Just What do People Want?

R

ray gower

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2001
Messages
3,315
I've read my way through the various threads on the horrors to come in Battlestar Galactica and yes there are a lot of negatives floating around.
What appears to be missing is some coherent thought on what is required (Not seen the tasters) and not just by the die-hard fans, it has to appeal to others.

For my tuppence:

Battlestar Galactica was a cheap throw-away production, from the original film to the ever cheapening TV series.
Starting anew and in a series with a little money behind it, might be worth the effort.
As it has been already been chopped and shopped so many times with nothing to show for it, I suspect the cash has disappeared and any remake will be a disaster whatever they do!
So perhaps a re-editting and re-release of the originals (just loosing the ghastly Earth series, please!), then doing a continuation from there?

Whilst it would be nice to see some of the original characters present (Admiral Starbuck anyone?). It can no longer be based around them. It needs new characters to lead the way.
Whether the new characters use the same 'tags' or not is irrelevant at this point. Noting that the original was often held up to be sexist some balancing could be accepted. Perhaps Miss Starbuck is the daughter of said Admiral Starbuck, as long as she follows the family line (sly trickster?).

What should the show include. By its concept BG was not a sophisticated show (even for a childrens show). Bimbling from one planet to another, with inherent disasters at both ends yields a monotonous series.
If the producers have chosen to take an easy option, to get the spotty herberts to sit and watch, one can not entirely blame them, as long as it is not overplayed.
If I were allowed free creative scope, I could also see myself including sex, tiffs and downright major bust ups, simply because it is part of humanities struggle to survive. Would also look at a lot of the other problems of having a whole race adrift in a mass of space ships, the little fiefdoms that form etc (they did touch upon it in the series as well). But how to keep it all simple enough to fit BG is another problem.

Anybody else care to add to this?
 
The Epic story of Battlestar Galactica should not be a remake, but a continuation.

Battlestar Galactica has been off the air for twenty-four yarens (years). Four or five revival efforts have failed. The current attempt is four-hour mini series production by The Scifi Channel. This latest endeavor deviates from the heart and soul of the original series, like Galactica: 1980, a cost cutting attempt by ABC, which failed after six episodes.

Richard Hatch, Apollo on the original series has a viable production, Battlestar Galactica: The Second Coming. http://www.battlestargalactica.com/about/bgtsc/index.html. His trailer has had fans excited at conventions here in the United States and Europe.

“Battlestar Galactica explores humanity's mythologies and origins. It delves into the core of humanity's spirit, the engrained curiosity to learn more about themselves. Battlestar Galactica: The Second Coming has storytelling potential to surpass current science fiction productions.â€

Ronald D. Moore’s dubious excuse of the loss of Lorene Green and John Colicos as a reason to go over the same Space twice is specious.

Practically everyone remembers Apollo and Starbuck as ‘THE’ stars of Battlestar Galactica. An accurate analogy of Apollo and Starbuck is Star Trek’s, Kirk, Spock and Bones. No one could imagine Star Trek with out this trio. The very same holds for Richard Hatch and Dirk Benedick.


Harve Bennet, the man that rescued Star Trek by producing ‘Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan’ wanted to do a Starfleet Academy movie. The film would have focused on the early years of the original characters. The fans were outraged because they could not imagine (or re-imagine) new actors in the roles of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. Consequently, the film was not made and Mr. Bennet was removed from the Star Trek franchise.

Ronald D. Moore, do you owe your ‘Trek’ resume to Ricardo Montalban?

Battlestar Galactica is remembered not only by fans of the ABC series but by years of reruns of primetime on ‘The Scifi Channel’. Many potential viewers will wonder so why do a remake at all, plenty of people are familiar with the Cylon sneak attack. The sole surviving Battlestar and ‘The Rag Tag Fleet’, searching for Earth. If ABC had not folded the highest rated science fiction series ever, we would have had Isaac Asimov writing for the second season.

Regarding Galactica: 1980, as a reason for a remake is down right silly. Practically all fans view Galactica: 1980 as a children's show, in a children’s timeslot 7:00PMEST Sun. Ergo, it's merciful early demise, after six episodes. Btw: Battlestar Galactica was replaced with ‘Mork and Mindy’.

If ever there was a show that deserved a chance to be redone, and have its mistakes corrected; it would have to be Battlestar Galactica! Richard Hatch (Apollo) has fought for years now to bring this about. He even put his own money into making a trailer to show how this classic could be updated. Now the ‘The Scifi Channel’ is going to slap him and every fan of the old show in the face by "reimagining" Battlestar Galactica. No revival as the many fans have been clamoring for, with the original cast and themes intact; this new production will throw all the things we fans have loved into the trash.
 

Attachments

  • 8ball.bmp
    5.1 KB · Views: 233
That was all well and good, but was a repeat of what has gone earlier. It still lacks any argued opinion on what the show should include, but a great deal of 'That is wrong because it wasn't done before!'.

That it may have had a record audience for one or two episodes, I am not in a position to deny. That fact alone does not mean it was a huge success.

The original was starved of funds and pulled for a reason. The only reason I can think of from a US perspective was that it didn't sell enough advertising to suport it. Nor did it sell particularly well overseas.

I would not deny that there is a strong army of followers either. But are they possibly falling into the same trap of the avid Trekkies that killed the ST Academy idea (something that has been discussed on StarTrek here)? To simply follow the original formula is going to place the whole series against some very strong competition, Andromeda, Star Trek, Farscape and even Stargate, at least one of which is playing in the last chance saloon for being over done in recent years

Unless some more positive ideas can be expounded, that will be popular with a much wider audience. We ought to wait to see the actual results, apply 20/20 vision and some decent fan fiction? Afterall the release of ST Next Generation was met with some pretty comprehensive condemnation from the died in the wool Trekkies
 
Did you know

When Battlestar Galactica was aired in 78 & 79 it was the highest Science Fiction show ever, far higher ratings that Star Trek some ten years earlier? Plus it was very exspensive back then, George Lucas sued Battlestar Galactica, even though his ELM CG/FX company did the work on Battlestar Galactica?

Ronald D. Moore's script for the new version has been catching flack, a synopsis is @ www.filmjerk.com
 
From The Science Fiiction Weekly

Moore's Galactica is Still Less

http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue292/letters.html

To say that the road to a Battlestar Galactica revival has been very rocky is underestimating it, to say the least. It has been full of so many ups and downs, twists and turns, that the frustration is now at an all-time high. Especially for a fan base that is still so unbelievably vocal for a 24-year-old show that only lasted one season! (Not counting the cheap, six-episode imitation, Galactica: 1980.)

Amongst the high points of the revival was Battlestar Galactica series star Richard (Apollo) Hatch listening to the fans by writing four books to continue the story (with the fifth due in 2003) and even mortgaging his own home to produce a four-and-a-half minute trailer for both the fans and showing The Powers That Be what the fans wanted. (And fans applauded the efforts!) He even secured a large backing of funds for a movie or series ... all of this because he believes in the show, just as the fans do.

When Bryan Singer and Tom DeSanto (of the X-Men and X2 movie fame) jumped into the game with their own production, the fans were a little reluctant. We weren't sure of their intentions. Up to that point, fans were hoping for Richard's efforts to evolve into a movie or series. But as their plans emerged, even Richard himself got behind their efforts, as did many fans.

Unfortunately, Bryan Singer focused 100 percent on X2 and Tom DeSanto had the rug pulled from beneath him in April 2002 when the SCI FI Channel seized the project. (DeSanto was said to be three weeks from production!) Star Trek's and Roswell's Ronald D. Moore was brought aboard to "remake/reimagine" the original series. While the man is a talented writer/producer, fans were slapped in their collective faces by this.

Since the announcement, Moore has found little Internet support for his planned Battlestar Galactica mini-series ... and most fans have been outright rejecting his plans. Yes, he has spoken to fans first-hand, answering a Q&A session on BattlestarGalactica.com. We appreciate and respect that, but the bottom line is: Fans keep speaking up for what they want ... and it isn't Moore's remake concept. Just look around the Internet, or ask Battlestar Galactica fandom. People want a continuation with members of the original cast (characters), themes, ships and concepts, plus the addition of new actors/characters, technologies and story elements.

(Again: Richard Hatch's "The Second Coming" trailer demonstrated the potential, as does his book series. And Internet Web sites worldwide are supportive of a continuation, not a remake. That includes a petition supporting Tom DeSanto which has over 16,000 signatures!)

Ronald D. Moore has said many times that he has to follow what he believes to be right ... and that is why he is doing a remake. This has left a very bitter taste in the mouths of us fans. Business-wise, he is ignoring what the fanbase (and potential viewers) want ... and have clamored for in recent years. This is disappointing, given license-holder Vivendi Universal's financial situation ... and need for a strong franchise opportunity, i.e., Battlestar Galactica.

It has been many months now since we have heard from Ronald D. Moore. Many of us pray the entire re-imagining/remake idea is gone.

We are announcing our writing campaign to Mr. Barry Diller, head of Vivendi Universal/Universal Television. This letter writing campaign will take place on November 22, 2002. It will reconfirm that we fans are still here, still upset about a "remake" idea, and still wanting a continuation of the original Battlestar Galactica series.

I thank you very much for your time.

T. Shawn Hardy
tshawnhardy@hotmail.com
 
Galactica

I agree with you dvo . I just don't see why they should even call it Battlestar Galactica if they are only willing to keep a few things from the original. We don't want every thing from the original because we know that there were some things that we didn't like either but Galactica did have many great things from a fans perspective and to change that when all you have to do is update it, makes no sense.

All one has to do is ask, why are they bringing this show back?
Well that's easy because they must think that there are enough people out there that want to see it back. It's true and the online petition for this show to be brought back is up to 16000.
Plus most on that petition state what they want and Ron isn’t even close to delivering it. Don't get me wrong, I think he is a great writer and I liked most of his trek episodes but it shows that he was a trek fan and plus he had others to answer to.
This time he has free reigns and it shows that he isn't much of a fan of Galactica. Can you imagine how upset trek fans would be if the new Trek movie had Data as a girl and pretended that he always was one?

Well that's what Moore is doing by changing Starbuck into a lady and after 25 years of waiting, I'm very disappointed.

Almost every show can have a story that came before it and that's why I say that a continuation will not hold viewers back from watching. Star wars still became huge even though it started off at number 4 with a scrolling of the story to establish things.

Just because the history was established on film, will make no difference in my opinion. Galactica has to be updated and I think we all agree on that. Many shows have older actors so bringing back the 2 main characters in good supporting roles isn't to much to ask for and people do die so writing Adama's death or Baltar's into the story isn't too far fetched either.

I do believe that there is a way to please every one but starting off by going against the existing fan base all together, isn't a smart way to get out of the gate in my opinion.

I know that a lot of times I find it hard to realize why there are fan bases to certain shows that I don't like or think much of but I take my hat off to anyone that feels so strongly about a show because it's great that we can get into something that much and it almost becomes an event to sit down and watch it.

No mater how I feel about a show, I will always respect the fan base that belongs to that show. They are the heart and soul of why it keeps going.
owd
 
Re: Galactica

Originally posted by OWD
Can you imagine how upset trek fans would be if the new Trek movie had Data as a girl and pretended that he always was one?

Well that's what Moore is doing by changing Starbuck into a lady and after 25 years of waiting, I'm very disappointed.
Click to expand...
It has been done on ST, admittedly between series. We've had 7 of 9 and now T'Pol. Data himself was only a replacement for Spock.

If Starbuck's replacement prooves to be done like that, it might not be so bad?
 
I grew up as a fan of this show. I ended up liking it even more than the Star Wars movies, maybe because it was on every week and I got to visit it more often.

I'm up for either a continuation, a remake, or a finale to the original story. I read the news at filmjerk recently. I was excited at first, but by the second or third paragraph I had a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach, and by the time I reached the part about Number 6 I didn't even want to read anymore. This is not the Battlestar Galactica I remember.

I don't expect things to look the same all this time later. I know that a remake would have plenty of updates and new angles to explore, but this is ridiculous. Call names replacing names, characters changing sexes, android sex cylons...

As I said, ridiculous.

I like the schoolteacher/president idea and Baltar as more human character is a good idea too. The rest is pure poop.
 
Welcome to Ascifi, Captain Cumquat. Hope you'll enjoy yourself here!

And thanks for highlighting some of the more positive side of the new show (if it ever makes it and it isn't strangled at birth by the rabid fans that want Dirk Benedict). It would be good to see a richer and deeper Baltar, hopefully it will do the same for the rest of the characters as well?

There has to be some changes between the 70's and now, if only because the people playing the characters are too old to play wise guys now. The thought of Richard Hatch leaping from zimmer frame to fighter and back is not one worth considering.
As the main characters have to change anyhow, changing sex is perhaps not the largest problem. Call signs is not an issue at all.

I agree sex cylons is not a great idea on the face of it, but again it will depend upon what is actually done with them. From here it sounds like a cunning plot device for an episode, not a major part of the series.

As for the sex aspect, it was, as I recall, always in the original, in a frivolous fashion. So again how much stronger it will be played is a wait and see.

Again I make the observation that Star Trek Next Generation was roundly condemned for not being Star Trek from the moment it was announced until after several episodes were shown. Yet it has become the most popular Trek series of all and arguably the definitive item. Fortunately Paramount ignored the bleating.
 
When TNG came out, TOS had already had a full life. 3 TV seasons, 4 movies. Why "rabid" fans bleated about TNG, I don't know. I do however think that someone should pay attention to the bleating going on now with Galactica, which never got the chance to develop that TOS did.
 
>It has been done on ST, admittedly between series. We've had 7 of 9 and now T'Pol. Data himself was only a replacement for Spock.<

>If Starbuck's replacement prooves to be done like that, it might not be so bad?<

Those characters may have been Spock clones in the since of copying his characteristics and I do agree with that by the way but they did not introduce 7 of 9 as Spock. If they did, the fans would have gone nuts and rightfully so because that would be ridiculous. The one beef that I had about the Trek spin offs was that to many were doing there best impression of Spock but having the same characteristics as another and trying to pass one off as the other, are 2 totally different things in my book.



> And thanks for highlighting some of the more positive side of the new show (if it ever makes it and it isn't strangled at birth by the rabid fans that want Dirk Benedict).<

So we are rabid just because we are expressing what we want after being loyal to a 1 season show for the last 25 years? Are we not all allowed to like and dislike? Are we not allowed to express our selves?

Like I said before, I respect others and their right to like or dislike Ron's version and that’s why I speak out against his version and not against him or the people that like it.

The main thing is that the majority of the fans are unhappy with Ron's direction and it was Richards’s trailer, campaigning along with our years of campaigning that made it look feasible for them to bring back.

So how do I know this? Well it's been well documented over the years and all the info like Richard taking his research to Universal and many other things can be found on such sites as BattlestarGalactica.com .

>There has to be some changes between the 70's and now, if only because the people playing the characters are too old to play wise guys now. The thought of Richard Hatch leaping from zimmer frame to fighter and back is not one worth considering.
As the main characters have to change anyhow, changing sex is perhaps not the largest problem. Call signs is not an issue at all.<

We have never asked for Richard or Dirk to come back as their younger characters. Things change and with a continuation, we could see them in good supporting roles as older versions of those characters. More down to earth and mature. Isn't that how most of us get with age?

> Again I make the observation that Star Trek Next Generation was roundly condemned for not being Star Trek from the moment it was announced until after several episodes were shown. Yet it has become the most popular Trek series of all and arguably the definitive item. Fortunately Paramount ignored the bleating.<

Well I disagree with the next generation being more popular then the original but that’s just my opinion and you may be right but they did not try to redo the whole thing over and name the characters the same as the original. Yes they molded some of them after the original but they put it in the future and didn't try to pretend that the original didn't exist.

Galactica fans are obviously fans of Battlestar Galactica so when some one comes along to re-do the whole thing and ignores many things from the original, I can't see how we should react any other way but I guess that’s just me and we all have a right to our opinions so I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

OWD
 
I have no objection to you or anybody else complaining about what they think is going to happen to their favourite show. Unfortunately, it isn't doing much for the likes of me, who merely enjoyed the original series and would like to see it return.

What I hear is that it is a series to avoid at all costs, simply because there are no redeeming features. Now surely you don't mean that?

So what I was hoping for was some pointers at the bits that may have improved the show, so it is no longer a 'I'll watch it if I'm at home' into a 'Gosh this is going to be worth making a point of watching'

Is there so much wrong with being a little optimistic. Or will you argue yourself out of being a fan? That would be a great pity.

Sure there are going to be things that aren't right, compared with the earlier series. But just because it is different, does not mean it will be bad.
 
No, there is nothing wrong with feeling the way you do, just as there is nothing wrong with feeling the way I do either. I don't want to come off as telling people how to think, so if I did then I'm sorry. I'm just not interested in a re-imagined Galactica. Especially with all those changes but it's cool that you are willing to give it a chance and I truly hope that if it gets the go ahead, you and others find it very enjoying to watch.


We all have different tastes and to each there own, so I respect your feelings towards Ron's new production and I hope that you and your loved ones have a very merry Christmas.

OWD
 
Taken the liberty of hiving off the comments regarding the script and attaching them to the thread Galactica Script Review. If only to keep them together.

Sorry to interfere with the complaints, chaps!
 
But just what do people want?

I've been reading these kinds of negative comments both here, and elsewhere, for about a year now, and I'm begining to agree with Ray.

Originally posted by ray gower
I've read my way through the various threads on the horrors to come in Battlestar Galactica and yes there are a lot of negatives floating around.
What appears to be missing is some coherent thought on what is required (Not seen the tasters) and not just by the die-hard fans, it has to appeal to others.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of discussion about what is bad, but hardly anything on what would be good. I frequently hear that it should be like Richard Hatch's idea, but I haven't seen those tasters either, so why is that so good?

I think that to make your case better, you should focus on what is good. I know that you don't want a remake or a re-imaging. I'd agree with a remake being pointless, I'm not sure about a re-imaging. You say that you want a continuation, but that would require forgetting about the last series completely. To have the original actors appear as themselves, it would also have to skip over a lot of history, as it would need to be set a similar amount of fictional time after the original series. But this is all background really, the important thing is 'just what kind of story do you want?'

What questions do you want answered? Which old characters do you want followed up on?

I don't want to stop you lambasting Ron Moore, but there are six or more threads here doing that already, and not a single one which tells me the qualities that made 'Battlestar Galactica' so good.

It's not that I don't agree with you. "Sex Cylons" sounds almost disturbing; it reminds me of a porn film called "Flesh Gordon". I've seen too much recent sci-fi TV about teenage boys fantasies, but I think it is a more general, larger problem with the TV industry, not something that has only been inflicted upon 'Battlestar Galactica' alone.
 
Re: But just what do people want?

Dave after Battlestar Galactica was pulled out from under Tom DeSantos , fans have been receiving bad news about the 're-imagined' remake.

The only positive stuff about the 'new' script is an online petition with a lot of guys that have universal email addresses, the Trek sites have been told that Ron D. Moore 'new project' needs help.

Nothing from The Scifi Channel/Universal, before or after this script synopsis was leaked @ www.filmjerk.com , sort of makes me wonder if this is a last grasp? Our only tangible input cam from a Q&A @ http://www.battlestargalactica.com/discussions/rm2002qa/bg_moore_sept2002qa.html

Originally posted by Dave
I've been reading these kinds of negative comments both here, and elsewhere, for about a year now, and I'm begining to agree with Ray.
Click to expand...

Hey it is not just a bunch of fans, check out:
http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/directorscut/homepage.html
 
Like it or Not

Whether you like it or not Richard Hatch is not going to write or direct the new Battlestar Galactica.

The reasons for that are going to be far ranging. Starting from the simple fact that Fox/Universal have never been the most adventurous studio, so have gone for experience over enthusiasum. Okay Hatch has been acting for a long time, but Moores successful writing, directing and producing credits far exceed a three minute trailer (no matter how good).
There is undoubtedly a degree of politics involved as well, which could have come from Universal, Moore, Hatch or more likely a combination of all three. And I dare say a certain whiff of deal scents the air as well, considering some of the cancelled projects Moore was involved in

But if we could leave the Richard Moore is the devil incarnate bit for a minute:
It just could also be because the Hatch trailer offered nothing more than the original series with better effects (we all like effects- Studios because they are cheap- Us because it looks as if something is happening). Ultimately the show failed in its original formula.
Again I stress I haven't seen the trailer, but I have read a review of it.
The review makes copious mentions of the effects, but in comparison little real mention of the side issue of plot. A sentence to start and one at the end.
Those same effects will almost certainly appear in Moore's Galactica (he likes effects too!) But from the rather unfair stand of only having a review of a trailer and one of a script (Neither of which give a true reflection on what really will happen) I think for the time being I will stand on the Moore version potentially having more to offer
 
"I think for the time being I will stand on the Moore version potentially having more to offer"

Ray Gower, no one's trying to change your mind. At least, I'm not. You made a sarcastic "Sorry to interrupt with the complaints, chaps" post earlier. Are we allowed to not like the new script here? I guess you're the moderator, so I'll await your decision as to whether or not I'm allowed to disagree with you. If not, does anyone know of any other boards where they discuss Battlestar?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top