New BSG vs Original BSG

Stark

I'm curious. I've never seen the original Battlestar Galactica. I know the obvious changes - Boomer and Starbuck are now females, Cylons are created by man and can look human in the new one. But I reckon there are other interesting changes that I don't know about. For example I found out recently that in the original BSG finale Adama was revealed to have telekinetic powers and I keep hearing of a "Starchild".

So, those of you who've seen both, what have you to share?

galactus

Boomer & Starbuck are female-types? What's next? Talking daggits?

bizmark

Ya wtf was up with the bloody sex change like made no frigging sence

JustHalf

Well, if you insist that everything is like the old Battlestar Galactica, then you get a series that is crappy compared to the fantastic new one.

I keep hearing "WTF? Changes?", but this is pointless. If you treat the two as seperate shows (which they are), you'll enjoy the second one much better.

Fenster

The original started great, but went steadily downhill from there.

Nukem

Old one was pretty gritty in terms of content but was ahead of its time (until Star Wars came out)

The sex change thing-honestly think thats a good thing gives more balance to the show.

Besides Boomer aint sore on the eyes.

TCamen

AFAIR -- the Starchild was mentioned in reference to 'V - The Series', because that damned annoying kid was always being called that..

I have the original BSG on DVD, comparisons after the season of the new BSG has finished just seem pointless really. They're so different in the execution of the same basic premise of 'humans on the run from a relentless army of enemy robots'. I like both, though one for camp, retro enjoyment, and the other for serious, gritty sci-fi drama.

galactus

Nukem wrote:

Old one was pretty gritty in terms of content but was ahead of its time (until Star Wars came out)

Umm: Star Wars - 1977, Battlestar Galactica - 1978

Johnny Storm

Nukem wrote:

Old one was pretty gritty in terms of content but was ahead of its time (until Star Wars came out)

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by the above so please correct me if I have misunderstood you. But FYI the original BSG was a fairly cynical by-the-numbers attempt to cash in on the cinematic success of the first Star Wars film in a TV format.
EG
Original Starbuck - Han Solo
Viper - X-wing
Dagit - R2D2
etc

@ing great back then) and there were some good episodes. But after that it was pretty much a slow and steady decline until we got to "BSG 1980" (AFAICR) which was set on Earth with a different cast and featured low budget flying motorbikes - talk about jumping the shark!

IMHO the worst thing about the new BSG is that it is a re-make. I love the new one and still have a certain respect for some of the old one. But they are as different as chalk and cheese and comparing the two today is pointless in my opinion.

As regards Starks original question, sorry, I started to loose interest in the origianl BSG once they began to get into the mystical stuff. AFAICR they met God/powerful alien/bunch of flashing lights who directed them towards Earth. I dont remember any religious/mystical aspect to the Cylons.

galactus

Johnny Storm wrote:

But after that it was pretty much a slow and steady decline until we got to "BSG 1980" (AFAICR) which was set on Earth with a different cast and featured low budget flying motorbikes - talk about jumping the shark!

Just want to butt-in and say the episodes set on Earth were excellent. Just googled one of my favourite episodes:

"The Night the Cylons Landed: a new, more powerful Cylon fighter manned by three Cylon Centurions and two Cylon humanoids crashes on Earth. A Centurion and a Cylon survive the crash only to meet Wolfman Jack at a local Halloween party. The Cylons search for a radio station so they can transmit Earth’s location back to Cylon. Troy and Dillon are hot on their trail and must stop that transmission"

Of course people at the party think the Cylon costume is really cool and then the mayhem starts

savemejebus

I think the first series (excluding galactica 1980, well except for the starbuck one) was great. There were weak episodes but thats the same with all sci-fi. It was obviously cashing in on star wars but I think it did it well by not just rehashing the empire jedi thing but linking up ancient earth mythology with aliens a la chariots of the gods. Interestingly enough the whole cylons looking like us was done in a galactica 1980 episode too.

Dr Z was the starchild thingy from the original series, think he was supposed to be the human son of one of the lords of kobol or some other alien race.

Also the mysticism and all that stuff makes sense when taken in context with what was planned for season 2 of the original series, richard hatch followed the line of thought through in his fiction, but suffice to say Ascension and evoloution etc were all on the cards, plus the back story to the original cylons which was pretty cool (tbh i don't know whether the cylon backstory was all richard hatch and his co-writer or whether glen a larson had a hand in it too)

Having said that i enjoy the new series just as much because it's so different, to me the remake is more a character based drama that happens to be set in space than pure sci-fi as i usually think of it, it's much more edge of the seat. I think it's done very well although I have to say that i thought that the whole cylons as humans smacked of low budget when i heard about it.

Something interesting to remember when talking about the original series is that it was cancelled because it was too expensive to produce, not because of horrible ratings.

MisterAnarchy

Something interesting to remember when talking about the original series is that it was cancelled because it was too expensive to produce, not because of horrible ratings.

Correct .It was costing $1m per episode back when syndication and re runs didnt exist.
The whole idea of the original series was great but the series was rushed ,scripts were constantly being re written and changed .
The bonus disc on the DVD box set is very revealing.
The new series has had 25 years to tweak and improve the old formula which had the essence of a great series.

Bazookatone

The differences that I've noticed are:
1 Obviously, Starbuck and Boomer are girls (and soooo pretty)

2 The new Galactica is slightly different to the original (Different engines, flight pods are higher up and they retract, the nose section is at the same height as the fuselage, and not slightly below it)

3 Foxy and his mother aren't in it at all (The producers wisely decided not to put Foxy in the show after the miniseries)

4 The viper Mk 2's are slightly different to the original vipers (They're ore intricate models, that's all0

5 Obviously the Cylons and their ships are different

6 The flight helments no longer have an ancient Egypt design ethic + the pilots wear flight suits

7 Adama Jnr. isn't a sycophant to his father as he as in the original

8 No effing daggits, thank God!

DavidByrne1969

One thing they both have in common is that both SUCK!!

I watched the new one from start to finish and was horrified at the ending, what the hell happened?

Ending was too abrupt...



BSG (Old) was only good because most of us were 6 years old, have another look at it...



Bitter Old Man... :mad:

ixoy

DavidByrne1969 wrote:

One thing they both have in common is that both SUCK!!

Care to be more constructive? Why does it "suck" exactly? Storylines? Acting? SFX? C'mon get some debate going if you believe this.

I watched the new one from start to finish and was horrified at the ending, what the hell happened?

Ending was too abrupt...

Why'd ya watch it all if ya thought it sucked? Anyway, the finale was a cliffhanger. They left lots dangling to encourage you to come back before. It all depends on whether you like the cliffhanger model or not - personally I do when the series is being renewed, as BSG is.

I don't understand the need for people to have all their questions answered so quickly. Whatever happened to a bit of patience and respect for the writers? I mean let's take the old sci-fi chestnut: Babylon 5. It takes the full run of the series (5 years!) nearly before we fully understand a vision that Londo has. Yes, questions get answered along the way but it's only in the long run do we get to appreciate the full picture. And that's the model I want to see for BSG - do something really epic and if it leaves us in suspense now and then, so be it. Otherwise stick to the episodic series like Enterprise or C.S.I.

djmike

I was a huge fan of the original series, those guys were such players.
I found the pilot episode on VHS that i'd taped yars ago.
Pure.nostalgic.gold.
The soundFX , the Campness , that little bear thing...
The deep deep deeeeeep ness of the narrators voice.....

The new series has that CSI slickness that makes me gag. The dialouge is poor and predictable. To a certain extent ive moved on from sci-fi , so maybe im biased.

i aint knockin the newie , i just prefer the oldie.

Keano_sli

Myself and my mates were huge fans of the original especially after Star wars and watched it religously as kids, but I do remember it kinda tailing off at some point after they got to earth and never really seen the end. When I heard they were doing a remake I thought great but just never seem to have time to watch series on TV these days so only caught a bit of it so feel it would be very unfair to compare the too. Still remember spending hours in school drawing Battlestars all over my books Oh happy innocence.
So I say if you have time to watch and enjoy the new one, do so. But it is impossible to compare with something made in the late Seventies before CGI and when we were all kids.

Sith1ord

I see several critical mistakes in the points made in here (some already addressed like the air dates vs star wars)

First, BSG was not a clone of Star Wars. It was attempted in the '60s after Star Trek. So maybe the characters were semi-based there. But it didn't fly with the network till after Star Wars. It makes sense that he didn't care if he was riding the coat-tails of Lucas. Writers and producers want people to watch/read.

Second, watch the mini-series from 2003. It fills in a lot of holes. It explains a reasonable way for the Cylons to take out everyone but Galatica.

Third, the entire idea of the new BSG was to take the old concept, and have it be accepted by today's culture. Even with the new effects, who would watch BSG made today without the old? I think the lasers that magically lock on and the "turbo" booster is so sad that its amusing - at least for a 70's sci-fi show.

Finally, Character's gender and race (you didn't notice the XO is not black anymore?) was part of the way that they are defining new relationships and new problems for the crew to face. Same with having a President and Adama not being some member of Council too. It makes more sense really.

In today's world, sex sells. Even in the original, they had sexy female characters. We have seen sexy women in nearly all recent Sci-Fi. Name one that doesn't have any kick-ass female from the last several years, and you will have named a show/movie that probably didn't do so well.

And all I wanted was a list of the original episodes for the DVDs I got from blockbuster... Look at a google search caused tirade.
(I wanted to point out too that even people born after the original can still like it... born in 82 and got into Star Trek TNG. Good Sci-Fi survives)

galactus

Sith1ord wrote:

I see several critical mistakes in the points made in here (some already addressed like the air dates vs star wars)

First, BSG was not a clone of Star Wars. It was attempted in the '60s after Star Trek.

The original BSG was made in 1978:
http://battlestar.ugo.com/series/original_battlestar_galactica/

This was a year after Star Wars "A New Hope" was released.

There are definitely references to earlier sci-fi shows like "Star Trek" in the original BSG but it was definitely released to cash in on whole the post-Star Wars thing.

Same could be said for a lot of late 70s movies (Superman and Close Encounters for example).

So its you who are wrong! The Cyclons know where you live and are coming for you.

Seriously, the original BSG is way cool, whatever the motivation for making it. I've always prefered the later (1980) episodes such as "The Night the Cylons Landed":

http://members.cox.net/battlestar/G80D.htm

Sci-fi corn at its best!! :cool:

Horatio

The Starchild is mentioned in the last series to feature Dirk Benedick a Starbuck.
He gats marooned on a planet with a human female and a cylon warrior whom he befriends. Naturally being Starbuck he gets it on with the female and creates an heir which when it eventually escapes the planet with its mother reunites with Galactica in time for the new series when they find Earth and have those annoying kids dressed as cub scouts, how screwed up was that ?

savemejebus

galactus wrote:

The original BSG was made in 1978:
http://battlestar.ugo.com/series/original_battlestar_galactica/

This was a year after Star Wars "A New Hope" was released....

So its you who are wrong!

he never said it was made before star wars, just that it was pitched before it and that the funding wasn't given till the network saw how successful star wars was

First, BSG was not a clone of Star Wars. It was attempted in the '60s after Star Trek. So maybe the characters were semi-based there. But it didn't fly with the network till after Star Wars.

TerrorFirmer

New one is great - I always hated the old BSG.

The effects weren't great - granted ILM at the time was way ahead of rival companies - but they are really cheesy and fake in many parts, and they date terribly today even in comparison to ANH. However, didn't John Dykstra (or however you spell his name) have a hand in the movie effects? Generally, just didn't like it - it didnt create a believable enviroment for me that I really got into. Not that the new one does - but its pretty, and its a bit more interesting

savemejebus

i think the effects in the pilot were pretty good but what annoyed me as the series went on was the recycling of the same few shots in every dogfight, i guess the budgets must have been plummetting as they tried to cut costs towards the end

TonyD79

The title music to the new one is crap.It needs a new one not a rip off of the old one but somehting memorable.Mark snow does music for X files,millenium n now smallville. He took john williams original superman music and gave it an original new feel.


Starbuck as a woman is good cause it would be near impossible to get a male character to be as cool as the original one.

The new cylon robots are crap compared to the original ones but i might feel different after seeing a preview of the 2nd episode of season 2.

New Balter is class n so is his Cylon blonde chick (pity about the rest of the cylon humans)

Another big difference is how the cylons seem more dominant and more of a threat to the BSG which i suppose is good

The Corinthian

Almost all sci-fi series between 1977 and 1987 tended to be either Twilight Zone clones, such Amazing Stories or Tales from the Dark Side or otherwise were essentially based in the present day (e.g. V, Alien Nation). The original Battlestar Galactica was actually one of the few to be set in a futuristic or alien setting. Indeed, in between the original Star Trek in the late 1960’s and its return (in the guise of TNG) in 1987, I think Space 1999 and Logan’s Run were the only other TV series that attempted such a setting.

The old series is recognisable in the new and, outside of bringing the whole thing up to date (making it grittier, relying a little more on science fiction than science fantasy and updating the special effects), there have actually been very few real changes to the storyline. Other than the gender changes for Starbuck and Boomer, the only serious change is that the Cylons were created by man and rebelled rather than an alien race and rebelled (as in the original). That ‘they have a plan’ is arguably another addition, or perhaps simply an omission in the original.

Beyond that changes are largely cosmetic and meant to add more meat to the characters; modern audiences simply do not tolerate the simplistic characters of twenty years ago. And the actors have changed - which is as well given that Lorne Greene (the original Commander Adama) died in 1987.

But I simply don’t know if you can compare them. It would be like a comparison between Shakespeare’s Tempest and the movie Forbidden Planet (the latter is a sci-fi version of the former). I remember being very impressed with it or in Space 1999 almost thirty years ago. But they’ve dated, much like any other sci-fi series or movie. Actually, with the exception of perhaps Star Wars or Alien, very few haven’t.

Well, that's my 2 cent.

Praetorian

In short

Battlestar 1978 was excellent
Battlestar 1980 was terrible (other than the return of starbuck episode)
New Battlestar is excellent so far

Apollonaire

Nukem wrote:

Old one was pretty gritty in terms of content but was ahead of its time

It was a bit of a farce, I mean their whole way of life was effectively wiped out in the first half, in the second half they are on a Casino Planet. I mean I would hardly call that gritty.

In the original the Cylons were created by an alien race of lizard like beings and lead by an Imperious Leader. Count Iblis a fallen being of Light (Galactica's devil) had a hand in creating them.

In the original Baltar was not a pawn of the Cylons but an active participant in the betrayal and spent much of the series working with the Cylons to hunt down the Colonials (despite an apparent beheading in the movie)

Apollo was married briefly in the original to Serina played by Jane Seymour, Boxey was her son. She died of radiation poisoning/cancer and Apollo adopted her son.

There are other alien races in the original series such as Ovions and Borellian No-men.

The original series played up the more Von Daniken elements and was well grounded in Mormon belief.