Accepting Both Versions of Battlestar Galactica

When I heard the news of Richard Hatch coming onboard the new Battlestar Galactica television series as a different character, my feelings were mixed. One part of me felt overjoyed that Hatch would be returning to the BSG universe. However, I also felt a little depressed because it also means that Richard Hatch now accepts the reimaged version of BSG and the chances of seeing a continuation movie were slim.


Now looking at it from a different perspective, I think it's a very good move because if the series does well like the mini, then the propects of seeing a continuation movie coming to fruition are much better. Think about it: if the mini had done poorly at the ratings, why bother to waste more money on a television series or continuation movie? I see no problem of having both the reimagined version and the continuation movie, it will please fans of both the original and the new Galactica. Even Ron Moore himself has donated money for the cause of seeing a continuation movie.


Look at it this way: if one wished to be poetic, one can say that the reimagined version of BSG is from a parallel universe and does not in any way change or interfere with the timeline established in the original series. In the new version Adama is alive and well and has a son named Apollo, but Athena does not exist in that universe. In the old version Adama is dead and Apollo is the commander of the Galactica and Starbuck is the new colonel. Who knows? Maybe at one point in the new series the writers will establish this parallel universe concept, thus, satisfying both fans. Thoughts anyone?


Whitestar

[Eric Paddon]

Your ability to "accept" is a lot easier than it will ever be for me.

No matter what happens with this series, there isn't a single thing that will ever change my mind about it's badness as a concept, and how at heart it represents for me Galactica as envisioned by its detractors for the last 25 years.

The things about Galactica that have always earned it scorn from so many has been for me personally, the things that made me embrace it as my favorite sci-fi series of all time. That it dared to be different by suggesting there were moral absolutes of good and evil in the universe, and that the wars mankind sometimes finds himself thrust in can be reduced to a simple dichotomy of good vs. evil. That there could exist a universe in sci-fi where mankind had not outgrown his need for faith, and that men of faith could be men of strong principles and character.

All of that is missing from the reimagining. And IMO the changes were quite deliberate in that regard because Moore views sci-fi within the Star Trek framework of no absolutes in the universe, hence he would be the kind who would insist on making the Cylons man's creation run amuck rather than the Devil's own creation (as WOTG revealed to us). But for myself, that is unacceptable because it destroys for me one of the most critical things that makes the original series special. Likewise by showing a total absence of people of strong character rooted in their faith, Moore reflects the prevailing cliches embraced by so many who hated the original series for doing the opposite.

Those principles will still be there in a new series no matter how many original cast members Moore is able to bribe into taking part in the remake in the hopes of getting the upset fan base to shut up (that IMO is at the heart of Moore's overtures to Richard) and be marginalized. And it will still be a Galactica that will always remain totally unworthy of the name IMO.

I also stand firmly by my belief that the success of this reimagining means forget any hopes of a true continuation happening. The common sense wisdom will be, "If the original was so good it wouldn't have been remade to begin with in such a drastically different way, and if the original cast members are taking part in it, it makes less sense to do one". I can not be impressed with an appeal to the idea that "these people don't make their decisions based on common sense" because as a Galactica fan, I have spent too many years placing optimistic trust in those who suggested a true revival wasn't too far off from happening, and I refuse to ever think that way again after too many years of disappointment.

For me, the remake will always be the imposter version and I must count myself among those who want it to fail. That may strike some people as being too negative or letting oneself be too upset over something that doesn't matter much in the broader scheme of what's important in life, but from my standpoint, the many years of being part of a Galactica fanbase and trying to stand up for what the series meant in the face of so much bashing the show received for not following the conventional wisdom of sci-fi (not to mention rebutting the false charges of "rip-off") will have been totally in vain if the concept had to be reborn according to the philosophical perspectives of those who hated the original series and never tried to understand why it reasonated with its fanbase to begin with.

[BST]

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon

"If the original was so good it wouldn't have been remade to begin with in such a drastically different way,...

One could argue that the "way" that Galactica was done, by Moore, was NOT the original intent. There was an alternative which, would have stayed much closer to the core concepts, etc. The end result -- Moore's mini -- was achieved due to political opportunism by Bonnie Hammer.

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon

...and if the original cast members are taking part in it, it makes less sense to do one".

It could also serve as a gauge of interest, for the original cast members. I mentioned something similar to this, previously, on other threads: if the ratings spike during the episodes in which TOS actors appear, what does that say to you? It's a good measure of interest, IMO, and could conceivably vindicate our efforts over these many years.

[Eric Paddon]

Originally Posted by BST

One could argue that the "way" that Galactica was done, by Moore, was NOT the original intent. There was an alternative which, would have stayed much closer to the core concepts, etc. The end result -- Moore's mini -- was achieved due to political opportunism by Bonnie Hammer.

No argument from me on that point. Trying to explain the politics behind that though is not going to be easy to explain in making another continuation pitch.

Originally Posted by BST

It could also serve as a gauge of interest, for the original cast members. I mentioned something similar to this, previously, on other threads: if the ratings spike during the episodes in which TOS actors appear, what does that say to you? It's a good measure of interest, IMO, and could conceivably vindicate our efforts over these many years.

But what about those of us who don't want to watch the series no matter who is appearing in it? I have no desire to contribute to the ratings success of it for even one night and that I think goes for a lot of other people too. If there is a spike then what I see happening is Moore making the bribe pitch to everyone else and in the process undermining the true continuation effort even further.

[BST]

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon

But what about those of us who don't want to watch the series no matter who is appearing in it? I have no desire to contribute to the ratings success of it for even one night and that I think goes for a lot of other people too. If there is a spike then what I see happening is Moore making the bribe pitch to everyone else and in the process undermining the true continuation effort even further.

Eric,

Step away from the "fan" perspective, for a moment. Just look at it from a straight "numbers" point of view. What would it say then?

I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying, I'm just trying to get you to observe it from another direction.

[thomas7g]

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon
...and if the original cast members are taking part in it, it makes less sense to do one".


I think that may not be right. I think that is how us fans see things. And I may be wrong, but I believe that is not how hollywood thinks. Quite frankly its MONEY MONEY MONEY! Can they make money?

if there is an audience who will pay for it, and I think there is, then they will do it to make money.

[Eric Paddon]

Originally Posted by BST

Eric,

Step away from the "fan" perspective, for a moment. Just look at it from a straight "numbers" point of view. What would it say then?

I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying, I'm just trying to get you to observe it from another direction.

Well in terms of numbers it seems to me that we'd be looking at best, a spike of about 1.5 to 2.0 or 2.5 at best with that one gimmick of having the original cast. That isn't the kind of statistic that I think would lead to a big $50-80 million budget movie because it wouldn't say much about how many millions they could make off it.

Of course if executives really paid attention to the meaning of numbers, then Galactica would have gotten it's second season in 1979 in a heartbeat.

[thomas7g]

actually it was the cost back then. The average tv episode cost about $340,000 or so back then. And BG cost over a million an episode! So it just plain cost too much.

Though alot of that was due to ABC's insane schedule which caused alot of overtime cost. The show was pushed way to fast to produce episodes. Had ABC given the production a month or so to prepare before going into a full season's schedule, the writing would have been alot better, and the cost would have been dramatically less. And who knows.... the show may have hit a second season and more on its own.

[Eric Paddon]

Originally Posted by thomas7g

actually it was the cost back then. The average tv episode cost about $340,000 or so back then. And BG cost over a million an episode! So it just plain cost too much.

To me, I always felt it was more due to ABC's position as the #1 network at the time that did Galactica in more than production costs. ABC was riding high at the time and I think developed a swelled head about what kind of numbers it expected from its shows that they didn't appreciate the fact that Galactica made them competitive for the first time ever against CBS on Sunday nights. If Galactica had been on NBC, which had just entered the dark days of the Fred Silverman era, it would have been renewed in a heartbeat.

[BST]

Eric,

Sorry for not being more clear. I was quite 'droopy-eyed' about that time, last night. I was originally referring to the 'effect' that a ratings jump in episodes with TOS actors would have, compared to the ratings for the other episodes. My impression of this would be that if the ratings do, in fact, jump during those episodes then, that could show that people were still interested in the original series actors and that they were, in fact, still marketable.

This is, primarily, in response to 'long-ago' previously stated opinions, mainly on Skiffy, that TOS actors were 'over-the-hill', that 'their day had passed' and that no one wanted to see them again.

BST

From the researching and reading, I don't think I'm as pro "new" BSG as I used to be. I thought ANY BSG would be better than none, but not after seeing screen shots, learning that the equivalent of The 3 Musketeers of TOS (Apollo, Starbuck and Boomer) is now a guy and 2 chicks. VERY BIG disappointment in my eyes, very large indeed. TOS or nothing. I've seen pics of Richard and Terry and Richard with the holographic Adama in the 2nd Coming I believe, and that looks more like TOS than this "new" felgercarb!

[thomas7g]

Tom passes Phoenix a



Eric you could be right. Though without being able to tlak to the big wig who cancelled BG its hard to tell.

Oh well... at least we aren't like Gilligan's Island that was cancelled so the network exec's wife could enjoy Gunsmoke.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Whitestar

When I heard the news of Richard Hatch coming onboard the new Battlestar Galactica television series as a different character, my feelings were mixed. One part of me felt overjoyed that Hatch would be returning to the BSG universe. However, I also felt a little depressed because it also means that Richard Hatch now accepts the reimaged version of BSG and the chances of seeing a continuation movie were slim.


Now looking at it from a different perspective, I think it's a very good move because if the series does well like the mini, then the propects of seeing a continuation movie coming to fruition are much better. Think about it: if the mini had done poorly at the ratings, why bother to waste more money on a television series or continuation movie? I see no problem of having both the reimagined version and the continuation movie, it will please fans of both the original and the new Galactica. Even Ron Moore himself has donated money for the cause of seeing a continuation movie.


Look at it this way: if one wished to be poetic, one can say that the reimagined version of BSG is from a parallel universe and does not in any way change or interfere with the timeline established in the original series. In the new version Adama is alive and well and has a son named Apollo, but Athena does not exist in that universe. In the old version Adama is dead and Apollo is the commander of the Galactica and Starbuck is the new colonel. Who knows? Maybe at one point in the new series the writers will establish this parallel universe concept, thus, satisfying both fans. Thoughts anyone?


Whitestar

First of all Whitestar welcome to the fleets

I for one will Never be able to accept the MINI as being part of TOS.

Richard Hatch can do what he wants ................my mind is made up.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by BST

One could argue that the "way" that Galactica was done, by Moore, was NOT the original intent. There was an alternative which, would have stayed much closer to the core concepts, etc. The end result -- Moore's mini -- was achieved due to political opportunism by Bonnie Hammer.

Well said BST. The way she and Moore 'reimagined' it was a slap in the face
to say the least. I think YOU said what they did ...........in the NICEST way
possible. The MINI was indeed Achieved due to POLITICAL OPPORTUNISM!

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon

To me, I always felt it was more due to ABC's position as the #1 network at the time that did Galactica in more than production costs. ABC was riding high at the time and I think developed a swelled head about what kind of numbers it expected from its shows that they didn't appreciate the fact that Galactica made them competitive for the first time ever against CBS on Sunday nights. If Galactica had been on NBC, which had just entered the dark days of the Fred Silverman era, it would have been renewed in a heartbeat.

I think You're right about that Eric.

[bsg1fan1975]

I want a continuation of TOS or nothing. I am not going to accept less than that. I am disappointed at the direction the mini went and will not watch it or anything related to that misbegotten effort even under the threat of torture!

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by bsg1fan1975

I want a continuation of TOS or nothing. I am not going to accept less than that. I am disappointed at the direction the mini went and will not watch it or anything related to that misbegotten effort even under the threat of torture!

I will not be watching the 'mini' either.

IT simply IS NOT for ME.

[Jayworld]

Nope....not for me. Never have accepted the mini-series version, and never will. To do so, at least for me, in my mind, would invalidate all the time and effort that I have given through signing petitions, letting people know about the "real" story behind the Sci-Fi Galactica before it aired, writing letters, staying diligent and active on this board and Battlestar Galactica Club Forums, attending the conventions and supporting the original actors when I could, buying TOS the first day it came out as a DVD boxed set, buying the merchandise from the original series, etc.

In a way, I liken this on-going saga of Battlestar to "Lost in Space." You had the original, beloved series from the 1960s. It was re-imagined as a major motion picture a few years ago, even utilizing several of the original cast in cameos, but ultimately, was seen as a failure from the box office draw. Now you see a new Lost in Space series coming to NBC, which supposedly will be much truer to the original series (kind of an update to the original series). It was original supposed to have the original cast as the Robinsons, and another "family" sent out to find the long lost Robinsons. The premise would be to have the original cast in hypersleep, while sending out the original robot in a probe for help. The episdoes would deal 60% with the new family searching, and 40% of the original cast being searched for. This was directly from Mark Goddard's mouth about two years ago at a local convention, and then Jonathan Harris passed away, which killed those plans for the original cast to be part of a new Lost in Space series....

The sooner the mini-series/new series is gone, the better, in my opinion, as I still support a continuation movie and/or series.

Thanks,
Jayworld