So I started with this show...

[Robert Maxwell]

You keep saying "more dynamic and visceral" as if they make any kind of point.

They don't. They're just words you throw around without anything to back them up.

[Deckerd]

I'm getting some popcorn, brb.

[The Mirrorball Man]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

Yes, the old SFX are in some ways better. If nothing else, they are more dynamic and visceral..

That's an interesting point of view but I can't quite understand where you're coming from. Could you provide us with, say, one clip from each show to illustrate in what way the old BSG feels more "dynamic and visceral" than the new one?

[backstept]

Take a look at the main battles in Hand of God, the Resurrection Ship two-parter and the Exodus 2 parter, and tell me it's not dynamic, visceral and exciting.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'll look for clips and post them later

[The Stig]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

First I'm a big fan of RDM and his work on Trek.

And I liked the fact that this show has some deep themes.

But man, these shows... sucked!

I hated the camera work. Let's zoom in, not keep the camera steady, and zoom in some more at random intervals.

It was filmed in a documentary style, so the idea was that the camera operator had to scramble to find the frame and track the action because he didn't know what would happen next. I think it worked fairly well, particularly in the effects shots.

See, JJ did some similar "energetic" camera work on his Trek film, but at least his performers embued their roles with enough life to match the enegey of the camera. Two of the most reputed actors, Olmos and McDonnell, seem lifeless and stagnant, giving line readings that never change.

Well that's simply wrong. Olmos and Mcdonell gave shockingly raw performances that ran the entire gamut of human emotion. I can only assume that you didn't watch the show if that's your opinion on their performances.

I know he's the stoic captain, but when he checks up on Starbuck to see how she's making out fixing the raider, and when he announces that there's a potential threat on board, his tone is the same in both instances. Ther eis no difference. Every line he delivers is wooden and exactly the same.

Not so much, no. Off the top of my head, I'd point to the confession scene between Starbuck and Adama in 'You Can't Go Home Again' as a prime example of just how much EJO can do with his eyes.

I like Olmos but I think tha Scott Glenn would have been a better choice, because Glenn portrayed a similar style of captain in Hunt for Red October, yet the actor sis some subtle things in that performance that let us know there was a human behind the character even if the captain and his command style was deliberately dispassionate.

Scot Glen was good in 'Red October,' but I wouldn't put him in the same league as EJO.

Often five or six dramatic things will be brought up in two minutes of screen-time, then they will be all shelved for much later episodes.

THE CGI space scenes look like bad video games and lack the excitement and visceral energy of the old show.

Starbuck writing her name in duct tape on a raider so they'd recognize her... how ludicrous can you get?

The original show featured the same Viper with the same afterburner trail over and over and over again. At least nuBSG gave lip service to the concept of zero-g flight. As for Starbuck writing her name on the Raider, how else should she try to identify herself?

[DalekJim]

I dislike JJ Abrams' shaky lens-flare wankery style too but the battles in NuBSG are terrific and exciting. Some of the best CGI you'll get on TV.

[Robert D. Robot]

CGI vs. models? I suppose it still depends on the quality of the CGI and/or the quality of the models and how they are filmed. I've always enjoyed Babylon 5, despite my initial need to shift my mind to get accustomed to the CGI look of that production. The CGI of nBSG is -for me- quite a jump in quality over the visuals that they we able to create for B5. I love Star Trek TOS, but the special effects for that show are not in the same league as something like what we see in nBSG. Although I think it is interesting to see what they have done for TOS Remastered, I still am very fond of the original special effects. The beat-up, re-numbered model of the Constellation rotating slowly in space, however, just can't compare to that sequence in TOS-R where the rock hits the battered primary hull of the Constellation, bounces, and shatters.

Same goes for Original Galactica effects. While I am fond of them, and I respect and enjoy them for what they are, they would look crude and dated if those techniques were used in a production made today.

To simply prefer old special effects may be a case of personal taste and nostalgia (and this is everyone's right), but those factors don't hold up well when objectively comparing the quality of the effects.

[MickJo1701]

The CGI for the vast majority of nuBSG is excellent, admittedly there are certain sequences in seasons 3 & 4 that have bugged me since I first saw the series but I certainly wouldn't say the VFX isn't dynamic or visceral.

The decision to film documentary style was what visually set the show apart for previous SciFi series IMO.

[tighr]

MickJo1701 wrote:

---

The decision to film documentary style was what visually set the show apart for previous SciFi series IMO.

I agree... I instantly noticed this tactic, the "zooming in and out before focusing on the subject". I thought it added a bit of realism to the obviously CGI shots. Part of what made nuBSG work for me.

[teacake]

I love everything.

[Robert D. Robot]

[I removed the comment originally posted here because -although it was a intended as a humorous observation on the way the discussion was developing- it is possible that the remark might be taken as more of a dig, rather than what was intended]

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'm removing my post as well. i was in a bad mood when I responded and I shouldn't have been so snappy with my remardk. At the time, I really felt that the comment about Katie Couric and Palin was an unjustified comparison that was meant to be a dig on personal opinion, and I was furious, and snapped. I apologize.

[Robert D. Robot]

^ I am sorry. That post of mine was not intended to be about the validity of either of the points of view expressed by the posters in the discussion, it is just that the wording used in that particular exchange sounded a bit like that exchange in the news a while ago.

However, making any comparison of anyone (or anyone's choice of phrasing) to Sarah Palin should be done only with very careful consideration and only with either a close friend (who will laugh it off) or with an enemy (that you wish to intentionally antagonize). While I can not call you a close friend, Flying Spagetti Monster, you are a fellow member here and definitely not an enemy; I regret that my urge to make a joke overruled my good judgement. I am sorry to have ruffled feathers!

[Neroon]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

Oh shut up. Just shut up. here aren't many useable clips of the old BSG battles online. Plus, we're talking about an aesthetic opinion.

Screw you

Infraction for flaming. Comments to PM