You know, I tried very hard to like this series. I very much WANTED to be taken in and entertained and delve into it, but I just can't
I am a die-hard Sci-Fi junkie. I can quote Niven &Pournelle &Drake as though they were my own kids. Asimov, Heinlein, Forstchen? Bring 'em on.
I enjoyed the Original BG back in the day. I still have some old trading cards, and a near-mint set of the fold-out blueprints.
This new series, though, just left me flat. I can't say for certain what it was, but it just couldn't keep me interested. Same with the Stargate series. Interestingly enough, I enjoyed the Farscape series.
I wish BG luck. I don't want it to fail, but like I said, I just couldn't get interested in it.
That certainly seems a reasonable conjecture, but then again we do see that Starbuck had a childhood.
At any rate, given that the Final Five were revealed in the temple on the algae planet, i wonder if the Final Five really are even Cylons. After all, Cylons evolved in the past 50 years, whereas the Final Five predate the Colonies by almost 5000 years! Clearly theres a meta narrative going on, and the skinjb cylons are in my opinion not even remotely akin to the walking toasters, though that may be what they were told.
That certainly seems a reasonable conjecture, but then again we do see that Starbuck had a childhood.
And?
I'm sorry, some of the scientific premises of this show strike me as silly. These premises may help the story, but they trap you if you apply any amount of logic.
These Cylons are machines that mimic biological processes so completely that for a long time there was no way to test for them even on a cellular and practically molecular level. They mimic biological processes so completely that the Cylons can successfully breed with humans -- and the crossbreeds can grow.
And yet they cannot sexually reproduce by themselves.
And yet they have abilities that exceed what normal humans can do: strength, stamina, disease resistance, radiation resistance, hide and activate as sleepers, and oh, yeah, the ability to die and transmit your personality to a new unit for replication. Where in the virtually human bodies do you hide all these powers?
And yet there exists a disease (or toxin, I forget) which is utterly lethal to them, yet completely harmless to humans.
And yet, they (presumably) are created fully grown, and never go through childhood and growth.
I don't think having a childhood precludes one from being a Cylon, given the Cylon baby. But really, I just don't think their science as revealed makes a whole lot of sense, so using it to predict what will happen in future episodes is a losing battle. Cylon science can do whatever the scriptwriters need it to do. If they need Starbuck to be born a Cylon, then she was born a Cylon, and poof! the science allows it.
Frankly, my suspension of disbelief was pushed to the limit almost from the start: the idea that they can be undetectably identical to human and yet have all these extra abilities is just hard for me to swallow.
I liked but did not love the miniseries. I fell in love with the series the first season and most of the second season. I didn't care about inconsistencies in technology (show me the SF series that doesn't have any) or the obvious anacronisms. The drama was intense and the plotting was tight and original and obviously running a plot-driven narrative.
Somewhere along the way it became obvious that they'd lost their way. I'm hoping they bring me back around this season--and that they really do end it. Series need to end, dammit.
Dean, I'm not criticizing the tech inconsistencies. I'm advising people not to try to "prove" anything based on the tech, because the tech can do any damn thing the writers want it to do. If the writers decide that every single human ever seen in the series is actually a Cylon and there are no true humans left, then that's how the tech will work, consistency be damned.
Well, now, it's been pretty consistent through the show that Cylons have difficulty reproducing, so much so that they ran multiple experiments trying to reproduce with humans and with their one success being seen as something of a miracle. There are no cylon babies anywhere in the show, they always come out fully formed.
So it's not really the tech per se, it would be dramatically inconsistent with everything they've done before. They'd have to come up with a pretty damned good explanation not to be seen as (once again) insulting their fans.
I think Starbuck having a childhood precludes her being a Cylon, although it wouldn't surprise me a bit if it turns out Cylons have been experimenting with seeing if they can transfer humans into Cylons.
I am so not surprised by this news. SCIFI screwed over Farscape fans by canning it after four seasons, citing, of course, ratings. Just like they're doing with BSG! Apparently Skiffy thinks they can continue to piss off genre fans with impunity, because we'll just keep on coming back for the next "best show on TV" they deign to air.
I'm just happy I'll be able to watch "Dr Who" on BBC America, and won't have to rely on Skiffy for it.
Hokie, I seem to recall that Helo knew Starbuck from way back, and also that Adama made some reference soimewhere to seeing her and Lee grow up together.I could be wrong.
Fair enough. At this point I'm just confused how an apparently reincarnated person appears in the midst of Cylons without being one. I guess that's why the episode is a cliffhanger...
There has never been a genuine science fiction television series, and there have been damned few genuine science fiction movies.
Now by "genuine" I mean SF which does not violate known scientific laws, and any extentions are at least reasonable. This used to be known as "hard" SF. Practioners included Hal Clement, Poul Anderson, Larry Niven, and Jerry Pournelle. If memory serves Greg Anderson may be in that category as well. Basically you won't see phasers, light sabers, "warp core breaches," or any of the other pap drooled from the popular media. If a planet is circling a specific kind of star at a given orbit, then you can rest assured the author checked to find out just what kind of environment that would produce, and generate species logical to that environment. Anderson, for example, was one of the few writers to develop plausible carnivore species. Niven, on the other hand, came up with one of the more plausible herbivore species with his Puppeteers. In fact Poul Anderson's concept of a warm-blooded avian species was quite creatively original, while still preserving known laws.
A second tier of authors -who focused more on people and the society derived from (realistic) postulated science & technology would include Gordon Dickson and H. Beam Piper. Piper especially avoided "gizmos." He postulated contra-gravity, "collapsium" (apparently analgous to neutronium) plating for ships, and a wide variety of "atomic" batteries, from flashlight-sized to power-a-building-sized. Critics generally give him a pass on that since he died in the early 60s, before they had a better grasp of the utility of nuclear power. Still, in just about all of his work the most advanced personal weapons you'll find in his work are cordite-driven slug-throwers; both pistols and rifles. He even re-uses certain company "brands" across novels!
Point being that virtually all the movie and TV SF you see is -strictly speaking- SF-based, not genuine SF. So we have Battlestar Galactica, where the ship is shot at, invaded, blown up, and generally abused, but it never loses its anti-gravity!! Wow.
Same thing for Star Trek and Star Wars, although Lucas essays a pathetic attempt at humor at the beginning of Episode 3 relating to artificial gravity. Considering the physics are completely mucked up and he has star cruisers firing big guns with bloody recoil, we don't need to take that one example seriously.
One goodie that Star Trek fell into was the idea that you could start to "transport" something, then stop. You would basically "hold" the "matrix" in "stasis" (damn, that's a lot of quotes), then complete the "transport" later. Mind you, you still can't create or destroy energy or matter, and even one pound of fresh-roasted coffee involves an insane amount of potential energy, so there must be some truly humongous capacitors on the Enterprise, somewhere.
I could go on for hours, but I'm sure most of you have better things to do. Bottom line: objecting that all series have inconsistencies begs the question, since none of this stuff is real SF in the first place.
5.16.2007 1:47am
Commenting on Dean's World is a privilege, not a right. Dean is your host, you are his guest, and you should behave in that fashion. Dean is not your babysitter, nor is he your punching bag. Please remember this. In general, you are free to disagree with anyone on any subject you wish, but abusive behavior will not be tolerated.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.
You know, I tried very hard to like this series. I very much WANTED to be taken in and entertained and delve into it, but I just can't
I am a die-hard Sci-Fi junkie. I can quote Niven &Pournelle &Drake as though they were my own kids. Asimov, Heinlein, Forstchen? Bring 'em on.
I enjoyed the Original BG back in the day. I still have some old trading cards, and a near-mint set of the fold-out blueprints.
This new series, though, just left me flat. I can't say for certain what it was, but it just couldn't keep me interested. Same with the Stargate series. Interestingly enough, I enjoyed the Farscape series.
I wish BG luck. I don't want it to fail, but like I said, I just couldn't get interested in it.
Respects,
At any rate, given that the Final Five were revealed in the temple on the algae planet, i wonder if the Final Five really are even Cylons. After all, Cylons evolved in the past 50 years, whereas the Final Five predate the Colonies by almost 5000 years! Clearly theres a meta narrative going on, and the skinjb cylons are in my opinion not even remotely akin to the walking toasters, though that may be what they were told.
And?
I'm sorry, some of the scientific premises of this show strike me as silly. These premises may help the story, but they trap you if you apply any amount of logic.
These Cylons are machines that mimic biological processes so completely that for a long time there was no way to test for them even on a cellular and practically molecular level. They mimic biological processes so completely that the Cylons can successfully breed with humans -- and the crossbreeds can grow.
And yet they cannot sexually reproduce by themselves.
And yet they have abilities that exceed what normal humans can do: strength, stamina, disease resistance, radiation resistance, hide and activate as sleepers, and oh, yeah, the ability to die and transmit your personality to a new unit for replication. Where in the virtually human bodies do you hide all these powers?
And yet there exists a disease (or toxin, I forget) which is utterly lethal to them, yet completely harmless to humans.
And yet, they (presumably) are created fully grown, and never go through childhood and growth.
I don't think having a childhood precludes one from being a Cylon, given the Cylon baby. But really, I just don't think their science as revealed makes a whole lot of sense, so using it to predict what will happen in future episodes is a losing battle. Cylon science can do whatever the scriptwriters need it to do. If they need Starbuck to be born a Cylon, then she was born a Cylon, and poof! the science allows it.
Frankly, my suspension of disbelief was pushed to the limit almost from the start: the idea that they can be undetectably identical to human and yet have all these extra abilities is just hard for me to swallow.
Somewhere along the way it became obvious that they'd lost their way. I'm hoping they bring me back around this season--and that they really do end it. Series need to end, dammit.
So it's not really the tech per se, it would be dramatically inconsistent with everything they've done before. They'd have to come up with a pretty damned good explanation not to be seen as (once again) insulting their fans.
I think Starbuck having a childhood precludes her being a Cylon, although it wouldn't surprise me a bit if it turns out Cylons have been experimenting with seeing if they can transfer humans into Cylons.
I'm just happy I'll be able to watch "Dr Who" on BBC America, and won't have to rely on Skiffy for it.
Fair enough. At this point I'm just confused how an apparently reincarnated person appears in the midst of Cylons without being one. I guess that's why the episode is a cliffhanger...
There has never been a genuine science fiction television series, and there have been damned few genuine science fiction movies.
Now by "genuine" I mean SF which does not violate known scientific laws, and any extentions are at least reasonable. This used to be known as "hard" SF. Practioners included Hal Clement, Poul Anderson, Larry Niven, and Jerry Pournelle. If memory serves Greg Anderson may be in that category as well. Basically you won't see phasers, light sabers, "warp core breaches," or any of the other pap drooled from the popular media. If a planet is circling a specific kind of star at a given orbit, then you can rest assured the author checked to find out just what kind of environment that would produce, and generate species logical to that environment. Anderson, for example, was one of the few writers to develop plausible carnivore species. Niven, on the other hand, came up with one of the more plausible herbivore species with his Puppeteers. In fact Poul Anderson's concept of a warm-blooded avian species was quite creatively original, while still preserving known laws.
A second tier of authors -who focused more on people and the society derived from (realistic) postulated science & technology would include Gordon Dickson and H. Beam Piper. Piper especially avoided "gizmos." He postulated contra-gravity, "collapsium" (apparently analgous to neutronium) plating for ships, and a wide variety of "atomic" batteries, from flashlight-sized to power-a-building-sized. Critics generally give him a pass on that since he died in the early 60s, before they had a better grasp of the utility of nuclear power. Still, in just about all of his work the most advanced personal weapons you'll find in his work are cordite-driven slug-throwers; both pistols and rifles. He even re-uses certain company "brands" across novels!
Point being that virtually all the movie and TV SF you see is -strictly speaking- SF-based, not genuine SF. So we have Battlestar Galactica, where the ship is shot at, invaded, blown up, and generally abused, but it never loses its anti-gravity!! Wow.
Same thing for Star Trek and Star Wars, although Lucas essays a pathetic attempt at humor at the beginning of Episode 3 relating to artificial gravity. Considering the physics are completely mucked up and he has star cruisers firing big guns with bloody recoil, we don't need to take that one example seriously.
One goodie that Star Trek fell into was the idea that you could start to "transport" something, then stop. You would basically "hold" the "matrix" in "stasis" (damn, that's a lot of quotes), then complete the "transport" later. Mind you, you still can't create or destroy energy or matter, and even one pound of fresh-roasted coffee involves an insane amount of potential energy, so there must be some truly humongous capacitors on the Enterprise, somewhere.
I could go on for hours, but I'm sure most of you have better things to do. Bottom line: objecting that all series have inconsistencies begs the question, since none of this stuff is real SF in the first place.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.