BattleStar-eyed wonder [Archive] - The Five-Minute Forums

Burt

07-15-2006, 07:59 PM

I just sat down today and watched a ton of Battlestar Galatica (The new one). It's pretty good, I must say. But the best part is the effects. The ship fight scenes are utterly amazing. I mean I love DS9's Sacrifice of Angels as much as the next person (a little too much, some might say) but Star Trek starship battles are very different. More...neat? BSG is closer to StarWars, although I think even Star Wars is some what 'neatish'. BSG battles looked, quite real! There was once bit with two Battlestars taking on a couple of BaseStars, and with the missiles and fighters moving round, it was very 'Navy Aircraft battle' like.
Very good!
The only thing - downside - is how depressing the show is. All the death and killing! And how everything seems so very hopeless!
Had to watch a few Voyagers to cheer myself up!

PointyHairedJedi

07-15-2006, 08:16 PM

Oh, you think nuBSG is depressing? Just try watching the seventies Gerry Anderson show UFO. Now that's depressing.

I'm glad you like it though. It really is a great show, and perhaps one of the better reimaginings that have ever been done. In fact, Captain Scarlet is the only other one I can really think of, which coincidentally was also a Gerry Anderson show.

e of pi

07-15-2006, 09:32 PM

As you can tell from my sig, I have seen the coming of the Light of the Pixels of Kobol, and have purchased all the episodes from iTunes. That, and that Ryan Connors Leslie needs more lines, but I digress. The ship designs are very good, and the battles are, as Valium says, very good. It does get depressing, though...but I have this site to cheer me up!

Zeke

07-16-2006, 04:46 AM

I have a love/hate relationship with BSG: I hate why people love it. You might think I got all this off my chest during the April Fool's event, but nope, not even close. I could fill page after page with angry invective about the show, the mentality it feeds upon, and what that mentality does to people. Sometimes people I care about.

You guys, however, have not yet been eaten by said mentality -- so by all means enjoy the show.

e of pi

07-16-2006, 07:24 AM

Chancellor Valium

07-16-2006, 12:38 PM

I think the point is that its depressing. Science fiction tends to work best with a depressing view of the future...Otherwise you get what I like to call the TOS-effect - everyone smiles and They All Live Happily Ever After at the end of the episode and its back to the status quo...

On the other hand, it's not quite got the dull depressingness of say, Blake's 7. I mean, not many programmes have managed to see like Marvin wrote them and then kill off almost the entire cast in the final episode...Its like King Lear, only not quite so well written...

UFO is also quite depressing. And the new Captain Scarlet really isn't as good as the original...

Burt

07-16-2006, 01:19 PM

There are, as I see it in my twisted worldview, two ways to enjoy any scifi show:

1. Watch it, enjoy it, be inspired by it, never mention it.
2. Watch it, becoming fanatic, kill all braincells.
3. Watch it occasionally because you're too busy painting a model based off of it, make ships based off of it, join online communities to parody it.

The first is the bulk of scifi fans.

The second is fairly unhealthy.

Fortunately, I chose the third for almost all of scifi. As I type this, I am looking for the model of my first BSG ship, a support ship for BattleStars that carries 10 Vipers, 2 Raptors, and lotsa guns. It's made to act as a destroyer, frigate, or crusier to the BattleStar's carrier/battleship. I made it out of 2 Lego Bionicle feet. Yes, I am that nerdy, and clumsy enough to lose it. I am cool. B)

I don't know. Look at that. What people do with their time. I mean I may have dabbed in some model making in the past, but it not like I have say -
-A Bird of Prey
-WarBird
-Defient
- 6 Other Federation Ships
-Deep Space 9
-Kazon Raider
-Maquis Fighter
- 3 Star Destroyers
-Deathstar
-Blockade Runner
-Troop Carrier
-AT-AT
-AT-ST
- 2 K-9's
- 3 Daleks

Well now, that would just be crazy, wouldn't it?

Chancellor Valium

07-16-2006, 05:31 PM

Perhaps we ought to have a thread for posting pictures of models?

I've been trying to model a Dalek in gmax...so far I have the dome and eye-stalk, and that's about it...

Tate

07-17-2006, 06:48 AM

There are, as I see it in my twisted worldview, two ways to enjoy any scifi show:

1. Watch it, enjoy it, be inspired by it, never mention it.
2. Watch it, becoming fanatic, kill all braincells.
3. Watch it occasionally because you're too busy painting a model based off of it, make ships based off of it, join online communities to parody it.

I've heard that there are three types of people; those who can count and those who can't. ;)

Fortunately, I chose the third for almost all of scifi. As I type this, I am looking for the model of my first BSG ship, a support ship for BattleStars that carries 10 Vipers, 2 Raptors, and lotsa guns. It's made to act as a destroyer, frigate, or crusier to the BattleStar's carrier/battleship. I made it out of 2 Lego Bionicle feet. Yes, I am that nerdy, and clumsy enough to lose it. I am cool. B)

I made a lego model of Voyager once. I assembled it in one afternoon during a burst of creativity. I later modified bits and pieces of it, and I even drew blueprints for it. It's somewhat dissasembled right now, but I might be able to put it back together again.

Zeke

07-17-2006, 07:05 AM

I was really into Trek models in high school. You should see my Voyager. For some reason I never got around to building my DS9 model... it's probably still around, so one of these days I'll do it.

I've heard that there are three types of people; those who can count and those who can't. ;)

<kow`> "There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't."
<SpaceRain> That's only 2 types of people, kow.
<SpaceRain> STUPID

(Courtesy of bash (http://bash.org/?25464).)

e of pi

07-17-2006, 03:30 PM

I love that line. I really love the people who react how SpaceRain did.

Derek

07-17-2006, 03:34 PM

I think the point is that its depressing. Science fiction tends to work best with a depressing view of the future...
This line of thinking is so depressing, I don't know where to begin.

Chancellor Valium

07-17-2006, 04:13 PM

This line of thinking is so depressing, I don't know where to begin.
Then begin at the beginning and end at the ending!

:D

evay

07-18-2006, 01:01 AM

Zeke, do you find it upsetting that people enjoy a "dark" scifi show, or are you cranked about people who praise it blindly and won't admit to any faults? I enjoy the show, but it's no Trek, and neither is it the Second Coming. RDMoore and Co screw up just as much as anyone else. I'm curious what your objections are.

Zeke

07-18-2006, 03:11 AM

Oh, I have no problem at all with dark shows. Some of my favourite Trek episodes are bleak ones like "In the Pale Moonlight" and "Mortal Coil," and I'm enjoying the hell out of the new Doctor Who series. Gene Roddenberry's vision is what separates Trek from most sf, but that doesn't automatically make it better than less optimistic concepts.

What bothers me about BSG is that it seems almost grown out of the basher mentality. "Let's not be Trek" is the closest thing it has to a guiding philosophy. Bashers loved B5 and Farscape too, but those shows didn't love them back the way BSG does. Consequently, the show can get away with things Trek couldn't. Picture for a moment a Trek series as glutted with sex as BSG is. Can there be any doubt that it would be reviled as pandering to the lowest common denominator? But BSG gets to be "Sci-Fi Sexuality Dealt With (http://www.jammersreviews.com/ent-4/bound.php)." I guess all it takes to deal with sexuality is show everybody screwing and never look at the consequences; it's not like sex means anything, after all.

And what really gets to me is that everyone is buying it. Not just the bashers, everyone. BSG is all over the net, nigh-inescapable. And it gets slack no other sf show gets. The complaints bashers had about VOY and ENT pale before the ones they should have about BSG but don't. Moore is completely flying by the seat of his pants. The Cylons can do whatever's necessary for the plot because they're mysterious. Maybe "they have a plan," but no one has any idea what it is. And why should they? Their fans don't care.

Did you know that Kira used to be every bit the Trek defender I am? We felt just the same way about the basher mentality... and then, little by little, I watched it eat her. In the end she'd become a dyed-in-the-wool TWOP-type fan, agreeing with the mob, saying stuff like "squee," and ending sentences? Like this. By the time BSG came out, it fit her like a glove. So yeah, I have something of a personal investment here -- maybe too much. But I will do anything I can to fight the basher mentality. And I'll watch BSG, sometimes enjoy it, but I'll never forget what it stands for.

PointyHairedJedi

07-18-2006, 10:22 AM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v136/PointyHairedJedi/seriousbusiness.jpg

evay

07-18-2006, 02:02 PM

Picture for a moment a Trek series as glutted with sex as BSG is. Can there be any doubt that it would be reviled as pandering to the lowest common denominator?
Isn't that one of the common complaints about ENT, as your own link proved? It certainly pissed me off that they made the ship's Vulcan into the Show's Babe.

I guess all it takes to deal with sexuality is show everybody screwing and never look at the consequences; it's not like sex means anything, after all.
::scratches head:: Okay, who's had sex on BSG? and what happened afterwards?

Chief and Boomer: in the context of a loving relationship. She was outed as a Cylon agent. She died.

Helo and Sharon: sort of in the context of a loving relationship. She's pregnant. Helo takes responsibility. Kid is born and must be coped with.

Kara and Lee, sort of: Aborted drunken tryst between friends.

Kara and her underwear model: eventually in the context of a relationship, as they get married.

Lee and Dee: eventually in the context of a loving relationship.

Chief and Cally: married, or at least partnered, and she's pregnant.

The Tighs: married. Very twisted relationship. Ellen sleeps around, and is one of the show's secondary villains.

Dee and Billy: dating.

Baltar: Complete and utter tramp, who will sleep with humans, Cylons, battered women, and chip-generated fantasies. Also the show's villain, a total scumbag and vile coward.

Six/Gina: Manipulating Cylons. Show's villains.

Did I miss anyone? As I'm seeing it, all the positive sex is more or less in healthy relationships between adults, and all the people who are running around screwing anyone are -- gasp! -- the bad guys, whom the show reviles. Kara is not celebrated for her drunken grope of Lee.

You know what I don't see? The endless goddamn soap opera they made of Trip and T'Pol. There's no will they/won't they, no coy withdrawals, no genital-teasing. The Siren is a Siren, and acts like one. The officers are competent and dress appropriately for their duties.

Moore is completely flying by the seat of his pants. The Cylons can do whatever's necessary for the plot because they're mysterious. Maybe "they have a plan," but no one has any idea what it is. And why should they? Their fans don't care.
have you listened to the three-part writers' meeting podcasts? Maybe the writers don't know, but they are spending a lot of time thinking about it. They're not just churning ahead blindly. They acknowledge the corners they could paint themselves into. I don't mind that Moore doesn't have his plan worked out yet. The writers don't have a frakking clue what's going on on "Lost" either, and that show regularly makes the Top 10. (not that I watch it -- just making the analogy.)

I cheerfully acknowledge BSG's faults. Moore screws up his own continuity, and made an ENORMOUS error in having Roslin ban abortion. And it's NOT Trek; it doesn't celebrate the best we could be and hold it up as a goal. (and you cannot accuse me of not supporting Trek in general or ENT specifically, considering all the work I did on my support page over S3 and S4.) But I also recognize good writing when I see it.

Burt

07-18-2006, 04:10 PM

The writers don't have a frakking clue what's going on on "Lost" either, and that show regularly makes the Top 10. (not that I watch it -- just making the analogy.)

Slightly changing the subject, even though I know it's not what you meant. But, lordy has anyone watched Lost? I mean I can watch most TV shows. Really. Anyone that can sit down and watch 'The Web of Fear' (Doctor Who 1st Doctor), enjoy it AND, not find people walking around in huge bee suits silly - well lets just say that no matter how 'bad' Enterprise, Voyager, BSG and all other sci-fi shows get they'll never be at that level.
But Lost? Yes, it has about a zillion great ideas.
The monster, random animals that shouldn't be there, The hidden bases, The countdown thingy, The others, The numbers, The chance meetings, The boy, The French women, The illness and everything else.
And what happens..?
Zero.
No point is ever explained. No-one ever seems to react how any normal person would to these events. No plots are uncovered. I watch an episode and something big happens at the end of it, and you think 'Wow! Now that will be explained next episode! They wouldn't just forget about that, would they!?' But they do. It would be like Buffy finding Dark Willow killing Warren. And then the next episode being about something totally different. I DON'T CARE ABOUT SUN'S CABBAGE PATCH! I just wanna know about the numbers!
I've watched the first series. And I've just finished watching the second. I was so bored. The thing that keeps me going on Buffy, Angel, 24 (And Series 3 Of Enterprise) was the plot. Finding small bits of info thoughout, building up the picture, understanding more and more as you go along. I know some stuff needs to be kept hidden till the end, but with Lost it feels like it's everything!
The problem with Lost is it's based around 'THE SECRET-tm'. That one big idea. No-one knows what it is -either they've all been taken by aliens, or there're in purgatory- whatever. The thing is, the writers can't tell us what it is. Cos then the mystery will be gone, So I'm guessing I'll have to wait till the very end to find out.
There was a big cliff-hanger at the end of series two. One of them 'This will change everything bits'. But knowing this show, everyone will have forgot about it by next series.

Zeke

07-19-2006, 10:01 PM

evay, I'm ready to admit when I've been nailed, and you have nailed me. I didn't think that "consequences" comment through at all. I still think Jammer's wrong that BSG has any sort of special maturity where sex is concerned, but the charge I made is unfair, and I'll remember that.

I doubt we'll ever see eye to eye about T/T, though. Will-they-won't-they is how the majority of TV romances work (look at Apollo and Starbuck). I think S4's arc would have been the last of that -- if the show had been able to continue, we'd have seen T/T settle into something like Tom and B'Elanna, but more central because of the characters' importance. I don't like "Harbinger" any more than you do; I guess the reason it doesn't bother me as much is that I was expecting T/T practically from the word go. When I talked to Thinkey after "Broken Bow," she was dead convinced that those two would be the show's big couple, and so I kept an eye out for it and ended up liking the idea.

Finally, the fact that I don't think BSG is more mature than Trek about sex doesn't mean I think Trek is mature about it. That idea would always have been dubious, but it was eradicated for good in the decon chamber. (Hmm, guess decon did do something.)

evay

07-20-2006, 02:28 AM

I appreciate your fair-mindedness -- can't ask for more than that. :) I agree with you that Jammer's wrong, and we can agree to disagree about T/T.

Chancellor Valium

07-20-2006, 10:53 PM

Um, Zeke, the new Doctor Who is about as depressing as walking in a field of pansies in the bright sunshine with Eddie, the central computer of the Heart of Gold [provided you added legs for him/it]. RNT even designed it specifically to be 'upbeat' and have a 'positive' air. Just thought I'd say that first of all ;)

Secondly: Most Star Trek is fairly formulaic and dull, IMO. DS9 being the exception in that it broke the mould rather by admitting - SHOCK! HORROR! That the galaxy was not starkly divided between 'Goodies' and 'Baddies', and that CONTROVERSY! HERESY! - the Federation was not whiter than white (they'd been buying black-market Daz - always buy the retail version, folks...). Seriously. Single episode adventure, the Glorious Federation Triumphs, move on. Occasonal two-parters, but They All Live Happily Ever After at the end of the episode. All right, it's not quite so bad in VOY, but it still happens. In DS9 characters do develop, at least...The most exciting main-character event to happen in TNG was that Tasha Yar died, right at the beginning. Ooo.

Anyhow.

One of the great reasons for liking BSG for me is that it's learnt all the good lessons from B5 - or at least pretends pretty well - without some of the pre-DS9 "whiter-than-white Earth" thing (and better dialogue - is there a single first-season episode where Sinclair doesn't mention something like "this could destabilise the very foundation of this station - peace.", owtte?)

Oh, and am I the only one who finds Baltar's way of speechifying an amusing parody of Chairman Blair?

Zeke

07-20-2006, 11:36 PM

Derek

07-20-2006, 11:46 PM

Secondly: Most Star Trek is fairly formulaic and dull, IMO. DS9 being the exception in that it broke the mould rather by admitting - SHOCK! HORROR! That the galaxy was not starkly divided between 'Goodies' and 'Baddies', and that CONTROVERSY! HERESY! - the Federation was not whiter than white
Wow. Obviously you and I just look at stories in different ways. TOS and early-to-mid TNG wasn't about the "Star Trek universe," it was, as TMP stated, about the "Human Adventure." The Federation and the constructions around it and the characters in it were very often just means to an end. They were trying to say something and they used the Trek universe as the vehicle to do it. Sure, sometimes they'd have the fun scifi plot or humorous plot, but very often it was supposed to be black and white. The Enterprise crew was supposed to be the good guys, who helped the helpless and righted wrongs and hopefully said something to you the viewer while doing it.

As Star Trek grew, the writers became more interested in the universe they were creating and hence started to tell more stories about the universe and about the characters. These are still good stories, and I have enjoyed them, but I don't watch them in the same way as I watch the old Trek.

About BSG: I have tried to watch the show. I watched a few random episodes in the middle of the first season, and recently I Netflixed the miniseries, but honestly, it's not doing much for me. I could keep watching it, but I'm not seriously inclined to.

Chancellor Valium

07-20-2006, 11:46 PM

Perhaps compared to earlier Doctor Who series, but it's still darker than most Trek. The Doctor (Eccleston more than Tennant) has such a deep sadness to him now that he's the last Time Lord; it doesn't often show, but it's always there. And the nature of the series allows more characters to die, because most places the Doctor goes, he doesn't come back.

I have been a little annoyed with the overly convenient endings of some episodes. "The Doctor Dances" was one thing because the Doctor exulted in the fact that "everyone lives" for once, but since then we've had "New Earth" and "The Idiot's Lantern" with similar too-easy endings. The Tenth Doctor's only really costly victory (that I've seen so far) was in "The Age of Steel," though you must admit that one was pretty grim.

Not really. It's all sentiment sans emotion - and in the end feels like little more than sap, IMO.

Burt

07-21-2006, 03:55 AM

I think I tend to follow Derek more - Star Trek wasn't trying to show everything as perfect and people as flawless beings - they were more metaphors. To explore different parts of Humanity. (Racial differences, The Cold War, etc). Trying to show that there Humanity could achieve more though co-operation, and putting aside differences. And like he said, that was up till mid Next Gen. Now it's more focused on action type stories (I still like!), which I guess is in part due to the need to compete with other sci-fi shows. I suppose back in the original days and at the start of Next Gen there wasn't much competition, so they could do more slower 'moral' stories.
To be honest thought, I caught a BSG on TV today (Remake). It was the one about a Cylon suicide bombing, and then a big old trial to find out who was to blame. And as I watched it, I realized, it was very like 'The Drumhead', an old Next Gen episode. Yes, more glitz and glamour - and certainly more kissing- but they were so alike even down to the 'Captain gets Tried at the end and proclaims it a witch-hunt'. I suppose even though Star Trek never really had the sex, drugs and rock&roll in it, so long as the story had meaning, it didn't really matter.
As for Doctor Who I think this series has quite a bit of depth and sadness in it. As a companion, the Doctor seemed very close to Rose. A fair few other companions seemed rather 'throwaway'. But the way this was played, it always felt to me that there was always a worry in the Doctors head about the safety of Rose. I wonder if they’ll be able to add this to the next assistant. Plus there's him being the (So far) last Time lord. He doesn't seem too happy bout that. And while he's never been a fan of the Daleks, he's turned really quite cold towards them, with what’s happened with his race. I don't know, to me the whole thing has a much darker feel. (Again I mean against the older series - compared to some American shows it's practically the Teletubbies) Even the TARDIS is different. Darker, spookier.

Chancellor Valium

07-21-2006, 04:08 PM

But there isn't any substance - everyone always lives happily ever after at the end of the episode...TPOTW - everyone is ressurected, for example.

Burt

07-21-2006, 08:26 PM

Sometimes I think the journey can be just as important. I suppose the ends can be a little bit 'cop-outs', but it's usually the episodes that are trying to make a point. 'The measure of a man' for example - Oh how I love that episode - nothing really changes by the end. But it was making a point - That machines are our equals.
Freedom to the Washing Machines! Long live the Toasters!
I kid. I get the really meaning - respect all people, everyone/thing equal.

Chancellor Valium

07-22-2006, 09:57 PM

"The Measure of a Man"? Don't recognise the title, I'm afraid...The TNG Data Trial one?

Burt

07-23-2006, 12:47 AM

Yeah, thats the one. Nothing better than a picard speech. God he's good at them. I must have watches that episode 100's of times. The Drumhead is another good Picard Speechy episode.

Chancellor Valium

07-23-2006, 01:06 PM

Ahh...Picard speeches. I wonder - lock Picard and Sheridan in the same room - who would have the last word?

mudshark

07-23-2006, 07:09 PM

If they chew each others' ears off and there's no one else around to hear, did either of them actually say anything?

PointyHairedJedi

07-23-2006, 10:19 PM

Sheridan? Hmph. Some people just don't know when to stay dead.

Sa'ar Chasm

07-23-2006, 10:30 PM

Give the guy a break. Sometimes it takes people a couple of tries to get something right. Practice makes perfect.

PointyHairedJedi

07-23-2006, 10:35 PM

I think Baal should definitely give a helping hand with that one.

Burt

07-24-2006, 04:44 AM

Sheridan? Hmph. Some people just don't know when to stay dead.

What is it with the dying nowadays, anyway? Sheridan twice. Buffy, at least twice, (Gonna be three in the end) maybe more. Picard's had it a few times. I know some guy in StarGate kicked the bucket more than once (Jackson?) And Captain Scarlet? Just don't ask.
So is dying the new black then?
I prefer the good old days in literature where people didn't just 'die' and come back again willy-nilly.....wait..
Sherlock Homes....
Ok scratch that.

PointyHairedJedi

07-24-2006, 09:21 AM

I've said this before and I'll say it again:

Duncan Idaho pwns all.

Chancellor Valium

07-24-2006, 09:41 AM

Since when was Sherlock Holmes literature? It's badly written - it gets worse as time goes on, in fact - and illogical. Take The Speckled Band - Conan Doyle has Holmes solve the case by knowing more than we do, and by a very contrived last cry from the girl. She could've said something a bit more bloody useful...

As for not dying, I think we perhaps don't value life as greatly any more, and just expect magical escapes.

The good Doctor might have something else to do with it, of course :)

Zeke

07-24-2006, 10:52 AM

Valium, I've officially lost all hope of you and me ever seeing eye to eye on the quality of stuff. There's very little I enjoy more than a Sherlock Holmes story.

PointyHairedJedi

07-24-2006, 04:44 PM

Burt

07-24-2006, 04:59 PM

Valium, I've officially lost all hope of you and me ever seeing eye to eye on the quality of stuff. There's very little I enjoy more than a Sherlock Holmes story.

lol. I suppose it was a little harsh, Shelock Holmes isn't known as a classic for nothing....
But I have to say, it's not really my cup of tea. I'm more a Agatha Christie fan. I say 'more-of', I mean totally! I think she's fantastic! I love her stories, I think they're first class. I really love the idea she has of 'Playing Fair' - by giving the reader the clues they need to solve the crime.
To be honest, I think she is one of the best writers in the world ever. And her booksales are not to be taken lightly - 2nd best selling author ever, after Shakespeare (And in my humble opinion - I think he's totally crap! Dull writing and almost no relevence to today's world!) and usually first best selling in a country (i.e. France).
Go Go Christie!

Burt

07-24-2006, 05:04 PM

Oh, they are immensely entertaining, that's for sure, but hardly of great literary worth. I personally find Agatha Chirstie to be a far keener observer of human nature than Doyle, though Sherlock Holmes undoubtedly remains one of the better characters ever created.

lol, dude you totally beat me to the Agatha Christie point!
Did you know there's a new 'Murder on the Orient Express' coming out with David Suchet playing? Totally excited about that! Been waiting for it for years!

evay

07-24-2006, 06:27 PM

after Shakespeare (And in my humble opinion - I think he's totally crap! Dull writing and almost no relevence to today's world!)
wow, I'm sorry you feel that way. I find Shakespeare still relevant (MacBeth for politics, Othello for politics and jealousy, Julius Caesar for politics, Romeo and Juliet for headstrong teenage rebellion and the giddy rush of first love, lots of the sonnets can break your heart -- just off the top of my head) and his language sparkles. What did you read, or what kind of teacher did you have, that the Bard came off so poorly to you? You've never seen a single film adaptation of Hamlet you enjoyed? Never watched a single stage performance of any of the plays you liked?

Burt

07-24-2006, 07:07 PM

wow, I'm sorry you feel that way. I find Shakespeare still relevant (MacBeth for politics, Othello for politics and jealousy, Julius Caesar for politics, Romeo and Juliet for headstrong teenage rebellion and the giddy rush of first love, lots of the sonnets can break your heart -- just off the top of my head) and his language sparkles. What did you read, or what kind of teacher did you have, that the Bard came off so poorly to you? You've never seen a single film adaptation of Hamlet you enjoyed? Never watched a single stage performance of any of the plays you liked?

Ok yeah, there are some aspects that are ok. As you say, the love the R&J felt for each other, and the tragic nature of Macbeth.
Macbeth was one that we studied. I found it drawn out, and quite frankly, dull. The same with R&J (R&J? That sounds like a Deptment store...! lol). But my biggest bone is with 'A Midsummer Night's Dream'. I was looking forward to that. A comdey? That will brighten up English class (After essay's on euthanasia and the genocide of World War Two!).
But brighten up?
I have yet to find and humor in the whole thing! Because (I feel) it's no longer relevent to today.... The humor is no longer funny.
But my teacher certainly tried to sell him. She was a fantastic English teacher, though and utterly loved Shakespeare.
I just dislike that so much time is spent in schools studying it. I really think they should open up (Certainly in England) and look at other books/authors. Like I said, I think Agatha Christie is certainly under used. The women is a humor nature genius!

Burt

07-24-2006, 07:07 PM

I'm not saying I pushed the reply button twice. There is however, a chance that it happened....

Zeke

07-25-2006, 11:04 PM

I love Agatha Christie almost as much as Conan Doyle; G. K. Chesterton also wrote some terrific mysteries (his detective was Father Brown). And the Bard is definitely worthy of his fame. I cherish my copy of Shakespeare's collected works -- a one-volume, leather-bound book printed over a hundred years ago. I'm the third in my family to own it.

I'm a bit of a Polyanna sometimes, I know. But I'm glad of that. I'd rather my standards be too low than too high -- people who take everything cynically rarely find something they can just enjoy.

Speaking of which, I meant to remark on this earlier...

Not really. It's all sentiment sans emotion -

What in the world is "sentiment sans emotion"? It reminds me of the Cynic (http://www.cynicscorner.org)'s oft-repeated term in his VOY reviews: "name-dropping masquerading as continuity." That always ticked me off. Most of the time, name-dropping is what continuity is.

evay

07-26-2006, 09:18 AM

What in the world is "sentiment sans emotion"? It reminds me of the Cynic (http://www.cynicscorner.com)'s oft-repeated term in his VOY reviews: "name-dropping masquerading as continuity." That always ticked me off. Most of the time, name-dropping is what continuity is.
"name-dropping masquerading as continuity" is throwing in something without really addressing it properly -- the Ferengi on ENT is a prime example. Given that we aren't supposed to know who the Ferengi are prior to "The Last Outpost," to have them abduct the most important ship of the fleet, and spend several hours in contact with the bridge officers and crew, but have no log of the event surviving to Picard's time even in a fragmentary or misunderstood form, seems ridiculous. That was someone trying to make a TNG connection but not understanding how to do it properly. "Regeneration" with the Borg was better, although still not a great idea. Mentioning kas-wahn in a story with a lot of camping references is a name-drop which is continuity.

So maybe "sentiment sans emotion" is the idea that the sentiment is stuck in falsely, rather than really earned by good writing engendering the actual emotion in the viewer? It's the script holding up a sign saying "YOU SHOULD SAY 'AWWWW' NOW!" because the writer couldn't figure out how to create something properly? That's my guess. The phrase was in reference to Dr. Who, which I haven't seen to tie in to the discussion.

Derek

07-26-2006, 11:32 AM

I love Agatha Christie almost as much as Conan Doyle; G. K. Chesterton also wrote some terrific mysteries (his detective was Father Brown).
Chesterton wrote fiction? One more reason to try to get around to reading some of his stuff.

Burt

07-26-2006, 01:28 PM

I love Agatha Christie almost as much as Conan Doyle; G. K. Chesterton also wrote some terrific mysteries (his detective was Father Brown).
I'd wasn't sure I'd heard of this guy, it sounded like something I knew...but that turned out to be the Father Dowling Mysteries.
Don't tell anyone I said that, ok?

I did find this cute story about a Father Brown movie though...

'While on set, filming the Father Brown movie, actor Alec Guinness was approached by a young Italian boy who, seeing him in costume, exclaimed 'Padre, padre!' and, hanging on his arm, rambled on and on in a language that Guinness didn't understand. Eventually, the boy said goodbye and left. Guinness, amazed and impressed that the mere uniform of a priest could inspire such trust and happiness in a child who was such a complete stranger, that he started to investigate the Roman Catholic faith, and subsequently joined the church.'

I'm a bit of a Polyanna sometimes, I know. But I'm glad of that. I'd rather my standards be too low than too high -- people who take everything cynically rarely find something they can just enjoy.

I totally agree with that. I'll reading anything once. And a few thousand times if I like it. Shakespeare I've tried - we learned about and read many in school - I've even picked up a few more and read them since. But it is really not my thing. But I won't turn anything new down.
I do remember a slight disagreement with a friend. He loved 'Lord of the Flies'. Best book ever he said and certainly best childrens book. While, on the other hand, I thought Harry Potter was. I read his, and while it was ok, I found it a little dull and depressing. He on the other hand read about 10 pages of 'Potter', and proclamed it 'Crap!'
Hey ho!
There is one book I want to read again, but I can remember it's name. It's about a bunch of people all over a town, caught in an earthquake (including one guy who has an (?)Irish surname). When they wake up the part of the town they're in has been shifted to another world, and it's now like a floating island in a no-where place. And there's this scary black goo monster thing, that doesn't like the light and is trying to kill them.
Sounds daft, but really was rather good. Anyone know it?

PointyHairedJedi

07-27-2006, 08:06 AM

I can't say it rings a bell at all.

Chesterton is one of those people whose work I feel I ought to read more of, but have never actually got round to doing so (a bit like the essays of George Orwell, when I've only read his fiction, but oh, what fiction). I'm also I suspect rather biased towards SF, in that my standards are perhaps less stringent than they are for other sorts of fiction, though to be fair I consider some of the best novels and short stories ever written to be in that genre, wide as it is.

Chancellor Valium

08-03-2006, 11:12 PM

Valium, I've officially lost all hope of you and me ever seeing eye to eye on the quality of stuff. There's very little I enjoy more than a Sherlock Holmes story.
Don't get me wrong, I find them entertaining in a similar way to that by which I find the Flash Gordon film entertaining ( "Quick! Check the angular vector of the moon!" ), just not literature in the same way that, say, the aforementioned Christie is.

Oh, and "sentiment sans emotion" is like...well...when you hear of people crying about for example, the death of someone they never knew, never met, probably never even saw in their life, but cry because its...done. Or because they ought to. There's sentiment, but there's little substance.

Oh, and cynicism is fun.

Zeke

08-04-2006, 12:04 AM

No, disguises are fun. Cynicism is practical. And I'm all in favour of it, just not all the time. When you find yourself being really cynical about a TV show, it may be a sign that you're taking it too seriously (or too personally).

I'm aware of the irony, by the way. I take BSG and Veronica Mars way the heck too personally. Nobody's perfect.

PointyHairedJedi

08-04-2006, 12:14 PM

Apart from the Pope, obviously.

mudshark

08-04-2006, 01:59 PM

Obviously (http://pr0n.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/d/db/Pope2lz.png).

Chancellor Valium

08-04-2006, 11:12 PM

Obviously. (http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/pope.html)

I apologise for not choosing the BBC, but A) I don't trust their neutrality, and B), they are rather silent on this topic...

I believe this conversation may be spiralling into the same furrow carved by a certain gentleman named "Borusa". I suggest we change the topic, PDQ.

mudshark

08-05-2006, 03:16 AM

Righ-- ... errr, how's that?

Zeke

08-05-2006, 03:29 AM

The parts of Valium's post I understand are right -- this is an unproductive line of conversation. I think a sensible compromise we all can agree on is that (a) Pope Benedict does kinda look like the Emperor, and (b) that's not his fault.

Anyway, papal infallibility is a much-misunderstood subject. It only applies to ex cathedra statements, and those are rare.

I believe this conversation may be spiralling into the same furrow carved by a certain gentleman named "Borusa".

Personally, I was thinking Martin Luther.

Chancellor Valium

08-05-2006, 10:50 AM

Righ-- ... errr, how's that?
I'm sorry?

Burt

08-05-2006, 09:49 PM

Who's Borusa? The only one I know is...well the Timelord one.....And I think he's still stuck on the side of a coffin/tomb....

Chancellor Valium

08-07-2006, 09:45 PM

My point ;)

ijdgaf

10-23-2006, 06:19 PM

Zeke

10-24-2006, 07:24 AM

I just thought I'd pop in to say that "Exodus, Part 2" was without a doubt one of the finest hours of sci fi to ever grace television. Or hell -- any medium.

To call it amazing would be an understatement.

Hot frakking damn....
This is exactly what I don't get about you BSGers. Good episode, sure, but how can you possibly claim it's brilliant or groundbreaking? This kind of episode works a certain way; we've seen it with DS9's "The Sacrifice of Angels," with B5's "Endgame." "Exodus II" did nothing special. It was entertaining, it moved the pieces where they needed to go, and that's it.

Derek

10-24-2006, 01:15 PM

And besides, "Exodus, Part 2" is where they killed the Professor. Not that the third season has been all that great, but you can't break up the core group. And the new girl they seem to be replacing him with is just annoying. I think I may be done watching this show.

Zeke

10-24-2006, 01:42 PM

You're considering slip-Sliding away?

Gatac

10-24-2006, 03:28 PM

Regardless of whether you consider the writing or direction groundbreaking, I can't help but have a positive opinion of a show that makes me jump up and cheer. I know they're emotionally manipulating me and I love every second of it.

Take that, objective criticism!

Gatac

Chancellor Valium

10-24-2006, 04:42 PM

@Zeke: True, but originality isn't necessarily a good thing. Three words. "Love and Monsters". You'll see. If you haven't already.

That said, while I haven't seen the Exodus double-bill, it doesn't sound like no 'In the Pale Moonlight'.

And I will be raving about that episode for the next twenty years, or at least until it's brilliance is duplicated or outdone.

Zeke

10-24-2006, 07:23 PM

e of pi

10-24-2006, 09:35 PM

Well, I'll say this, I must admit that the effects were pretty darn cool. The atmospheric jump is the stuff of legend. Also, the series is going back to its roots a little, and that's cool too. Brilliant? I might not go that far, but I'm still watching the show next week.

Chancellor Valium

10-24-2006, 10:19 PM

I've seen "Love and Monsters." It wasn't without its charm, but yeah, the twist at the end was beyond stupid. Your point is well taken, and I can think of many other cases... "Threshold," for example. It doesn't get much more original than "drive too fast and you're a LIZARD!"

Charm? If by charm you mean up-itself, my-aren't-we-clever 'humour', then yes, I suppose 'charm' is as good a word as any.

It makes 'Spock's Brain' look like quality sci-fi. Partly because even Spock's Brain just isn't that stupid. And doesn't contain the following:

1) the abysmal Scooby-Doo crap at the beginning of L&M.
2) An attempt to dismiss the programme's fanbase and any critics of the writer
3) Peter Kay
4) An alien drawn by a nine-year-old
5) A young man trying to seduce an older woman who looks like the rear end of a cow and acts like it.
6) References to fellatio*
7) Rose Tyler in 'Dumb Chavette' mode
8) Jackie Tyler
9) A rating of 6.66m - a clear sign of the damnable craptitude of the episode.

Also, the early drafts turn half of Elton's backstory into a gratuitous continuity reference.

*This further puts toward my own theory that Russell T. Davies can't decide whether to make the programme totally a Children's TV thing, complete with Andy-Pandy, or to use it as a vehicle to exorcise his own personal demons.

Rant? What rant?

Burt

10-24-2006, 10:22 PM

This is exactly what I don't get about you BSGers. Good episode, sure, but how can you possibly claim it's brilliant or groundbreaking? This kind of episode works a certain way; we've seen it with DS9's "The Sacrifice of Angels," with B5's "Endgame." "Exodus II" did nothing special. It was entertaining, it moved the pieces where they needed to go, and that's it.

Yeah, I like clever and twisty shows as much as anyone, but sometimes big action bits can do it too...
I still remember sitting and watching Sacrifice of Angels in totally disbelief... This was the bit that so many storylines over the years had worked up too....It was kinda a release. Like shaking a fizzy drink, then finally opening it. I think of them as special episodes. Many shows have them. That one big exciting episode, that any non-fan wouldn't have a clue what was going on, but you, would sell your soul to see...

ijdgaf

10-24-2006, 10:24 PM

To explain myself a bit. It goes a little to what Gatac speaks of.

The word that characterizes the episode best is payoff. We've had three episodes of build-up to a conflict that came to fruition in this episode. I didn't find "Exodus, part 2" brilliant because of profound philosophical questions or shocking twists. I found it brilliant because it seemed to so simply pull off the impossible task of giving the audience a satisfactory payoff to what had come before. And it did it with so much damn style. We were told already how clever the battle plan was. What we got didn't fail to deliver -- it did that and then some. Tigh stole two very crucial scenes at both ends of the episode -- his character continues to be absolutely fantastic. And he joins the rank of a dozen characters who got their time in the sun and glowed spectacularly. Ellen. Starbuck. Leoben. Anders. Roslin. Adama. Lee. Baltar. And hell, even Gaeta. Especially Gaeta. There was a profound sense of cause and effect where everybody's actions were plausable and in character. We finally got a hell of a lot of payoff. And it felt damn good.

So this episode didn't make me think too much. But that's just fine. The show does that plenty (and has done so plenty recently). It appealed to a more primitive part of the brain. That happy ending center that BSG never caters to all that often, and as a consequence makes each a treasure. That's not to say all has been won, of course. I bet we see a survivor count next episode and I bet it's way lower. But it was a good day. Full of maneuvers just fantastic enough to drop a jaw and just plausable enough to avoid skepticism.

The rare sort of show that causes me to put random expletives after the word "holy". Damn enjoyable. And yeah, brilliant.

And re: "In The Pale Moonlight" -- part of the reason that episode sticks so well is the way it shows the darkest side in all of us. The dirty side of Utopia. The new Battlestar Galactica lives in that dark side. There couldn't be an equivalent for that episode on the show. It wouldn't have an analog. And I have a hard time seeing a fan of that episode not enjoying RDM's new series.

Chancellor Valium

10-24-2006, 10:33 PM

And re: "In The Pale Moonlight" -- part of the reason that episode sticks so well is the way it shows the darkest side in all of us. The dirty side of Utopia. The new Battlestar Galactica lives in that dark side. There couldn't be an equivalent for that episode on the show. It wouldn't have an analog. And I have a hard time seeing a fan of that episode not enjoying RDM's new series.

Never said I don't *enjoy* BSG. I just don't rate it as highly as other things. One criticism, however, must be the lack of contrast in the series. There's not even the *occasional* joke. Or even half a joke. There's just dark all the way down.

Don't get me wrong, I like dark, but without light, how can you tell it's dark?

ijdgaf

10-24-2006, 10:45 PM

That's not really a fair criticism. The characters on the show joke around all the time, be it Starbuck with her pilots, Adama with Lee... or Tigh... or Roslin... or any of his extended family, really. Doc Cottle makes sarcastic jokes all the time.

And again, the show certainly isn't all dark either. There is a definite contrast, and here it is: a dark, overpowering pessimism makes every victory all the sweeter for the characters. Look at the end of the miniseries. Or "Hand of God". Or "Colonial Day". And now "Exodus, part 2". I hate to bring in the oft-cited argument here, but it many ways it is the opposite of Trek in this respect. Where dark episodes of Trek stood out ("Year of Hell", "In the Pale Moonlight", etc.), the lighter optimistic episodes of BSG stand out in a different way. It gives the show an overall sense that things aren't hopeless in even the bleakest situations. Anyone who says the series is all dark doesn't seem to be paying much attention as far as I can tell.

Chancellor Valium

10-24-2006, 10:50 PM

How many actual victories have there been? I don't just mean where they've escaped to fight another day, or not gotten themselves killed for another day, I mean actual, real victories. Where they've actually, really defeated the Cylons. One? Two?

Cottle's remarks are hardly jokes. And in any case, how often does *he* appear? Twice a season?

I'll agree, Trek was too prozac-utopian. But BSG has boxed itself into a corner. It's bleak to the point where it simply can't get that much worse. Soon, they're going to run out of disasters.

ijdgaf

10-24-2006, 11:00 PM

Well there are still cylons around, of course. But I can think of three episodes off the top of my head where the cylons were dealt a major strategic blow.

But I wasn't just talking about victories against the cylons. For one, there are a multitude of episodes where a successful mission did not entail major cylon casualties. "Miniseries". "Home". "Scar". "Lay Down Your Burdens".

And its a little silly just to focus on the cylons, since there are many enemies aboard the fleet itself. Does "Colonial Day" not count as an optimistic episode? What about "You Can't Go Home Again."? "Flight of the Phoenix"?

I could certainly add more to these lists. The show certainly depicts a drastic situation and dire actions on the part of the characters. But part of the series' poignancy is that it's not all pessimism.

edit: According to imdb (http://imdb.com/name/nm0722413/filmoseries#tt0407362), Doc Cottle has been in eleven episodes so far. Not counting his season three appearance(s?). He was introduced in the fourth episode of season one. That's eleven out of thirty (pre-season three) episodes he's been in. Roughly every third episode.

Burt

10-24-2006, 11:03 PM

You know it's too dark when the viewers start topping themselves. To be honest I found B5 kinda dark. I sort of like it, butsort of not. I like being in the Trek universe. It's so dam happy, and warm and fuzzy. But sometimes it is nice to take a dip in the darkside. More so when the effects are that good.

BTW what is that ship on your logo Chancellor? It looks like....The one from Event Horizen...or the one from Starship troopers...

Chancellor Valium

10-24-2006, 11:06 PM

A success doesn't really generate an alleviation of tension. You don't tend to think 'Yes! I've finished one page of the hundred-thousand page form I have to fill in to get my bank card cancelled because someone stole it. What an achievement! I'm proud of myself!"

@Burt: B5 wasn't that dark...In some ways I'd describe it more as...gothic. Particularly the Shadows.

re: The Ship - Starship Troopers...Event Horizon?!

This, young fella-me-spoon is Discovery One!

ijdgaf

10-24-2006, 11:17 PM

Did Adama's Earth speech in the miniseries not alleviate tension? Or the reconcilliation of Adama and Roslin and their subsequent return from Kobol with a new clue on the search for Earth? Or Starbuck's return from Caprica with her posse of survivors?

Chancellor Valium

10-24-2006, 11:22 PM

Adama's Earth speech reads like someone desparately trying to convince themself of something as much as their audience.

Adama and Roslin - that was just a resolution of their own screw-up.

Starbuck's survivors are just more mouths to feed, and more people to protect. Sure, there's a small amount of hope, but at the same time they're another problem.

ijdgaf

10-24-2006, 11:28 PM

I'm not sure where you're getting these flaws from. For one, Adama has never sounded desperate. For two, the "more mouths to feed" argument is your own, and not something the show brought up. It's your outlook that's pessimistic there, not the show's. And for three, how is that not a textbook case of the aleviation of tension? (Most of) our characters lost on Kobol are back, the government/military schism has been healed, and our crew finally has a clue where to head to find Earth. How is that not an alleviation of tension? How is that not optimistic?

ijdgaf

11-05-2006, 03:25 AM

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that season three is at least as good as season one. Certainly better than season two. Anybody else agree?

Gatac

11-05-2006, 06:57 AM

The show does have a very charming way of digging its characters out of the holes it puts them in. By my count, Apollo and Starbuck are back on a mission and ready to ride. Tigh's not looking so good, but it's been pretty clear for some time now that he needs serious help.

Gatac

JVTruman

11-05-2006, 03:23 PM

There's not even the *occasional* joke. Or even half a joke.

I don't know. When they had the episode with the Cylon viewpoint, I found it rather amusing that Six had Baltar in her head.

Additionally, they have a few amusing little things, like the 'NO STEP' under the Viper's cockpit. I don't know why, but I think seeing a standard modern safety warning on a ship made by people who have never even been to Earth is a bit funny.

ijdgaf

11-05-2006, 07:47 PM

Jeez, how could I forget Baltar? The guy's hillarious.

Gatac

11-07-2006, 05:26 PM

It's a hard knock life. (http://www.lifeformz.com/weblog/uploaded_images/cylon-797954.jpg)

Gatac

mudshark

11-07-2006, 05:49 PM

Heh. Haven't seen that one for a while.

Burt

07-10-2007, 07:48 AM

Ok, I've finally brought all the seriesisisis? on DVD, including the mini series, and sat and watched them all. Well, up to the end of series one anyway. The mini series was pretty good. Some nice moral dilemmas.
Of the main lot, I really enjoyed '33'. Made me feel right on edge. That is some good telly.
One question... in the room where the Viper pilots are given orders, when they ever walk in to or out of the room, they all touch a picture on the wall. Is that something important? Is there a story behind it? I know about in real life how aircraft flight crews have certain lucky charms....and things they do before/after flights. This the same?

ijdgaf

07-11-2007, 07:07 AM

It's apparently a picture of a guy on his knees seeing the devestation from the attack on Caprica (or maybe some other colony). Sort of a never-forget picture for the colonials to rally around.

Chancellor Valium

07-11-2007, 06:05 PM

...Could I just say that I found the middle episodes of series three fairly dull?

ijdgaf

07-12-2007, 04:24 AM

Happened two seasons in a row, really. What everyone has been calling filler episodes. Which they are. From everything I've heard though, it's pretty much a network mandate. Sci Fi has been worried (perhaps with some merrit) about such a serialized show not being able to pick up new audience members. So a certain number of episodes have been required to be self contained and non-plot advancing. And they generally turn out pretty dull. Which, IMO, does more to alienate the viewership than Sci Fi's worries.

It's worth noting though, Season Four shouldn't have anything like that. They've said repeatedly that since there's no pressure to get the ratings for another season, there's no reason the season can't be one long 20 (22?) episode arc.

Hopefully it'll eliminate the sagging.

Burt

07-15-2007, 10:00 PM

Deeply, Deeply in love with Battle Star Galactica! On to series two now. God thats good telly. Between that and Charmed (I just got into it, it isn't half bad) I may just make it till something good starts up again. House...Scrubs... I'm looking at you.

Nate the Great

07-15-2007, 11:07 PM

Oh, another Scrubs fan! More power to ya, dude.

They're still making Charmed?

ijdgaf

07-16-2007, 05:21 AM

The three best sitcoms of recent memory: The Office, Scrubs, Arrested Development.

Burt

07-16-2007, 10:00 AM

Oh, another Scrubs fan! More power to ya, dude.

They're still making Charmed?

No I believe it finished... Last year? Or something. However it was one of those programs I missed out on (Not my fault. It was back in the 'Dark' days, when only the honored few could get Channel 5), so I'm working my way though it now. Series 2 and counting!

Scrubs is one the few shows I can laugh so hard at, that sometimes it gets hard to breath. 'Floating Head Doctor' Battering Elliot to death on doorframes while running with her was one of those moments.

Another is Bottom. The Chess Episode. Bloody brilliant.

Nate the Great

07-16-2007, 12:49 PM

It'll be interesting to see where they can go with the plot from here. I'll have to admit that I thought that they were perching perilously close to Jump the Shark territory with THREE pregnancies at once. What was THAT about?

"Medical and Surgery interns are sort of like rival gangs. Not real gangs, but those cheesy gangs you see in musicals." :)

Burt

07-20-2007, 05:53 PM

Battle Star Galactica: How the hell can one show be so good? I'm at Pegasus, and it was just fantastic. How does the show go from here? Better or worse?

Chancellor Valium

07-21-2007, 12:28 AM

I'm sure there's a joke to be made about BSG being like an old mattress, that while initially comfortable, you roll over and find it sags in the middle...

Burt

07-21-2007, 09:38 PM

I'm a sucker for the old mattress.
Hey! Thats not fair, you can't not like an episode and a certain bit of that episode, then use an image from it, Chancellor!

Chancellor Valium

07-22-2007, 02:18 AM

I'm a sucker for the old mattress.
Hey! Thats not fair, you can't not like an episode and a certain bit of that episode, then use an image from it, Chancellor!

Buh-wha?

Burt

07-22-2007, 02:35 AM

Your little picture. It's from 'The Sound of Drums' where the doctor was talking about the timelords? And if I remember correctly, you didn't like that episode! And you didn't like the idea of the Timlord being outside...
But, if we didn't have that episode, then we wouldn't have that fantastic shot of the timelord standing outside.

ijdgaf

07-22-2007, 04:16 PM

The latter half of Season Two is a bit dissappointing. Fortunately, the First part of Season Three is pretty much the best the series has ever been since the miniseries. And the last part of Season Three is close (the middle part... not as great, alas)

Chancellor Valium

07-22-2007, 04:33 PM

Burt

09-09-2007, 07:07 PM

Ok, I just watched "Exodus". (Yeah I know, bit behind.) I though it was very good. I liked how the show worked on the planet so well. Some shows, like Trek, aren't usually that great on planets. Anyway though, the battle at the end, I feel was a bit stupid. I mean... why would you destroy a better and more powerful ship to keep an old bucket? I know that they said Lee would have evacuated most of his crew and Adamas wasn't ready... but still! Worst battle plan EVER! I'm surprised Adama didn't slap Lee silly when they met up again. He just lost one of two last remaining ever Battlestars! And the better one at that! But, yeah yeah, I know, the writers wanted to return it to a one ship show, and not even the power of a BS can overcome the writers.
I did like the... kind of theme at the end - Loss. Lee had lost the Pegasus. Kira a child. Tigh a wife. Gatia his... moral code? Laura lost Hera.... Bout the only happy one was Adama!

Liked it though. Enjoying this series.

Quinalla

10-29-2007, 08:41 PM

I too really enjoy BSG, even the bad episodes (and they are there for sure) I still enjoy seeing all the characters I love and love to hate. I agree that all the Trek-bashing and "the show can do no wrong" attitude that some of the fans have is silly, but it doesn't prevent me from enjoying the show. But yeah, I am always leery of bandwagon things, hence why I waited so long to read Ender's game (good), Harry Potter (good), The DaVinci Code (bleh) and watch Lost (meh). And sure, it is a dark show, but I like to have a dark show to watch at times. I don't try and argue if a show is ground breaking or whatever, I haven't seen enough TV to argue that, but I know a couple of the best episodes IMO really hit me hard emotionally. Also, I do think the cast is pretty good which doesn't hurt them at all. They made some of the badly written episodes into something halfway decent :)

As for TOS, it did use the universe to tell the stories it wanted to tell, hence why it seems so black and white. NG has its faults, but c'mon, it has Picard and Data and Worf. Sure, they still told some moral stories, but they started to say "Hey, we have this cool universe, let's play!" DS9 is still my favorite Trek series as it had such cool political, religious, etc. stories to tell. I think often because it took some risks, it had some really great episodes and the few terrible ones, but overall, I loved that show. I watched all of Voyager and I liked the show fine but was disappointed as I felt it had the potential to be more, but Jim's Reviews did make me kinda fall in love a bit :) I watched the 1st season and some of the 2nd season of Enterprise, but I just never really got into the show. Someday I would like to watch it all though as I have heard good things about it from people I tend to agree with.