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.

Comments

no mas no mas!

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:no mas no mas!

[pyrrhonist]

Well, at least you're not bitter about it.

Re:no mas no mas!

[Daemonik]

Sci-Fi has a Farscape mini series scheduled for next year too that's supposed to take up from where the series ended.

As for why Sci-Fi schedules the shows that it does, it all comes down to money. Science Fiction shows are expensive and easy to screw up in the eyes of the hardcore audiences that follow them like they're Jim Jones with a fresh batch of kool-aid.

The fact that Sci-Fi has any original programming is pretty cool, but it's far cheaper for them to run 'freak-of-the-week on their way to dvd' movies and 'reality' (*cough* Edwards *cough*) shows than to produce a good science fiction series.

Also, considering that broadcast television has f****d up with Enterprise and couldn't figure out Firefly, a network that goes out on a limb to update a series like Battlestar Galactica, creates 3 Dune mini-series, buys up Stargate and spins off another series, is developing an Earthsea mini and is finally giving Farscape a mini isn't all that bad in my book. At least they're trying dude, which is more than NBC, CBS, FOX or the others can say.

Re:no mas no mas!

[Chris_Jefferson]

There is a very good reason that Stargate got 8 seasons and Farscape got 3 years.

I tried starting watching farscape at the start of season 3, stargate at the start of season 4. Stargate I got 90% of within 3 episodes or so and picked the rest up. Farscape kept referencing back so many times that after about 4 episodes I gave up. I wanted to like it, I really did, but I just could not get into it.

Now I've watched it from the start, and love it. But I also understand that you can't expect most people to put that kind of dedication into a TV series. Farscape just got so clever and complex that there was no way anyone could get into it.

Let's just hope

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't find the ratings too low and revamp it into Galactica 2006. "Hey, look, we're on Earth now!"

Nostalgia

[Moderation abuser]

Am I the only one who finds the fact that nostalgia is driving the current Science Fiction series aired to be supremely ironic?

Richard Hatch? Oh no

[bravehamster]

God, I hope he keeps his clothes on this time. And Olmos better watch out, or he'll find that everyone has voted him off the Galactica

*yes I know it's a different Richard Hatch.

Richard Hatch?

[PeterChenoweth]

Oh thank god it's not the Survivor Richard Hatch.

Terrible nightmares of naked homosexual Cylons hell-bent on manipulating the universe...

Lost all interest..

[leathered]

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.

Old news...

[Orne]

They've been showing previews for it since the Stargate SG1/Atlantis season premier weekend... and pretty much every other hour of the day... can't miss it.

Also of note:

Farscape is coming back as Farscape: Peacekeeper Wars. Old News.

New series based on Ursula K LeGuin's EarthSea coming in December. Old News.

Firefly is coming back in movie form as Serenity next summer. Old News.

SciFi channel is also contemplating a Larry Niven Ringworld miniseries. Old News.

And most likely, there's going to be another 8 or so Tremors spinoffs...

"Human Cylons" are a mistake...

[Hanno]

...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.

Re:"Human Cylons" are a mistake...

[digitalhermit]

Actually, I can imagine that no-name cylons would be cheaper -- no need to pay a recurring actor/actress since anyone can don a costume and continue... Plus I seem to recall that the identity of the Cylon infiltrators was already known... Unless the lookaline happens to have been the human from which they cloned the appearance...

For my predictions:
A cylon becomes a 7-of-9; that is, it integrates into human culture. There will be some episodes where it reverts back to its roots, but somehow, through sheer human (ha) will, overcomes its mechanical nature. A human crewmember falls in love with the Cylon.

A Cylon and a human get trapped on a planet. They need to overcome their differences in order to survive. Someone insults Mickey Mouse. One says, "Picard in big chair, turning."

A human infiltrates Cylon HQ by mimicking Capt. Kirk's robotic delivery: Jones....Jones.....Cannot....keep....straight....f ace..

A crew member dies in an early episode but reappears in a later one as the son/daughter/doppelganger. Time travel may be involved. Or cloning. Or, egads, Cylons replicating. They'll call him Duncan. Duncan Idaho. Or Tasha if it's a she.

A gay space pirate named Sonny Crockett appears. He seems to know the captain from way back... Rumors float and some light-hearted banter.

Re:And a year from now...

[Em Ellel]

I'll be cancelled.

I think you may be cancelled way earlier than that... let me make a few phone calls.

(sorry, could not resist)

Ponderosa in space

[baomike]

Do I really want more?
Maybe the Cylons and Daleks can once and for always
make space safe for inorganics.

I enjoyed the new BSG

[beldraen]

Unfortunately, I think most people are just not going to "get it." I had a discussion with a friend who is the true "but this isn't like the original show, so it sucks!" The most fascinating thing about of this series is the fact that the Cyclons are now human. The pilot ended up with some great philosophical (for the Slashdot crowd, this won't work because it requires thinking about other positions than your own, I know..) ideas and plot points:

-- Are the Cyclons more human that we are? Can they have all their emotions without being socially destructive? Or, are they less human because they are so reigned in? Do they have freewill? Can they have freewill and yet also be sleeper programmed?
-- Is Baltar just psychologically unsound or did they plan a device in his head? We know that there are at least one other Cyclon on board, but I seriously suspect another. Are they the perpetrators or is Baltar unconsciously being controlled?
-- How will Starbuck deal with having passed Zack? In theory, this should lead to her resignation, but we cannot afford to lose any valuable pilots.
-- How with the X.O. handle his daemons now that his job isn't plush anymore?

This series has a lot more drama to it, which is probably why the "old crowd" doesn't care for it. I can say that the people I know who weren't raised on the old show really like this one.

Great...

[payndz]

...now what about an update of Buck Rogers In The 25th Century?

"Bidibidibidi, nice ass, Wilma!"

Re:Richard Hatch?

[bnenning]

Terrible nightmares of naked homosexual Cylons hell-bent on manipulating the universe...

Provided the Cylons in question are portrayed by Tricia Holfer and Grace Park, I have no problem with that scenario.

Remake after remake after remake...

[SoLO]

Stargate SG1: Spinoff of a pretty good movie
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/2004/040 7.turner.html

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.