khaosworks | Living in the now (Reply)

This is in reply to

osj's comment to my Battlestar Galactic post.

I'll tell you why I'm not getting the boxed set... because, as much as I love "Saga of a Star World" and "War of the Gods" and "The Living Legend", only about 8 or so episodes out of the entire first season do not suck. And that's just not worth the price and pain of shelling out for the episodes that do. And I've known they suck since I first watched them as an eleven-year-old. I much, much preferred the novels, which I think remained truer to the original idea of the show.

(Um, I wouldn't mind if anyone bought me the set though. Hint. Hint.)

BSG was a cool concept that was squandered, much like Star Trek: Voyager was. I suspect that since the novels didn't suck, it was Larson who caved to network pressure somehow to dumb down storylines or stick to well-worn cliche plots. As glorious as the pilot was, even that had its cringe-worthy moments.

The part that I love about BSG, the part that I feel is the core to the series, is the central myth. It's about brothers of humanity struggling to survive far across the universe against a genocidal war, impossible odds. That's a very powerful image, humanity's last stand, heroism in a situation far more desperate than anything in the history of mankind.

Laura Roslin: "It's over. You've got 50,000 people.'
Adama: "It hasn't even begun."

Consider if you wanted to do that kind of series again. A group of colonies gets wiped out by an implacable invading force, forcing the survivors to flee into space, pursued by their foes. You don't slap a BSG label on it, fans are going to bitch that it's a rip-off. At the same time, you look back on the BSG series and go, "Oh man, I have to admit that 'Murder on the Rising Star' exists in continuity?"

It can be done. Richard Hatch and Christopher Golden certainly tried to do it in the post-series novels. But when you have an opportunity to completely reimagine the core myth, to take what grabbed you as a kid and try to make it a success this time, to make it appeal to today's generation. Now there's a challenge.

Because you can't trade on nostalgia forever. I can't think of a "sequel" series aside from TNG that has actually been a success, and that worked because it jettisoned the entire old cast, and the concept of Star Trek doesn't need that origin story that BSG demands. You can't jump straight into the series and then say, "Well, kid of today, go watch 'Saga of a Star World'." They'll look at the sets, the SFX (good as they were for the time), Muffit and Boxey and go, "What the fuck is this, isn't that the guy from Bonanza?"

And if you can't do that, what do you have that will grab the viewer? You have to re-work the myth, because that's where the power comes from. As long as you're faithful to the spirit.

That's why I loved Disney's Tarzan, and Hercules, although they played bloody hell with the originals. I didn't like Pocohontas, but for reasons other than the historical criticism it came under (I'm prejudiced against Vanessa Williams, and I didn't like the animation style all that much... personal taste). You want to give the Little Mermaid a happy ending? Enhhh... not so much, because the tragedy kind of was the point of the original. But you want to make it a Broadway musical, be my guest, as long as it's good - and it was. You know what I'm saying.

So, the new BSG, good or bad? I'll be the same as most people who remember the show from their childhoods but have no illusions about it, I guess. I'm going to plop myself in front of the TV set and telepathically transmit my challenge.

"Convince me."