I am *very* dissapointed.

[Rowan]

Originally Posted by BarrymoreYorke

Excellent, excellent observation. This, of course, leads to the feeling of getting punked down in the middle, which creates the sense (at first) that these scenes are gratuitous, when they're plainly not.

Thanks Barrymore, but I think it got burried amidst a new discussion

Well there were many things i didn't like in the mini, but i don't see these so called sex scenes as offensive. It looked alot worst in the script, but the final work has nothing offensive IMHO. But i might have a different perspective as i'm from another country. I've seen many US famous people really surprised about what one can do and say in most european tv shows. Things that for the viewer are normal, but the guest star says it would never be possible to do in US in that time slot. Hell, why should i be shocked by the "naked back" scene when during commercials i can see those lady's breasts in some Nivea commercial, at any time slot. Kids see plenty of hakf naked woman at most of the beaches, because topless is not forbiden arround here.
I agree it could have been done differently, with more charm or something, but i don't think it's that offensive.

[bsg1fan1975]

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

Do stormtroopers look like Cylons?





Umm, no. Stormtroopers are cloned men in white armor. Cylons are chrome colored cyborgs.

And I don't think Larson would sue you. You are using a basic premise and I would assume you would then create original characters to tell that story not reliant on using BGT character names.

Your point?

I'm saying that Moore is a hack writer who borrowed from other specific movies to tell his story which are all a little familiar. Do you UNDERSTAND THAT?

And as far as the DeSanto Apollo/Cylon plot twist... to me it does sound a little too "Borg" for my liking. Wow! I bet your surprised I would say something like that huh? Maybe that will prove to you that I have a more open mind than you think.

JV

Exactly my point as well Jerry. Moore is nothing but a no talent hack who can't write for beans!

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

Do stormtroopers look like Cylons?





Umm, no. Stormtroopers are cloned men in white armor. Cylons are chrome colored cyborgs.

And I don't think Larson would sue you. You are using a basic premise and I would assume you would then create original characters to tell that story not reliant on using BGT character names.

Your point?

I'm saying that Moore is a hack writer who borrowed from other specific movies to tell his story which are all a little familiar. Do you UNDERSTAND THAT?

And as far as the DeSanto Apollo/Cylon plot twist... to me it does sound a little too "Borg" for my liking. Wow! I bet your surprised I would say something like that huh? Maybe that will prove to you that I have a more open mind than you think.

JV

Well written JV

Keep posting

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Lusitan

Well there were many things i didn't like in the mini, but i don't see these so called sex scenes as offensive. It looked alot worst in the script, but the final work has nothing offensive IMHO. But i might have a different perspective as i'm from another country. I've seen many US famous people really surprised about what one can do and say in most european tv shows. Things that for the viewer are normal, but the guest star says it would never be possible to do in US in that time slot. Hell, why should i be shocked by the "naked back" scene when during commercials i can see those lady's breasts in some Nivea commercial, at any time slot. Kids see plenty of hakf naked woman at most of the beaches, because topless is not forbiden arround here.
I agree it could have been done differently, with more charm or something, but i don't think it's that offensive.

Lusitan you are right about the differences in culture. Because Topless is
forbidden here.

I hope you keep posting.

It's always good to see things from some one elses point of view

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by bsg1fan1975

Exactly my point as well Jerry. Moore is nothing but a no talent hack who can't write for beans!

Well he 'CAN' write .....................IF he has a FORMULA to follow
that has a set of rules he's not allowed to VEER from as was
the case with Star trek and all of it's SPIN OFFS.

It's when he's ALLOWED to REIMAGINE something ....................
that's when the can of worms Opens.

Love the pictures of the cylon and the storm trooper!

Yes, they do look similar! (I know that's not the answer most want to hear)

The main difference quoted was the color of the exterior. That's a pretty weak defense of the point. No one says cylons are storm troopers but you have to admit on the basis of looks a case can be made for inspiration.

[Rowan]

Originally Posted by Lusitan

Well there were many things i didn't like in the mini, but i don't see these so called sex scenes as offensive. It looked alot worst in the script, but the final work has nothing offensive IMHO. But i might have a different perspective as i'm from another country. I've seen many US famous people really surprised about what one can do and say in most european tv shows. Things that for the viewer are normal, but the guest star says it would never be possible to do in US in that time slot. Hell, why should i be shocked by the "naked back" scene when during commercials i can see those lady's breasts in some Nivea commercial, at any time slot. Kids see plenty of hakf naked woman at most of the beaches, because topless is not forbiden arround here.
I agree it could have been done differently, with more charm or something, but i don't think it's that offensive.

It's a little different in Canada too, In Quebec we have programs and movies on at all times of the day with graphinc sex and nudity, and in British Columbia we have wreck beach were people are completely naked kids and adults alike. So I was not offended by what I saw in the mini I'm just not interested in scenes like the one with 6 in a Sci fi program, I do enjoy it in a different type of programe, I just want my Sci fi to focus on battles in space etc.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Gaelen

It's a little different in Canada too, In Quebec we have programs and movies on at all times of the day with graphinc sex and nudity, and in British Columbia we have wreck beach were people are completely naked kids and adults alike. So I was not offended by what I saw in the mini I'm just not interested in scenes like the one with 6 in a Sci fi program, I do enjoy it in a different type of programe, I just want my Sci fi to focus on battles in space etc.

\

That's what I want too .............for my Sci Fi to focus on the PLOT, and on
the battles, etc.....................

[Ethan]

I just want my Sci fi to focus on battles in space etc.

Amen! I totally agree on that.

Ethan

[monolith21]

Hey!
I haven't been over here in a while and I guess I've missed a bit! Ya know, I do believe that Ron Moore has taken a lot of flack for this new show and some of it has been very personal. I'm almost apathetic about the whole thing. Do I blame Ron Moore? Not so much as I am dissapointed with the direction he went with the show. Do I blame any of the people who were in charge of the remake? Not so much that either. I'm sick of blaming people and I'm ready to put my support 100% behind a new Battlestar project. I think the mark was missed with the original audience simply because they tried to make it too modern.

I don't take much offense until someone tries to lump those of us who continue to support the original concept into one tidy little package to hide away in the corner. We won't be happy with anything he does? 100% Not true. If Ron Moore were to write an amazing script tomorrow that was closer to the original concept I'm sure he could win over the most skeptical fan.

I'm seeing a trend of dismissal amoungst fans of the new show. They seem to think that we won't be happy unless the show comes back exactly the way it was. I think something has been lost in the translation here. If these people think that we want nothing new....just the same 70's hair cuts and uniforms and ship designs transported twenty five years intot he future I think they haven't done their homework.

We had our hopes built up for something grand and what we were given was something far inferior. The DeSanto project was not a carbon copy of the old show, but it certainly was a logical progression of where it would have gone and it was certainly more true to the original than what we were presented with last December.

I don't think Ron Moore is the devil. At Galacticon Tom DeSanto said that Ron Moore was high on their list of people to write their version. He may have done an excellent job! Heck, part of me is still holding on to some foolish hope that the new show will find a way to reach out to the old fans and maybe even open the doors up for a contunuation of the original...but that hope is small.

One thing I am absolutely sure of is that discussing how much the new show sucks doesn't get us anywhere. We're not going to convince the new fans that their show sucks and it does nothing to further our cause. I'm estatic that the fan base is so full of zeal, but it's just being put to ill use! We, the fans of the original series that are putting our support behind a continuation are quite passionate about Battlestar Galactica.

Yes, as long as the new show remains so distanced from what Battlestar Galactica was we may never like it. There may be less of us than we like to believe, but there is definitely more of us than they think there is. There are the casual fans who remembered Battlestar and tuned in to the new show only to find something largely unrecognizable. Not all fans of the original are as passionate about it as we the core group. Not everyone could afford to fly out to L.A. for the convention.

I think that Miceleh's response to the interview was quite appropriate and I think that Ron Moores letter was also appropriate. We need to continue to be proactive I think if we're going to make our presence known. If they put us down, I think we should respond just like Miceleh did. We're not on the attack here...we're on the defense. Our "Offense" hasn't really begun yet...but it's looks like things are starting to change in that department. I hope I can speak for a lot of us when I say that our goal is not to bring down the new show, but rather to bring about a continuation of the original. The Mini Series is just a bump in the road along the way.

Sorry for being so long winded!

-Mark

[BST]

Mark/monolith,

Welcome to the Fleets!

We had our hopes built up for something grand and what we were given was something far inferior. The DeSanto project was not a carbon copy of the old show, but it certainly was a logical progression of where it would have gone and it was certainly more true to the original than what we were presented with last December.

"We had our hopes built up for something grand..." -- that is, quite probably, one of the truest statements that I have read, in ANY forum.

While I find the remainder of your remarks to be those of someone very enlightened and informed, I found the above quoted paragraph to be one that sums up the feelings of many of the folks who call Colonial Fleets home.


Enjoy yourself and again, welcome!!

BST

Forget it... Not even gonna go there.

[jewels]

Originally Posted by shiningstar

First of all Boomer ...........the issue of whether or not TOS was a rip off of
starwars was RESOLVED in a COURT OF LAW.

It was decided that there were enough DIFFERENCES in the script where TOS
was NOT in any way a RIP OFF or Plagurizing Starwars.

Shiningstar: I remember there being a comment from the judge over the Fox/Universal lawsuit, that the writers of the Bible had more to complain about as far as "stealing concepts" than Lucas had. The actual quote was pretty funny.

[warhammerdriver]

Originally Posted by shiningstar

Because Topless is
forbidden here.

Not everywhere here. In NYS it is legal for a woman to go topless as long as she isn't being lewd about it.

So any beach/park/etc. in NYS is a topless one.

Not saying it's right or wrong, just that it's legal.

Originally Posted by monolith21

Hey!
I don't take much offense until someone tries to lump those of us who continue to support the original concept into one tidy little package to hide away in the corner. We won't be happy with anything he does? 100% Not true. If Ron Moore were to write an amazing script tomorrow that was closer to the original concept I'm sure he could win over the most skeptical fan.

I'm seeing a trend of dismissal amoungst fans of the new show. They seem to think that we won't be happy unless the show comes back exactly the way it was. I think something has been lost in the translation here. If these people think that we want nothing new....just the same 70's hair cuts and uniforms and ship designs transported twenty five years intot he future I think they haven't done their homework.

We had our hopes built up for something grand and what we were given was something far inferior. The DeSanto project was not a carbon copy of the old show, but it certainly was a logical progression of where it would have gone and it was certainly more true to the original than what we were presented with last December.

-Mark

I think you will find that 90% or more of the "minifans" support the original concept, TOS. Most also support a continuation.

Actually I am amazed that most "TOS only fans" seem to never voice any interest in continuing the original series. I would rather see a season 2 than any of the mentioned 20+ years in the future continuations. What is wrong with getting new actors to play the old characters? There does seem to be an element in the anti-mini crowd that wants to have nothing but the original actors (at least Hatch and/or Benedict) in a continuation only.

Thus far the only "hopes for something grand" out there was the Desanto version. We have no actual scripts. From what I see of Desanto we have kept the TOS mythos but changed the story to a Star Trek Borg war scenario. I would watch and support it but I don't see this version being a "better" Battlestar than what we are getting now with Moore.

Just because something keeps 100% of the mythos doesn't mean its any good...just look at BSG1980.


Just for grins: Since we only know a limited back story to the Moore version, who's not to say that his version is not set thousands of years into the future in the same 12 colonies after the cylon empire self destructed. The cylons and TOS are now just a myth. You could fit this into the TOS mythos if you wanted. If you want things to work or not work bad enough you could make or unmake anything.

[Boomer65]

Originally Posted by antelope526

Love the pictures of the cylon and the storm trooper!

Yes, they do look similar! (I know that's not the answer most want to hear)

The main difference quoted was the color of the exterior. That's a pretty weak defense of the point. No one says cylons are storm troopers but you have to admit on the basis of looks a case can be made for inspiration.

If you want a *really* arguable comparison look at the Starbuck/Hans Solo angle.

[Jerry Vasilatos]

Originally Posted by Boomer65

If you want a *really* arguable comparison look at the Starbuck/Hans Solo angle.

Okay:

Han Solo-

Loner mercenary pilot with his own starship, the Millenium Falcon. Avoids conflicts unless he is well paid. Has a wookie co-pilot, Chewbacca. Cocky and arrogant until he becomes allied with Luke Skywalker and the Rebel Alliance, a group fighting a Galactic Empire for control of the galaxy. Also wears his own gear.

Starbuck-

Enlisted fighter pilot with a military issue Viper fighter. Loyal and trustworthy, and follows orders even if he is vocal and unsure of the outcome. Partners with several human pilots who fly their own fighter ships, Apollo, Boomer and Jolly. Likes to smoke cigars and gamble. Cocky and loveable, a real ladies man. Fights against the Cylons, a cyborg empire whose goal is the eradication of the entire Colonial race. Also wears a fleet issued pilot's uniform.

So what's the big ripoff of Han Solo, that Starbuck is a pilot who is cocky?

Sorry, it's a universal archetype that wouldn't hold up in court.

And if you really believe the Cylons look like Stormtroopers, I could equally counter that Boba Fett's slit visored helmet ripped off the Cylon helmet design.





By that argument, should we then say C3P0 is a ripoff of Maria from Metropolis, or the cyborg design an inspiration?





Larson borrowed from Exodus and the flight of Moses and the Jews from Egypt and redressed it into a science fiction theme that was original in it's execution.

Moore simply borrowed existing concepts and cobbled them together from several sources like I cited in an earlier post.

I tend to cite how a specific concept is used and if it looks the same as a case for ripoff (the Cylon fighters being copies of the Droid Federation fighter shipr from "The Phantom Menace")

Your turn-

JV

[Boomer65]

Wow, Jerry you're really overlooking the obvious. Solo was the swaggering hotshot counterpart to stoic Luke. Starbuck was the swaggering hotshot counterpart to stoic Apollo. One reserved, one not. Both are “Cocky and loveable, and real ladies men”. Do you really claim to miss that? Really? (See the Time review at the end of this post.)

And if you really believe the Cylons look like Stormtroopers, I could equally counter that Boba Fett's slit visored helmet ripped off the Cylon helmet design.

Why not? And pointing out how Cylons are robots and Stormtroopers are clones is inane and besides the point. We’re talking about their outside appearances.

Larson borrowed from Exodus and the flight of Moses and the Jews from Egypt and redressed it into a science fiction theme that was original in it's execution.

Original in it’s execution? I can't say for sure. Human’s battles against robots has been around for quite some time. Fred Saberhagen had a relatively long running series regarding man’s war against robots. The concept of alien developed machinery threatening man was also not new in BSG. Someone also mentioned how BSG resembled Wagontrain Ho or some other western whose theme was similar to BSG’s. Larson could be accused of "borrowing" from a bunch of different sources - just like Moore.

Okay here’s something I dredged up from the web (trust me it’s not the only one either). I’m not posting it as proof that BSG was a rip-off of Star Wars but rather that comparisons are relatively easy to make – for anything. I’m sure there were people out there claiming Star Wars, Star Trek, Buck Rodger, et al were rip-offs of something or other. I’m not going to post the whole review but rather just post the beginning – you want the rest here’s the link
http://www.kobol.com/archives/time.html

[ Battlestar Galactica review in Time Magazine (September 18, 1978) ]
Small Screen Star Wars
Battlestar Galactica seems strangely familiar
by Bob Rich
What much-ballyhooed show has the following elements:
1. a wise old man whose mission is to save the human race;
2. an unusually nasty villain who wants to destroy the human race;
3. two handsome young bucks who trade good-humored gibes;
4. the most huggable little robot in the universe;
5. a bizarre bar-room populated by inhuman creatures on a desert planet;
6. lots of gray spaceships whishing around against a brilliant blue background?

The answer, as anyone knows who has been watching TV promotion spots lately, is ABC's new series Battlestar Galactica, perhaps the most blatant rip-off ever to appear on the small screen. The show ripped off, naturally, is Star Wars, which Galactica copies in nearly everything but wit and talent. As a result, even before the show premieres this Sunday, it has been caught up in legal controversy.

The plot differs from Star Wars only in detail: by some devilish mischief, a race of robots has zapped twelve of the 13 planets harboring the human race. Led by a human renegade called Count Baltar, a first cousin to Darth Vader, the robots take off in hot pursuit of the survivors of the dozen planets, who are manning a ragtag fleet hovering around the "battlestar" Galactica. The humans are desperately searching for the 13th planet, a lost, legendary human colony called Earth. Lorne Greene is the wise old man in charge, and Dirk Benedict and Richard Hatch play Han Solo and Luke Skywalker... oops. Lieut. Starbuck and Captain Apollo. Galactica's version of Artoo Detoo is a robot dog, a "daggit," named Muffit. Unfortunately, the duplicator at Universal Studios, which is producing the show, seems to have broken down before it could re-create the inimitable Threepio or Star Wars ' Wookie, the most famous Teddy bear since Winnie-the-Pooh.

[Jerry Vasilatos]

Baltar is a first cousing to Darth Vader huh? The entire plot that this writer references as a ripoff of "Star Wars" is an entirely different narrative, the only things similar in what Dykstra says, in that both are "genre" pictures. Comparing "Star Wars" and "Galactica" is like comparing "Silverado" to "Unforgiven". Both contain archetypes and are set in the old west. The similarities end there. So is it the same with "Star Wars" and "Galactica". Moore's is just a bad remake.

It's funny. those of you who defend Moore's "Battlestar Craptacular" wouldn't even have the abomination to enjoy had it not been for the original. I can't remember a remake of a great classic I ever liked, although I have seen great remakes of mediocre movies. "Galactica" was great the way it was. Moore's remake didn't even come close to being as fun and entertaining.

I think we should just drop all pretense and call Moore's version what it is, a remake, instead of a "re-imagining". "Re-imagining" seems to absolve all parties involved of butchering the material.

Anyone want to see Moore "re-imagine" "Casablanca"?

JV

Boomer65:

You are right on the money. It is also an issue you can never win because those that DON'T WANT to see the obvious never will. I don't think any of us are saying Battlestar Galactica IS Star Wars but Battlestar Galactica obviously draws inspiration from there and a host of other former movies.

I read that Lucas was inspired by various Japanese animes before making Star Wars. I am sure a Japanese film expert could point out the similarities there down to the samarai sword (light saber) and the obvious Asian dress of the non-machine characters. The "force" and the concept of balance is straight from the yin and yang of Japanese zen Budhism.

Battlestar Galactica is a great series as we all know. The fact that it took a lot of older stories and remade them into a great mythos does not detract from its greatness.

Star Wars is George Lucas's star saga based on Japanese society (It also supposedly is a warning about where Lucas sees our democracy going in the future) and Battlestar Galactica is Glen Larson's based on American society. What changed between the two:

13 colonies - We have 13 original American colonies.
guns instead of swords - American fighting has always been decided by bullets not sabers.
bible and the book of Mormon replace Budhism - Change the faith to Larson's. The trek from Missouri to Utah is the quest for "Earth"
Miltary stories based on America's wars not Japan's - We have stories based on Pearl Harbor(Saga of A Star World), Coral Sea(Living Legend), Midway(LL), Patton(LL), the Dirty Dozen(Ice Planet Zero), U.S.S. Ben Franklin(Fire in Space), Soviet Cold War (Terra episodes), Vietnam (1,000 yahrn war/Cylon back story), Hell in the Pacific (BSG1980-Return of Starbuck), In Harm's Way (mini), and 9/11 (mini)

It's OK to see the inspiration. A great writer is allowed to stand on the shoulders of giants and raise the bar to a new level.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Boomer65

Wow, Jerry you're really overlooking the obvious. Solo was the swaggering hotshot counterpart to stoic Luke. Starbuck was the swaggering hotshot counterpart to stoic Apollo. One reserved, one not. Both are “Cocky and loveable, and real ladies men”. Do you really claim to miss that? Really? (See the Time review at the end of this post.)


Why not? And pointing out how Cylons are robots and Stormtroopers are clones is inane and besides the point. We’re talking about their outside appearances.


Original in it’s execution? I can't say for sure. Human’s battles against robots has been around for quite some time. Fred Saberhagen had a relatively long running series regarding man’s war against robots. The concept of alien developed machinery threatening man was also not new in BSG. Someone also mentioned how BSG resembled Wagontrain Ho or some other western whose theme was similar to BSG’s. Larson could be accused of "borrowing" from a bunch of different sources - just like Moore.

Okay here’s something I dredged up from the web (trust me it’s not the only one either). I’m not posting it as proof that BSG was a rip-off of Star Wars but rather that comparisons are relatively easy to make – for anything. I’m sure there were people out there claiming Star Wars, Star Trek, Buck Rodger, et al were rip-offs of something or other. I’m not going to post the whole review but rather just post the beginning – you want the rest here’s the link
http://www.kobol.com/archives/time.html

Boomer .........I think if ANYONE is "overlooking" the OBVIOUS it's YOU.

According to the Court Case ........
of Lucas Sueing Larson/desanto because BSG was
a RIPOFF of Star Wars .......................
Lucas LOST .............

He LOST because he FAILED to PROVE his Case.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

Baltar is a first cousing to Darth Vader huh? The entire plot that this writer references as a ripoff of "Star Wars" is an entirely different narrative, the only things similar in what Dykstra says, in that both are "genre" pictures. Comparing "Star Wars" and "Galactica" is like comparing "Silverado" to "Unforgiven". Both contain archetypes and are set in the old west. The similarities end there. So is it the same with "Star Wars" and "Galactica". Moore's is just a bad remake.

It's funny. those of you who defend Moore's "Battlestar Craptacular" wouldn't even have the abomination to enjoy had it not been for the original. I can't remember a remake of a great classic I ever liked, although I have seen great remakes of mediocre movies. "Galactica" was great the way it was. Moore's remake didn't even come close to being as fun and entertaining.

I think we should just drop all pretense and call Moore's version what it is, a remake, instead of a "re-imagining". "Re-imagining" seems to absolve all parties involved of butchering the material.

Anyone want to see Moore "re-imagine" "Casablanca"?

JV

Well said Jerry.

[Boomer65]

Originally Posted by shiningstar

Boomer .........I think if ANYONE is "overlooking" the OBVIOUS it's YOU.
According to the Court Case of Lucas Sueing Larson/desanto because BSG was
a RIPOFF of Star Wars

I’ll say it again because you either didn’t read my earlier response to you or you didn’t understand it (I’ll even caps it since you think that helps) – WE’RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PLAGARISM IN THE LEGAL SENSE.

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

Baltar is a first cousing to Darth Vader huh? The entire plot that this writer references as a ripoff of "Star Wars" is an entirely different narrative, the only things similar in what Dykstra says, in that both are "genre" pictures. Comparing "Star Wars" and "Galactica" is like comparing "Silverado" to "Unforgiven". Both contain archetypes and are set in the old west. The similarities end there. So is it the same with "Star Wars" and "Galactica". Moore's is just a bad remake.

I guess these people are off too (who is Isaac Asimov anyway):

Star Wars was fun and I enjoyed it. But Battlestar Galactica was Star Wars all over again and I couldn't enjoy it without amnesia. -Isaac Asimov, "Science Fiction is more than a Space-Age Western," Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Spetember 17, 1978.

A strange mix of the flight of the Israelites from Egypt, the Wagon Train teleseries and the views of Von Daeniken [sic] whose "God is an Astronaut" slogan the film literalizes... the superior special effects notwithstanding, make for a charmless clone of George Lucas' paen to the innocent delights of gee-whizz heroics. - Phil Hardy, The Film Encyclopedia: Science Fiction, William & Morrow Company, page 339.

Perhaps the least likable of all TV SF in its ineptness, its cynicism, its sentimentality and its contempt for and ignorance of science. BG was devised by Glen Larson (who went on to do a similar job on Buck Rogers in the 25th Century) in the wake of the successful film Star Wars which it resembles closely in many respects. Space battles, the raison d'etre of BG, were carried out by planes apparently designed for flying in atmosphere, with fiery exhausts which, Larson is quoted as saying, "make Space more acceptable to the Midwest." The casting of Western star Lorne Greene as the patriarchal leader, Adama, emphasized the obvious subtext of wagon trains rolling west under constant attack by Indians. Other cast members were Dirk Benedict as Starbuck (ne' Solo), Richard Hatch as Apollo (ne' Skywalker), Maren Jensen as Athena and Noah Hathaway as the cute boy, Boxey, whose nauseating robot dog (ne' R2D2) may have been the low point. Ratings began well but soon fell off and since each episode cost three times as much as a conventional one-hour drama, the series was terminated ...The film (Saga Of A Star World) is poor. Mission Galactica: The Cylon Attack is more cardboard still. - John Clute & Peter Nichols, The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, St. Martins Press, 1993, page 97.

Battlestar Galactica proved to be a resounding dud... The borrowing from Star Wars in every detail became so painfully obvious that not even the four-year-old minds for which the series apparently aimed could fail to notice the resemblance. - Harry and Michael Medved, The Golden Turkey Awards, Perigee Books, 1980, page 108.

Look, I’m not trying to knock TOS – all I’m saying is that comparisons are going to be made to ANYTHING. So please, please, don’t try to convince me how “original” TOS was.

"Galactica" was great the way it was. Moore's remake didn't even come close to being as fun and entertaining.

It wasn’t great – I readily admit that. But it wasn’t *as bad* as a lot of sci-fi I’ve seen lately – Supernova, Wing Commander, et al. Bleagh.

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

It's funny. those of you who defend Moore's "Battlestar Craptacular" wouldn't even have the abomination to enjoy had it not been for the original. I can't remember a remake of a great classic I ever liked, although I have seen great remakes of mediocre movies. "Galactica" was great the way it was. Moore's remake didn't even come close to being as fun and entertaining.

Anyone want to see Moore "re-imagine" "Casablanca"?

JV

I bet you enjoyed Glen Larson's cut and paste remake of Midway and Patton called affectionately by us Battlestar Galactica fans as "Living Legend".

I bet you enjoyed Glen' Larson's cut and paste remake of The Gun's of Navarrone, The Dirty Dozen, and Ice Station Zebra (So that's where he got the title ) called Gun on Ice Planet Zero.

I bet you enjoyed Glen Larson's remake of the Victory at Sea episode of the U.S. S. Ben Franklin called Fire in Space.

I bet you enjoyed Glen Larson's remake of Hell in the Pacific entitled The Return of Starbuck.

I bet you didn't like but I enjoyed Glen Larson's remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still that became the first episode of BSG1980.

I am sad to hear you didn't enjoy Ron Moore's cut and paste remake of Saga of A Star World and In Harm's Way.

Casablanca might make a good story to remake in the Galactica mythos although I think the Maltese Falcon might be better.

[Dawg]

Dawg is not in a good mood.

Dawg is having a bad day at the office, in fact.

Could we tone down the attitude here, just a bit? We can all make our points without being condescending to opposing views.

For the record, everyone, inspirations do not, necessarily, mean copies. The rogue with a heart of gold is as old as storytelling. Being inspired by Moses' 40 year trek or Brigham Young's oddysey across North America does not mean BSG is a retelling of either tale.

Some of the episodes of BSG were rushed into production, which meant rushed scripts. That meant grabbing at concepts and inspirations that were popular at the time. Gun, Lost Warrior, Celestra, all of those and more are examples of this.

There's no need to get hot and bothered over recognizable themes and concepts that gave rise to TOS episodes. I'd bet real money that, in the upcoming series, Moore does exactly the same thing.

So let's keep it to a dull roar, OK? We don't want to make Dawg angry - you know what they say about Mad Dawgs.



Thanks, guys.

I am
Dawg

[monolith21]

Those stories paid homage to the stories that came before them...they weren't remakes or reimaginings. To pay homage to a story is one thing...but with Battlestar there was enough existing story to work with.

Moore can be accused of borrowing, so can Larson. There's not a single writer alive today that couldn't be accused of that. I think where most people are dissapointed is that the new Galactica was a shadow of so many stories including Battlestar Galactica itself. It didn't quite commit to the Battlestar mythos.

As far as the characters resembling characters from Star Wars or whatever else, or the stormtrooper and cylons or whatver...of course they all reseble each other...they were designed by the same person! Does that make Battlestar a cheap imitation of Star Wars?

No.

I mean the whole Stoic and wise character and his swaggering sidekick thing had been used a million times before BSG and Star Wars. Watch some westerns. None of those things cheapen Galactica at all.

-Mark

Originally Posted by Dawg

There's no need to get hot and bothered over recognizable themes and concepts that gave rise to TOS episodes. I'd bet real money that, in the upcoming series, Moore does exactly the same thing.

Thank you Dawg for repeating the point I have been trying to make. Retelling an old story in a new setting simply tells us the power and relevance of the source theme. Many stories are universal for all time.

The easy answer is "Yes it is similar but it is not the same".

If you step back I think we can all see that West Side story was very original but it was still inspired by Romeo and Juliet. I think the same can be said for Battlestar Galactica and most other scifi and stories in general.

Hell in the Pacific may have inspired The Return of Starbuck but the relevance of the theme also meant that a few years later it was made into another scifi classic, Enemy Mine. I think they all have a similar theme, very different settings, and yet were all great in their own right!

[Boomer65]

Originally Posted by monolith21

Moore can be accused of borrowing, so can Larson. There's not a single writer alive today that couldn't be accused of that.

As far as the characters resembling characters from Star Wars or whatever else, or the stormtrooper and cylons or whatver...of course they all reseble each other...they were designed by the same person!

I mean the whole Stoic and wise character and his swaggering sidekick thing had been used a million times before BSG and Star Wars. Watch some westerns. None of those things cheapen Galactica at all.

Thanks to you too monolith. You, Dawg, and antelope said it perfectly. This is all I've been trying to say. Although I didn’t know that the Stormtroopers and Cylons were designed by the same person.

[monolith21]

No prob Boomer!
I've seen a lot of people coming down on both the original BSG and the new one about rip offs and it kinda bums me out a bit. I mean, I'm no big fan of the new show, but it's more because I didn't think it was true enough to the BSG mythos. I hate that people always bring up the rip off issue. Anyone poised to call Battlestar a rip off of Star Wars better go watch a few Akira Kurosawa films. Try The Hidden Fortress on for size and then we'll talk! That movie is pretty much "A New Hope" in Japan! The new BSG "borrowed" just as much from other films as the old.

I understand what Jerry was saying totally. Its ok to write a story that borrows from Casablanca...but if ya remake it (why?) don't give all the characters a sex change and screw around with the lexicon of that story.

And to make sure I don't step on anyone's toes....Ralph McQuarrie did the original designs (which in my opinion looked even more like stormtroopers!) but they were altered to more of what we saw on screen later on by Andrew Probert. At least that much I know, but I'm sure a ton more people were involved.



-Mark

P.S. Unless I'm mistaken, The Return of Starbuck was inspired by the short story "Enemy Mine" and not vice versa. The movie didn't come out until the mid 80's but the story came out in '79.