Remastered BattleStar Galatica?

[Dawg]

Oddly enough, as much of a fan as I am of the current SFX of Transformers, Iron Man, Avatar, etc., I find myself in much agreement with Eric's stand. I'll admit I enjoyed the Star Wars special edition releases, but the films themselves lost much of their original charm and impact with the tinkering.

To "upgrade" an original needs to be carefully considered before being attempted. In 99% of the cases, the answer should be "no."

However, BG may - and I emphasize the "may" - be within that 1% that would benefit from remastering the SFX. But to be successful, they must have the exact right hand on the helm, and not do what Lucas did with Star Wars.

Every scene must remain intact, as aired. No adds, subtracts, no new CGI daggits inserted, no new CGI Cylons. The only thing a remaster should do is replace the repeated shots, like the two-raider kill while #3 banks off, and the raider exploding after being shot by the gun turret.

And those new shots must look like they were done in 1978, with real models.

Seamless.

Otherwise, I'm with Eric. Don't change a thing.

I am
Dawg

[KJ]

Well you must not like DK's BG edits then Dawg, cos DK while respecting the BG original outputs and was keeping the original content intact, he definitely took certain liberities with his own adjustments and SE upgrades with his fan edits as well.

Alright the key word here, being a fan edit. But it still amounts to the same end result, an interesting ; "what if" SE restoration of the original series if the studio themselves had done it instead etc!

If DK had the resources and did his own Remastered high quality edits of Battlestar Galactica as we're talking about. With models and well as CGI meshes fitted in there etc. You're going to tell me you wouldn't let personal bias of one of our own doing a successful edit would be different or more unexceptable than Universal doing it, if they did it the same way?!

I think not!

Come bet you'd be more willing to except it if it were DK's version rather than an official studio remastering even if it were done correctly as you say.

And there is nothing truly "Seamless" about any SE thats been done, EVER. A digital effect is just that, even subtle minor ones are just that; 'digital'. ST:TMP is said to be respectful to Robert Wise's vision and thats true, but lets not kid ourselves, if those SE effects were done optically, it wouldn't look anywhere near as clear or digitally neat as the existing current Star Trek: TMP re-edit does. If its done in 1979 then its done in 1979, if its done in 2000 then its obviously done in 2000. Seamless doesn't mean some stylised tampering wasn't done to improve it years later down the road. Seamless just means the 'said' job was very convincing and handled well, cos its very photorealistic or still very appealing to the eyes better yet, is all.

Originally Posted by Dawg

Every scene must remain intact, as aired. No adds, subtracts

I certainly don't see why the deleted scenes can't be restored and inserted back into their original slots for a "remastered" edition. There aren't any commercial times or airing window's a 'Special Edition' has to answer to? And the editing of the original smoothed out as well, makes for logical sense doesn't it. Unless your always for; Boomer and Apollo drawing their blaster guns on Sheba & Bojay in Living Legend "out of order" one minute with guns drawn, the next drop a line of dialogue with no guns, yet put'em away when the 'kaxlon alarm' goes off.

Thats like huh.....?

And like i said, a Blu-Ray disc can hold the original untampered '78 version, long as a brand new 2010-plus remastered version in there as well, then = EVERYBODY WINS!!!

Nuff said!

KJ

[Dawg]

Originally Posted by KJ

Well you must not like DK's BG edits then Dawg, cos DK while respecting the BG original outputs and was keeping the original content intact, he definitely took certain liberities with his own adjustments and SE upgrades with his fan edits as well.

Alright the key word here, being a fan edit. But it still amounts to the same end result, an interesting ; "what if" SE restoration of the original series if the studio themselves had done it instead etc!

If DK had the resources and did his own Remastered high quality edits of Battlestar Galactica as we're talking about. With models and well as CGI meshes fitted in there etc. You're going to tell me you wouldn't let personal bias of one of our own doing a successful edit would be different or more unexceptable than Universal doing it, if they did it the same way?!

I think not!

Come bet you'd be more willing to except it if it were DK's version rather than an official studio remastering even if it were done correctly as you say.

And there is nothing truly "Seamless" about any SE thats been done, EVER. A digital effect is just that, even subtle minor ones are just that; 'digital'. ST:TMP is said to be respectful to Robert Wise's vision and thats true, but lets not kid ourselves, if those SE effects were done optically, it wouldn't look anywhere near as clear or digitally neat as the existing current Star Trek: TMP re-edit does. If its done in 1979 then its done in 1979, if its done in 2000 then its obviously done in 2000. Seamless doesn't mean some stylised tampering wasn't done to improve it years later down the road. Seamless just means the 'said' job was very convincing and handled well, cos its very photorealistic or still very appealing to the eyes better yet, is all.

I love David's edits. Particularly the Return of Starbuck one. But he approached it with the right attitude, not the same attitude that Lucas took with the Star Wars re-edit. In fact, the Star Trek remasters took the right attitude, too.

But every tweak, no matter how perfect, takes away from the original. Remember the uproar over colorizing some classic movies? The whole point to that was that it took away from the vision and impact that the original had, that the filmmaker had a vision and that vision came through in black and white - colorizing took that away.

I can appreciate the upgrades - I did enjoy the Star Wars remasters, but the impact was greatly lessened by the editing Lucas did.

Originally Posted by KJ

I certainly don't see why the deleted scenes can't be restored and inserted back into their original slots for a "remastered" edition. There aren't any commercial times or airing window's a 'Special Edition' has to answer to? And the editing of the original smoothed out as well, makes for logical sense doesn't it. Unless your always for; Boomer and Apollo drawing their blaster guns on Sheba & Bojay in Living Legend "out of order" one minute with guns drawn, the next drop a line of dialogue with no guns, yet put'em away when the 'kaxlon alarm' goes off.

Thats like huh.....?

And like i said, a Blu-Ray disc can hold the original untampered '78 version, long as a brand new 2010-plus remastered version in there as well, then = EVERYBODY WINS!!!

Nuff said!

KJ

I reiterate - every tweak takes away. Adding scenes that weren't there before changes the whole package.

My thinking is that the oft-repeated SFX of BG detracted from the storytelling; we were jerked back to the here-and-now, out of the story and into the technology of film making, each time we recognized the same raider exploding once or twice each episode. That is what I would change in a remastered version - and that's the only thing.

I am
Dawg

[Eric Paddon]

*****Mr Paddon quit the procrastination seriously, take a look at the thread since you've posted? If you disagree with everybody on Matador thread fair enough. But this isn't leading anywhere, when you drag this out about how you don't agree on a topic most of us are interested in. We're trying to take this beyond mere debating and into something worthwhile if the Galactica fanbase moved in this direction or if fans support it enough to make a official campaign. Its one thing to disagee its another to to drag down somebody else's thread harpng on about how you don't like it nor see the point etc etc. Thats been said enough times. I saw you and Taranis having having a few barbs this morning from my clock, then early this afternoon i could've said one thing in a reply or so but figured i've said enough so far and let everybody else talk it out, and went out cos i had things doing in town today******

I think what I expressed is a legitimate POV, and I was having it in the course of a civil discussion. OTOH, this comes off to me as an outright personal attack and a demand that the discussion be a one-way street on the topic which conjures for me some unpleasant memories of about five years ago when I discovered that certain individuals had developed the attitude that saying one harsh word about a certain reimagined TV show was "hurtful to their psyche" and that only positive things could ever be said about it. For something like this, where like it or not, there *is* a legitimate argument from the other side rooted in issues of preservation (because it is a fact that the original version of Star Wars, which is the one that *became* a phenomenon may end up lost to us forever because the care of remastering the negative of the original version won't be given us given Lucas's preference for SE editions that force the viewer to accept SW as a sequel to the prequel films rather than a product of its time) is something I think needs to be part of the discussion, along with the issue of whether or not this sudden modern-day obsession with redoing FX sequences has the ability to cheapen the areas of what constitutes the more important part of cinematic storytelling. So far, I have not heard an answer from the other side on this point, and have only heard it said that we can adopt selective standards on what kinds of film and TV should fall victim to this kind of "reimagining" and which ones (that arguably could use it more if one is concerned about realism in FX like "Forbidden Planet") which to me isn't much of an answer I can understand.


*****For real, for Matty and everybody else's sake no drawn out arguing please. No "ego" crap in this thread. *****

I think in light of your remarks aimed at me, that sentiment rings a bit hollow from my perspective. But I will agree on one thing, this topic does not belong in a section in which the purpose was to generate discussion on suggested ways of improving or fixing the original episode *stories* if we were ever given the chance to make new scripts for some theoretical new project using the old stories. As the one who suggested the creation of the "New Twists" section for that purpose, I think seeing that side of discussion on the creative side subordinated to the one about FX making is something I don't have much reason to be in favor of, but until today I never felt I had reason to say that publicly. Being told that there should only be one side of a discussion in this thread has at least given me a reason to say otherwise now.

[monolith21]

Originally Posted by Dawg

Every scene must remain intact, as aired. No adds, subtracts, no new CGI daggits inserted, no new CGI Cylons. The only thing a remaster should do is replace the repeated shots, like the two-raider kill while #3 banks off, and the raider exploding after being shot by the gun turret.

And those new shots must look like they were done in 1978, with real models.

Seamless.

Otherwise, I'm with Eric. Don't change a thing.

I am
Dawg

I agree with this 100%. The only issue I have with the series is how often the same shots are used over and over. That is the only change I would support. I'd rather see a well shot model over CGI any day. The thing that hasn't stood up over the years is the reused footage. It is the one thing that pulls someone seeing the show for the first time right now straight of the experience.

[gmd3d]

I agree with the fact that some aspects of the Star Wars reworked where best left alone and should have been left alone....what I think they should have been is neither here or there in this discussion.


I think I said that the movie or pilot Episode of BSG should be reworked and given a updated effects to fix the short comings of the effect that are present..

CGI or Physical Models . (I don´t care as long as it done right) keeping the intention and the spirit intact should be the aim esp for the first one..

but there are things that would be done to enhance the viewing experience
for BSG.

something I would like to see address that has always held my interest and giving me cause for speculation. I not going to mention them as there is no point at present.

The following series need new effects as I and others have posted that the repeat use of the Pilot Episode / Movie is irksome. (mind you when the did add a new effect it was great)

I would use CGI as it the easiest to film and control..

I not trying to change anyone mind´s here Eric´s or other wise. I respect Eric´s POV I think it wrong as much as he think mine is wrong ..... that OK

but apart from a fan effort a remastering is not going to happen soon if you expect it from a studio. that´s a given.

DK (David) work is a stunning approach and he should be applauded.

bottom line for me is the original Effect are hurting the viewing experience for the show.

[KJ]

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon

I think in light of your remarks aimed at me, that sentiment rings a bit hollow from my perspective. But I will agree on one thing, this topic does not belong in a section in which the purpose was to generate discussion on suggested ways of improving or fixing the original episode *stories* if we were ever given the chance to make new scripts for some theoretical new project using the old stories. As the one who suggested the creation of the "New Twists" section for that purpose, I think seeing that side of discussion on the creative side subordinated to the one about FX making is something I don't have much reason to be in favor of

Thats your perspective, not the reality though, its more or or less saying you've got an opinion and are entitled to it, but i've got the facts. If thats the case, then fair enough player. And just cos you started or co-opted an idea for a thread secton doesn't in anyway whatsoever mean you *police* the Battlestar Galactica fanbase opinions on things. I'm pretty sure Myself, Matador and Taranis and others views on the matter are certainly similarly shared beyond this thread on BG forums throughout the internet on the same issue o.k.

And a "legitimate POV" regardless shouldn't be bullied upon anybody.

You may feel this discussion is being demanded by me to be a one-way street, but that not what i'm asking for at all. Your basically insulting Matador by deliberately arguing something you know outright your against, i.e. stirring up arguing rather aggressively without due cause. I don't mind other members sharing your opinions, but they don't nearly come off as you do when discussing this. And come bet if you didn't post an opinion and they did, while disagreeing with them, the tone wouldn't feel so destructive.

Seriously you need to look at yourself before harping on about how its your right to have this POV etc and yet come off being 'mister' know-it-all and sound as if you sabotaging Matador's thread out of spite. Suggesting a thread to CF doesn't mean whatever your presently not in favor of, doesn't mean you get to practically 'lamblast' other CF members views on a subject you don't hold onto yourself. Its the nature inwhich you've made your opinions felt that came off as *an attack* in itself, in other words!

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon

I think what I expressed is a legitimate POV, and I was having it in the course of a civil discussion. OTOH, this comes off to me as an outright personal attack and a demand that the discussion be a one-way street on the topic which conjures for me some unpleasant memories of about five years ago when I discovered that certain individuals had developed the attitude that saying one harsh word about a certain reimagined TV show was "hurtful to their psyche" and that only positive things could ever be said about it.

Please who are you preaching to with that kind of comment? So Taranis and myself are now Ginoids supporting the "Gino" fanbase way of thinking now eh? That insulting in itself to lable anybody on CF with regardless of your personal thoughts on them. Don't make a mountain out of a molehill!

Moving on i want to answer somebody else's input

Originally Posted by Dawg

I reiterate - every tweak takes away. Adding scenes that weren't there before changes the whole package.

My thinking is that the oft-repeated SFX of BG detracted from the storytelling; we were jerked back to the here-and-now, out of the story and into the technology of film making, each time we recognized the same raider exploding once or twice each episode. That is what I would change in a remastered version - and that's the only thing.

And i'll also reiterate. Media especially when it comes down to DVD/Blu-Ray film or science fiction Television offers a choice, between an Original or Special Edition incarnation. This will not change now o.k., yes it might change the whole package THATS THE POINT, a necessary upgrade artistically speaking which keeps the interest int he story present by smoothing out a few things which look so badly outdated years later down the road.

And point of fact, the majority of most success sci-fi fantasy films and TV shows now as of 2010 HAVE Original and Special Edition versions. Not many well known creations don't have these.

Want examples...o.k.

1) Terminator 2 Judgement Day Theatrical cut & Special edition (Also DVD edition with the "Future Coda" ending)

2) Aliens 1986 Theatrical followed by 1992 Special Edition (Which is seen as the definite cut over its theatrical cut)

3) Star Trek TOS 1966 & 2006 Remastered series. Nuff said.

4) Star Trek movies (TMP, TWOK director edition, TUDC laserdisc extended cut) etc etc.

5) The Lord Of The Rings trilogy (theatrical and Extended editions)

6) Babylon 5 The Gathering. Original 1993 version Vs 1998 Special Edition.

7) Close Encounters Of The Third Kind. Blu-Ray disc contains all 3 versions of the same film with all numerous cuts etc

8) The Abyss (at this point listing James Cameron movies confirms my points to no end!)

9) Red Dwarf. Which has an original broadcasted version Vs the newer CGI remastered picture quality versions.

10) Star Wars. Should i really go on at this point?


Think you'll find every major TV and film Sci-fi and fantasy had a regular and special edition cuts, either close soon after its original release or much later onwards a few short years or decades later. Points been made all the same though, which Taranis said earlier but much more beautifully.

BG would need to sustain its one season cult status by going further and reinventing/revitilising itself through putting out a "special edition/remastered" version today 30 plus years later. And god knows a Blu-Ray picture BG would be beautiful to gaze at let alone listen to with a 5.1 or 7.1 surround soundtrack!!!

KJ

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Taranis

there is a damn good CGI model of the Galactica available already

made by Folkrm

https://www.colonialfleets.com/forums...ad.php?t=15996

others been built

https://www.colonialfleets.com/forums...ad.php?t=17315

made by maudib

This is pretty awesome model and lots of detail. Think there is way to get this to use in 3ds Max?
Think the creators of this model would give me OK to use it?

[gmd3d]

Folkrm model is not publicly available .... I did have it myself at one point but lost it when My old PC Crashed ..

Maudib is still in the building stage .

I hope to some day see these available for future fan art or film ... short of building it myself .... but that will not be in the near future at least until my present Star Trek fan film modelling is done.

fingers crossed for the Big G release in the future

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by KJ

Want examples...o.k.

1) Terminator 2 Judgement Day Theatrical cut & Special edition (Also DVD edition with the "Future Coda" ending)

2) Aliens 1986 Theatrical followed by 1992 Special Edition (Which is seen as the definite cut over its theatrical cut)

3) Star Trek TOS 1966 & 2006 Remastered series. Nuff said.

4) Star Trek movies (TMP, TWOK director edition, TUDC laserdisc extended cut) etc etc.

5) The Lord Of The Rings trilogy (theatrical and Extended editions)

6) Babylon 5 The Gathering. Original 1993 version Vs 1998 Special Edition.

7) Close Encounters Of The Third Kind. Blu-Ray disc contains all 3 versions of the same film with all numerous cuts etc

8) The Abyss (at this point listing James Cameron movies confirms my points to no end!)

9) Red Dwarf. Which has an original broadcasted version Vs the newer CGI remastered picture quality versions.

10) Star Wars. Should i really go on at this point?


Think you'll find every major TV and film Sci-fi and fantasy had a regular and special edition cuts, either close soon after its original release or much later onwards a few short years or decades later. Points been made all the same though, which Taranis said earlier but much more beautifully.

BG would need to sustain its one season cult status by going further and reinventing/revitilising itself through putting out a "special edition/remastered" version today 30 plus years later. And god knows a Blu-Ray picture BG would be beautiful to gaze at let alone listen to with a 5.1 or 7.1 surround soundtrack!!!

KJ

some of these I did not know about ... must have a look for them
esp this one Babylon 5 The Gathering. Original 1993 version Vs 1998 Special Edition. B5 is great and I have the complete collection

BG would need to sustain its one season cult status by going further and reinventing/revitilising itself through putting out a "special edition/remastered" version today 30 plus years later. And god knows a Blu-Ray picture BG would be beautiful to gaze at let alone listen to with a 5.1 or 7.1 surround soundtrack!!!

I agree with you here on this .. I would not buy another DVD release unless the effects where properly address as was mentioned already.

It would need to be tastefully done with all due consideration to the original intent of the film makers as did foundation Imaging did for ST TMP which is the best example I can think off..... forget the Star Wars versions for now that is Lucas input on his creative project.. his vision and he in the past stated when the original films where done the technology was not available for his vision which is why he waited until it was available to do the prequels. whether we personally like them or not is another story. save for jar jar binks I did like them ...

BSG TOS should be given the same due consideration as these other films / shows given it place in the history of entertainment.

Robert Wise was personally involved with the remastering of ST TMP. there is no reason why the same count not be done for BSG.

but I would no more shove my ideas at any one but I feel the TOS BSG is stagnating compared to the aforementioned shows and films.

[Eric Paddon]

Originally Posted by KJ

Thats your perspective, not the reality though, its more or or less saying you've got an opinion and are entitled to it, but i've got the facts.

I believe there are facts to support my perspective too because this comes down to a subjective question on whether altering with a work is a good thing or not. I happen to believe it is not, and I cited a number of examples to note how this standard that is being called on for Galactica would never in a million years be applied elsewhere, and while you may not agree with that, it is a legitimate perspective rooted in a factual context.


*****And just cos you started or co-opted an idea for a thread secton doesn't in anyway whatsoever mean you *police* the Battlestar Galactica fanbase opinions on things*******

I never said I did. That is the attitude you assumed unto yourself yesterday with your out of line hit job on me in which you declared that this issue is to be discussed only among advocates on one side of it. There was nothing out of line in how I was doing the back and forth with Taranis and I had in fact chosen after his last comment to move on, only to come back to it long afterwards when I saw your little hit job from out of left field which was all too reminscent of what made 2005 an unpleasant year in Galactica discussion circles. And don't try to suggest I was including Taranis in that, those remarks were directed solely at your one post.

****And a "legitimate POV" regardless shouldn't be bullied upon anybody.***

And once again, I say, physician heal thyself. You chose to act like a bully toward me because I was having an ongoing conversation on the issue.

*****Your basically insulting Matador by deliberately arguing something you know outright your against, i.e. stirring up arguing rather aggressively without due cause.******

I haven't even addressed Matador once so that is another lie on your part. I simply chose to register my view that advocating redone FX for Galactica is harmful to the integrity of the work of the original, and as one whose primary field of expertise is historical preservation it carries with it the dangerous risk that the original works get lost forever in the process which is what's happening with the SW trilogy, plus that there are questionable artistic reasons behind the concept when the standard is not applied consistently.

****And come bet if you didn't post an opinion and they did, while disagreeing with them, the tone wouldn't feel so destructive. ***

You are the one who introduced a destructive tone into this thread, so I suggest you quit your little game of projecting your own behavior onto myself.

[Reaper]

The main problem with this discussion (I wouldn't call it an arguement) is that everyone is right. Both sides are 100% correct. How is this possible? Cause it's all opinion. none of us had anything to do with the original production (writing and putting the show together) so we can't say that the Released Show doesn't match our vision (Aliens Special Edition, The Abys Special Edition) Or what was done to the Star Trek movies.

I am split on the Star Wars Changes myself. I've been a DIE HARD Star Wars fan since I saw the previews as a 5 year old. It's been a DRIVING force in my imagination since then. And I have spent untold amounts of money on costumes so I can cling to a part of that legacy (through charity work in costume and official LFL events) I think Some of the additions to the Special Editionm and the DVD edition helped the story. I love the redone Space Battle of ANH. the Establishing shots of Mos Eisley and Bespin give you a better scale for both settings. Changing walls to windows in Empire it more in keeping with a City in the clouds. You'd want it open. I even like the insertion of the Jabba the Hutt Scene in ANH. It adds to Solo's mindset and shows he NEEDS that money. But when Lucas changed the story is where I don't like it. Greedo shooting first, changed dialog between Vader and the Emperor. this was not needed or wanted.

The worst thing Lucas then did here was say "this is Star Wars now, Deal with it, we won't release the Theatrical cuts anymore" If we do this, and IF we get UIniversal to back it, release it, anything like that, We have to do it ALONG SIDE the original Versions. Because Those are the editions that people fell in love with.

I'm with Monolith, The Space battles, the reused SFX shots, the Same battle, over and over again, at this point, takes away from the show for me. I want, and yes, I mean me, myself lol, unique battles every time those Vipers launch. using the cockpit scenes, and dialog EXACTLY as it was in the show. Enhance the color, restore the footage, but don't change it.

Insert the re-edited Return of Starbuck (minus the G1980 stuff) into the series officially. And I like DK's use of the DeSanto Viper here. It shows that time has passed.

Let the Raiders have more variety, it's been shown that in some SFX shots there is a Gold Raider in the formation. Show this and let the Gold Cylon Raider be derstroyed, appear again in other shots (this was supposed to be Cylon Squadron leaders as I understand it, where a Gold Cylon would be flying) Let Baltar's Raider be such a Raider. DK had Baltar flying in a special Raider in his edit. it'd be easier to color the Raider Gold as a Squadron Leader/Command Raider.

I'd support the insertion of SOME deleted material. But when we do this, having the Original DVDs continue to be available is more important for those who don't want changes. If we get Universal backing and release, I'd want a Box set release similar to the Alien Quintology. Having both versions in the same box and allow everyone to be happy!

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by Reaper

The main problem with this discussion (I wouldn't call it an arguement) is that everyone is right. Both sides are 100% correct. How is this possible? Cause it's all opinion. none of us had anything to do with the original production (writing and putting the show together) so we can't say that the Released Show doesn't match our vision (Aliens Special Edition, The Abys Special Edition) Or what was done to the Star Trek movies.

I am split on the Star Wars Changes myself. I've been a DIE HARD Star Wars fan since I saw the previews as a 5 year old. It's been a DRIVING force in my imagination since then. And I have spent untold amounts of money on costumes so I can cling to a part of that legacy (through charity work in costume and official LFL events) I think Some of the additions to the Special Editionm and the DVD edition helped the story. I love the redone Space Battle of ANH. the Establishing shots of Mos Eisley and Bespin give you a better scale for both settings. Changing walls to windows in Empire it more in keeping with a City in the clouds. You'd want it open. I even like the insertion of the Jabba the Hutt Scene in ANH. It adds to Solo's mindset and shows he NEEDS that money. But when Lucas changed the story is where I don't like it. Greedo shooting first, changed dialog between Vader and the Emperor. this was not needed or wanted.

The worst thing Lucas then did here was say "this is Star Wars now, Deal with it, we won't release the Theatrical cuts anymore" If we do this, and IF we get UIniversal to back it, release it, anything like that, We have to do it ALONG SIDE the original Versions. Because Those are the editions that people fell in love with.

I'm with Monolith, The Space battles, the reused SFX shots, the Same battle, over and over again, at this point, takes away from the show for me. I want, and yes, I mean me, myself lol, unique battles every time those Vipers launch. using the cockpit scenes, and dialog EXACTLY as it was in the show. Enhance the color, restore the footage, but don't change it.

Insert the re-edited Return of Starbuck (minus the G1980 stuff) into the series officially. And I like DK's use of the DeSanto Viper here. It shows that time has passed.

Let the Raiders have more variety, it's been shown that in some SFX shots there is a Gold Raider in the formation. Show this and let the Gold Cylon Raider be derstroyed, appear again in other shots (this was supposed to be Cylon Squadron leaders as I understand it, where a Gold Cylon would be flying) Let Baltar's Raider be such a Raider. DK had Baltar flying in a special Raider in his edit. it'd be easier to color the Raider Gold as a Squadron Leader/Command Raider.

I'd support the insertion of SOME deleted material. But when we do this, having the Original DVDs continue to be available is more important for those who don't want changes. If we get Universal backing and release, I'd want a Box set release similar to the Alien Quintology. Having both versions in the same box and allow everyone to be happy!

you have made some excellent point Reaper.. having both versions would be nice . I already have the original on DVD and I love to watch it from time to time.

General Reply:
I am not going to repeat all the points I made before to show where I agree ..

I respect all the views here from everyone . in agreement with me or not
it only my view point after all. Eric´s and Dawg´s views are as valid as mine and KJs and all the one for a remastering. again its not going to happen from a studio .. they don´t care as they have the new version to milk first..

and no matter what happens not everyone is going to be happy with it.
we can be banging our head against this from now to Xmas and still won´t agree if some one is generally in apposition to a remastering of the Show..

and I am certainly not going to be involved in one.

I think the thread should resume with the originators original desire (sounds great that bit)

[BST]

Gentlemen,

I've had to open the windows since it's getting a little warm in the room.

Please remember to keep the remarks focused on the topic and not the poster.



In honor of Mother's Day, I'm going to close the thread for the day since you will, no doubt, be attending to those more important in your lives. I'll re-open it tomorrow morning after awakening... (EDT)


Enjoy the day.



BST

[BST]

As promised, the thread is now re-opened.

Please focus on the issue and debate it to your heart's content.


BST

[Matador]

Hello all,

Just letting everyone know that i'm still working on my CG Galactica stuff to be added into a "remastered BSG concept".

I've had a few emails asking me to repost the link to my youtube site with what I've done so far.

Here it is.
https://www.youtube.com/danakinobi#p/a/u/1/cThC2FQh8SI

https://www.youtube.com/danakinobi#p/a/u/0/VjeqqRel_hI

I've been working with 3ds Max for all the modeling and animation. I'm working to make some cutscenes that I think would look cool in a remastered version.
I saw the link that has the CG modeled Galactica.

https://www.colonialfleets.com/forums...ad.php?t=17315

Very impressive. Detail is amazing.

I would like to get in contact with the creator or creators of that model to discuss methods used to detail the hull... Such as gun torrets, pipes, and all the awesome hull plating.
So if anyone knows... Please let me know.
Cheers,
Matador

[gmd3d]

well the modeller is maudib and he is using lightwave for his model.

as for the details no idea .. But I am sure he would be happy to pass on his ideas ..

[KJ]

Originally Posted by Reaper

The main problem with this discussion (I wouldn't call it an arguement) is that everyone is right. Both sides are 100% correct. How is this possible? Cause it's all opinion. none of us had anything to do with the original production (writing and putting the show together) so we can't say that the Released Show doesn't match our vision (Aliens Special Edition, The Abys Special Edition) Or what was done to the Star Trek movies.

I am split on the Star Wars Changes myself. I've been a DIE HARD Star Wars fan since I saw the previews as a 5 year old. It's been a DRIVING force in my imagination since then. And I have spent untold amounts of money on costumes so I can cling to a part of that legacy (through charity work in costume and official LFL events) I think Some of the additions to the Special Editionm and the DVD edition helped the story. I love the redone Space Battle of ANH. the Establishing shots of Mos Eisley and Bespin give you a better scale for both settings. Changing walls to windows in Empire it more in keeping with a City in the clouds. You'd want it open. I even like the insertion of the Jabba the Hutt Scene in ANH. It adds to Solo's mindset and shows he NEEDS that money. But when Lucas changed the story is where I don't like it. Greedo shooting first, changed dialog between Vader and the Emperor. this was not needed or wanted.

Hmmm? Very interesting dialogue and opinion there too Reaper. Yeah but i gotta say dude that, some opinions, are more valid than others especially when backed with "common sense" and having a vision, of keeping the old girl renewed in the public eye!

Don't want it to sound arrogant or anything. Just that i'm applying a smart rationale of what Taranis, myself and others have hit upon earlier in this debate. Keeping it as it was, only applying and placing emphasize on digital tweaks to clear the picture, having a 5.1 surround sound track and editing flubs fixed.

Thats hardly making massive changes to storylines is it?

Originally Posted by Reaper

The worst thing Lucas then did here was say "this is Star Wars now, Deal with it, we won't release the Theatrical cuts anymore" If we do this, and IF we get UIniversal to back it, release it, anything like that, We have to do it ALONG SIDE the original Versions. Because Those are the editions that people fell in love with.

I'm with Monolith, The Space battles, the reused SFX shots, the Same battle, over and over again, at this point, takes away from the show for me. I want, and yes, I mean me, myself lol, unique battles every time those Vipers launch. using the cockpit scenes, and dialog EXACTLY as it was in the show. Enhance the color, restore the footage, but don't change it.

Thats what were debating however, how to go about it while keeping it from becoming what Lucas did with SW and what Paramount could've done with Star Trek Remastered.

The Star Trek Remastered episodes aren't massively changed, if anything their problem lies in the fact, they a) they weren't worked on enough and digital flubs now exist b) fans have issue with the fact it wasn't worked on long enough to make it even better as many opportunities were lost c) its budget could've been much bigger considering Star Trek's global impact and the sheer money $$$ Parmount Pictures rakes in of off Star Trek's name as a franchise etc. Same goes with Star Wars and 20th Century Fox!

Battlestar Galactica at Universal can't claim the same thing.

Both Star Wars and Star Trek despite the digital changes made to their respective SE editions in recent years. Are enjoying and making serious amounts of money off of; newer, cleaner/crisp, surround sound mastered, re-broadcasted (ST), etc and thus enjoy a rebirth of interest cos their franchises are being kept alive by renewed interest over time and their classics cleaned and polished every now and then?

Still gonna brag about the classic BG series in 10 or 15 years time when the newer technology like 'Super HD', 3D or even early hologramatic technology hits the market and first and second generation DVD's of the late 20th century early 2000's become like the LP's, A-tracks and old VHS recorders of yesteryear?

Space 2099 currently taking advantage of the situation?! So why should their be the old 'procrastination' of keep a cult classic looking outdated and so old-ish when it can also easily enjoy the benefits of having a facelift substantially and keep up with its sci-fi peers if you understand the metaphors i'm going with here! Overfamiliarity with the 2003 DVD release might make you think it ends there, but i don't think so. Can't see why BG couldn't simply go the HD Blu-Ray, IPod/IPhone download or 'online website download' even route, once its been remastered.

I've frequently asked this in the past, so at least everybody knows i'm damn well absolutely genuine about my feelings on the situation. Its a legitimate request and i feel Matador, myself, DK, TwoBrainedCylon, Titon, Jjrakman etc have all been down this discussion so many times in the past. Because it'll be a worthwhile endeavour for the fanbase and Battlestar Galactica in general!

We want a Galactica theatrical movie, but when it seems the studio's jerking us around again, we lose that "tie-in" to revisit to the classic series getting a technological boost too!

Taranis and Matador are absolutely right though. Just like Space 2099, reckon any BG SE lies with the fans now. And any unified fanbase project would make sure it certainly wouldn't ever go off the rails with whackyness etc! Beyond the BG movie, beyond the previous CFF Ad efforts, and the Hatch BG:TSC and Singer/DeSanto BG TV revival. A BG:SE is the only thing worth going after in that order of things. Comic book adaptations and FanFiction fall behind anything media related and you know it, thats simple basic facts of the situation, and not opinions!

Think about it!

KJ

[Eric Paddon]

Originally Posted by KJ

Still gonna brag about the classic BG series in 10 or 15 years time? KJ

In a word, yes. For the same reason that fifteen years from now the 1933 King Kong will still be regarded better than the flash in the pan that was Jackson's.

That is my definition of "common sense." To paraphrase Adama in LL, it may not be others, but it is, as others have at least acknowledged an equally valid perspective relative to this issue.

[Reaper]

Some Opinions are never more valid then someone else's Opinions. You may get more people to agree with your opinion, but that does not make it more Valid, simply more acceptable.

You can back up your arguement and make your argument more valid, but Your opinion is simply that, your opinion. Based on your likes, dislikes, and values.

While you argue your side here, do not loose fact that not everyone will agree with you. And sometimes passion for a cause can put off people who do share your opinion, when you let that passion get away from you.

[KJ]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Some Opinions are never more valid then someone else's Opinions. You may get more people to agree with your opinion, but that does not make it more Valid, simply more acceptable

So you say, then again they'd be YOUR opinions in relation to the opposing aruging views put forth by somebody else (or albeit groups) and not the reality of it said discussion. Take a look at my country's government right now for example. Its 'Hung' in the literal sense of the word right now, and MP's are all in a twist as to who to back, but does it really matter when the Tories of this country are practically sitting in the driver's seat because of their opinions and politics got'em there in the first place? Doesn't matter if what they're saying is seen as opinion in the "commons" and goes around in an endless debate, their more acceptable way of thinking/opinions and political viewpoints i.e. opinions on how to "Govern" put'em there in the first place.

Some opinions ARE more valid, its a basic fact deny it all you want to. But it'll be harder to do so, in the face of proof or facts backing up a much stronger arguement however! quibbling simply cos you got another viewpoint which differs from somebody else's, doesn't make the situation disappear or change the undeniable facts.

Originally Posted by Reaper

While you argue your side here, do not loose fact that not everyone will agree with you. And sometimes passion for a cause can put off people who do share your opinion, when you let that passion get away from you.

Yes so agreed, and while i've been around this fanbase, i've seen time and effort being wasted on things that had absolutely no fruitful promises pay off. So i'm more than speaking from previous experience right there! And i didn't share whomever's passion when they lost me neither! I've said before there was no ego in this thing from me and others, go back and re-read this entire thread post by post if need be. What your saying doesn't apply to me nor those sharing my opinions, believe that!

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon

In a word, yes. For the same reason that fifteen years from now the 1933 King Kong will still be regarded better than the flash in the pan that was Jackson's.

Good then do so.

Cos if and when either Galactica Fanbase(s) (we aren't the only ones?) puts out SE projects of its own or there's an official SE Restoration of Battlestar Galactica from Universal. We'll all be hopefully enjoying a HD version with touchups that keep the old girl from being left behind quality-wise, and BG would benefit from the modern day digital advances in technology.


At the end of the day, myself and others can lead you to water like a horse (metaphorically speaking) but we can't make you drink?

But a 'horse' has to drink something? eventually doesn't it!

KJ

[KJ]

P.S. How exactly long do you think the old 'negatives' from the series will last? Thus effecting and compromising a "restoration" project endeavour of anykind (official or fanbase driven!).

Even if you don't wholly agree with an debate, you could at least say you'd wish for a another release that keeps the series from becoming unusable in the future far as formats are concerned.

KJ

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon

In a word, yes. For the same reason that fifteen years from now the 1933 King Kong will still be regarded better than the flash in the pan that was Jackson's.

That is my definition of "common sense." To paraphrase Adama in LL, it may not be others, but it is, as others have at least acknowledged an equally valid perspective relative to this issue.

I agree that the original King Kong will be still regarded better than Jackson .. Originals usually are. and the original BSG is still regard the same way over it recent remake (we won´t go there )

As many think that Sean Connery´s Bond is still the best over any other bonds that followed ... yet each younger generation will possibly argue for Roger Moore . Timothy Dalton etc etc

your always going to get that .


one of the points we have made is that ( We Feel ) at the current condition of the visual Effects (Space Craft etc) is not holding up well after 30 plus years and while the life action is solid and wonderful.

the visuals are letting it down ..... for example

one of the master shots of the Galactica you can see the support of the Galactica Model as its moving across the screen...

now this blows the whole impact of the effect and I am no longer looking at a mighty space ship in Space .... I am looking at a 79 inch plastic and wooden model in a studio some where in the Hollywood hills.

I have added a screen capture from my DVD set to illustrate..

that´s one if the shot that could stand a change and a remastering ....

Lucas saw the same thing in Star Wars Trilogy and changed it and cleaned it up for future sales and to ensure the quality was up to that future viewership.

BSG will remain a classic all right, and it will possibly be in the same group as The forbidden Planet ...... I would have it remain where it should be .. as in the same classic group as Star Wars and Star Trek ....

there are many fan forums about the above but I have not seen many for FP

if its believed that keeping BSG as it is will attracted new fans as Star Wars Star Trek do...... its a short sighted view that will ultimately push BSG into the Group as the original King Kong and Forbidden Planet George Pals films.

people that sentimentally watch these old sci-fi keep them around and they should not be touched as they don´t need them .. its not necessary as they are perfect as they are

relevant to the effects of the time.

BSG is not effects wise holding up well .. its too grainy, lots of noise on the screen.

that´s the honest truth..... and if were all honest when we view it we should see that to keep it fresh and insure its future .. it needs to be remastered cleaned up and presented afresh ...

Effect can be shot the same angles and intent . I don´t care but I will never buy another DVD SET with the effects as they are .. if I lost my valued BSG set I would still not go out and by the set again because of that disappointment that I feel when I see how poorly they are holding up when I bought it a few years ago. the stories are still as wonderful as when I first saw it.

Lucas saw it and corrected it .. insuring Star Wars trilogy a place for a long time to come .......

Battlestar Galactica deserves no less a treatment IMO

.. again its only my view ... I respect all here and their views..

thanks for reading

[Reaper]

ok, Let's get VERY specific KJ, please present to me the Facts that make Eric's Opinion that the Original broadcast Shows are not good enough. Please prove his opinion wrong.

And I do ask you to be Very specific in your answer. only supply "proof and Facts" that relate to his opinion being wrong please.

Edit - And remember, this is coming from someone who supports creating a SE of the Series.

Something else to note here, Not everyone views the SE of Star Wars as a good thing, I have heard a growing army of voices that feel Lucas Killed Star Wars by making ANY changes to the Theatrical "Iconic" cuts.

[Eric Paddon]

Originally Posted by KJ

Some opinions ARE more valid, its a basic fact deny it all you want to.

Not in this case. Even I have been the first to concede the point that this argument revolves *entirely* around the issues of the subjective. And I come into this with a consistent view that *no* alterations to a film or TV show should be made that rely on technology that was *not* present at the time the film was made. This is not the same thing as going back and re-editing films using only footage shot at the time or restoring an original roadshow cut of a movie that was then cut down for general release. In the case of those restorations, the end product remains a product of its own time which contextually, from an artistic *and* historic standpoint, I believe all films should always be, with no exceptions.

I do not regard the FX to be a component of an end-product in film that is somehow more important than any other element that is necessary for the creation of a great film. To me, they must be accepted for what they are and when they were made just as I must accept the fact that a film from the 1970s can't have Humphrey Bogart in it (to cite one off the wall example of what this boils down to). The day films and TV series cease to be recognized as products of their own time is the day we compromise much of the work's overall artistic integrity.

Let's cite another example that goes beyond the realm of FX but proves the same point IMO. If the FX of 1978 are "dated" and thus make it impossible to enjoy the end product today and thus require replacement of said FX, then who is stop someone else from then saying that because big orchestral film scores are out of favor with today's young audiences (and it's a sad fact that the days of the big epic orchestral scores with their signature themes are now gone forever) we should replace the music scores of Galactica and Star Wars etc. with synthesized scores that are more "with it"? And I wouldn't dismiss that because unfortunately there already is precedence for this kind of tampering in a "restoration" when the 1965 western "Major Dundee" was given a totally new score for its recent restoration. If you open up a can of worms in the FX department and sanction it for all time, then you in the end are going to make it possible for further kinds of tinkering
in other areas, and yes, I fully expect that to include colorization if someone really thinks they've come up with a state of the art process. And that isn't something I'm about to give approval to either.

And I also have still not heard an answer that to me coherently addresses the question of *why* does this obession with redoing FX only apply to the end products that in the 1960s and 1970s were absolutely state of the art compared to its contemporaries? I just can not see the logic in saying that work from the 60s and 70s needs to be freshened up but the same old cheap models from "Forbidden Planet" can stay as is, or that "Star Trek" must be altered to be "updated" but you're still going to have a load of anachronistic dialogue about World War III in the 1990s (not to mention Chekov's reference to Leningrad, which thankfully ceased to exist in 1991) that will always be there to remind people of when this was first made. And that ends up giving you an artistic clash of styles on a giant scale that I don't find aesthetically pleasing at all on any level.

Galactica's virtues in what it did at the time should be celebrated, and it should be viewed as a classic leap forward for how FX could be done on television in the same way we view other works of the past as great trailblazers and pioneers for improvements in the future on *other* projects. Merely because you *can* do things better today does not mean that artistically it works to retroactively slap all that back on the works of the past just because one is more popular in some eyes than others and thus can be treated differently. Some people might have their own standard and think otherwise, and its not my place to say that they somehow have a lesser appreciation for what constitutes good and not good aesthetic results. All I can say is that I have my standard, and it stems from a consistent view I take regarding *all* films and TV shows. You can disagree, but you can't call the position inconsistent, nor is it valid to suggest that its a call to enjoy something in low quality. I want to see the *original* work presented in the best quality restored negative etc. today so that the viewing experience can always be like it was for those who first experienced it and not through the experience of beat-up syndicated prints with several minutes missing etc.

[KJ]

Edit--

*sigh* Whatever Eric Paddon, the debate is about a 'Remastered' Battlestar Galactica - Go READ "THE THREAD TITLE". This isn't one of your threads where you go off and rant at somebody with any supposed intellectual insights. While the debate is raising awareness of restoring Galatica digitally somewhat its mixing in more elements than just FX and CGI effects, also formats and software that it might be played on. You don't seem to grasp that end of the arguement at all, and see it as another opportunity to whine on as per usual. and if your going to use example use current one, using Forbidden Planet or King Kong because of their age is kinda desperate.

Figure that needs saying, even if you'll have a mod jump in on your behalf. I'm brave enough to be brutally honest.

Anyways... in responce to Reaper who asked...

No Reaper, because if you have been reading this thread entirely they it shouldn't even be a question raised, as if need to bring up proof when the discussion have brought up more than enough facts and points of debate to have this sort of discussion in the first place. Why should i start dancing to anybody's tune simpl cos your not coming up with anything that puts a 'dent' in my or matador's or Taranis arguements.

And please, don't feel that because i'm not going there you made some sort of point against me, cos you haven't.

I fail to see what possible points you've made for for own arguements that Galactica ought remain on a double-sided DVD from 2003 with no restoration effort being made, in light of today's jump to HD-DVD Blu-Ray or IPod/IPhone downloadables etc etc to no end.

Originally Posted by Reaper

And I do ask you to be Very specific in your answer. only supply "proof and Facts" that relate to his opinion being wrong please

Nope not seeing why, each side should descent there with that. If you weren't so one-sided you'd have launched the same questions at him, he isn't in the right cos he have views similar to yours neither. Besides its already proven you side likes DK's edits, what makes his edit do likable for you, if you don't want a bloody thing altered or changed whatsoever regarding the classic series?

If your such a purist, then even DK's work as a fanedit would automatically be seen as a 'no-no' cos its been altered from the original.

And i'll say it again for those that aren't keeping track of whats being put down in this discussion. I'D WANT THE ORIGINAL SERIES ON THE BLU-RAY UNTOUCHED AS WELL. NEXT TO A BRAND NEW REMASTERED BG SERIES ALA STAR TREK REMASTERED ON BLU-RAY!



Going beyond the lackluster attitude of always saying it'll be switched around too much and altered etc. Why don't you back your views with some evidence if your feeling you'd need to take this somewhere's with exhibit A' and B' in a courtroom or something?

If its such a request you're looking for however. Then i'll ask Taranis or Titon or TWB to put up comparison pics to point our the comparison between what a respectful restoration could be like and outline the project if it were to be undertaken, compared to the original shots from the 78 series original that while.

What do you say Taranis? Could you prepare some jpegs of photoshopped comparisons pics of the original with errors and shots fixed but aren't massively altering anything too much.

Next to an outlined list we could possibly put together to outline every *niggle* so that everything is layed out for those still asking themselves what we're asking for this thing!

Also whats views do you hold now, seeing how far this has come,...Matador?

KJ

[KJ]

Y'know, i'm gonna go off and get back to making that list, and perhaps talk to like-minded others etc. And with any further possible interest, revisit this debate with something i reckon will grab people's attention better.

For now argue this to your hearts content. Just don't want to see it ruined by off-topic examples set by others!

Peace!

KJ

[Reaper]

So, when asked flat out, you decline to State only Facts and proof. I asked for no arguement, I didn't ask for a recap of your opinion. I asked for the simple facts.

I have indeed followed this thread, and frankly, the reason I asked for these "facts" is simply cause you provided no facts. You have amply provided your opinion, and backed that up with other opinions that happened to support you. But there hasn't been a single FACT presented in this arguement. You are simply relying on being in the majority. that's fine.

But where you fail, is in the RESPECT aspect of any arguement.

It's a telling FACT that you are on shakey ground if you can't convince someone who SHARES your opinion, why he should support you.

Why haven't I asked these same questions to Eric? the answer is simple. While he has argued against you, he has respected your side, and presented his agruement against. He's answered you point for point and made a compelling arguement to the contrary of your position. He has claimed no facts, and not belittled your opinion.

That's the last I'll comment on any of that, I know my point will be lost on a few here, I just hope some do understand what I've said.

Now, that aside, The purpose of this thread is to discuss Remastering the Series. Whether that remasting simply involves restoring the quality of the original prints, a little more editing to remove model stands, but no changes to the content or effects, or replacing said effects with modern effect, this is what we should talk about, and concentrate on. If you don't think any of this should be done, Your opinion is valid, but not on topic (in my opinion of course) Since it is unlikely that Universal will get behind any of this at any point int he near future, this is a fan based effort. No more official then DK's Fan Edits. The goal is just broader. Taking what DK has done and moving it further along.

I do think we need to close this thread, move past what's been argued and start a new topic. The new one should be on topic and not include the debate on whether we should or shouldn't do it. but if we can, and how much can we do.

For better or worse, there is my full opinion. I present it as mine, and mine alone. And I stand behind it.

[Eric Paddon]

Originally Posted by KJ

*sigh* Whatever Eric Paddon, the debate is about a 'Remastered' Battlestar Galactica - Go READ "THE THREAD TITLE". This isn't one of your threads where you go off and rant at somebody with any supposed intellectual insights.

Figure that needs saying, even if you'll have a mod jump in on your behalf. I'm brave enough to be brutally honest.

No, it means you're incapable of showing basic civility even AFTER you were told by the Moderators to do so. What a pity that you'd rather presume some arrogant right to indulge in yet another uncalled for personal attack on me just because I register a perspective different from your own. I at least, chose to treat the discussion as a fair-minded exchange in which I don't begrudge the other perspective, so long as there is an understanding of just how serious an issue this whole question raises which for many people like myself is not a trivial matter. It evidently says something for the insecurity of your own position that you can't summon a response in the spirit of what message board discussion is supposed to be about and instead have to take the low-road. And what's laughable is how you then defend your low-road bullying as an exercise in "honesty" that somehow "needed to be said" when the real definition of it is intellectual cowardice of the first order. And that is something that *really* needs to be said because if you want to know who ruined this thread with off-topic personal attacks and smears, all you need to do is look in a mirror. If Taranis and Reaper can make the case for their side without attacks, it surely should be within your capacity to do the same.

[BST]

I really do dislike closing a thread, simply because a person cannot check his or her tongue, at the door. I trust the meaning of that remark is clear to all.

****************

Now, I have several questions.

Except for updating the master copy of the Galactica shows on a medium more durable than currently being used, why is it necessary to "update" the originals with new footage?

When "updating" the original scene with what you "think it should look like" or "want it to look like", isn't that the same as "re-imagining" that particular scene?

We all know how others who "re-imagined" things named Galactica were vilified so, will we be doing that to ourselves as well?


Before I go any further, I do want to clarify something -- I am not criticizing anyone for efforts made to broaden the interest of Galactica or to pose "what if" scenarios to favorite scenes or episodes. In fact, I congratulate those, like Dave Kerin, who have the talent and imagination to visually entertain us with different twists on old scenes. Stuff like that is what keeps me interested and coming back.



But, I feel that it is simply an indication of what can be done, not necessarily what should be done.