New Battlestar Galactica series..Any news of a dvd release? (1 Viewer)

[Britton]

Why didn't they release a "Season 1.0" boxset? That box was called just plain ol' Season 1. That's my final say in this matter.

 

[Dharmesh C]

I decided to buy BSG set this week after a few recommendations. I fell asleep during the mini series and finding it difficult to stay interested on disc 2.
Some neat ideas but it lack a sense of importance and intrigue.

I hope it gets better.

 

[Jay Pennington]

Let's not forget that network promotions departments write their own copy and may have been in error if they promoted the cliffhanger as a "season finale".

I worked in TV news, and the promotions people pretty much did what they wanted and sometimes misrepresented (intentionally or not) the stories they were promoting. I'm sure it's not so different at the network level.

 

[Will_B]

The "season" shall from this point forward not be referred to as either "season two" or "season two point o", but rather shall be known simply as "Betty".

 

[Qui-Gon John]

Zack, as Mark points out, you keep saying Sci-Fi changed their minds is a fact. But you fail to provide any source information to back that up. That is why I asked if you had some kind of inside information. Since you do not indicate that is the case, we can only surmise you are just stating your opinion and calling that a fact.

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

I've seen actual development reports from Sci-Fi. There has always been a break scheduled between now and January. It is not Season 3. It is a continuation of Season 2.

 

[Bill_Nolan]

It was the "summer season" finale. They use the "season" word differently on the Sci-Fi channel than the rest of the TV world. Their shows have Summer Seasons and Winter Seasons. Season 2 is made up of one of each. The DVD's are just designed to cash in on the interest as soon as possible.

- B

 

[Zack Gibbs]

This is how I would look at it too. They never classify the number of the season and its common on cable shows (MONK follows this exactly), the only difference here is the DVD release of the summer season. Because the DVD's do count their seasons they will have no choice but to classify the Winter season as either 2.5 or 3. I think Universal will decide that releasing "BSG season 2.5" will possibly be confusing to customers, and in the interest of not wanting to lose any sales, however slight the possibility, they'll decide to go the easy route and call it Season 3.

 

[Paul McElligott]

And you know this, how?

How do you know the marketing department at Sci-Fi didn't simply screw up when they put together the promo? All I know is that Ron Moore, the guy in charge of the show, says that season two is 20 episodes. I don't see any reason to dispute him.

 

[Sam Favate]

For years now, HBO has been putting out season sets of the Sopranos with only 13 episodes, so does it really make a difference if Universal does the same with BG and calls them "Seasons"?

It's a great show - it's aired in 10 or 13 week increments; the DVDs are released the same way. As long as the quality of the transfers or the extras don't suffer, I don't care how they label the show.

("BG: Season Betty")

 

[Mark Talmadge]

Actually, Sci Fi has always done this with just about every show that has been released. Farscape, Stargate SG-1, Stargate Atlantis, Invisible Man, Sentinel ... Sci Fi has always taken a break in their broadcast schedule and return two months later with new episodes.

The thing you have to remember is that most other shows take 4-week breaks within a broadcast season but Sci Fi puts that break time together. They don't show repeats of the series until after every episode has aired. If you recall, Sci Fi airs the first half of the episodes, takes a two month break, doesn't show any repeats of the season, and then finishes off showing the rest of the episodes.

It's their way of showing the entire season, without running through the repeats until the following season ends.

 

[Sam Favate]

Really enjoying Season 1. Just watched "Bastille Day" and I have to say I'm really impressed with Jamie Bamber. Far more than just a pretty face (which, if you ask me, is all Richard Hatch was to the original show, along with Laurette Spang and Maren Jensen), he's really intense. It's very refreshing to see a young leading man in a series like this that can handle complex situations and a complex character. Of course, the sharp writing helps. (I should add that Richard Hatch is great in the new show; it gives him a chance to do things the original show could never have conceived of.)

 

[Mark Talmadge]

Excuse me? Richard Hatch & Dirk Benedict WERE what made the original Battlestar Galactica great and I highly contest the fact that they were merely pretty faces. Sure, the script-writing was pretty bad but that was the fault of the staff writers working for Universal at that time. You can't blame the actors for the bad dialogue or cheesy writing. The original show is pretty enjoyable.

I look at the new series as the keeper of the flame, one generation passing the torch off to another. It's unfair to judge or compare one series over the other. Both have their positive traits over the other.

Plus, you have to look at how the original series was treated back during the seventies and eighties. Universal was severely tied down because of what George Lucas was doing with the Star Wars films and he didn't want anyone copying his use of special effects and other ideas he used for Star Wars.

Jamie Bamber and Katie Sackoff have added new dimension to the characters and while the acting on the new series is better than the original series (writing from the seventies television shows are horrendous) Richard Hatch and Dirk Benedict had a strong on-screen presence that is often missing in many sci fi epics. Even William Shatner didn't have that type of presence as Captain Kirk.

 

[RickER]

Lucas didn't have any say or control over the effects of Galactica in the 70s. Yes Lucas did sue Universal, but that didn't stop them from doing what they wanted. The problem with the effects is they shot their johnny wad on the first 5 hours aka the Battlestar Galactica miniseries (1978). After that, 90% of the effects were reused, and reused even more! As you said Mark, it is not fair to compare both shows. The effects work of the 70s took far longer and cost way more. Galactica of the 70s was the most expensive show ever. Now a million an episode is nothing. Gotta love them both for different reasons. Apples and Oranges.

 

[Mark Talmadge]

Yeah he did, Universal agreed that they would not violate his creative rights by using the same sound effects he was using like the sound of the blasters and lasers and all of that. Just watch the bonus features on the BG Original Series set, it's all in there.

Universal was greatly hampered and the series was even nearly canceled because of budget problems and the like.

 

[Simon Massey]

Never saw the original series but I have just completed watching Season 1 of the new series and I have been very impressed. Looking forward to seeing Season 2 now.

 

[Ric Easton]

I'm looking forward to owning season Betty. It still seems like a long wait for Season Veronica on Sci-fi.

Ric

 

[Steve Berger]

Wrong "Betty" I think. "Master Pain" might be the predecessor and "The Chosen One" could be the next.

 

[Christian L.]

TVSoDVD has the new cover-art for Season 2.0. Looks great, fits Season 1 pretty well. Can´t link to it directly, because i´m still

 

[Gord Lacey]

Here's the link Christian:
http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/newsitem.cfm?NewsID=4240

Gord