According to IMDB, Edward James Olmos, who plays Adama in the new Battlestar Galactica miniseries, said:

That's not a good sign, is it? :-?

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2009 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

Wow. How'd the producers of the new series let him get away with saying that in public?

Well when one of the actors (starbuck) gets their character reference from Terminator 2, you know they are following the origonal show very closely. :-)

info

__________________
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world."
G'Topia

Some more articles: http://www.scifi.com/mbb/browse.php?tid=1
This one seems particularly detailed on what happened at the press conference.

Olmos had made a vaguely similar statement before, although I also have trouble understanding how he allowed himself to be so blunt. Maybe he wants out of the show.

The Sci-Fi Channel’s remake had been mentioned before on this forum, here and here.

__________________
"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it." -George Bernard Shaw

Wow, I give Olmos 10 points for honesty. Good for him. ALthough if his evaluation is accurate I don't see how this new version could be any worse than the original series........

Have you read the script reviews for the new series?

__________________
"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it." -George Bernard Shaw

You know what this means though, don't you? Now we have to watch it...just to see if it's really as bad as he says it is.

Perhaps we're seeing a cunning bit of reverse-psychology advertising here?

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

The thought did cross my mind. I guess that's always a possibility.
But, judging from Bonnie Hammer and Ron Moore's previous interactions with the fans, they aren't that subtle.

__________________
"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it." -George Bernard Shaw

Riiiiight. And how often have the suits that run Hollywood shown anything resembling the level of intelligence needed to pull that off? :roll:

On the linked article in the thread at cylon.org there is a claim that the Star Wars producers sued the BG guys for plagiarism. Whaaat? They were both set in space and on alien planets and the heroes flew around in spaceships and shot at bad guys, without benefit of Star Trek transporter beams. Other than that, where's the resemblance? Star Wars Ep IV in a nutshell has been described as: "This is a really bad movie ... but it's a really GOOD movie!" Of BG, the critics despised it--not least because its openly pro-military-readiness tone grated on the Establishment--and audiences loved it--same reason, plus all the cool spaceships and wisecracking pilots.

The critics were happy when BG packed it in due to high costs that advertising couldn't cover, but then we got the A-Team, our motto: "3,000 Rounds Expended Per Show Without Hitting Anything." Be careful what you wish for.

That is pretty good intel analysis, Tuckerfan. The fact that SciFiChan knowitalls decided to hijack a beloved show and populate it with their own sociopolitical vision, and think nobody would notice or object, is strongly symptomatic that these doofuses aren't pulling some massive scam; they just don't have a clue. On the extremely remote chance that they do, let's exercise REVERSE reverse psychology and stay away in droves. It's like talking to the media when they don't like your point of view, you say exactly the opposite of what you mean so that when they misquote you, it'll be accurate in the end.

Bravo EJO! =D> I have NEVER heard of such admirable truth in advertising from Hollywood. Even after reading the horrible script reviews, I was still curious. I think I am now cured. I might even watch some Miami Vice reruns in gratitude.

__________________
"You're only young once, but you can always be immature." -- Dave Barry

On the linked article in the thread at cylon.org there is a claim that the Star Wars producers sued the BG guys for plagiarism. Whaaat?

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the basis of the lawsuit was that someone who had worked at Lucasfilm on the SW movies left to go work on Battlestar Galactica (I think his name was Dykstra?) -- and took some concepts or designs with him that LFL believed were legally theirs and couldn't be used on a non-SW project. Or something like that. Either LFL lost or the suit was thrown out.



Anyway, back on topic, I'll also lend a hand to EJO. =D> =D> =D> If for nothing other than making the folks at Sci-Fi Channel sweat a little.

They lost the suit.

George Lucas/ Lucasfilm were very defensive back then. They saw themselves as owners of any concepts that even vaguely resembled Star Wars. For instance, Lucas made Glen Larson promise that he wouldn't show the fighters firing 'lasers'. But Larson broke his promise...

[Edit: 'Lucasfilm', not 'ILM'.]

__________________
"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it." -George Bernard Shaw

Well, a quick check at imdb shows that the mighty John Dykstra did indeed do visual effects supervision for both SW and BG, so you might be right there. He is a bit good at that sort of thing...

Let's try watching the miniseries before we judge it, and spare me any "I read a script review online" at Ain't It Cool News stuff. :roll: If it turns out it blows, fine.

The thing I love is the people complaining about the changes made relative to the original series, as if BG was some sort of classic work that must have its precious concepts preserved. Battlestar Galactica was a crapfest, folks. Plain and simple. I'd like to see someone take the basic idea and completely rework it. In fact, I'd make changes just to **** off fans of the original because anyone who can be a rabid fan of that pile deserves to be ****ed off.

And call me nuts for actually reading what Olmos said, but it appears he was talking to the hardcore fans of the original series, and not people in general. This has the "something small blown way out of proportion" stentch from 50 paces. His words distill down to "the new miniseries is different from the old series, so fans of the old series might not like it, and probably should not watch."

A lot of it seems to be "I hate SciFi Channel because (they cancelled Farscape/they air John Edwards/Bonnie Hammer ran over my dog, whatever) and therefore I will hate the new BG miniseries. Furthermore, I will not even watch the new BG sereis, and I will still hate it."

It's a very sad attitude to see from SF fans. I posted a similar "wait until you see it" comment on another board, and three people accused me of being a *PAID* shill of the SciFi Channel. Wheee!

Lesson to be learned from all this: fanboys suck.

I agree with you on that idea of waiting to see it first usually TheGalaxyTrio. But with Sci-Fi's track record and the previews being show my hopes are not very high at all. I have not seen the origonal show at all. I only saw a few episodes of the 80's version.

This new one seems to be more "how many times can we show clevage and explosions" then any real story plot. Heck the fact that one of the Actors took her acting style for the role of starbuck from T2 is a good example.

The fact that SciFiChan knowitalls decided to hijack a beloved show...

See, I just don't get this. Beloved why? I was a kid when I saw BG in its original run, and I could tell then what a poorly done show it was.

I've actually thought for many years that someone should take the basic BG premise and completely rework it, maybe make it a little more than "fleeing the Cylon tyranny". How about "standing up to the Cylon tyranny despite long odds"? More of an empire versus empire story with the Cylons being hugely more powerful than humanity as the series began, but with humans slowly and steadily gaining the upper hand as time went on. Something a little more heroic than constantly running away.

Maybe. I have no high expectations for it. I was a HUGE Farscape fan (I just thought it was wildly inventive and darkly fun through its entire run), and have no love for SFC. Fortunately, Showtime's "Dead Like Me" now looks like it might fill the dark-inventive-fun gap in my schedule.

But, I'm willing to give it a chance.

I'll tell ya, though... a rousing skiffy adventure with 'splosions and clevage could still be better than the original BG series with its endlessly recycled FX and terminal goofiness.

Maybe they should have done an anime version. Actually, "Starbuck" sounds like the name of an anime female in a battle bikini anyway. Shinchiro Watanabe could have done the idea some justice.

In the end, this what's really important: When does Season 3 of "The Shield" start?

Why?
Do you “wait to see” everything on TV or the cinema?
I don’t. I read reviews to make up my mind whether I’m going to waste good money on it or not. Sometimes I agree with the reviews, and sometimes I don’t. But they still give me some information on what to expect.
There have actually been many films that I haven’t bothered to watch lately because of what I read about them.

BTW, Ain't It Cool News actually did a praising review of Moore’s script. Then again, they had a praising review of The Phantom Menace, too.

Please speak for yourself.
People complained about Lucas’ special edition of Star Wars, and people complained when there were rumours that Spielberg was going to PC-ize ET. I don’t see why it should be any different with Galactica.
Viewers have opinions; when they like something, they don’t want it to be spoiled. Is it really that hard to accept this little fact of life?

That is your opinion, and you are certainly entitled to it. But it isn’t the only one in the world. Otherwise, the Sci-Fi Channel wouldn’t be trying to remake it.

A lot of what?

It’s a “sad attitude” to have an opinion?!

Please don’t judge Galactica fans from a sample of three. There are a few more around.

Those sound like good ideas. What’s your point here, exactly?

Maybe you should tell that to Herman Melville.

__________________
"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it." -George Bernard Shaw

I can appreciate your feelings. My brother feels the same way, that they're taking the old concept and improving on it.

Well, maybe, but I disagree, however, on some of the premises presented.

• If you want to take the concept and improve it fine - but could you at least change the names of the characters and the show? Make other adjustments?
  
  Females playing "masculine" roles just does not work. (Terminator 3 or Cutthroat Island anyone?) Tough females are fine so long as they are still feminine (i.e. Ripley in Alien(s) or Ivonava in Babylon 5). But a female taking on the role of Starbuck? Decking a superior officer? :roll:
  
  A male and a female in a buddy-buddy role doesn't always work out right.

There's really better ways of making females as main characters than what I saw presented. [-(

And sure, the original Battlestar Galactica was a late '70's series with TV values of the era, which gave it more of a "campiness" by today's standards. And sure I was a kid back then. And sure I am a female. But I actually liked the dynamic of the characters. I hate seeing that so mutilated.

Give me a completely different show based on the concept, maybe I wouldn't complain so much (apart from - oh, why do female characters these days have to be synonomous with sex, as other posters have pointed out?).

Anyway, that's my rant.

__________________
"As I lay beneath the Southern Cross, the stars tell more than I could" . . . David Meece

Uhhh, well, it's hard to do this when the Cylons have annihilated all twelve homeworlds and all other battlestars (well, there does turn out to be one other, but with Lloyd Bridges commanding it--you half expect him to say "wow, picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue"), and the Cylons just plain outnumber the surviving Colonials many times over. Like Joe Stalin supposedly said, "quantity has a quality all its own" and he oughta know. The Rag-Tag Fleet has no supplies, spares, overhaul facilities, new spacecraft, fuel, or anything else other than what they carry or happen to find. Valiant warriors win battles only when they have the tools and numbers to do so. Othewise, they have to avoid confrontation when possible. Following the "BANZAI!!!!" strategy will result not with humans gaining advantage, but with them getting wiped out in short order--look at what the Japanese Army did when their islands got invaded.

Okay, so BG isn't high literature, but millions of people have very fond memories of it. There's adjusting some details, and then there's cutting the heart out of the show. What SciFi is doing is just like, say, having the Little Engine That Could chant "I don't think I can, I don't think I can" or Horton giving up on the egg and admitting "An elephant's faithful, about 15 percent."

I agree with you that EJO wasn't warning off the whole world, just the preexisting fan base, if for no other reason than he was catching an unbearable amount of felgerkarb for something that really wasn't his fault.

__________________
"You're only young once, but you can always be immature." -- Dave Barry

What part of "completely rework" did you miss? I was talking about a reworked version that was more, as I said, "empire versus empire".

I honestly don't even bother than much with reviews anymore. I watch Ebert & Roper simply to see some scenes and because I find their reviews to be entertaining in and of themselves. Too many times I watch something that was lauded and found it to be not worth the the time I wasted on it, or avoided something that was lambasted, and I then I really like it when I happen to catch it years later on TV.

I still want my $5 back from Ebert for watching "Center Of The World" based on his reccommendation. :x I'll never learn...

I have other ways of determining a crude probability if I may enjoy something, but you can never really know until you see it. I don't like many cop shows, but I watched The Shield when it premiered, and it's now in my top ten favorite TV shows.

That's because Harry sold out.

Uh, I did. All I said was "If it turns out it blows, fine." How is that not speaking for myself. It's not speaking for anyone, actually.

Those people were silly too, but it's also a completely different situation on two levels.

1. It was modifications of the originals. People were concerned, I guess, that the original edits would no longer be available.
2. It was modifications done by the original creators. It's their party and they can cry if they want to.

Nobody is altering the original BG episodes. Personally, I'd like to give them the "Sealab 2021" treatment and re-edit them into something entertaining, but that's just me.

Never said it wasn't. But BG blew white hot chunks of suckiness.

Or maybe they thought it blew, and that's why they have reworked it as extensively as the seem to.

The complaining.

No, it's a sad attitude that SF fans, who also tend to favor science and the scientifc method, would judge something sight unseen.

It was just an anecdote.

Discussion on a message board devoted to discussing things?

I'll have to get John Edward to help me on that one.

down boy! down! Oh, bad! bad!

-Oh, sorry. I was feeding my daggit some Kibbles&Bytes and he left a pile of resistors all over the floor.

Where was I?

I mentioned on another thread that I stopped watching that stupid show the episode the fleet ran out of fuel and coasted to a stop.

Actually, it was probably because I kept waiting for Adama to call for Hoss and Little Joe and he never did.

I finally settled on watching Buck Rogers because the show's tongue was so firmly in cheek. Right through the cheek in some cases.

Actually, my favorite TV/SF fantasy never came true. I kept hoping the Invader's stiff finger would go from the pinky to the second.

I hate to bring this up but if Starbuck is being played by a woman shouldn't she be called Stardoe?

But seriously folks, I saw BG when it was in theatres when I was a wee lad and I thought it was the coolest thing since SW. Now a few years back I went out and bought the original movie on video. I sat down to watch it and....

IT FELT LIKE Glen A Larson WAS TRYING TO JAM FELGERCARB INTO MY BRAIN THROUGH MY EYESOCKETS ....aaaaaaaaa...the pain.....aaaaaa . I could not believe how badly this series has aged. I've even tried to watch some of the eps on Space up here in Canada and they still suck worse than a galactic black hole. The recycled "special" effects and the wooden characterisation ruin what is a pretty unique and original premise for a space opera. I honestly can't see how SFC could make it any worse (brrrr...just imagine if they do ). And pleez don't flame me since, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, ....this is just one man's opinion .

__________________
Always remember wherever you go, there you are (but only if you are observed).

BG is bilge, so how can a remake be worse, It's up alongside Buck Rogers in 25th C, V, Babylon 5, ST Voyager, DS9, Farscape, Andromeda, Roswell, Space Precinct and Total Recall (tv series).

US TV shows used to be real cool as well, what happened after 1980?

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Computer graphics.

I must take exception to the use of the word bilge in reference to one of my favorite shows, DS9. :-? I love it and there is nothing you can do about it. =;

__________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." Carl Sagan

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t read reviews of a film or TV show to see if the author of the review liked it, LOL! I’m not that naïve.

I already know that there are enough people in this world for all opinions to exist, and I’m quite accustomed to not agreeing with critics.

When I read a review, I generally don’t care whether the author liked what he saw/read or not. Instead, I pay attention to why he liked or disliked it. Would his reasons have made me feel the same, or not? Is the author’s bias toward or away from my own? – Because all critics have a bias, of course.

You can learn a lot from reviews that way.

I don’t quite agree. It all depends on how much you know, and how reliable your sources are.

I agree that it was a different situation, but those were just examples. Essentially, my point is that I don’t see what’s the problem with people having an opinion about a production before it premieres, and stating it.

Except that Bonnie Hammer and Ron Moore have been trying all along to sell this thing as something that ‘will appeal to old fans and new viewers alike’.
Apparently, Olmos disagrees.

People judge things sight unseen all the time in their lives. When I go to a theater and look at the films on display, there are many that I can tell right away I’m not going pay to watch, because they’re not the kind of film that interests me.
We’re not discussing science or a trial here – it’s just a TV show.

I guess that would be appropriate...

__________________
"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it." -George Bernard Shaw

There is one particular movie reviewer in the Detroit Free Press that seems to trash all of the movies I like. How does one get that job? And can I have it? 8)

__________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." Carl Sagan

There was a satire magazine called "Cracked" (similar to Mad) that did a good parody called Cattlecar Galaxica. One of the great spoofs was a play on the fake time and distance units that BG used. A "centon" became a "frisbee" and so on.

There's a panel where Amada called for Hoss and Little Joe to saddle up and ride. A flunky says, "That's the wrong show, sir." "Oh," says Adama, who then called for Starbuck and Apollo to saddle up and ride.

As campy as Buck Rogers was, it can never be forgiven for Twiki. Crime against humanity, that little robot was.

The Cylons at least *looked* cool, even if their artificial intelligence cores were programmed by a thousand space monkeys banging on keyboards with their butts.