Beta
×

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!

Final Season of Battlestar Galactica Confirmed

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the well-frack dept.

Television 500

Ant writes "Via Dark Horizons, IESB reported from the 10th annual Saturn awards yesterday, and spoke with Battlestar Galactica stars Edward James Olmos and Katee Sackhoff. Olmos confirmed that, as far as the show that's been running so far, the fourth season will be the last one. It's currently slated to start airing in January of 2008. 'Olmos says "This will probably be the most extraordinary season of 'Battlestar'. It's the final season, so it's definitely going to be the most vicious. As far as we know, in respects of the way we have this show constructed, this is the final season." Sackhoff says "I think part of the problem is that it's an expensive show. It is [a great show], but we don't have the viewership that a great show should get."'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This really....sucks. (0)

Chanc_Gorkon (94133) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084507)

I hate to say it, but this REALLY.....REALLY sucks. SciFi must care more about wrestling then anything else. I hope that this isn't true.....there's STILL time!

Why is it that. all good things come to an end.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084649)

eg:(Battlestar, Serenity, etc)

But heaping piles of suck (reality TV) not only go on forever, but get copied repeatedly?

So terribly sad.

Re:Why is it that. all good things come to an end. (4, Insightful)

StarvingSE (875139) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084747)

Because reality TV is really really cheap to produce since it doesn't use high profile actors and needs little in terms of props and what not. Also, people love to watch other people's stupid drama. Reality shows purposely choose people who can't get along.

Also, most of the American TV viewing public is stupid and couldn't possibly understand or enjoy a show like Battlestar or Firefly for long. I think they should seriously think about either producing these shows direct to dvd. There can be a strong business case given how well the firefly and serenity dvd's sell.

Either that or release them in theaters on a regular basis ala old-school serials.

Re:Why is it that. all good things come to an end. (2, Interesting)

Rydia (556444) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085131)

I understand yet dislike Firefly and despise BSG. Does that make me an idiot?

It's all a matter of opinion.

Re:Why is it that. all good things come to an end. (4, Insightful)

jfengel (409917) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084839)

Because a lot of people love comfort food.

A lot of people don't want to be challenged by their entertainment. They saw a TV show that they liked yesterday, and what they want more than anything in the world is to watch that same TV show again. You need to change it just enough that they're not bored by an exact repetition, but core should be as close to identical as humanly possible.

Sci-fi fans aren't entirely immune to it, either. They brought Zombie Star Trek out for years after it should have been given a dignified burial. James Bond film scripts have been (until the most recent one) essentially mad-libs. And they'll even watch the same old movies (e.g. The Empire Strikes Back) until they can quote the dialogue and can spot changes on a frame-by-frame basis (and accuse those of doing so of raping their childhoods).

Poor Battlestar is just too expensive to continue. It must cost nearly as much as Lost, a show which probably has 10 times the viewership. Better to let it die than to compromise their vision.

Re:Why is it that. all good things come to an end. (4, Informative)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085109)

Funny that you mention Lost because the four big US networks are now complaining that they have lost 2.5 million viewers since last Spring. It's not just Battlestar Galactica.

Mike Elgen over at Computerworld has a few ideas on where those viewers have gone. I don't know why so many have left so quickly but I'm sure it has something to do with the poor shows available. "Survivor", "American Idol". These are the shows with the highest ratings?

If you think things are bad on TV now, wait until June when the Writer's Guild of America West and East combine for the first time in a long while to get better contracts from the production studios. The Director's Guild and another couple of Guilds are lined up right after that. TV will be pretty poor for a long while I guess.

Won't bother me though. I watch very little besides BG and the canceled "Daybreak". And why should I when I have access to HD television and excellent shows such as "Planet Earth" on Discovery HD.

Re:Why is it that. all good things come to an end. (0, Troll)

EvilTwinSkippy (112490) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085113)

If they spent a fraction of the budget on writing an continuity as they had on post-production, I don't think we'd be having this discussion.

You could see this coming (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084737)

BSG is the only thing worth watching on SciFi. The rest is really, really dumb crappy pseudo science type stuff and awful b-list type movies without even camp value. These guys even make Bruce Campbell suck.

A while ago there was a scary article the indicated that SciFi was actually having ratings success with these low production value monster movies and such. If the drones actually show up to watch Mosquito 2 or whatever, why should they waste good money on a show that has to pay good actors and script writers and special effects masters?

Re:You could see this coming (2, Informative)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084927)

I'd say Stargate and Dr. Who are good.

Of course, we can't hold SciFi accountable for Dr. Who since they can't touch it other than playing it, thank all that is good.

but seriously, when these go off the air, I'm probably just gonna ditch cable.

Re:You could see this coming (5, Insightful)

Skreems (598317) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085053)

As much as I take issue with the SciFi channel canceling amazing shows (see: Farscape), this is not one of those times. The 4th season is, I'm almost positive, a 22 episode season. Well, Ron Moore is on record saying that he'd do 2 more 13 episode seasons, or a single 22-23 episode season, and in that time he felt like he could bring the story to the conclusion that he'd been working towards. Now, I suppose part of that might be ending early to make sure they GET an ending, but this is not just SciFi killing a great show. They've had a definite climax planned for the story, and if they can reach it in one season, and not have as much filler as in season 2.5 and 3.5, I'm all for it.

...then make it... ROCK! (4, Funny)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084787)

> I hate to say it, but this REALLY.....REALLY sucks. SciFi must care more about wrestling then anything else.

And what's wrong with wrestling? Open the event with the battle of the MILFs -- President Laura "The Amazon" Roslin vs. D'Anna "I'm Not Xena" Biers. Have Boomer walk the ring in a tight bikini, holding up the round cards. End the series with the grand finale: Starbuck vs. Six, and hold it the landing bay of a Cylon base star's worth of jello!

> there's STILL time!

After sitting through an entire season of budget-constrained character development... "there sure is, buddy, there sure is."

Re:This really....sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084827)

"....care more about wrestling then anything else"
THAN....THAN anything else, do Americans know the difference between then and than, proper grammar should be a requirement for posting a response online !

I do agree that it does "suck" especially since BSG is the best show that Scifi has and one of the best shows on cable.

Re:This really....sucks. (1)

Duggeek (1015705) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084847)

Wrestling belongs on SciFi like Freddy Krueger belongs on Lifetime.

If they had just given it to Spike in the first place, then Spike wouldn't have had to invent their own “TNA” version. (Yes- more wrestling... that's what television needs... </sarcasm> )

Now... let's see about re-making Buck Rogers! [wikipedia.org]

Re:This really....sucks. (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084851)

They care more about money than anything else. Scifi is owned by NBC Universal, which is another way of saying GE. They are really good at caring about money. BSG costs a lot per viewer; wresting...doesn't.

No, it doesn't (5, Insightful)

KingSkippus (799657) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084939)

This is the way the show should end, on a high note. As pointed out somewhere else further down, the show is starting to degrade. There was a time when you never really knew what was going to happen next. A time when, unlike other shows, they weren't afraid to kill off major characters or have the plot twist 180 degrees in another direction.

Now, though, it's gotten where you know that all the majors will be with us next week, that in the end, everything will work out okay. It's just gotten kind of ho-hum.

If they make this the last season, it gives them incredible freedom to do some really great things dramatically. All characters are fair game. All plots are on the board for major twists. And they can always come back and do movies or mini-series if there's a demand for it.

Here's my prediction, though. They get to Earth, but as it turns out, it's not exactly the thirteenth colony they expected. Think about it. It's all happened before, right? The Cylons and the thirteenth colony have encountered each other just as our ragtag colonial crew and the Cylons are encountering each other now. They intermingled (Eve, anyone?), and the result is that we here on earth are actually the progeny of both colonial humans and Cylons. We even adopted both religions. People here are killing each other over the same ideological differences as the Cylons and the colonials are.

I could be wrong, but I think that's ultimately the ending plot twist. When all is said and done, it turns out that WE are Cylons, too, a fact that has been lost to antiquity.

Re:This really....sucks. (5, Insightful)

TrippTDF (513419) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084943)

From a writing standpoint, I think it's great. BSG and Lost both have the same problem... they have a very definite end-point... for BSG, it's finding and populating Earth. For Lost, it's getting off the damn Island. These are the driving forces behind the shows, and on one level or another the action and drama come out of these arcs. However, if you keep stringing them along for two long, they start to suck... there's only so many ways you can delay the end-point before the audience gets tired, and you jump the shark.

These shows will ultimately be more successful with end-points written- the writers will have a clear goal of what to write to and how to make it interesting to get there, instead of just coming up with more ways to string viewers along.

While it sucks that it's going off the air, it'll make for better TV along the way.

Re:This really....sucks. (1)

decairn (669433) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084955)

The series nees an end point otherwise it becomes like X-Files which ends up having no point in being made each week.

Re:This really....sucks. (5, Insightful)

sammy baby (14909) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085025)

I have to disagree.

Look, I think BSG is the best show on television right now (as much as it's on at all right now, rasm frasm nine month hiatus). But despite the fact that the show has occasionally floundered a bit, I've generally had the feeling that the show is actually going somewhere, that Ron Moore et. al. are actually interested in telling a story. One that has... what's it called? Oh right! An end.

Contrast this with Lost, which I started off watching avidly, but now... well, the four phases of Lost watching:

1. This show is great! I wonder what they'll do next?!?
2. Huh? That didn't make sense.
3. You guys are making it up as you go along, aren't you?
4. God, I hope you guys are making it up, because God help you if you planned it this way.

And Lost just got extended another three seasons.

Re:This really....sucks. (4, Insightful)

dyslexicbunny (940925) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085125)

Ron Moore already said it would be at most 5 seasons in the podcasts. They know what they want to accomplish so it's not going to be a half-assed ending. Are you saying that you would prefer BSG to run as long as say Stargate?

I have no interest in BSG running 10 seasons. You will likely be unable to keep the entire cast together and let's face it, this cast is solid. You will run out of plot ideas to look at and have to make up the next enemy (Gaould, replicators, Orai) and it just gets silly to me. I used to love Stargate but I lost interest simply because I didn't have time to keep track of everything going on (new development x or superevil badguy y and spinoff z) and some of it just got ridiculous to me.

This is the story that they want to tell and thus far, I have yet to be disappointed. Some episodes aren't as interesting. Some twists were ridiculous. But the story is still there and I believe it will end well.

Re:This really....sucks. (1)

Bamafan77 (565893) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085143)

I hate to say it, but this REALLY.....REALLY sucks.
In a way I agree. BSG is great TV and I hate to think we won't be getting new eps after next season.

But I'm more eager to see how everything ties together. I think it'd be great if we limited all shows to 4 or 5 seasons (at most) and avoid the fates of shows like "X-files", "Lost", "Alias", etc. Often times, writers have maybe 3 seasons of great material, but are forced to water it down so broadcasters can squeeze more money out of it over the course of 6+ seasons.

Good (2, Insightful)

Richard McBeef (1092673) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084515)

Because that show has taken a real dive in quality.

Re:Good (1)

Chanc_Gorkon (94133) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084665)

Huh? Did you SEE the season 3 finale?? Oh well.

Re:Good (3, Insightful)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084751)

Huh? Did you SEE the season 3 finale?? Oh well.
There's too much confusion...

On one hand, I love the show, and hate to see it end. On the other hand, you can only drag out the story so long before it gets out of hand, so this may be the best way to end it.

Besides, isn't there a spinoff show planned?

Re:Good (2, Funny)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085049)

Yes.

Battlestar Galactica 2010 where the crew hides the ship in orbit and go down to earth and try to blend in with the low tech people that live there. It will be gritty and cutting edge!

I just realized that I made almost all BSG fans that remember the old show spit all over the screen and scream "OH GOD NO!"

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084953)

Huh? Did you SEE the season 3 finale?? Oh well.

Yeah, it reminded me of a shitty Law & Order episode. And Starbuck lives? Please.

Parent is not Flamebait... (4, Insightful)

colonslashslash (762464) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084983)

Why was this modded flamebait? I'm a massive BSG fan, it's one of my favourite shows on TV, but it has taken a dive in quality since the beginning of the third season.

Since the escape from new Caprica in the Exodus two-parter, the show seems to have just drifted into the realm of the weird and pointless at times. Filler episodes have increased (such as the boxing episode - Unfinished Business, and the rogue doctor killing Saggitarans in The Woman King), and the main story has been tangled up in a load of tired existential and spiritual nonsense that doesn't seem to be going anywhere. The finale of Season 3 even has Starbuck coming back from the dead, apparently as a figment of Lee's imagination. Oh great, another character inexplicably living in someone's head.

Of course, it's all down to opinion in these matters, but for me I'd like to see the show's main story to get back to the heights of Season 1 and 2 (and the start of Season 3). The desperate and down-trodden survivors of the human race fighting to stay alive and stay ahead of the Cylon fleet hunting them at every jump. Brilliant and touching filler / side-story episodes like Season 2's Rise of the Phoenix and Scar, and more all-or-nothing dogfights with the genocidal toasters.

I'll be watching season 4 whatever happens, it's still a good show. But I do think it has been missing its potential lately - hopefully it will improve next season.

Correction (1)

colonslashslash (762464) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085071)

Flight of the Phoenix - not Rise of the Phoenix.*

Damn Terminator 3 trailer in the background messing with my booze-addled brain.

Expensive show, but what about DVD? (4, Interesting)

nizo (81281) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084529)

I would be amazed if this miniseries didn't make a nice chunk of change from DVD sales/rentals though, especially if they made a movie spinoff later (though like Serenity, making it appeal to people who haven't seen the series might be tough).

Re:Expensive show, but what about DVD? (1)

EvilTwinSkippy (112490) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084941)

I don't think Firefly jumped the shark to the breaching out of the water level BSG achieved though.

They have gone into so many dead in corners, only to be saved by a "Dues ex Machina" that I'm expecting to see a pile of cheese and people with labcoats in the final episode. /Seen the whole thing so far //Wants several hours of his life back

Re:Expensive show, but what about DVD? (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084949)

I actually quit watching season 3 just after four episodes, not because I didn't want to see it, but because I wanted to enjoy it so much that I decided to wait and get it pristine on DVD, rather than have it "spoilered" by watching it on TV. Commercials, kids, and the wife, who for some bizarre reason doesn't understand that Battlestar Galactica time is no interruptions time make it hard to give it the attention that it deserves.

Expensive show? Cut costs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084959)

No wonder it costs so much! It must cost a fortune to make the cylons look exactly like humans. Spend less time getting those special effects perfect and concentrate on the story line instead.

vicious - ouch! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084535)

"It's the final season, so it's definitely going to be the most vicious."

So even more shakiness used for shakey-cam? *sigh*

Shame no one watches it (5, Insightful)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084547)

I wonder if they would have gotten more viewers if the show were on a "major" network as opposed to the SciFi Channel. I guess the problem with a major network is that the show could not be as edgy as it is. I guess its best asset is that it flies under the radar. Unfortunately, it's also its downfall.

Re:Shame no one watches it (0)

MontyApollo (849862) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084629)

I think it is NBC that owns Sci-Fi, and with all the good press the show was getting in the beginning they ran some episodes on NBC (Friday or Saturday nights I think). I think the ratings sucked, so they only tried it 2 or 3 times at the most.

I have found my interest in the show waning, personally, especially this last season. I think they need more war elements.

Re:Shame no one watches it (1)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084697)

The pilot was on NBC(?) I didn't see any differences between the sci-fi and NBC version. Maybe a few commercials were added. Unless "Frak"(sp?) is going to be added to the dirty word list.

Adding it to one of the major networks would be a good thing. Is there a market for a space/sci fi based show nowadays? Is the average joe interested in this?

Re:Shame no one watches it (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084889)

That's exactly it! Don't you remember what got Farscape frellin' killed off the USA network?

Re:Shame no one watches it (0)

El Gigante de Justic (994299) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084785)

They would probably get more viewership if every other word wasn't "frak", or some conjugation of it. I don't have problems with language in shows, but hearing frak 100 times an hour just gets irritating, and I know people who have stopped watching after a few minutes because of just how annoying it got.

Re:Shame no one watches it (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084947)

Personally I don't see anything frelling wrong with hearing frak so often in the show!

Re:Shame no one watches it (1)

Chanc_Gorkon (94133) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084859)

Yep....it flew right under DRADIS and did not get noticed enough.....

Re:Shame no one watches it (1)

xRelisH (647464) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084929)

I wonder if they would have gotten more viewers if the show were on a "major" network as opposed to the SciFi Channel. I guess the problem with a major network is that the show could not be as edgy as it is. I guess its best asset is that it flies under the radar. Unfortunately, it's also its downfall.

I don't think the show being on a major network would have made any significant difference. The problem is that a lot of people who don't watch BSG will refuse to watch it on the grounds thinking that it is too nerdy or even mistaking it for Star Wars or Star Trek.
Unfortunately, I don't think there is any way to attract these viewers as they're pretty much ignorant. ST:Enterprise tried by showing more T&A in their episodes and we all know how that went...

Re:Shame no one watches it (5, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084951)

I wonder if they would have gotten more viewers if the show were on a "major" network as opposed to the SciFi Channel.

Actually, they had a lot more viewers. Right up until the SciFi channel broke up their powerful friday night lineup [savestargatesg1.com] (BSG->SG1->Atlantis) and tried to launch BSG up against the Big 3 fall lineups. (Urk!) Sorry, SciFi. You're not that big.

The SciFi channel has some of the greatest shows ever made. Yet time and time again they shoot themselves in the foot. Twice. Just to make sure they get both feet. Then they get some prosthetics so they can shoot themselves in the foot again. Twice. Just to be sure.

Re:Shame no one watches it (1)

mblase (200735) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085155)

I wonder if they would have gotten more viewers if the show were on a "major" network as opposed to the SciFi Channel.

Doubtful. Being on HBO certainly hasn't hurt the popularity of "The Sopranos".

I tried watching BG early on, but just couldn't get into it. The show was too serialized (episodes were chapters of a larger story, not stories in themselves), too dark, and too confusing to newcomers. There wasn't any hope that things would get better or come to a positive end for any of the characters. Why would most people want to watch a show like that?

Also, the jerky "reality-show" camera techniques got really annoying really fast.

Puzzled (2, Funny)

Stanistani (808333) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084563)

I don't understand the buzz about a space opera starring Lorne Green with a bunch of villainous robots in tin suits with a single shiny red eye...

Re:Puzzled (2, Funny)

dtolman (688781) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084781)

Hey buddy - there's THREE networks out there- just because you only spend your nights watching Gil Gerard as Buck Rogers over on NBC, doesn't mean we can't turn the dial over to ABC and enjoy the realistic special effects.

My only question is when CBS is going to get the message and launch there own series? I mean c'mon, The Incredible Hulk is just too campy for my tastes.

you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (4, Insightful)

Yonder Way (603108) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084567)

...to be brave enough to bring us cutting edge TV shows that we can't help but love.

And then kill them.

Re:you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (5, Insightful)

StonedYoda47 (732257) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084641)

How quickly everyone forgets FOX - Firefly, Family Guy, Futurama.......Married with Children

Re:you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (1)

StarvingSE (875139) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084849)

Yet FOX has a reputation for edgy TV because of shows like "When Hampsters Attack..." go figure.... :/

Re:you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (1)

d0rp (888607) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085135)

Fox, on the other hand, has a habit of killing shows before even really giving them a chance.

Re:you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (3, Insightful)

iknownuttin (1099999) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084733)

And then kill them

Or, go out while they're still hot instead of beating it into the ground (like the Star Trek series)?

Maybe the writers, producers, and actors got together and said, "There's not much more we can before we go stale and become a parody of ourselves." There's some real talent on that show (they're not your typical network hacks) and I think they want to keep their work, I don't know, "true".

Re:you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (1)

Chanc_Gorkon (94133) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084779)

Yeah they are right bastards.

Re:you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084791)

Unlike Farscape, which in my opinion got a hell of a lot better after the first season (season 2 was superb, maybe a slight dropoff after season 2 but 3 and 4 were also good esp. end of season 4)... ...the last season of BSG sucked in comparison with prior seasons. Some good episodes here and there, but I watch a fair amount of TV, and compared to other available shows, it's not as good. Seasons 1 and start of season 2 were *especially* superb, but it's sort of gotten blah. The first season was outstanding.

Otherwise, I agree--SciFi is becoming like the old WB, but instead of the 5 year "kill it" bug (i.e. Buffy, Angel), it's got a 4 year one.

Re:you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (1)

Count of Montecristo (626894) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084879)

Besides, the execs at Sci-Fi have been trying to kill this potential cash cow since season 2, i dont understand why. First with the abnormally long hiatus between seasons, almos trying to turn off viewership. Then changing the airing date, as if the show wasnt good enough. Im sure there are funding issues too. Perhaps there is an internal disagreement between Sci-fi and the producers, over the gods know what, but it's been a great show being hindered by the very network that airs it. shame on them.

Re:you can always count on the Sci-Fi channel... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084931)

Fear no more, SCI-FI channel has learned from all this and will NOT repeat this mistake again. With a phony, er, I mean "sci-fi" thriller in wrestling, it's guaranteed to stay on til the end of time.

hopefully other shows (1)

cerenyx (250774) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084585)

I think BSG is one of the best things to happen to American TV in awhile. I guess we can only hope that the same talent behind the show will continue to make other excellent TV shows like this.

Re:hopefully other shows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084969)

You realize that BSG was co-financed with Sky One...

That's what you get (5, Insightful)

GeneralTao (21677) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084605)


Over the last season and a half, the show has been sucking pretty badly. It feel a long way from the absolute best show on TV ever, to yet another middling sci-fi show where everything gets wrapped up neatly at the end of each episode, no prominent cast members ever die, and they beat you over the head with whatever moral/political point they are trying to make at the time.

I hope they go out with a bang. I hope they are, as Olmos said, vicious. BSG started out as a gritty, dark and hard story about the shit hitting the fan over and over again. Let's hope the writers remember that before it's too late.

And I'd rather the show end nicely than fade into irrelevance by over-staying its welcome (as per Star Gate).

Re:That's what you get (1)

GeneralTao (21677) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084669)

"feel a long way" should have read "fell a long way"

Re:That's what you get (3, Insightful)

Jeffrey Baker (6191) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084911)

I really hope the fourth season is great. The miniseries and the first season were amazing. There was a great deal of suspense in the parallel plots on Galactica and on the planet Caprica, and the Cylons were sinister and mysterious. In season 3 the Cylons are some kind of angsty teenagers. And I don't think that a good cliffhanger consists of morons whistling Hendrix in the bathroom. WTF?

Re:That's what you get (4, Informative)

hey hey hey (659173) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085105)

morons whistling Hendrix in the bathroom

morons whistling Dylan in the bathroom

Hendrix is the just the most famous cover.

Why so expensive? (1)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084617)

ST Voyager, DS9 and TNG all ran longer, were they somehow cheaper to produce? Voyager had 7 (!) seasons... and it kinda sucked through most of those!

Did more people actually watch Voyager and DS9 than BSG?

Re:Why so expensive? (2, Interesting)

Samurai Cat! (15315) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084719)

"Did more people actually watch Voyager and DS9 than BSG?"

I figure, yes - because they were both shown on normal broadcast networks, as opposed to a cable/satellite-only channel.

Plus there's that whole "they're not as good as BSG but, sci-fi-wise, they were about the best thing on TV when they were on" thing. :P

The nature of BSG's story is that they couldn't keep running forever - as sad as I am that (assuming the actors quoted are correct) the fourth season will be the last, it kinda makes sense.

Re:Why so expensive? (2, Informative)

SpiffyMarc (590301) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084759)

Star Trek is SUPER cheap to produce! Have you actually watched those episodes?? Every planet is a series of caves!

Seriously though, Star Trek TV series have been notorious for having small budgets.

Re:Why so expensive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19085097)

"Seriously though, Star Trek TV series have been notorious for having small budgets."

On the other hand, Babylon 5's crew used to point out that they made their episodes on a fraction of the cost of a Trek episode. Trek stuck to miniatures for a long time (I think Enterprise was the first fully CGI series, although I'm sure CGI crept in earlier)which can be expensive and limiting.

Re:Why so expensive? (1)

MontyApollo (849862) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084763)

I think Voyager more than kinda sucked, but I don't know how being on the UPN versus SciFi Channel (cable) compares in terms of potential viewers. DS9 and TNG were syndicated. I personally thought DS9 was the best of the shows overall, but I imagine more people watched TNG.

Re:Why so expensive? (1)

Dancindan84 (1056246) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084789)

I don't know what the viewership numbers on the series' are, but I'd hazard a guess that Voyager and DS9 had more simply due to name recognition.

Re:Why so expensive? (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084813)

Yup, I reckon they did. Voyager took Trek to a level of banality where it was literally a no-brainer to watch it. Contrast with BSG, where I will not watch it unless I can pack the kids off to bed, bar the door, recline the Captain's Chair and crank the volume up to 11. I'd rather wait and watch the DVD than miss even 30 seconds of it.

Re:Why so expensive? (1)

kalirion (728907) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084869)

Cable shows tend to get far less viewers than broadcast TV. Compare the top 15 cable [zap2it.com] vs. the top 20 broadcast [zap2it.com] shows for last week...

Re:Why so expensive? (1)

EvilTwinSkippy (112490) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085045)

<i>Did more people actually watch Voyager and DS9 than BSG?</i>

That was the joy then of Broadcast TV. You get a timeslot, and there are millions of bored eyeballs for which your show has to be more entertaining than the 7 other channels they get.

Good News (2, Insightful)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084621)

I love the new BSG, but I want to see them end strong. The second half of season 3 had too much filler. I want to see them focus on their main story arch and go out on a high note.

By contrast, one of my other favorite shows used to be The Sopranos, a show that has floundered for the past two years. They seem to be ending with their weekest run of shows to date. It will be hard for me to remember that show as fondly as I would like.

Rome was a great show that didn't run long enough, but there was no filler. A damn good series from start to end.

Sometimes less is more. (Star Trek, I'm looking at you)

Re:Good News (1)

Anonymous Monkey (795756) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085013)

Amen! I think TV would be a much better thing if things didn't drag on just because they can.

Any Nielson viewers here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084623)

How do they know what the viewership is? No one asked me if I watch the show. How many Nielson viewers do you know?

deja vu (3, Interesting)

WebHostingGuy (825421) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084655)

Part of the problem is that is expensive...that is the same thing that resulted in the cancellation of the original series.

About the first series... "It was the most expensive television production of its time: $7 million (U.S.). Each weekly episode cost a purported $1 million (U.S.). "

I've been here before for the first series, and am seeing it now. In another 30 years when the third version is made I'll bet it won't last for the same reason.

Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084799)

"All this has happened before... and will happen again."

Re:deja vu (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19084981)

Don't worry, I expect that they will replace all the major characters soon, find earth, and then sneak around in flying motorcycles reporting to their leader, who we find out later is the omniscient child of Starbuck.

Just like the old BSG! (1)

JerSully (824068) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084657)

You all realize this is what killed the first BSG. Money spent to 1000 of viewers is what they look at. That's why they moved the first show to Earth in that last (horrible) season - to save money on effects.

good shows should end early (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084675)

I haven't watched BSG, but by all accounts it's an excellent show. I'm sure I will get around to watching it one of these days. That said, I'm in the very small camp of people that believes that good shows should end their run early. Yeah, it sucks that the show is over, but at least it'll end while the writing was still good and well before it jumped the shark. One thing that I can't stand seeing is a show that just keeps on going and going until it simply can't gasp for breath anymore. Good shows should die young, imho.

You're suprised? (1)

mandark1967 (630856) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084693)

This is simply par for the course. Sci-Fi ALWAYS starts out by making a great series and then simply cancels it claiming not enough viewers tuned in... 1 FarScape 2 Stargate 3 BSG 4 ??? 5 Profit!!@1 Stand by to see 6 Eureka 7 PKJ 8 SG-Atlantis go away within 2 years as Sci-Fi morphs into the B-Movie and wrestling channel, thereby continuing their slow spiral into nothingness.

Good. (1)

rockhome (97505) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084753)

I like to see shows end in a timely manner. 'Galactica' as a series needs to have an end point, that is intrinsic to its main story. With an ending in sight, the writers can deliver a quality final season and satisfactorily resolve story arcs. Plus, it is in danger of running past the point of being good(Lost), and nobody wants that.

Re:Good. (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084907)

After watching the Season 3 finale, I can't be sure if they did a great show, or jumped the shark. I need to see where they go with things before making a decision, but I really hope no sharks were involved.

I understand why. (1)

lordvalrole (886029) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084765)

This sucks but if you look at season 3 compared to season 1 or 2, you can see why. Most of the episodes were boring. The were only a couple good episodes of the season. The one episode where galactica came down to the planet and saved everyone...and the very last episode of the season. If any of the writers read this, bring back the action packed drama of space flight. Make an intense last stand with the cylons and humans. Don't make a happy ending where everyone gets along with each other. Nearing the end of the season start killing off main characters left and right. And for the love of god don't do what Stargate SG1 or Sopranos did or is doing...which is put filler episodes in the last season. SG1 ended their season halfway and the last half of the show was crap. The whole last season of Sopranos is crap and is just filler episodes. Make this the most epic season of all time for any sci-fi show. Otherwise you end up just pissing away a great series and pissing off a lot of people.

Number Six has left the building (0, Offtopic)

SockPuppet_9_5 (645235) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084777)

TRICIA HELFER is on in a TV pilot that FOX picked up for the Fall called THEM.

So how are they tracking viewers? (2, Insightful)

TheWoozle (984500) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084805)

"but we don't have the viewership that a great show should get"

Are they including iTunes downloads and DVD sales? If not, why not? These days, anyone between the ages of 15 and 30 spends more time watching downloads and DVDs than they do tuning into TV broadcasts.

The era of everyone tuning into a scheduled TV broadcast is *over*. Does Nielsen still think it's 1960?

Re:So how are they tracking viewers? (1)

Chanc_Gorkon (94133) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084985)

Good point. I know alot of people who do buy it on iTunes or download it on that thing called a torrent! ;D

Nielsen AND NBC/Universal.....get with the friggin times.

Re:So how are they tracking viewers? (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084999)

How much advertising revenue is generated by those iTunes purchases? That is what Sci-Fi is primarily concerned with. Online viewers don't watch ads.

Re:So how are they tracking viewers? (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085001)

I can attest to that. I don't have cable TV, I have NetFlix. It's cheaper and I see more of what I want on the schedule I want. BattleStar Galactica happens to be the series of DVD's I'm receiving.

Re:So how are they tracking viewers? (1)

bigbigbison (104532) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085011)

That may be but I teach at a college in the US midwest and this semester I brought up Battlestar as an example of something we were talking about and the majority of them had never even HEARD of the show, let alone seen it. I have a feeling that most of my students are doing what I was doing as an undergrad: drinking and hanging out with friends and not watching much tv except for ESPN. (OK, so I didn't watch ESPN but most of my male friends did.)

The Cylons Have A Plan (5, Funny)

wiredog (43288) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084845)

I just hope they've finally decided to share it with the writers.

It's on TV?? (1)

HomeLights (1097581) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084855)

I didn't even know this was on TV. SciFi doesn't know how to market whatsoever.
Too bad. This show deserved better.

No sense in throwing good money after bad money (1)

gd23ka (324741) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084871)

"It's the final season, so it's definitely going to be the most vicious. As far as we know, in respects of the way we have this show constructed, this is the final season." Sackhoff says"

Tell you what if anything this is probably going to be the lamest ending
to the BS-Galactica saga, because if they are already sure they flogged
this dog to death why invest a hell of a lot of money into it?

Just like old Levi used to say.

Good (2, Insightful)

Von Rex (114907) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084913)

This used to be my favourite show, but there's just been too many bad episodes in the last couple of years. I don't really care if I even see it anymore, though I usually catch a repeat at some point. I'd rather see one more good season, where they are forced to wrap up the story, than several more seasons of the half-ass crap they've been coasting along with lately.

And they'd better have a really, REALLY good reason to explain why Tigh and the Chief are Cylons, or the first episode of the last season just might be the last one I ever watch. Talk about jumping the shark.

It is a great show (1)

samantha (68231) | more than 7 years ago | (#19084963)

I don't know anybody that is remotely a geek who doesn't watch it and love it. BUT they put so much time between seasons it is easy to wander off. It is frustrating as hell. I would rather have the entire show done straight out than have to wait most of a year for the next season. A year is a really long time today.

Lets hope they can tie up the plot threads (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085003)

Personally, I prefer having shows end with a well thought out conclusion that ties up as many plot threads as possible instead of what happens to most TV shows where they just start to suck for a season or two and are abruptly canceled with little chance to actually finish up the story. It's hard to argue against the fact that the last season had a lot of filler in it, and it's probably about time for the writers to start wrapping it up. They need to have more episodes like the last one of the season and less like the stupid boxing episode.

Also, Is Starbuck Jesus?

In a way, it makes sense... (4, Insightful)

garylian (870843) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085009)

Think about it. If their goal is to "find Earth", the missing colony, how much story is there left to tell after that point?

This happens in a lot of shows, where the big point plot that always seems like a distant thing finally arrives. And once it does, there isn't much left to talk about. It becomes an entirely different show, with a different focus, and viewship will decline.

Look at some fine examples from TV's past.

Twin Peaks was a brilliant and weird show, that had a whole bunch of people talking. I still remember going to "Twin Peaks viewing parties" at friends houses, where we would all watch the episode together, and then start to dissect it over coffee and pie. (Those of you that remember the show will remember the line "damn fine pie".) But, once we knew who the killer was, there was nothing left to tell. They tried a second season, and it was a colossal flop. We all got what we wanted.

Moonlighting was another example. Once "Dave" and "Mattie" became romantically involved, instead of dancing around the subject, nobody really cared anymore. The show went into the toilet, ratings wise.

If BSG closes up shop after they find Earth and get things settled in, there is a good chance that most viewers will never say "Damn, BSG jumped the shark".

It is the reason 24 keeps on working. Every year, it reaches its ending, and the next year's season is a totally new (sorta) scenario for Jack Bauer to fix.

Personally, I like the TV show "Heroes", but I worry that it is headed for a Twin Peaks type ending. Once they save New York City, where will they go that will keep our attention? If we all end up feeling satisfied with that ending, then nobody will want to watch season 2.

Drag On (1)

Darktyco (621568) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085021)

While it sucks to see a good (even if it hasn't been THAT great recently) end, I am happy to know that it will end without having several crappy seasons at the end. Too many TV shows seem to run season after season until the writers are completely out of ideas and the quality of the stories start to tank. I'd much rather have something shorter and sweeter. I like how a lot of the anime TV series in Japan run for a single season with something between 12 to 26 episodes. These series can focus strongly on a main arc and usually have much better pacing than something like LostOurDirection Season 6.

I Welcome This (1)

DirkBalognapantz (609779) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085035)

I think it is about time we got over the expectation that any well-loved TV series should stay on the air for an open-ended run. I love BSG. I even get enjoyment out of the filler episodes. But I would love a tight, well-though out story arc with a good series conclusion even more. What is the problem with telling a good story and wrapping things up when you are done? For example, I watched every episode of Carnivàle, and was actually quite pissed off that they did not plan on wrapping things up at the end of the 2nd season. I would have been quite happy with that. Instead, they added a last-minute twist that made me feel even more cheated after HBO dropped their ass. It could have been brought to a logical conclusion in 2 seasons. Perhaps this is an American problem. As a country, we seem to have a media oral fixation that makes us act like more product is always better. Wake up. It is not.

But there's so much left (2, Informative)

fearpi (1100889) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085051)

Having followed the show for the entire run, I can agree with all of these sentiments: that the show is one of the best on television, that the show hit a weak stretch in season 3, and that it may be best to keep the entire show strong to end it before it gets too long. The problem, however, in this case, is that Ronald D. Moore still has "two chapters" he wants to tell (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07085/770732-352.s tm [post-gazette.com] ). Passage of time has been crucial to the show (especially the season 2 finale) and while it wouldn't be as bad as seeing nothing of consequence happen for long stretches of episodes (Star Treks), the show now runs the risk of having all that RDM wanted to happen over two seasons occur in the short span of one. True, it may give us a filler-free season, but the show's success is largely due to its believability - and that comes into jeopardy, I think, if the show and the Galactica herself comes an unbelievably long way in such a short amount of time.

Another Source (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19085075)

Olmos interview about the "final season"

http://www.ifmagazine.com/new.asp?article=4445 [ifmagazine.com]

dear NBC... (1)

vena (318873) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085079)

after SG-1 putters out this year, BSG is the only show you have on SciFi. maybe if you used SciFi as more than a vehicle for advertising Heroes you could make some money on it.

Good Job (2, Interesting)

Nyeerrmm (940927) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085107)

I must say, good job to whoever made this decision. I love the show, and the last half season definitely helped make up for the Baltar vacationing with the Cylons crap. But.. shows have to end, and its much better to end it on the writers terms than having to quickly wrap it up when the show gets canned.

Take ST:TNG as an example, it ended at the height of its popularity, and the last season is the most amazing one in my opinion. So rather beat it into the ground (which they did with new series instead) they took it out in grand fashion, with the crazy two-parter with Q and a possible future, and bringing back Yar and all that.

So heres hoping they do it right and its not a show where you can't help but think 'What the hell happened?' years later.

Bummer (1)

tmwsiy (731634) | more than 7 years ago | (#19085141)

gods damnit this frackin sucks
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?