Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

473 comments

"Nothing for you to see here" (-1, Offtopic)

Kithraya (34530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209917)

I hope the "Nothing for you to see here" message isn't a premonition for the quality of the show...

If Ron Moore were to produce The Phone Book... (5, Informative)

Audent (35893) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209922)

I'd turn up. More power to ya, Ron.

BG has gone from strength to strength. Who'd have thought it, for a remake of such a camp piece o'crap. I went in with EXCEEDINGLY low expectations. Maybe that's the secret.

Anyway, Ron can tell a story. I'll be there.

Re:If Ron Moore were to produce The Phone Book... (5, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209986)

You say that now, but you haven't seen the episode where Starbuck flies her viper over a tank full of Space Sharks.

Ooops! I forgot! SPOILER WARNING!! THE ABOVE IS A SPOILER!!! DON'T READ IT IF YOU HAVEN'T SEE THE EPISODE!!

Her? Her? (1)

artifex2004 (766107) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210118)

I keep forgetting Starbuck's a female, now.

I wonder if this will finally make my props from the original series go up in value...

Star Trek linked to pedophilia? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210075)

This has very little to do with the article, but the L.A. Times recently published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit [torontopolice.on.ca] that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl" [pqarchiver.com] ). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:
On one wall is a "Star Trek" poster with investigators' faces substituted for the Starship Enterprise crew. But even that alludes to a dark fact of their work: All but one of the offenders they have arrested in the last four years was a hard-core Trekkie.
Wow. All but one in four years. Seemed rather unlikely to me.

So, I called the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit and spoke to Det. Ian Lamond, who was familiar with the Times article. He claims they were misquoted, or if that figure was given it was done so jokingly. Of course, even if the figure was given jokingly, shouldn't the Times reporter have clarified something that seems rather odd? Shouldn't her editors have questioned her sources?

Nevertheless, Det. Lamond does confirm that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest." They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs."
Det. Constable Warren Bulmer slips on a Klingon sash and shield they confiscated in a recent raid. "It has something to do with a fantasy world where mutants and monsters have power and where the usual rules don't apply," Bulmer reflects. "But beyond that, I can't really explain it."
I asked Det. Lamond if this wasn't simply a general interest in science fiction and fantasy, such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or similar. Paraphrasing his answer, he said, while there was sometimes other science fiction and fantasy paraphenalia, Star Trek was the most consistent and when he referred to a majority of the arrestees being Star Trek fans, it was Star Trek-specific.

I have a bad feeling about this... (2, Funny)

tm2b (42473) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210153)

Maybe so - but if we find out that Dr. Zee and the superior Cylons from Galactic 1980 are fighting a temporal cold war, I'm outta here. Aw hell, that'd even bring the original BSG and the Moore version into the same "continuity"...

I hear that Berman & Braga are looking for jobs now, after all, and Moore worked with Berman on DS9... [Shudder]

Re:I have a bad feeling about this... (1)

sanman2 (928866) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210178)

Nah, Dr Zee will first go back in time to fight the Nazis, like any hero seeking rite of passage must do. Caprica comes much later. He may bring along Wolfman Jack.

I for one (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15209923)

I for one welcome our new Cylon Overlords.

Re:I for one (-1, Offtopic)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210074)

Pyslons, you're insenitive clod! Where's a grammar nazi when you need one... :P

Re:I for one (0, Offtopic)

flynns (639641) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210133)

Pyslons, you're insenitive clod! Where's a grammar nazi when you need one... :P

Cylons*
you*
?*

Right here! ;)

Re:I for one (1)

flynns (639641) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210136)

...insensitive*

-sigh-

This is a follow as well (4, Funny)

gasmonso (929871) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209925)

The original series started back in 1954 and was called Paprika.

http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]

rut ro (0, Troll)

UniverseIsADoughnut (170909) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209927)

So how long till they introduce klingons and upset people. Will fred flinston travel in time and end up there?

Will people curse the lame theme song, and then demand the series be saved later on?

And most importantly, who will be introduced as the newest Sci Fi hot chick.

At any rate, maybe this will be good, cause there is a lot to be explained

Prequel? (2, Interesting)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209934)

Don't we write stories from the beginning anymore?

Re:Prequel? (1)

ezratrumpet (937206) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209939)

Not unless we're absolutely certain that the only way to get major studio interest involves starting at the beginning. Even so, there's always *something* that happened before the beginning.......

Re:Prequel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210116)

"Even so, there's always *something* that happened before the beginning......."

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1)."

Re:Prequel? (5, Funny)

daspriest (904701) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210224)

I'm still waiting for the book before Genesis on the origin of God, It should make quite the prequel.

Re:Prequel? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210261)

"What if God was only one of several omnipotent beings? And what if our Earth is only the latest in a long line of Their flawed creations?

"This Fall on Fox prepare to be on the edge of your seat as the creators of '24' and 'The X-Files' team up to bring you *drumbeats* 'PreGenesis'"

Re:Prequel? (3, Insightful)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209992)

Well, they clearly can't do a sequel, because the series isn't over yet. And in a fleet of 45 thousand people (ignoring "Lay Down Your Burdens II for a minute) there aren't really enough interesting things going on to have a a co-existing series. I mean, unless the fleet splinters for good along Pegasus/Galactica lines or something (in which case, it'd be two pretty much identical series).

Therefore, a prequel is really your only shot. And considering BSG started with the near total destruction of an entire civilization that looked pretty darn cool in its own right...

Re:Prequel? (2, Funny)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210014)

And considering BSG started with the near total destruction of an entire civilization that looked pretty darn cool in its own right...

See? There ya go. You already know how the prequel is going to end :-)

Re:Prequel? (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210022)

Yeah, we do know how it's going to end, which is kind of annoying, but we only know that the Colonies survive, and that Adama and any other characters make it. 90 percent of the ships and characters in the show are still at risk of death at any time.

Re:Prequel? (3, Insightful)

Gattman01 (957859) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210091)

See? There ya go. You already know how the prequel is going to end :-)


That didn't stop Lucas from making his prequels.
That didn't stop the people who knew what was going to happen from seeing them anyway...:P

That being said, sometimes know what the results will be can drive suspense, especially if things seem to be going in an direction away from whats *SUPPOSE* to happen.

Still need to end up with expected results anyway, otherwise people will complain, like when a certain character says she remembers he real mother when she was very young, but in a prequel we find out the woman died in childbirth?

Re:Prequel? (2, Funny)

Babbster (107076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210017)

Well, they clearly can't do a sequel, because the series isn't over yet.

I'll tell ya the real reason they can't do a sequel: Because as bad as anyone might have thought the original BSG was, Galactica 1980 was at least a hundred times worse. I don't think anyone could "reimagine" that into anything good. :)

Re:Prequel? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210013)

We've been writing them from the middle for quite some time now (unless you consider Sophocles or Homer to be recent authors). Ever hear the phrase "In medias res" [wikipedia.org] ?

Honestly... (4, Funny)

TechnoGuyRob (926031) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209935)

I'm not interested in a series whose name is an anagram of "I C A CRAP!"

You make a valid point... (5, Funny)

TCQuad (537187) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209980)

I'm not interested in a series whose name is an anagram of "I C A CRAP!"

That may be a valid point, but I can't trust any comments by One Butch Orgy.

Re:You make a valid point... (-1, Offtopic)

DreamingReal (216288) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210270)

Heartiest laugh I've had while reading Slashdot in YEARS!

Re:Honestly... (1)

Russ Steffen (263) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209985)

It's a good thing we don't moderate posts based on anagams of the poster's nickname, Mr "ENOCH TUB ORGY" [mbhs.edu]

Re:Honestly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210150)

"Honey borg cunt" is also a questionable anagram... :)

Re:Honestly... (4, Funny)

CosmeticLobotamy (155360) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209996)

And I think anyone objecting to a show about evil robots whose name is an anagram for "Cyborg tune ho" should be regarded with suspicion.

Re:Honestly... (1)

onenil (624773) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209997)

This coming from a guy who's name is an anagram of "G YOU RETCH, NOB"

Re:Honestly... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210094)

I was more concerned of his anagram of
BOY CURE THONG
and/or

BOY COG HER NUT

Don't hurt BSG (4, Insightful)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209942)

I just really hope that this doesn't hurt the quality of BSG by spreading writing/producing talent as well as budgets too thin. I mean, I think Stargate might be suffering from that right now, having two complete series to do.

I also think that having a prequel could hurt a bit, because I feel like a strength of BSG is its unpredictability. I mean, it changes so much (season finale anyone?) that I feel that knowing the ending (Cylons created, rebel, we fight to a draw, Galactica survives to the present day, none of the Colonies get totally destroyed, etc) kind of hurts it.

Re:Don't hurt BSG (4, Insightful)

Babbster (107076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210043)

I don't think Stargate is suffering because there are two SG shows. I think it's suffering because it's been around for so long. Once the Goauld (sp? and I don't care to remember :D) were taken out/neutered, the show started to lose its way. I don't really blame them, though, because that war had to end (probably a season too late, really).

I think both shows (SG1 and Atlantis) are still entertaining, but the best seasons are probably behind us.

Re:Don't hurt BSG (0, Flamebait)

supabeast! (84658) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210174)

"I don't think Stargate is suffering because there are two SG shows. I think it's suffering because it's been around for so long."

Stargate is suffering because it's just a knockoff of those original Star Trek episodes where the crew encounters a planet that happens to represent a static civilization. IIRC, TOS had three such episodes in its entire run, and that was too many. Stargate has been running the gimmick into the ground nearly every episodes for nine seasons, trying to justify it by tossing in guest spots by evil galactic overlors. Of course, there we also the episodes about the replicators, which amounted to almost two seasons of nothing but knocking off the Borg.

I'm not sure if the Stargate shows are a sign of how hard it is to get decent Sci-Fi produced by mainstream American media outlets, or of how pathetic Sci-Fi fans are for continuing to watch that shit in the first place. Either way, it's pretty sad that we aren't getting something better.

Re:Don't hurt BSG (2, Insightful)

madstork2000 (143169) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210180)

I don't htink StarGate is diluted by having too shows, I think it is dilutted by getting unfocused. There are about a zillion enemies now, and I can only by then defeating one major threat at a time. and that it HARD to do. For example we have seen the replicators pretty much wiped out unceremoniously.

I would have liked to see an extended war with them, and the human replicators (no a crappy Sam clone). But I honestly think they were pressured to kill of the replicators because they were too much like another Sci-fi series... BSG.

Atlantis would also be better if they didn't keep intorducing villian of the week. A la ST: Voyager / ST: Enterprise. In my opinion the best ST series was DS9, and that usually focussed on one bad guy at a time, allowing us to learn more about each villian, that growth is important so we can have emotions about the villian, we can see strengths and weaknesses, learn compassion, etc.

Lately StarGate and the recent star trek series, have all broken from that model, jumping around to a multitude of diferent threats, never allowing the audience to identify and build any emotion toward the bad guys.

BSG has successed because they focus on one enemy / problem, and all the story is focused on either learning more about how we deal with the enemy, or about the personalities of the main characters. We are not uncovering weird space aliens every episode, nor are we picking fights with unknowns aliens every step of the way, running errands for some star fleet command, etc. What we see is people, by and large average people, trying to deal with extraordinary circumstances. We can relate to those people and that is why BSG is so compelling.

If the new series can capture that same focus it will succeed too. Though, it seems to me like it will be hard to focus on an enemy that does not exist yet. Which means we'll likely see the two families as rivals, with motives along the lines of profit margins, and ethics, etc that will allow the cylons to rapidly evolve.

It will be a fine line, as it seems to me the technology be even less important in the new series than it is on BSG. On BSG it really takes a back seat since about the only things they seem to have that is far advanced from us is big space ships (with FTL drive and artificial gravity), and of course the cylons.

Oh well, even the Sci-fi sucks for not picking up Firefly, and for killing Farscape, BSG absolutely rocks, and if the spin off is 1/4 as good it will be entertaining and something I would be interested in watching.

-MS2k

Re:Don't hurt BSG (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210071)

I completely agree. I'm a huge fan of the series and, to be honest, I'm completely mystified as to why Moore went along with this ... considering how much he values the quality of the show & how much time it takes just to make the 20-episode seasons. This was a big issue for the show, especially in the second half of the season, and it's also one of the reasons we saw some filler episodes such as "Black Market"; it's also why the season was pushed back until October, at least one of the reasons. In general, you get the sense that, to maintain their standards and put out 20 episodes, they are essentially pushed to the wall.

Yeah ... the only thing I could possibly think of is that, perhaps Sci Fi approached Moore and said: look, we're going to do this prequel whether you're onboard or not. So, if you want creative control, here's your chance. Honestly, I think this might have happened. If you notice over at Sci-fi, Moore hasn't updated his blog or made any announcements or anything of that nature. Not a word.

If this is the case, it's not good news, as you're going to have a bitter producer, reminiscent of Moore under B&B back in the ST: TNG days.

Great idea, BUT... (2, Insightful)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209945)

...does anyone else think it might be a tad too early to start doing the prequels?

Re:Great idea, BUT... (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210006)

No, it's better this way. It would be much better to find out NOW, if Ron Moore is going to be the next Lucas, rather than wait for many years to have him destroy our childhood dreams.

Re:Great idea, BUT... (1)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210181)

I didn't mean he should wait 20+ years to do the prequels. But seriously - Galactica hasn't even hit season 3 yet.

Re:Great idea, BUT... (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210089)

Unlike George Lucas, Ron Moore is having his mid-life crises while he's young. Which means that the complete saga DVD set will be out a whole lot sooner.

Re:Great idea, BUT... (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210233)

So, do the Cylons shoot first on the complete saga special edition DVD?

Its not really a prequel (3, Interesting)

voss (52565) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209947)

You know adama wont die but thats about it.

Also regarding the prequel issue, lots of movies come about
world war II and are quite good despite people knowing
how world war II turned out they still seem to have good plots.

Remember eps 1-3 (was:Its not really a prequel) (1)

Lead Butthead (321013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210073)

You know adama wont die but thats about it. Also regarding the prequel issue, lots of movies come about world war II and are quite good despite people knowing how world war II turned out they still seem to have good plots.
Well, everybody KNEW where Lord Vader (we're not worthy, your unholyness) came from, but that didn't stop Lucas from botching it.

It's going to be GREAT! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15209951)

OMG! Am I the only one that is excited about this?
It's great news! I'm sure it's going to be awesome.

Rejected names (4, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209955)

Boomer loves Chachi

Col. Tigh's Place

Laverne and Dualla

Caprica City 90210

A Different World

Law and Order: Special Cylon Unit

Re:Rejected names (1)

Russ Steffen (263) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210011)

Personally, I was hoping for CSI:Picon.

Re:Rejected names (0, Offtopic)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210087)

Cylon Sympathizer Integotation?

Re:Rejected names (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210225)

How could I forget The All-New Apollo and Scrappy-Doo Show ? Now, that would be a fine spin off.

Another Pre-Series Possibility (5, Funny)

tiktok (147569) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209961)

I was hoping it would be ADAMA: The College Years.

Maybe in one episode, Adama has the sorority girls from Caprica Caprica Caprica over for a game of Strip Pyramid.

Re:Another Pre-Series Possibility (1)

Stoutlimb (143245) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210119)

Ya know, Adama and Tigh in their college years would actually be quite a show, I think. Somehow I am sure Rosslyn could fit in there somehow too as a sorority girl. You just know she was a crazy education student at one time, eh.

Re:Another Pre-Series Possibility (2, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210207)

This could be a first: casting an actor with a severe acne problem. Seriously, have you seen Olmos's face?

Re:Another Pre-Series Possibility (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210223)

This could be a first: casting an actor with a severe acne problem. Seriously, have you seen Olmos's face?

Those are BATTLE SCARS, you insensitive clod.

Steadicam? (2, Interesting)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209969)


Will this one also feature the "edgy", trendy, subtly shaky camera work designed to give that "gritty, real-world" feel? Sheesh, it's overdone and hackneyed already. I think there's even software now that can take perfectly-filmed stuff and shakify it "for artistic effect".

Re:Steadicam? (1)

Embedded2004 (789698) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210042)

I'd be more interested if there was software that automatically removed the shake effect. I find the shake annoying at times and it would be interesting to watch the show with it removed.

Re:Steadicam? (3, Informative)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210135)

Adobe After Effects [adobe.com] for one. You'll want to get the Pro version, I think, and use an image stabilization filter.

Like Odyssey 5? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15209971)

This is just going to be like that series called 'Odyssey 5'. Where there were humans trying to create AI and a group of people were trying to stop them. That was a friggin good show, I have no idea why they friggin cancelled it. Maybe Caprica will follow in their footsteps too...

Smart Sci-Fi vs Idiot Plots (3, Interesting)

Rydia (556444) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209973)

So, after finally getting around to watching "Tooth and Claw" (Doctor Who 28x2), I am reminded of Gregg Easterbrook's discussion of (someone's, I forget whose) theory of the sci-fi "idiot plot," a plot which can only carry on forward motion if everyone involved is an idiot. BSG has been full of them, especially of late, with fantastic "should we ask him if he still has that bomb we know was ours yet is the only one unaccounted for? Naaaaaah."-related activities.

Why do I mention Doctor Who? Because it, quite simply, is not that. Star Trek (at least TNG) likewise rarely ran into this problem, so it's not just an american thing. But why do we buy into these plots? They're ridiculous on their face, yet we keep watching more sci-fi full of them. Are we that impressed by apocalyptic stories and high technology that we ignore the whole reason we're watching the show?

I just don't get it.

Re:Smart Sci-Fi vs Idiot Plots (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210015)

I disagree. I don't think there has been much in the way of "idiot plots" up until "Lay Down Your Burdens", and I feel that

1) There was no reason for Tyrol not to trust Cavil (he's an ordained priest after all)
2) The only person who didn't trust Baltar was Roslin. Adama didn't like him, but had no reason to think that Baltar would actually give a bomb to a Cylon. I mean, he was the frakking Vice-President, and the chief scientist. It's not unreasonable that people trusted him with a nuke, even if he was a little different...

POSSIBLE SPOILERS IN ABOVE POST (0, Offtopic)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210030)

Yeah, sorry about that, forgot a spoiler warning.

Re:POSSIBLE SPOILERS IN ABOVE POST (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210240)

This season has had some iffy moments with its CHARACTER DRAMA OF THE WEEK episodes that seem to divert from the core story to give a main character concentrated character development, but the last episode of the season gave me mental anguish. Baltar is absurdly inept as a leader, in a way that's just out of character. He might certainly make a poor leader, but he would be more ineffectual and weak than despotic given his personality. They seem to have mixed in a little classical Baltar when the quirky, narcissistic character was working so well.

Re:POSSIBLE SPOILERS IN ABOVE POST (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210275)

Of course Baltar is despotic. He doesn't handle people disagreeing with him well, especially people he considers below him. I mean, I feel like he spent the year doing every 18-25 year old girl he could get his hands on, and considered affairs of state annoyances.

Re:Smart Sci-Fi vs Idiot Plots (-1, Troll)

Gryle (933382) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210096)

Fact: God hates fanboys. Especially rabid fanboys.

Re:Smart Sci-Fi vs Idiot Plots (2, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210172)

Are we that impressed by apocalyptic stories and high technology that we ignore the whole reason we're watching the show?

Boobs?

KFG

Re:Smart Sci-Fi vs Idiot Plots (4, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210272)

Every so often I read a slashdot comment that forces me to imagine it as if it were being spoken by the Comic Book Guy.

Battlestar Galactica worse Sci-Fi show ever (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15209982)

If it's anything like the "re-imagining" of this show, count me out. No idea why so many people fall for this show. The new BG is below par in just about every aspect of production. Bad casting choices, terrible acting, cheesy sets, barely acceptable lighting, herky-jerky camera work, exceedingly shallow politically correct plotlines and characters, not to mention the barely concealed pro-USA anti-terrorism propaganda agenda in the writing. The only thing this show has going for it is some nice CG effects, but those are usually cut together in such an amatuer, MTV-style fashion that the viewer never really gets a chance to become immersed in any of the shots. Sometimes episodes have no space battles or spaceflight of any kind, and the show devolves into nothing more than a soap opera on the bridge of a spaceship. If the original plan to do a continuation of the original series created by Bryan Singer and Tom DeSanto [battlestargalactica.com] had gone forward, the show, and subsequent spin-offs probably would have been very watchable and entertaining. As it is now, the show has no soul, because it's nothing more than a hijack of someone else's great concept.

Re:Battlestar Galactica worse Sci-Fi show ever (1)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210032)


But the idea was to make it as appealing as possible to females for maximum audience acceptance. That's why Starbuck is now a tough girl and the show is essentially a soap c/w on/off again love affairs and some intangible Cylon blonde babe that manipulates that guy.

Re:Battlestar Galactica worse Sci-Fi show ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210083)

That's why Starbuck is now a tough girl and the show is essentially a soap c/w on/off again love affairs and some intangible Cylon blonde babe that manipulates that guy.

I'd let that hottie manipulate me, if you know what I mean.

That goes double for Boomer.

Re:Battlestar Galactica worse Sci-Fi show ever (2, Funny)

MachDelta (704883) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210126)

Why hello Dirk Benedict, I didn't know you had a Slashdot account.

Re:Battlestar Galactica worse Sci-Fi show ever (4, Funny)

hords (619030) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210101)

If it's anything like the "re-imagining" of this show, count me out. No idea why so many people fall for this show. The new BG is below par in just about every aspect of production....

Dad? I didn't know you read slashdot!

Battlestar Galactica worse Sci-Fi show ever-Sexed. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210209)

Son? Why aren't you in your room with a woman?

Re:Battlestar Galactica worse Sci-Fi show ever (1)

BigJasonWebb (866958) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210222)

I love opinion stated as fact. Good job!

Wow! It's Richard Hatch! (1, Offtopic)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210247)

Hey Richard! It's great to see you posting but you really should get an account.

First in a limited series (4, Funny)

ian_mackereth (889101) | more than 8 years ago | (#15209988)

There are only twelve types of BG spinoffs.

Re:First in a limited series (5, Funny)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210002)

There are only twelve types of BG spinoffs.

But there are many copies...

Re:First in a limited series (5, Funny)

xdc (8753) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210106)

There are only twelve types of BG spinoffs.

But there are many copies...

And they have a plan.

Re:First in a limited series (2, Funny)

frosty_tsm (933163) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210158)

There are only twelve types of BG spinoffs.

But there are many copies...

And they have a plan.

To have their own TV network. The Cylon Fiction Channel... (or Cy-Fi for short).

Re:First in a limited series (5, Funny)

Neoncow (802085) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210168)

There are only twelve types of BG spinoffs.

But there are many copies...

And they have a plan.


dingding-da-dingding-da-ding

Re:First in a limited series (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210084)

I'm looking forward to the 6th spinoff, myself.

Hollywood's fascination with prequels (5, Interesting)

prakslash (681585) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210005)

What is it with Hollywood's fascination with prequels anyway?

First there was Star Wars with Eps I-III, then there was Star Trek with Enterprise and the new proposed movie on when Kirk/Spock were in the Academy. And, now this.

I feel doing prequels is a bad idea and will never produce great entertainment.

There are three main reasons:

(1) Future is Known: Since the audience already knows what will happen to the characters in the future based on earlier movies, there is never that subconscious element of suprise. For example, no matter how much the main characters are in jeopardy, we know they will survive to justify their existence later in history. Writers basically paint themselves in a corner since they are bounded by the events that are supposed to come later.

(2) Risk to Established Canon: Sometimes the writers try to inject novelty by doing things that meses up the canon. They introduce things that no longer justifies what was established in the earlier movies. This leaves a bad taste in the audience's mouth because it invalidates everything they have come to believe. For example, the appearance of Borg on Star Trek Enterprise before the time of Kirk.

(3) Anachronistic Special Effects: Since prequels get made with special-effects technology that has evolved much beyond when the earlier movies were made, we end up seeing special effects and the general look of the movie not being in line with what we would expect how things would look in the past. For example, some of the consoles and user interface screens used by the cast in Star Trek Enterprise looked more advanced than the ones on Star Trek : DS9. This anachronistic anomaly again leaves a bad taste in the audience's mouths.

I feel Hollywood should abandon this fad of making prequels and just start making more novel sequels where what they can do is only limited by a good writer's imagination.

Re:Hollywood's fascination with prequels (1)

Russ Steffen (263) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210041)

Well, number 3 shouldn't be a problem for this BSG prequel, afterall the Galactica was basically current tech when this sequel takes place. The set designers and FX people have a pretty good model to work with, namely stuff just needs to look pretty much like does in BSG.

Re:Hollywood's fascination with prequels (3, Insightful)

Babbster (107076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210081)

I don't think any of your three concerns apply in this case.

1. "Future is known": While this is true in a "historical" sense, if the series is set 50 years in the past the only three main BSG characters who could show up are Adama, Tigh and the doc. Given that all of them would be at most late-teens, early 20s, I doubt that they're going to be a focus of the program. Thus, it would be more like watching a dramatization of events happening during World War II, in the sense that we know what happens between 1945 and 2006 but the story could still be entertaining.

2. "Risk to established canon": Since this series would be running concurrently with the only other material from the same reality AND it's being run by the same folks, this holds very little danger. They've really only gone into detail about events in the months right before the Cylon attack, so there's not much "canon" to put at risk.

3. "Anachronistic special effects": For movies and programs separated a large number of years, I can see this being a problem. Again, though, this doesn't apply at all to BSG.

I think I agree with you in general, mainly on the issue of screwing up what has gone before (or after - prequel/sequel tense confuses), but I don't think this particular concept is too dangerous.

Re:Hollywood's fascination with prequels (5, Funny)

McFadden (809368) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210100)

What is it with Hollywood's fascination with prequels anyway?


Do you really need to a$k?

Re:Hollywood's fascination with prequels (1)

BorgCopyeditor (590345) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210110)

Good points, but how do you explain the Vito Corleone sequences in Godfather II?

Re:Dumb and Dumberer? (0, Offtopic)

GoldTeamRules (639624) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210143)

What about Dumb and Dumber...er....nevermind.

No kidding! (1)

raehl (609729) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210161)

(3) Anachronistic Special Effects: Since prequels get made with special-effects technology that has evolved much beyond when the earlier movies were made, we end up seeing special effects and the general look of the movie not being in line with what we would expect how things would look in the past.

Anachronistic SPECIAL Effects? How about Anachronistic REALITY? Or are you still operating your PC with toggle switches?

Re:Hollywood's fascination with prequels (1)

TrevorB (57780) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210239)

Risk to Established Canon

You did see the season two finale, right?

**What** canon? ;)

Re:Hollywood's fascination with prequels (4, Informative)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210245)

"What is it with Hollywood's fascination with prequels anyway?"

The sad thing is, I've yet to see a prequel done well. The reasons you've mentioned are limitations, but they're also windows of opportunity.

The future is known, right? So why make a prequel that supports it? What if what you thought you knew about it wasn't correct? What if the Sith were really the good guys? What if the Federation was built on slavery? What a difference a generation or three makes.

Risk of Established Canon? Typically a fair point. I'd refer back to my previous comment. First Contact was a semi-interesting example of it. Cochrane was recorded in history as a big hero to humanity, turns out he was just a regular guy with fairly selfish motives in mind.

On an unrelated note: I don't think your Borg example was very strong. They were the Borg from First Contact. If anything, they helped explain some of the other oddities in the series, such as the lack of the NX-01 in the 1701-D's conference room. I think a better example would have been the Feringi. The Federation had supposedly never met them, but obviously they ventured in to Star Fleet's space from time to time. That was not a smart move. Thanks B&B.

Anachronistic Special Effects: Okay, Star Trek was unusual here. The show started in the 60's. Deep Space Nine did a Forrest Gumpian venture into the past. They had no real choice but to follow that pattern. Modern shows like BSG wouldn't really suffer from this. Set construction these days has pretty much reached a point where just about any artistic vision can be made. Actually, this is one of the reasons the prequels come about anyway. When a movie alludes to a massive un-realizable event, a prequel made a few years later can offer the opportunity to make it happen.

Believe it or not, this is not a rebuttal to your post. Lots of opportunities are presented by prequels, but Hollywood just doesn't seem to be able to zero in on them. If they can't take these simple steps and make something compelling, then I agree, they shouldn't go this route. Gimmick gimmick gimmick.

Interesting prospects for scifi shows (1)

jigjigga (903943) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210045)

With this development, we know "the guys with the money" are willing to invest in interesting SCIFI shows. Imagine if these guys, who pulled battlestar from what the original was to its current version, did some remakes or updates of other series that were simply not done right. SeaQuest anybody?

No! (1)

NalosLayor (958307) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210049)

Bad idea! Distracting the writing talent from one show is not a good thing, plus prequels never work out well. If they have different talent, that may be just as bad.

Too Adama-Centric? (2, Interesting)

xdc (8753) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210068)

The article [zap2it.com] is rather scant on details, but includes this information:

"Caprica" will be set more than 50 years prior to the events of "Battlestar Galactica" and focus on the lives of two families -- the Adamas (ancestors of future Galactica commander William) and the Graystones. Humankind's Twelve Colonies are at peace and on the verge of a technological breakthrough: the first Cylon.

As "Battlestar Galactica" is about a lot more than space battles, "Caprica" will be as much family drama as sci-fi tale.

I have mixed feelings about this spin-off. On the one hand, I have become more or less addicted to Battlestar Galactica and want something to tide me over until the third season starts. On the other hand, the plot of Caprica, as presented in this write-up, strikes me as cheesy. Is this a family feud? With billions of people in the twelve colonies, why does the Adama family need a central role in the new show? (Isn't one series enough? Was there a pre-William Adama back story in the original show or in Hatch's books? Being a BSG fan of only recent vintage, I don't know. This just reminds me of the 130-year McFly-Tannen conflict in Back to the Future.)

Battlestar Galactica is a riveting show. Hopefully its creators will achieve similar success with Caprica.

Re:Too Adama-Centric? (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210113)

I feel that if they didn't have Adama in there, every fan in the world would be like "Where's Adama?"

First Cylon! (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15210188)

I'm most excited about meeting the first Cylon. In the series, the Cylons a sophisticated belief structure and a strange confidence in those beliefs (although we know they sometimes change their minds). We get to see a little of how Cylon society is structured in the second season, but there are a lot of unanswered questions. How did an artificial intelligence creat a monotheistic belief system? How did it come to believe anything at all? Why do Cylons believe they're God's chosen species?

In the director's commentary for the first-season episode "You Can't Go Home Again," Moore and Eick say that they think the key to a great BG episode is to give away secrets. There's a lot of secrets left.

UH OH! Family Drama? (1)

popo (107611) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210200)

This could be really, really bad.

I'm picturing families having dinner with cylon servants....

This could easily ruin the other series for me...

Re:UH OH! Family Drama? (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210265)

Um, there's family drama like mad in BSG. Some key episodes SPOILERS AHEAD

Act of Contrition (Starbuck and Cmdr Adama about Zack)
You Can't Go Home Again
Kobol's Last Gleaming (the boxing match, and Lee's "betrayal")
The Farm (Lee can't denounce his dad)
Home (the Adamas coming to terms with each other)

I mean, between Lee and Commander Adama, there's huge tension (the boxing in KLG), and Starbuck and Commander Adama and Zack have that whole thing going. I mean, there's a lot of family-based drama in the original.

Product Placement, Anyone? (-1, Flamebait)

Joska (78000) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210205)

This could have been a fabulous show but what poisons it for me, no pun , etc., is the damned tobacco promotion. Come on now, these people have never been to Earth, yet somehow the accursed Sir Walter Raleigh has travelled through time and space to bring them the same cretinous habit that is killing millions of addicts here and now? It breaks my heart that I can't enjoy this show as the overall quality is otherwise stunning but pushing that stuff is pure evil. Maybe the Cylons really are better than us. Do they smoke? I don't remember, but I don't think they sell each other out.

Re:Product Placement, Anyone? (1)

saforrest (184929) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210230)

yet somehow the accursed Sir Walter Raleigh has travelled through time and space to bring them the same cretinous habit that is killing millions of addicts here and now?

Well, according to his own testimony Ron Moore is a pretty hardcore smoker. (I confess: I downloaded the podcasts.) I agree with you; though it would be hard to imagine Starbuck without the cigars.

Re:Product Placement, Anyone? (3, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210257)

You think that BSG is bad? Did you see the Lord of the Rings? Product placement all over the place! Pipeweed this, pipeweed that. Sheeesh! It's a good thing not that many people saw Lord of the Rings, or we might be facing a sequel.

Barrel Bottom Scraping: Von Dummiken Miniseries (2, Insightful)

StefanJ (88986) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210215)

Also in the works are a miniseries based on the book "Chariots of the Gods"

Oh, Puh-LEEZE!

I was a gullible little tweener dweeb when Chariots of the Gods? was a hot paperback. It didn't take long to see that it was a crock.

Now, it's an old crock. (Heck, the idea was getting kind of corny when the first Battlestar Galactica series cribbed from it for their background.) There are tons of SF books that Sci-Fi could be adapting that would have better name recognition.

Filing Erich von Daniken's "Chariots of the Gods" (3, Insightful)

maggard (5579) | more than 8 years ago | (#15210267)

I worked for the Boston Museum of Science's Lyman Library when I was in high school. One afternoon someone came in and asked for "Chariots of the Gods". I'd not heard of it (I volunteeered in the Planetarium, and knew Erich von Daniken's premise, just didn't recognize the title right off) so I walked them over to the card catalog to look up where the book was shelved.

On the way I passed my boss, who had overheard the request. He gave me a nod, and directed me to Humor, where he'd shelved the von Daniken books. I do recall someone once complaining about the von Daniken's being in that section, Les's comment was we were a science library and they'd be shelved there or nowhere.

I really wish the Scifi Channel would stop with the psuedoscience-as-science bs, talking-from-the-dead scam, and big-bug-o-the-week movies, and get on with telling some really good SF: Strong stories with powerful ideas. Stargate et al is nice light comedy in the SF genre, but von Daniken presented as legitimate, well, give me a snarky G'aould any day.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...