T the show you enjoyed as a kid. If you want your kids to enjoy the BSG you liked when you were young, go buy the original BSG series on dvd for them.
And I don't see why a sci fi series dealing with adult themes should be made child friendly. Kids have enough TV of their own. Its bad enough with most films being downgraded to 12 certificates without infliciting the same on TV shows. Clearly you think the original series is rubbish or you would have shown your kids that instead.
So you have no problem with your kids watching a dozen planets and billions of people being annihilated in a nuclear holocaust, people being left behind to die of radiation sickness, starvation and the like, people being executed, committing suicide - but don't nobody go killing babies?
The baby killing scene builds tension the best way possible - showing us that the Cylons had no issue with killing off the weak and innocent. She's even musing about the baby's weakness as she does it. That's why it is so effective - it tells us that there is no negotiating with them, tells us that they have no compassion and that we'd be better off hoping that the group of hungry lions don't eat the baby gazelle.
But back to my original point - why is it that you feel your kids can enjoy watching billions of people being killed, but you can't allow them to watch a single one being killed? Why is it that you feel that your kids can enjoy watching an episode like 33, where humans themselves kill a ship with a significant amount of the survivors of the attacks (I think 1,300 vs 45,000), but the sound effect of a baby's neck snapping and a mother crying out in anguish is too much?
Personally I thought that the cylon killing the baby was more of a mercy killing so the baby wouldn't suffer when the nukes fell. Showing the audience that the cylon had some human qualities.
The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)
That part was pretty much intended to bother everyone, I think. I didn't enjoy the miniseries that much, but the rest of it, especially the start of season 3 and the last season, was especially awesome... apart from a few inevitable filler episodes here and there.
the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck
*gasp* Not a baby!! Considering the fact that they nuke everything and anything they can see about half an hour later, the baby was lucky. Lateron in the show have breeding farms with humans, and they steal Starbucks ovary, and much later they subjugate all of humanity under the guise of "co-existence" and torture their prisoners. They steal Sauls eyeball (again with the bodypart snatching, what's up with that?). Oh, and then there were suicide terrorists. But oh dear gods, they snapped a babies neck, that really makes this show inappropriate for kids as opposed to... all the other things.
I'd much rather have something I could take my kids to and just plain enjoy.
Feed'm Disney, or Pixar, or whatever is popular these days. Hell, I was entertained for hours with Tom & Jerry and Roadrunner back in the day. (Beware though, in some cartoons featuring Roadrunner, Wiley Coyete is violently smashed against big boulders most often followed by an explosion. This may offend you.) Most of my friends with kids have an entire shelf full of that stuff, and they tend to watch shows like BSG when their kids have gone to sleep.
Just saying, not everything needs to be suitable for kids. There's plenty of stuff that's ready made for them and is still enjoyable to parents.
I remember Tom swallowing dynamite and bowlingballs.
Do I love the classical cartoons that are funny and not pouring with political correct utopian ideas. I loved them as a kid and I'm still not a mass murderer. It must be magic.
I get tired of this... "I watched this as a kid and it was good and this new stuff well..."
MOVE ON!!!! I watched the original TOS, and original Battlestar Galatica, and want to know something. I prefer the new ones. Even TNG is showing its age now. As we evolve socially certain things are tacky and cliche. Sure it is fun to watch, but you have to jump over those odd moments.
Take James Bond, which I have never been a fan of. The latest one Quantum Solace I loved! Many Bond folks said, "gag gag..." Just lik
As a series BG is perfect , one of the best Sci Fi series in a generation. But no, they've got to milk the franchise until it goes moo and dies. Isn't the new Caprica series enough? Why can't hollywood producers know when something is complete and just leave it as is to be savoured , not slowly milked to death because i'll bet you this film won't be the last.
"Milking a franchise" for writers/producers/distributors is like re-using bits of code for developers. It worked once, and with only a little bit of tweaking, it will work again. If you can bill twice for something you've already written, you do it. Obviously.
Entertainment *can* be art, like code *can* be poetry, but mostly it's not. People gotta eat.
I can believe it as it was about the opposite in spirit of what the original one was. Actually I don't know what Larson tough about the new BSG but Dirk Benedict didn't like it [dirkbenedictcentral.com]. Personally I enjoyed both shows, I hope the movie will be as good as them.
Just sounds like sour grapes to me. This isn't the 1970s anymore - TV series (well, the upmarket ones) need people who can actually act well, not just stand on their mark looking good. ANd I don't think anyone could accuse Benedict of being the worlds best actor - calling him wooden would be unfair to the pine desk I'm typing this at.
I'm a child of the late 80s and 90s, and I grew up watching Star Trek DS9 and later spending my teenage years watching the newer BSG series. So out of curiosity, I went back and watched the old BSG...
There's a reason they did a rebooted series and not something based off the old one. Because the old one is a piece of crap. It was morally simplistic, hokey, ripping too much off Star Wars, too Mormon (Larson is a Mormon), and requiring too great a suspension of disbelief in order to enjoy.
Penny Arcade [penny-arcade.com] talks about milking brands.
I loved the new BSG series - one of the things I've enjoyed doing most involving a screen in the last several years. But this just seems like a really shameless attempt to get more money out of me. At least let a couple years pass; I can't even buy all the episodes of BSG on DVD yet.
Ok, when the NEW BSG came out, I was like...is this a continuation, is this a complete do over...how is it going to work... They came up with a sort of nice way to begin the series as say they left then came back...
Now they are saying they are going back to the drawing board again....why? More importantly, are they going to keep Starbuck? She is hot!
The Hollywood Singularity will occur when a movie is remade before the previous remake has finished production. I am glad to see this bold step towards the Hollywood Singularity.
Bede bede bede (Score:4, Insightful)
I never bought into any of this re-imagining crap. It's not like how Lucas was able to squeeze more story out of the Star Wars trilogy by adding in effects that brought it up to modern-day standards (and fixed the story in parts that didn't make sense). The re-imagining of BSG was almost a totally different show with only the thinnest of veneers tying it to the original series.
I liked the show, though it was definitely too dark (lighting-wise) and the overuse of 'frak' was annoying, but I felt that it could probably stand on its own as a series.
I went back and watched several Star Trek TOS episodes and found them to be clever, campy, and very forward thinking. If I were to watch TOS and DS9 back to back, I think I'd have the same reaction as I did to BSG. The difference, of course, is that there was the excellent TNG series which bridged the gap between TOS and DS9. Any re-imagining of a series that changes the fundamental aspects of the base concept is going to run into this problem.
It's not a re-imagining. It's a cashing-in on the name value of the original concept. I think it is nothing short of a rip off for those who loved the original series. It's also a rip off for those who like the new series itself but are forced to associate it with the original series.
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Insightful)
That aside, I still consider it awesome.
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Insightful)
And a whole 'nother ending, to boot. The show's ending was awful, not just for reasons of plausibility and deus ex machina storytelling but because it ended on a very idiotic "moral" that should rightly offend any technology-loving slashdot nerd. The show managed to go along the entire time without really being preachy and muddying the waters on social issues... then BAM! It hits you with "OK THE MORAL OF THE STORY IS THE BEST KIND OF LIFE IS LIVING A SHORT, BRUTAL, DISEASE-FILLED EXISTENCE, LETS GET RID OF ALL OUR TECHNOLOGY!" and everyone agrees (despite nobody agreeing on anything else in the course of the show) and everyone goes their separate ways to die their eventual brutal deaths. Also, WATCH OUT YOUR ROOMBA WILL GET YOU.
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:4, Informative)
Really? All 40 thousand survivors + whatever Cylons there were are just going to give up their understanding about the entire universe and not teach it to their children or leave some sort of octagonal stone/metal records behind? I can understand Lee Adama (a non-scientist soldier who was just fed up with the war and all and blamed the existence of nuclear bombs on the evil SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY) deciding to go all hermit-action. I can even understand a majority of the uneducated masses doing that. But everyone? Really? I mean, after basically insinuating that Doc Cottle was the sole physician in the fleet they pulled a frakking neurosurgeon (John Hodgman you rule) out of their ass in the final season. We have to assume there are quite a few educated others in the fleet that, even if they wouldn't be super excited about building a modern city right away, would at least be able to separate the evils of the application of technology (war and such) from the advantages that come from understanding the world around them. The Adamas can drive all their technology and records and books into the sun, but they can't take away all these people's lifetime education. Even Gaius Baltar is going to start farming... did anyone catch that? That's right, the agricultural revolution actually started 140,000 years before you think it did.
I mean, where do you draw the line at where "technology" is, anyway? What, are they going to take away the hunting spears from the native humans and say "NO! TECHNOLOGY BAD!" After really liking the whole series for four seasons, like the parent post says, they pull classic hippie / not-thinking-the-concept-through / technology-and-science-is-inferior-to-"nature"-even-though-it's-a-part-of-it crap.
Parent
But but but (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a cashing-in on the name value of the original concept.
If the jumpsuits are skin-tight, would it be all bad?? I, for one, say bring it [scificool.com] on [moviestore.com].
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Interesting)
Would it have been any less of a rip-off if the show and the characters had been given different names? I doubt it. I also doubt that completely rewriting the show to remove any and all allusions to the original series would have made it any better. I keep hearing on this site how no media content is completely novel, and the best content is that which builds on pre-existing ideas. The BSG re-imagining is an excellent practical example of this.
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Insightful)
I keep hearing on this site how no media content is completely novel, and the best content is that which builds on pre-existing ideas. The BSG re-imagining is an excellent practical example of this.
AbsoFragginglutely damn it the original BSG was a re-imagining of Wagon Train which in turn was inspired by any number of Westerns. I suspect we could probably trace it all the way back to Chaucer and The Canterbury Tales but then who did he nick the idea off?
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Funny)
Obligatory SPOILER ALERT
No doubt all fiction can be traced right back to a factual account of early humans' journey out of Africa... which by coincidence is exactly where the BSG re-imagined series ends.
Perhaps it can be traced right back to when the survivors of the 12 colonies landed in Africa, in which case all fiction can be traced to Battlestar Galactica.
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:4, Insightful)
Never mention 1980-anything with respect to Battlestar Galactica again!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
DS9 actually got interesting when they stopped dicking about on Bajor and had them some wars...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>DS9 actually got interesting when they stopped dicking about on Bajor and had them some wars...
I found that DS9 got tedious when they stopped dealing with the political and social situation on Bajor and turned it into yet another humans vs aliens war story.
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Insightful)
>Humans vs Aliens? You mean what Star Trek is all about?
>(Granted, it's actually Aliens vs Humans with the help of Aliens).
Star Trek was never about aliens vs humans. It was a hopeful (and a bit naive) programme about the expansion of humanity into the Galaxy. For the most part the conflict was driven by human conflict, not wars with aliens.
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that wasn't the point. Star Trek wasn't about inter-species conflict. The Klingons weren't just ridged headed aliens (and originally, they weren't). Star Trek was political allegory. The Klingons were the Soviets; the Federation was the U.S. The point of the whole "we won't fight directly but we'll both bully smaller planets to join our side to fight against their side" was the common theme. The result was that a higher being (the Organians) came in, bitchslapped their stupid asses and said "behave".
Almost every story and every alien world (save for filler episodes) were an allegory for modern-day problems. Everything form how we treat veterans to racism to ruthless imperialism (Cardassian occupation of Bajor) and the moral ambiguities of those situations.
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Insightful)
DS9... was that the Star Trek about the Gas Station on the interstate?
No, it was Ron Moore's big-budget "re-imagining" of the campy Sci Fi classic "Babylon 5".
(ducks)
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Informative)
DS9 only got good when they hired 1/2 the creative people off of B5
Which creative people would that be? There were 110 B5 episodes. Of those 92 were written by JMS. All 44 episodes of seasons 3 and 4 were scripted by him.
because fox said (You guessed it) B5 is cancelled.
That would be a peculiar thing for Fox to say, as B5 was produced by Warner Brothers and aired in syndication.
Amazingly they recanted
not quite... what happened is that TNT agreed to pick up the show.
which is why the last season of B5 was crap they had lost 1/2 their talent and squeezed the last 2 years of story arc into season 4 to finish the series.
The only person I recall leaving was Claudia Christian who played Cmdr Ivanova.
Damn you FOX!!
Fox had nothing to do with anything.
Good post. Next time try some facts.
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede - say what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Did the new BSG go into territory the original didn't? Well yes, some. But *everything* that happened in the original series happened in the new one, which I give Sci-Fi kudos for. (Ok, excepting for the daggits or flying motorcycles...)
Or Apollo raising Boxey. Or landing on a casino planet with insect people that start sticking the crew into hive compartments. Or Baltar becoming the leader of the Cylons. Or Starbuck being stranded on a prison planet where the inmates are the descendants of the original inmates. Or Apollo being stranded on a frontier planet and having an old-west shoot out with Red-Eye. Or encountering Count Iblis. And there are probably more that I just can't think of right now.
I guess it depends on your definition of *everything*.
Parent
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:5, Funny)
This post sounds better if you read it to yourself using the Comic Book Guy's voice from the Simpsons...
Parent
Amazing (Score:5, Insightful)
Brought to you by the same minds that thought Syfy was a good name change......
Re:Amazing (Score:5, Funny)
Brought to you by the same minds that thought Syfy was a good name change......
When a movie reminds you of that channel, would you say it's Syfylous?
Parent
Re:Amazing (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. You can't have channels with generic terms like "Discovery" or "History" or "Learning".
Parent
Thank goodness (Score:4, Interesting)
I can only hope. The 1970's show was something I loved as a kid (I remember running to the TV when I heard the theme song come one), and it's something my little kids have enjoyed. The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)
There's an audience for this kind of fiction (as I'm sure SciFi's ratings proved), but I'd much rather have something I could take my kids to and just plain enjoy.
Why does everything have to be child friendly?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are we not allowed to have adult sci-fi now? If you want to let your kids watch sci-fi theres plenty of sacharrine shit from Pixar and the like available.
"The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)"
You're coming across as just a teensy bit wet my friend.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Are we not allowed to have adult sci-fi now? If you want to let your kids watch sci-fi theres plenty of sacharrine shit from Pixar and the like available.
"The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)"
You're coming across as just a teensy bit wet my friend.
You say I should go to Pixar films. I say you should watch the Saw movies. People with your tastes have no more claim on the BSG franchise than people with my tastes.
I was just saying that I wanted my kids to be able to enjoy something that I enjoyed when I was their age. I'm sorry that's hard for you to handle.
Re:Why does everything have to be child friendly?? (Score:5, Insightful)
So get the original series on DVD and show them that.
Parent
Re:Why does everything have to be child friendly?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
You have no idea what my tastes are (Score:5, Insightful)
And I don't see why a sci fi series dealing with adult themes should be made child friendly. Kids have enough TV of their own. Its bad enough with most films being downgraded to 12 certificates without infliciting the same on TV shows. Clearly you think the original series is rubbish or you would have shown your kids that instead.
Parent
Re:Why does everything have to be child friendly?? (Score:5, Insightful)
So you have no problem with your kids watching a dozen planets and billions of people being annihilated in a nuclear holocaust, people being left behind to die of radiation sickness, starvation and the like, people being executed, committing suicide - but don't nobody go killing babies?
The baby killing scene builds tension the best way possible - showing us that the Cylons had no issue with killing off the weak and innocent. She's even musing about the baby's weakness as she does it. That's why it is so effective - it tells us that there is no negotiating with them, tells us that they have no compassion and that we'd be better off hoping that the group of hungry lions don't eat the baby gazelle.
But back to my original point - why is it that you feel your kids can enjoy watching billions of people being killed, but you can't allow them to watch a single one being killed? Why is it that you feel that your kids can enjoy watching an episode like 33, where humans themselves kill a ship with a significant amount of the survivors of the attacks (I think 1,300 vs 45,000), but the sound effect of a baby's neck snapping and a mother crying out in anguish is too much?
Parent
Re:Why does everything have to be child friendly?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I thought that the cylon killing the baby was more of a mercy killing so the baby wouldn't suffer when the nukes fell.
Showing the audience that the cylon had some human qualities.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)
That part was pretty much intended to bother everyone, I think. I didn't enjoy the miniseries that much, but the rest of it, especially the start of season 3 and the last season, was especially awesome ... apart from a few inevitable filler episodes here and there.
Re:Thank goodness (Score:5, Insightful)
the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck
*gasp* Not a baby!! Considering the fact that they nuke everything and anything they can see about half an hour later, the baby was lucky. Lateron in the show have breeding farms with humans, and they steal Starbucks ovary, and much later they subjugate all of humanity under the guise of "co-existence" and torture their prisoners. They steal Sauls eyeball (again with the bodypart snatching, what's up with that?). Oh, and then there were suicide terrorists. But oh dear gods, they snapped a babies neck, that really makes this show inappropriate for kids as opposed to ... all the other things.
I'd much rather have something I could take my kids to and just plain enjoy.
Feed'm Disney, or Pixar, or whatever is popular these days. Hell, I was entertained for hours with Tom & Jerry and Roadrunner back in the day. (Beware though, in some cartoons featuring Roadrunner, Wiley Coyete is violently smashed against big boulders most often followed by an explosion. This may offend you.) Most of my friends with kids have an entire shelf full of that stuff, and they tend to watch shows like BSG when their kids have gone to sleep.
Just saying, not everything needs to be suitable for kids. There's plenty of stuff that's ready made for them and is still enjoyable to parents.
Parent
Re:Thank goodness (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I get tired of this... "I watched this as a kid and it was good and this new stuff well..."
MOVE ON!!!! I watched the original TOS, and original Battlestar Galatica, and want to know something. I prefer the new ones. Even TNG is showing its age now. As we evolve socially certain things are tacky and cliche. Sure it is fun to watch, but you have to jump over those odd moments.
Take James Bond, which I have never been a fan of. The latest one Quantum Solace I loved! Many Bond folks said, "gag gag..." Just lik
They just can't leave well alone (Score:5, Insightful)
As a series BG is perfect , one of the best Sci Fi series in a generation. But no, they've got to milk the franchise until it goes moo and dies. Isn't the new Caprica series enough? Why can't hollywood producers know when something is complete and just leave it as is to be savoured , not slowly milked to death because i'll bet you this film won't be the last.
Entertainment is an Industry (Score:3, Insightful)
"Milking a franchise" for writers/producers/distributors is like re-using bits of code for developers. It worked once, and with only a little bit of tweaking, it will work again. If you can bill twice for something you've already written, you do it. Obviously.
Entertainment *can* be art, like code *can* be poetry, but mostly it's not. People gotta eat.
In other words (Score:5, Insightful)
Larson hated the new series
Re:In other words (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
I bet he'd have liked it if he'd been in it (Score:5, Funny)
Just sounds like sour grapes to me. This isn't the 1970s anymore - TV series (well, the upmarket ones) need people who can actually act well, not just stand on their mark looking good. ANd I don't think anyone could accuse Benedict of being the worlds best actor - calling him wooden would be unfair to the pine desk I'm typing this at.
Parent
Re:I bet he'd have liked it if he'd been in it-NOT (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Whore that brand (Score:3, Insightful)
Penny Arcade [penny-arcade.com] talks about milking brands.
I loved the new BSG series - one of the things I've enjoyed doing most involving a screen in the last several years. But this just seems like a really shameless attempt to get more money out of me. At least let a couple years pass; I can't even buy all the episodes of BSG on DVD yet.
Yeah another paradox (Score:5, Funny)
All of this ... (Score:5, Funny)
All of this was re-imagined before and it will be re-imagined again.
Re:All of this ... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Ah crap! (Score:3, Interesting)
Ok, when the NEW BSG came out, I was like...is this a continuation, is this a complete do over ...how is it going to work...
They came up with a sort of nice way to begin the series as say they left then came back...
Now they are saying they are going back to the drawing board again....why? More importantly, are they going to keep Starbuck?
She is hot!
The Hollywood Singularity (Score:5, Funny)
The Hollywood Singularity will occur when a movie is remade before the previous remake has finished production. I am glad to see this bold step towards the Hollywood Singularity.
...And they have a plan. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bleh (Score:4, Funny)
grats for spoiling the ending, someone mod that down :D
Parent
Re:Bleh (Score:5, Funny)
grats for spoiling the ending
You can't spoil the ending: the writers already did that.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)