For those "discussing" alternate universes that would
leave the original intact, you need to research your
facts. Also there are some Larson supporters stating
that since Ron Moore's script isn't a remake they
don't have a problem with it. Well, per Ron Moore the
Sci-fi Production of BSG is a REMAKE . Therefore
Moore' BSG is not an alternate universe. Moore's BSG
is meant to re-write the original, plain and simple.
Ron has stated that he wants to go back to the
beginning and tell the story from the start. That
doesn't mean he wants to create an alternative new
universe so Larson can have his own unharmed, it means
he wants to over write Larson's creation. Since it's a
remake Larson supporters should stand by what they've
stated and start protesting Ron's non-canon remake
because whether the mini is a success or not, it will
over write Larson and there won't be any chance for
any coninuation movie after that.
Everyone needs to realize that the alternate universe
"discussion" is as invalid as bsgbountyhunter's
"sidestory" disscusion and in my opinion implemented
for the same reasons. If you go ahead and waste your
time discussing or believing in an alternate universe,
then you're only helping Moore, CaptJames and his ilk.
That's how Moore's crew likes to play, they "imagine
and "pretend" with you all they want in order to
neutralize and betray you.
They have already did this to the rest of Galactica fandom during their so called joint letter writing campaign to preserve the original timeline.
Even though virtually every Larson supporter would rather have Moore's vision and Larson's vision on separate timelines, the heart of the matter is they already lied and betrayed three different camps ( Singer/DeSanto supporters, Hatch supporters and the legit remake supporters) within the Galactica fandom.
Who's to say that the Larson supporters won't be their next victims on the list?
I hope that Larson fans read the Q & A with Ron Moore at bsg.com to have a better understanding of what this remake represents.
https://www.battlestargalactica.com/d...ept2002qa.html
Ron: It's precisely because I was a fan of the old
show that I want to do a remake. I'd like to go back
to the beginning and tell the story from the start
because I think it's the best way to make a successful
series and the way that opens up the most creative
avenues to explore.
Q: What advantages does the reimagining have over a
continuation?
Ron: "...my pitch was to remake the series. Did I
think about doing a continuation? Sure, it was an
obvious (and creatively valid) idea, but in all
honesty it didn't interest me as a writer as much as
the possibilities inherent in going back to the
beginning and retelling the story from a fresh
perspective."
Q: Will this be more of a "remake" than a
"re-imagining"? Will it easilly fit into the existing
Galactica universe? Will fans be able to easilly
accept the new version as an extension, if not
continuation, of the original?
Ron: I'm not sure of the semantic difference you're
trying to make. It will follow the same basic plot as
the original with most of the original characters,
themes and settings.
Q: ...WHY is this production being called a
reimagining?
Ron: Personally, I call it a remake.
BTW Chris Larson says that the remake sucks
For the Larson Supporters
