Quote:
|
Originally Posted by antelope526
Read what Glen Larson really wanted to do in 1980 and you'll find a blue print for what Ron Moore is doing now. Glen Larson wanted to move Galactica to a later time slot and produce it for a more mature audience.
The comment in an earlier post about a certain segment of the fans wanting nothing but the same actors in the same clothes is very true. I personally would like to see TOS continued as if BSG1980 never happened. The TOS cast however would be too old to reprise their roles. I would like to see new actors playing the old roles as if TOS ended yesterday. It would probably need to be a bit darker and more mature but it would have made a better transition for the majority of older fans. I think in a way Moore is doing just that. Changing the names and some of the Egyptian memorabilla may have fired up a small segment of the current fan base but it also took the expectation monkey off the backs of the current actors.
|
And got my information about "Return of Starbuck" straight from him. Whether they were using the premise from "Hell in the Pacific" or not, Glen specifically wanted to end on an episode that was a return to the spirit of "Galactica" and what he wished it could have continued to be. He was not happy that Universal imposed a "dumbing down" to fit family hour and while the whole slant of "1980" and setting it on earth was to do it cheap, I really doubt that the thinking behind this episode had solely to doing something easy "in the desert". I doubt that mockup of the Raider ship and other effects in that episode were "cheap" to do. Glen's intention was to go out with a bang instead of a whimper, and I think he succeeded despite the failure of "1980"'s other content to many core fans.
I don't doubt that LArson wanted to go in a "darker" direction, I have heard rumors that the second season would have focused on the death of Sheba and Apollo's withdrawel from command from being wracked with guilt. But these are LOGICAL story progressions into "dark" territory, not forced stuff to be "edgy and controversial". What makes you think fans don't want to see "dark"? It's like the "Empire Strikes Back" - "dark" is great, as long as it serves the story and characters, and I think what DeSanto was planning was a more logical progression into mature themes than Moore's "Battlestar Craptacular".
JV
