Larson page on G2003 site

the3rdhuman · May 1st, 2003, 08:43 AM

What's up with that? An attempt to win over the Larson fans? Giving Glen some respect? How can they do that after delivering the ultimate insult by re-writing his work?

None of this makes sense (it never has made any sense)

peter noble · May 1st, 2003, 08:50 AM

What's up with that? I don't know. Your new avatar I find very disturbing however!

Regards,

Peter

the3rdhuman · May 1st, 2003, 09:00 AM

But since we've heard nothing regarding the casting of Number Six, I figured I'd submit my leading candidate.

Yes, Carrot Top is very disturbing.

adjudicator · May 1st, 2003, 09:07 AM

They need a larger fan base for there precious mini...

So they are trying to trick the Larson supporters into helping them by saying that the mini is an alternate universe and does not effect BSG.
does not wash with me.

the3rdhuman · May 1st, 2003, 09:13 AM

I hate that along with "dream sequence"

adjudicator · May 1st, 2003, 09:23 AM

Yes that has been there song, will I have been over there talking to them..
But its an alternate Reality.
Then I say "great show me the place where someone, anyone on the production crew says that"
then they say "but its an alternate reality.."
So basically the made it up to try and pacify the fans of larson and a continuation...

adjudicator · May 1st, 2003, 09:24 AM

by the way that avater is really nasty

LordStarFyre · May 1st, 2003, 09:31 AM

...What they have in mind with that Larson Page...

Although, if they follow their Leader's que, they'll say Larson is backing MooreRon's Abomination...

Milty Shills don't seem to be long on Trustworthyness...

Hito · May 1st, 2003, 09:34 AM

It is no plot to trick larson fans, it is common sence.

Obviously if it is not a story which takes place within the bounds of the established TOS lore, then it must be another "reality" altogether.
It is an alternate "story" reality.
No diffrent than any retelling of any story when the events of both stories are contradictory.
I cant help it that it is to difficult a concept for you to grasp, but if you can accept that galactica 80 was an alternate reality and it was made to continue the established TOS lore i dont see why it is such a huge leap to keep this an alternate universe.

It will not overwrite the continuity of the original series.
Trust me after the mini airs and you pop the "Saga" DVD into your player, you will see Dirk Benidict, Richard hatch and Loren Green not Katee Sachoff, Jamie bamber and EJ Olmos.

LordStarFyre · May 1st, 2003, 09:37 AM

...Line...

It makes no sense, and it is nothing more than a pungent pile of Milty Propaganda, meant to quiet those who rightfully think Moore is Overwriting the original...

Hito · May 1st, 2003, 09:39 AM

When your video tapes & memories get overwritten then you will have a valid point.
Till then your arguments are lacking

LordStarFyre · May 1st, 2003, 09:40 AM

...Your Arguments about Alternate Reality are Lacking, in Truth...

Hito · May 1st, 2003, 09:41 AM

Prove it

Hito · May 1st, 2003, 09:43 AM

and then prove to me that G80 didnt exist

oldwardaggit · May 1st, 2003, 09:48 AM

Hito, I agree because with all the hard work that the fans have done, all the BSG sites on the net and the petition with over 16800 on it, just to name a few things that are in the same reality, Sci fi and Ron Moore are definitely doing this show in a different reality. LOL

I guess this is one of those agree to disagree things.

Take care
OWD

LordStarFyre · May 1st, 2003, 09:52 AM

...Did Exist, and it took 23 years to move passed it so we could bring back Galactica the way it should be.

Instead, Moore, Eick, and your, ah, Friend Milty have foisted this Abomination off on us, instead of what we've fought for all these years.

Hito, this "Alternate Reality" BS is so Intellectually Dishonest, AND it's the current "Party Line" from Milty.

Why not just admit what so many have already figured out, Moore's Abomination completely Overwrites the Original, and you are working with the Group that supports that End...

Dawg · May 1st, 2003, 10:05 AM

Please. That's a cop-out. It is a cheap, last-resort cop-out.

It either is or isn't Battlestar Galactica. Period. Either you accept the original premise or you reject it.

The dominant opinion here is that this remake is not Battlestar Galactica, that the original premise has been rejected. The name and certain superficial aspects have been hijacked by people who had no intention of actually remaking Battlestar Galactica, but to instead slap the name on something else - a collection of cliche's and T&A.

Hito, I have a lot of respect for you and your opinions, but please don't insult my intellegence with this claptrap!

I am
Dawg

jewels · May 1st, 2003, 10:09 AM

I wonder what the Larsons think of their page?

Chris is not pleased with the mini, someone said. Hmmmm.

Hito · May 1st, 2003, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LordStarFyre
...Did Exist, and it took 23 years to move passed it so we could bring back Galactica the way it should be.

Instead, Moore, Eick, and your, ah, Friend Milty have foisted this Abomination off on us, instead of what we've fought for all these years.

Hito, this "Alternate Reality" BS is so Intellectually Dishonest, AND it's the current "Party Line" from Milty.

Why not just admit what so many have already figured out, Moore's Abomination completely Overwrites the Original, and you are working with the Group that supports that End...

Why dont you find a monicum of intelectual honesty for once instead of the same old angry retoric.

Who are you to dictate what Galactica "should" be?
How is it you get to pick and choose what is "real" and what is not about the original galactica?
Why is it ok for oldschool fans to want to "overwrite" TOS continuity but you cant accept that an entirely diffrent story takes place in a seperate reality.
A retelling of a story does not destroy the elements of the original.

But just because i am generous, here is an argument i will give you to use against the so called "neos" becasue it is beyond your rational capacity...

If successful the miniseries and resulting regular series will replace the original series in the "consciousness" of the general public, amking it a more difficult task to revive the original series.
People will no longer associate BSG with Hatch And Benedict it will be assiciated with Sachoff and Bamber.
The same way that as newer generations associate Star Trek not with Shatner and Nemoy but Stewart and Spineer.

If it is that case to you that this mini will overwrite your own reality then you must not be as huge a fan as you thought.
Because I can accept both and week willed wnought to believe that it can somehow "steal" my childhood memories.

Hito · May 1st, 2003, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dawg
Please. That's a cop-out. It is a cheap, last-resort cop-out.

It either is or isn't Battlestar Galactica. Period. Either you accept the original premise or you reject it.

Either or is not a valid stance in this instance.
TOS Galacitca IS Battlestar Galactica for it's time
MINI Galactica IS Battlestar Galactica for today.

We've gone through the examples in popular media over and over again, so i wont site them here.
But the fact remains that when somthing new comes along it dosent wipe out the original it exists seperate from it.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dawg

Hito, I have a lot of respect for you and your opinions, but please don't insult my intellegence with this claptrap!

I am
Dawg

Then dont insult mine by trying to convince me that anything is destroying the original series.
It may supplant it in the minds and mempories of a younger generation, but the original still exists.
Both physicaly and in the memories of those of there to experiance it firsthand.

LordStarFyre · May 1st, 2003, 10:31 AM

...Generosity from the Mouth of Milty, delivered by you...

"Who are you to dictate what Galactica "should" be?"

Someone who has fought for 25 years to bring it back. Someone who didn't need to service both sides of the fence to accomplish my goals.

"How is it you get to pick and choose what is "real" and what is not about the original galactica?
Why is it ok for oldschool fans to want to "overwrite" TOS continuity but you cant accept that an entirely diffrent story takes place in a seperate reality.
A retelling of a story does not destroy the elements of the original."

Right Hito...

So changing Starbuck and Boomer into Women, and Boomer into a Cylon Spy, Turning Tigh into a raging Alchy, Divorcing Adam and his Wife, Eliminating the very Family Values within the story, and making each and every character a dyfunctional basketcase DOESN'T OVERWRITE THE ORIGINAL?

Sorry Hito, even though you've convinced yourself that what Moore is doing is a good thing, doesn't mean the vast majority have the same flexibility of spine.

" But just because i am generous, here is an argument i will give you to use against the so called "neos" becasue it is beyond your rational capacity..."

Oh, Like your comment about me being attached to Richard's Jock is a good example of your Rational Capacity?

Hito, how exactly is it an example of your generosity, when you do nothing more than spout Milty and Moore's Rational Du Jur?

" If successful the miniseries and resulting regular series will replace the original series in the "consciousness" of the general public, amking it a more difficult task to revive the original series.
People will no longer associate BSG with Hatch And Benedict it will be assiciated with Sachoff and Bamber.
The same way that as newer generations associate Star Trek not with Shatner and Nemoy but Stewart and Spineer."

This is your idea of Rational?

"If it is that case to you that this mini will overwrite your own reality then you must not be as huge a fan as you thought.
Because I can accept both and week willed wnought to believe that it can somehow "steal" my childhood memories."

Well Hito, it isn't a matter of stealing childhood memories, but Hijacking a Revival Effort for the sake of a Disgruntled Hack Trek Writer, and your Boss, Milty...

Dawg · May 1st, 2003, 10:38 AM

Quote:

If successful the miniseries and resulting regular series will replace the original series in the "consciousness" of the general public, amking it a more difficult task to revive the original series.
People will no longer associate BSG with Hatch And Benedict it will be assiciated with Sachoff and Bamber.
The same way that as newer generations associate Star Trek not with Shatner and Nemoy but Stewart and Spineer.

The first of that, Hito, is valid. That is the overwriting that would cause us the most grief. It takes the real Battlestar Galactica and attempts to invalidate it; it should be a grave concern to any fan of the original, including you; and, to be brutally honest, I'm beginning to have my doubts as to how much a fan you really are. You are arguing for the demise of what made Battlestar Galactica stand out among the science fiction of the day, and would make damn good science fiction now.

You cannot draw real parallells between ST and BSG, though, because the franchises have been handled so differently. Fans of ST of all generations now associate it with Steward and Spiner, but also with Shanter and Nimoy, Brooks and Visitor, Mulgrew and Beltran. That is because the franchise was supported, respectfully, by its creators. Pity BSG wasn't, and isn't, being treated so respectfully.

Quote:

Then dont insult mine by trying to convince me that anything is destroying the original series.
It may supplant it in the minds and mempories of a younger generation, but the original still exists.
Both physicaly and in the memories of those of there to experiance it firsthand.

I'm not suggesting otherwise, and I don't think anybody else is, either. We all know that the DVDs and tapes won't suddenly erase, or the memories we have will disappear. We know what Battlestar Galactica is and was and could be; and it is NOT what is being produced now. THAT's where the fight is. We are attempting to rescue an ideal, I suppose. Tilt at windmills, perhaps. If they had called it something else, maybe we'd accept it. But they've hijacked it, and you're supporting the hijackers.

I am
Dawg

LordStarFyre · May 1st, 2003, 10:41 AM

AMEN DAWG!!! Ditto to everything you said!

(Also put much better than I could)

oldwardaggit · May 1st, 2003, 10:44 AM

I hate to be a party pooper guys but I did make a promise lately that I would do more to moderate these boards. I'm all for one voicing their opinion on how they feel. As I have said before, we all have the right to our opinion and we have the right to voice it but when insults to the person you are talking to, start to accrue just because the other disagrees, then in my opinion, that is taking things a little to far for this thread.

I find things are starting to heat up again so please don't throw pitch forks at me if I close this thread.:ax: or an axe because that would hurt too. lol

WD

kingfish · May 1st, 2003, 10:45 AM

My biggest problem is in marketing. If one watches the trailers they think this is TOS Galactica.

LordStarFyre · May 1st, 2003, 10:46 AM

<---- Saluting with, then resheathing Sword...

michaelfaries · May 1st, 2003, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by kingfish
My biggest problem is in marketing. If one watches the trailers they think this is TOS Galactica.

FYI: This will be addressed on BattlestarGalactica.com and BattlestarPegasus.com in May.

Michael
:colwar:

Stevew · May 1st, 2003, 10:57 AM

Maybe they should name it BSG the next generation like they did in ST?
S

oldwardaggit · May 1st, 2003, 11:01 AM

Thanks LSF. Its support like yours that's going to make our efforts go a long way.

OWD

Dawg · May 1st, 2003, 11:07 AM

By Your Command, Mr. President.

I am
Dawg