Announcement

**morjana** · 24 July 2006, 11:05 AM

I don't know if this will help the debate or not over Mr. Grazier's crediantials/opinions, but he's been writing BSG Tech Blogs for Hollywood North:

http://www.hollywoodnorthreport.com/...p?Article=3228

"We're discussing the technical aspects of computers, networks, viruses, and Cylon hacking, as presented in Battlestar Galactica. Back to Zinjo, who touches on what I think is the most interesting aspect of all our computer espionage issues: how the Cylons gain remote access to Colonial computers:"

And the expounds on the science of BSG.

Morjana

**PG15** · 24 July 2006, 12:44 PM

Truth is one thing, but respect is quite another. The a-hole may have the first one (and that's debatable IMHO), but he has none of the second.

**Jonzey** · 24 July 2006, 12:53 PM

It's too bad Sciffy sucks BSG's giant, bloated critical acclaim so much, otherwise I'd imagine he'd get in trouble for a comment like that.

**MediaSavant** · 24 July 2006, 01:09 PM

Originally posted by Jonzey

It's too bad Sciffy sucks BSG's giant, bloated critical acclaim so much, otherwise I'd imagine he'd get in trouble for a comment like that.

I don't know why you and others are saying that. It's not like anyone watches Stargate to learn science(and if you do, stop right now). I was a huge Farscape fan, yet I admit its science wasn't very good. It wasn't the reason I watched. In those days, if Grazer said that about Farscape, I'd agree with him, too. But, it wouldn't change the other aspects of Farscape that made it great in my opinion.

If he had criticized the writing or the acting it would have been a much more damaging statement than criticizing the science.

**Ugly Pig** · 24 July 2006, 01:13 PM

I have yet to watch any BSG so I don't know who this guy is. But I will say this: To publically slam another sci-fi show, especially one that is not even a competitor but in fact airs on the same network, is downright unprofessional. And obviously, it's also rude.

**RCoombes** · 24 July 2006, 01:13 PM

When I spoke to a friend, who is a big sci-fi fan, about the new BSG he told me that he doubted that the new Cylons would be able to perform half the duties that you so easily see them do. He told me that they looked too top heavy and would stumble around a lot. He also suggested that the new Cylons would fall down everytime something hit them. I don't pretend to be a master about robotics, but he is going on to a PhD at Reading University in Robotics, so he should know what he's doing. Also I know for a fact that one BSG has a completely terrible science moment.

Spoiler:

If that isn't bad science I don't know what is.

As for Stargate, Stargate employ many experts to do background checks on their theories and esp in their Mythiology. Occassionaly they have a bad moments, but generally I can see the science working.

**Jonzey** · 24 July 2006, 03:18 PM

Originally posted by MediaSavant

I don't know why you and others are saying that. It's not like anyone watches Stargate to learn science(and if you do, stop right now). I was a huge Farscape fan, yet I admit its science wasn't very good. It wasn't the reason I watched. In those days, if Grazer said that about Farscape, I'd agree with him, too. But, it wouldn't change the other aspects of Farscape that made it great in my opinion.

If he had criticized the writing or the acting it would have been a much more damaging statement than criticizing the science.

It's more to do with the fact that he singled out Stargate out of aaaall the other possibilities: Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Farscape, The X Files, and so on. A lot of which have faaar less accurate science than Stargate.

**lowriders95s10** · 24 July 2006, 05:17 PM

the worst science of BSG is

Spoiler:

what a frelling idiot

**penguininablender** · 24 July 2006, 05:57 PM

Originally posted by lowriders95s10

the worst science of BSG is

Spoiler:

what a frelling idiot

i agree, how is that ok and wormholes are not? yes...frelling idiot indeed

**Seshat** · 24 July 2006, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by Ugly Pig

I have yet to watch any BSG so I don't know who this guy is. But I will say this: To publically slam another sci-fi show, especially one that is not even a competitor but in fact airs on the same network, is downright unprofessional. And obviously, it's also rude.

I felt his remark was very catty and simply showed how insecure he must really feel.

**sparklegem** · 24 July 2006, 06:24 PM

I don't have any problem with it. I thought it was funny, actually. Doesn't our show pride itself on being tongue-in-cheek?

**AutumnDream** · 24 July 2006, 07:57 PM

You guys are getting too defensive. Stargate's "science" gets pretty ridiculous sometimes. But it's Stargate. It's a "comedy disguised as a science fiction show", as TPTB say. It's not supposed to be ultra-realistic.

**prion** · 25 July 2006, 03:47 AM

Originally posted by MediaSavant

I don't know why you and others are saying that. It's not like anyone watches Stargate to learn science(and if you do, stop right now). I was a huge Farscape fan, yet I admit its science wasn't very good. It wasn't the reason I watched. In those days, if Grazer said that about Farscape, I'd agree with him, too. But, it wouldn't change the other aspects of Farscape that made it great in my opinion.

If he had criticized the writing or the acting it would have been a much more damaging statement than criticizing the science.

Oh heck, I wouldn't count on ANY tv show to learn science, except maybe Bill Nye the Science Guy. It's like learning forensics off CSI; there's a modicum of truth things are fudged for great drama.

What's annoying about the BSG slanging off on Stargate, at least to me, is that it's just a tacky thing to say. Of course, maybe next year some creativ eperson on Eureka will be saying the same thing about BSG

Meanwhile, most posts, live accounts and photos from COMIC con (and videos!) are piling up at the Comic con thread

http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=30638

**PG15** · 25 July 2006, 12:36 PM

Originally posted by AutumnDream

You guys are getting too defensive. Stargate's "science" gets pretty ridiculous sometimes. But it's Stargate. It's a "comedy disguised as a science fiction show", as TPTB say. It's not supposed to be ultra-realistic.

Again, whether the statement was true or not doesn't matter, it's the lack of respect shown to a fellow Sci-fi channel show.

**Seshat** · 25 July 2006, 01:00 PM

Originally posted by prion

What's annoying about the BSG slanging off on Stargate, at least to me, is that it's just a tacky thing to say. Of course, maybe next year some creativ eperson on Eureka will be saying the same thing about BSG

Not only was it tacky, but it was bound to offend many of the Stargate fans in the audience (not to mention the actors and producers there). I mean, why would you want to alienate your potential audience?? That's why I think it was a very stupid thing for him to say out loud at any kind of event.

When I think of the exceedingly warm reception received by the BSG actors who made surprise appearances at the Vancouver Stargate con...and then at ComicCon this full-of-himself Grazer goes and knocks the SciFi shows that were for a time his show's lead-in, thus paving the way for his show to be accepted, it makes me lose respect for him and his product. He should know better than to do that. It's simply not professional.

No, Stargate is NOT BSG, nor does it have to be to be entertaining television. It sounds to me like this self-proclaimed "visionary" is full of a lot more than just vision.

Announcement

Stargate mentioned at BSG Comic Con panel

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment