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.'"
6 out of 10 shows on the list are cable/satellite only and of those, 2 are on pay channels only. Can the big networks like ABC, CBS, and NBC compete anymore? It seems like the talent has moved elsewhere and the big three are caving in under their own weight.
http://religiousfreaks.com/Attention authors of lesbian slash fanfic, that is not an invitation to depict... or is it?
I love this show. Battlestar is the only show in the last 10 years I have watched every episode of. It was disappointing to see mini-series + 13 episodes being season 1 then only getting 10 more for season 2.0. I really hope they get some budgeting to do more episodes now.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
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.
...that it probably is the best TV show. Have you seen the other stuff - at least the ones that men can watch? The only other good shows I can think of in the US market are "reality" Discovery shows like Mythbusters, Monster Garage and the one where they build custom motorcycles (and I am not a gearhead at all but there is something satisfying about watching someone create a machine by hand).
The Simpsons went downhill after Conan left and they shipped all their animation to Asia.
Uh...Season 2 has 20 episodes. They started on the second season so soon after 1 that there needed to be a break to catch up.
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).
I'm surprised that neither Stargate SG-1 nor Atlantis are on the list.
Personally, Stargate beats BSG anyday.
I thought it would stink when I read about the changes they had made to the original such as making Starbuck a woman, but it has turned out to be pretty good overall. There are a few things I wish they hadn't changed. There was something I like about those polished chrome Cylons, and the old fighters. (Both Cylon and Colonia)
And after watching the original series again for the first time in over 20 years, it wasn't nearly as good as I remember - even the first season before it started going south. (I won't even mention Galactica 1980) I was only 12 or so at the time the originals came out, so my standards in entertainment were probably lower. On a negative note, I would swear both original and new series must have been sponsored by a tobacco company.
I hope next season will be still showing on weekends in HD.
I wonder when the six million dollar man remake comes out?
My rights don't need management.
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?"
C'mon. Prison Break?
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
Shouldn't all 10 entries be "reality TV". With the way all the networks push this type of show, you'd expect them to be absolute chart-toppers. Shouldn't a show like "Who Wants To Eat A Bug" (aka "Fear Factor") be at #1?
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
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.
I wonder when the six million dollar man remake comes out?
We can rebuild him.
illegitimii non ingravare
The finest pair of performers since Uncle Miltie's falsies!
.nosig
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...
shakey-cam?
By that do you mean the emulation of battlefield witness filming? First time I saw it I thought it was brilliant. I remember, though I try to forget, seeing the original BSG. This series is so far ahead I can't believe my eyes or luck.
bad acting
Huh?
bad plot
I like stories that mess with my head, stories that are complex, make me think and leave me a bit stunned. BSG does this totally. "Lost" tries to do it but seems simple minded in comparison (though it aint bad). The plot is probably the best part of the series.
Sorry I can't help thinking this has to be troll.
Bitter and proud of it.
Yeah because the last thing we would want to do is be enlightened or anything...
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
BG started back in 2003 according to TV.com for its pilot. 2004 for regular episodes.
Grey's Anatomy is another great show too.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Battlestar Galactica was darn good with first season. After that I think much of what happens feels awfully repeative, slow and farfetched. I'm really disappointed with 2:nd season, too much petty infighting while whole humanity is dying and I got the feeling they're stalling the story. Like they would be streching the shorter story to longer one.
But I think Lost instead has been pretty intresting last few episodes, before that I got the feeling they were just talking amids woods towards the end of first Season.
My vote however goes to Rome. Not because it's best and most intresting serie, but because it's actually few that actually tries to portray each minicule detail of some place that isn't right now and here. It's not just a serie written one place, and imitated poorly in another. It feels like story that happens in a real place. The characters also quite beliavable, and not too dramatic or shallow. Actors are quite good too, better than in prementioned two in my opionion. Story is bit short however, and maybe lacks some depth.
Rome is more portray than a play in my opionion.
Nobody knows the trouble I've seen, nobody knows has the trouble seen me, even I sometimes wonder why I write these line
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?
Actually, the other Friday night shows do this regularly, so if BSG gets renewed (as I assume it will) this'll be normal. They air 10-11 eps of Stargate SG-1 and Atlantis from late July to Oct, then do reruns, then finish the season. Other, "mainstream" shows have started doing this, like the "OC" on Fox.
Plenty of soaps, yes, but only one show that has high-quality characters who actually display some depth, as opposed to the one-dimensional "characters" on most other shows...
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
The first possibility is that this show is really, truly deserving of the number one spot of 2005's best television.
The second possibility is that the man behind the article had the self-discipline and fervent determination as a die-hard fan of Battlestar Galactica (and probably any of its sci-fi cousins) to give reasonable, detailed and accountable reviews up until that point to earn the credibility he needed to be in the position to be the reviewer of 2005's best television shows. And then, at the last moment he pulled out his hardcore sci-fi passion and placed it at the top of a list that usually never gets a sci-fi show just to have snuck in the passion of his life into the mainstream.
Sneaky or not, the rest of the list is reasonable (which still allows for the second possibility to actually be true).
My page.
...my girlfriend called me a dork for ditching her to watch battlestar galactica. i said, "you think i'm a dork now? just wait until i start a friendster group dedicated to battlestar galactica where i'm the only member!" so that's what i did.
long story short: i can feel battlestar galactica's ownage with all of my body. yes, even my pepe!
That is one awesome show. I still chuckle every time the show starts. The camera leers at Steven as he turns to it with the sound of an eagle screeching loudly. He's supposed to be ultra-conservative, but he is so over-the-top it is obvious he is making fun of it. For example, he explained how think tanks are good, and one of them sponsors the show. He then goes on to show one of their videos on oil, which shows a jungle setting with a dinosaur and human fighting with the voiceover "5,000 years ago..."
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
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, 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.
You are forgetting Monty Python. Monty Python blows simpsons out of the water. It's older and has stood the test of time. It also has fewer over all episodes than the simpsons and therefore less material to work with and yet still as memorable and rewatchable.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
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.
It isn't just that the scripts that are sloppy, it's like the concept behind the show was only an afterthought. Military dudes shooting at aliens is all we're meant to be interested in. Never mind that I don't even have to be paying attention to notice gaping plot-holes where writers have thrown science out the window. It's fiction, so that means they can stretch things a little and invent magic gizmos that can bend time or materialize fresh pretzels out of thin air, but there's still a point where things get a little too nutty. There's limits to how far you can stretch creative licence.
Shows like BSG, Firefly and even Farscape have shown that you can have outlandish plots without having to abandon all logic, so there's really no excuse.
% mkdir
% ls -dF
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
BSG has been renewed for a 3rd season. For some reason it appears as though the originating press release has been pulled from Sci-Fi's website.
Season 2.5 of BSG begins on January 6
I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally.
... until I watched Firefly. After watching Firefly, I realised that I didn't really care about any of the characters in BSG. I'm not all that excited about the new episodes of BSG, but if new Firefly episodes were being made I would be counting down the days in anticipation.
I'll still watch BSG, but it's not as good as other sci fi shows in recent history.
-- The doctor said I wouldn't get so many nose bleeds if I just kept my finger out of there!
Ok, this is Slashdot so we know the story is false. You watch BSG and post here...and have a girlfriend?
Next time try something more believeable, pal.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
You're right. Clearly his time is much better spent replying to posts about a TV show on slashdot.
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.
I call bullshit. Clearly the show of the year is Tiki Bar TV. Goddamn critics.
/. zen: Imagine a Beowulf cluster of Beowulf clusters...
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?)
So, I've only watched the first season so far. Or most of it anyway. For those of you who've seen all the episodes:
Have the humans figured out that if you want to find out if someone is a cylon they can exploit the cylon's major design flaw? You just fuck them doggie style and see if their back starts to glow? Or do they fuck "ride 'em cowboy style" in every episode? Is that how much life in the future will suck? No more doggie style? Then the future humans deserve to be killed off by the cylons.
Anyway, the cylons don't seem like a real formidable enemy, if they designed themselves to be undetectable in every way except, oops, the massive glowing red virgin alarms embedded in their spines.