Battlestar Galactica 2003? (1 Viewer)

[Jeff]

And even more here:

http://www.mediablvd.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=180

 

[Eric Paddon]

That merely increases the number of people who can consider themselves part of a baffling mystery of life.

As far as I'm concerned, those who think Moore's piece of junk is great are people who really haven't much regard for the original to begin with. They are certainly not to be counted among the real fans who fought hard for 25 years to try and see a true continuation made that resumed the storyline of characters we genuinely liked and cared about. And for shame to Ronald Moore for destroying 25 years of dreams in the name of his tasteless "reimagination".

 

[Eric Paddon]

"but I also heard that Tom DeSanto wanted a crack at it, among others)."

That's an understatement David. DeSanto had written a script and had a continuation set 25 years after the original which was to bring back several cast members for a series project with Fox. Sets were constructed and they were weeks away from beginning when 9/11 brought everything to a halt and then Bryan Singer, whose involvement had gotten Fox to approve the project, had to move on and then Fox lost interest and DeSanto was left with nothing. Then when Sci-Fi took interest, their execs demanded a total reimagination of the property and thus enter Ronald Moore and his travesty.

The long and short of it is that the real Galactica fans were on the verge of seeing 25 years of dreams finally come true only to see something happened that never in our wildest imagination did we think we'd see. Something with the name "Battlestar Galactica" on it written by a man who is ignorant of the original series and contemptuous of the very things that made the original special and enduring to us (the storng, positive characters, the clarity of an absolute good-evil struggle, the importance of religious faith in the lives of people) and who reinvented Galactica in the image of its detractors by loading it with the stale, putrid cliches of dysfunctional characters, secularism and contempt for religion, and boring "shades of gray" approaches to conflict, not to mention gratuitous sex galore.

I loved how Dirk Benedict finally let loose with his opinions on this travesty in a recent magazine article. What he said best expresses the feelings of the traditional fan base.

 

[Randy*S]

I would'nt even touch this dvd with a 100000 foot pole.
If it is'nt the original or at least a respectful continuation then they better NOT expect to be getting my money.

 

[derek]

Excellent posts Eric you've summed up my feelings quite well.

 

[James Lee]

Okay, I have to say something here.

I really take offense to this notion that people who like both the old and new Galactica are somehow less of a fan than others. Eric, I can appreciate how much you hate the new Galactica. I really do. It's obvious there are people who hold the original very dear to their hearts. Well, you know what? I love the the old Galactica as well. Maybe it doesn't have the same sort of spiritual impact or meaning on me that it does for others, but that doesn't mean I cannot be a fan.

Eric, if you (or anyone else) simply cannot comprehend how anyone can enjoy both versions of Galactica, fine, that's your own personal hangup. Don't insult me because I don't happen to share your opinions.

 

[Eric Paddon]

James, the botom line for those like me is that if you think that Moore's version is somehow a worthy heir to something with the name "Battlestar Galactica" on it, then whatever affection you have for the original is not sufficient to have wanted to see a true continuation of the storyline we were left hanging with 25 years ago, and for which people like me have wished to see continued at long last in a real, respectful project (we of course do not acknowledge the thing called "Galactica 1980").

You are entitled to whatever opinion you choose to have regarding these shows. And I am also entitled to my opinion regarding those who think Moore's vision is somehow wonderful in the tradition of the show it hijacked the name from.

 

[James Lee]

That's fine. I agree that you have your opinion and I have mine. What I take offense to is the notion that because I liked the remake, I cannot possibly be a fan of the original. There are different levels of what constitutes a fan. You don't seem to think there is in this case. Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying, but that's the way it comes across to me.

 

[Kraig Lang]

Both your opinions are valid, but Eric, I find this statement really offensive and you might want to reconsider how you state it.

 

[Eric Paddon]

My opinion, which I am entitled to, is that those who think Moore's version is great, are ultimately by default those who at best can only say they "liked" the original or saw it as a "guilty pleasure" because their affection can not have been strong enough to want to see the storyline continued, and for the original to finally get the respect it deserves rather than the flagrant disrespct given it by Moore, David Eick, Bonnie Hammer and all the others associated with it.

By my definition, a fan of Battlestar Galactica who understood and loved what it stood for, is a fan who has spent the last 25 years fighting the good fight to rebutt the lies and disinformation spread by its bashers (for example, the "Star Wars ripoff" lie, which always leaves out how George Lucas' lawsuit was dismissed as being without merit, and how Lucas was a hypocrite of the first order considering all the genres and films he borrowed from; or the lie that Galactica drew bad ratings when its ratings were the highest any sci-fi show has ever drawn in the history of network television), and who loyally read substandard comic book revivals and substandard novels by Richard Hatch to help the property, and who endured one disappointment after another as we kept hoping for the big break to finally come. We are the ones who kept interest in the property alive for 25 years, and Ron Moore, the outsider who never watched more than one episode after 1979 before he decided what was wrong with it, sabotaged our dreams in the name of his monumental ego.

But if you think Moore's reinvention is so great and can be enjoyed, then fine, go ahead, but it sure as heck reveals to someone like me that you didn't have regard enough for the original to see it done justice and with respect and dignity that Moore's effort took away from it completely.

I'm sorry if that annoys you, but that is how I feel. As I said, you are entitled to believe what you like, but I am also entitled to believe what I think about those who think the two can be "loved" equally because to me that is like saying that the presidential candidates can be loved equally when they stand for two different things completely.

 

[James Lee]

You know Eric, I commend you on your passion for Galactica and what it means to you. However, I completely disagree with with what you said, and I'll leave it at that. Obviously, this debate is only going to go in endless circles. We've both said what we felt needed to be said and I think that is sufficient.

 

[DougFND]

Battlestar Galactica may be the definitive highlight of my television youth. I loved the show, I still love it. I very, very much wanted to see the continuation with the original cast.

That being said, I am more than willing to give Moore's version a chance. I still haven't seen it, it's been sitting on my TiVo since last December. I'm hoping to finally watch it this weekend.

I'll judge it on it's own merits. I'm not going to automatically hate it just because I love the original so much. And I'm not going to automatically like it because it is called Battlestar Galactica.

 

[Terry St]

If you have been personally fighting for 25 years for a new BSG series, and this is it, then I can understand why you're disappointed. You have to admit your expectations might have been just a wee bit high however. I confess my regard for the original is nowhere near as high as yours. I saw it. I enjoyed it. It was a great TV series for the time. However, I've seen better since. (*gasp* Blasphemy!) The new version wasn't better than the original BSG at it's best, but that was the freakin' pilot! It definately wasn't anywhere as gawdawful horrible as BSG at it's worst, so I'm willing to give the new version a chance. (Except maybe Starbuckette. She really did suck.) Feel free to go ahead and fight for another 25 years for your ideal vision of what BSG should be. Everyone should have a hobby.

 

[Robert Floto]

Speculate on another person's feelings all you want. I like both versions. Sure they're apples and oranges, but it is very presumptuous of you to state emphatically that anyone who likes the new version cannot be a true fan of the original. You don't know me or my thought process.

I lived on Galactica when it was originally broadcast. I was at best skeptical of the new "re-imagining". But then I saw it and was pleasantly surprised.

I'll most likely pick up the DVD...and I will definitely give the new series a chance.

 

[Eric Paddon]

"Why did Sci-Fi's exec's demand a "total reimagination" of the property? Maybe DeSanto's version, even though it catered to long-time fans, sucked. I wouldn't rule that possibility out. Sci-Fi exec's have proven their stupidity before but, since they've produced more Sci-Fi shows than myself, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt."

You'd be wrong. What Sci-Fi did had nothing to do with the quality of the script and everything to do with a decision to spite DeSanto and his approach to the property because the DeSanto project was slated to be done for Fox as the prelude to a revived series, and Sci-Fi execs didn't want to just jumpstart something planned for another network originally, they wanted to put their own "trendy" stamp over it. After they did this, the Sci-Fi flack department issued one lie after another about supposed connections to the original that weren't there which finally proved too much for even Edward Olmos who had to be blunt about things in a press conference, and if that wasn't bad enough the Sci-Fi channel went out of there way to trash the entire fanbase of the original series as a bunch of neurotics locked in a 70s time capsule and suggesting that our fondness for the original was based on a love of dated hairstyles and FX.



"You have to admit your expectations might have been just a wee bit high however."

Wrong again. We had our hopes dashed back in 1993 when supposedly Fox was interested in a revival project. You know what killed interest in that? Low attendance at the 15 Yahren Con in Los Angeles. But the reason the attendance was low was because the hotel that ran it suddenly forgot it was sponsoring it and their flunky employees were answering phone calls about the Con by saying "There's no Convention taking place here" and in the process a lot of people who planned on coming got turned away needlessly thanks to those morons (Dirk Benedict almost didn't show up because of the info he got) and the hotel had to apologize for what they did, but the damage was done.

And then with DeSanto-Singer, we got right to the precipice of something definitive only to have it snatched back at the last minute. The interest in this case went a lot further then any planned original cast continuations of Lost In Space ever did.

"It definately wasn't anywhere as gawdawful horrible as BSG at it's worst"

One-dimensional dysfunctional characters spouting dialogue lifted from the soap opera plots of "Midway" and "In Harms Way"; cheap costumes taken off the rack; a philosophical approach totally at variance with the original; wooden performances by all actors involved. The list is endless.

As far as fighting for the true vision, I'll take an interest in a genuine revival campaign, which only Glen Larson can do now that he successfully won theatrical rights away from Universal, only when this show fails and becomes deservedly forgotten like the 90s version of "Get Smart" since IMO one can't happen without the other.

 

[David_Blackwell]

Eric, I like the new BSG. I would have loved to see a continuation. However, I have found some of the episodes of the original to be poor while other episodes were good.

 

[Eric Paddon]

Of course Galactica had its share of bad episodes. But its the strength of the best episodes (the pilot, Lost Planet Of The Gods, Living Legend, War Of The Gods, and most importantly the last episode The Hand Of God) that played the most significant role in developing the show's themes as well as the broad story arc of the series and its based on what was principally established in those episodes that justified the 25 year desire for a true continuation.

 

[Lars_J]

Let me add myself to the list of people who definately enjoyed BSG 2003. And I find it superior to the old BSG. (so far)

Of course, I've only seen the old BSG in reruns shortly before seeing BSG 2003, so it clearly lacks the nostalgia factor for me.

 

[Sven Lorenz]

Ron Moore is a very competent writer and I have no doubt that the show will run for many seasons. He should try to hire some of the old DS9 gang, Ira Steven Behr and Rene Echevaria are busy right now, but what is Robert Hewitt Wolfe doing lately?.

The miniseries was the best pilot for a show since DS9's Emissary IMHO.

And Eric, if Richard Hatch has calmed down enough to even accept a guest spot (or maybe even a recurring character) on the new show then maybe you should doing the same (calm down I mean - not getting a guest role . ).

 

[Eric Paddon]

"Ron Moore is a very competent writer"

Not when it comes to Galactica, where he is an incompetent hack getting his jollys by recycling the kind of cliches Galactica refreshingly avoided, and now still incapable of original thoughts for his masterpiece reinvention as he was touting it, is now going to rework classic episodes which means we can all expect his version of Commander Cain to be a crazed female whose militarism stems from a nasty bout of PMS.

"He should try to hire some of the old DS9 gang"

Seeing Galactica remade in Star Trek's image is yet another cause for reaching for the Immodium.

"And Eric, if Richard Hatch has calmed down enough to even accept a guest spot (or maybe even a recurring character) on the new show then maybe you should doing the same (calm down I mean - not getting a guest role . )."

Sven, don't waste your time trying to get those of us who have every reason to be pissed off by the existence of this piece of junk to go away by giving us your version of Katee Sackhoff's "deal with it" line. And as for Richard Hatch, who only took that role to get a paycheck that he can't get anywhere else, I prefer to stand with Dirk Benedict whose sentiments summarized things perfectly in a recent article where he blew Moore and company off.