A Thought for TOS Diehards...

[Gemini1999]

Speaking as a moderator....

I think that this discussion has lost any meaning whatsoever. I'm sure that the original poster didn't mean for it to go on like this.

Maybe it's just better to leave people to state what they like and what they don't without a lot of posturing and chuntering on about it.

Surely, there must be something more engaging when discussion Battlestar Galactica than going on about the differences in the fanbase(s).

The one thing I will say about the division in the fanbase - As long as people feel the necessity to make statements like "TNS fans need to understand..." and "TOS fans need to (fill in the blank)", there will be a division. I never signed an oath pledging allegiance to one series or the other. I don't need to understand anything - I'm just a fan - period.

The basic truth of it all is that we are ALL fans of Battlestar Galactica and Fleets is a forum of fans of Battlestar Galactica. The sooner we all start acting like fans of something as opposed to combatants in a conflict, the less "whining and griping" will take place.

Darrell - I'm not trying to tell you that you can't make negative statements or sweep the negativity under the rug, but if you have a point, make that point already - I'm aging here....

The one thing that the "Criticisms" forum was created for, was to allow people to say what they wanted to about either show without causing a problem. It wasn't however, meant to be a TOS vs. TNS forum. Either show has its good and bad points and we all have differing opinions regarding that.

I don't know what else to say....

Best,
Bryan

Originally Posted by Dawg

If you look at most reviews where TOS is mentioned, regardless of if it's in a magazine or on the internet, TOS in nearly always spoken of dismissively - it's cheesy, it's a one-hit wonder, lousy writing & character development, etc. The glowing pro-TNS reviews are invariably at the expense of TOS.

I am not referring to television and movie critics who write for various publications. I am referring to the actual posters who join the various Battlestar Galactica boards. If you have to paint the TNS posters with a broad brush as a result of print media television critics I don't really know what to say.

On top of that the vast majority of positive TNS reviews that mention TOS in a negative light I have read posted on any Battlestar Galactica site including the ones primarily run by TOS only owners and with primarily TOS only members tend to have been posted by the very people who claim to be offended by them. They are usually posted by a TOS only fan who then rips the review apart.

Again I have yet to see one example of a TNS fan writing a desparging episode review of any single TOS episode posted on any Battlestar Galactica site episode review section. On the sites that post TNS episode reviews including here we have plenty of examples of episode reviews written by people who make no bones about their negative view of the show.

I am willing to bet on any given day you can find a post by a TOS only fan desparing TNS posted during the previous 24 hours on one of the four major Galactica boards (not counting sciffy) . I doubt you can honestly say that in reverse.

[Dawg]

Originally Posted by Darth Marley

Well maybe I am being extra dense today.

Is your complaint an issue with new, random geeks coming here and saying things that offend you?

Maybe they have looked at "both sides now" and just hold a different view.

From where I stand, fans of the new show are not "taking shots" at the old, except in the sense there is a new show, and it is new. I have geeks in my family that hold the same views of many "media critics."

Is it still just too "forced" to expect peace in the valley? Should CF go the same route as BSGC?

No, Darth, you're not being unusually dense. You are a very bright guy.

Warrior is being very clear in his approach. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If there is going to be understanding among BSG fans then even the more dyed-in-the-wool are going to have to accept the opinions of others. So, if someone is going to tar osBSG fans as the problem, then the opposite is also a valid viewpoint. That's what he's doing - pointing out that the opposite side of the coin has the same face value.

There really are two camps in BSG fandom, you know. One that wants to fight amongst ourselves and one that doesn't.

Bryan's right.

I am
Dawg

[Dawg]

Originally Posted by antelope526

I am not referring to television and movie critics who write for various publications. I am referring to the actual posters who join the various Battlestar Galactica boards. If you have to paint the TNS posters with a broad brush as a result of print media television critics I don't really know what to say.

On top of that the vast majority of positive TNS reviews that mention TOS in a negative light I have read posted on any Battlestar Galactica site including the ones primarily run by TOS only owners and with primarily TOS only members tend to have been posted by the very people who claim to be offended by them. They are usually posted by a TOS only fan who then rips the review apart.

Again I have yet to see one example of a TNS fan writing a desparging episode review of any single TOS episode posted on any Battlestar Galactica site episode review section. On the sites that post TNS episode reviews including here we have plenty of examples of episode reviews written by people who make no bones about their negative view of the show.

I am willing to bet on any given day you can find a post by a TOS only fan desparing TNS posted during the previous 24 hours on one of the four major Galactica boards (not counting sciffy) . I doubt you can honestly say that in reverse.

Do you know why, antelope? It's because we've seen all the negative osBSG reviews for the past 25 years - they've all been discussed ad nauseum. The reason nuBSG is taking prominence in the discussion is because it's new, not because of any other reason.

I am
Dawg

Originally Posted by Dawg

There really are two camps in BSG fandom, you know. One that wants to fight amongst ourselves and one that doesn't.

Bryan's right.

I am
Dawg

When we post long enough I know we always end up in agreement. On this note of agreement with my good friend dawg who I often disagree with but always respect I head off to the TNS and TOS forums to meet my fellow fans of whatever forum I am on and then....back to work in the real world!

[BST]

Originally Posted by antelope526

Only one problem: Look at the TOS episode reviews versus the TNS episode reviews. On the TOS reviews there are no TNS fans writing the desparaging reviews.

Has it been said anywhere that a thoughtful review, whether good or bad, could not be done, with respect to TOS episodes?

Originally Posted by antelope526

On the TNS episode reviews a large amount of the reviews are the reviews written by people who hate TNS but watch it just to slam it. Look at the threads objectively.

I agree that there is some axe-grinding going on. However, is it incorrect or impermissible for a person to post a "bad" review. There are those who do not think it's "the best sci-fi" in years and do not think that Moore is a creative genius. Is it wrong for those comments to be stifled, in a misguided attempt at keeping peace amongst the two groups?

Originally Posted by antelope526

Most TNS fans are also TOS fans. Although it does happen it is rare to find a TNS fan desparing TOS today. When the exchanges do happen they are usually a response to a TOS only fan replying on a TNS subject. Example: GINO sucks, reply: I like it better than TOS (TOS only fan: They are desparing TOS)

Case in point?

Originally Posted by antelope526

The response may be an opposing viewpoint but it is not an objective viewpoint. I think if you look at the TOS section you will find either TOS only fans or dual fans like Martok, myself, Rowan, etc. posting. The reverse of that can't be said on TNS threads.

Well, the story could go like this. TOS or TOS/TNS fans post in both areas because they have knowledge of and have something to say about BOTH shows. In a fair amount of cases, you'll find reasoning about particular items which explains that person's preference. If a person takes the time to gain knowledge about the other show, in order to provide a viewpoint which may be either good or bad, is it wrong to silence that viewpoint (if bad) in order to avoid raining on the parade?

Originally Posted by antelope526

Good recent example: A TNS thread: How should the series end: One reply: As soon as possible. That may be funny but it says volumes. No one would today post on the Dreams forum on a question about how should TOS end with such a response. If you can't see that, you can't see what's really going on.

Yes, that is a good example. Point well taken.

Originally Posted by antelope526

Once upon a time so called minifans may have flamed this issue but ever since I have been here, over a year it definitely is fanned primarily by one side. As a fan of both versions it makes me sad.

Flaming TNS does TOS no favors.



I'll pose one thought for TNS fans - when you read a post about TNS, from a TOS fan, "give it a chance". Try to take that person's POV into account. The person may not intend to be mean-spirited but, their words may paint a different picture. Truly understanding one's counterpart in a conversation can usually keep a civil tone to the conversation and often times yields a successful conclusion to the conversation and some commonality of thought.

I, personally, have decided to watch TNS in order to better communicate about the show with TNS folks. I had the desire to discuss it "real-time" and not rely on other POV's to make up my response. The remarks that I post are going to be real feelings, whether good or bad, not something to "poke you in the eye" about.

BST

I for one enjoy the TOS only fans that comment on the show when they are making real comments about real things they see. I also thank the moderators in particular who don't like the show but watch it anyway in some part because they are keeping up on what they moderate. No show is all peaches and cream either. I for one still have significant issues with the way the character of Kara Thrace is written. Many primarily TOS fans I think Jewels in particular have made some real negative but very inciteful comments about that character. I have written negative things about the Apollo character. I find these type comments as valid as questions about Carillon. I think Kingfish doesn't like TNS (I may be wrong) but I find all his comments very insightful also. Gemini is on the fence and has some great insight.


I think in all we hope for good commentary and conversation while avoiding things just meant to stick a knife in. We all should know what that means and try to police ourselves. Most of us think BG80 wasn't that hot but I don't see any viciousness in those episode reviews.

[BST]

Originally Posted by antelope526

I think in all we hope for good commentary and conversation while avoiding things just meant to stick a knife in. We all should know what that means and try to police ourselves.

....and that my friend, is what it's all about.

[Senmut]

"Peace in the valley". Did we ever find it?

[Jayworld]

Not sure, especially since seemingly the interest in Battlestar as a whole, at least in my perspective, has waned considerably over the last several years. I see when I log on here that we have a multitude of members, yet only 24 of us are active. Does that mean that many have migrated to Facebook pages or other forums, or has interest in Battlestar, whether nuBSG or osBSG just really diminished the further we get away each year from Richard Hatch's failed continuation attempt through his trailer and series of books, the failed DeSanto/Singer mini-series back-door continuation, or the nuBSG (GINO to some)?

As posted much earlier (14 years earlier!), after being extremely disappointed in the Universal/Sci-Fi Network reboot decision of Battlestar rather than a continuation, I decided to give the new series a try.... I watched 2 1/2 episodes (one of them the first appearance of Richard Hatch as Tom Zarek), and I just could not do it. At least for me, the content was not of my liking (too much darkness, profanity, etc.). Just was not my cup of tea.

So for me, Battlestar has and always will be the show that was on ABC from 1978-79 that I watched faithfully each Sunday night (unless pre-empted), purchased action figures, comic (first Marvel, then Maximum Press, etc.), novels, posters, attended shows that featured original series stars, etc. That's my Battlestar. Always will be.

[Charybdis]

You said it, Jayworld. I did try to give the new BSG a chance but seriously, I could barely get through about two minutes, much less two episodes!! But that's just me. If you liked the new show, more power to you...just not my cup of tea either...

Let's see if this new movie idea has something we can like about it. They say it's going to be a totally NEW reboot!!! Wow, not sure anything has had this many reboots!!!

[Senmut]

Originally Posted by Jayworld

I decided to give the new series a try.... I watched 2 1/2 episodes (one of them the first appearance of Richard Hatch as Tom Zarek), and I just could not do it. At least for me, the content was not of my liking (too much darkness, profanity, etc.). Just was not my cup of tea.

Shouldn't that be tankard of ambrosia?

[Charybdis]

Aahh, going for some of the nectar of the gods, eh?? Yes, not my tankard of ambrosa...

[WarMachine]

For my part, two things.....

First, I don't post much here, not because I've lost interest in BSG, but because the last decade has been very rough for me, personally, and until very recently, keeping my head above water took precedence.

Second -- I, too, tried to give GINO a chance. Multiple times. When someone bashes the new, I take it with a grain of salt...But in GINO's case? It was an unrelenting hammer of vulgarity and darkness. There is no other way to describe it. There was no hope, whatsoever.

Likewise, my original assessment of GINO still stands: When an episode's pilot is so unappealing that I get up and wash the dishes before the first two hours are over -- it's garbage. Especially when it not only doesn't improve, but gets progressively worse over time.

There is more to science fiction than Michael Bay FX.

[Senmut]

That is why some of us write our own.
Like the VS.

[Jayworld]

Yes, some of the fan fiction is quite good. One of the best I've read (appears elsewhere here on the forum) was the synthesis of two of my favorite Sci-Fi shows, Battlestar Galactica and Planet of the Apes.

From time-to-time (and perhaps a waste of time at that), I play "what if" games with Battlestar Galactica, such as:

1. What if Richard Hatch's continuation vision was green lighted? Where would we be now?
2. What if the DeSanto/Singer continuation telefilm backdoor pilot was greenlighted into a series on Fox. How would that have played out? How many seasons would it have lasted? Would our view, being Original Series aficionados, been more or less enthusiastic?
3. This one keeps me coming back for more musings: what if Battlestar had NOT been a series but instead a set of three multi-hour movies as originally conceived (Saga of a Star World, Gun on Ice Planet Zero, Pegasus Returns). Would Battlestar have continued as made-for-TV movies in a popular vein well beyond 1979 (compare the Perry Mason TV movies that did quite well for many years)? Perhaps Battlestar would have run 6, 7, 8 years by being a series of television movies, perhaps 2 a year?

[Senmut]

You ever write any, Jay????


Hint, hint.

[Jayworld]

Many, many lifetimes ago I wrote a Battlestar novella in 7th grade English class. It was about 24 handwritten pages. Nothing since then, but I do write (mostly theological research papers, some poetry, etc.)

[Senmut]

Wish I could snag you for the VS!
Theology...tell!

[Senmut]

Wish I could snag you for the VS!
Theology...tell!

[Jayworld]

Originally Posted by Senmut

Wish I could snag you for the VS!
Theology...tell!

I have a Masters in Arts in Apologetics. I have written scholarly papers on topics in the New Testament, etc., and I lead weekly seminars.

Unfortunately, my BG 7th grade paper is long gone, but I do remember some aspects of it, such as a heated rivalry between Athena and Cassiopeia, the death of Lt. Jolly, and transportation tubes (something I came up with) that could extend from ship to ship and be used in the instance of saving survivors from a damaged ship.

[Senmut]

What is in your seminars?

[Jayworld]

Last semester (fall) we went through the complete book of Daniel and Prophesy, and this semester we are going through the book of Revelation and Prophesy, as the two books go hand-in-hand.

[Senmut]

I see. Pretty much an Evangelical perspective, then?

[Jayworld]

Yes, a conservative, evangelical, dispensationalist perspective.

[Senmut]

Okay. Just wanted to get it clear, for myself. A good many terms get tossed about without clear definition.

[Eric Paddon]

Originally Posted by Jayworld

Yes, some of the fan fiction is quite good. One of the best I've read (appears elsewhere here on the forum) was the synthesis of two of my favorite Sci-Fi shows, Battlestar Galactica and Planet of the Apes.

From time-to-time (and perhaps a waste of time at that), I play "what if" games with Battlestar Galactica, such as:

1. What if Richard Hatch's continuation vision was green lighted? Where would we be now?
2. What if the DeSanto/Singer continuation telefilm backdoor pilot was greenlighted into a series on Fox. How would that have played out? How many seasons would it have lasted? Would our view, being Original Series aficionados, been more or less enthusiastic?
3. This one keeps me coming back for more musings: what if Battlestar had NOT been a series but instead a set of three multi-hour movies as originally conceived (Saga of a Star World, Gun on Ice Planet Zero, Pegasus Returns). Would Battlestar have continued as made-for-TV movies in a popular vein well beyond 1979 (compare the Perry Mason TV movies that did quite well for many years)? Perhaps Battlestar would have run 6, 7, 8 years by being a series of television movies, perhaps 2 a year?

Thank you again for the kind word about the POTA crossover!

The other questions you pose are good ones and as I've found myself returning to the realm of fanfic writing again recently it's gotten me to thinking a lot about those kind of questions too.

1-I'm not sure Richard's project would have been very satisfying unless he guaranteed locking up everyone of importance for it, and that meant we had to see Dirk, Herb and especially Anne because there is something I would find personally wrong if we never saw some acknowledgment of Apollo and Sheba coming together. I have always taken it so much for granted in 25 years of writing fanfic that this happened between them that it was a shock to me when the emergence of Larson's infamous S2 memo revealed killing her off.

But in terms of broader story, I always had my doubts about Richard. His novels that he had ghostwritten were simply awful. It gave me the impression that Richard's grasp of the series wasn't as great as his reputation had us believe and that ultimately he was looking at Galactica more as a means to the end of jumpstarting his career. That hunch was proved right IMO when he was won over to GINO with a meaty role.

I think obviously if it had happened, there would have been some satisfaction to see a project but would it have been accepted as the best possible way to close the series? I really doubt that in my mind.

2-If DeSanto/Singer had happened there was hope. Although the script I remember reading so many years ago (which I don't have any longer) wasn't perfect it would have been something I would have been prepared to give a chance and wait and see.

3-I am less positive that being a series of TV movies would have been successful at that point in time. Yes, they would have been better written but 1978-79 was a point in time when the occasional "rotating" series was a dead concept in TV with shows like "Columbo", "McMillan And Wife" etc. which had ended their runs. The Mason movies were successful because they were revivals but an original series with that format I think would have tried the patience of viewers. All it would have taken was a serious ratings drop from one film to the next and the plug would have been pulled.