New Battlestar

13 posts ยท Dec 14 2003 to Dec 22 2003

From: Robert Bantly <bantly_robert@h...>

Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:36:09 -0800

Subject: New Battlestar

What did everyone think? I thought that Sci-Fi channel laid another egg.

The old series was corny even in the late 70's, but it was fun to watch.

From: David Rodemaker <dar@h...>

Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:27:37 -0600

Subject: RE: New Battlestar

Nope, the general consensus in my group of friends was that it's a hit. We
liked how the characters all had a new twist, and that it wasn't a
frame-by-frame update of the old series ala _La Femme Nikita_ and _Point
of
No Return_ (IIRC the Hollywood version title)

From: Foxx Travis <lordkalvin2002@y...>

Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:17:33 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: New Battlestar

I thought it was OK. Combat sequences were pretty cool. Home planets getting
nuked was cool. Hard to except Starbuck as a woman. Even harder to except some
cylons as "androids" that are just like humans. But hey, it'll allow for tons
of story lines. I did get nostalgic over the old Battlestar Galactica theme
being played during the flyby of the Viper MkII's and at the end of the second
episode when one of the "androids" says, "by your command". Unfortunately, it
didn't sound the same as when the "walking toasters" of the old show said it!!

How did you like it when the Cylon android snapped the baby's neck? I thought
that was a little over the top.
> --- Robert Bantly <bantly_robert@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:25:22 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: New Battlestar

> --- Foxx Travis <lordkalvin2002@yahoo.com> wrote:

> How did you like it when the Cylon android snapped

What are you talking about?

From: Michael Llaneza <maserati@e...>

Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 18:57:23 -0800

Subject: Re: New Battlestar

Dr.Baltar's girlfriend kills an infant in public and just walks away in

the crowd. I don't recall so much as an FX for the act, but the look on her
face made it clear what she was doing, the mother's reaction moments

later just confirmed it.

That was probably the most significant bit for Number Six' character.

> Brian B wrote:

> --- Foxx Travis <lordkalvin2002@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Dean Gundberg <dean.gundberg@n...>

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 09:20:16 -0600

Subject: RE: New Battlestar

> >>How did you like it when the Cylon android snapped

To put it into a bit more context, while in a crowd, Six sees and infant
crying in a stroller. She comments not to worry as your pain will be over soon
(foreshadowing the destruction of the colonies). She engages in small talk
with the mother commenting on how small the child is (Cylons not having
children they are a novelty) and how can that small neck support the head. The
mother is distracted as the father is on his way back, and Six reaches down
and a crack is heard. Six is now walking away quickly in the crowd as the
mother comes back and notices the child is not moving, she then starts
screaming. Finally focus on Six and her face, it is not the normal calm face
but there is something more. Is it regret? Is it sadness? Is it remorse? We
don't know if she did it to spare the infant further suffering when they start
nuking the colonies, or if it was an accident as she was examining that
fragile neck.

This new Battlestar Galactica did get the highest ratings of any SciFi Channel
show for 2003 and its 3rd highest ratings ever, with viewership of part 2
actually going up from part 1. Thus I do expect a regular series to
result from that mini, mini-series.

From: Michael Llaneza <maserati@e...>

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:37:16 -0800

Subject: Re: New Battlestar

Ok, that's good news. I wonder how long it'll take to put BSG2.0 into series
production.

> Dean Gundberg wrote:

> This new Battlestar Galactica did get the highest ratings of any SciFi

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:52:00 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: New Battlestar

> --- Michael Llaneza <maserati@earthlink.net> wrote:

I don't remember that at all.

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:53:11 -0800 (PST)

Subject: RE: New Battlestar

> --- Dean Gundberg <Dean.Gundberg@noridian.com> wrote:

Hmmm.... I did miss a bit of the opening, was it early in the movie?

From: Michael Llaneza <maserati@e...>

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:53:30 -0800

Subject: Re: New Battlestar

Yep. Sci Fi will probably be re-showing it regularly in 2004.

> Brian B wrote:

> Hmmm.... I did miss a bit of the opening, was it early

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:24:20 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: New Battlestar

*shudder* Not sure I want to see that scene.

> --- Michael Llaneza <maserati@earthlink.net> wrote:

From: Doug Evans <devans@n...>

Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:06:01 -0600

Subject: Re: New Battlestar

I finally got around to having a look, though I'm not finished, I did wonder
why there was no comment about the Cylon Raiders 'look'.

At the small risk of a spoiler, didn't anyone else think they looked like a
cross between say Andromeda Ascendant and, more closely, Silent Death's Talon?

http://store.ironcrown.com/items.jsp?category=7144

The_Beast

From: CS Renegade <njg@c...>

Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 22:39:24 -0000

Subject: RE: New Battlestar

> From: ~ On Behalf Of Doug Evans

> I finally got around to having a look, though I'm not

Bring back the toasters!

For what it's worth, I checked the new Chariot catalogue with Richard Noble
and he reckons they can still source
"ISV1" for those who want classic not-Cylon-Raiders in
the UK. Don't know about overseas, though I could ask...

Nathan "keep those modern figures away from me" Girdler