Slashdot Mirror
SciFi Channel To Air A New Galactica Series
EvilBuu writes "The Sci-Fi Channel has begun airing ads announcing a full Battlestar Galactica series following the surprisingly (to some) good new mini series starring Edward James Olmos. Looks like it will be a straight forward continuation of the mini, with the same cast and more Cylon goodness!" According to this press release, Richard Hatch will guest star, and the show will air starting in January 2005.
Granted, I wasn't old enough to have watched the original Galactica (I'm not even 30 yet), but I did watch part of the mini-series and was thoroughly bored. Why they're going to make a regular series out of it, I'll never know.
One thing I *do* know is that as good as Stargate SG-1 is, it pisses me off that Stargate gets 8 seasons and counting *AND* a spinoff while Farscape got three years and change with an abrupt axing without doing the characters justice in the "ending".
That was enough to tick me off originally. But then Sci-Fi made it worse by continuing with that idiot John Edwards who "talks to stupid people"... oh - and supposedly their dead loved ones too (*cough* cold read *cough*). And then they had those two retarded "dream experts" that made everything in their show about *sex*. Sci-Fi is turning into the fucking LifeTime network. Then that terrible "Taken" by Spielberg (or lucas - I can't seperate the two anymore) and then that attrocious three hour guerilla marketing (disguised as a documentary) for The Village which investigated how M. Night Shyamalan is really some sort of voodoo shaman kind of guy with magical powers really did me in for good.
I canceled my cable last week due specifically to my dislike for the Sci-Fi network. I'll put that $120/mo into something more worth while and any shows that I deem worthy enough to waste my time watching, I'll just grab from bit torrent.
Anyway, back to the original point. What is it with Battlestar Galactica? It's about as exciting and interesting as that really crappy "Dark Shadows" series (and don't even get me started on the Mormony Goodness of the show). Is it just that SciFi couldn't find the funding for their 400th Sci-Fi Original movie about killer bees, killer anacondas, killer bats, killer dragons, killer spiders, killer rats, killer mosquitos, killer cats, or alien viruses?
I loved BG as a child and I recently watched some re-runs for the first time since, all I can say is that the original series have not aged well, the whole thing looks cheesy and very early-80s. The scripting is laughable on occasions.
Contrast this to when I saw repeats of Dr Who, Blake's 7 etc from the same era. They seemed to have aged very well like a good wine, and despite some very dubious sets and sfx they make you realise that it's the quality of writing that make shows like these a classic.
For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
...I saw the mini-series and yes, it was surprisingly good. I really really liked it. I liked that they avoided a lot of sci-fi cliches, except one.
So let's face, the invention of human cylons is a big horrible mistake and one of the worst sci-fi cliches ever. Obviously, they wanted to save on the CGI-effects budget and wanted to avoid cheesy robot costumes. So they came up with human-looking cylons. The pilot movie made it clear that the following series will revolve around the question which of the Galactica crew members is actually a cylon, possibly without even knowing about it.
But I see no suspense whatsoever from a plot point that was innovative in 1927's "Metropolis" but that has been worn off ever since: Is that person human or isn't it? Am I talking to the original or not? The idea of non-human enemies posing as humans to subvert the human forces has been done to death by every incarnation of Star Trek and practically almost every other sci-fi show ever made. I see no new idea coming from this. Too bad.
I just wish they would have avoided that and come up with some non-cheesy robot cylons.
------------------
You may like my a cappella music
Stargate SG1: Spinoff of a pretty good movie
;)
0 7.turner.html
Stargate Atlantis: Spinoff of a spinoff
BS: Galactica: Remake
Andromeda (LBX): Bought from syndication
Scare Tactics: science FICTION channel REALITY series.
They have a couple other "original" series that I have not seen so I do not feel comfortable talking about. Good for them that there seem to still be a few original shows. See here for their seriously weakened lineup when compared to a few years ago: http://www.scifi.com/onair/shows/
Apparently original ideas are no longer acceptable on SciFi channel.
Why else cancel the amazing show that is Farscape? Farscape takes science fiction to a new level, and a lot of people are picking up on it after the huge fan response to the cancellation.
(Okay actually SciFi didn't "approve" of Farscape because they didn't own it top to bottom. The Farscape game, the little action figures, everything, was under Henson's control. Under the surface the Farscape cancellation is about media consolidation; SciFi Channel doesn't like what they can't own completely.) See this Ted Turner article about this general trend in the industry: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/04
A lot of people still haven't seen Farscape, so I invite you to watch it Monday through Friday, 9AM-4PM, from Friday, Oct. 1, through Friday, Oct. 15. SciFi channel is airing all 4 seasons so people can catch up.
I beg of you; spread the word about this amazing show.
p.s. I do not wish to offend on Stargate fans or Andromeda fans. Im just extremely passionate about Farscape, I hope you will not be turned off by my enthusiasm.
John Susek