Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BSG Not very original

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    BSG Not very original

    This is from another bboard

    Quote:When the series started to gain momentum and became a critical darling, you realized your pipe dream of getting a revival just the way you wanted it wasn't going to happen.


    Actually, we quickly realized that Moore/Ron’s version of Galactica was “Galactica in Name Only”, hence the term GINO. Anyone who’d seen ANY other sci-fi through out their lives, was able to quickly pick-up all the riffs in the show. Moore/Ron borrowed from Star Trek, from Babylon 5, from Space: Above and Beyond, X-Beyond the Frontier, Alien Nation, Earth: Final Conflict, Andromeda, Star Wars... and the list goes on and on.

    Hell, he went as far as to actually RIP OFF dialogue from TV shows and movies LINE – FOR – LINE!

    And while we’re talking about how successful Galactica is... well... why don’t we look at the show’s ratings, shall we?

    The Galactica Mini-Series has a maximum Nielson Rating of 3.8 on December 9, 2003 for the second part of the Mini-Series.

    Since then? Well by the start of the First season the Ratings were:

    33/Water January 14, 2005 2.6

    -- but by the end of that season it was:

    Kobol's Last Gleaming pt.1 March 25, 2005 2.2

    -- and by the end of the second season it was:

    Downloaded February 24, 2006 1.8

    -- and this just gives you the averages as GINO spins around the drain, its ratings continuing to drop, a lot of this “critical acclaim” coming from people like Matt Roush – a Trekkie whose been friends with Moore/Ron for years; they’ve been friends since Moore/Ron’s STNG days.

    The show is “not” cutting edge.

    It is a straight-up riff on dozens of other shows, borrowing plots, borrowing stories, borrowing thematic styles, borrowing chunks of dialogue from other shows in order to prop up this series.

    And, as the ratings continue to drop and the appeal of this show, which has completely failed to find a broad-range market appeal outside the established sci-fi community.

    This show has ratings that are lower than Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek: Enterprise.

    It is not a ratings success and it has actually succeeded in driving fans off (Colonial Fleets have outright banned GINO from their forum, and they’re the biggest Galactica site on the web) while failing to garner any new fans to support the show.

    Success?

    I think not.

    Quote:How pathetic must your life be to watch and REVIEW a series you despise.


    Well... uh... actually... only ONE person does that. The Moderator of this forum, "Thinker" and he does it so those of us who have no interest in support GINO, don't have to go through the PAIN - actual, physical, mental, and emotional pain - of watching anything THIS bad.

    Quote:But to write full length reviews, write endictments against the characters, come up with 5,000 lame nick-names for each character...that takes you to a level of uberloserdom that I have never seen before.


    And yet… you are posting here with us. :\

    :lol

    For some of us - GINO is a guilty pleasure.

    For some of us - GINO is the reason we locked out SFC.

    It all depends on one's perspective.

    My perspective?

    This show sucks and that the classic BSG series was, over all, a better show with better characters.

    Let's examine some of the facts, shall we?

    Classic Battlestar Galactica WAS the highest rated Sci-Fi series to EVER aired on television.

    Classic Battlestar Galactica IS the highest rated Sci-Fi series to have EVER been aired on television.

    The title does not belong to Star Trek, to Buck Rogers, Next-Gen, Babylon 5, X-Files, or any other TV series... it belongs to Classic Battlestar Galactica and the show would have continued on for years, if not for the cost involved in making a big-budget sci-fi series in 1978.

    :smokin

    You cannot say that, because the original show was made in 1978 and the cast has 1970s hair, that the show was some how less valuable or poorer in quality than Neo-Galactica. That would be like saying that "Star Trek II, the Wrath of Khan" was inferior to "Star Trek: Nemesis" because William Shatner was wearing a girdle and had 1980s hair. :lol

    What is the psychology behind the animosity?

    Glad you asked. :evil

    Fist, a history lesson: Rick Berman, during his stint running the Trek franchise, operated under the notion that to succeed and get his version of Trek to work and be judged as good or superior to the original, he had to actively pursue devaluing and undermining TOS, get fans to tow the company like that TOS was bad; he did this in order to prop up things like... Voyager and distract people from realizing just how sucky his version of Trek was. :x

    Ronald D. Moore, who studied under Berman for years, has adopted this same notion. Devalue the original version of Galactica, undermine the show in it's entirety and pick out key points about the show in order to TRY and get fans to tout HIS company line that Neo Galactica is better; to prop up his own show, by pointing out issues with the original incarnation of Galactica. :rolleyes

    Sad thing? :|

    You guys have bought into this hook, line, and sinker! :lol

    Fancy camera movement does not make the new Galactica superior to the original. Nor does making the character's so flawed as to be nearly useless, just so he can showcase character growth which looks monumental without making much of any change at all... simply because the bar has been set SO LOW. brother

    Now, if you want to look at the original Galactica and point to episodes like "The Magnificent Warriors", which even classic fans admit to being Galactica's version of "Spock's Brain", and try and use that to claim the entire series was horrible, then I would just like to thank-you for being Ronald D. Moore's loyal puppet. :\

    But I would like you to show me an episode of Neo-Galactica that can hold a candle to:

    Saga of a Star World
    Lost Planet of the Gods
    Gun on Ice Planet Zero
    The Living Legend
    Fire in Space
    War of the Gods
    Murder on the Rising Star
    Experiment in Terra
    Take the Celestra
    The Hand of God

    Well? Can you seriously tout episodes like 33, Water, Bastille Day - a cheap riff on "Baltar's Escape" - as being comparable? How about yawners like Scattered or Valley of Darkness, their big season openers?

    With all the plot riffs and concept riffs from:

    "Flight of the Phoenix (Water)"
    "LEXX" (time repeating it's self - dark CGI FX - sex, sex, sex)
    "ST: Voyager" (Seven of Nine, calling woman "sir")
    "Space: Above & Beyond" (human build simulants out to kill humanity after becoming self aware)
    "Star Wars: Attack of the Clones" (Heavy Droid Troops = new Cylon design)
    "Farscape" (Mental Clone of Scorpious being implanted into John Kryton's head)
    "ID4" (computer hacking to disable enemy computer systems and leave them vulnerable to attack)
    "Logan's Run" (Man and a woman running about post-nuclear world and being hunted down for extermination)
    "Taken" (aliens looking to create a human/alien hybrid to evolve and preserve their race)
    "Babylon 5" (Evolution conspiracy motivating the bad guys ~ coup of the legal president)
    "Wing Commander" (Borrowing the opening/closing launch bay design, to say nothing of 3D animation style)

    -- and the show ripping off dialogue from just about every popular movie and TV show that came out of the 1970s, including Patton and his verbal sparring with Monty, The Incredible Hulk and David Banner's warning to Reporter Jack McGee, etc, etc, etc. My god, it is like the guy goes to www.imdb.com and goes to the "famous quotes" area for a flick he's riffing, in order to find dialogue he can use, because Ronny and his boys cannot come up with any good lines on their own. :lol

    This is what you call superior? brother

    I am sorry but nothing Boxey and Muffit ever did, comes near to being as BAD as all the points mentioned above.

    Having watched nine of the thirteen episodes from Season One – what most have told me were the best episodes of Season One – I have not been impressed, have not seen anything that even attempts to be original.

    As a writer myself, I immediately took notice that Ronny is pulling a classic Hollywood trick... take a well known theme the audience has enjoyed in the past, and do it just a little bit different so as to make the new version of a tried and true story, not boring.

    For the most part, he has succeeded, due in no small part to the director and NOT the writing.

    I freely admit that Neo-Galactica is well directed and has very stimulating camera action, but the writing is paper thin – I’ve seen episodes of Power Rangers with more depth!

    Also, let us not forget that ALL Ronald D. Moore has done... is take the ORIGINAL version of “Battlestar Galactica” and . . . stretch . . . it . . . out.

    THAT’S IT!

    Their entire first season brought us from the ORIGINAL Saga of a Star World, to the episode Lost Planet of the Gods! Their entire Second Season will ONLY take us from Lost Planet of the Gods, to the episode The Living Legend!

    Am I really the only person who has noticed that Ronny is SO creatively bankrupt that ALL he can do is take the story arc from the original series and stretch the whole thing out with exposition and riffed plot points and call that a season?

    How much you guys want to bet that their THIRD season (oh, God I pray it doesn’t make it that far ), would take them from the episode The Living Legend to the episode War of the Gods? Hmmm? Who wants to take that bet? :lol



    Neo-Galactica? Still a sucky riff fest, packed with borrowed plots, stolen dialogue, and some piss poor characters who cannot hold a candle to the originals.

    Face it the new Galactica sucks. It has one good actor but the stories are lame and stupid - plot's boring and tedious - and the entire show is devoid of any originality.

    #2
    Hmmm....Spider or one of his 4 followers?

    EDIT:

    Nevermind, it's Spider. You can tell by his condescending tones and lame attempts to demean the series any way he can. If he thinks GINO sucks I wonder what his opinion of DeSantos canned version would have been.
    Music Profile: 83710 Songs --- 3714 Artists --- 7051 Albums

    Comment


      #3
      Hmm well I'm just going to put a blanket disagreeal on all his opinions there

      Old BSG was a campy sci fi show that was cashing in on the sucess of Star Wars at the time. I've watched a few of the old eps and I can honestly say I wouldn't be reccomending it to anyone (unless you were drunk and looking for something to make you laugh ). The obvious TV production values hurt the show - even though at the time it was the most expensive TV show ever made - the story lines were standard scifi and the acting was nothing special.

      The arguement about 'ripping off' story lines is silly. Every television show and movie reuses story lines and plots that other shows have done. The difference is in how that story line is presented, and how it is made unique by the show. I'm quite sure if I bothered too, I could find dozens of ripoffs and cliches in the old BSG.

      feel free to post my response there

      What makes the new BSG so good, imo, is its willingness to not hold back any punches. Standard scifi resolutions (the aliens were controlling them, it was a VR simulation, it was a dream etc) are gone and instead real consequences are provided for teh characters. And none of the characters are the standard scifi heroes (Do No Wrong, We Are Always Right!) either. The characters are fallible human beings with all the flaws and ugliness that the human race posses.

      Personally, looking at the arguements that are given against the new BSG (especially from the die hard fans of teh old series), I think that those fans can't accept the sophistication of the new BSG. They've come looking for their escapist sci fi show and instead found one that is presenting real world issues. There is nothing wrong with escapist scifi (Stargate is one), but after a while they begin to get a little boring. The new BSG is a breath of fresh air in that regard.

      I wonder how long I'd last if I posted that over there?

      Comment


        #4
        Thing about Spider is he ONLY likes campy scifi series. He (like you said Agent Dark) was looking for a Trek-like series and instead got something completely different, and he just doesn't let go, no matter what you say. You present a counter-aurgument, he just backs into a corner and starts throwing rating statistics at you. I gets tiresome.

        After about a year of his "copy & pasts" threads he eventually got banned from most BSG sites around the net, now he just lurks around IMDB and Stallion Cornell's site (would be a great site to throw debates if Spider wasn't there annoying both sides all the time.)

        I've come to completely ingore anything he posts. It's there for trolling reasons and trolling reasons only. His argumets against Galactica are so wide (the ripping off theory he has) it could apply to every other scifi out there, including the original, which was almost sued for 37 acts of copyright from Star Wars. But dont tell him that, he'll throw a Nielson at you.

        It's always interesting to debate with the other TOS loyalists, though. For the most part, they're a bunch of good guys who just don't like GINO because it isn't what they wanted. Stallion especially has some great opinions. They don't resort to trolling, which sets them apart.
        Music Profile: 83710 Songs --- 3714 Artists --- 7051 Albums

        Comment


          #5
          Wow, I'm speech-less. There are some other very well written BSG buffs who will respond in greater depth to this then I, but a couple observations...

          I think the real complaint here isn't that BSG isn't original, it's that it's not THE Original, has in TOS. Personally, having watched TOS I thought the acting was corney, the plot was kinda thin, and the characters were 2 dimensional and unchanging. I'm glad Moore took the new BSG in a differant direction. I also like how he has tied some things into the new series, while taking others in an entirely new direction.

          As far as borrowing is concerned, BSG actually differs greatly from most major sci fi series (star trek, babylon 5, etc) in that the universe of BSG is not full of differant life and life supporting planets. The universe is pretty empty and humanity and its creation seems to be the only life out there, that alone is a huge departure from the sci fi norm. The poster kept complaining about "barrowing" yet could cite no specific instances of meaningful lifts other than to say it has things in common with like 10 other shows. So what? Every sci fi show will have some things in common with every other show, it's just the nature of the genre. The fact that it takes place in space with space ships, doesn't that make it a rip off of every sci fi show every made? Of course not.

          Face it the new Galactica sucks. It has one good actor but the stories are lame and stupid - plot's boring and tedious - and the entire show is devoid of any originality.
          Wow, that's some well-supported critiquing.

          I would argue the plot's intriqing and fresh, the characters are deep and involved, and the show maintains its originality in the face of a million sci fi clones.

          The rating criticism is deeply flawed, considering sci fi is basic cable. And for basic cable in this day and age a 1.8 average is pretty good.

          Well, I could keep going on and on but I'll end my rant here. At the end of the day, it's subjective. I like the new BSG, but others don't and I can't fault them for that it's just their opinion.

          The bottom line is that for this guy (and people like him) BSG should have continued or remade the original, and the fact that it didn't and is so successfull, and will likely be far more successfull than the original, only serves to infuriate him.

          EDIT: lol. I told you others would post. =)

          Comment


            #6
            Wow, what a sad sad sad delusional little person. They have no actual concept of what the new BSG is appearently and they have no understanding of RDM or his work. To whoever that guy is if he happens to be reading this I want to let you in on a little secret about the new BSG: ITS NOT A FRAKIN' REMAKE OR REHASHING OF THE ORIGINAL YOU FRAKKING MORON! Face facts. The original BSG was crap. It was a nice try, but the production values, the storylines even the acting (and I love lorne green) sucked. But the idea was awesome and RDM recognized that. So he took the core idea and tweaked and fixed it and came up with better writing and a better direction to take. So you like the original better than the new one? good for you, but don't denigrate it ad homminen because it isn't the original. it is quite obvious that that guy does not understand RDm or the new show. RDM studied under Berman? Please. RDM has more talent in his baby toe than Berman AND Braga combined. You like the original better than the new one? Cool, but if you are going to try to put down the new Galactica in favor of the old one at least try to grasp the actual point of the show.

            Comment


              #7
              I've seen some of Spider's trolling on a lot of different boards, and he/she always 'writes' the same old recycled, defecating drivel time and time again. Who ever Spider is really needs to step back, take a look at themself and stop acting like the spoilt, belligerent child that they obviously seem to be.
              Last edited by Vip3r; 17 March 2006, 02:07 AM.

              BSG75 Viper Squadron

              Comment


                #8
                Well, Spider is a viewer demographic, albiet one I think most people don't relate with.... (atleast not me.) I think there is enough SCIFI, dramas..... storylines out there that anyone can draw any correlation between those old stories and the plots/details in any other series like the new BSG. I am unimpressed with that argument.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Im with you guys TOS was not very good but TNS has lost it magic with me the mini and season 1 groundbreaking tv S2 was very weak RDM let the show take a nose dive if S3 ratings get lower thaN S2 the show will get canned like farscape was.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    He had a pretty funny post a couple months ago when the 2.0 DVD was being released. He spoke too soon about how sales were "bombing" (it was 37th on Amazons Scifi & Horror), than not a week later it peaked at number 2, and number 3 overall DVD's.

                    He is also the same guy who claimed (and was CERTAIN) that the mini would not go series. After season one finished, he was SURE season two would never happen. Now even after news of renewal, he claims season three wont happen. Good grief, kid, you'd think you would learn from the past. He still has this idea in his head that Scifi will pull a "Farscape" (or a DeSanto BSG), and cancel it abruptly.

                    And you know what, season two's ratings were fine. What the big deal? The season averaged a 2.0? What did the Stargates average? Hmmmm, thought so.
                    Last edited by Chricton; 17 March 2006, 07:55 AM.
                    Music Profile: 83710 Songs --- 3714 Artists --- 7051 Albums

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I wouldn't have too much confidence that SciFi won't pull another Farscape and cancel it.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Chricton
                        He had a pretty funny post a couple months ago when the 2.0 DVD was being released. He spoke too soon about how sales were "bombing" (it was 37th on Amazons Scifi & Horror), than not a week later it peaked at number 2, and number 3 overall DVD's.

                        He is also the same guy who claimed (and was CERTAIN) that the mini would not go series. After season one finished, he was SURE season two would never happen. Now even after news of renewal, he claims season three wont happen. Good grief, kid, you'd think you would learn from the past. He still has this idea in his head that Scifi will pull a "Farscape" (or a DeSanto BSG), and cancel it abruptly.

                        And you know what, season two's ratings were fine. What the big deal? The season averaged a 2.0? What did the Stargates average? Hmmmm, thought so.
                        Scifi likes to make money if BSG stops making money they will cancel it BSG cost like 2 million an episode stargate cost like 1 mil or less an episode so if SG-1 gets 1.8 ratings then they are still making money is BSG gets a 1.8 rating scifi is not making money.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by IEatCylons
                          Scifi likes to make money if BSG stops making money they will cancel it BSG cost like 2 million an episode stargate cost like 1 mil or less an episode so if SG-1 gets 1.8 ratings then they are still making money is BSG gets a 1.8 rating scifi is not making money.
                          Where are you getting the idea that Neilsen Rating equate to revenue? All the Neilsen measures is viewership. They don't directly relate to how much money a show makes. The money comes from advertising contracts, broadcast rights, syndication contracts, and more recently DVD sales. These are all effected by ratings, but they are also effected by the target audience of the show, the channel it's on, the time slot the show airs in, and the season (fall, winter, off-season, split-season, etc.). Also, production is not the only cost involved. There are also advertising and promotion costs involved in making a television show, among others. In short, a 1.8 Neilsen Rating does not equal $1.8 million in revenue. Shows with high ratings can loose money and shows with lower ratings can make money. Money making in television depends on a multitude of factors, not just ratings.
                          Last edited by HT1138; 17 March 2006, 09:19 AM.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by IEatCylons
                            Scifi likes to make money if BSG stops making money they will cancel it BSG cost like 2 million an episode stargate cost like 1 mil or less an episode so if SG-1 gets 1.8 ratings then they are still making money is BSG gets a 1.8 rating scifi is not making money.
                            Don't pull numbers out of your butt. Like HT1138 said, you have absolutely ZERO grasp one what a Nielson point is. Scifi doesn't even pay for all of Battlestar, they "share" the cost with Sky One. Had you done a little research you would understand that. The high end episodes during season one never broke 1.5 million. Average episodes cost 1.2 million. Reduced 500,000-700,000 from the 2 Million it would be without Sky One's involvement.

                            If Sky One was not helping Scifi with this series, it WOULD NOT EXIST. 2 Million an episode is too much for Scifi. That's just .8 million shy of ABC's "LOST", which during season one, was one of the most costly shows on TV. I'm not sure what the budget this season it, probably a little higher.

                            As of season nine, Stargates budget was 1.7 million. Why so high? Because if you noticed, Stargate has to produce many more sets and conduct and licence off-location shootings. Battlestar for the most part is shot within the confines of pre-existing sets. Stargate also has a much larger problem when it comes to props and costume design.

                            Battlestars major budget draw is its CGI effects. No offense to Stargate fans (myself hugely included) but Battlestars CGI stands on a whole different tier than SG-1's.
                            Last edited by Chricton; 17 March 2006, 09:35 AM.
                            Music Profile: 83710 Songs --- 3714 Artists --- 7051 Albums

                            Comment


                              #15
                              I really wish people would at least TRY to be coherent when they're saying something. I can't be bothered to try and decipher the first post. Is it ALL original content? Is the whole thing stolen from another site? Is it the author's opinions, or someone else's? Or is it all of the above? What the frack ever. From what I can gather, someone is b****ing about BSG not being original. Well, duh. I thought that was pretty clear right from the start.

                              I don't think it's worth waging a holy war, taking commandments from board to board and proclaiming that This is This and That is That and Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Series. I watch BSG to kill time for an hour. I've developed a strong liking for the characters and storylines, I feel an emotional investment in their fictional little lives and frankly, I don't really care if BSG is the first original idea created in three thousand years or if it's recycling stories which have been around just as long. I find it interesting, I find it original, I find myself entertained... and that's all I'm really looking for in a TV show: to be entertained. BSG generally accomplishes that in spades.

                              I may have had my problems with the finale, but generally speaking, I'm a happy camper. If the show bothers other people, *shrug* ya can't please everyone. As long as no one is running around telling me I can't like the show because of such-and-such, I don't really have a problem with naysayers. Some of 'em can write very intelligent, well thought-out critiques on why something bugs 'em while others are content to parrot condemnations without substance. You learn to tell the good from the bad quickly enough and the ones who aren't worth listening to either fade out again or go on ignore.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X