Comments on: Why Galactica?

By: Mick

Mick — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:44:47 +0000

BTW. Mojo, I remember you and I exchanging emails about the 3D models of Galactica
and some vipers way back in 1996 for the remake..( You were at Foundation imaging ) It sure as hell took them long enough
to start the production man..

By: Mick

Mick — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:41:50 +0000

I loved BSG as a kid.. I still love it..
I dont question my reasons for loving it..I just love it.
But, they really have to ease down on that silly camera movements on cg parts..
Who’s idea is that anyways..? Looks totally noob..
Everything else looks cool, and I still love it.. (love the blonde cylone chick too – makes me wanna become a cylon) LoL

By: Master Prudent

Master Prudent — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:54:11 +0000

Bwah, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Ha!

Every time I see an old vs new BSG flame war I wonder if the same five people are posting the same argument over and over again.

All this has happened before and all of this will happen again.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 05:20:41 +0000

Jeff. uhhh, no, I don’t think it could have been called anything else other than Battlestar Galactica, since it is a retelling of the original story. The basic plot is the same, with some variations. Also, I tend to agree with you that the original series wasn’t necessarily a clone of Star Wars. In fact, my understanding is that the concept dates back to 1974, when Glen Larson conceived a story called “Adam’s Ark.” That was the genesis of Battlestar Galactica.

The problem that I had with the original series was the overuse of stock footage from week to week. However, I realize that was necessary to keep production costs down. I think at the time, the weekly episodes cost $1 Million a week to produce. I look back at it fondly. It was good for what it was at the time. Escapism. The new series is far superior in every way, production values, writing, character development and storyline. I don’t believe it would have been possible to tell it this way back in 1979.

By: darthmojo

darthmojo — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 02:06:56 +0000

JEFF: I think it’s funny that you typed out all that but abbreviated “Powers That Be” to save some time.

By: JeffG

JeffG — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:53:47 +0000

The original tone that mojo put out was pretty off base. First, to call the original BSG a “cheap” copy of anything denotes the fundamental stupidity of the author. The original production cost of the 3hour movie has been quoted as being as low as $8M and as high as $14M. This is 1978 dollars so that is a helluva lot of money for a cheap knock-off. The original Star Wars cost about $15M to produce so BSG (at either quoted amount) wasn’t too far off.

As for the idea that BSG copied Star Wars…I don’t think so. True…Star Wars success probably got it green-lighted and supported by a bigger budget than it would have otherwise, but that doesn’t qualify something as a copy of something else. If you’re looking for that, I think the Monkees copying the Beatles is more accurate. And let’s point something else out. If you want to berate BSG because it “copies” Star Wars, then let’s berate Star Wars for copying the 7th Samurai, and every movie on Arthurian legend ever made. I like Star Wars, but I liked BSG better as a story because it had a tie in to earth whereas Star Wars simply suggested their was this whole universe of simultaneously advanced and yet somehow ancient looking civilizations some of whom were so power hungry they would build ships the size of a planet (where did they get the damn money to do that???)

The story lines of BSG were pretty simple…but mostly fun. The underlying story was that the powers of evil (call it the Devil, Satan, whatever you want) was/were bent on the destruction of humanity and had manipulated a race of beings that had let technology get the best of them to aid in that effort (that’s where the Cylons came from). There are also direct connotations that the goal of the evil in the universe was to keep humanity from evolving to the next level (becoming part of the cosmic consciousness)some Catholic and other Christian dogma suggest that when that happens the evil (Devil, Satan) ceases to exist. So Iblis’ objective is to continue on forever but he can’t if humanity succeeds in evolving to the next level.

So that’s the real story line. In Star Wars you have a struggle between good and evil also but because there is no correlation to earth lore, we do not understand what the fundamental goal or objective of evil in the Star Wars Universe is other than to rule the Universe (to what end?) The Galactic Emperor wants to rule the universe and do what, get additional discounts on senior meals at Denny’s? Score with some young hotties, “..hey baby I’m Galactic Emperor…”

Certainly, the original BSG is flawed. It was never intended to be a weekly series and the production values of a feature film (which it had) were nearly impossible to keep up. Episodes were in post production (several times) last minute the morning they were to be aired on ABC. Some of the dialogue of the show seemed thrown together (kind of like a Star Wars film in that way…don’t ya think?” “It’s obvious this contest will not be determined by our knowledge of the Force, but by our skills with a lightsaber.” C’mon.

As for the new BSG…yes…BSG was hugely popular and still is. The PTB that made the re-imagined version banked on the enormous press they would get by calling their show BSG. I have no qualms about the new version…it could just as readily been called “Babylon 5″.

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:46:45 +0000

Well, Darrell, WWII was way before my time! So unless you are in your 70’s?

I’, talking about my generation that grew up watching the original series. I have no recollection of Pearl Harbour because I never lived through it.

By: Darrell Lawrence

Darrell Lawrence — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 06:21:55 +0000

Michael, ever hear of WWII? Yes, our country had lived through a “9/11″, except it was on a 12/7 instead :)

Ever hear of Godzilla? The original movie, I mean. It was the analogical movie in regards to WWII.

So yeah… Hollywood has been there and done that.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 07:29:56 +0000

Darrell,
I don’t think anyone was saying that the FX of the 3 hour premiere of ToS BSG were cheesy. What was cheesy was the constant re-use of those effects in later episodes. I liked the OS, but as an adult, I look back at it and have to laugh. It was cheese. But, those were far different times in which we lived. We had not lived through a 9/11. The compelling stories that we see today could never have been told back then. In a way it was a far more innocent time, but maybe that is because most of us were kids, and hadn’t yet had 30 or 40 years of life experience under our belts.

By: Mark L

Mark L — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:11:49 +0000

The original was popular because of it’s multi-generational appeal. It was a family western in space. The young crowd got the sci-fi gadgets, the heroes and the babes. The older generation had the Bonanza-style plots, and very good actors like Colicos and Greene. It was a hit because it struck people at several levels.

My basic objection to the new BSG when it came out was that it abandoned the family premise. The sex and violence factor were raised to the point that I couldn’t watch it with my 9-year old. We only recently started watching it. I enjoy the new series. The storylines – while predictable to a degree – are still more adult in nature. Still, I resent that they pushed the envelope as much as they have. It wasn’t necessary.