January 13, 2005
VINTAGE CHEESE:
New `Galactica' gets deeper, darker than '70s series (Charlie McCollum, 1/10/05, San Jose Mercury News)
When Sci Fi first announced it was making a revisionist version of Battlestar Galactica, the cheesy 1970s space opera, it caused a huge uproar among fans of the original who seemed to have forgotten just how bad the show was. Among the complaints: None of the original cast had been invited back and Starbuck, one of the main characters, was being changed from a man to a woman.But when the new ``Galactica'' aired as a miniseries last year, it not only got good reviews (even from older fans) but also set viewership records for Sci Fi. So, inevitably, it's now back as a weekly series -- and quite a good one at that. It debuts this Friday at 9 p.m. with two episodes before assuming its regular 10 p.m. Friday time slot on Jan. 21.
As re-imagined by Ronald Moore -- a sci-fi veteran with credits that date back to ``Star Trek: The Next Generation'' -- the series is far darker, a good deal scarier and a whole lot sexier than the original. A sense of fatalism permeates all the initial episodes as the exhausted crew of the spaceship Galactica attempts to fend off the seemingly endless attacks of the Cylons, intergalactic bad guys.
The engrossing series is loaded with surprisingly strong stuff, including provocative takes on terrorism and the politics of genocide. The special effects are unexpectedly good. And the acting -- from the likes of Edward James Olmos as Commander Adama, Mary McDonnell as President Roslin and Katee Sackhoff as Starbuck -- is light-years better than in the original.
Sexier than Lorne Greene?
MORE:
Sci Fi reverts to original space mission and launches weekly 'Battlestar' series (Suzanne C. Ryan, January 13, 2005, Boston Globe)
For the past 10 years, Richard Hatch has been on a mission to return the classic space drama ''Battlestar Galactica" to the small screen.The actor, who starred in the original 1978 series about a group of space colonists desperately searching for earth as they are pursued by evil robots, has written seven books advancing the story line. (His latest, ''Redemption," will be published in April.)
He produced a four-minute film trailer illustrating his ideas for a spinoff. And he's made the rounds at about 30 sci-fi conventions, signing autographs and appearing on panels, all in the hopes of resurrecting those pesky red-eyed villains, the Cylons.
Tomorrow night, Hatch's dream becomes a reality. A retooled version of ''Battlestar Galactica" will return to television as a weekly Friday-night series on the Sci Fi Channel at 10.
The premiere follows a successful ''Battlestar" miniseries, which aired on the channel in December 2003 despite objections from fans who disliked some of the new twists, as in the dreaded Cylons now looking humanoid and mingling undetected among people.
Much to his delight, Hatch, 58, will guest star in two episodes this season, although he'll portray a terrorist -- not the daring fighter pilot Apollo, his former character.
58? Posted by Orrin Judd at January 13, 2005 7:45 AM
Okay, I saw the new pilot a little while back and was very dissapointed. Contrary to the article, most of the fans of the old series HATE the new series with a passion.
Why? Well personally, there's the pointless sex, the sexism (Despite having some strong female characters, a lot of the characterization is basically misogonist), the apparent contempt for anyone in the military and the general moral relativism.
The heroes of the new Galactica are not anywhere near close to convinced that they should even survive, that their civilization has any merit whatsoever. "Ask why they hate us" is the commonly accepted premise of the humans' reactions to the Cylon menace.
In short, this is a completely blue-state sci-fi show. Whereas Star Trek is leftist-utopian, BG-New is Leftist-distopian.
I recently managed to pick up a few of the classic episodes (VHS-being blown out at Wal-Mart at $2 each)and yes, some of them are bad. Very bad. I'd watch any of them over classic Trek though, and some of them are excellent (Baltar's Escape for example). However does anyone doubt that today's SCi-fi TV series will look equally poor in twenty years time?
As for the other fans who dislike the new series, their complaints seem to be mostly about Starbuck, the adversarial relationship between Adama and Apollo and the tone of the show.
Yes, I will try the new episodes of BG-new. Perhaps they will redeem themselves. Perhaps not, but I'll try to keep an open mind.
Posted by: BC Monkey at January 13, 2005 12:15 PMIf it is anything like the pilot, it will have to improve significantly to be merely hideous. You could lose IQ points watching the old series, but this could set new standards of sheer awfulness.
Posted by: Bart at January 13, 2005 2:26 PMI've seen the first 10 episodes (they've already been broadcast in Britain thanks to some weird contractural agreement, and they're not terribly hard to find online), and let me be the first to assure you--this show does NOT suck.
I went in to the miniseries expecting garbage, and was pleasantly surprised to get adequate entertainment (it ran on too long, but it wasn't garbage). I went into the series expecting adequate entertainment, and was shocked to find the best TV show--of any genre--that I'd seen in years.
It's not the original, but let's face it, the original was 80% silly 70's TV and 20% neat looking ships (okay, and Lorne Greene was great). The 2005 edition is better in every conceivable way.
Posted by: Will Collier at January 13, 2005 4:08 PMCaught the replay of some part of the miniseries on NBC last Saturday night between football plays (sorry, OJ). Not too bad, and had an actor from one of the best shows ever on television (as I've noted here before). Though he was on when Due South was past its prime, Callum Keith Rennie was quite good, I thought.
Not much room for acting when your brains are getting beat out, though...
Posted by: jsmith at January 13, 2005 11:25 PM