I always have to laugh when people call BSG intellectually satisfying.
I liked 'Stargate:Atlantis" better than "Battlestar Galatica"!
- Thread starter Jayson
- Start date
Loved the mini-series, enjoyed season I, when it was more about sci-fi, and less about "drama".
Atlantis was a big "meh", but enjoyable enough.
Atlantis was a big "meh", but enjoyable enough.
Perfect summary of the way I felt about it too.
Er... thank you.
Oh, somebody must.Hey now, nobody actually likes Frank Miller's All-Star Batman & Robin.
Possibly so; it does seem to incur a lot of mockery. But it still falls into the same darker-and-grittier-reaches-level-of-self-parody category as the others. It's hard to say, really, why B&R is laughed at while nuBSG is the darling of the tragically hip. It's like why do people defend the recasting of Star Trek yet violently oppose the recasting of the voice talent on Futurama? Some things are inexplicable.
I believe that's pretty much it. But it's still the D&G fad to the point of ridiculousness, especially following relentlessly on the heels of "Civil War" and "Secret Invasion" and all the other depressing events they've had. "World War Hulk" was one. I can't think of the others. This is what people seem to want these days. Dark, dystopian milieus full of unlikable, corrupt characters; not to mention the frequent shocking death of major characters. Perhaps it's because young people have all grown up in the post-Reagan world and just accept this as the norm.
On its own, it could be an intriguing premise, depending on the ultimate explanation (which nuBSG never had). However, I believe Ron Moore made some excuse about not wanting to distract from the storyline. I think it was more likely a lack of imagination and a desire to appear mainstream.
Yeah, that's it exactly; the trend is to mainstream the magic out of everything.
Quality?
Or maybe it's because the Futurama voice talent were only just putting out movies this year, while the Star Trek cast haven't been academy age since before the show was first broadcast.
Possibly because the cast of Star Trek is far too old (or dead) to continue whereas the Futurama cast are all quite capable of continuing in their roles. Also, presumably the people that liked nuBSG while not liking B&R did so because they thought that nuBSG was better written than B&R. Just as I'm sure that there are some things that you would label as "non-gritty sci-fi" (TM) that you don't like despite the fact that that you like other "non-gritty sci-fi" things. Some things are inexplicable but these aren't among them.Oh, somebody must.Hey now, nobody actually likes Frank Miller's All-Star Batman & Robin.
Possibly so; it does seem to incur a lot of mockery. But it still falls into the same darker-and-grittier-reaches-level-of-self-parody category as the others. It's hard to say, really, why B&R is laughed at while nuBSG is the darling of the tragically hip. It's like why do people defend the recasting of Star Trek yet violently oppose the recasting of the voice talent on Futurama? Some things are inexplicable.
nuBSG was much more interesting than Atlantis because it was something different and wasn't afraid to show a darker side to sci-fi as opposed to the often light-hearted Atlantis. Not saying there's anything wrong with light-hearted shows, but I've seen it all before in older series. Atlantis also recycled familiar plotlines a bit too much aswell.
Hmm. No, that's not it.Quality?
No, I more got the impression that Futurama fans felt that only those certain actors could play the parts, while the Star Trek reboot proponents felt that the characters are just parts that any number of actors could play.
I'm not talking about crossover appeal between B&R and nuBSG; I'm sure that the audience for most of the examples I mentioned are largely exclusive. But the overall appeal of this type of entertainment is in the air, so it strikes me as a bit odd that Frank Miller has fallen out of favor while the other examples still have "the buzz."
I think it is. I found the show compelling and innovative from a production standpoint, I liked a lot of the ideas it presented, and I like that some things were open-ended enough to allow for some additional thought and debate. It's been over for almost 5 months now and I still think about it, especially how it ended. I don't feel that way about very many things I watch.
The look of their civilization wasn't clearly explained on the show, but there is an overriding theme ("This happened before and will happen again.") that at least sheds some light on the matter. Moore also went further in his interviews by mentioning a "collective unconscious" that people from different eras drew from subconsciously to create. To be fair though, that wasn't addressed on the show itself. I guess the question now is whether or not the afore mentioned theme is enough to allow someone to connect the dots.
That's a possibility, but even if it started off that way, I think he did manage to use what he had to make up something that worked. The show is filled with holes that he managed to plug with what I thought were some great ideas and explanations.
People are complaining that BSG didn't look alien enough? Really? Who gives a shit? So long as the characters are good and the story is good it doesn't matter if they're walking around in togas.
^ The production design is as much a part of the shows as the charcters are, so I'd say that looking good is important.
Because the other examples ARE GOOD! Christ. You seem to be making a virtue out of rejecting what's popular for the sake of rejecting what's popular, which makes you no better than the poeple you claim only like this stuff because it's what's "in the air" right now. Just because you categorically reject an entire style doesn't mean others aren't capable themselves of making quality distinctions about works that use that style.
It is, but not as important as story and characters. Plus, the show did look good so where's the problem?
^ I'm just not one to downplay it as unimportant. For me it's an equal part of a complete package. And yes, the show did look good, so there's no problem.
Yeah, that really misses the point doesn't it?
^^ Not if your interests involve creativity.
Funny how Moore's "collective unconscious" allows for a history of Human civilization on this planet with an incredibly diverse variety of cultures that are far more alien to the here and now than an alien civilization that existed thousands of years ago on another planet. And funny how the here and now is an exact cultural clone of that alien civilization at a completely different stage of its development. He just wanted that mainstream appeal, that's all. That's part of the current trend. This genre used to be about "the sense of wonder" and "the literature of ideas." Now it's about proving that we're not those geeks that SNL makes fun of.
No, those other examples are pathetic. And I don't reject an entire style-- although I do reject conformity, especially when it's been going on, and getting more extreme, for a quarter of a century. There are other shows currently and lately that make pretty good use of that style, such as Lost and Firefly.
Funny how Moore's "collective unconscious" allows for a history of Human civilization on this planet with an incredibly diverse variety of cultures that are far more alien to the here and now than an alien civilization that existed thousands of years ago on another planet. And funny how the here and now is an exact cultural clone of that alien civilization at a completely different stage of its development. He just wanted that mainstream appeal, that's all. That's part of the current trend. This genre used to be about "the sense of wonder" and "the literature of ideas." Now it's about proving that we're not those geeks that SNL makes fun of.
While I agree that Moore's creative claims for the show's style strike me as somewhat dishonest, it's not really possible to do truly strange and alien on a TV budget--at least, not in a fashion that I would accept. I doubt it has as much to do with this conspiratorial mainstreaming you speak of as much as it was simpler to create a series that didn't look idiotic if they recycled real-world items for clothing and props. Why pay more to custom-build a whole world when real life has done most of that for them? As long as we're comparing nuBSG to SGA, I saw what happened when Stargate tried that alien style, and it looked mind-bendingly, brain-searingly, drool-inducingly moronic. I mean, seriously, seriously stupid. I would much rather have the "unimaginative" style of nuBSG, where my intuition can look past the visuals so as to see the story and characters involved, rather than a (failed) attempt to be alien where the cardboard sets pull me out of the narrative. I suspect you'll try to cast this another way people who like that kind of thing are perpetuating a lack of imagination, but so be it. If it's a failure of imagination to overlook visual shit, then so be it.
Huh. I guess Moore might have had a creative reason after all.
There's only so many ways or times I can say I feel you're wrong, so simply consider me to have said it again, and for a final time. We're clearly never going to agree on this.
I think BSG would have been much bolder if he had just taken the logical stance that these travellers originally came from our Earth and all the messy consequences of that story, especially if the denouement were set in a recognisably contemporaneous Earth. It was a copout having "Earth II" and it was a copout not having any Earthers to say WTF?
Shows I liked better than the new Battlestar Galactica: Babylon 5, some of the Star Trek series (especially DS9).
Shows I liked better than Stargate Atlantis: Babylon 5, pretty much all of Star Trek, the new Battlestar Galactica, Firefly, Lost, Fringe, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, possibly Heroes.
Shows I liked less than Stargate Atlantis: Farscape, Eureka, Sliders, Earth: Final Conflict (Season 2 onwards), Lexx, Andromeda, Seven Days.
Shows I liked better than Stargate Atlantis: Babylon 5, pretty much all of Star Trek, the new Battlestar Galactica, Firefly, Lost, Fringe, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, possibly Heroes.
Shows I liked less than Stargate Atlantis: Farscape, Eureka, Sliders, Earth: Final Conflict (Season 2 onwards), Lexx, Andromeda, Seven Days.
It's possible that several Earth cultures, past and present, existed in Colonial society, we just never saw much of them. Kobol for example seems to have had their version of ancient Greece. It even had an Oracle at Delphi. And like I said, the world Moore created and the explanations behind it work for me even if part of it was in fact an attempt to be contemporary and mainstream. Also, as Gep Malakai said, it probably wouldn't have been possible to do a truely alien culture that looked good and naturalistic on whatever budget they had. For me, it was better that they shot a scene in an actual opera house in Vancouver rather than try to create a bluescreen backdrop the way Enterprise did when Archer appeared at the stadium in San Fransisco. I've always been glad that this show did away with a lot of unconvincing CGI, obvious sets and fake backdrops. Stuff like that wouldn't have gone well with the cinema verité style Moore was aiming for.
Since I'm on the subject, I think "cinema verité" is a better way to describe the show than saying it tried to be "mainstream".
Last edited:
Similar threads
