Slashdot Mirror
Time Names Battlestar Galactica Show Of The Year
szyzyg writes "Time Magazine's Television Critic James Poniewozik has put Battlestar Galactica at the top of his list of the Best TV Shows from 2005. His summary starts off 'Most of you probably think this entry has got to be a joke. The rest of you have actually watched the show.'"
This is definately a pleasant suprise - I personally think that Battlestar Galactica was remade with class, care and just the right ammount of respect. The show neither attempted to please everyone like so many do (then fall on their faces as bland clones), nor did it attempt to remain 100% true to the original and thus dated itself. It was a well deserved award, for a good peice of science fiction.
Where's Lost? That's another great show! :(
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Shakey-cam is because the show is supposed to be done in a pseudo-documentary style, not because the cameramen are stuipd ;)
Both seasons of Galactica have been great. The second season has been extremely good. Better than the first season. There have been some episodes that are just amazing.
Absolutely the best show on. House would be my number 2.
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
I had never seen the show. Thought that remakes of pedestrian 70's shows and sci-fi channels universally shabby line-up and platinum-blond cylons meant this show would suck hard. I was wrong. BSG is what would happen if Steven Bochco or David E Kelly decided to do sci-fi. Fine dramatic episodic TV with character arcs that would span months or even years. And the back story of the sucky original actually makes a perfect stage for current events lessons without being Star Trek preachy (or so obvious since they had to cram everything down you throught in a single episode). I must eat my words. There may be hope for the sci-fi channel other than as an outlet for crappy action with poor production values and pseudo science masquerading as thoughtful sci-fi.
Oh I know you ain't hatin' on BSG!
No seriously... best all around television sci-fi in the last 15 years hands down. I would lean toward Firefly... but obviously it lacked staying power.
Obligatory Joe Dirt Quote--
"You guys got somethin' to say to me? Why don't you say it in the microphone. I got a backup mike right here. Check one two, testing, testing. Yup, they both working and guess what? they don't like no feed back, what's up?"
It's about risk taking. The major networks simply aren't willing to take risks. They wait for the latest flavor of the month and then rush to copy it. A million versions of CSI, a million versions of Law and Order, a million reality shows. The big three have become a joke. ABC is the only network of the big three that has non-news related shows that I bother to TiVo anymore. Fox, FX, Sci-Fi and HBO are where it's at now. FX has to be my favorite network in terms of original programming. The Shield, Rescue Me and Nip / Tuck are great shows and Thief looks promising. HBO would be next in line with Deadwood, Rome, Curb Your Enthusiam and The Soporanos (which should end after this season ... talk about dragging things out .. but it's still better than 80% of the other shows on TV).
No Arrested Development? It's the funniest and most clever sitcom I've seen for many years, but, sadly, it just doesn't get the public recognition it deserves.
Here, some of the best moments--the real high points of the show--occur when people's non-verbal reactions are highlighted by judicious use of close-up or shifting of perspective. You get to watch people make bad decisions on the basis of their emotional reactions at the same time that you sympathize with them, or at least understand why they feel they have to act as they do. It doesn't always hit the mark, but when it does, I think, it's better than anything else on TV.
Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
This phrase "vanishingly small", I do not think it means what you think it means. CSI is on air something like 3 hours every day, and you're also watching a CSI clone...
As another big SG fan, I have to agree. SG just lacks the drama of BSG. SG is a fun show but it can't compete with BSG as far as story and acting. SG is sci-fi, BSG is drama in a sci-fi world.
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
...it really does.
I love the show and catch every episode, but many episodes just don't stand up for a second viewing. Not all of them - 33 and Water I must have watched 5 times the first week after I saw them the first time. Others - eehhhh, not so much.
Someone else mentioned Simpsons. The first season, my roommates and I recorded every episode. As soon as the episode finshed, we would rewind it and watch it again. We must have watched "The Babysitter Bandit" episode 4 times that night.
No show since has had that level of rewatchability, and I doubt another one will.
seg fault
For the Slashdot crowd, I was expecting a few comments here and there about the above show.
If you've never watched it, House MD is an excellent show. The writing is biting and sarcastic, especially from the title character. The acting is excellent, they frequently show wicked CGI surgery goodies, exploding orgrans, pus-spewing ulcers, etc.
House also has a wicked Vicodin habit, his boss is a h4wt13 to boot. It's on tonight on Fox, at 9PM EST.
(No, I do not work for Fox, but will accept per-diem payments if they so choose.)
[http://it-tastes-so-good.blogspot.com] Are you hungry?
BSG just might be the best TV show these days, and there's a strong argument that it's the best science fiction show of recent years. That's a sad commentary on the state of SF TV, because BSG isn't great. It's good, but also has some serious shortcomings. On a scale of 1 to 10, I give it about a 6. It just seems wonderful because few other SF shows ever score higher than about 3.
Put another way. . . It's worth watching, but there's a lot of room for improvement.
I think what makes Galactica work (at least for me) is that it's really a story about people - how we intereact, and how often we are our own worst enemies.
... "water water everywhere, but not a drop to drink". Anyway, I thought a weaker part of that episode was that they were just saying how great Galactica's water recycling system was and how they could last so long without replenishment... assuming that they're also figuring in the replenihsing of other ships. Then, after losing half their water, they no longer can replen. What's up with that?
As for the water issue, it's been brought up before. Let's presume you're in our solar system, and your technology means you could get from Earth to Mars in a few weeks, you're running out of water, and you need enough for 45000 people. I realize that water molecules are pretty abundant in the solar system, but how many places could you get to where you could actually get that water in a potable form and in quantities you need, and in the time you need it? Just because it's everywhere, it's not necessarily useable - reminds me of an old peom
Anyway, Galactica is a good story, with very interesting characters, and puts those characters in very difficult situations. Nobody's all good, or all bad - they're people with good points and bad points. Roslin & Adama might be good leaders, but they both lead based on lies they've told - but presumably for the right reasons. Tigh is an alcoholic hard-ass, but he actually can make good decisions and help out from time to time. Tyrol, in love with someone who turns out to be a cylon, is fundamentally good guy who makes occasionally very flawed decisions.
And let's not forget the hot women. There's not a woman on that show that I wouldn't mind some one-on-one time with. But even with that, they're not just window dressing. They are strong, different, and play vital roles.
It's gritty, edgy, and a world with no easy-to-see right and wrong. It's everything that Star Trek is not (and I loved Star Trek).
I won't try to convince you that you should like it. But, I think there's a lot there - and it has a lot of things I like to see in a story. It sucked me right in.
That is what they should have said about "Firefly".
MadOgre.com
aggressive "sex sells" nature of the character makes me resent the makers for attempting to influence me in such a base way
They're not trying to influence you. The character is manipulating humans, particularly Baltar, and using their human instincts to do it. You should feel like it's manipulation, because it is. It just doesn't happen to be directed at you.
The whole human-form cylons thing rankles me, too
You don't "get" the show, then. It's not a cost-saving measure. It's the essence of the show. The cylons are biological. They think and breath and live. They profess a belief in a God that gives them life, and that they are our successors. Are they right? Do they even really believe that? As characters, it's those questions that give them depth in intrigue.
the camera would zoom in on their face
That does bother a lot of people, but as far as I can tell, the crew is trying to imitate the way real humans view the world. The camera focuses narrowly when a human watching would feel tense, because that's what a human does. The camera shakes and darts, because that's what our eyes do. You're not accustomed to seeing a camera do it, and it may never catch on as a technique (many will appreciate that), but it's interesting to see it done, when you understand what's happening.
That James Poniewozik dude is also responsible for Hitler being the "Time - Man of the Year '39"
You say that like it's a bad thing. Very few people have had as lasting an impact on the human consciousness as Hitler. As long as the award is for "most notable", and not "most racially tolerant" or "most philanthropic", it was a good choice. You shouldn't just ignore the effect people have on history just because they're evil, genocidal psychopaths - if you ignore them, then you become less equipped to deal with them in the future.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Could be worse. I could be spending my life caring about how other people spend theirs. Why do you care if people "waste time" on tv?
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
No, the excess of sex is simple pandering in the guise of artistic pretense. Of course the lords of artistic pretense (namely critics) eat this sort of thing up.
Clearly your definition of "excess" is very different from mine.
I would define the scenes of the illusionary 6 sauntering around in her tight red halter dresses to seduce Dr. Baltar as "just about the right amount" of sex on the show, and if anything, "not enough."
But I could see why it would bother you... if you are gay.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
No, it is not that the acting pre-seventies was universally piss-poor, but the style of acting was different. Dramatical tastes differ for different periods.
In the thirties and forties, acting styles seem to have been more heavily influenced by stage acting and being able to project emotions and actions broadly enough for those in the back rows to relate. The epics of the fifties seemed to require a larger than life stance to live up to the broad material. In the sixties and seventies, the cultural revolutions playing out in society as a whole seem to have seeped into both scripts and acting. Scripts ceased to focus on epics and refocused on individual struggles and personal drama ("I *am* big. It's the *pictures* that got small." - a perfect lament for the death of epics.). Such scripts required a more natural acting style. The eighties brought us action heroes, with their odd mix of broad and natural styles capped with one liners. The nineties brought us blue screen acting, trying to combine any of the above styles whilst playing to nothing.
To return to our topic, Battlestar Galactica is trying very hard to stay with the modern, naturalistic style while incorporating a notion of naturalistic production. The idea for the look of the show is a war documentary. The acting style is as natural as possible and the camera movements are, by and large, an attempt to replicate the feel of a handheld or shoulder mounted camera. Effects shots seek to replicate Gulf War footage and acting tries to replicate human emotional response under massive pressure. For some, this succeeds admirably, feeding the show's atmosphere. For others, it just looks like bad camera work to hide the lack of a budget and mopey, neurotic characters portrayed by actors who run the gamut of emotions from A to B, as Miss Parker would say.
That James Poniewozik dude is also responsible for Hitler being the "Time - Man of the Year '39"
And Hitler wasn't? Did he or did he not influence what was going on in 1939?
Every single Episode of "Andromeda" wipes the floor with the whole Battlestar Craptica crap.
You have got to be joking. Andromeda is weak, deriviative stuff starring a second-string hunk as your standard rebel hero in cliche-land. I can hardly finish an episode even when I'm bored. Galactica breaks ground in so many ways it's not funny. the space flight is more realistic than anything else out there. The ensemble acting is superb. The plot arc raises interesting questions...
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
Its a pretty sad world when everything which is successful is just a remake of something that was done before: Battlestar Gallactice, Lion, the Witch, and The Warddrobe, The Office (a.l.a. office space), King Kong, etc.
I still think the true winner because of originality are of 2003 was "24". For 2004, it was "Lost", and this year it was certainly not Battlestar.
-- Betting on the survival of the media industry is a serious risk. I advise investing elsewhere.
Come on...raping the alien? ... After that episode I don't watch BSG.
That was the best episode yet. The whole show questions the validity of the cylons' claim to humanity, and that episode puts the questions in very certain terms. Are the cylons "human" enough to be entitled to human rights? Was it morally wrong for the soldiers to rape the cylon they'd captured? If not, then would it have been wrong to do the same to Sharon?
That episode was directed at everyone who did not or does not believe that the cylons are "human" themselves. If they're "toasters", as so many of the human characters believe, then is anything that you do to them wrong? There are definitely characters in the show that think so, and in believing so, they are beginning to see the cylons as a living race.
Of course the show is an allegory. Rape is torture. The cylons, as a race, are trying to exterminate the human race, although some individual cylons don't support that goal. Are the humans justified in torturing the individuals that they perceive as the enemy? What if they cylons might give up some information that could save human lives by doing so?
1. Person comes in mysteriously ill
2. No one know whats wrong
3. Med students guess some crap but house arrogantly shoots them down
4. House makes an off the wall obscure diagnosis which:
5. (not neccesarily in order) House gets in fight with Cuddy or other superior
6. House was right on all preceding counts. Everyone else is wrong and foolish
7. Meanwhile, some ultimately unrelated and useless person drama is affecting one of the main characters.
In the end, no-one but house EVER makes the correct diagnosis. Thew few times House permits his assistants to actualy do anything they are wrong and the patient almost dies, setting up an even more dramatic "House Saves the Day" moment...
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
Not only that, but the cylons imho look and sound worse than the original, the vipers are crappier than in the original, and would you really have me believe you can fly a crashlanded cylon attacker by digging into its guts and then squeezing certain organs?
I was hoping that in season 2 they would atleast be able to create episodes without atleast one huge plothole in it, but so far season 2 is even worse than the first one was.
Why exactly is reading a book inherently superior to watching a story told on television (or seeing a play, or a movie, or something else)? As far as I see it, a good story is a good story, and good writing is good writing regardless of the medium. I love reading books, but I also love watching good TV shows, reading good comics, watching a good play, watching a good movie, etc. I think it is ridiculous to say that books are inherently superior.
In character, that's the case. The creators of the show, however, are not in character. Out of character, there really isn't a robot trying to manipulate Baltar. They're just actors, and their acting is designed to attract viewers, in order to sell commercials.
Sex does sell, so I would be surprised if they didn't include sexual content of some kind. To their credit, they fit it into the plot, rather than tacking it on as an afterthought.
When you said, "You don't "get" the show, then," were you telling that to me or not? ...Maybe I was. When I posted that, I was *sure* that the post I originally replied to was made by a user, and not AC. I guess I was wrong. :)
there are some heinous examples of people flinging insults at each other over a subjective opinion
It's slashdot. What did you expect?
I haven't said anything about the presentation of the cylons as living beings.
Presumably you made the claim that the human-form cylons were a cost-saving measure. I assert otherwise. The story revolves around the fact that the cylon race believes that they are to replace us. They're trying to be human. The story would have to be significantly different, and could not touch the same topics as effectively, if the cylons were not human in appearance.
I'm not sure what you mean about "this" not being a black-and-white issue, though.
"This" refers to the "sexual" content of the show. Some people will cynically believe that it is using sex to sell the show. Others, like myself, who find the story more compelling than the appearance of the characters, won't. This, too, is somewhat subjective. If you refuse to accept that it has significance in the story, then you're making a black-and-white issue of something that isn't.
I call bullshit. Clearly the show of the year is Tiki Bar TV. Goddamn critics.
/. zen: Imagine a Beowulf cluster of Beowulf clusters...
If they're "toasters", as so many of the human characters believe, then is anything that you do to them wrong?
This was definitely an excellent, and hard-hitting, episode. It really caused me to sit back and ponder the very nature of torture, and what is "right" and "wrong" in that context. The very act of causing pain to a person/thing/etc. for the sole purpose of torturing it is, in itself, an admission that that person or thing CAN feel pain (physical, mental, emotional, whatever). Otherwise, what's the point?
So if the question is can the Cylons "feel"?, then the torturers, whether they admit it or not, have answered. This can lead from here to quite a lot of ethical debate. Of course, my explanation is paltry compared to the flood of thoughts and emotions brought on by that one scene... and that's what made it so powerful for me.
Adama looks like he's about to have a psychotic break 24 hours a day. Which is what I would expect someone to do, if they were trying to keep alive what little is left of humanity after a nuclear holocaust. He feels tired, and you can see it. Doesn't know what to do, and is afraid that those he leads will see it and despair. His one confidant, the president is totally whacko, to the point he couldn't even stomach it anymore... but then he's lost it to, and she's forgiven.
Less than 50,000 people left, mostly because they had to abandon the ships that had no FTL. Every week something more horrible than the last happens, to the point that they can't even trust the hardware that keeps them alive in the void of space. And there is no understanding their enemy, period.
vs.
Bad scifi settings with an overcamped enemy and everyone trying to spout the next oneliner.
I only hope that the writers are planning BSG far ahead, I don't like making it up as they go along. Pick the number of seasons you want out of it, and figure out a way to end it with a bang. (The humans manage to escape, only a few hundred left on a wilderness planet, worried that the cylons might not all be dead?)
But I could see why it would bother you... if you are gay.
Childish namecalling really hammers your point home.
Cable TV is quite different than when it first came out. When I have access to it cable seems to be very similar to what broadcast tv used to be. Mostly crap with a few bright spots. Now they have commercials too, as well as calls for "standards"(censorship). It seems like cable has much of the type of content broadcast used to have ( minus some provocative things). It is all just moving from one place to another with the big difference being that people now have to pay for the crap they used to watch for free. The hope is that cable tv will be more responsive to viewers...nothing speaks as loud as people letting subscriptions lapse. Then again, I can't see Joe Average giving up television no matter how much he complains about it.