In 2019, Mr. Robot creator Sam Esmail announced that he was working on a reboot of Battlestar Galactica, the sci-fi series from the late 1970s about humanity st
I haven’t seen that much of Battlestar, but I’m gonna hazard a guess that they couldn’t think of a decent ending and came up with some esoteric bullshit, like 90% of sci-fi franchies?
I’m open to reboots, assuming they’re done well of course, and don’t get cancelled halfway through, like most sci-fi shows nowadays.
The BSG reboot really suffered from being a product of its era.
It’s when shows were first really dipping their toes into telling an overarching narrative, but writer’s rooms were still very much geared toward producing stories of the week. The result was that a lot of shows at the time would start incredibly strongly, set up a lot of really interesting premises, and then just meander along because the writers were literally making things up along the way and because there was no coherent plan.
Know how Game Of Thrones fell apart in the last couple of seasons when they outran the preplanned narrative of the books? That’s how a lot of TV ended up in the early 2000s. BSG and Lost are probably the two most prominent examples from around that time, but it was a pretty common problem as the format of TV shows was starting to change.
Heroes lives in my brain as some of the absolute best TV ever made and some of the worst. The first season is incredible, the drop in quality afterwards is shocking.
Most shows were like that at the time, but many could still prevail. Battlestar never fully clicked with me though. I found the space realism interesting but it kinda lacked a narrative focus and the “filler” stuff just did not catch my interest at all, and neither did the characters, which often at least can make up for it.
I definitely appreciate it when shows start with a fully written story already in mind though. But even then they’re not safe of cancelling, because the start might be slower than viewers would like.
Ironically, I’d say the mentioned Stargate started out pretty weak and got better over time (excluding SGU). SG-1 had absolutely horrendous acting in the beginning and a lot of lacking filler episodes with plot points that never resurfaced again.
I still vaguely remember one of the episodes where they planned to ambush the Goa’uld, but failed and Carter hysterically cries out for O’Neil in the most cringeworthy fashion.
My initial comment was more thinking of how sci-fi stuff tend to go all spiritual nuttery towards the end though, which is especially sad when they start out with such a heavy emphasis on science. Always feels like the writer wants to push some narrative.
I haven’t seen that much of Battlestar, but I’m gonna hazard a guess that they couldn’t think of a decent ending and came up with some esoteric bullshit, like 90% of sci-fi franchies?
I’m open to reboots, assuming they’re done well of course, and don’t get cancelled halfway through, like most sci-fi shows nowadays.
The BSG reboot really suffered from being a product of its era.
It’s when shows were first really dipping their toes into telling an overarching narrative, but writer’s rooms were still very much geared toward producing stories of the week. The result was that a lot of shows at the time would start incredibly strongly, set up a lot of really interesting premises, and then just meander along because the writers were literally making things up along the way and because there was no coherent plan.
Know how Game Of Thrones fell apart in the last couple of seasons when they outran the preplanned narrative of the books? That’s how a lot of TV ended up in the early 2000s. BSG and Lost are probably the two most prominent examples from around that time, but it was a pretty common problem as the format of TV shows was starting to change.
Heroes lives in my brain as some of the absolute best TV ever made and some of the worst. The first season is incredible, the drop in quality afterwards is shocking.
Most shows were like that at the time, but many could still prevail. Battlestar never fully clicked with me though. I found the space realism interesting but it kinda lacked a narrative focus and the “filler” stuff just did not catch my interest at all, and neither did the characters, which often at least can make up for it.
I definitely appreciate it when shows start with a fully written story already in mind though. But even then they’re not safe of cancelling, because the start might be slower than viewers would like.
Ironically, I’d say the mentioned Stargate started out pretty weak and got better over time (excluding SGU). SG-1 had absolutely horrendous acting in the beginning and a lot of lacking filler episodes with plot points that never resurfaced again. I still vaguely remember one of the episodes where they planned to ambush the Goa’uld, but failed and Carter hysterically cries out for O’Neil in the most cringeworthy fashion.
My initial comment was more thinking of how sci-fi stuff tend to go all spiritual nuttery towards the end though, which is especially sad when they start out with such a heavy emphasis on science. Always feels like the writer wants to push some narrative.
BSG had the perfectly bleak, nihilistic ending in the middle of the last season but unfortunately continued on after that.