PDA

View Full Version : I don't like the idea of BSG Universe...



Merlin1701
September 23rd, 2008, 11:00 AM
If people who read this have read any of my other posts you will know that I am a big fan of the Stargate universe; but I’m afraid by the sound of the plot I will not be a fan of 'Stargate Universe' or as it will forever be known as BSG Universe.

The whole premise of this new show sounds terrible, and I’m deeply saddened that this show caused the premature death of a far better show in my opinion.

I will give it a week but it may well end up on the heap with Battlestar and Jericho. My review may be written before deadline but it will give me a chance to watch repeats of SG1 and SGA…so not all bad then.

g.o.d
September 23rd, 2008, 11:05 AM
don't worry, with current SG writers, producers SGU will never be BSG...sadly.

ToasterOnFire
September 23rd, 2008, 11:15 AM
don't worry, with current SG writers, producers SGU will never be BSG...sadly.
Agreed, the mindsets of the two PTBs are very different.

thekillman
September 23rd, 2008, 11:19 AM
* faints *

Cavil
September 23rd, 2008, 11:55 AM
While i am a huge fan of all things Stargate, I too am not looking that forward to Universe, Atlantis is going well and to cut it short does seem like one hell of a bad decision, but its happening and we have to deal with it...

On the other hand IMO, BSG is far superior, I frakin' love it.

Moao
September 23rd, 2008, 02:01 PM
If people who read this have read any of my other posts you will know that I am a big fan of the Stargate universe; but I’m afraid by the sound of the plot I will not be a fan of 'Stargate Universe' or as it will forever be known as BSG Universe.

The whole premise of this new show sounds terrible, and I’m deeply saddened that this show caused the premature death of a far better show in my opinion.

I will give it a week but it may well end up on the heap with Battlestar and Jericho. My review may be written before deadline but it will give me a chance to watch repeats of SG1 and SGA…so not all bad then.

I like your sig.:)

Rise Of The Phoenix
September 23rd, 2008, 02:38 PM
If people who read this have read any of my other posts you will know that I am a big fan of the Stargate universe; but I’m afraid by the sound of the plot I will not be a fan of 'Stargate Universe' or as it will forever be known as BSG Universe.

The whole premise of this new show sounds terrible, and I’m deeply saddened that this show caused the premature death of a far better show in my opinion.

I will give it a week but it may well end up on the heap with Battlestar and Jericho. My review may be written before deadline but it will give me a chance to watch repeats of SG1 and SGA…so not all bad then.


I don't think TPTB will make it into a carbon copy of BSG, it just sounds to me that there will be similar elements to some of the stories within some episodes of the show.

All modern sci-fi is by no meens completely original, it's the way in which the stories are told and the characters within the show that make it unique.
TPTB haven't failed in making the Stargate shows into the success that they have become up until now so I don't see why all the pessimists are saying that SGU will be the death of the franchise.
Everyone just has to have a little faith that Universe won't disappoint them.

As I've said on I think about 3 other threads there has been no actual proof that Universe caused the death of Atlantis, just that TPTB have desided to take a new direction with the franchise.

There's still gonna be the Atlantis movie to look forward to so Atlantis hasn't been totally forgotten and the gate will still be featured in Universe.

In the end it doesn't really matter what side of the fence you are on, whether your optomistic as I am or a pessimist as many others appear to be, only time will tell and those who fear the worst may well be surprised.
We'll all know soon enough :)

Rise Of The Phoenix
September 23rd, 2008, 02:40 PM
If people who read this have read any of my other posts you will know that I am a big fan of the Stargate universe; but I’m afraid by the sound of the plot I will not be a fan of 'Stargate Universe' or as it will forever be known as BSG Universe.

The whole premise of this new show sounds terrible, and I’m deeply saddened that this show caused the premature death of a far better show in my opinion.

I will give it a week but it may well end up on the heap with Battlestar and Jericho. My review may be written before deadline but it will give me a chance to watch repeats of SG1 and SGA…so not all bad then.


I like your sig.:)


That is a pretty sweet sig :D

ferrari20092
September 23rd, 2008, 02:47 PM
With Modern Stargate Writers, I am confident it won't be anything like BSG.. However I am glad they have finally decided to bring in Fresh Faces and make the show slightly Darker. I think I might enjoy SGU, Even though I would have loved to see Atlantis continue.

Lady Margaret
September 23rd, 2008, 05:06 PM
I really hope they don't make it too much darker. Part of what made the other two shows so popular was their ability to laugh in the face of their enemies, especially when inappropriate. (the term "darker" IMO doesn't go with that)

AutumnDream
September 23rd, 2008, 05:21 PM
Agreed, the mindsets of the two PTBs are very different.

Judging from the Universe character descriptions, the producers have just as profound a misunderstanding of what BSG is as most Stargate fans.

jenks
September 23rd, 2008, 05:38 PM
Oh yes, only those blessed with supreme intelligence can understand the genius of Battlestar Galactica! Ha ha. :rolleyes:

Pharaoh Atem
September 23rd, 2008, 05:41 PM
don't worry, with current SG writers, producers SGU will never be BSG...sadly.


Agreed, the mindsets of the two PTBs are very different.

SG's idea of dark isn't even close to BSG dark ....not close at all

Blistna
September 23rd, 2008, 05:50 PM
I don't think TPTB will make it into a carbon copy of BSG, it just sounds to me that there will be similar elements to some of the stories within some episodes of the show.

All modern sci-fi is by no meens completely original, it's the way in which the stories are told and the characters within the show that make it unique.
TPTB haven't failed in making the Stargate shows into the success that they have become up until now so I don't see why all the pessimists are saying that SGU will be the death of the franchise.
Everyone just has to have a little faith that Universe won't disappoint them.

As I've said on I think about 3 other threads there has been no actual proof that Universe caused the death of Atlantis, just that TPTB have desided to take a new direction with the franchise.

There's still gonna be the Atlantis movie to look forward to so Atlantis hasn't been totally forgotten and the gate will still be featured in Universe.

In the end it doesn't really matter what side of the fence you are on, whether your optomistic as I am or a pessimist as many others appear to be, only time will tell and those who fear the worst may well be surprised.
We'll all know soon enough :)

Couldn't have said it better myself. :jack:

TheHumanElement
September 23rd, 2008, 07:00 PM
I think Rise Of The Phoenix is right. The way I interpreted the articles I read, Stargate Atlantis was being canceled because it wasn't attracting new viewers. If I'm not mistaken, for the Sci-Fi channel, it isn't enough to have good ratings, you have to draw new viewers thus showing consistent steady growth. Atlantis wasn't doing that so they canceled it. Fortunetaly TPTB pitched Universe and Sci-Fi accepted. So it's very likely that Atlantis would have been canceled regardless of whether or not Universe came along.

I actually think it would be great if SGU became more like BSG, in terms of quality of story telling and style and values. Merlin, what exactly is it about BSG that you don't like?

I interpret the word darker as meaning more realistic. So we might see more realistic responses to the gritty harsh reality of space warfare. For me a space faring version of Black Hawk Down comes to mind.

Rise Of The Phoenix
September 23rd, 2008, 08:39 PM
I don't think TPTB will make it into a carbon copy of BSG, it just sounds to me that there will be similar elements to some of the stories within some episodes of the show.

All modern sci-fi is by no meens completely original, it's the way in which the stories are told and the characters within the show that make it unique.
TPTB haven't failed in making the Stargate shows into the success that they have become up until now so I don't see why all the pessimists are saying that SGU will be the death of the franchise.
Everyone just has to have a little faith that Universe won't disappoint them.

As I've said on I think about 3 other threads there has been no actual proof that Universe caused the death of Atlantis, just that TPTB have desided to take a new direction with the franchise.

There's still gonna be the Atlantis movie to look forward to so Atlantis hasn't been totally forgotten and the gate will still be featured in Universe.

In the end it doesn't really matter what side of the fence you are on, whether your optomistic as I am or a pessimist as many others appear to be, only time will tell and those who fear the worst may well be surprised.
We'll all know soon enough :)


Couldn't have said it better myself. :jack:

Great minds think alike :D

Milky_Joe_1984
September 24th, 2008, 05:13 AM
I have to say, the very first thing I thought of when I read the press release about them wanting to appeal to a younger audience, I immediately thought, they're going to 'sex it up', and we'll have a Stargate version of BSG.

Now, I'm sure BSG appeals to many, but it wasn't my thing, so if it does turn out that way, I'd struggle to enjoy it...

Merlin1701
September 24th, 2008, 06:35 AM
I have to say, the very first thing I thought of when I read the press release about them wanting to appeal to a younger audience, I immediately thought, they're going to 'sex it up', and we'll have a Stargate version of BSG.

Now, I'm sure BSG appeals to many, but it wasn't my thing, so if it does turn out that way, I'd struggle to enjoy it...

I just didn't become involved in BSG, nice to hear that some others didn't either. As for the advent of a dark series has anyone watched season 7 of Smallville? Smallville has become truly brilliant with involving scripts and fluid camera work, not to mention the sheer tone that we call 'dark' enveloping the latter of the season.

I’ve put the points in a spoiler tag in case you have yet to see it and wish to watch it with a look of surprise.

The show has involved a sex scene between Lana and Lex, Lex throwing a child into his mammoth fire place and shooting his father. These don’t seem drastically ‘dark’ but in relation to the previous episodes and the direction of the scenes they were!


I like your sig.:)
I put a few on my public profile page. If you would like them.

ciannwn
September 24th, 2008, 09:38 AM
Oh yes, only those blessed with supreme intelligence can understand the genius of Battlestar Galactica! Ha ha. :rolleyes:

BSG takes a different approach to things than SG1 and SGA. Nobody is obliged to like the show and there's no need for anyone to be super intelligent in order to follow it. I love BSG myself but still think it's a mistake to try to make SGU a bit more like it while retaining humour etc. Why can't they just plan SGU to be a show for own sake without aiming for it to take the place of the 'network jewel' as David Howe calls BSG here -

http://www.gateworld.net/news/2008/08/sci_fi_explains_hopes_for_istarg.shtml

GhostPoet
September 24th, 2008, 10:41 AM
I actually really like the idea. It's not BSG as they are not in a ship trying to find home. They are stuck on a ship that has it's OWN destinationS. Never knowing where they are going next most likely.

I think the idea sounds like a lot of fun.

AutumnDream
September 27th, 2008, 01:46 AM
Oh yes, only those blessed with supreme intelligence can understand the genius of Battlestar Galactica! Ha ha. :rolleyes:

No. But SG fanatics who rip on it typically do so because they've heard the misconception of it having "soap opera" qualities, maybe check out a clip on Youtube, and then have their misinformed opinion set for life as they embark on their crusade to defend bad Stargate writing against unfavorable comparisons to BSG.

I am saying that if the SGU producers are attempting to imitate BSG to create a more dramatic show (as the recent press release implied) then the SGU character descriptions display a very unfortunate misunderstanding of what BSG is.

Ikaros
September 27th, 2008, 07:03 AM
If people who read this have read any of my other posts you will know that I am a big fan of the Stargate universe; but I’m afraid by the sound of the plot I will not be a fan of 'Stargate Universe' or as it will forever be known as BSG Universe.

The whole premise of this new show sounds terrible, and I’m deeply saddened that this show caused the premature death of a far better show in my opinion.

I will give it a week but it may well end up on the heap with Battlestar and Jericho. My review may be written before deadline but it will give me a chance to watch repeats of SG1 and SGA…so not all bad then.

They where very clear at their interviews. They wnated a show to replace BSG , so they killed SGA in order focus on their new soap opera.
I personally wonder how can any stargate fan take this? How can they not see it and how can they ignore the fact that it's clearly been told be TPTB?.
Their casting call was another step towards that direction.:sholva:

Ikaros
September 27th, 2008, 07:11 AM
Judging from the Universe character descriptions, the producers have just as profound a misunderstanding of what BSG is as most Stargate fans.

The sci fi channel's boss called BSG a soap opera in his interview , here at Gateworld. I don't understand how you assume that people who make their living from TV, can't see a show for what it is. I'd say they know better what is what.
I'll just won't buy their opinion when they try to advertise things.Because that's a different thing.
BSG and SGA had nothing in common. People that likes SGA in their majority, cannot watch soap operas etc....
So that decision is offensive to them and to the Stargate franchise itself. IMHO.

ciannwn
September 27th, 2008, 12:47 PM
The sci fi channel's boss called BSG a soap opera in his interview ,.

He called it a space opera, not a soap opera -

http://www.gateworld.net/news/2008/08/sci_fi_explains_hopes_for_istarg.shtml

Howe also wants Stargate Universe to help fill the "space opera" gap left when network jewel Battlestar Galactica goes off the air next spring.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_opera

Space opera is a subgenre of speculative fiction or science fiction that emphasizes romantic, often melodramatic adventure, set mainly or entirely in space, generally involving conflict between opponents possessing powerful (and sometimes quite fanciful) technologies and abilities. Perhaps the most significant trait of space opera is that settings, characters, battles, powers, and themes tend to be very large-scale.

The word romantic is a link to this page -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_(genre)

The original romantic fiction wasn't lovey dovey stuff in the modern meaning of the term.

As a literary genre, romance or chivalric romance refers to a style of heroic prose and verse narrative current in Europe from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. Romances often drew on the legends and fairy tales and traditional tales about Charlemagne and Roland or King Arthur. A related tradition existed in Northern Europe, and comes down to us in the form of epics, such as Beowulf. In late medieval and Renaissance high culture, the important European literary trend was to fantastic stories about the marvellous adventures of a chivalrous, heroic knight, often of super-human ability goes on a quest.

Merlin1701
September 28th, 2008, 12:25 AM
They where very clear at their interviews. They wanted a show to replace BSG , so they killed SGA in order focus on their new soap opera.
I personally wonder how can any stargate fan take this? How can they not see it and how can they ignore the fact that it's clearly been told be TPTB?.
Their casting call was another step towards that direction.:sholva:


The sci fi channel's boss called BSG a soap opera in his interview , here at Gateworld. I don't understand how you assume that people who make their living from TV, can't see a show for what it is. I'd say they know better what is what.
I'll just won't buy their opinion when they try to advertise things.Because that's a different thing.
BSG and SGA had nothing in common. People that likes SGA in their majority, cannot watch soap operas etc....
So that decision is offensive to them and to the Stargate franchise itself. IMHO.


Ikaros, exactly. Atlantis was tied to SG1 universe in that the story telling was rather similar and followed on foundations built by the SG1 series. I liked the fact the cast had strong ties to the original show and there was the crossover element, or at least the possibility of such. I liked the strong supporting cast e.g. Mitch Pileggi.



He called it a space opera, not a soap opera -

http://www.gateworld.net/news/2008/08/sci_fi_explains_hopes_for_istarg.shtml

Howe also wants Stargate Universe to help fill the "space opera" gap left when network jewel Battlestar Galactica goes off the air next spring.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_opera

Space opera is a subgenre of speculative fiction or science fiction that emphasizes romantic, often melodramatic adventure, set mainly or entirely in space, generally involving conflict between opponents possessing powerful (and sometimes quite fanciful) technologies and abilities. Perhaps the most significant trait of space opera is that settings, characters, battles, powers, and themes tend to be very large-scale.

The word romantic is a link to this page -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_(genre)

The original romantic fiction wasn't lovey dovey stuff in the modern meaning of the term.

As a literary genre, romance or chivalric romance refers to a style of heroic prose and verse narrative current in Europe from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. Romances often drew on the legends and fairy tales and traditional tales about Charlemagne and Roland or King Arthur. A related tradition existed in Northern Europe, and comes down to us in the form of epics, such as Beowulf. In late medieval and Renaissance high culture, the important European literary trend was to fantastic stories about the marvellous adventures of a chivalrous, heroic knight, often of super-human ability goes on a quest.

ciannwn…I’m sorry to surprise you with this fact but wikipedia is not the bible of definitions and is in fact donated to by visitors; so I could go on there and write:

Space Opera - A term utilised by producers and network managers to bring soap operas to a different viewing audience. Scene locations are swapped to a science fiction based settings e.g. The Woolpack/ Queen Victoria/ Rovers Return on the planet Vega Prime. To ensure a soap opera fans are drawn to the series the shows scripts will continue to follow more romantic, often melodramatic adventures just set in space. Adding technical definitions also helps the illusion.

Then you go on about Mills and Boon.

ciannwn
September 28th, 2008, 03:01 AM
ciannwn…I’m sorry to surprise you with this fact but wikipedia is not the bible of definitions .

I already knew that 'Space Opera' isn't the same thing as 'Soap Opera' so it's the reason why I used the wikepedia definition. Here's a definition of Space Opera from a different source.

http://www.active-voice.net/category-definitions/

Space Opera takes place mostly in outer space and on distant planets, with extremely advanced technology and often with many alien species. It is often epic in scope; its closest cousin in fantasy is Sword and Sorcery.

Here's an essay on the history of the tern 'Space Opera'. It originally started out as a pejorative but now means -

http://www.sfrevu.com/ISSUES/2003/0308/Space%20Opera%20Redefined/Review.htm

Thus the term space opera reentered the serious discourse on contemporary SF in the 1980s with a completely altered meaning: henceforth, space opera meant, and still generally means, colorful, dramatic, large scale science fiction adventure, competently and sometimes beautifully written, usually focussed on a sympathetic, heroic central character, and plot action [this bit is what separates it from other literary postmodernisms] and usually set in the relatively distant future and in space or on other worlds, characteristically optimistic in tone.

I also happened to know that medieval romances weren't Mills and Boon stuff. Here is information about them from a source other than wikepdia -

http://faculty.uca.edu/~jona/second/romannot.htm

We can, nonetheless, describe in a general way what the word means when applied to medieval narrative. The basic material of medieval romance is knightly activity and adventure; we might best define medieval romance as a story of adventure--fictitious, frequently marvelous or supernatural--in verse or prose. Earlier romances in English are in verse; those in prose (Malory, for example) are generally late.

Perhaps surprisingly, any "love interest" is likely to be incidental to the story of a medieval romance. An exception to this rule may be found in the breton lai: the term refers both to the relatively brief form of medieval French romances, professed to have been sung by Breton minstrels on Celtic themes, and to the English medieval poems written in imitation of such works. These romances often wove their stories around a famous legendary figure (Arthur, for example, or Tristram) and took as their immediate subject matter a love story of some kind.

Jean Bodel, a twelfth-century Frenchman, developed a three-part classification of romance, by "matter" (i.e., subject matter), that is still frequently used: the Matter of France, the Matter of Britain, and the Matter of Rome the Great (often called the Matter of Antiquity). A fourth matter--the Matter of England--has been added by modern scholars to more accurately describe the medieval English romance.

Here's information on what The Matter Of France is about -

http://www.burgundytoday.com/historic-places/myths-legends/chanson-de-geste.htm

They were sung troubadour stories of the military and religious heroics mainly of Charlemagne and his Paladins against the Moorish invasion. The most famous is the Chanson de Roland about the Battle of Roncevaux Pass.

Finally here's a a few extracts from The Song Of Roland in modern English taken from this site -

http://omacl.org/Roland/r234-291.html

Pure white the horse whereon Malprimes sate;
Guided his corse amid the press of Franks,
Hour in, hour out, great blows he struck them back,
And, ever, dead one upon others packed.

Grim blows they strike, the slaughter's very grand.
And marvellous and weighty the combat:
Before nor since was never such attack.

So many shafts, by God! in pieces lie
And crumpled shields, and sarks with mail untwined!
So spattered all the earth there would you find
That through the field the grass so green and fine
With men's life-blood is all vermilion dyed.

As the above verses reveal, a medieval romance isn't the kind of story we think of as a romance today.

Ikaros
September 28th, 2008, 08:07 AM
He called it a space opera, not a soap opera -

http://www.gateworld.net/news/2008/08/sci_fi_explains_hopes_for_istarg.shtml

Howe also wants Stargate Universe to help fill the "space opera" gap left when network jewel Battlestar Galactica goes off the air next spring.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_opera

Space opera is a subgenre of speculative fiction or science fiction that emphasizes romantic, often melodramatic adventure, set mainly or entirely in space, generally involving conflict between opponents possessing powerful (and sometimes quite fanciful) technologies and abilities. Perhaps the most significant trait of space opera is that settings, characters, battles, powers, and themes tend to be very large-scale.

The word romantic is a link to this page -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_(genre)

The original romantic fiction wasn't lovey dovey stuff in the modern meaning of the term.

As a literary genre, romance or chivalric romance refers to a style of heroic prose and verse narrative current in Europe from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. Romances often drew on the legends and fairy tales and traditional tales about Charlemagne and Roland or King Arthur. A related tradition existed in Northern Europe, and comes down to us in the form of epics, such as Beowulf. In late medieval and Renaissance high culture, the important European literary trend was to fantastic stories about the marvellous adventures of a chivalrous, heroic knight, often of super-human ability goes on a quest.

Space or Soap , the Opera remains. As remains the fact that they also said that they wanted to replace BSG with SGU, but you didn't mind to analyze this as what it is.They let down the fans of one show so they can please the fans of another!!!!
The words they use are rather indifferent to me. What they where saying is pretty clear.
They desided to go mainstream.Sci fi fans are not mainstream. That's why i am mad with people saying that "making money isn't bad" and "they have every right to want to make money".
They also have an obligation to their channel's fans, who watch it because they think it's SCI FI.

ciannwn
September 28th, 2008, 09:22 AM
Space or Soap , the Opera remains. As remains the fact that they also said that they wanted to replace BSG with SGU, but you didn't mind to analyze this as what it is.They let down the fans of one show so they can please the fans of another!!!!

From that essay on the history of the 'Space Opera' definition.

http://www.sfrevu.com/ISSUES/2003/03...ned/Review.htm

colorful, dramatic, large scale science fiction adventure,

BSG is definitely dramatic and could be classed as large scale in the scenario of all but a few of the human race being massacred etc. It also includes politics, religion, philosophy, ethics and a study of a human society in microcosm. As I'm a BSG fan I'm certainly not going to be pleased by what, at the moment, sounds like a handful of 20 year old cliches stuck on a space ship which they can't control.


What they where saying is pretty clear.

What it suggests to me is that they've got space operas confused with soap operas. SG1 was science fiction adventure on a grand scale. SGA has menacing aliens, advanced technology, space battles etc. SG1 and SGA could go under the heading of Space Opera but neither of them are Soap Opera.


They also have an obligation to their channel's fans, who watch it because they think it's SCI FI.

If SGU is set on a space ship going around galaxies and the characters are visiting other planets it will be genuine sci fi. Not all science fiction is good, however. There's been some really awful stuff.

I found this amusing article called How to Write Bad Science Fiction -

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/234947/how_to_write_bad_science_fiction.html?page=2&cat=2

For the lead characters he suggests -

1) Teenage Male Lead: Caucasian male with the overall intellectual capability of a hamster who suddenly uses a plan that he devises (using both quantum physics and nuclear engineering) to destroy whatever you chose to threaten to destroy the Earth.

2) Teenage Female Lead: Caucasian female with a brain size just above that found in the above-mentioned bipedal and quadripedal mammals whose main contribution to the plot can be summed up in three words:" thirty-eight C."

SGFerrit
September 28th, 2008, 09:39 AM
No. But SG fanatics who rip on it typically do so because they've heard the misconception of it having "soap opera" qualities, maybe check out a clip on Youtube, and then have their misinformed opinion set for life as they embark on their crusade to defend bad Stargate writing against unfavorable comparisons to BSG.

I am saying that if the SGU producers are attempting to imitate BSG to create a more dramatic show (as the recent press release implied) then the SGU character descriptions display a very unfortunate misunderstanding of what BSG is.

I am a big BSG fan. Even I think BSG is a lot more 'soap opera' a lot of the time, compared to most SciFi.

ciannwn
September 28th, 2008, 10:47 AM
I am a big BSG fan. Even I think BSG is a lot more 'soap opera' a lot of the time, compared to most SciFi.

It depends on how you're defining the term 'soap opera'.

http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Modules/TF33120/soaps.html

Unlike a play or a series there is always a wide range of characters in a soap opera (which means that no single character is indispensible).

and

Soaps are unlike traditional dramas (e.g. sit-coms) which have a beginning, a middle and an end: soaps have no beginning or end, no structural closure. They do not build up towards an ending or closure of meaning. Viewers can join a soap at any point. There is no single narrative line: several stories are woven together over a number of episodes. In this sense the plots of soaps are not linear.

BSG does have a wide range of characters but some of them can hardly be classed as indispensable to the plot. BSG has a beginning and a middle - it will have an end too seeing as TBTB of the show decided that Season 4 is going to be the last one. It would also be difficult for a viewer to join BSG halfway through the series and know what's going on.

Now we come to drama which is a term originating with the theatre -

http://citruscollege.edu/apps/Pub.asp?Q=1196

DRAMA: General term to describe character interplay. Today, often means a serious, non-comedic performance in a movie or on television. Involves conflict or contrast of character.

Going by this definition, all the character interactions and conflict in BSG fall under the heading of drama.

Shan Bruce Lee
September 28th, 2008, 04:46 PM
BSG takes a different approach to things than SG1 and SGA. Nobody is obliged to like the show and there's no need for anyone to be super intelligent in order to follow it. I love BSG myself but still think it's a mistake to try to make SGU a bit more like it while retaining humour etc. Why can't they just plan SGU to be a show for own sake without aiming for it to take the place of the 'network jewel' as David Howe calls BSG here -

http://www.gateworld.net/news/2008/08/sci_fi_explains_hopes_for_istarg.shtml

I think that's what tptb will do. Howe can ask them for a darker show but he doesn't get to write or direct the episodes. So it'll be darker than SG-1 or SGA while still retaining the feel of the Stargate Franchise, (Adventure, epic etc.)

Shan Bruce Lee
September 28th, 2008, 04:55 PM
No. But SG fanatics who rip on it typically do so because they've heard the misconception of it having "soap opera" qualities, maybe check out a clip on Youtube, and then have their misinformed opinion set for life as they embark on their crusade to defend bad Stargate writing against unfavorable comparisons to BSG.

I am saying that if the SGU producers are attempting to imitate BSG to create a more dramatic show (as the recent press release implied) then the SGU character descriptions display a very unfortunate misunderstanding of what BSG is.

"typically" is the wrong word to use here. Most of the SG fans that say what you're talking about have actually watched a lot of BSG. I don't even know where you got the idea that they never do.

BSG has its moments, but it's not the epic masterpiece you're making it out to be.

Merlin1701
September 29th, 2008, 04:21 AM
It depends on how you're defining the term 'soap opera'.

http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Modules/TF33120/soaps.html

Unlike a play or a series there is always a wide range of characters in a soap opera (which means that no single character is indispensible).

and

Soaps are unlike traditional dramas (e.g. sit-coms) which have a beginning, a middle and an end: soaps have no beginning or end, no structural closure. They do not build up towards an ending or closure of meaning. Viewers can join a soap at any point. There is no single narrative line: several stories are woven together over a number of episodes. In this sense the plots of soaps are not linear.

BSG does have a wide range of characters but some of them can hardly be classed as indispensable to the plot. BSG has a beginning and a middle - it will have an end too seeing as TBTB of the show decided that Season 4 is going to be the last one. It would also be difficult for a viewer to join BSG halfway through the series and know what's going on.

Now we come to drama which is a term originating with the theatre -

http://citruscollege.edu/apps/Pub.asp?Q=1196

DRAMA: General term to describe character interplay. Today, often means a serious, non-comedic performance in a movie or on television. Involves conflict or contrast of character.

Going by this definition, all the character interactions and conflict in BSG fall under the heading of drama.

Stop posting definitions! It’s not bolstering your argument, its just detailing your ability to use a search engine.

ciannwn
September 29th, 2008, 06:00 AM
Stop posting definitions! It’s not bolstering your argument, its just detailing your ability to use a search engine.

I'm posting these definitions because it looks like what the terms actually mean in the movie/TV industry according to media studies websites. If TPTB of a particular show set out to make a drama you can call it 'soap' all you like but it won't change their attitudes if they define drama as character interactions etc.

This doesn't mean that SGU mightn't end up something like a 'soap opera' if it just meanders along without an overall story arc which will give things a definite beginning, middle and end.

jenks
September 29th, 2008, 04:49 PM
No. But SG fanatics who rip on it typically do so because they've heard the misconception of it having "soap opera" qualities, maybe check out a clip on Youtube, and then have their misinformed opinion set for life as they embark on their crusade to defend bad Stargate writing against unfavorable comparisons to BSG.

I am saying that if the SGU producers are attempting to imitate BSG to create a more dramatic show (as the recent press release implied) then the SGU character descriptions display a very unfortunate misunderstanding of what BSG is.

The character descriptions don't display anything of the sort, they're short bios for the sake of casting agents, there's absolutely no way to discern how they will be written just from those short paragraphs. And I wish people would actually start reading the press statements, they've said that they want more character drama, like BSG, not that they're going to write in a BSG style, but everyone seems to ignore this, I mean why let the truth get in the way of a good rant? It becomes tiresome though, especially so when the show airs and it's not what they expected, so they turn around and bleat that the producers have lied to them again. :rolleyes:

ciannwn
September 30th, 2008, 01:10 AM
The character descriptions don't display anything of the sort, they're short bios for the sake of casting agents, there's absolutely no way to discern how they will be written just from those short paragraphs. :

People are going "Eeek" at these short bios because one character is meant to be beautiful, another character stunning and sexy and a third character every teenage girl's fantasy. Maybe people wouldn't have such a negative view of things if those bits of the bios had been missed out.

How are they defining "every teenage girl's fantasy"? Where did they get their ideas about teenage girls' fantasies from?

AutumnDream
October 1st, 2008, 02:33 AM
BSG has its moments, but it's not the epic masterpiece you're making it out to be.

I didn't make it out to be anything of the sort and don't think it is a masterpiece in any regard other than in the abysmal realm of television writing. It is not particularly hard to shine when 99% of your competition has absolutely no grasp of writing. If you think I mean to imply that it is a masterpiece by saying SG compares unfavorably to it, that's not the case at all. It's a matter of extremely bad vs. pretty decent.

Also, the only real bit of the show that could easily be classified as soap opera was excoriated by the head writer as being ineffective.


People are going "Eeek" at these short bios because one character is meant to be beautiful, another character stunning and sexy and a third character every teenage girl's fantasy. Maybe people wouldn't have such a negative view of things if those bits of the bios had been missed out.

How are they defining "every teenage girl's fantasy"? Where did they get their ideas about teenage girls' fantasies from?

40 year old men's concept of teenage girl fantasies. Horrifying.

cryptmagic
October 1st, 2008, 08:19 AM
I hope they make it more realistic. I mean come on they began to hint at a relationship between mckay and keller. Shepard kind of liked teyla, but it's as if he was gay and confused whether he liked her or not. They should go back to the mythology that made the early SG1 great. Yeah you can have some bad guys, but that shouldn't be the main theme. Look at the early episodes of SG and you will see how they gradually changed. Also in real life conflict between two rivals is never one sided. I feel like the underdog humans like usual will somehow wipe out the wraith, just like they did with guald and ori. If they want people to take it serious make a more realistic story with some kind of story arc.

Shan Bruce Lee
October 1st, 2008, 05:16 PM
I didn't make it out to be anything of the sort and don't think it is a masterpiece in any regard other than in the abysmal realm of television writing. It is not particularly hard to shine when 99% of your competition has absolutely no grasp of writing.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. It's good but nowhere near the top 1% of all television.