OT: BSG Series - Page 2

Atrocities · #11 December 12th, 2004, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Nodachi said:
AT, I totally disagree with you about the new BSG. I think that they're doing an excellent job with it. So far the stories have been more...human, for lack of a better term. Much better than the original.

Why do you say it seems to be low budget? And what does a cigarette have to do with it?

I did say that it was not a bad series. The writing is great, very engaging, but the locations, clothing, weapons, jargon, terms, and so are all low budge. Hell even Farscape on its limited budge always seemed to have alien looking locations, even on human looking planets. The show is done on the cheap and that is a shame.

Atrocities · #12 December 12th, 2004, 06:47 PM

Quote:

atomannj said:
Well I have to disagree with you. I grew up on the original show and this one beats it big time. Can we say repeated stock footage. I think the acting is fine for scifi and animation is great. I even like their take on the story line. I hope they incorporate some of the other ideas of the TOS like the Pegasus. But I do have to say I don't like the new centurions. I'd rather have the old school Versions.

SPOILER

I never said anything about the acting, or the effects. Those are good. The little detail things are what seem to bug me the most. The ciggerette thing, the clothing some of the new pilots wore. Things like the location they used for the abandon city, the "dinner". The old fashoned clocks they used..... they are our clocks.... They could have done a far better job with props then they have. And SPOILER the whole Organic machine ship thing..... SPOILER

I like what I have seen thus far, it is truly a significant departure from the original series, and that may or may not be a good thing. At least Richard Hatch got a guest appearance out of the deal.

Over all, as the show gains popularity, hopefully they can get more money to pay attention to the detail a bit more.

Azselendor · #13 December 12th, 2004, 11:57 PM

Anything like that can be blamed squarely on the Nazi-shewolf that runs Sci-Fi. She has a habit of praising series, but cutting the funding from underneath it to make those delightfully moronic independent films that should never be made and give the board a new car.

BSG was supposed to start airing this month in the US, but it was pushed off for the Earthsea miniseries and a few other events. I think this problem stemmed from sci-fi's unwillingness to touch thier 5-weekday show that air for 4-hour blocks of time.

I'm looking forward to both programs, BSG most of all. It looks to be a lot more serious than other series out there.

Then of course, for Stargate... I'm looking to thier season finale and thier two villians for it. Apophis and..

(SPOILER)

Ra

Randallw · #14 December 13th, 2004, 12:39 AM

um I appreciate the effort, but your spoiler isn't hidden.

Atrocities · #15 December 13th, 2004, 02:31 AM

I really liked the original series, despite the looped footage, and the new one is a differant breed of BSG that is welcome despite its under funded budget.

I think that this series could be as good as any good sci-fi show on the air if it is given the money to be so. But the current king of Sci-Fi is Stargate and SGA, and both of those shows are just the standard in the industry for which to set your quality and production design from.

Sci-Fi channel has a lot going for it, but like you said those horrid independent movies they make defy logic. Hell I ask myself sometimes if they can get the money to make those horrid D- movies, then why can we not get the money to make a nice SE IV movie?

Nodachi · #16 December 13th, 2004, 03:09 AM

First off, I do agree that the two Stargate shows are the best sci-fi in production right now.

However, I'd like to point out that the producers of BSG are going for a totally different look to their show. They wanted a more gritty feel to it. The lack of small high-tech details makes the show more accessible to a wider audience. There also was a reason given in-show about the lack of high-tech but it was implied rather than stated. These people had already fought a war with the Cylons, their own high-tech creations, so a society-wide disillusionment with high-tech would be natural.

Raging Deadstar · #17 December 13th, 2004, 07:18 AM

Also, Does anyone remember the first two seasons of Stargate? They were good and many enjoyed them, but you can tell that each season has improved with Quality. Hopefully if BSG continues we will see the same.

As for the Stargate spoiler I already Knew, But for those in dispair it isn't what you all think. I would have cried if Apophis came back to life AGAIN! It was getting laughable.

Of course you can't blame them, SG1 have butchered their way through most the Egyptian Pantheon and a few others...

Also for those who were questionning if there would be a SG1 Game: Click Here and all Shall be revealed

Atrocities · #18 December 13th, 2004, 11:13 AM

Quote:

They wanted a more gritty feel to it. The lack of small high-tech details makes the show more accessible to a wider audience. There also was a reason given in-show about the lack of high-tech but it was implied rather than stated. These people had already fought a war with the Cylons, their own high-tech creations, so a society-wide disillusionment with high-tech would be natural.

Hense the cheap look of the show. To me cheap means that it is to simular todays everyday life to be believed as occuring in the future or in an another part of the galaxy.

What I am saying is, they could have achieved the low tech look and feel of the show without using ciggerettes, modern clothing, known city locations, toasters, US Military rashions, us military trucks, current military avation terms, modern looking ammunition for hand held weapons, modern day looking weapons, every day common clocks that reflect earth time, etc. The use of these items does nothing to boalster the show as being futureisting or gritty. It just makes the show look down right dirt cheap with very low production quality.

Hell even TOS has more going for it than this new BSG. At least in TOS, even by todays standards, suspends ones belief of reality far better than this new BSG does.

Not enough time was spent on attention to detail. They did it on the cheap, dirt cheap - low budge with the attention to detail that is a kin to a high school made movie.

The acting is fine, the CGI work is fine. The stories are ok, and the premis is very interesting. However, the lack of attention to production detail is aggervating as all hell.

Even the low budge TV flick Earth Above and Beyond did a far better job at selling the shows future concept than BSG.

Simply put I think the show looks to current day modern, and that to me makes the show so cheap that it would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.

I really believe that this is Moore telling people that they are too stupid to know the differance. A throw back to his star trek days.

tesco samoa · #19 December 13th, 2004, 01:45 PM

AT. I will have to catch up.... I just watched the 2003 movie.

As for SG1 I am on the first season. My wife finds the acting horrible. I agree with her.... Special effects are very cheap in that show.

But I will give it another season as I see protential in it...

Fyron · #20 December 13th, 2004, 03:41 PM

Quote:

tesco samoa said:
AT. I will have to catch up.... I just watched the 2003 movie.

As for SG1 I am on the first season. My wife finds the acting horrible. I agree with her.... Special effects are very cheap in that show.

But I will give it another season as I see protential in it...

Note, "first season"... As with any sci-fi show, the first few seasons tend to suffer from very low budgets and such...