Battlestar Galactica Feature Film Confirmed 342
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.'"
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.
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
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.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm guessing the name was necessary to obtain funding for the series.
"I want to make an gritty and edgy new sci-fi series, loaded with violence and moral conflicts. Oh, and in the first episode, 50,000,000,000 people die."
"No."
"Ok. My second proposal: A re-imagining of Battlestar Galactica."
"GREAT IDEA!"
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.
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?
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, and the mice were furious!
PS. (Score:3, Interesting)
The last episode did seem to be a re-imagining of the end of the Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (TV and (first) Radio series, it's the end of the Book "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe").
Just think of the parallels:
A man in a bath steers the last remnants of a dying race to their final destination planet, Earth, in a ship who's name starts with the letter 'B' ("B Ark" vs. "Battlestar Galactica").
They land in pre-historic times and out-compete the indigenous pre-agricultural humanoids, supplantin
Re: (Score:2)
I believe you meant "AbsoFrakkin`lutely"
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Lame special effects
I guess you're trolling but I'll bite and ask: Are you frakkin' kidding?!! I remember watching the show every Sunday night and being blown away by the FX. There was nothing on the air like it in 1978:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ED89A1rm-Bg [youtube.com]
This stuff was done *on TV*, with MODELS and motion-control cameras. It was unprecedented. I realize every kid today can whip off an episode of Star Track on his Macbook, but that was not the case in 1978.
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:4, Insightful)
Never mention 1980-anything with respect to Battlestar Galactica again!
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
He got it. He didn't merely fixate on that one aspect of the original.
Fortunately, he did seem to really "get it" and tried to focus on the
character aspects of the original series that were really the heart of
the success of the original series.
TOS was all about Kirk+Spock+McCoy. Space and the future human nirvana
was just the backdrop. Trek starts to reek not when it forgets about
the cuddly teddy bears but when it forgets it's about people/characters.
Trek succeeds only when it doesn't deviate too far from be
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.
Re:Bede bede bede (Score:4, Funny)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also a rip off for those who like the new series itself but are forced to associate it with the original series.
I definitely can second that. If it's anything like Abrams Star Wars^W Wars^W Wars^W Trek film for TNG ff. fans, then: no, thanks.
Re:Bede bede bede - say what? (Score:3, Interesting)
To say that re-imagining is crap is to say that any story that is redone is automatically inferior to it's predecessor.
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*.
Re: (Score:2)
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
No bit he got a lot more blood out of that rock. He sucked in a Lot of the rabid fans, even after the introduction of Jar-Jar all of you rabid fans went back to watch Ep II and Ep III.
Star Wars fans are suckers. He proved that. BSG fans will be just as big suckers, Movie studios count on rabid fandom to go and buy or spend even though the film is tripe.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
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).
Yeah, I'm so glad how me made Greedo shoot first, but Han still measures time in distance.
Now excuse me for yard. I've got a phone call.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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...
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?
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically both come from America
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syphilis#European_outbreak [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Amazing (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. You can't have channels with generic terms like "Discovery" or "History" or "Learning".
Meh... (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
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.
Re:Why does everything have to be child friendly?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fair enough. However, I think far too many movies these days are ruined (or at least not as good as they could / should be) due to being "suitable for kids" and trying to appeal to a broader audience.
Obviously Star Wars comes to mind with Jar Jar, but you also had similar things in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (Mutt getting hit in the crotch, the swinging with the monkeys), and the Transformer movies of course (the twin's being all ghetto, Bumblebee peeing on the guy, etc). These thi
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And I'm not required to watch the drek the movie'll be.
But even if every bit of onscreen violence is taken out, the main idea that mankind has almost been obliterated and is now being hunted by remorseless machines is adult and not all that suitable for kids.
I wasn't proposing having the BSG movie be "Elmo in Space." I'd be perfectly willing to bring my older kids to a movie with space fights, Centurions vs. Colonial warriors shooting each other with side-arms, etc. Even with scenes showing the nuking of their home planet and possibly having to leave some behind.
What I won't bring my kids to is babies having their necks snapped, or the sex scene where the Cylon skin-job mounted on top of Baltar, with her spine lighting up as she has an orgasm.
I really don't c
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.
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?
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is nothing new. Folks pay other people to kill cattle, swine, sheep, goats, rabbits, fish, crustaceans and poultry on their behalf millions of times every day. Most of them would have to be personally starving before they could bring themselves to be that necessarily predatory/brutal up close and personal. To say nothing of using a knife to clean the guts out of a hog before r
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The death of one is a tragedy, the death of a million is a statistic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Claim?
WTF does "claim" have to do with it?
They made a BSG series that is not for kids. So... don't show it to your kids. You might as well place some "claim" on Saw and say they should make that kid friendly.
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
Re: (Score:2)
(the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)"
I can't remember that one, is it on the DVD edition? I only watched the part that aired. And i can understand why you consider that gross. Especially when you're a 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: (Score:2)
Too bad that the whole final season was a one big filler.
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.
Re:Thank goodness (Score:4, Insightful)
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
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
70's Starbuck was male.
Err, that was the GP's point.
Others maybe don't know that.
70's Starbuck objectified women.
Which doesn't necessarily imply that he was male. Women can objectify women, too.
And then thre ws the whole "women flying vipers, we can't do that!" episode which IIRC ended with a patronizing "didn't they do well" and was never mentioned again.
Now that's a good example for objectification. And i didn't know that one :)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
"perfect" is far too generous. It was VERY good in parts; it was also absolutely dire on occasion and the ending was a complete betrayal of the sci-fi fanbase (IMO of course). For me, it would have been perfect if they had decided the show was sci-fi at heart; instead they decided to write a space opera.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why can't they know when something is "complete"? Because despite all the claims to the contrary, Hollywood (indeed, the entire entertainment industry) is NOT about "art"--it's about money. There are a lot of individuals in the industry who think of themselves as artists, and there are a few (a very few) who actually are artists--or at least craftsmen--but most of the decisions about what gets produced, and how those productions are edited, marketed, and then "slowly milked to death" are made by people who
In other words (Score:5, Insightful)
Larson hated the new series
Re:In other words (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that is true... but there's some gaps today too -- Tricia Helfer and Grace Park for example. They ain't winning any acting awards this side of hell freezing over. TnA casting all the way.
Re:I bet he'd have liked it if he'd been in it-NOT (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately Sci fi is a genre that doesn't age well unless its done *really* well. Cheap sets, tacky costumes, poor technology (sorry , a wardrobe with flashing lights and some tapes spinning doesn't cut it in 2009) and bad acting end up making something made in the 70s or 80s almost comical now. One of the few exceptions I can think of is Space 1999 (not sure if the yanks ever got that) which I watched last year and though it looked a bit dated the effects somehow still worked and Martin Landau was/is a
Re: (Score:2)
I caught an episode of UFO [wikipedia.org] once. From a modern perspective it wasn't great but I could almost watch it - until one of the shots where the actors were wearing space helmets and bell-bottoms. I just couldn't take it seriously after that.
IMO Gerry Anderson should have stuck to puppets. I know it was always his ambition to do live-action, but supermarionation was what he did best. Thunderbirds has barely aged at all.
Re: (Score:2)
"Thunderbirds has barely aged at all."
Agreed. I guess its because its puppets which makes it almost cartoon like and cartoons generally age much more slowly than live action.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Problem is every time I watch any of the Thunderebirds I keep having a song run through my head...
"america...... America..... America F Yeah! here we come to save the mutherfin day now......"
Thunderbirds is forever changed now...
Re: (Score:2)
Actually after hearing all my life about how great that movie is, I tried to watch it last year. I might it about half way through before the cheesiness (especially the soundtrack) was too much to bear. Sometimes I think people who saw the original before it was outdates simply view it later with different standards than people watching for the first time.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Dirk Benedict may not have liked it, but Richard Hatch actually had a proposal for a sequel to the original series. He has a demo tape with some awesome footage that is everything you would expect from the original series. I got to see it a few years ago when he came to a convention I was at. (And how can you go wrong with a sequel to a show that killed off an '80s pop singer in the first episode?)
Article [scificool.com]
Youtube [youtube.com]
However, the people with the big money wanted to do Boobiestar Galactica, and denied him the
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a a developer that get his/her code forked and improved x100
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)
Good thing too (Score:2, Funny)
slashdot advert ? (Score:2)
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!
Aim between (Score:2, Interesting)
The former was a product of the times but suffered the same sort of flaws that would happen in similarly targeted family-friend shows of today - it had it's own Annoying Kid/Jar Jar (Boxy and Muffet the robot-ape-dog-thing), shocking techno-blags, appalling support actors (not to mention somewhat teak-like main actors). But there was always a sense of prevailing optimism, and heroes were heroes as opposed no
Re: (Score:2)
And I agree that they are essentially the same premise done under two different world views. The original was the classic hero odyssey, politically right wing ("Sometimes the opposite of war is not peace, the opposite of war is slavery"), family values type of fare - space opera and simple at its roots. The re-imagined series was exactly the opposite - there were no
Singer already tried this. (Score:2)
Nine years ago, Singer was working on a made-for-TV adaptation of BSG, but it got delayed and died and eventually Fox "lost interest" in the project.
So rather than sitting back and saying, "Well, Ronald D. Moore got lucky and did great, good for him!", Singer's got time now and is probably thinking "Hey, I can make a lot of money on this!" I'll bet whatever he does is based on the work from 2000. Or maybe it's Larson saying "Hey, I hated that re-imagining, let's see if Singer's still interested and I can m
Why can't Larson do what Lucas Did (Score:2)
... and spruce up the old series with CGI environments... ships in the air and a couple of bantha or dewbacks walking through New Caprica before the attack?
Seriously, in how many ways does this story need to be told? It's why we have re-runs and syndication agreements.
I could see doing something like Richard Hatch's idea of creating a new movie that erases the embarrassment of Galactica 1980 and adds to the story where the original series left off, with as many of the original actors as you can get. But a
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)
DO NOT WANT -- or NEED. (Score:3, Insightful)
Does this mean (Score:3, Funny)
Starbuck will be a guy again?
Re:Bleh (Score:4, Funny)
grats for spoiling the ending, someone mod that down :D
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Bleh (Score:5, Funny)
grats for spoiling the ending
You can't spoil the ending: the writers already did that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Really? You thought "Cylons started with an emo teen" was a good plot?