Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

B5 influenced by Battlestar Galactica?????

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Capt.Montoya
    Ranger Captain

  • Capt.Montoya
    replied
    Originally posted by sketh
    I see your point, but I read an article in SFX about the remake, it seems there is a deliberate intention that they want to make it the most un sci-fi sci-fi show.
    This I think can only be a strength though, it gets so sticky when shows artificially throw "in vogue" science into a script since this only dates the show (the love of TNG and DS9 for the tachyon particle springs to mind), plus the fact they tend to miss the point quite spectacularly.
    The interesting thing there is that the tachyon particles (also used in B5) stemmed from a prediction of an early version of String Theory, and it was one of its most controversial predictions (but is was considered analogous to the historic prediction of antimatter), current versions of string theory do not need nor postulate a faster than light particle, so that science has become nothing but fiction.

    Getting outdated seems to be part and parcel of Science Fiction as whole. Several classic SF stories are based on ideas on the cutting edge of science at the time they were written, but further refinement and development of science meant that such ideas were proven wrong and abandoned.

    Which in the end doesn't matter as long as those stories are still good.

    Trek however has an unfair advantage: treknobabble can't be proven wrong as it isn't really scientific. <insert evil emoticon here>

    B5_Obsessed:

    I'd think you might be right and that the visual homage to Galactica might have been inserted by the CGI people without JMS realizing it.

    The new Battlestar Galactica starts this Friday... I'm looking forward to checking it out.

    Leave a comment:

  • jal
    Confirmed User

  • jal
    replied
    Holy shit! Did someone a few posts back refer to the Cylon ship as a raider?!

    Nuff said.
    yep, me.

    i never noticed any similarities between old BSG and B5, one was crap, the other was great.

    Leave a comment:

  • B5_Obsessed
    Confirmed User

  • B5_Obsessed
    replied
    Originally posted by Capt.Montoya
    Lacking the original post I'm not sure, but by the date I think it might be a reply to someone raising that one same point... and it sure does fit the scene description.

    Run a search for Galactica in the archive and you'll find all that JMS has said about it.
    But if you run a search for "homage" you'll find that in most cases whenever a fan said "that's a homage to...." JMS said it wasn't.
    It's funny that the question was asked immediately after the episode. For those of us who grew up on Galactica, an alarm bell went off immediately after seeing that scene. I'm still unconvinced, though. JMS may not have intended any in-joke or homage, but the geeks sitting in front of the Amigas may well have. JMS was absolutely correct in how the guns would track and eventually acquire their target, but the framing of that scene is virtually identical to the old BSG stock shot. From that angle, even the profile of the raider ship is highly reminiscent of the Cylon (raider?).

    Holy shit! Did someone a few posts back refer to the Cylon ship as a raider?!

    Nuff said.

    Leave a comment:

  • bakana
    Confirmed User

  • bakana
    replied
    As far as lifting story ideas, that's a time honored Hollywood tradition! How many remakes of A Christmas Carol have you seen on TV?
    NOT.

    Most productions of A Christmas Carol quite properly credit Charles Dickens as the original author.
    BTW, one reason so many studios Do it is that the original copyrights have expired and it is in the Public Domain.
    Meaning anyone is Legally allowed to use it.
    And they don't have to Pay for it.
    Even so, as I said, they show the courtesy of giving the author Credit.

    Galactica never showed Anyone that courtesy.

    BTW, anyone who "likes" the Cylons should check out the Original:

    Fred Saberhagen's Berserkers


    The BERSERKER SAGA
    by Fred Saberhagen

    NOVELS:

    * BERSERKER, Ballantine, 1967. Ace, 1980. Ace, 1992.
    * BERSERKER BASE, Tor, 1987.
    * BERSERKER BLUE DEATH, Tor, 1985.
    * BERSERKER FURY , Tor, 1997.
    * BERSERKER KILL, Tor, 1993.
    * BERSERKER MAN,Tor, 1992.
    * BERSERKER PLANET,Tor, 1991.
    * BERSERKER PRIME, Tor, 2003.
    * BERSERKER STAR, Tor, 2003.
    * BERSERKER THRONE,Tor, 1986.
    * ROGUE BERSERKER, Baen, 2004
    * SHIVA IN STEEL, Tor, 1998.

    COLLECTIONS:

    * BROTHER ASSASSIN, Tor, 1993.
    * BERSERKER ATTACK, 1987. A special limited edition for Waldenbooks Otherworlds Club.
    * BERSERKER LIES,Tor, 1991.
    * BERSERKER WARS,Tor, 1981. Tor, 2003.
    * ULTIMATE ENEMY, Baen, 1987.


    OMNIBUS:

    * BERSERKERS: THE BEGINNING, Baen, 1998. Reprint of BERSERKER and ULTIMATE ENEMY.
    * BERSERKER MAN : MEGA BOOK, Baen, 2004. Reprint of BERSERKER'S PLANET, BERSERKER THRONE, BROTHER ASSASSIN, and BERSERKER MAN.


    BERSERKER is a registered trade mark of Fred Saberhagen and can not be used without permission.
    He also wrote a Wonderful series telling the story of Dracula.
    From Dracula's point of view...
    bakana
    Confirmed User
    Last edited by bakana; 01-09-2005, 01:29 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • sketh
    Confirmed User

  • sketh
    replied
    Originally posted by z^3
    I would agree that the new BSG is genuinely one of the best science-fiction televisions shows in recent times, probably the best since B5. In terms of apparent B5 influence, new BSG has an incredibly tight story-arc and an authentic, almost cinematic, feel about it - something that I haven't seen for quite a while.

    Where new BSG it falls down, I think, is in adherence to science and detail. B5, for example, paid careful attention to scientific items such as artificial gravity (or lack of until a certain level of technology), whereas BSG pays attention to certain themes (such as no sound in space) but doesn't offer an explanation for other, seemingly inconsistent facts (such as artificial gravity - which, in my opinion, seems above their level of tech). But, in the scheme of things, this doesn't really matter, and doesn't seem to distract from the series at all.
    I see your point, but I read an article in SFX about the remake, it seems there is a deliberate intention that they want to make it the most un sci-fi sci-fi show.
    This I think can only be a strength though, it gets so sticky when shows artificially throw "in vogue" science into a script since this only dates the show (the love of TNG and DS9 for the tachyon particle springs to mind), plus the fact they tend to miss the point quite spectacularly.

    Leave a comment:

  • Paul
    Confirmed User

  • Paul
    replied
    Larson didn't disappear after Galactica 1980. He was associated with Knight Rider, Magnum P.I, Quincy, and a few other shows. Galactica borrowed heavily from Chariot of the Gods. Larson also tried to incorporate Mormanism into the show. War of the Gods is one of the examples of this as the Colonials meet the devil in Count Iblis. Tom DeSanto was origianlly slated along with Bryan Singer to bring Galactica back with both Dirk Benedict and Herbert Jefferson Jr in the original roles as Starbuck and Boomer. Richard Hatch would have appeared at the end of the mini as Apollo who had been assimilated by the Cylons.

    Leave a comment:

  • SpooRancher
    Confirmed User

  • SpooRancher
    replied
    Cylons?

    Originally posted by jal
    i do miss the old Cylon raiders though, they just look better than the new ones.
    Can't you get one for free by opening a bank account? (toaster joke)

    Leave a comment:

  • b5finland
    Confirmed User

  • b5finland
    replied
    I love the new battlestar galactica series it is awesome, best scifi after Babylon 5. So far ive seen every episode.

    Leave a comment:

  • jal
    Confirmed User

  • jal
    replied
    I'm gonna watch though. I hope they've tuned doen the gratuitous glowing spine sex this time around.
    no glowing spines in sight, very semi nudity in very limited places, not much of anything to warp anyones fragile little mind.

    i do miss the old Cylon raiders though, they just look better than the new ones.

    Leave a comment:

  • Capt.Montoya
    Ranger Captain

  • Capt.Montoya
    replied
    From:_STRACZYNSKI [Joe]
    Subject:_Just as a note, that wasn't any...
    To:_GENIE__
    Date:_5/14/1994 10:19:00 AM__




    Just as a note, that wasn't any kind of tribute to Galactica; that's
    simply how ack-ack guns or anti-aircraft (or spacecraft) guns work in terms of
    tracking a target. BG probably based its actions on those same principles as
    well.

    jms
    Lacking the original post I'm not sure, but by the date I think it might be a reply to someone raising that one same point... and it sure does fit the scene description.

    Run a search for Galactica in the archive and you'll find all that JMS has said about it.
    But if you run a search for "homage" you'll find that in most cases whenever a fan said "that's a homage to...." JMS said it wasn't.

    Leave a comment:

  • B5_Obsessed
    Confirmed User

  • B5_Obsessed
    replied
    I've mentioned this before, but I think there was one BSG homage in Babylon 5. In "Signs and Portents" (I think) there is a scene where a raider ship comes diagonally across the screen, too close to the anti-ship guns. The guns track toward the ship from lower right to upper left and KAPOW!, the raider blows up in the upper left corner. Anyone who has referenced BSG's repeated use of stock explosions knows exactly the scene I'm talking about.

    As for the new BSG, yes, I do see a lot of B5 influence: The arc, darker plot, the uniforms, the look of the tech and sets, and even the simulated hand-held photography pioneered during B5's space battles.

    I don't know if I like the new Cylon Base Stars compared to the old ones (I've only seen the pilot). Unlike the Galactica itself, their shape bears no resemblance to at all to the old ones.

    I'm gonna watch though. I hope they've tuned doen the gratuitous glowing spine sex this time around.

    Leave a comment:

  • WorkerCaste
    Confirmed User

  • WorkerCaste
    replied
    I just wanted to drop in my two cents regarding some of the criticisms of Battlestar Gallactice. Remember when it was made! Cheesy effects were mentioned, but when that show hit the air these were the most remarkable FX on TV. John Dystra had left ILM and started his own effects company using the motion control techniques he pioneered. That was one of the items that made BSG too expensive to produce, regardless of ratings. Sure, they reused effects from the library over again (and again, and again...) but that was the way it had to be done. As far as lifting story ideas, that's a time honored Hollywood tradition! How many remakes of A Christmas Carol have you seen on TV? While that lack of imagination will keep a show from being truly great, it doesn't mark it as distincly poor. Especially in the late 1970's. When BSG was on the air I watched it and felt it was one of the best things that had come along to date. Of course, I still wanted more from my TV SF, but at least it represented progress.

    As for Gallactica 1980, well, the less said the better. I feel absolutely no need to defend it in any way, shape or form.

    The new BSG is looking interesting, though, and I'll make an effort to catch that.

    Leave a comment:

  • Towelmaster
    Dr. Zelenka

  • Towelmaster
    replied
    I haven't seen the new version but you're right : the original sucked bigtime. I collect SF(books as well as vids and dvds). Costs a lot of money but hey! it's fun to watch that stuff on a rainy sundayafternoon!

    So over the years I have stocked my videowall with things like :

    StarTrek:TOS complete
    StarTrek:TNG about three seasons of the best eps.
    StarTrek:Voy : complete except for 1 video ( )
    StarTrek: DS9 : First season and last season, can't be arsed about the in-betweens(B5 rulez)
    Babylon-5 : Everything except fof S5(soon to be released)
    Crusade : "Complete"
    The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy(check my nickname).

    And the list goes on and on and on... I even collect SF that isn't so brilliant. And lots of SF-movies of course...

    But I draw the line at BSG:TOS. Or rather at all Glenn A. Larsson-stuff. That guy didn't do anything worthwhile after 1975. It is just not worth the money :

    BSG -> repeat-shots all over the place, no original storyline in sight for miles, no crediting the proper writers, crappy acting, etcetera.

    Sorry about the rant. Do I come across as anti-Larsson enough yet?

    So if somebody else remade BSG I must check out the new version, see if it's any better. Is it out on dvd yet?

    Another one worthy of a f*ck*ng rant :

    Mr. Gerry Anderson(plus wife) :

    Space:1999? -> Every time the moon paused at some alien planet and neatly took off again after our heroes had their adventure I cringed, I wanted to puke. The guy had no shame. Oh, and most of the actors couldn't act. It was a StarTrek rip-off anyway : take 4 or 5 main characters and a couple of stooges to fill the screen, write all the dialogue around these main characters, don't don't don't use too many effects because they cost money, re-use the sets so obviously that people recognize the stain on the wall of room #1 to be the same as the stain on the wall in medbay, etcetera.


    Sorry. you triggered my "bad SF"-button...


    Addendum : http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0488991/
    Towelmaster
    Dr. Zelenka
    Last edited by Towelmaster; 01-07-2005, 04:42 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Garibaldi's Hair
    Busy! Busy! Busy!

  • Garibaldi's Hair
    replied
    I have seen both the original and the new one, and they are so dissimilar that the BSG name just seems bolted on.

    The new show is a proper SF show, the original was a piece of Saturday tea-time television fluff, in much the same vein as Knight Rider or Buck Rogers in the 25th Century. Entertaining fluff, but nothing more than that.

    Not surprising really considering they were all Glen A. Larson productions.

    After a while, the most fun could be had counting how many stock shots of vipers launching/fighting/whatever you could spot that were repeated from previous eps (or even earlier in the same one).

    Leave a comment:

  • jal
    Confirmed User

  • jal
    replied
    i did see the original and i really wish i hadn`t, i thought it sucked back then and still do.

    but this new version is definately something else, i think it is the best show since B5 finished it`s run and i`ve been hooked on it since the pilot episodes.... happy days!!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X