I nominate him for Ultimate Central's TV Guru.
Battlestar Galactica (re-imagined)
- Thread starter leather_w0lf
- Start date
I nominate him for Ultimate Central's TV Guru.
Bass
Nexus of the World
I always chuckle a little when people say, "Sure, seasons 2 and 3 where rubbish but it really picked up in season 5!" I've used that argument myself. But most sci-fi shows don't get a second season (hiya ODYSSEY 5). So I think waiting for four years for a show to find its stride is unreasonable. Too many good shows die before they get a chance and shows like STARGATE or SMALLVILLE keep going, year after year, and they're rubbish. DEADWOOD got three seasons. INVADER ZIM got 26 episodes. FIREFLY got 14. CRUSADE got 13. DRIVE got 6 episodes. It lasted two weeks on television. Two episodes never even aired.
When I got bored of 24 after 12 episodes, I didn't care when people told me season 4 was really good (or season 3, I forget which). And I don't care that LOST fourth season is good. I couldn't get through the first season.
When you realise that a show like ROME lasted only 22 episodes and told a huge story, or GENERATION KILL told a full, complete story with over two dozen characters in 7 episodes, or LIFE ON MARS and SPACED were complete in 14 episodes or FAWLTY TOWERS and THE OFFICE rewrote British comedy in 12 episodes each, I have a real tough time accepting "sure, the 40+episodes of these two seasons were rubbish, but these 20 episodes in its latest season kicked ***".
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA was great for the first season (except for the finale). The second season was half/half. The third season had (IIRC) three good episodes. Out of 20. Enough. LOST, I had enough by the eighteenth episode or so. HEROES, was boring but I gave it a chance, and from episode 9 to the end of season 1 it was great. Season 2 felt like a stutter step, and season 3 fell flat on its face. I find all these shows very similar. Like the recent Trek spin-offs: they have the potential for greatness, but very rarely meet it.
To me, there's no difference. My feelings for HEROES are the same for GALACTICA and LOST.
Betrayal. [/emo]
In other news, I really never had any problem with Season 3. It was just as good as Season 2, which, IMHO, was just a little bit worse than Season 1.
Am I missing something, or am I just oblivious? I love what everyone seems to hate, and hate what everyone seems to love.
Last edited:
Volunteer Fire Detective
Well-Known Member
No fair! DEADWOOD and ROME are my favorite TV shows, you're not allowed to bring them up! It makes me not want to argue any more.
To that end, I understand what you mean. I generally like to stick through shows to see if they turn out better; for example, I stuck with Heroes for 2 1/2 seasons, but after the first season (which was admittedly pretty good), I just had to give up. I honestly don't have the same problems you have with season three, but if you really only liked 3 episodes, I can certainly see why you wouldn't want to watch it anymore. I guess I just have a little bit more faith that a story will be better in the long haul, whether warranted or not :lol:
Why thank you for the compliments.
Lynx
Well-Known Member
You know, Bass, I usually agree with you on most things. However, I completely disagree with you here. The longer a show runs either A) the worse it becomes or B) the better it becomes. It's almost impossible to have a show run for years and years and be completely stellar the entire run. It just isn't going to happen. Either it's going to be mediocre at first as they build up the mythology or it's going to blow its load early, have a mediocre middle, and then, perhaps if they've planned well enough, salvage the end.
With Firefly, there's a damn good chance that seasons 3 or 4 could have been rubbish. It happened to Buffy and it happened to Angel. Same with any of the shows you mentioned. As it is, some shows start out rubbish and improve with time. LOST had a spectacular first season, as did BSG. The problem with LOST was that the show was meant to have an end and, when that end wasn't in sight, they had to stretch it out. With BSG, the third season was completely messed with by the network. They wanted more standalone episodes and, because of that, we got a sub-par season.
As for Heroes, they wrote themselves in a hole. They should have gone with the anthology route: a new group of heroes every season fighting a new villain. Instead, they went with their previously established group, many of which were simply too powerful to continue writing well.
To be more on topic, I loved this episode. The only part I didn't like was
Dee's suicide
Dee because they had no idea what else to do with her character.
As for the Final Cylon, I thought it made a lot of sense.
For a long time, it was said that the Five were in the fleet. Then, all of a sudden, Deanna says only four are. It was obvious that the fifth was supposed to be dead. It also made a lot of sense for the 13th Tribe to be Cylons. And for the Final Five to have been from Earth, that had to be the case. As for them resurrecting. . .well, they're Cylons. Of course they're going to resurrect. The question now becomes. . .HOW did they resurrect?
As for Kara, well, that, along with the question I asked and the general "Well, where do they go now?", become the questions to ask for the final nine episodes.
I'm stoked. Hell, I'm excited for both The Plan and Caprica, too.
Random
Didn't **** any of those *****es
Lynx is totally right here. TV shows are not made in a vacuum and as such will have their ups and downs. The only question is, will the ups be worth it. In the case of Lost, as Volunteer Fire Detective pointed out, the worst episode of Lost is still an amazingly well produced, acted, written, etc story. And so the downs of the overall mythology being dragged on is easily made up for by the rest of the production and is worth it in the pay offs of the final days.
I caught this episode by chance, knowing only what I saw flipping back and forth on the recap show that aired before it. I thought it was really great and engaging, It really kept my interest throughout the whole thing.
I caught this episode by chance, knowing only what I saw flipping back and forth on the recap show that aired before it. I thought it was really great and engaging, It really kept my interest throughout the whole thing.
ourchair
Well-Known Member
I think what Bass is trying to suggest is that TV shows should be good and short, and well-conceived from beginning to end, rather than long and good with ups and downs in between.
That's an ideal that's not going to happen as often as we'd like, because TV producers and advertising dollars want a long-term reliable places to put their ad dollars, but it wouldn't be right to completely defend a series for its flaws just because you can't count on them being excellent all the time over 4-10 seasons.
That's an ideal that's not going to happen as often as we'd like, because TV producers and advertising dollars want a long-term reliable places to put their ad dollars, but it wouldn't be right to completely defend a series for its flaws just because you can't count on them being excellent all the time over 4-10 seasons.
Bass
Nexus of the World
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
I now know your one weakness VFD. :twisted:
I disagree. LAW & ORDER has remained as an entertaining, albeit not particularly substantive, police procedural. While it's episodes go up and down, the show as a whole is of the same quality. Same for the three 7-season long STAR TREK spin-offs. All remained at a pretty similar consistency. While TNG and DS9 found their 'groove', their groove was only a slight improvement. And VOY was always rubbish, but consistent.
That said, I'm nitpicking. You're right; the majority of cases, a show just gets worse as it goes on. It's less likely to get better, just because of the nature of television. The first seasons are going to be the ones with the most thought behind them because they had to 'sell' the show. It's rare that once on the path of success, a show stops trying to 'sell' itself. It's one of the reasons FIREFLY was so good - every episode had to 'sell' the show.
As I just mentioned, I agree. FIREFLY, if not under the constant threat of cancellation, might have been really poopy. And if it continued, might have gotten even worse. But there's no denying that the 14 episodes we GOT, were brilliant. And deserving of more episodes. Compare those 14 episodes with other shows first seasons, and you'll start to wonder how some shows get renewed long after they've proven an inability to deliver.
And I agree about BUFFY and ANGEL. BUFFY's first season was fun, it's second brilliant, and it's third was just astounding. It's fourth wasn't as good as the previous three, but it was still a lot of fun. It's fifth was worse still. It's sixth was almost unwatchable. And it's seventh was retarded. After high school, the show fell apart. ANGEL, on the other hand, had two fantastic seasons. Season 3 fell apart at the end, and season 4 was a mess. Then... season 5 came out of nowhere and totally energized the show. It was a terrific season.
Now, as for LOST, I didn't get through the first season. It became apparent that the writers had no idea what was going on in any meaningful way. Sure, they may have had the whole 'magnet' thing planned, but they didn't know how to bring it into the story. It's evident when you compare LOST to shows with an overarching mystery that is known by the writers. The first season of HEROES moves with an almost clockwork precision. The main question of the first season of BABYLON 5 is revealed in its 9th episode. And then there's all manner of other stories that are set up, progressed, and resolved throughout the show. Bringing up an overarching plot element and then returning to the status quo is a tease, not progression. THE X-FILES did this at least once a season. And then LOST seemed to go out of its way to make its characters unlikeable. When I quit the show, I liked Daniel Dae Kim (because of CRUSADE and not because of anything he did in LOST) and Hurley. Even Locke I was tired of.
As for BATTLESTAR GALACTICA... see, we're never going to agree. You think the season was subpar because it had too many standalone stories. I think it was awful because it was too self-involved with its inconsistent, bull**** mythology. The first episodes of BSG were ALL standalone and they were awesome. The only thing that sucked was Helo. But as the series progressed the fantastic, "the last refugees of humanity surviving in the blackness of space" got replaced with a fanwank of destiny and "who's a cylon?" and "what is their plan?" and all that rubbish. They betrayed the core concept and turned into the crappy STAR TREK spin-offs which lectured people on morality and faith with half-assed, ill-conceived thoughts. Blerg.
The reason I'm not giving the show 'another chance', is because this 'mistake' of focusing on their bull**** mythology without properly understanding where it was going was in the mini-series. It was in the first season, but in a minor way. And in the second season, it took up half the damn season. And in the third, 90% of the season was this fanwank bull****. I fail to see why the fourth season won't be more of the same. They, to my mind, are compounding the mistake, blissfully unaware it exists.
Unless the ship's medical staff turn out to be cylons, I can't be bothered to watch a show that spends all its time going on about its own continuity when the writers can't even be bothered to remember what has happened in the show.
That's why I don't watch HEROES anymore.
Not at all. What I want is a show with a strong concept. A TV show needs a strong concept. It needs it so that it's unique identity is always present, and it needs to be strong so it can be continually repeated and progressed.
A show's concept can change, but it's bloody hard to do. BUFFY's concept of 'teenagers fighting monsters' changed when they grew up and it fell apart. ANGEL changed from 'private investigators fighting monsters' to 'lawyers fighting monsters' and it worked.
See, COLUMBO lasted ages and it was just good. It had a strong concept (the character of Columbo) and they just repeated it.
What I can't stand is a show with a weak *** concept or a show that betrays its concept because the show flounders, gets desperate, and falls apart. If a show's concept is "a fully planned mystery about people on an island" or "the cyclons have a plan", then the writers should know that concept. If their concept is intrinsically finite, that it has a beginning, middle, and end, then the show's writers are honour-bound to know it in advance. If the show's concept doesn't, if it's a repeatable concept, then they need no ending.
Anyhow, I didn't mean to pop in and bash BSG. I just saw Skotti's comments and felt I should say, "This is how I feel" and leave. BUT! I have been drawn into the argument of "BSG sucks" versus "I'm wrong about BSG being good".
Lynx
Well-Known Member
Perhaps. I would like to see a TV show that only has three planned seasons and finish out its story in that. However, as you said, networks are never going to let that happen. Some shows, like most of the ones I mentioned, I found worth watching because the good far outweighed the bad.
I can't really say anything about Law and Order because I never really watched it. But, as for Trek, I disagree. I felt the first two seasons of both TNG and DS9 were mediocre. It wasn't until later that those shows hit their stride. VOY, I felt, was the opposite. It had a great premise and a great start, but fell apart quickly. Much like Heroes.
As for LOST and BSG, it seems what you disliked is exactly what I liked. I liked most of the characters in LOST, save a select few. And I felt they knew exactly where they were going, but were having problems getting there. As for BSG, I liked the mythology AND the survivor aspect. So, I can agree to disagree on both of those since we're disagreeing on such a fundamental level.
It was because of Illyria, plain and simple, I know it, you know it, and everyone else knows it...
Now Whedon's cocking that up by first de-Freding Illyria, then to really screw it, he's de-Illyriaing Fred... WTF??
And back on topic, I have to agree, when BSG was more stand alone episodes, like in the first couple seasons, it was good television. This whole over arching BS with the completely contridictory history/mythology, it just feels likeLoebs writing. That whole "oooo let's see how far we can push the fans before the flee en masse".
Last edited:
Random
Didn't **** any of those *****es
I disagree here Because the first two seasons of Lost were not about the overall mythology, they were not about solving the overall mysteries but more about the characters and their personal stories and quest for redemption, while throwing in a lot of philosophical and religious ideas and metaphors. So you have to watch those two seasons as an episodic show. Also there are bunch of mysteries in the first season that has been answered. The only big three questions introduced in the first season that haven't been answered are, what are the Other's goal, What is the island, and what is the monster. The thing is, these answers are the writer's climatic ones, they're the show ending ones. But meanwhile we do get the set up, progressed, and resolution with a bunch of other intriguing mysteries. And just as you said how a show can switch gears and either be better or worst using the Buffy Angel example, there was always going to be that switch from a character drama to exploring the overall mythologies. The only problem was it seemed that switch should have happened in the third season, but it caught caught in an odd middle ground between those two concepts. So to say the writers had no idea in any meaningful way is really bull, just because their early on focus of the show was the characters, their progression and development, does not mean there was no plan. They knew what they were doing, where they wanted to go early on, but they just wanted to start with the characters and slowly go deeper into the grander mythology.
As a fan whose seen all the episodes I can say that it is very clear they new what they were doing with it very early on. There are a lot of things shown in the first season that you learn later on which to me clearly demonstrates foresight into it all.
Bass
Nexus of the World
For me... it was Spike. I loved the Spike/Angel dynamic. The Immortal episode is sooooooo good.
There's a simple principle when it comes to the 'big' mystery arc of a show: if the writers bring it up as a major discussion point of an episode, they're honour-bound to develop it. In BABYLON 5, whenever a mystery was brought up, it was heavily progressed (though I'm sure, there's one or two exceptions). Otherwise, it wasn't mentioned. If it's not mentioned, then I, as the audience, don't feel I need to be given an answer. But if every week, the show goes on about Cylon destiny or the final five or the monster on the island or the Other's plan... well, they gotta do something with it, or it's just a big continuity wank. They're stalling for time. HEROES really did that in its third volume. In the first season of LOST, you had preggo-girl and psychic kid. And the shaft. And every episode brought it up and did nothing with it. :/
If it brings it up, it's got to progress it. Otherwise, it's just a tease.
Random
Didn't **** any of those *****es
I really don't see it as stalling rather just being slow, slowly peeling the layers to it all. I think the pacing is actually quite good, because there is just soo much there to just throw it all out there and loose sight of these character. Also if you think about it, if the psychic kid's power doesn't play a major role until the end through a natural progress of the established story you'll have a bunch of fans wondering why they would just now see this when it would make sense to have sense examples of it earlier. Likewise with the four toed statue, people would be wondering why the castaways never saw any remnants of this civilization until we learn about them. The creators carefully place a lot of little clues that shows us how big of a picture this show is so we can slowly unravel it. Yes they are teases, but they are teases that have and will pay off. I doubt by the end on next year there will be no loose ends
Ninja4peace
Well-Known Member
I think this might've gotten a little off-topic.
I don't rate the firefly comics at all. Yet the series and film are perfect as they are. Not too long and start and finish with 1hr30, 2 hr episodes. I'd prefer more series like that rather than fewer that are really long.
That said some work. Bass you love babylon 5 and that really flags to start off with, and the end was hideously mutilated by editorial ("no season 5 try to wrap everything up at the end of this season.....oh ok, your ratings are up again give us another series"). Long series have faults, but can still rule.
I think BSG could easy reach that level of epic. Is it true that they're gonna finish on a massive 3hour film to mirror the pilot/miniseries?
And on a marginally related note- I bought the boardgame, it's all kindsa awsome.
I don't rate the firefly comics at all. Yet the series and film are perfect as they are. Not too long and start and finish with 1hr30, 2 hr episodes. I'd prefer more series like that rather than fewer that are really long.
That said some work. Bass you love babylon 5 and that really flags to start off with, and the end was hideously mutilated by editorial ("no season 5 try to wrap everything up at the end of this season.....oh ok, your ratings are up again give us another series"). Long series have faults, but can still rule.
I think BSG could easy reach that level of epic. Is it true that they're gonna finish on a massive 3hour film to mirror the pilot/miniseries?
And on a marginally related note- I bought the boardgame, it's all kindsa awsome.
Last edited:
Oh god.... Spike and Angel in Rome was probably one of the best episodes in the entire series. And it had Illyria.
DIrishB
The Timeline Guy
:lol:
I'm glad you and I can both see that universe, Nexus.
Wow.
Good point. Still, it just didn't hit a chord...I mean...Ellen? So what?
Quite true.
I'll look forward to more of your posts in this thread then.
I'm a bit worried about how Caprica will come off, however.
The final episode will be a two-parter (titled "Daybreak"). The first part will be an hour long. The second part will be two hours long.
And its been said that the DVD release will be significantly extended with extra footage (possibly an additional hour), much like Pegasus was on the 2.5 DVD Season.
Care to give a more detailed review? How's it work? Space battles, fighting Cylons on ship, conspiracy/Cylon hunting?
Bass
Nexus of the World
Slow pacing is different to stalling. BSG and LOST and HEROES stall. THE WIRE and GENERATION KILL had a slow pace.
I actually like season 1. The first episode "Midnight on the Firing Line" is really quite intense. As for season 5... the first half is rubbish. This is true. But the second half where he plays out the Drakh/Centauri angle fully works very well. But, definitely, season 5 is really weak for most of it. :/
The slow-motion fight was so gorram funny.
Volunteer Fire Detective
Well-Known Member
Yes, but Lost and BSG don't bring them up every episode. And when they do, they reveal a little at a time. This is useful in two ways: it allows the creators to periodically remind the viewers of the main mysteries behind the show, and it also (usually) increases "audience participation" - I find myself constantly thinking, when watching an episode of Lost or BSG, "well how is this going to play out?" And then we get a little clue, and my brain goes into overdrive trying to piece it all together.
It's all very deliberate, especially now that we're reaching the end of these respective series. Shows like BSG and Lost reward extended viewership and an active participation in trying to solve the show's central mysteries.
I don't think it's fair to compare them. They're completely different types of shows, and not just by genre; The Wire, for example (and I say this having seen only I think the first season) doesn't really have a large, over-arching "mystery" and a complex "mythology" that the entire series is based around. It doesn't have the weight of needing to mete out the answers to its central mysteries over the course of an entire series, at least not in the same way BSG and Lost do.
It seems we have a fundamental disagreement that must lie at the heart of this entire conversation: I like the direction they took BSG, you don't. I think they managed to change the show in a good way, you don't. In short - we're arguing over fundamental opinions that can be neither proved nor disproved.
In other words, we'll never agree, so it's probably best just to get back on topic
P.S. I think most of those shows that have "repeatable" concepts are inherently weak because every episode is the same. I don't watch House because after you've seen one episode, you've seen them all (House is grumpy, some patient has a weird disease, House is grumpy, they think they've solved it, but oops! it just makes things worse, House continues to be grumpy, one of his underlings has to break into the person's house/do something else illegal to find answers, no one has a clue, House pulls a solution out of his *** but he has to kill the patient for five seconds to use it, but, completely unexpectedly, it magically works. House makes a grumpy yet profound speech about how the "real world" works. Wilson shakes his head. The end). I can only watch one episode of Mission Impossible at a time, because every freaking episode is the same thing over and over again. Etc. I prefer shows that move, even if they move slowly.
P.P.S. Have you seen Damages, Bass? It's easily the best show I've seen for wrapping up it's central mysteries in a meaningful and timely way, and the one season of it that's aired is probably better than Lost and BSG combined. If you haven't, you should seriously check it out.
Ninja4peace
Well-Known Member
Hmmm...i'll say a little about it. but it might be a little misplaced. discussion might be better in an "all about boardgames" thread. but anyway here goes.
it's got some of the same elements as werewolves or mafia if you know those i.e. you get given cards at the start and some of them say "you are a cylon" on them. Also half way through the game more cards are dealt, and if you started off as a human it might now transpire that you were a sleeper agent.
The game is prertty complicated, but that's more to do with the number of things happening at once. Humans have got to reach Kobol, by jumping a few times, but they've got to make sure they have enough resources (fuel,food,population, morale). Also Centurions keep on boarding the ship and you have to kill them off, or this can be the end as well.
There's not a lot of dice rolling in the game. Sometimes you need to make "skill checks" where all the players put some of there skill cards in a pile, and if the number of good ones beats the bad ones you pass...I'm simplifying a little but you see the scope here for cylons to scuper the human's plans.
there's 10 characters- pretty much who you'd expect. There's also two titles, the admiral (who has control of the nukes) and the president (who has a deck of special cards).
Each turn you get crisis cards where nearly anything could happen. e.g. Admiral has to decide wether to stage a coup or not. If he does he gets the president title and morale goes down, but if he doesn't population, food and fuel all go down.
I think it's done a pretty good job of capturing the paranoia and tough decisions that are present in the series. and all the characters seem well thought out. e.g. if you're gaius you pick more cylon cards and so are more likely to be a cylon, so people distrust you more already. Have only played once so far but hopefully stays good. And it might be better with more people too.
