Sucked in by crap? Battlestar Galactica

CaptainMench

CaptainMench

Carbonite Member
Am I being sucked in by crap or is Battlestar Galactica as good as I think it is?

First, I know it's a geek show, but I'm hooked.

The editing, the stories, the actors...

The actors... when have you seen a show with such great actors who are all VERY good looking who can actually act too?

Is the flaws of this show hidden by the fast paced editing and shakey handheld filming? Am I being had here?

Why do I like this show so much!?

BTW -- it's filmed on HD Tape.

CaptM
 
I've never really watched it. I'll tell you one thing, though. It's so rare that I actually find something on TV that I enjoy. Now that you've found something, don't question it. Just enjoy.:beer:
 
It's definitely a good show, but lately it's threatened to jump the shark. They're playing with a more episodic formula this season versus having longer story arcs. I prefer the story arc approach to the more Trekkie episodic show format.

You're not the only one Captain. Its totally ruined my Friday night. I don't go out anymore. I'm hooked.
 
Rolling Stone called it one of the best shows on TV, so it's probably not crap--For RS to come out and call a TV show awesome is something I haven't really seen them do.
 
I think it's the best TV show I've ever seen. Actors performances are so rarely disappointing and often exceeds my expectations
Catchy VFX stuff, never too much in the way (except centurions perhaps).
Editing is good, but they're starting to use the same formula too much (episode starts a few minutes before the conclusion and then jumps back to 48 hours earlier and heads toward the ending)
I just needed a copule episodes to get used to the shakes.
I guess the last episodes have shorter arcs by puropse, the first half of this season was just a big story arc itself, I guess they'll revert to big arcs for the season finale. At least to do one of their "deadly" season finale cliffhangers.

But still: by far the best sci-fi drama I've ever seen.

Leandro
 
No crap here... this truly is one the greatest. If Trek hadn't gone completely off the air I don't know that I would have been forced to seek this out, but I'm glad I did!

The first half of Season 2 was really a wrap-up of the Season 1 arc... I agree that lately things have been stumbling, but last Friday's "Starbuck vs. Scar" ep feels like they're putting it back on track. The idea of Scar still seems kind of silly, especially since he just got invented for this episode (just like Apollo's prostitute friend suddenly appeared in the black market ep).

Not sure why they keep insisting on flashback episodes that re-hash the previous 48 hours. However, this latest one did a really good job of taking us back and forth. Character development for Starbuck was top notch and much needed. The closing scene with Starbuck and Helo was fantastic.

I think things will build to an awesome climax for the season 2 finale... especially with a "real" Six in the fleet and a Boomer and Helo's kid on the way.

I know it's digital, but anybody know which camera it is? I've never been able to track down a clear anough behind the scenes still.
 
I've never seen it. The only thing on TV that I schedule around is 24. That is my show I make sure and watch every week. I don't generally have time for any other TV. But, I'll have to Tivo Battlestar Galactica sometime!
 
That's why I didn't jump on board at first -- Cylons that look human and Boomer and Starbuck turned into girls... but now I wouldn't have it any other way.
 
They use FW950s.

It's a great show. I never miss it. It's a highlight of the week.

But Sci-Fi ran an old-series Galactica marathon last week, which I caught bits and pieces of. I kept thinking, "ah, REAL BSG!"
 
I have been watching the DVDs from season one, and am blown away. I love it. At first I was wierded out by miss Starbuck, but I got used to it.
 
i'm not a fan of the editing techniques the show uses......and i guess alot of other tv shows out there. The quick zoom ins and zoom outs that serve no purpose drive me crazy.
 
Normally on BSG they quick zooms are used to quickly focus in on a particular character for a "moment" ... and they do some cool reveals where they will be tight on a ship out in space and then smash zoom out to reveal a billion circling Cylon Raiders etc.

Regardless of the real intent, I thought this bit of Ron Moore's blog from last April was pretty humorous:
"Why did you choose jerky camera movements?? I'd like to know just why you chose to do this? To me, the camera work looks like it's been done by a first-year film student trying to impress his instructor. It does not emphasize the documentary style you say you're looking for. It's a lazy way to try to instill some kind of emotion to a scene that's lacking in that emotion. If the dialog cannot convey the emotion, new-age and/or lackluster camera work is not going to aid in that conveyance. A weak story line isn't going to be made interesting by "creative" camera work so I would suggest you concentrate on script content, not photographic tricks."

The visual style of the show was deliberately chosen to evoke a sense of realism to a world that, by its very nature, is fundamentally unreal. Ours is a world of many conceits, in which the viewer is asked to believe a great many things that he knows do not exist and so we strive to create a mood that implies, in ways both explicit and subliminal, the idea that, "Yes, in fact, this is a real place and you are watching real events occur." By doing so, we hope to encourage the viewer to suspend his natural disbelief and invest himself into the drama. One of the tools we use to achieve that is to use a visual style which suggests that the viewer is eavesdropping on the proceedings, peering into an objective reality that was captured in some way by an imaginary documentary film crew. The same holds true for the exterior space shots, which are designed to continually suggest that a real cameraman is filming the action as a way of implying that someone had to go "out there" and shoot these objects. The audience has a built-in awareness, whether they are conscious of it or not, of exactly how real cameras move and behave when they are being aimed at real objects, and more we can suggest to the audience that a real camera was involved, the more they're willing to accept unreal objects as actually existing.

Then again, maybe it just looks cool and we like it, so there.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top