BSG not too bad...

[ThePanzer]

I was actually semi-pleasantly surprised with the BSG remake last night. Of course based on the "re-visioning" my expectations were so low that Triumph the Wonderdog could've played the part of Starbuck and I would have humored it...

In fairness it had its stupid moments but then again the first shows for Farscape, B5, and ST:TNG weren't exactly stellar either...

Anyone else watch it last night?

Also, has anyone heard who's going to be carrying the FS mini-series finale? I haven't heard Sci-li attached to it yet so I wonder if it will be straight to video or another network.

Also, anyone else notice how much the upcoming programming on Sci-li looks like utter dren?

The reality show, the cartoon, etc, etc,...

Ick!

[DZ_Crasher]

Also, anyone else notice how much the upcoming programming on Sci-li looks like utter dren?

The reality show, the cartoon, etc, etc,...

The show with the muppets?

Give all a chance I say... except for Scare Tactics which I was just fundimentally against...

[Sultanofsham]

Yeah it wasnt too bad except for:

1. The slut-bot. Lets say something stupid then kiss the guy at the station. Why? I guess they thought it'd score points with teenagers watching.

2. The new "CGI" Cylons. I dont mind the way they look but if your going to use CGI could ya try to make it look better (fit in)with the surrounding scene. It looks bad.

3. Why blow up the station (or at least start firing on it) while the slutbot and the other Cylons are on board?

4. Why O why would the slutbot, on an undercover mission in the heart of enemy territory, do anything stupid that might draw attention to itself like say, snapping the neck of a child? Tis is just plain stupid.

5. Slutbot getting it on with Baltar. Do we need to see this? Do we need to see her backbone glow? Again it must be something for the 12-15 crowd.

6. Adama and Apollo feud. A father and son feud, wow, how original.

7. New Cylon fighter has an "eye". Lame. I would use a better word to describe it but I dont want to offend anyone. :rollin:

8. Starbuck. That reveiwer that said "she has all the charisma of the typical PRICE IS RIGHT contestant" gave her far far to much credit.

9. Cylons can shut down the humans ships via remote. How Wrath of Khan.

10. Baltar. Now hes just a fool, not a traitor. I guess we're suppose to feel bad for him getting snookered by the slutbot maybe?

11. The humans have no idea about what the Cylons have been up to all these years. Ummm yeah, fight a war with them to a draw then dont keep an eye on what they're upto afterwards.
:rollin:

12. The battlestar from TOS looks better then this new one. The new one looks like a flying trashheap to me.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Now I will say I like the new Viper and the attitude jets on it. Nice bit of work on it and I love the turning and firing that Apollo did to destroy the missiles. The dogfight was ok although it seemed rushed.

[Daffy]

BSG not too bad...
I was actually semi-pleasantly surprised with the BSG remake last night. Of course based on the "re-visioning" my expectations were so low that Triumph the Wonderdog could've played the part of Starbuck and I would have humored it...

We watched BSG last night and thought it does have all the tell tall signs of made for tv but it really wasn't that bad. It did have some slow moments but don't most. As for all the talk :tiptoe: about Starbuck, 6, etc. (and no we are not teenagers) - what? :shrug: - what ? Hey, It beats watching any of the reality shows out there. :rollin:

daffy :)

[Captain Calhoun]

I agree and disagree with Sultanofsham on some points. The "slutbot" (so true) didn't really belong there, or at least needed not to be as slutty. The random killing that Sultonofsham mentioned was there to show just how ruthless the Cylon's are. I did not like Baltar because I could not blame him for anything other than thinking with Little Gaius. He should have been more at fault. Apollo came across as a little bit too whiny for my tastes. Tigh was a nice change and was acted well. I loved it when he burned through his wife's picture yet still wears his wedding ring. Boomer was nothing like the original but, for what she was - a rookie who had no idea what was going on - it sort of worked. Helo's(?) sacrifice, though shot REALLY well, seemed pointless. He had the makings of a cool character and I was disappointed to see him brushed aside so quickly. The grease monkey, aka Tyrol, was awesome. You always saw those guys in the original and giving a face to one was a very good addition. I was surpirsed when I first saw Starbuck because, in my opinion, it is the character that is (dare I say it) the most true to the original. Aside from the gender change, what I saw, that same carefree hotshot attitude, was Starbuck, and it amazed me. However one downside to this is that if this ever progresses past this mini series, they're probably going to want to put some sexual tension between Apollo and Starbuck, and that will more than likely kill it. As for Adama and the "President" I really haven't made up my mind yet on wether I like them or not yet.

Technically the show was amazing. The cinematography was brilliant. It challenges how "space operas" should be shot in the future. The score seemed strange, but worked surprisingly well during the space battles. Even though the Vipers still look like air-breathing ships, the addition of physics was very cool (I hate how they say they were the first when B5 did it first back in '93). CGI was top-notch, however the new Battlestar, Basestar, and Cylon raiders looked really stupid. Why does the red eye need to be on the ship? Also I hated how sometimes the score/SFX was louder than the volume of the actors' voices in some scenes. They should change that in the future.

As for those people who think it was slow, all I have to say is try to expand your horizons. They set out to make a very character driven show and that's exactly what they did. If you cut away to the Atlantia being destroyed, etc. it would be cool but it would take the story away from the characters. The story is much more dramatic staying on a smaller group of characters and seeing how they deal with what's going on around them, most of which they cannot control.

[Da-Met]

I thought the first half hour was really weak, and did not do a good job introducitng the characters (except for STarbuck. Sorry gonna go against the grain here and say it: I like her). But once we got past that, the show was quite good. I enjoyed it and will watch night 2. I believe this is the only non-Farscape I've watched on Sci-Fi other than like 5 minutes of children of dune.

[Selena]

In a word ... :yuck:

[ThePanzer]

Yeah, most of the things that fell into the stupid category had the slutbot involved in some fashion. It was like the set-up for the Cylons being ruthless and evil needed a baby-killing to say "Look in case you didn't notice the Cylons are EVIL!!!!!!!."

To be fair though most 1st episodes tend to ratchet up the sex, violence, etc to make it look "edgy" and "fresh." Even a certain blue-skinned fav in FS tended to run around naked in the first season...

So BSG, if turned into a series, might actually turn out to be pretty decent in spite of the tinkering, Bonnie's incessant yapping, and the fact that it's on an anti-sci-fi channel.

The only problem is once we get into it they'll cancel it in the 4th season on a cliffhanger.

Argggghhh!

:ewink:

[AnnieBW]

If you're going to have a character-driven show, at least have characters that people can care about! I'm sorry. Yes, I only watched the first hour. But I popped over to the last 15 minutes of part 1 tonight before "24", and I still didn't give a frell if Capt. Adama lived or died. Or any of the others, for that matter. And, FYI, I'm not one of the rabid "old BSG" fans. I had no opinion other than it was a cool show in the late '70's, and Dirk was a hottie.

As for "expanding my horizons", I'm sorry. I watch most sci-fi on TV, or at least give it a chance. I've even watched "Mutant X" a few times. :D I didn't have high hopes for BSG turning out well, but I was hoping to be pleasantly surprised. After all, Matt Roush liked it! But, I figure that, if the first hour of a four-hour show doesn't grab me, it's not worth the other three hours. I did tape it, mostly because a friend who doesn't have cable wanted to see it. It wasn't that the pace was slow. It was more like, "been there, seen that back in 1995, when it was called Space: Above and Beyond." Only SAAB was telling real stories, with characters that you cared about.

It's very rare when I say something sucks. Usually, I'll just say that "I couldn't get into it." The new BSG sucked. Maybe it got better tonight, but I rather doubt that.

- Annie

[bouyantman]

well...i watched part two tonight and i still think it just might be something that i will follow if they continue with it!:aok: ...and so what if there are some sexual scene's :lech: ,this version of bsg is geared toward the more adult side rather than the pre-teen one was!.....and you gotta admit that 6 is one fine looking woman! :lech:..oop's!,i mean cylon.. :cylon:

[10SCgal]

I'll go out on a limb and say that I thought it was bloody-tastic well done! Sooooooo much better than Taken.

EJ Olmos was awesome with his low-key manner, and his dialogue with the XO seemed genuinely real, just a couple of old salts swapping tales.

I totally bought into the post 9-11 sensibility and liked how the events unfolded like a great military movie -- which happens to be set in space. People really made some very hard decisions and the camera let us sit with them while they chewed on that -- and then we didn't have to have some lushly swelling music in the background bashing these dreadful and delicate moments into our brains. Silence was used to good effect.

And sometimes the music was dead-on for a scene-- I can only call it a "Hindu wail" but one of the pieces was appropriately mournful and unsettling. The primal drum beats for the fight scenes worked for the most part exceptionally well. Only one that didn't was in the first encounter --- and that's because civillization at that point hadn't yet disintigrated into its basic survival mode.

Got to admit Helfer was pretty creepy as No. 6 -- she's the one who's playing Farrah to Ben B's Lee Majors. And I agree with the posts above-- Starbuck's the closet to the original.

Loved the show--definitely watchable. Unfortunately, Skiffy's other promos and promises just turn my stomach!!

[BillFrugge]

I cannot believe that people who crave Farscape can actually like this re-make. Are you people so hard-up for science fiction that you'll watch anything? Watch some more Farscape to remind yourself what good is.

This was four hours of B-plot stories, and the actual story seemed to get lost amongst all of the personal problems. Yes, character development is essential to good story telling, but that's all we got! Anything that happened to further develop the main plot was off-screen -- just like what happened during Star Trek: Deep Space 9.

If they were to re-edit the mini into a 2 hour movie, they might have something.

Sci-Fi banked on this mini to bring more people to the network. They expect it to bring in people who would LOVE to see Mad Mad House.

[Captain Calhoun]

Its kinda funny that you draw similarities between DS9 and BSG because BSG was written by Ronald D. Moore, who was one of the producers/writers behind DS9.

[Scaper989]

I thought the second night was significantly better then the
first, character driven half. Part two was much more plot driven
and, let's face it, who really cares about any of the characters?

I do object to the whole Nural Clone bit. That was directly stolen
from Farscape. Sure, shows will "borrow" from each other, but
not signature elements. Can you imagine another science fiction
show "borrowing" the transporter technology from Star Trek?
They also swiped the hyper-space jump from Star Wars with
their "FTL" drives. Come on now, at least Andromeda invented
their own "slipstream" travel.

The last clone, er, cylon they showed at the very end, did take
me by supprise. I expected any other clones to be minor,
background, extra types. I also didn't think the one Baltar had
identified was really a cyclon, but rather Baltar himself was one.

If they can stop blatently ripping off other show's signature
technology, and if I can get over the new Starbuck character
(who I still hate, she has no redeming value whatsoever
beyond her piloting skills), this could turn into a good series.

[vhsiv]

Originally posted by Scaper989
The last clone, er, cylon they showed at the very end, did take me by supprise. I expected any other clones to be minor, background, extra types. I also didn't think the one Baltar had identified was really a cyclon, but rather Baltar himself was one. Now wouldn't it be interesting if Sex-of-Twelve had slipped Baltar a roofie, and he was now a bioloid, and he didn't know it?

Kudos to the actor who was abandoned on the weapons depot - He was a Cylon, and I didn't even see that one coming, unlike so much else in the show...

Poor Tyrol - he's sleeping with the alien, and he doesn't even know it...

Who are the other 3 of 12 bioloid-Cylons, then?

[Ammit]

Waitwaitwait, there was a neural clone? I could only get through 41 minutes of it, so obviously I missed out on THAT... wtf?

[Captain Calhoun]

Yeah, you missed it man! The slutbot neural clone gave Gaius a handjob. What fun! :headbang:

I liked the mini-series, but at parts like that I was like, "What were they thinking!!!!!!!"

[vhsiv]

Originally posted by Captain Calhoun
Yeah, you missed it man! The slutbot neural clone gave Gaius a handjob. What fun! The high standards of network programming prevail yet again!

Of course, you had to be able to STAY AWAKE in order to see *that* favor being bestowed upon Mr. Baltar...

[Scaper989]

Originally posted by vhsiv
The high standards of network programming prevail yet again!

Of course, you had to be able to STAY AWAKE in order to see *that* favor being bestowed upon Mr. Baltar...

But THAT'S the part that kept me awake!

[kechara420]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/07/arts/television/07TVCO.html


December 7, 2003
Back to the Sci-Fi Future
By HAL HINSON

Ronald D. Moore, a writer and producer of "Star Trek: The Next Generation," "Roswell" and "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine," has declared an end to the "planet of the week" approach to science fiction.

"The traditional space opera with its stock characters, techno double talk, bumpy-headed aliens, thespian histrionics and empty heroics has run its course," Mr. Moore wrote in the introduction of a mission statement for his collaborators on "Battlestar Galactica," a four-hour mini-series that has its premiere tomorrow night at 9.

Mr. Moore's vision of a new kind of science fiction that emphasizes realism and dramatic conflict over escapism and fantasy mirrored that of his fellow executive producer, David Eick, who had taken a different path to the same conclusion: the genre they both loved — with its mythic grandeur, heroic emotions and monumental themes — had become obsolete.

The original "Battlestar Galactica," which followed the journey of the only battlestar to survive a seventh-millennium alien attack that had wiped out most of mankind, was the perfect embodiment of the moribund science fiction of the past. But within that much-publicized, short-lived series, created by Glen A. Larson 25 years ago, Mr. Moore and Mr. Eick saw all the pieces of what they hoped would be a revitalized genre relevant to a new century.

"The notion of a band of refugees who had survived this holocaust and were trying to forge some sort of society while searching for a new home had always appealed to me," said Mr. Eick, who is now executive vice president for USA Cable Entertainment. However, he had never been interested in a remake of the old series or a sequel to it. Instead, he agreed to develop the project only if allowed to rebuild it from the ground up. "My goal from the start," he said, "was to discard everything from the earlier series except its basic DNA."

In their search for a new approach, Mr. Eick and Mr. Moore began to look for alternative models. "Instead of grandeur, we wanted immediacy," Mr. Eick said. "And so we thought of films like `Blackhawk Down.' We didn't want the viewer to be swept away to a different world. We wanted them to feel like they are there, as if they'd switched over to CNN. We wanted it to be hand-held, like a documentary, as if what they were watching were real."

Mr. Moore said that the breakthrough moment on the project came when, instead of treating the story of the Galactica as a movie or a television show, they decided to take it seriously. "When we said to ourselves, `O.K., what if this really happened?' everything changed," he said. "Our decisions about the style of the film and how it should look. Our choice of director, cinematographer, the look of the special effects."

The Australian director Michael Rymer was chosen for the project not because he'd established himself as master of the genre, but because his earlier films ("Angel Baby," "Queen of the Damned" and especially "Perfume") demonstrated what Mr. Moore called "a dynamic use of the documentary or cinéma vérité style" that would facilitate a marriage of the fantastical and the naturalistic.

"I have always been drawn to that loose, spontaneous, Altmanesque approach," Mr. Rymer said. "And so my way of working dovetailed perfectly with the style Ron laid out in his mission statement."

"Because Ron's script created such a plausible reality," he said, "I could be pretty loose and give the actors a lot of space to contribute things on their own."

Mr. Eick said he had never dreamed of attracting actors with the talent and prestige of Edward James Olmos, who plays the old Lorne Greene role of Commander Adama, and Mary McDonnell, who portrays the president of the 12 human colonies of Kobol. (In fact, Mr. Moore said, the biggest obstacle was getting the actors to put aside preconceptions based on the 1978 series and read the script.)

Only a handful of characters from the original "Battlestar Galactica" (which recently became available on DVD in a deluxe 25th-anniversary edition) have survived, and most of those have been given face-lifts, if not radical makeovers. The swashbuckling Lieutenant Starbuck, who was played in the original by the meticulously coiffed Dirk Benedict, remains a troublemaking maverick who likes a good cigar, even though the character is now a woman, played by Katee Sackhoff. Commander Adama's older son, Apollo (Jamie Bamber), also survived, though the dashing pilot and his father are barely on speaking terms.

But the Cylons — the ruthless race of supermachines responsible for the seventh-millennium Armageddon — have undergone a much more radical transformation. In the original, they were the incarnation of pure evil, dedicated to the elimination of all human life in the universe. In the mini-series, the Cylons are still responsible for driving the human race to the brink of extinction, but, Mr. Moore said, "they are no longer evil for evil's sake."

At the beginning of the mini-series, viewers learn that Cylons were created by humans to work as servants and that over time they evolved from slaves into soldiers, rebelled against their masters, began a bloody, 1,000-year war for their independence, then mysteriously disappeared after signing an armistice with the humans.

The new "Galactica" begins on the 40th anniversary of that disappearance. Without an enemy to fight, the human race has grown complacent and let down its guard. In the meantime, the Cylons have made yet another evolutionary advance, shedding their metallic cocoons along with the yoke of servitude. Now virtually indistinguishable from human beings, this new species of Cylons has been hiding in plain sight, infiltrating every aspect of human existence. One particularly alluring Cylon known only as No. 6 (Tricia Helfer) has managed to beguile Dr. Gaius Baltar (James Callis), the arrogant young computer genius in charge of designing the navigation program for the colonial fleet, and to gain access to everything the Cylons will need to wipe out the entire human race. ("Galactica" fans will remember that Baltar was the traitor in the first series as well.)

While admitting that the notion of machines rising up against their masters is a well-established sci-fi device, Mr. Moore sees this new breed of enemy as a more ambiguous adversary, whose existence raises intriguing and complex questions. "They're not your typical space Nazis," he said, adding that by creating them, the humans were in a sense guilty of playing God. "And what if the Cylons see themselves as the next step in God's plan for the universe? Couldn't they also feel justified in killing their parents in order to survive?"

Because the mini-series is intended as a sort of back-door pilot for what its producers hope will be a continuing "Battlestar Galactica" series, Mr. Moore acknowledges that it raises more questions than it answers.

"I saw this story as an opportunity to examine what we are going through now in the post-9/11 world," Mr. Moore said. "What are the issues we struggle with? What do we take responsibility for? What do we blame ourselves for, and what do we blame the outside enemy for? And how much of that outside enemy has to do with us?"

[BillFrugge]

Originally posted by kechara420
"My goal from the start," he said, "was to discard everything from the earlier series except its basic DNA."

(In fact, Mr. Moore said, the biggest obstacle was getting the actors to put aside preconceptions based on the 1978 series and read the script.)

These two statements are what bugs me the most. If the original series was so awful, why do anything with it? The title of the series was so important to them in order to attract people, so they must have understood that some of us liked it, even if they didn't.

[Digger]

"The traditional space opera with its stock characters, techno double talk, bumpy-headed aliens, thespian histrionics and empty heroics has run its course," Mr. Moore wrote in the introduction of a mission statement for his collaborators on "Battlestar Galactica," a four-hour mini-series that has its premiere tomorrow night at 9.

Mr. Moore's vision of a new kind of science fiction that emphasizes realism and dramatic conflict over escapism and fantasy mirrored that of his fellow executive producer, David Eick, who had taken a different path to the same conclusion: the genre they both loved — with its mythic grandeur, heroic emotions and monumental themes — had become obsolete. I think that attitude is an oversimplification. A traditional space opera done WELL can still be just as vital and dramatic as "Earth Based" sci-fi. The problem is that there's just too much bad sci-fi being made. It's about the writing as much as the special effects. If everyone thought the way Moore does then you would stop seeing space based sci-fi entirely. If we did it would mirror the way the US pretty much abandoned the space program in the early 70's. It is just now starting to ramp up again with the renewed interest in getting to Mars. Much of the space based sci-fi in the past 50 years was a reaction to the public interest in wanting to know "are we alone in the Universe". Should we stop producing that type of sci-fi it would be tantamount to saying "Maye Copernicus and Galileo were wrong. Maybe Earth IS the center of the Universe. Maybe we are all alone."

There is a place for all kinds of sci-fi. To say that traditional sci-fi is obsolete and should be abandoned is wrong.

[mgraylorn]

From Digger:"Maye Copernicus and Galileo were wrong. Maybe Earth IS the center of the Universe. Maybe we are all alone."

This fits right in with the self absorbed me generation - who think that they are the center of the universe.

Largely, an interest in scienct fiction mirrors society. We no longer place a value on the search for knowledge and education - everyone is out to get whatever they want and be damned with anyone else, but they want it handed to them because they are too lazy and whinney to go after it themselves.

The state of the space program depresses me no end. When I was a kid, we used to get up in the middle of the night to see the televised liftoffs, or landings, or space walks, or walks on the moon. Today a Mars mission didn't get there because someone didn't check units - they programed feet and miles while the calculations were in meters and kilometers. Such incompetence is inexcusable - but that is the state of our space science today.

In 1969, I figured I'd take a trip to the moon in the early 2000s. Today I don't think we have the technical skill to send people to the moon.

[generic_screenname]

It's not too bad...for me to poop on!

http://www.tomsimpson.org/images/triumph_head.jpg

Sorry. The devil made me do it.

[fermicat]

What is it with this dog showing up everywhere?

Clearly, I do not watch enough TV because I am way behind on pop culture..... The first time I saw that dog was on VH1's I Love the 80s specials -- and it was apparent that he was (supposedly) well known.

Except to nerds like me who don't watch a lot of TV.....

[generic_screenname]

Originally posted by fermicat
What is it with this dog showing up everywhere?

Clearly, I do not watch enough TV because I am way behind on pop culture..... The first time I saw that dog was on VH1's I Love the 80s specials -- and it was apparent that he was (supposedly) well known.

Except to nerds like me who don't watch a lot of TV.....


snurched from the vast sea of pop culture trivia that is the World Wide Web

"For the two of you who don't know, Triumph, The Insult Comic Dog is a sketch character on Late Night who debuted during a Westminster Dog Show bit in 1997. The Yugoslavian plastic puppet dog is an insult comic who ends all of his Rickles-esque zingers with "...for me to poop on!" Since his first appearance as part of larger skit, the cigar-chomping Triumph has broken out into numerous sketches by himself (including a Christmas Special and a failed sitcom with Conan), and even On Location bits hosted by himself to the Westminster Dog Show (twice), and a LA Tour bus."

A few years ago there was a lawsuit by now-defunct Pets.com.

"The Sock Puppet Dog is a commercial shill for online pet store Pets.com. The character first appeared in a series of "drive-alongs" with a delivery truck for Pets.com, but achieved his biggest fame after a spot during the Super Bowl. Although he has an "edge," the Disney-owned Sock Puppet Dog is much less controversial than Triumph, although he particpates in some Triumph-esque activities (teasing and cavorting with real pets, tweaking humans).

The Incident & Lawsuit

After the Sock Puppet Dogs' appearance, Robert Smigel (creator and voice of Triumph) made some comments in interviews, and, as Triumph, in a bit on Comedy Central, that the Sock Puppet Dog was just a watered-down Triumph knock off. He also apparently wrote a letter to Pets.com about the issue. This letter is currently the biggest question mark in the case, as Pets.com keeps referring to it, but neither side will make it public.

Based on the comments and the letter, Pets.com saw fit to sue Smigel (and Smigel only, not the show or NBC) for essentially sladering the Sock Puppet Dog by implicating that they stole the concept of Triumph and by associating the Sock Puppet Dog with the unsavory Triumph"

that ought to be more than you ever want to know about a puppet dog.

[vhsiv]

"The traditional space opera with its stock characters, techno double talk, bumpy-headed aliens, thespian histrionics and empty heroics has run its course..."

{blah, blah, blah}For all this talk and spin by the producers, the suits, etc., it's got to be mentioned that many of the 'innovations' for the new BSG were, in fact, produced elsewhere and shoe-horned into the Moore & Eick BSG: The CGI-vérite (out-of-focus, trembling frame, shotgun effects) and the Faux-vérite live-action cinematography were developed for Firefly (b. 2002- d. 2002). The same FX house did CGI for both shows.

Many of us on this board know about Fox's short-lived 'Space:Above and Beyond (http://www.tvtome.com/SpaceAboveandBeyond/)' (b. 1995- d. 1996) - similar premise, without the 13 Colonies. Smarter, in many respects than late-vintage Trek, and without the shiny-shiny dry-cleaned stage sets.

A "new kind of science fiction that emphasizes realism and dramatic conflict over escapism and fantasy" - that would be Manny Coto's then-succesful 'Odyssey 5' (b. 2002- d. 2002) canceled by Showtime, in order to herald their newest teeny-bopper jrrl show, 'Dead Like Me'...In short, Moore and his BSG manifesto is a reaction 'against' many of the prevailing science-fiction clichés he helped to create, when he was a producer on Rick Berman's Star Trek franchise - the sadder thing is that he really hasn't produced anything new here. He's simply assembled some of the most interesting ideas from a string of original show concepts (might I add cancelled show concepts - 'Firefly,'Odyssey 5', 'Farscape', 'S:AAB', 'BSG:TOS') and organized them into a pastiche of a re-imagined Galactica, while abandoning the still-intriguing core concept of the original (Erich Van Daniken's 'Chariots of the Gods (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0425166805/002-2820663-4367258?v=glance)'-cum-Larsonian Mormonism (http://www.proaxis.com/~sherlockfam/art5.html)) and swapped-in some flag-waving, post-9/11 felgerkarb.

Besides the obvious lifts from other show-concepts, I find it particularly interesting - or telling - that Moore's new Galactica embraces both a fear of technology and a sort of corporate monoculture, "politically correct" to the point of making a 'top' Defense technician a sexaholic and the XO of a distingushed military ship an alcoholic with family troubles and beseiging an otherwise strong female leader with breast cancer - altogether, a 'Beverly Hills, 90210' set of concerns, which topples the 'advanced' civilization of the 13 Colonies. Is it Moore's intention to lay the success of the Cylon attack squarely at the feet of these flawed and 'broken' civil servants?

Obviously, if either men - and hypothetically, the pro-tem Laura Roslin - had actually been on their jobs (rather than chasing women, spirits and cancer), the Cylon attack would never have happened. What does this *really* say about Moore and his regard of 9/11?

I believe a real challenge will emerge if this show goes to series - Moore has already gutted the exising canon of 'edgy' shows and current events for their novelty - there is next to nothing left for him to steal. Can he take the BSG 'crisis' he has created and turn it into something that his new audience will return to week after week, or is this just meant to be a feather in David Eick's (now a development Exec. at USA Television) cap?

[fermicat]

Originally posted by generic_screenname
snurched from the vast sea of pop culture trivia that is the World Wide Web

"For the two of you who don't know, Triumph, The Insult Comic Dog is a sketch character on Late Night who debuted during a Westminster Dog Show bit in 1997. The Yugoslavian plastic puppet dog is an insult comic who ends all of his Rickles-esque zingers with "...for me to poop on!" Since his first appearance as part of larger skit, the cigar-chomping Triumph has broken out into numerous sketches by himself (including a Christmas Special and a failed sitcom with Conan), and even On Location bits hosted by himself to the Westminster Dog Show (twice), and a LA Tour bus."

Egads! This dog thing has been going on since 1997 and I didn't notice it until a few months ago?!? I am hopelessly out of touch..... <sigh>

Although I remember the sock puppet from pets.com.

[generic_screenname]

You're not out of touch. It's just that I was raised by TV's warm glowing warming glow.

[Digger]

n short, Moore and his BSG manifesto is a reaction 'against' many of the prevailing science-fiction clichés he helped to create, when he was a producer on Rick Berman's Star Trek franchise And didn't he give a lengthy interview at IGN a few days ago about Rick Berman and the Star Trek franchise? I looked but couldn't find it, but I remember it being mentioned in another thread.

[Darth Buddha]

Buddha... LOVES ... TRIUMPH!

[generic_screenname]

That is one giant bald man.

My little avatar seems inadequate nowadays...

[ThePanzer]

My biggest gripe with Moore is his self proclaimed entitlement to remove the "obsolete" elements from Sci-fi. So what exactly is obsolete and how does his good-but-not-great remake of BSG play into it? Talk about having ego and nerve... If anything Sci-fi fans are probably the most intelliegent genre around and the least likely to need a Star Trek alumni to dictate what good sci-fi is.

And how is having a promiscous cylon bimbot prancing around in new sci-fi any better than the borg-with-boobs in old-sci-fi trek????

It's also kind of funny that the Sci-fi channels only real successes lately have been in the genre they claim they want to move away from.

[10SCgal]

Originally posted by vhsiv
In short, Moore and his BSG manifesto is a reaction 'against' many of the prevailing science-fiction clichés he helped to create ... the sadder thing is that he really hasn't produced anything new here. He's simply assembled some of the most interesting ideas from a string of original show concepts ...

And George Lucas resurrected the Western in space and put meaning into the sequel of a movie serial.

But the observations are dead-on ..... though that's feldergarb .

Now does anyone remember what Laurette Spang's Cassiopeia did before she was a med-tech???....

[vhsiv]

Please note that this is pure hearsay - I went back to Cylon.org looking for an original post, but I haven't found one...conundrum7g@Colonialfleets.com (http://www.colonialfleets.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=5400)
rumor: TV option for Moore BG not picked up

Sandy released this info on the Cylon.org forums. Its rumor, but the rumors come from good sources.

The Scifi execs were overjoyed at the increased ratings. The first night got 3.5 share, the second night went up to a 3.8. But its a matter of costs. it cost a fortune and there isn't the amount of money available to go into a full tv series production.

Though this isn't a dead end. The series just isn't picked up for this next year, maybe the next. Maybe it will be sold like Buffy was to the WB or JAG to CBS. Who knows. BG revival has always been a ship with termite problems.

This isn't 100% reliable, but I trust Sandy. And I thought you would prefer to hear about this than wonder.

from colonialfleets.com (http://www.colonialfleets.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5397)
Jerry Vasilatos@colonialfleets.com:
I don't think it's a big surprise the series isn't getting picked up.

And if it did, where would it go?

No search for earth. A dismal, bleak, depressing episode each week focusing on what? I find it interesting that as much as the original show is maligned, the structure allowed for the direction it went in, there was a focus, even if some episodes took detours into the "planet of the week" setups. Also, this mini had no hope, no heart, can anyone conceive of someone "re-imagining" "Star Wars" like this? It and "Galactica" share common roots in good vs. evil, and a fairytale like mythology with characters that people loved. Which showcases the ultimate hubris of Bonnie Hammer, and farming out the way she and Sci-Fi wanted it to go to Ron Moore. As much as I detest this show, Moore was given a job with no options for revival or a continuation, so this is what we got. The mini offers no mythology, or foundation for what made the original so beloved, no matter how good the FX were or the acting by Olmos. No one will hold this mini dear in years to come the way fans have of the original. Moore says he was given a directive by Bonnie Hammer to "re-imagine" "Galactica", not continue it, and that he couldn't do this show and give it another name without people calling him on it because of it's similarities in story to "Galactica". I think this is BS, you could have taken the story we just saw on the mini, changed all the BG related names to something else, and with a few more tweaks it would have been a new series by Moore, not a cannibalization of "Galactica" and a slap in the face to fans, Richard Hatch, Glen Larson, or the rest of the original cast who made the original series so much fun.

What struck me tonight about the difference in attitude of the mini and the original came down to something simple... in the original series, Apollo would have tried to figure out a way to save the refugees that were ultimately left behind, the mini's Apollo didn't even think twice about the "numbers" how many would be saved over the sacrifice of leaving so many behind. I think that's the difference in how heroes of the "old days" (chivalrous and ready to do whatever was needed to save those threatened in the most dire of circumstances) with those of today... crunch the numbers and leave helpless victims behind. That to me was the coldest scene in the new mini, as dramatic as it was, the baby killing scene notwithstanding.

[vhsiv]

from the webmaster@cylon.org (http://www.cylon.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2461&highlight=series):This miniseries HAS NOT been picked up as a series and isn't going to be in the near future.

Sci-Fi doesn't have the money. Praise the ratings, go on about how much you'd like to see other episodes, ... do whatever. The sponsers don't have the money and the long-term chances of this version maintaining an audience that will sustain the financial requirement on the Sci-Fi Channel is too bleak to be seriously considered. This isn't my perception. Its the decision the Sci-Fi Channel management made this afternoon. Skiffy can't afford to continually advertise this production in the manner they did for the miniseries to maintain the ratings they need. Look for the money to go to "Stargate: Atantis". That's going to be the next Skiffy push. He follows up by saying:I do not consider this a rumor. As we've known in the past, "insider info" is only as accurate as the reliability of the person relaying it and the person "in the inside". As for this, the person who relayed this to me has been correct about every single detail shared since the "reimagining" was first announced. I've known this person for years. They are indirectly connected with the decision process.

Throughout the Treklord fiasco, the prequel debate, and all they gave me the completely straight story and confirmed statements made by Ron Moore when Ron stated things that "Universal Insiders" claimed was a lie, but which turned out to be true. If this is wrong, this will be the very first time I have ever been misled by this friend. I was given some very precise details on this decision, the conditions around it, and the reasons behind it.

Expect Stargate (both versions) to be the next big push by Skiffy.

One contributing factor to this (although by far not the major influence) was Glen Larson's lawsuit that asserted his rights to any money and credit for the miniseries. That complicated a possible series since Sci-Fi would also have to deal with Glen Larson in future productions.
But then, Michael Hinman over at SyfyPortal (http://www.syfyportal.com/article.php?id=1219) comes down on the opposite tack:The BSG audience was the third best ever for Sci-Fi, trailing only the miniseries "Taken" (which had Steven Spielberg attached) and "Dune." It also was Sci-Fi's best night of the year in total viewers and in all key demographics.

Zap2it described Sci-Fi Channel's officials reaction to the ratings as "ecstatic."

Word should be coming down in the near future on whether or not the ratings were enough to earn the project its own series. But it's safe to say that the chances of there being a "Battlestar Galactica" series on the Fall 2004 schedule is highly, highly likely.Who knows?

[AnnieBW]

If they couldn't afford paying half of $1.5 million per episode for Farscape, how the heck can they afford to fund the total cost for a BSG series? :grr:

- Annie

[BillFrugge]

There won't be a BSG series, but there may be another movie or mini.

Watch Sunday's ratings for the re-airing of the mini. As good as they were, they're not likely to be sustainable.

[vhsiv]

Originally posted by AnnieBW
If they couldn't afford paying half of $1.5 million per episode for Farscape, how the heck can they afford to fund the total cost for a BSG series? Originally posted by BillFrugge
There won't be a BSG series, but there may be another movie or mini.

Watch Sunday's ratings for the re-airing of the mini. As good as they were, they're not likely to be sustainable. There's some fuel for our collective letter writing: Has Skiffy ever made a promise for something other than SG-1 and actually kept it? They seem to want to be some sort of 'player' network, but seriously, they were in mcuch better shape 4 years ago when they had as many as 5 original shows - now its SG-1 all the time and a bunch of scattershot C-grade movies.

I sincerely hope that NBC takes one look at their little retarded operation over there, and decides that that is no way to run a network, much less a public-access station. They are in the business of making offers - Farscape, Roar and now BSG - and then backing out of them. That's no way to build a loyal audience, in spite of the pap that they publish in their press releases.

If you can't afford the series, you shouldn't commission the pilot...

[CosmicTheorist]

I don't remember reading of any other series that Skiffy promised a season and then reneged. Farscape is the only case that I know about.

Skiffy signed a contract with MGM in 1998 to acquire Poltergeist, The Outer Limits, and Stargate SG1. Skiffy acquired all 3 and had new episodes produced for all 3. Skiffy made a 3 year deal for First Wave, and even though First Wave's ratings averaged at best 0.9, Skiffy kept First Wave on the air for all 3 seasons. Skiffy never promised Sliders or IMan more seasons then they actually had. Skiffy never promised to produce more B5, and it has not promised more BSG.

Farscape's case is unique in Skiffy's history.

;)

[Farsight]

If you can't afford the series, you shouldn't commission the pilot...

Your mistake is that you're trying to apply logic to Sci-Fi... :)

[waltersgirl]

There won't be a BSG series, but there may be another movie or mini.

is that your perception or did you read that somewhere?

[NeilGartner]

I was wondering, what happened to Edward James Olmos? I mean, months ago he sidewinded Bonnie, Moore and the big heads at Skiffy when he told reporters that the fans of the original series should not watch the new BSG. They had to be furious and he was their big star for the show.

Even if they were willing to keep him, I can't see EJO willingly going back if the show were to become a series. It sounded like he regretted taking the job.

Has anyone heard anything?

Neil

[BillFrugge]

There won't be a BSG series, but there may be another movie or mini.

Originally posted by waltersgirl
is that your perception or did you read that somewhere?

That is my perception based on what I have read here and elsewhere.

Ratings. Even though they were high, there is still no garauntee that a series will continue to receive the same. I believe they would be a bit more careful before allocating the funds by producing another movie or mini to test the sustainability of an audience. One of their complaints about Farscape is that reruns didn't attract an audience -- how would BSG perform?

Money. They spent a lot of money on advertising. I wouldn't be surprised if the total money spent on this mini approached the cost of one season of Farscape. To commit the money for a full season without assurances of a weekly hit would be risky.

Plot. So far, all we've seen is a rehash of the first hour of the original show. What is the weekly concept? Running away. Presumably, a few episodes would contain the discovery of more Cylon spies: After they are found, they know the spies on sight. Since they have an aversion to 'space-based' shows, most action would be on the ship or on a planet.

Sets are already built. I believe that they could fund another movie or mini as a test, and not have to build new sets. I don't believe they'd build them strictly for a one-off.

Sci-Lie seems to get more of a benefit from minis, so I think they'd allocate some money to another BSG. The concept of the show seems ideally suited to movies anyway. A regular series would gradually lose its audience.

[BillFrugge]

Originally posted by NeilGartner
I was wondering, what happened to Edward James Olmos? I mean, months ago he sidewinded Bonnie, Moore and the big heads at Skiffy when he told reporters that the fans of the original series should not watch the new BSG. They had to be furious and he was their big star for the show.

Even if they were willing to keep him, I can't see EJO willingly going back if the show were to become a series. It sounded like he regretted taking the job.

Has anyone heard anything?

Neil

That 'stunt' got them some publicity. Plus, (in my opinion,) Bonnie and company seem to delight in upsetting the fans. If you remember, Bonnie said 'kill me now,' and giggled.

[AnnieBW]

Didn't Skiffy pull some stunt on JMS with "B5: Legend of the Rangers"? I recall that it was written and produced as a pilot for a new series, but Skiffy sat on it for a year, until all of the principals had taken other jobs. Do any of you rabid B5 fans remember that?

- Annie

[vhsiv]

Originally posted by CosmicTheorist
I don't remember reading of any other series that Skiffy promised a season and then reneged. Farscape is the only case that I know about. Actually, in recent history, Skiffy made a big deal about broadcasting the last 3 unaired episodes of 'Roar', another child that Fox drowned in the bathwater back in 1997. A week's worth of on-air publicity - and then nothing. IT was already in the can, so Skiffy was only paying license fees, not for production.

Maybe it did or didn't help that they were airing 'Roar' on Wednesday nights, opposite 'Enterprise', but it was a welcome alternative until they dropped it completely.

'Invisible Man' was also a show that was 'on the the bubble' as well, though that skirmish was not publicized, as it was an intra-Universal/USA thing. I don't know if promises were made as such, but it got good ratings for them, and Bonnie et Cie. kept the producers on the hook until it was too late. Sadly, it was an in-house Universal/USA production, so all of their vertical-integration talk was set out with the trash. Same pretty much goes for 'The Chronicle'.

And if we're talking bad faith here, there's the whole 'Legend of the Rangers' debacle - bought, paid for and then run against a major football game last January. After the game was over, the West Coast ratings picked up, but Bonnie and Michael "Thriller" Jackson were no longer interested.

[vhsiv]

Originally posted by AnnieBW
Didn't Skiffy pull some stunt on JMS with "B5: Legend of the Rangers"? I recall that it was written and produced as a pilot for a new series, but Skiffy sat on it for a year, until all of the principals had taken other jobs. Do any of you rabid B5 fans remember that?Here it is - Digger and I discussed it (http://www.savefarscape.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18232&perpage=15&highlight=lotr&pagenumber=1) prior to the new BSG broadcast -
Originally posted by vhsiv
The major issue with LoTR was that Skiffy kept it in the can for about a year before broadcasting it against a HUGE football game - Patriots against the Oakland Raiders (January 20, 2002). Anyway, anyway, Skiffy claimed it was a failure even though the ratings for the movie picked up demonstrably *after* the ballgame was over, and folks on the West Coast were allowed to watch it without other sundry distractions.

It was on that performance alone that Skiffy chose not to finance their own continuation of the B5 Universe...JMS in his own words (http://www.b5tv.com/greatmaker/articles/216/)

[AnnieBW]

Thank you. I knew it was something like that, but couldn't remember all of the details.

- Annie

[NeilGartner]

Originally posted by BillFrugge
That 'stunt' got them some publicity. Plus, (in my opinion,) Bonnie and company seem to delight in upsetting the fans. If you remember, Bonnie said 'kill me now,' and giggled.

A stunt? From the news bits I had read, it sounded very serious.

Neil

[vhsiv]

Originally posted by CosmicTheorist
I don't remember reading of any other series that Skiffy promised a season and then reneged. Farscape is the only case that I know about. I'm also reminded of the 'Sliders' situation by AlphaNova (http://www.cylon.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=21170#21170) over at Cylon.org - Skiffy didn't *break* any promises as much as they decimated the show's premise and direction:"You have to understand, SciFi just doesn't think like the "normal" stations. They believe in the quick hit ratings. They picked up Sliders from FOX and then held onto it until they had the entire fourth season in the can. They didn't start showing their new episodes until June, and by then all the actor's contracts expired. SciFi intended Sliders to be a lead in for "Welcome to Paradox", which was the show they were really interested in. Sliders was intended to be a one season show for them and Paradox their big show. When Sliders did great for them, they were in the position of having no money for the fifth season. This led to the departure of Jerry and Charlie O'Connell. When they scrounged up the funds, they only wanted 13 episodes. They were forced by the parent company into going for a 18 episode season in order to bring up the episode count to 88 shows. The lack of funds was also a reason they couldn't give Jerry the Executive Producer job he wanted in order to do season 5. They picked up Stargate with the idea that it, too, would be on for only one season. Again, when it did great for them, they needed to can something else to free up the funds.

"Anyone who has observed the antics of SciFi Channel and Bonnie Hammer over the years won't find any of this a surprise. Three times they have cancelled the second highest rated original series on the schedule for either (1) lack of money (in other words, money put into new, unproven shows) or (2) political reasons. Would the Galactica mini have had a greater chance of becoming a series on another channel? Probably. Why bother with a reimagining for just four hours? Because SciFi thinks that's the way to go. They really figure they are doing people a favor by putting these shows on for a brief amount of time. Sliders, Stargate, and Outer Limits were all picked up with it in mind that it was just for one season. They wanted to grab viewers who watched the channels they came from. In Outer Limits case, it was intended to showcase four backdoor pilots. When none of them caught on, Outer Limits was out the door, too.

"Sad to say, SciFi is going to keep on doing this. I now no longer believe that any show is going to last beyond a couple of season on SciFi until the management changes".

[CosmicTheorist]

Has Skiffy ever made a promise for something other than SG-1 and actually kept it?
Sliders was not promised another season that was then canceled before it could be made. But the Sliders fans do have a better argument with Skiffy then any other group of fans, with the exception of Farscape's fans, because it was canceled when its ratings were averaging 1.2 (as best as I can tell with the lists that I've collected); First Wave was in its first season and its average at that time was 0.9. I have not been able to find any reason why Sliders was canceled except for a statement by Ms Hammer that Skiffy believed the series had "run its course" or something like that. No dren about "failing to grow" or "declining" ratings, just straight out Skiffy doesn't want it anymore.

Now "politics" at USA Networks probably did get Sliders canceled because Stephen Chao, Bonnie Hammer's boss at that time, made the 3 year deal for First Wave. I read someplace that Chao "loved" First Wave. That is probably why First Wave was kept rather then Sliders, even though Sliders was doing better then First Wave. Please note that First Wave WAS promised 3 seasons and it GOT 3 seasons.

;)

[vhsiv]

Originally posted by CosmicTheorist
I have not been able to find any reason why Sliders was canceled except for a statement by Ms. Hammer that Skiffy believed the series had "run its course" or something like that. It's always 'something like that' - with Bonnie it seems to be the same song, but with a different tune. I seem to recall her saying something apropos "We've done all we can with Farscape - it's served us well in the past, but it's not the kind of thing we wanted to go into 2004 with."

Even though they'd made a big noise months earlier with the UNPRECEDENTED 2 season renewal.

CT, I'm sincerely sorry if I ran this thread off-topic. I, and a couple of other people here just have many months of Skiffy irk up our skirts.

As a matter of consequence there are two Skiffy *bad faith* politics threads currently running over at Cylon.org.

One that's particularly brutal is this one:
SyFy Portal says BSG Series Highly Likely (http://www.cylon.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2482&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0)
Incidentally, the above threat carries lots of semi-accurate information about Farscape's cancellation, as I have come to know it. For the time being, I'm content to lurk over there.

The other one - which seems to have been invaded by a proto-Troll, one 'Cicero' who claims to have been the 1st AD on BSG 2003:
An Important Message from Two-Brained Cylon (http://www.cylon.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2461&start=0)
Two-Brained Cylon is the Cylon Alliance Administrator, and his inside-(SciFi)-connection has reported to him that a BSG series may not be in the Universal budget for FY 2004.

'Sliders' is also covered in the first of the threads that I mentioned, above, but I've seen a better synopsis of the 'Sliders' situation enumerated around here somewhere...

Oh, and for those that are interested, December 31st is apparently the 'drop dead' date for Skiffy to decide if they're taking BSG to series.

[CosmicTheorist]

Nothing to apologize for, vhsiv.

When I have information that can answer questions or contribute in some way to a discussion, I like to put in my "2 cents" worth. I didn't watch the "reimagined" BSG, so I couldn't add anything to that discussion. But I have found your info from the BSG bboards to be very interesting.

Please, continue.

;)

[NeilGartner]

Here's what I was looking for! I grabbed this from Cylon.org. Although it is coming from Two-Brained Cylon sources, if true, it won't help BSG to become a series.

Neil

TwoBrainedCylon

Also, the last I heard, Edward J. Olmos still refuses to sign on for a series which will further dampen the chances since he was a key character.

[vhsiv]

Some of those folks over at Cylon.org are really cutting into one another in unproductive ways - I spent the better part of 3 hours (I know, forgive me) pouring through some 30 pages of posts related to the entire BSG debacle. There were posters who were for the reimagined miniseries, posters who were against it, and in the midst of it various dissertations on Skiffy's history with it's alleged 'fan base'.

But there were also personal attacks. Who's website said what, when, with what sources. Who's website stole what, from whom, when. Who's mother was sick in the hospital and who was doing whom favor by not pissing all over them, etc., etc. In between many unproductive lines there was lots of informative stuff, many things I had heard or read before, but it was also valuable to see what others with a Skiffy gripe were thinking and writing.

I've enumerated some of the more salient points above, but it might be worth having a few 'goodwill Ambassadors' go over there at some point if only to build a bridge btween our two groups.

[Davesnothome]

"Sliders" had run its coarse, IMO. It had three of its four original stars leave the show prior to the final season. They even left it on the air long enough to produce a concluding epiusode, who's quality and solution left some wanting.

"Invisible Man" had seen it ratings start to slip on the Scifi channel. Am attempt at local syndication broadcasting of the series, had resulted in dosappointing ratings, in a changing market for that type of series.

"First Wave" had a full three season run, and I read Coppola had decided not to continue production of additional episodes, based on cost and eroding ratings.

"B5: LOTR" may have been a victim of bad timing, resulting in poor ratings or not. But it also suffered from the fact, it wasn't that great to begin with, IMO. No one showing any interest in reviving the show and taking it too series, must mean something. That no network has sufficient faith in the premise!

Dave

[BillFrugge]

Originally posted by Davesnothome
"B5: LOTR" may have been a victim of bad timing, resulting in poor ratings or not. But it also suffered from the fact, it wasn't that great to begin with, IMO. No one showing any interest in reviving the show and taking it too series, must mean something. That no network has sufficient faith in the premise!

Dave

Don't speak too fast regarding B5:LOTR... JMS is currently doing some writing in the B5 universe. We may yet see more B5 in the near future.

[AnnieBW]

Originally posted by vhsiv
it might be worth having a few 'goodwill Ambassadors' go over there at some point if only to build a bridge btween our two groups.

Good idea. I'd do it, but I'm not really into that fandom. However, I have seen several fan groups descend into this kind of mess before over perceived insults, slights, personality conflicts, etc. We've even had some of that in the beginning of the Save Farscape campaign, with people accusing a certain individual of being power-hungry. (I don't know if that individual was or not, I'm just relaying recent history.) But, I think that we've all realized that we need to "put principles before personalities" and work toward a common goal.

Right now, BSG fans may not have a common goal. Seems like there's a big divide between the pro and anti-remake forces. It's a shame that there's not any kind of "fan mediation" group that can handle this kind of thing. Perhaps we Scapers can set yet another precident with that?

- Annie

[Da-Met]

Well, while it could be good to make some connections, I would avoid any sort of direct combining of goals. i've been a part of both this savefarscape as well as a firefly fan who was upset with its cancellation...

and I can tell you, having been to soem of those BSG boards a while back... it was like night and day. I saw and read such things that were so full of hate and venom and ugliness that... Comparing this great site and the people here, to there, is like night and day. I mean, we're both fanbases who are very upset at having been "screwed" by Sci-Fi, right... but seriously, it was so night and day, that I seriously wouldn't want to be associated with that group (mind you I'm just talking about the specific boards, not BSG fans in general. I imagine the decent people would have been drawn away from the boards long before now). Remember when Farscape was fist cancelled and although we were angry, everybody made an effort to be professional and courteous and decent, and since then we've gained quite a reputation with various organizations, various contacts... that place was like hte opposite.

The most disturbing thing that stopped my visits to one major BSG board for good was seeing this picture of Ron Moore, in which someone had photoshopped a bloody gunshot on his forehead and a thread of people responding about how cool that picture was. :(