Cinematical

As big of a BSG freak as I am now, I didn't start watching until season 3. At first I didn't have cable, and I knew it was one long continuing story, so I figured I could never pick it up. Fortunately they did that "Story So Far" thing right before S3, and I was hooked. (this year's 8-minute What the Frak? piece really didn't have quite the same effect.)

As for original SF content on the screen, how long has it been--since The Matrix? Maybe Sunshine, which I didn't see. James Cameron's Avatar sounds promising, at least--if it ever gets here.

Reply

I've watched BSG since the "miniseries" movie and was hooked immediately. The first few eps of S1 -- "33" always comes to mind -- sealed my fate as a fan.

I've gotten a few people hooked on it but, honestly, a few I know are waiting until the final episode is available on DVD before they start watching from square one. I knew people did this with those overblown fantasy novel series but not episodic television.

I consider BSG probably one of the finest dramas on television, and I mean ever. The sci-fi element is crucial to the show, of course, but it's what it should be -- the backdrop, the setting. We don't have technology shoved in our faces with the "ooh, ahh" attempts; it's just there and just part of the story. You accept it and move on.

As big of a Trek fan as I've always been, I lost interest in the franchise back with DS9. It was all too homogenized. I still watched an episode from time to time of the various series (DS9, VOY, ENT) but they all seemed more like a quick snack than a meal.

It's the difference between an epic and a story. Both are great on their own merits, and I'm not trying to start a "which is better" discussion as that's not what it needs to be about. Trek wins out with some because it's more accessible (you don't need to know seasons of backstory to just pick it up, usually) and not so depressing (not to say BSG is depressing, but it certainly is dark -- and some don't want to watch dark).

And agree with Cincinnati Mike on original S/F on the screen. MATRIX (the original only) was a standout. I thought STARGATE, before it, was a really off-beat s/f story. Beyond that, most things do appear to be adaptations, remakes, or sequels. (Though I have to say I'm salivating over the possibilities of a Pixar-enhanced WARLORD OF MARS series...)

Devil's advocate, here, on re-imaginings, though -- I'm going to throw the gauntlet out again for what should be the next big SciFi Channel re-imagined series: SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO (aka STAR BLAZERS). A little re-tooling and you have the perfect epic storyline. Earth carpet-bombed by an alien race, humanity struggling to survive, and a message from a distant world telling us of a cure (do we believe them? do we take that chance?). A group of people -- from all over the world, from all nations, all religions -- band together on one ship to make the journey.

It can work, and it has at least a few seasons' worth of story in getting there and back, not to mention the follow-up series and films worth of stories.

Reply

So when we talk about sci-fi trilogies many bring up "The Matrix". What I remember is a lot of people loving the first movie and hating the sequels. With the end of BSG coming next year this guy is keeping himself busy. He's got a new non-BSG series for the Fox Network. There's the "BSG" prequel series "Caprica", (not sure how involved
he'll be on that), and now this movie series. If Ron Moore can get multiple projects off the ground, which I like, why is every Joss Whedon project that's not "Buffy" related seem to be such a challenge? I say it here first hoping one day I might just read this article on Cinematical: "Whedon and Moore team up on new sci-fi project". Its enough to make me say "Lucas who?"

Reply

Cruise and Wagner scores another touchdown.

Reply

Moore's not writing a prequel, he is writing just another adaptation of John Campbell's original novel.

Reply