Bringing Back TOS Into Mini?

Y'all are referring a lot to two different examples: X-men for a movie that is not really set in the same universe as the comic, and Star Trek, which has a basic continuity in all its parts. I'm surprised you didn't think of another example--Superman! How many different versions of Superman have we seen? The original comic. The 50's TV show. The 70's movies. The 90's Lois and Clark. And now Smallville. None of these connect tightly to any of the others. In fact, the original comic doesn't even connect too tightly to itself! But they all share the same basic story line. Even that basic story has huge variations of detail. Yet all of them are recognizably Superman. You may like one and hate the rest, like most and hate one, or hate them all. (Me, I don't really care for Smallville).

We have two different versions of Battlestar Galacatica. (Even though I wish G80 never happened, it was a continuation of TOS) They don't cross over at all, and you are perfectly free to dislike one or the other, but they're both Battlestar Galactica.

Originally Posted by Thomasbombadil

Y'all are referring a lot to two different examples: X-men for a movie that is not really set in the same universe as the comic, and Star Trek, which has a basic continuity in all its parts. I'm surprised you didn't think of another example--Superman! How many different versions of Superman have we seen? The original comic. The 50's TV show. The 70's movies. The 90's Lois and Clark. And now Smallville. None of these connect tightly to any of the others. In fact, the original comic doesn't even connect too tightly to itself! But they all share the same basic story line. Even that basic story has huge variations of detail. Yet all of them are recognizably Superman. You may like one and hate the rest, like most and hate one, or hate them all. (Me, I don't really care for Smallville).

We have two different versions of Battlestar Galacatica. (Even though I wish G80 never happened, it was a continuation of TOS) They don't cross over at all, and you are perfectly free to dislike one or the other, but they're both Battlestar Glactica.

My point exactly!

Sorry, Barrymore. I read through the thread too quickly and missed your comment. You said it first.

[Count Iblis]

Originally Posted by Thomasbombadil

Y'all are referring a lot to two different examples: X-men for a movie that is not really set in the same universe as the comic, and Star Trek, which has a basic continuity in all its parts. I'm surprised you didn't think of another example--Superman! How many different versions of Superman have we seen? The original comic. The 50's TV show. The 70's movies. The 90's Lois and Clark. And now Smallville. None of these connect tightly to any of the others. In fact, the original comic doesn't even connect too tightly to itself! But they all share the same basic story line. Even that basic story has huge variations of detail. Yet all of them are recognizably Superman. You may like one and hate the rest, like most and hate one, or hate them all. (Me, I don't really care for Smallville).

We have two different versions of Battlestar Galacatica. (Even though I wish G80 never happened, it was a continuation of TOS) They don't cross over at all, and you are perfectly free to dislike one or the other, but they're both Battlestar Galactica.

Thomas/While I respect your view, and you make some good points, you leave out many important differences that making comparing TOS and the New Mini much harder to do in the minds of many BSG fans.

The first major one is that in "Superman" as you use as one example, the Characters are not drastically changed from the original concept as was done in the new BSG. Obviously making Starbuck into Stardoe, and making Boomer a Cylon, as well as changing his gender were major. The Tigh character is completely different too. Try making a version of "Superman" that say doesn't have the traditional character roles folks are familiar with and see what the response is? Can you picture Lois Lane for example....Having a sex change becomming "Larry Lane" and Superman still wanting to pursue a "Love Interest" there. Yep.....It's possible today, but not likely. Take Lex Luthor and make him look like a Robot instead of a human? (The Cylons now look like us) How would that change the tradition of "Superman"? Same arguments can be made with any of the shows you mention. The amount of extreme liberties taken with regard to established traditional ideas and characters make comparing TOS and the New Mini very hard to do for many fans of TOS.

In "Superman" / "Batman" etc. even in re-makes we still have most of the traditional characters and scenarios/ideas left intact. They are just modernized/updated versions that better improve marketability today. They are not completely re-worked as BSG was. I like to use Tim Burton as an example. He remade "Batman" did a wonderful job with it, and he kept the icons/characters intact very well. I thought he would have learned from that experience with his attempt at remaking "Planet Of The Apes". What happened? He changed to much of the original ideas, and fans were left grasping for something to relate too from the original film. That's the problem with trying to "Re-make" something. There is always the desire to change/throw in your own artistic flair/creativity. If you over do it, you can lose to much of what made the show a hit in the first place.

Sorry to rant. I'll kick myself with my "Cloven Hoof" now. Sincerely, Iblis.

Originally posted by Count Iblis
Thomas/While I respect your view, and you make some good points, you leave out many important differences that making comparing TOS and the New Mini much harder to do in the minds of many BSG fans.

The first major one is that in "Superman" as you use as one example, the Characters are not drastically changed from the original concept as was done in the new BSG. Obviously making Starbuck into Stardoe, and making Boomer a Cylon, as well as changing his gender were major. The Tigh character is completely different too.

All true. It's not an exact parallel. Note, however, that while the names and essential identities of the main Superman characters remained, the details changed radically. The Jonathan and Martha Kent of one version were completely different from another version. About as much different as Adama was from one BSG to the next. No, they didn't change Jimmy into Jill, but his personalities were totally different in the different versions.

How much change is too much? Is changing Lex Luther from an evil genius into a former boyhood friend going too far? Does changing Clark's "boyhood" from the 1930's to the 1950's to the 1980's make the whole thing relativistic and surreal, or does it just keep the concept updated? Those are good questions.

I'm not really trying to argue a point, just making observations.

ThomasBombadil:
Your point is right on the money. Superman is a perfect example of what has happened with the Battlestar universe. The sex change statement by Count Iblis is a red herring. If you assume the charcater of Kara Thrace with the callsign "Starbuck" is really based on TOS Sheba, it all becomes a non-issue. You can say the same thing about mini-Boomer being based on Athena not TOS Boomer.

For the "Smallville" fan:
Consider this. "Cloe" is actually "Lois Lane". In the future when Cloe moves to Metropolis and goes to work at the Daily Planet she will use the pen name "Lois Lane". Cloe is the one that wants to be a journalist not Lana. If "Smallville" last long enough this will be a plot twist.