Battlestar Galactica Movie Back On.

[Christopher]

I don't have a problem with seeing fantastical trappings. I don't always have a problem even with the unconvincing trappings. But I also think it's cool that Moore went a different route. Like Chekov's Phaser said: do away with the distractions and get to the story you want to tell.

But if the setting of an SF story is just a "distraction," then you're doing it wrong. In speculative fiction, the world itself should be a generator of story. The parameters and nature of the world should shape how the characters act and interact. If the setting is just decoration on an ordinary story that could take place on our world, then the writer is failing to take advantage of the opportunities the medium provides to explore human nature in ways that couldn't be done in an ordinary setting.

This is something that the Galactica/Caprica franchise did do at its best. The most interesting parts of Caprica's world were the alien parts -- the rise of artificial intelligence, the virtual world, the exotic religion and group marriages -- things that weren't just arbitrarily different, but different in a way that catalyzed story and shaped character interactions and allowed exploring thematic questions of human nature that you couldn't address in an ordinary crime drama, say.

I once read a great editorial from Stanley Schmidt back while he was still the editor of Analog, refuting the attitude among many writers that serving the characters well required a cavalier approach to the setting, science, and worldbuilding, or vice-versa. As he put it, the setting is essentially a character in its own right, because its nature and its rules affect the way the characters think and act just as much as they affect each other. And so the setting and the characters should be treated with equal care. It shouldn't be seen as a zero-sum choice between the two.

Not to mention that different things can be distracting in different contexts. For me, it was constantly distracting that these characters who were supposedly from an alien world were going around wearing present-day clothes and using Western names and so forth. And when they started using source music from our world -- that "All Along the Watchtower" thing that actually became a key plot point -- it just pulled me out of the narrative altogether because it made no sense. That is a distraction. The trappings of an imaginary world aren't distracting at all as long as they're integrated smoothly into the whole and feel like they belong. But incongruities and things that undermine suspension of disbelief are very distracting.

 

[Silvercrest]

Okay, but mostly what you're talking about is how fantastical world-building should be done in theory. In practice, it's been done so poorly so many times that jettisoning the fantastical seems like a reasonable option. If that's too distracting for some people, then okay. It doesn't work for everyone. It's a little hard to know where to draw the line, since obviously some of those elements still had to be there.

To be fair, I also had a hard time with All Along the Watchtower and the fact that it was a plot point.

 

[Chekov's Phaser]

Moore's BSG tried to appeal to viewers outside of traditional sci-fi circles. When you are trying to do that, you don't want to scare the viewers who are perhaps less inclined to sci-fi. So they went with a more contemporary setting, and they came up with an excuse as to why that was. Those of us that are sci-fi fans would not have been put off as much by futuristic clothing and settings, but I think the creators, and perhaps Syfy executives, felt their setting choices would be the best for pulling in a wide arrange of viewers.

While I didn't mind their choices, it is one of the limitations of sci-fi on film or television. They are usually constrained by budget and concerns of getting and keeping viewers. That's why science fiction books are still, in my opinion, the best medium for the genre!

 

[Christopher]

Okay, but mostly what you're talking about is how fantastical world-building should be done in theory. In practice, it's been done so poorly so many times that jettisoning the fantastical seems like a reasonable option.

I'm sorry, but "If you're not doing it well, just give up trying" doesn't strike me as a healthy attitude. And "If others aren't doing it well, you shouldn't bother to try" is even worse. If others aren't doing it well, or if you didn't do it well in the past, that's an incentive to do it better.

Granted, having 20th/21st-century North American cultural trappings in an ancient alien civilization is no worse than having Ancient Egyptian or Greek trappings in said civilization. They're all equally fanciful, and they're all just part of the stylistic choices the creators made in concocting their fantasy worlds. I just don't agree with the blanket generalizations you're citing as justifications for those choices in this instance. Any more than I agree with the assertion that they represent any kind of "realism."

 

[Silvercrest]

That's your prerogative, I suppose.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

So yeah, I don't think the new Superman movies are as good as the Christopher Reeve ones, Superman 2 will always be the greatest Superman film in my opinion, dark Superman and probably the direction just didn't work.

That wasn't quite what I asked.

For the record, I also have huge problems with the past two Superman movies, with "Smallville", with "Lois & Clark" and even with "Superboy". But that does not mean that there should never have been another live action Superman after Christopher Reeve, just because he was the "definitive" Superman. As Christopher pointed out, "definitive" is mis-used anyway.

Yes, I still consider Chris Reeve's protrayal as Superman to be definitive, but the live action productions that followed him each had things to add.

"Superboy" welcomed the more fantastic parts of the Superman mythos that the movies neglected, L&C worked really well as a romantic comedy, "Smallville" explored Superman's youth, something the Christopher Reeve movies mostly neglected as well (twelve years studying in the Fortress of Solitude), and in later seasons explored the expanded concepts and characters of the DC Universe, Superman Returns was a Hommage on the first Reeve movie while presenting a more Art Deco visual, and MoS gave us a Superman closer to he current comics than the Reeve movies are.

Now, again, all these productions were flawed, sometimes heavily, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have been made, and it certainly doesn't mean there never should be another live action Superman ever again.

So, why should there be no new version of BSG,, just because nuBSG was so "perfect"?

They did try to make things look a bit more alien/futuristic in the mini series but the show itself dropped a lot of that for budgetary reasons and I think it worked out great. The contemporary style set BSG apart from other shows that default to spandex jumpsuits and the like, and it made some of us question what was going on. If they're from a distant world, why does their culture look so much like ours? It piques your interest. Moore's been good at making things work on the fly and I think he did very well here. The show even developed an entire mythology around it. "This all happened before and will happen again."

It didn't pique my interest. It made me think the producers were just lazy and/or dumbing down the concept for dimwitted people.

 

[JD]

I wasn't at all bothered by all of the modern stuff in RDM's BSG. It did seem kind of weird at first, but I think it worked with the way they talked about things constantly repeating themselves. To me it wasn't really that different than any other si-fi shows' settings, this one just happened to look more modern than most.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

For me, it was constantly distracting that these characters who were supposedly from an alien world were going around wearing present-day clothes and using Western names and so forth. And when they started using source music from our world -- that "All Along the Watchtower" thing that actually became a key plot point -- it just pulled me out of the narrative altogether because it made no sense.

I remember reading that the explanation (which was never mentioned on the actual show) as to how our own society on Earth managed to generate such an absolute carbon copy of the worlds of the Twelve Colonies is because of some kind of genetic or racial memory. I doubt you believe that any more than I do.

That said, I'm actually wondering why they didn't simply start things out on Earth to begin with. Meaning, have all references to 'Kobol' on the show actually be Earth. That's actually what I thought they were going to do, to be honest. Have Kobol actually be Earth all along.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

That said, I'm actually wondering why they didn't simply start things out on Earth to begin with. Meaning, have all references to 'Kobol' on the show actually be Earth. That's actually what I thought they were going to do, to be honest. Have Kobol actually be Earth all along.

Not even Earth was Earth on that show.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Not the first Earth, anyway.

 

[Commander Richard]

That was a great twist. It would be hard to top.

 

[theenglish]

One of the biggest problems with costumes on sci fi series is that they all too often represent the fashion sense of when they were made and then look dated only a few years later. It is rare that a costume designer does something truly unique that creates a "timeless" sense to the clothing and hair designs in the movie or series. Two of the best, in my opinion, exceptions to this come from Star Trek. The red and black movie uniforms still look good today, and the purple grey jackets over the colored shirts in the later seasons of DS9 and the later movies still look good. The BSG uniforms in the Moore series still look good as well. In part, this is because two of these choices are based on military styles that haven't changed much in the past half century or so.

 

[Commander Richard]

It made me think the producers were just lazy and/or dumbing down the concept for dimwitted people.

I suspect that one of the things that Moore was going for was good production quality. If BSG had gone with a more sci fi look it probably would have made the show look cheap. 'Cheap' is a strong word though. Most sci fi shows look that way and that's fine, it's something we've learned to accept but it's nice to see a show like BSG take a different route.

 

[Christopher]

One of the biggest problems with costumes on sci fi series is that they all too often represent the fashion sense of when they were made and then look dated only a few years later. It is rare that a costume designer does something truly unique that creates a "timeless" sense to the clothing and hair designs in the movie or series.

I think Jean-Pierre Dorleac's uniform designs for the original BSG still hold up pretty well. The jackets with all the buckles that were never buckled were a little odd (they did buckle them sometimes on Galactica 1980, which had a different costuming staff, and it just didn't look that good), but I don't think their look is particularly dated. (Now, the hair, on the other hand...)

Two of the best, in my opinion, exceptions to this come from Star Trek. The red and black movie uniforms still look good today, and the purple grey jackets over the colored shirts in the later seasons of DS9 and the later movies still look good.

I've never much cared for the Wrath of Khan uniforms. Okay, they look snazzy and all, but they're ridiculous as everyday duty uniforms, way too heavy and overcomplicated. They should've used that look only for dress uniforms, and for everyday fatigues they should've ditched the Hornblower-cosplay jackets and just gone with the turtleneck and slacks, like the pilot uniforms.

People tend to trash the ST:TMP uniforms, but I think they look far more believable as practical, utilitarian wear, with a wide range of different variations for different needs -- one-piece, two-piece, long-sleeved, short-sleeved, etc. Plus they included specialty garb like body armor for security personnel and radiation suits for engineers -- innovations that the later movies kept but TNG and the later shows abandoned. The 22nd-century jumpsuits from Enterprise were great too, although they also skipped the body armor. Those two are the only uniforms that really feel to me like functional garments for starship officers rather than costumes for TV or movie actors.

 

[The Wormhole]

I've always been perplexed by the negativity towards the "suit and tie" wardrobe for nu BSG. After years of seeing them create futuristic looking civilian attire on the Star Trek shows which to be honest looked ugly and uncomfortable, I actually found it a breath of fresh air to see characters in a space opera dressed in normal clothes. That was new and inspired to me.

 

[Romo Lampkin]

That wasn't quite what I asked.

For the record, I also have huge problems with the past two Superman movies, with "Smallville", with "Lois & Clark" and even with "Superboy". But that does not mean that there should never have been another live action Superman after Christopher Reeve, just because he was the "definitive" Superman. As Christopher pointed out, "definitive" is mis-used anyway.

Yes, I still consider Chris Reeve's protrayal as Superman to be definitive, but the live action productions that followed him each had things to add.

"Superboy" welcomed the more fantastic parts of the Superman mythos that the movies neglected, L&C worked really well as a romantic comedy, "Smallville" explored Superman's youth, something the Christopher Reeve movies mostly neglected as well (twelve years studying in the Fortress of Solitude), and in later seasons explored the expanded concepts and characters of the DC Universe, Superman Returns was a Hommage on the first Reeve movie while presenting a more Art Deco visual, and MoS gave us a Superman closer to he current comics than the Reeve movies are.

Now, again, all these productions were flawed, sometimes heavily, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have been made, and it certainly doesn't mean there never should be another live action Superman ever again.

So, why should there be no new version of BSG,, just because nuBSG was so "perfect"?



It didn't pique my interest. It made me think the producers were just lazy and/or dumbing down the concept for dimwitted people.

Smallville was quite good, L&C was 90s smugness but there is nostaglia there. Anyway I'm not saying you can't make new versions, by all means go ahead. I think it's more just an annoyance/alienation from culture as it is around 2008-2016 and beyond. Why do people get so upset about the remakes of Total Recall, Robocop or the new Ghostbusters film? For me it's this, I was making a film and along with my friend and we asked two of the other cast members if they liked TOS? Now being 20 they said they preferred the new Star Trek films and didn't know or didn't want to know anything about the classic 60s TV show. I was like nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! in my mind because essentially they like an inferior, shallower product because it ticks the cultural norms of this era and it's more polished/professional while lacking any kind of soul, (thank you Abrams). So my issue is that when you do these updates at the moment, they're invariably worse, and that's what people then think is BSG, Robocop or Star Trek when you have these entire other fictional universes that are richer, more human and full of depth, wonder and genius that are being ignored because they don't fit in with this era, which basically produces shallow, corporate entertainment, where the dynamic between profit and art is completely turned towards the former so that it's totally unbalanced. In any case it's rather dispiriting that anyone I ask has not seen nuBSG, which is a shame as they're missing out on the greatest TV show ever, instead they prefer...Voyager...

In relation to Buffy being dark yet being a comedy, I agree Christopher, great writing is essential and Joss Whedon is a genius. His adaption of Much Ado About Nothing is an example of Shakespeare done right. I think a dark Buffy would be possible. I also agree that the moments of levity with Gaius for example worked extremely well in BSG. On the other hand I'm glad they didn't really go in for 'comedy' episodes like in the X Files which generally failed at said comedy. I think comedy is a very tricky thing to achieve.

 

[Christopher]

So my issue is that when you do these updates at the moment, they're invariably worse...

The complaint that "The stuff the kids like today is worse than the stuff I liked" has been a constant in every generation throughout human history. If it were remotely true, we would've long since degenerated to incoherent grunting. New things aren't worse, they just aren't what you're used to. Sooner or later, all of us have to realize that we aren't the primary target audience anymore. So we should face it with dignity and respect other people's right to like their own things, instead of stroking our own egos by pretending that our tastes are somehow fundamentally superior to theirs.

 

[Commander Richard]

That's the problem some people had with the new BSG. It wasn't what they were used to.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

I've always been perplexed by the negativity towards the "suit and tie" wardrobe for nu BSG. After years of seeing them create futuristic looking civilian attire on the Star Trek shows which to be honest looked ugly and uncomfortable, I actually found it a breath of fresh air to see characters in a space opera dressed in normal clothes. That was new and inspired to me.

That may be, but BSG was the wrong outlet for this. It totally works on "The Expanse", because that is actually our not-so-far future, but it's just ridiculous on a show about people to whom Earth is a myth.

Smallville was quite good, L&C was 90s smugness but there is nostaglia there. Anyway I'm not saying you can't make new versions, by all means go ahead. I think it's more just an annoyance/alienation from culture as it is around 2008-2016 and beyond. Why do people get so upset about the remakes of Total Recall, Robocop or the new Ghostbusters film? For me it's this, I was making a film and along with my friend and we asked two of the other cast members if they liked TOS? Now being 20 they said they preferred the new Star Trek films and didn't know or didn't want to know anything about the classic 60s TV show. I was like nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! in my mind because essentially they like an inferior, shallower product because it ticks the cultural norms of this era and it's more polished/professional while lacking any kind of soul, (thank you Abrams). So my issue is that when you do these updates at the moment, they're invariably worse, and that's what people then think is BSG, Robocop or Star Trek when you have these entire other fictional universes that are richer, more human and full of depth, wonder and genius that are being ignored because they don't fit in with this era, which basically produces shallow, corporate entertainment, where the dynamic between profit and art is completely turned towards the former so that it's totally unbalanced. In any case it's rather dispiriting that anyone I ask has not seen nuBSG, which is a shame as they're missing out on the greatest TV show ever, instead they prefer...Voyager...

You know, I get that. I used to be like that. But while I hate the current comics DC is putting out (I'm using this as an example, I could use others), but there's still all those classic comics I love, and some odd DC books like "Superman - Lois & Clark", or "Legend of Wonder Woman", that keep me happy.

And if some people enjoy those new books, good for them. If I meet younger people who don't know the older stuff I like, I tell them about it, give them a chance to get to know it, and if they're still not interested, well, that's okay. It's their loss, it's their right to choose the version they prefer, ultimately it's all the same.

Of course, I think like that while my two nephews (ten and eight years old) like Superman with the red trunks better than the current one.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

That's the problem some people had with the new BSG. It wasn't what they were used to.

That sounds like just another excuse for not liking nuBSG. It was 26 years between the two series'. I saw TOS when it aired and loved it as an 11 year old. Then I loved the new series as a 37 year old.