I am *very* dissapointed.

[BST]

Originally Posted by warhammerdriver

BST,

Read my post above yours. I think it's #27.

Aha. Sorry. We, both, had our thoughts "in the mail" at the same time!

I do understand and agree with your thought about an "extreme" faction that would really want that. It makes sense.

[jewels]

Warhammerdriver,
the other thing about BG that I think especially Universal never understood:
This show possibly had one of the hugest casual fanbases of any sci-fi TV show ever. They tuned in faithfully every week it ran, even following it through pre-emptings (BG was pre-empted 8 times in the 17 episodes of the show). They weren't necessarily Trekkies or fans of other Sci-fi. They were there because it was a family show, or as close as they would get to another Star Wars until "The Empire Strikes Back". But they were the viewers that kept Galactica in the top 20 throughout it's run.

25 years later, it's not exactly the easiest thing to rate what the true fanbase is currently. Because the people that tuned in every week weren't necessarily fanatics about it. They loved it but to most of those tens of millions: it was a TV show they enjoyed and that was it. A story they wanted to see told.

If Universal had possessed a functioning market research brain cell, they would have used the DVD release (done a year earlier than they did, just as Tim Smith & crew planned) to test the market for what people would support. If the original concept sold like hot cakes--maybe a show with retro values and clear heroes and villains was marketable.

Instead, they went in blind, took the reins away from a solid storyteller that could have preserved the franchise without losing the fanbase or the casual fans (Tom D.), kept Glen happy with royalties and had much more avenues for marketing merchandizing goodies like toys.

Check the news channel here: the "toys" (figurines) being released later this year--TOS figures....25 years after the thing aired. And this is the 2nd time TOS based collectables/toys have been released with only comics or video from the original series--no new shows with those characters--to support the marketing.

There is something about the story in TOS BG that people want to see....still. I'm hoping Mr. Larson will give us that. I'm sorry Mr. Moore's hands were tied and yes I do think he has his foot in his mouth often, but I'm sorrier still that Ms. Hammer did an end run around DeSanto just to get a flash in the pan rating. Universal could have had "it all" as far as the rights are concerned: now they are relegated to sharing the profit with some other studio when Glen gets his project going.

[Ethan]

I have commented on the RM BSG type of topic before. I want to say now that I understand Micheleh's concerns about the Galacticon comments.

Micheleh, did RM's apology satisfy you as far as his Galacticon comments go?

As a writer, and possibly a fan of TOS to some extent, Moore has the freedom to write whatever story he wants, or so it seems. What I have said before is that I look at RM's BSG as . . . just . . . another peice of fan fiction. It is sort of like 'what would BSG be like if it took that angle?'. For me, I enjoyed TOS a lot more than the Mini, but that doesn't mean that I can't like the Mini either.

My main complaint with the Mini is that I can not share it with my 5-year-old son like my family shared TOS with me. That is truly regrettable. Even so, I hope that Moore's fan fiction fuels a greater interest in the viewing public, even to the point that some viewers can someday wonder what would this series be like if it were a family oriented show again.

In my opinion, what we should do with RM's BSG is relegate it to a sort of continuing, ongoing fan fiction type of status, let those that enjoy it do so, and move on to doing whatever we can do to help Richard Hatch, or Tom DeSanto, or whoever to create the kind of program that we as a group would like to watch.

Micheleh, protecting Galacticon like you do is a good thing in my opinion and I think you should be commended for it. I am not in a position to do very much about helping to create a new BSG series. I plan to buy a back up set of the DVD package and hope to be able to purchase the Galacticon Package if I can. Other than that I can only hope that signing petitions and posting comments here will help us to get a Hatch/DeSanto/Larson type of project made.

That would be cool.

Ethan

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by jewels

Warhammerdriver,
the other thing about BG that I think especially Universal never understood:
This show possibly had one of the hugest casual fanbases of any sci-fi TV show ever. They tuned in faithfully every week it ran, even following it through pre-emptings (BG was pre-empted 8 times in the 17 episodes of the show). They weren't necessarily Trekkies or fans of other Sci-fi. They were there because it was a family show, or as close as they would get to another Star Wars until "The Empire Strikes Back". But they were the viewers that kept Galactica in the top 20 throughout it's run.

25 years later, it's not exactly the easiest thing to rate what the true fanbase is currently. Because the people that tuned in every week weren't necessarily fanatics about it. They loved it but to most of those tens of millions: it was a TV show they enjoyed and that was it. A story they wanted to see told.

If Universal had possessed a functioning market research brain cell, they would have used the DVD release (done a year earlier than they did, just as Tim Smith & crew planned) to test the market for what people would support. If the original concept sold like hot cakes--maybe a show with retro values and clear heroes and villains was marketable.

Instead, they went in blind, took the reins away from a solid storyteller that could have preserved the franchise without losing the fanbase or the casual fans (Tom D.), kept Glen happy with royalties and had much more avenues for marketing merchandizing goodies like toys.

Check the news channel here: the "toys" (figurines) being released later this year--TOS figures....25 years after the thing aired. And this is the 2nd time TOS based collectables/toys have been released with only comics or video from the original series--no new shows with those characters--to support the marketing.

There is something about the story in TOS BG that people want to see....still. I'm hoping Mr. Larson will give us that. I'm sorry Mr. Moore's hands were tied and yes I do think he has his foot in his mouth often, but I'm sorrier still that Ms. Hammer did an end run around DeSanto just to get a flash in the pan rating. Universal could have had "it all" as far as the rights are concerned: now they are relegated to sharing the profit with some other studio when Glen gets his project going.

Well written. Thank you for the post. Keep posting.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

He's doing a backpedal to make sure P.R. stays good. He should have thought first before he made the comment. That's the problem. He doesn't think at the amount of people he would hurt before he opened his trap because of his arrogance. He apologized. Great. Let's see if it prevents him from making insensitive comments in the future. I'm betting it won't.

Yes, you are correct in saying that there is a core group of fans who would not accept anything other than a continuation of Larson's original series who are closed minded, and I myself don't agree with them. But I think there is a larger, more open minded audience, that would have been willing to accept ANYTHING that wasn't a bastardization of what they held dear, which is what I believe the new BSG IS. I don't even hold Moore responsible, because I do understand he was given a mandate he had to follow that dictated no continuation (like what DeSanto wanted to do) by the true culprit, Bonnie Hammer. I don't wish Moore any ill-will despite his arrogance. I just wish he would understand he is not the GOD of sci-fi he thinks he is (the swarmy "hey man, I KILLED Kirk" comment he likes to throw around all the time epitomizes the attitude) and recognize there would BE no Galactica for him to bastardize had it not been handed to him. It was legendary material to begin with, not by his perceived importance at making it more "mature" or re-inventing the wheel. By that line of thinking, could or would anyone expect or want to see the original "Star Wars" trilogy or original run of "Star Trek" episodes "re-imagined" with the characters recast and a great foundation laid waste for other people's egos who couldn't just create something original of their own with it's own name?

JV

P.S. to everyone that likes to point the finger at Larson for "Galactica: 1980" and think he "killed" Galactica... he was given a set of directives by ABC after they cancelled the original show, much like Moore was told by Hammer "this is how we want you to do it". Don't blame Larson, when he discovered "Galactica:1980" was being cancelled he did "Return of Starbuck" to make sure fans knew he didn't forget what the original was all about and it's an example of how he wished he COULD have been allowed to do "Galactica" had the network not pulled the plug first season or set the rules for "kid-friendly Galactica: 1980".

Thank you for your thoughts. I agree that with the RESTRICTIONS that the
network and studio placed on BSG80 there was NO WAY that Larson could
have succeeded with it. I must admit that I loved the return of Starbuck.
That was the only episode that I liked about bsg80.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by BST

If these are your thoughts then, how little you understand us. I won't go over what has been stated, ad infinitum. Suffice it to say that our wants, desires, hopes, and dreams for a continuation are contained within these forums.



Regarding Moore, he wants to re-write the story, supplanting the original chemistry with his own 'realistic' concoction. We should support that? Sorry, this is one 'experiment' that I do not want to be associated with.

On the numbers issue, I find it rather amusing that folks still feel a need to try marginalizing the original series proponents.

Oh well...

BST

Bst you just said what I felt ............THanks.

[shiningstar]

In the beginning I was willing to give the Mini a 'chance'.
That is UNTIL I read the script and saw the wanton violance and the
many, many, many USELESS sex scenes .........which deserverdly warranted
a TV14 rating.

I was appalled at Moore's and Hammer's lack of respect for Larson, Desanto,
or Hatch for that matter. The more I read Moore's and Hammer's interviews
the less I liked them. My opinion on them HAS NOT and most likely WILL NOT
change.

There is no need for the senseless violance and "ADULT THEMES" that
RDM and his ILK would push on us.

There are plenty of Scifi's out there .........SUCCESSFULL shows (at least
until the "SCIFI" channel gets their hands on it) that do not have
to resort to pandering to our WORST instincts and impulses.

Starwars, startrek, TNG, Deepspace9, B5, EFC, SG1.............and many
more .............have been successful with the success being in the
storyline .......... and not in what Other people would push on us
as "ADULT THEMES".

What Moore and Hammer tried to do ........was to REWRITE the STORY
altogether and then try to PUSH this AS ...........BSG .........................

It wasn't and it's NOT.

The only person who had the decency to tell the truth (and although
I disagree with his political beliefs I have to respect his INTEGRITY) is
JOHN OLMOS.

If it were not for me coming to this site and reading the reviews of the
script as well as the "LEAKED SCRIPT" which I am told was very TRUE
to the actual movie .............I would have watched this crud and I
would have been even MORE outraged then I am by some of the
people on this forum who have been trying to THREATEN me and
other ORIGINAL BSG FANS by saying that since we REFUSE to watch the
MINI and it's SPAWN that our OPINION doesn't count.

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

P.S. to everyone that likes to point the finger at Larson for "Galactica: 1980" and think he "killed" Galactica... he was given a set of directives by ABC after they cancelled the original show, much like Moore was told by Hammer "this is how we want you to do it". Don't blame Larson, when he discovered "Galactica:1980" was being cancelled he did "Return of Starbuck" to make sure fans knew he didn't forget what the original was all about and it's an example of how he wished he COULD have been allowed to do "Galactica" had the network not pulled the plug first season or set the rules for "kid-friendly Galactica: 1980".

"Return of Starbuck" my favorite BSG1980 episode was a remake of "Hell in the Pacific". That's not my opinion but something I read from someone involved in BSG1980 production. It was made because it was easy to do on a shell of a budget compared to the other BSG1980 episodes. Since "Hell in the Pacific" was already a commercial success in its original version it was pretty much a guaranteed winner. "Hell in the Pacific" was later copied again in the SCIFI movie "Enemy Mine".

Read what Glen Larson really wanted to do in 1980 and you'll find a blue print for what Ron Moore is doing now. Glen Larson wanted to move Galactica to a later time slot and produce it for a more mature audience.

The comment in an earlier post about a certain segment of the fans wanting nothing but the same actors in the same clothes is very true. I personally would like to see TOS continued as if BSG1980 never happened. The TOS cast however would be too old to reprise their roles. I would like to see new actors playing the old roles as if TOS ended yesterday. It would probably need to be a bit darker and more mature but it would have made a better transition for the majority of older fans. I think in a way Moore is doing just that. Changing the names and some of the Egyptian memorabilla may have fired up a small segment of the current fan base but it also took the expectation monkey off the backs of the current actors.

[nccdee]

Sorry Shiningstar but take out the two sex scene with Baltar and #6 (the one where her spine glows and one the one on the Bridge) and the violent fight scene between Adama and Cylon-model on the Station, this would very tame and family friendly.

The baby killing scene was implied, nothing was ever seen. BTW: Ron Moore said there was reason for this scene which will unfold in the series. For this being a war theme show, very little destruction was ever seen, just implied (cities being destroyed, battlestar and viper blowing up in white light). There were some scenes of viper blowing up by a missile but not very graphic, I seen a lot worse.

As for "ADULT THEME", I see this in more and more Family shows. Have you watch 7th Heaven recently (former prostitution now live with the Camden; Peter threaten with child abuse; adultry and even issue about the Iraq war)? What about O.C.? Oh, but I guess if kids are really are doing it, then its no longer "ADULT THEME", right? Also, RM stated he did not want to go the route of the shows you mention. Leave It To Beaver, Father Know Best and other had winning formulas but someone decide to move away from that and found a new "dysfunctional" formula...All In the Family, Rosanne and others, which became hits.

"Pushing it"? Its called marketing. You either buy into it or not, your choice.

Is RM's vision Galactica? Your opinion is No. But it just your opinion. My opinion is Yes. Everything is there, the story, the concept, the characters and even the ships. Is it different? Of course (the "dysfunctioal formula" my theory). Thats the point RM is trying sell to a new generation. As a fan of the original, I see this as a positive step in keeping the fanchise alive. And if works, you better believe it will "spawn" a whole new Sci-Fi programming that will have darker and deeper overtones.

nccdee

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by nccdee

Sorry Shiningstar but take out the two sex scene with Baltar and #6 (the one where her spine glows and one the one on the Bridge) and the violent fight scene between Adama and Cylon-model on the Station, this would very tame and family friendly.

The baby killing scene was implied, nothing was ever seen. BTW: Ron Moore said there was reason for this scene which will unfold in the series. For this being a war theme show, very little destruction was ever seen, just implied (cities being destroyed, battlestar and viper blowing up in white light). There were some scenes of viper blowing up by a missile but not very graphic, I seen a lot worse.

As for "ADULT THEME", I see this in more and more Family shows. Have you watch 7th Heaven recently (former prostitution now live with the Camden; Peter threaten with child abuse; adultry and even issue about the Iraq war)? What about O.C.? Oh, but I guess if kids are really are doing it, then its no longer "ADULT THEME", right? Also, RM stated he did not want to go the route of the shows you mention. Leave It To Beaver, Father Know Best and other had winning formulas but someone decide to move away from that and found a new "dysfunctional" formula...All In the Family, Rosanne and others, which became hits.

"Pushing it"? Its called marketing. You either buy into it or not, your choice.

Is RM's vision Galactica? Your opinion is No. But it just your opinion. My opinion is Yes. Everything is there, the story, the concept, the characters and even the ships. Is it different? Of course (the "dysfunctioal formula" my theory). Thats the point RM is trying sell to a new generation. As a fan of the original, I see this as a positive step in keeping the fanchise alive. And if works, you better believe it will "spawn" a whole new Sci-Fi programming that will have darker and deeper overtones.

nccdee

I 'STOPPED' watching Seventh Heaven for that very reason.

OHHHHHHHHH FOR THE RECORD ...........my kids AREN'T doing it ..........
and because I am a RESPONSIBLE parent ...........THEY will NOT be
doing it.

I don't think scifi has to be dysfunctional in order to be entertaining.

And as for my "OPINION" which you are so intent on ATTACKING at any opportunity; it is as VALID as ANYONE ELSES opinion on this site.

[Jerry Vasilatos]

Originally Posted by antelope526

Read what Glen Larson really wanted to do in 1980 and you'll find a blue print for what Ron Moore is doing now. Glen Larson wanted to move Galactica to a later time slot and produce it for a more mature audience.

The comment in an earlier post about a certain segment of the fans wanting nothing but the same actors in the same clothes is very true. I personally would like to see TOS continued as if BSG1980 never happened. The TOS cast however would be too old to reprise their roles. I would like to see new actors playing the old roles as if TOS ended yesterday. It would probably need to be a bit darker and more mature but it would have made a better transition for the majority of older fans. I think in a way Moore is doing just that. Changing the names and some of the Egyptian memorabilla may have fired up a small segment of the current fan base but it also took the expectation monkey off the backs of the current actors.

And got my information about "Return of Starbuck" straight from him. Whether they were using the premise from "Hell in the Pacific" or not, Glen specifically wanted to end on an episode that was a return to the spirit of "Galactica" and what he wished it could have continued to be. He was not happy that Universal imposed a "dumbing down" to fit family hour and while the whole slant of "1980" and setting it on earth was to do it cheap, I really doubt that the thinking behind this episode had solely to doing something easy "in the desert". I doubt that mockup of the Raider ship and other effects in that episode were "cheap" to do. Glen's intention was to go out with a bang instead of a whimper, and I think he succeeded despite the failure of "1980"'s other content to many core fans.

I don't doubt that LArson wanted to go in a "darker" direction, I have heard rumors that the second season would have focused on the death of Sheba and Apollo's withdrawel from command from being wracked with guilt. But these are LOGICAL story progressions into "dark" territory, not forced stuff to be "edgy and controversial". What makes you think fans don't want to see "dark"? It's like the "Empire Strikes Back" - "dark" is great, as long as it serves the story and characters, and I think what DeSanto was planning was a more logical progression into mature themes than Moore's "Battlestar Craptacular".

JV

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

And got my information about "Return of Starbuck" straight from him. Whether they were using the premise from "Hell in the Pacific" or not, Glen specifically wanted to end on an episode that was a return to the spirit of "Galactica" and what he wished it could have continued to be. He was not happy that Universal imposed a "dumbing down" to fit family hour and while the whole slant of "1980" and setting it on earth was to do it cheap, I really doubt that the thinking behind this episode had solely to doing something easy "in the desert". I doubt that mockup of the Raider ship and other effects in that episode were "cheap" to do. Glen's intention was to go out with a bang instead of a whimper, and I think he succeeded despite the failure of "1980"'s other content to many core fans.

I don't doubt that LArson wanted to go in a "darker" direction, I have heard rumors that the second season would have focused on the death of Sheba and Apollo's withdrawel from command from being wracked with guilt. But these are LOGICAL story progressions into "dark" territory, not forced stuff to be "edgy and controversial". What makes you think fans don't want to see "dark"? It's like the "Empire Strikes Back" - "dark" is great, as long as it serves the story and characters, and I think what DeSanto was planning was a more logical progression into mature themes than Moore's "Battlestar Craptacular".

JV

excellent post JV .........Keep posting

I'm with you in supporting Larson. Yes he went out with a bang. Yes it was easy to do a remake of "Hell in the Pacific" since it was originally made as a radio play. Yes it was done with little remaining budget. Dirk Benedict was even doing Larson a personal favor.

And yes Larson wanted to do a later at night more mature version of Battlestar Galactica in 1980 and was stopped by the television executives. The version Larson would have given us would have more in common with Moore's version than TOS except we would still have one word names and Egyptian style flight helmets.

The episodes of BSG1980 were actually very expensive (with the exception of Return of Starbuck) which is part of the reason it was cancelled. It needed good rating just to break even.

[warhammerdriver]

shiningstar,

I think you need to go read post #27 as well. You missed something there.

[shiningstar]

I not only 'read' post #27 but I read your OTHER post as well.

Originally posted by Shiningstar:
many, many, many USELESS sex scenes

I'm sorry, this just confuses me. There's only ONE sex scene in the whole mini: The glowing spine scene with Number Six and Baltar, specifically. Anything else is either just kissing (Number Six and the Colonial officer at Armistice Station) or people starting to tear at each others' clothes (Chief Tyrol and Boomer). Tearing at clothes does not a sex scene make. There was more skin on display when Billy wandered into the shower room.

I mean, am I wrong here? How can I look at the mini and see only one sex scene, while someone else can look and see "many, many, many USELESS sex scenes"?

Besides, what WERE Starbuck and Cassiopea doing in that launch tube in "Saga of a Star World"?

[warhammerdriver]

Originally Posted by shiningstar

I not only 'read' post #27 but I read your OTHER post as well.

Nevermind. You missed my point.

[larocque6689]

Baltimore

I would add in the Armistice station segment and Baltar's distraction on the command deck in Part II as two more Number Six entries. The latter was filmed rather well considering what was going on. I am reminded of the clone-infested "Sixth Day" with Arnold S. which had a similar scene between a virtual cyber-companion and Arnold's best friend (who was a clone). Michael Rhymer would have been proud.

[nccdee]

Shiningstar, the "opinion" was not an attack on you (or anyone else) but to point out that one person trash is another person treasure. My post was to use your post as a comparision to my view. It was not to say your opinion was wrong or any less valid. I agree with you on the "family" value of TOS BG being lost.

I grew up watching great family shows like "Little House" and "The Walton". Unfortunately those days are gone. I know that PAX TV attempted reviving the idea of family entertainment (with Pondarosa and Doc) but it just not the same.

The O.C comment was meant to be a bit of a sarcasm toward the "teen" soap opra programming since it suppose to be marketed to that age group.

We can be greatful for DVD so we can return to our youth and share them with families and friends (H.R. Puff N' Stuff, anyone?).

nccdee

[Rowan]

I loved H.R. Puff N' Stuff, I have the video of the first show

Originally Posted by BarrymoreYorke

I'm sorry, this just confuses me. There's only ONE sex scene in the whole mini: The glowing spine scene with Number Six and Baltar, specifically. Anything else is either just kissing (Number Six and the Colonial officer at Armistice Station) or people starting to tear at each others' clothes (Chief Tyrol and Boomer). Tearing at clothes does not a sex scene make. There was more skin on display when Billy wandered into the shower room.

I mean, am I wrong here? How can I look at the mini and see only one sex scene, while someone else can look and see "many, many, many USELESS sex scenes"?

Besides, what WERE Starbuck and Cassiopea doing in that launch tube in "Saga of a Star World"?

Great post. It surmised many of the frustrations you can have when talking with someone who doesn't like the mini. Most of the abominations they say happened never did.

On the sex the most we saw was one bare back. Yesterday I saw more of Alissa Milano on a rerun of Charmed where she was a mermaid.

The famous "handjob" scene in the mini was about as bad as the diner scene with Meg Ryan in "When Harry met Sally".

There are actually more minority characters in the mini than in TOS.

The weak female argumant seems to blow right past President Roslin.

Those who hate the arrogant female Starbuck forget how Sheba was introduced to us.

Those who hate President Roslin forget Siress Tinia.

No baby was showed killed in the mini. The first day or two after the mini aired there were even threads that asked whether the baby was really killed. Some people watched it and couldn't tell.

Only one person was actually SHOWN killed in the mini and he was a cylon. The lasar shot to Serena in TOS and her ensuing agony was far worse. Letting your children watch a show where the only child they can identify with gets to see his mother die is not exactly family viewing.

There are a bunch of things I don't like about the mini especially in areas dealing with Kara Thrace and COL Tigh but I don't need to imagine things are worse than they are.

If you think the story sucks that's fine but you don't need to invent things that never happened.

[Rowan]

I'm also confused, I've watched the mini over 20 times now and I keep reading this in many posts but I don't get it what hand job scene? Where is it in the movie I must be daft 'cause I have completely missed it and no I'm not joking or trying to be a brat I'm serious could someone explain?

[Dawg]

There are two places where the script placed very graphic "handjobs" - the very beginning sequence, immediately prior to the station being blown up, and Baltar on the bridge of Galactica, with the Six chip playing games in his mind.

They were edited for broadcast to be less graphic.

I am
Dawg

There was only one "handjob" in the actual mini and it was all in Baltar's mind late in the mini.

It is about as graphic as the fake orgasm scene at the diner in "When Harry met Sally"

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Dawg

There are two places where the script placed very graphic "handjobs" - the very beginning sequence, immediately prior to the station being blown up, and Baltar on the bridge of Galactica, with the Six chip playing games in his mind.

They were edited for broadcast to be less graphic.

I am
Dawg

Well THANK GOD for THAT at least!

[Jerry Vasilatos]

I can only imagine the outcry from people if George Lucas decided to add "handjobs" to "Star Wars". Or maybe people would like to see classic "Star Trek" with CGI sex scenes of young William Shatner and the green alien dancing girl?

I guess I just don't understand why people willing to let so much be changed for the BG re-imagining don't consider it a betrayal of what BG was originally about, classic space fantasy adventure instead of modern WB style "angst in space". I also thought the "Lost in Space" movie was crap though. It seems whenever someone decides to "remake" something contemporary to instill their own "take" on it, they ruin what was great about it to begin with.

It's just too damn bad Ron Moore wasn't allowed to take his concepts, change a few things (like the BG names) and just introduce a new show with a new title that doesn't alienate fans of the old while serving fans of whatever it is he and Sci-Fi are peddling.

JV

[BST]

Originally Posted by antelope526

Great post. It surmised many of the frustrations you can have when talking with someone who doesn't like the mini. Most of the abominations they say happened never did.

On the sex the most we saw was one bare back. Yesterday I saw more of Alissa Milano on a rerun of Charmed where she was a mermaid.

The famous "handjob" scene in the mini was about as bad as the diner scene with Meg Ryan in "When Harry met Sally".

There are actually more minority characters in the mini than in TOS.

The weak female argumant seems to blow right past President Roslin.

Those who hate the arrogant female Starbuck forget how Sheba was introduced to us.

Those who hate President Roslin forget Siress Tinia.

No baby was showed killed in the mini. The first day or two after the mini aired there were even threads that asked whether the baby was really killed. Some people watched it and couldn't tell.

Only one person was actually SHOWN killed in the mini and he was a cylon. The lasar shot to Serena in TOS and her ensuing agony was far worse. Letting your children watch a show where the only child they can identify with gets to see his mother die is not exactly family viewing.

There are a bunch of things I don't like about the mini especially in areas dealing with Kara Thrace and COL Tigh but I don't need to imagine things are worse than they are.

If you think the story sucks that's fine but you don't need to invent things that never happened.

Nice misdirection, antelope. It still does not provide any insight, though, as to why some of those items were even necessary.

But then, again, I'm one of those supposedly 'stuck-in-the70s' types who thinks that the original concept and overall storyline was just fine and was very much deserving of being continued, not re-written.

[shiningstar]

Originally Posted by Jerry Vasilatos

I can only imagine the outcry from people if George Lucas decided to add "handjobs" to "Star Wars". Or maybe people would like to see classic "Star Trek" with CGI sex scenes of young William Shatner and the green alien dancing girl?

I guess I just don't understand why people willing to let so much be changed for the BG re-imagining don't consider it a betrayal of what BG was originally about, classic space fantasy adventure instead of modern WB style "angst in space". I also thought the "Lost in Space" movie was crap though. It seems whenever someone decides to "remake" something contemporary to instill their own "take" on it, they ruin what was great about it to begin with.

It's just too damn bad Ron Moore wasn't allowed to take his concepts, change a few things (like the BG names) and just introduce a new show with a new title that doesn't alienate fans of the old while serving fans of whatever it is he and Sci-Fi are peddling.

JV

I believe Richard Hatch said just about the same thing in a couple of interviews.

I so agree with what you just wrote

[Rowan]

Ok I just went back and looked at those two scenes in slow motion about 8 times each and I’ve written down what I saw. Hope it helps for those who didn’t see the mini.

Armistice station

6 sits on the desk facing the colonial warrior. We see her face up close, she asks if he’s alive we see his face up close when he says “yes” then her face up close as she says “prove it” her rt. arm is on the back of his shoulder and her left is at her side touching the desk. Close up of the kiss, then explosion, we see him pull back from the kiss as he registers the explosion and becomes afraid, then close up on her face as she says “it has begun” the camera pulls back and we see him from the back as he struggles to rise out of the chair but 6 still in the same position and with apparent ease and strength holds him down with a casually draped left arm over his shoulder and her hand clasps his face. Then we see a close up of their faces and both her hands are clearly grasping his face she begins to kiss him again it’s obvious to me at this point he realizes he’s about to die and gives up the struggle just as the whole station explodes. Her hands never go below the waist in this scene.



Baltar in CIC

First, they are fully clothed. She is sitting on his lap her legs are crossed we see her hand go down towards his crotch but our view is completely blocked all we actually see is her legs, his chest and part of her arm. The camera pans right back up to their faces we see him lean back in the chair a little and he utters a little sound of pleasure that’s it. We don’t see the repeated motion of her arm indication anything more is happening or ongoing and then the scene is over, it’s all implied The most she could have done in that moment was to rub his crotch, that’s not a hand job not in my experience.

[Gemini1999]

Originally Posted by Gaelen

Ok I just went back and looked at those two scenes in slow motion about 8 times each and I?ve written down what I saw. Hope it helps for those who didn?t see the mini.

There were some that saw a rough cut of the mini before it was broadcast and I also remember a couple of reviews that said that the Armistice Station scene was a bit more graphic than the broadcast version. It's not like we are gonna see Six's hand around his "unit", but if she shoves her hand down the front of his drawers and he starts moaning, she definitely isn't giving the man a back rub.

The only ones that could verify what was edited were those that got to see the rough cut and the broadcast version as well.

Anyone....? Anyone...? Beuller...?

Bryan
________
Yamaha Srx