Galactica News

[Blade Runner]

Ron Moore on Battlestar Galactica
Written by Scott Collura
Tuesday, 16 November 2004

The Sci-Fi Channel’s Battlestar Galactica redux was pretty well received last year – even if some Galactica devotees continue to hope for a new version of the old show with the original cast. Regardless of that sentiment, Sci-Fi is going ahead with their re-imagining of the premise and the 13-episode first season debuts in January.

Now Playing Magazine recently spoke with Ronald D. Moore, executive producer and showrunner for the series, in an exclusive interview. Moore reveals that Galactica, for all its sci-fi trappings, is really not much of a genre show.

“In fact, there are really no aliens in the Galactica universe,” he says. “We don’t have any planet of the week shows. Basically, it’s the 50,000 people stuck out in these ships, hunting for a place called Earth, and they have no friends and no enemies except for the Cylons. And most of the planets that they run into are uninhabitable and rocks in space and it’s a desperate attempt to find food and fuel and keep going. It’s a tale of survival; it’s not really an adventure of running into different species every week and doing that type of format. It’s really them stuck in these ships and they only have each other.”<br>
In an interesting twist to the format, Moore reveals that while most of the show will take place onboard the fleeing fleet of ships, the series will also cut back to the Galactica’s ravaged home planet of Caprica.

“It’s very different,” says Moore. “It opens up the show. It gives you an opportunity to go and tell stories on a planet surface. When we’re on the ships, it’s very interior; it’s very claustrophobic; it’s a lot of interior drama that’s happening. It’s more about character relationships. Then you get to cut back to Caprica and see a more suspense-driven type of plot. I see the show primarily as a drama… a psychological drama about what would happen to you and I if the world vanished and we were stuck on these ships out in the middle of nowhere fighting for our lives. What would happen to us? What would happen to our relationships? What part of our civilization and our culture would we choose to carry with us? What means something to you and I in [those] circumstances?”<br>
Moore, who got his start writing for Star Trek: The Next Generation, sees Galactica as a very different type of show when compared to the various Trek spin-offs.

“Star Trek is a very specific show; it writes within very specific parameters and Galactica is the anti-Trek,” he says. “Galactica goes out of its way not to do things the way Star Trek did them. I think Star Trek has a lot of good points to it. I think Star Trek is an interesting show that says a lot of good and positive and interesting things, but on some levels I don’t connect to the characters as human beings in the way that I do with the Galactica characters. I think the Galactica characters are very close to you and Star Trek is taking a very specific approach and saying this is what humanity will be like in the future, and holding up this idea of what the future will be like. Galactica says this is what we are like and this is what we’re like today and what if this happened to you?”

[Blade Runner]

DeSanto Still Pushing For Galactica

Source Sci Fi Pulse
7 December 2004
By Ian M. Cullen

According to a report posted at the Battlestargalacticaclub.com forums by jayworld, X Men producer Tom DeSanto is still pushing for a Galactica continuation in spite of the success of the Galactica mini series which aired last year.

Jayworld who met and spoke to Richard Hatch at the recent Wizard World Convention in Dallas (Arlington) was informed by Hatch that Tom DeSanto had recently approached Universal studios with the idea of doing a continuation movie or series as an animated show as apposed to a live action show, however Hatch claimed that Universal had turned the proposal down saying that fans of the new Galactica series may find it confusing if there was another Galactica series on at the same time as their remake.

Regardless of this news, continuations fans and the CFF are still hopeful that a continuation will be possible via an independent movie produced by Glen A Larson who happens to own the theatrical rights to Galactica.

[Alan]

Blade said:

Hatch claimed that Universal had turned the proposal down saying that fans of the new Galactica series may find it confusing if there was another Galactica series on at the same time as their remake.

Giving yet more ammunition to those few hardcore TOS fans who want to see the new series fail so they can get their continuation.

[Chalcedony]

What is the deal with TOS fans wanting a continuation? I'll say it here because I'm most likely to get an answer without landing in the middle of a flamewar. I really don't get it. It sounds like active campaigning for a "reunion show" (like the kind that Carol Burnett does every 10 years or so), and those are so awful. It seems a little perverse and I don't get it. I've seen posts on other boards that get pretty passionate about it. What's that all about? It was cool, but it wasn't THAT cool.

Genuinely curious, please don't send me off to bizarro flamebait land to be mercilessly poked at by Dirk Benedict fans.

S.

[Blade Runner]

[Chalcedony]

[Xenu]

I just wrote a huge, long reply to this before thinking better of it & deleting it, because it wasn't anything that hasn't been said before.

All I will say is...I hear ya', Chal . I'm very glad we got what we got.

[Chalcedony]

Xenu said:

I just wrote a huge, long reply to this before thinking better of it & deleting it, because it wasn't anything that hasn't been said before.

All I will say is...I hear ya', Chal . I'm very glad we got what we got.

Maybe nothing YOU haven't seen being said before, but I'm actually not real familiar with the standard arguments. :-) I'm just curious to know if there's a "positive" interpretation of TOS fidelity, because it just looks kind of tweaked to me. I understand fan loyalty, but what makes TOS that much more worthy of worship than, say, Buck Rogers?

I felt kind of sorry for Princess Ardala, but I also thought she had way better outfits than Wilma. Plus a way better name.

[Alan]

Wow, gotta love that hat! ;D

[Xenu]

First of all...yowsa!

Secondly....as to your question; its hard to say. I honestly do not know what makes the hardcore TOS fans treat BSG like its some kind of unalterable masterwork (and wittingly or unwittingly, thats what some of them do). I mean, I grew up in the 70's, I loved the show, too...but its not Dune...heck, its not even Star Trek. It did have an interesting premise with a lot of potential; thats the only reason I can really think of why it is treated with more fan reverence than, say, Buck Rogers.

Part of what I don't understand & can't get on board with as far as the continuation campaign goes is the insistance of most of these hardcore fans on using the original cast. I would like to see them pick up where the story left off as much as the next guy (though admittedly not as much as some), but why, oh why would you not want the best actors & talent possible to be cast, rather than somewhat obscure TV stars from a quarter-century ago who, though they may be nice folk & compotent actors, are not exactly dramatic, or even cinematic, heavyweights.

This, I believe, is one of the main factors that kept any of the fan-led revival efforts from really being taken seriously in any executive's eyes. Even in the big Variety ad they took out, the phrase "with the original cast" is right there in bold print. I know any producer I've ever met or worked with would have stopped reading then & there. No one in the industry would ever make that kind of casting leap of faith (that's an extremely kind euphamism I chose there, too). Heck, even the Star-Trek revival wouldn't happen in todays Hollywood market. Names sell...especially when foreign money enters the equation (then they are the ONLY things that sell). Sad but true.

I also don't know for sure, but just to play dimestore psychologist for a moment, I think that the reverence and insistence upon the return of the original cast is indicative of the hardcore TOS fans looking at things through somewhat rose-colored glasses. Its not really a continuation they want, or for Glen Larson's blessing, or for Starbuck to be a man....its that they just want that feeling back that they associate with the original show; be it because of fond childhood memories, or shared experiences with friends, or for whatever reason.

This is why, no matter how a re-make, re-imagining, or continuation was done, it would never please all the fans...or probably even most of them. The very fact that the source material itself is so...well, lets just say underdeveloped, at best, is a sign that the integrity of the show itself is not whats really important; everyone of the fans just wants Galactica back in their own special way...and the most obvious way is just to put all the pieces back together just as they were originally.

Unfortunately, the old series as a whole was greater than simply the sum of its parts....hence the best course of action, IMHO, was to simply start fresh from square one, just as RDM and company have done, and try to capture the potential of what the core idea of Galactica was, and what it could have been, had the circumstances been more in its favor. I think they've succeeded admirably; others feel differently & always will no matter what happens.

You have to admit, though, whatever the case, we've gotten 2 fine TV shows and a lot of interesting reading material out of the equation!

[DKCARTER]

Hi. I´m new at this forum. I love the new series and I hope it gets a long life. I think there is plenty of space for both shows because the new series is so different that I think both could easily go into very different themes and stories. When you think about the original you think STAR WARS...when I think about the new one I think 9/11, BABYLON 5, WEST WING...A new story is born and I love it. So if we get a fabulous TV show (and long-lived and loved because I´ve had bad luck with my last choices, as ODDYSSEY 5) and good movies, I can live with both (much better than with none of them)

[Blade Runner]

Alan said:

Wow, gotta love that hat! ;D

Did'nt JayKay bring that look back into fashion

[Chalcedony]

Xenu said:

First of all...yowsa!

Secondly....as to your question; its hard to say. I
You have to admit, though, whatever the case, we've gotten 2 fine TV shows and a lot of interesting reading material out of the equation!

Monsieur Xenu,

Thank you for taking the time to write such a nice long reply, it really did help (I had no idea they took out an ad in Variety! Wow!), and I think I understand it a little better now. I think you're on to something with your psychological reading. I'd thought something similar, that perhaps the generosity of TOS actors wrt conventions and being available to fans might have made them particularly hardcore loyalists. They are devoted to Richard Hatch. I think that's really sweet. I'm glad that he got a part in TNS.

"Celebrity" is a funny thing - I think people get enchanted by interaction with celebrities (minor or otherwise) because they're kind of like demigods that came out of the magic box and appeared in real actual life. Celebrities can end up with loyal followings even if they're not particularly good at what they do if they foster a positive relationship with their fanbase. (Then there are people who prefer to keep their distance and can do so because they're damn good at what they do. Plus the fanbase is scary, like the Wild Things in Where the Wild Things Are.

/me Oh, no, please don't go! We'll eat you up, we love you so!

[Chalcedony]

Alan said:

Wow, gotta love that hat! ;D

If the hat is the only thing in that picture that made an impression, I'm going to have to make some revisions to my Alan-idea.

[caseOrange]

Xenu said:

Its not really a continuation they want, or for Glen Larson's blessing, or for Starbuck to be a man....its that they just want that feeling back that they associate with the original show; be it because of fond childhood memories, or shared experiences with friends, or for whatever reason.

i think you nailed it there. They are not fans of the concept of BSG, they are fans of the show. Star Trek went on without Capt. Kirk and Mr. Spock, and Star Wars went on without Luke Skywalker because the fans are into the concept.
Granted, these examples might be a little off the mark because none of these characters reappeared with different actors in their roles, but i think you see what i'm getting at. Maybe a better example would be the James Bond series.
If these were true BSG fans they would like TNS because it would be a revival of the concept. Besides all that, they can't have the entire original cast back anyway because Lorne Greene is dead.