Greg Cox wrote:
Greg Cox wrote:
To each their own, I guess, but I confess that my mind boggles at the idea that the old BSG is the "best" anything.
Never saw the appeal, even back in the eighties.
Maybe this is a generational thing?
It probably is. Speaking for myself, as a member of the original audience of BSG:TOS (okay, I was only eight in 1978, but still...), I can honestly say I don't see what the younger folks see in Ron Moore's overrated, pompus remake.
Hah! That's not the generation gap I was thinking of! I was in college when the old BSG debuted and thought it suffered in comparison to the shows I grew up on, like TOS. Maybe you need to be exposed to old BSG at the right age. By the time it debuted in 1978, I was already too old for it. To my oh-so-sophisticated freshman self, BSG was kid's stuff.
But, for the record, it's not just "the younger folks" who prefer the new BSG. I'm an old coot who found the reboot much more dramatic and engrossing than the seventies version . . . .
Okay, I'll lay out my reasoning. It's not a generational thing at all.
First, while Twilight Zone was not always strictly sci-fi in its original run, during that run it presented some of the most incredible science fiction stories I've ever seen. "Where Is Everybody?," "The Invaders," "The Lateness Of The Hour," "Two," "The Odyssey Of Flight 33"...I wasn't old enough to see them in first runs but the first time I saw them in reruns as kid I was enthralled, literally enthralled, by those little amazing half hour dramas, in a way that I haven't been enthralled by any sci-fi show since.
By contrast, I saw my first Trek TOS episode when I was about six, and I found it dull. I've grown to appreciate it as I've gotten older, but nowhere near in the way I latched on to the TZ:TOS and never let go. Star Trek is good, but let's be honest: All it really is is Gene Roddenberry trying to redo "Forbidden Planet" over and over again every friggin' week. And Forbidden Planet is one of my favorite movies. And Trek has never been as good as that either.
Now with BSG:TOS, my reasoning is actually simpler and less high-falutin'. No, it's not great science fiction. In fact, it suffers from trying to be both Star Wars and Star Trek at the same time, which I always had a problem with, and one of the reasons why I liked nuBSG was that it bled all that trekkie/warsie nonsense out of the story. Haters can hate it all they like, but new Galactica was more "Galactica" than the original.
And yet, I still take it over Trek for these simple reasons: I like big-ass aircraft carriers. I like big-ass spaceships. Galactica is the first big-ass carrier spaceship I'd ever seen on the small or big screen. In my mind, everything else gets owned by that, and I tuned in RELIGIOUSLY to watch that big gorgeous beauty spit out vipers and blow Cylon raiders to smithereens. What? The plot was stupid? It wasn't about the characters? What's your point?
I'm Admiral2 and I approved this message.