Universal Developing Battlestar Galactica Movie

Alright I know what you’re thinking… the final episodes of Battlestar Galactica are about to air on the Sci Fi Channel, and they’re already preparing to spin it off into a feature film franchise. Well, although there is another direct-to-DVD movie planned for sometime after the series finale, they’re not about to bring the re-imagined version to the big screen. What is apparently coming to the big screen, however, is a Battlestar Galactica movie based on the original 1978 series instead!

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Universal Pictures are in talks with Glen A. Larson, creator of the original Battlestar, to write and produce a new movie based on his original concept. It will not be connected in any way to the Sci Fi Channel series, although characters like Adama, Starbuck, and Baltar will remain (Starbuck likely being a man again this time). Larson is the same man responsible for such classic shows as Magnum P.I., The Fall Guy and Knight Rider, but his own recent attempts to bring Knight Rider to the big screen have been stymied by the new NBC remake.

So why bring out a BSG movie based on the original series now? Wasn’t the whole point of the new series that they re-invented it for today’s audience? I think the only way I’d be interested is if they kept it campy and played on old school nostalgia, similar to what they were talking about doing for the Buck Rogers movie. Do you think this idea has potential? Does anyone actually want to see a new old Battlestar Galactica movie?

  • Irish

    This has to be a joke, right? In my opinion, a (1978 series) remake is just a huge waist of money, time and resources. Script in trash – now, please. If you want to get serious for a minute, make a feature film franchise of the new, “re-imagined” Battlestar Galactica with its incredible cast and brilliant cinematography. You’ll make so much $$$$ money you’ll be… well … what can I say.

  • Mark

    I cannot wait to see this! I hope Tom DeSanto is involved. Hell, the Sci Fi channel version stole most of its best stuff from his continuation work.

  • TheDecepticon

    Ron Moore’s BSG is a abomination. Comprised of soap opera-esque revelations mistaken for “depth” by virtually illiterate SF morons. The production design is off the shelf at Home depot. The acting is either wooden and lifeless or so overhammed that it would make Miss Piggy embarassed. The continuity is an abysmal mess. I watched one episode where two warriors were supposedly hiding from the cylons by sitting next to a campfire in the rain. Golly, surely no better way to hide from beings DESIGNED to find and kill humans than that! It seems one could defeat the cylons on Moore’s show by simply sleeping with their best friend instead of having to defeat them militarily.

    I find Moore’s BSG to be completely consistent with other SF channel fare, such as MANSQUITO.

    Tell me, what other science fiction was on TV at the time of the original? Virtually none. BSG opened the door to SF on television again after the 60’s. For that achievement alone, it deserves it’s own movie.

  • Goon



    the original BSG is a joke. the new BSG is the best show on television.

  • UFORocks

    @TheDeception; Wow, all that just to say you dont like the remake. Did you just write all that to prove how literate you are in comparison to the rest of us, “illiterate SF morons”?

    The remake is appropriate for the time in which it’s written and if you dont like it then you dont have to watch it.

    As to the original series I have to ask, “who gives a damn”? It was a bad series to begin with that got canceled. And it was completely forgotten by everyone outside of an obscure niche of people that actually liked the original series.

    The original was and still is crap, and making a movie based on it is a complete waste of time.

  • john

    When I heard of a movie being made, I was hoping a prequel similar to the Razor episodes. Seeing a young Adama would be great, as well as exploring the storyline that led up to the current BSG serie. I agree that it is the best series ever. Watching the 70’s version is like watching the Rocky Horror Picture Show, you just do it for the camp value.

  • Nushien

    I hope this is speculation. Almost all of the current Battlestar Galactica fans are fans of the most recent show. It’s very well written — with great depth and detail. I hope Moore gets to make a movie first :)

  • Haunted Mesa

    > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA

    > the original BSG is a joke. the new BSG is the best > show on television.

    No, you’re a joke. The new BSG is a disaster worthy of scorn. The old original BSG paved the way for the existing show so be grateful for that since Ronald Moore doesn’t have the talent or skill to create Battlestar Galactica circa 1978. The 1978 show had one big handicap with 30 year old tech. Even star was would be better made in 2009.

    The new show is about as stale as a crusty century old loaf of bread. Ronald Moores BSG is feldergarp. The attitude of the new show is let’s do everything different from the old show. Basically they changed several characters to women including Admiral Cain. Ronald Moore overhumanized the Cylons. In one episode the idea of a climax is a suicide. The 70s show doesn’t have the advantage of modern CGI because it would kick Ronald Moore’s Battlestar’s Ass if the old show had modern CGI and animation.

    The original show was way better cast and the opening was much better musically. The new BSG opening is the cylons evolved into 12 models and they have a plan. So what. The new BSG is slow as a snail and has very little scifi being more of a soap instead of having adventure or intrigue like the old show. The new BSG is like ER in space with a bunch of dialog and little to know scifi. They basically wanted a really cheap show at the scifi channel so the result is about 95% drama and character plot with maybe a 5% scifi show which is why there are so few space battles in the entire 5 year series. The idea of the new show is more drama and very little space or planetary intrigue or discovery. There was more action in the Battlestar Galactica 1978 Pilot than there was in the entire Battlestar 2004+ disaster.

    Dirk Benedict and Lorne Greene and John Colicos and Jane Seymour were way better as a cast than the new Battlestar with a bunch of no name cast members. Most of the new cast were basically nameless actors who no one had ever heard of or didn’t have the credits except possibly Edward James Olmos.

    Lorne Greene at least has a lot more charisma than Edward James Olmos. So does John Calicos as Baltar in a role that thoroughly destroys the new Baltar who attempts to be a messianic disaster.

    One thing that is absolutely terrible in the new show is that it is more of a soap opera written to appeal to drama queens and sci fi wannabes instead of featuring classic sci fi settings and exploration that the old show attempted to portray with greater courage 30 years ago with less technology and computer CGI in it’s infancy. The 1978 show was much more path breaking than the new show. It basically paved the way like it or not. The 1978 show explored much more technology and wasn’t afraid to push the bounds of TV technology. There was almost no technology in 1978 including video screens that were Tektronix terminals. A 6502 is thousands of times less powerful than a Intel Core 2. Semiconductors were extremely primitive but the show tried to push the scope much harder than the new show with 30 years of technology.

    Ronald Moores show BSG is so conservative it barely attempts to push the limits and has very little space interaction and just tries to turn the show into a play instead of truly exploring the limits of technology. They used bullets to protect the Battlestar Galactica. There are no technology innovations in the entire show and the stealth viper basically was a one or two show event which was never recreated. For all the colonies technology they still don’t exceed 21st century earths technology. In this regard it is a disaster.

    The old show make the mistake of trying to make the Cylons too robotic but the technology is 30 years old. This new show makes the Cylons too human and doesn’t even delve into the Cylon robotic culture and basically throws almost all the cylon robotics down the rabbit whole. Whereas the new show was written to appeal to men more the new show was written to appeal to women with more soap dialog and little technology.

    The 1978 show with Count Iblis Patrick McGee basically tops the 2004 which never really has anyone with the same acting caliber.

    This is a list of the BSG shows and which version was better.

    A greater than sign ‘>’ denotes which show element was better and a ‘ 2004 BSG
    Comments: BSG 1978 had Jane Seymour, Lorne Greene, Patrick Macnee, model-actress Maren Jensen (Athena), John Colicos, Lloyd Bridges, Terry Carter (Tigh). The old show cast was all a charisma cast.

    2004 BSG 30 years newer > 1978 BSG

    Opening score
    1978 BSG > 2004 BSG

    Chief Villain
    John Colicos Baltar > 2004 BSG “????” Villain
    Patrick McNee Count Iblis > 2004 BSG Baltar

    Admiral Adama
    Lorne Greene “Charisma” > Edward James Olmos

    Best BSG Babe
    1978 Jane Seymour > 2004 Tricia Helfer
    1978 Maren Jensen > Katie Sackhoff
    1978 Anne Lockhart > 2004 Mary McDonnell
    1978 Laurette Spang (Cassiopeia) > ????

    Best Music Score
    1978 BSG fanfare > 2004 BSG with Drums

    Opening Dialog
    1978 dialog with Patrick Macnee “There are those who believe that life here began out there,….” > “They have a plan” 2004 BSG

    Battlestar Displays
    1978 BSG Tektronix displays cooler > 2004 Battlestar Displays

    Pushing Technology
    1978 Battlestar Galactica > 2004 BSG

    Best BSG Cylon Robots
    1978 Cylons Centurion > 2004 BSG Cylons
    Hey the 1978 Cylons had lasers and would dust the new ones.

    Best BSG Cylon Basestar
    1978 Basestar > 2004 boomerang basestar

    Best Saul Tigh
    1978 Terry Carter (Tigh) > 2004 Tigh

    Best Commander Cain
    1978 Admiral “Charm” Legend Cain > 2004 “B****” Admiral Cain

    Best Episode
    1978 BSG “War Of The Gods” with count Iblis > ??? 2004 BSG

    Best BSG Show
    1978 BSG (13 wins one big handicap) > 2004 BSG (1 win)

  • Goon

    nothing you said is true.

    the end.

  • Haunted Mesa

    Please Explain what the new Battle Star Galactica means by “They Have a Plan.”

    What plan?

  • Haunted Mesa

    > nothing you said is true.

    > the end

    You mean what you were saying.

  • Mantra

    > Wow, all that just to say you dont like the remake.
    > Did you just write all that to prove how literate you > are in comparison to the rest of us, “illiterate SF > > morons”?

    You should take your words seriously.

    > The remake is appropriate for the time in which it’s > written and if you dont like it then you dont have to > watch it.

    Yes, We do have to watch it to correct the record and really ask for the Battlestar that fans want. Ronald Moore’s version of Battlestar Galactica is not the one that the “true fans want.” On the record I hope they never make another one like it.

    This is the same issue with the most recent Batman The Dark knight where it is like taking a canvas and painting it with dark oil. It has all the color and beauty of a horror novel and is like painting an impressionist painting in dark without color with no difference between grey or black. As Ford would say “you can have it in any color just so it’s black.” Battlestar 2004 is just bleak with no color or texture.

    There are fans that prefer the color and optimism and fun of the original Battle Star which had a lot more vision and potential. If the old show were also remastered like the Old Trek Show and would probably kick the new Shows ***.

    > As to the original series I have to ask, “who gives a > damn”? It was a bad series to begin with that got
    > canceled. And it was completely forgotten by everyone > outside of an obscure niche of people that actually
    > liked the original series.

    1978 BSG was a good series which had some bad episodes. The pilot movie for 1978 BSG was very good. There are bad Star Trek Shows that doesn’t mean that Star Trek is a bad show. 1978 Battlestar had some very good shows including the 7 million dollar pilot.

    The problem is that a lot of the new 2004 BSG episodes are bad and lack imagination or innovation or pizazz. Some examples are where the fleet went to earth and earth was nuked or when there was the episode ending suicide (You couldn’t due that on ABC which is why it isn’t on a network ABC unlike the original. Second tier shows can try to do really off the wall suicidal plots which would cause much more uproar on network TV).

    The coup was also kind of pointless since it didn’t really accomplish much to further the plot just detract from the shows direction which is missing.

    Another example of a bad episode or plot in the new BSG is where the fleet basically decided to settle New Caprica which was really a disaster and totally out of character of the show which is fleeing the Cylons. Not only that but the occupation was also portrayed quickly and very poorly. Adama would never let Baltar take the election.

    Another questionable action is the Cylon Human alliance.

    2004 BSG also had a bad plot when they made Cavil into a “Bad Teenage Cylon”.

    Another plot whole is where they sacrificed the better Battlestar Pegasas instead of the Galactica to escape from New Caprica. Logic would dictate that the older Battlestar would be destroyed and they’d try to save the newer one but this show doesn’t follow any sort of logic. Military planning would dictate saving the higher priority military asset than the lower priority military asset in a war. This is even more illogical considering the battle damage and that the Galactica was essentially mothballed prior to escape.

    A good well written show wouldn’t have these types of plot errors.

    JJ Abrams would make a way better Battlestar that is actually logical and compelling. Then again the Current Battlestar is nothing like Lost or Alias or Fringe.

    > The original was and still is crap, and making a
    > movie based on it is a complete waste of time.

    Actually the new 2004 Battlestar Galactica is a complete waste of time.

    The pilot episode cost $7 million so it’s not crap. The old show is not cheap either. They probably spent more on the original 1978 show than on the 2004 show per episode including inflation. If you make a real scifi show it probably costs more which is why 2004 BSG is 5% scifi and 95% soap drama.

    The 1978 Battlestar Galactica was one of the highest rated shows of all time. It had ratings the new show could only dream of. One of the reasons why it got canceled was the cost but you could argue that about Stargate Atlantis. Another reason is that the Scifi channel has no clue about programming and canceled Dresden for a cheapy Flash Gordon whose only redemption are the “Hot Women” and Farscape for Tremors. The Scifi channel is trying to cell the 2004 BSG as a gold enema or the greatest show which it’s not. The Scifi channels track record is B series shows such as Tremors or reruns of Dark Shadows or Ghost Hunters not Tony Soprano. “Don’t believe the hype. BSG 2004 is not a classic.”

    Based on ratings the old show was higher rated than the new show will ever be. Just on numbers the 1978 show is higher rated than the 2003+ new show ever will be so take that. The old 1978 Battlestar Galactica was a phenomenon while the new show is just on a third tier network with a smaller audience and less of a fan base. The 1978 original was on a real network called ABC not also ran Scifi channel which cancels shows periodically. Hey there are a lot fewer viewers of the new show than ever existed for the old show. Based on that the new 2004 Battlestar fans are probably a minority.

    The 1978 Battlestar is not crap. Crap is a Doctor Who show from the 60s campy with no special effects. The 1978 Pilot was very watchable as a feature with good special effects for 1978. The fanfare was inspiring and actually orchestrated by a professional orchestra unlike the new show. The cast was also above average and at least they had Jane Seymour which is more than you can say about the new show.

    If it weren’t for the original the 2004 Battlestar Galactica wouldn’t exist. All the themes in the original are also similar in the new show. Making a remake of the original would not be bad. If you hate the original so much why are you watching the new show @TheDeception since they are both similar in plot?
    The old show just has 30 year old special effects to handicap it whereas the new show has bad stories and bad direction which hamper it.

  • Johnny

    The possibilities for a BSG Movie are virtually as vast as the Galaxy, particularly using th Original series as the basis. A re telling of that story, a look back in to the dim past at the founding of the colonies, the ture origins of the cyclons, the fate of their long presumed dead creators, the fate of the Pegasus, the mysterious Crystal Ship, etc.

    An even more exciting possibilty is REAL actor taking on the role of Adama. Watching the crusty, semi senile character portrayed lamely by Edward James Olmos has all the excitment and believability of, lets say, Jerry Seinfeld playing Tarzan.

    The current castration, I mean, incarnation, of BSG reminds me of “Wing Commander”. Not the Excellent Series of Computer games, but instead The 1999 stinker in which Freddie Prinze Jr proved that bad acting and a bad script can overcome an special effects, no matter how good they are.

    Say Maybe edwatf James Olmos and Freddie Prinze Jr. could team up for the next talentless remake of a Sci Fi Classic series – “Lost in Space … the Rodriguez Family blasts off from the barrio”.

  • Let me put it this way: for me the greatness of the new BSG is self evident, and everything I’ve seen from the original, which admittedly is only so much, is sub-Tron cheese. You and your buddies from wherever this got linked from can all write massive diatribes, but when you have to try and shit on the new one so much to try and pump up the original, it doesnt come across as reasoned, and just falls on deaf ears.

  • “for me the greatness of the new BSG is self evident”

    Goon, you must realize you are killing me with this.

  • “Ronald Moore’s version of Battlestar Galactica is not the one that the “true fans want.”

    I dont care if the new BSG is true to the original and panders to the original fans. it is what it is and I like it. Ron Moore has been doing great work both here, as well as on Carnivale and Star Trek: TNG

  • yeah whatever Henrik :p

    I’d argue with you too but you’ve pissed on the Wire, Sopranos, and all these other shows, so whatevs. Not gonna go there, dont have time for the same ol argument.

  • I was thinking the exact same thing. I’m sure this post could go to 50 comments in 24 hours, but just seems redundant.

    I guess my social skills are improving.

  • I do agree that Ron Moore did good work on TNG though.

  • yeah, ha ha i was just thinking about how this was just going to play out exactly as we expect and people were just going to complain about us again.

    its nice that we’ve almost made peace about disagreeing on most things. group hug.

  • we agree on what matters – god and the wrestler.

  • one of each among our our favorite, and least favorite, fictional characters :P

  • Jason

    TheDecepticon and Haunted Mesa are both rambling idiots. Ronald Moore is a genius. The end.

  • Ernesto

    I am 42 years old. I hated the original BSG when I was a kid and as far as I am concerned the Ron Moore BSG is the best thing ever put on television. I am not interested in a movie based on the old version at all.

  • Fan of Both

    I love it, people fighting over which is better. Here’s a clue guys & gals…they’re two different shows with the same name. The 78-79 series was a battle against a completely robotic “culture” and encountered other “races” along the way (that second part reminds me of Star Trek actually). Its point was not to look into the frailties of humanity, but rather its ability to overcome. It did not have political commentary, it was made for entertainment. The new series is deeper in the sense of how it looks at people and persons, why we fight with each other, why we love each other, how we can fail, and how we can succeed. The culture of the times was vastly different as well. We were not involved in an unpopular war, religious strife was certainly not as noticeable, and sitcoms were far more popular than humanistic dramas. Look at them as separate series, using a similar background, and both are/were good shows. The original never really hit its stride, whereas people easily identified with the new characters, and wanted more, that’s all.

  • leathrpaws

    Mantra and haunted Mesa- neither of you has gotten the point of NEW vs. OLD BSG. The original series was the most advanced sci-fi series of its time, and yet it looks like crap and plastic now because the props and the effects are so outdated. It had some good concepts, but it was time for a fresh start. The “re-imagined” version started out with a war 40 years in the past, after which the Cylons simply disappeared. The Galactica, was being decommissioned and turned into a museum after some 50 years of service, when suddenly the Cylons are back, but they aren’t toasters anymore, they’re human-like. I was a bit disturbed about Starbuck and Boomer being women rather than men, but it worked. The “Cylons among us” idea was hard to grasp at first but it was developed well. In this age of advance graphics it would be a waste to simply redo the original, because those minds and those concepts have been replaced by others with a better view of the future. Look how Star Trek evolved through its 5 series. To ask for an updated original-style BSG would neither be a challenge for the studios nor entertainment for the fans. Stop trying to live in the past. Lost In Space (Movie) tried to do both, by using the old-style Jupiter 2 concept as a launch vehicle, but having the real Jupiter 2 nestled inside and updated. that movie would have spawned sequels if it hadn’t been only about effects and if they hadn’t chosen that ridiculous time-travel idea for the script. BSG as a series would never have lasted 4 years if they had just remade and revamped the original. I look forward to “The Plan” this summer, and also to “Caprica”. phooey on all you stick in the muds who don’t want anything to change from 1978 to 2004, just better effects- with the same story. the new series was about an old dilapidated ship that at one time HAD been like the ship in the first series- only it was 40 years later, which you obviously missed. Moore and the cast did a great job updating the concept for today, and couching the war on terrorism in the stories. The3 series is over, so stop griping. Let those of us who liked it have good memories, as you do of the original (me too, at the time I thought it was great, but I was only 25, and now I look back at it and roll my eyes.) peace and long life

  • leathrpaws

    oh yes- addressed to all of you in here- have that many folks really forgotten how to spell and make grammatically correct sentences? or don’t they teach that in schools any more?

  • ME

    Some of these people need to lay off the caffeine. WOW.

  • flockof4

    I might also add that comparing ratings and viewership numbers from 1978 to today is complete folly and disingenuous. The majority of households in 1978 had three networks plus PBS coming in over the air. Many didn’t even have that. Today most homes can bring in upwards of 10 channels OTA and more than 200 via cable/satellite. Nearly ALL shows have lower ratings today than they did then. There’s too much competition. I don’t so much mind that you two loved the original series and hate this one. That’s your opinion freely had. It’s your arrogance and false facts (see above) that render your diatribes mute.

    I was 10 when the original BSG was aired. I watched it; wasn’t my favorite, but I appreciated the show. The current re imagined series is light years beyond that one in story telling and ethos. And for a kind of cheesy cable channel (Sci Fi) they splurged on special effects and hit a home run with this series. I really liked it. They also had the courtesy to wrap it up for us. How many times does that happen? To address the original point, I’ll go see a movie based on the first series because I enjoy good sci fi. If it’s any good or not remains to be seen.

  • stinkybean

    I agree with flockof4, I will give the movie a chance, but it sounds like a dud in the making. The idea of pandering to all 10 of the fans left of original series sounds like a HUGE mistake to me. Hopefully they can bring back that retarded kid and his robot dog, maybe market it the thing to children, and it will work out. Maybe get some input from George Lucas and Stephen Spielberg, get them running around New York, fighting crime and cylons. If they are going to lay down a turd, may as well make it ripe as possible. Someone has to buy toys.
    That said, it would be very difficult to make a movie from the recent series because they did the unthinkable and went ahead and finished it, which is more than the original series did. I always wondered if Starbuck or Apollo would be the fire chief of New York.

  • Chris in Texas

    Wow, Haunted Mesa, you hit it right on the head. As far as writing goes, TOS definitely was better than BSG03. But, some people are easily wowed by CGI.

    One thing not really discussed too much, however, is the mythology/theology of the two series. Larson’s in TOS was far superior. And wow, could BSG03 have used a Count Iblis, or what!?! They crossed over Pegasus and Cain, so they should have done likewise with Iblis. But BSG03 doesn’t really explore good vs. evil. “God” in BSG03, in true intelligent design fashion, uses evil as much as good to suit “It’s” purposes (e.g., blowing up the Colonies to get the ball rolling toward the new Earth.

    What TOS series needs is a good solid ending like Moore gave us in Daybreak. The abortion that was the TOS sequel does not count, not at all. All what is really cool that Larson can do for us is bring Galactica and the fleet to our time (2009)!!! How cool would that be!?! They fly down, meet Pres. Obama or the head of the UN. Mankind on Earth realizes it’s not alone. That would be a sweet ending. Everything is bliss… and then the Cylons show up! Something crazy like the Planet of the Apes remake did.

    Original series vs new series debates really are useless, folks! Both had up-sides and down-sides. We’re gonna see this in May with Star Trek vs. ST:TOS. Pointless, pointless, pointless. Just enjoy the “rollercoaster ride through the eye of the needle” as Helo put it, folks!!!

  • Hellcrooner

    Guess what…
    Both versions are GREAT in their styles.

    And if you could sit Ronald D Moore and Glen A Larsson in the same table for 30 minutes they could come to an awesome conclusion.

    A film is a very GOOD oportunity to fulfill the Circle.

    All of this has happened before……..yes in 1978.

    Use the 78 Canon to set the Past of reimagined series, Let the Nuked “earth” Found in Revelations be the “Caprica” from the original series.

  • Thierry

    > The 70s show doesn’t have the advantage of modern CGI because it would kick Ronald Moore’s Battlestar’s Ass if the old show had modern CGI and animation.

    Not everything is in modern CGI and animation, there’s also something in distinguishing the term “galaxy” from the “star system”. In the OS, they kinda used… whichever.

  • Dean

    Well, I would love to see “Battlestar Galactica: Saga of A Star World” re-released on DVD in its entirety with updated special effects. I think “Saga” was originally a three hour movie.

  • Don

    im 21 years old, and of course i don;t remember sitting down and watching TOS version of BSG because obviously i wasn’t i wasn’t even born yet, but anyway i did happen to watch a few episodes and clips of the original series only because i was curious to see how the new series….and i have to im not to interested in the original but thats just me. in my honest and non-biased opinion i think that the original series was just a great series for its time but if u watched it now it just doesn’t fit.

    Sci-fi shows that come out in this day time can’t really be “too sci-fi” they have more to it than just a bunch of ridiculous action scenes every five minutes. both series have great story’s to tell but both are lacking something more that stops them from being exceptional.

  • Don

    i also believe fans of the old series barely gave the new reinvisioned story a chance because they already fell in love with it and anything else would be utter garbage i guess. maybe i would have the same attitude if the “reimagined” firefly but i wouldn’t bash it from the get go.

    i bet some of you who are completely bashing new BSG watched it all the way to end and still continued to say how much it sucked. also another thing so what if it was the highest rated series at that time, that has no relevance in 2009. back then there was no cable and cbs, nbc, and abc were the main three primetime networks because there wasnt anyone else, but today u have in between 200-300 something cable channels airing there own series. some of the popular cable tv shows only get 2-5 million viewers in ratings and those are good numbers. so who ever mentioned that “highest rated tv series” shit should retract that.

    TOS battlestar hard to watch but if you want that good ol’ late 70’s lack of ingenuity tv then thats your show

  • Anonymous Coward

    I’d love to know about the politics of this move on Universal’s part. I can’t imagine RDM is too pleased, either; but what’s motivating Glen Larson? Did he not like the new BSG? Is he trying to capitalize on the fact that he probably controls a lot of the intellectual property associated with the series and make some money? Is it a creative differences thing?

    Given the enormous popularity of the new BSG, whatever Glen Larson can come up with at this point is going to look like “Never Say Never Again,” the James Bond movie that no one likes to talk about that was produced out of a rights conflict. It even had an older Sean Connery who looked like he belonged in Indiana Jones’ motorcycle sidecar more than in an Aston Martin.

  • Kedesh

    The new BSG had its moments of greatness, but just when I would start to think it might top the old BSG, Ron Moore would make us sit through yet another prolonged idiotic sex scene with #6 — what absolute trash.

  • The two versions of the show were good in their time periods. I agree with both sides of the argument the original was a great leap in technology and the new version lacked any real Science being added to the Fiction of the story. The new version has told a good story very well and with much drama. New technology was severely lacking in the updated version. Case in point the medical technology was more like 1970’s than some advanced society with Faster Than Light space travel would be expected to have. I suspect RD Moore was not allowed to developed the technology side of the story any farther because Bonnie Hammer and others at NBCU dislike the Geek side of Science Fiction and are trying to remove this from all the shows now and to be shown on the newly directed (with new name) SYFY channel. If you are angry that the new technology aspect of BSG was not included with the show, blame NBCU.

  • joe massari

    am i the oddball here?? i just love both new and old series.. it seems everyone loves one or the other .. is there anyone else out there like me who can seperate the two in their minds and love them both ??? just curious……..

  • Marc Hamel

    I’m 41, I’ve seen both shows and let me tell you this: when I was 10, TOS was the best cause as a kid, the only thing that I wanted to see was space battles and my favorite heros kicking cylon ass without violence and blood. Now I’m older and also a veteran, I’ve seen the best of humans and the worst of them…I love the new series cause it’s a reminder that nothing is always pretty and simple for those who are trying to survive. Of course it as his flaws just like TOS, but just try to see the big picture here and learn something instead of complaining. Both shows have merits, as for a movie…why dont they try to put a bridge between them so that would make everybody happy ;)

  • JHo

    Give me a break…TOS of Galactica is all but unwatchable, regardless of your feelings about the recent incarnation.

    But I guess some folks feel that having a Penthouse and a handjob is better than real sex with someone else too.


  • I’m too young to remember much about the Original series. I did try several times to watch the new version, but could not get into it. I’m not a huge fan of soap operas or dramas that take themselves too seriously. I’m more a fan of oldschool Sci-fi and action adventures. If they were to make a movie based more on the original series that was more devoted to true Sci-Fi and not a soap opera then I would definitely watch it.

  • Devils advocate

    Personally I think that if this film does see production, then Larson and Universal are “jumping the shark” 40 years too late.

    The original is what it was. The new is what it is.

    Most of the fans of the original who are so obsessed with a television show, that was aimed at a late 70’s viewer, will never appreciate the re-invention of something that they are overly passionate about.

    Most of them re-live the glory of youth by putting on home made colonial jumpsuits and sport resin blaster kits to sci-fi conventions. Much like trekkies (trekkers) they will bash any atempt to modernize or re-imagine something that the creators admired enough in thier youth to try and bring it to a new and diverse audience. Simply because it does not conform to their conception of fan lore.

    I for one will watch any new movie as I have with many others and reserve my praise or scorn for after I see it, but I still say they are “jumping the shark”.

  • Wesley

    I never saw the original, but I’m honestly not a big fan of the new. It’s ok..just too much “drama” and not enough action or good mythos [although it started and never followed through]. Also at times the drama seems contrived, whereas a more logical and military choice that was available would have prevented it, yet the show never explains why the more logical option was not chosen (if it did this it would be better)

    In the end I don’t watch tv to see people cry for 15 min intervals. I watch for entertainment, and the new series was only ok at entertaining me.

    But that’s my opinion, watch whatever you want :)

  • r.mccormick

    i have read all these comments and have this to say,i liked them both.
    first off the 1978 pilot was supposed to be a movie and was released in the uk. to very good reveiws.second the show it self was fun and maby a little campy at times but that is what made it work.
    in the new show it was more real and that is what made that show work, and by the way i liked both starbucks.
    as for which show had better actors, both shows were well
    cast with damn fine actors.
    as for ships and the effects, i’m a little sided to the tos,i just liked the old viper. but the mark 2 which is similar to it looked real nice. i must admit i got a little lost on the season but it worked out well. only thing is that at the end it should of went off with the original opening.
    in closing both shows were fine in their on way, and worked for the time they were done, as for a new movie i hope it is done withe great writing and good actors and only makes the story that much more fun for my kids

  • EW

    I don’t know much the old BSG, but I don’t like the new one. I just watch it to see how bad and melodramatic it could be. It’s all soap characters, no proper story. And purposeless too – after all the fighting and deaths the Cylons “marry” humans and voila – our humankind is born like Messiah…oh, how deep…one would puke…

  • Nick From Pittsburgh

    Looking at these post I can see where they would WANT to so a remake of the original series for the big screen.

    I for one enjoyed the original as a kid. When the new version came out, I avoided it. But then I tuned in and hey I got into the story since it was much richer. I love all the BSG series.

    But look at the passion some folks feel about the series NEW or ORIGINAL and you have to be impressed. The orginal fans have been clamouring for this remake for years. I have no doubt whatsoever that this will make money, as long as it is done well.

    And in a few years you’ll start seeing movies of the newer version.

    I’m good with both now. Never enough good sci fi, so why complain.

  • Paul

    I’m 41 and was a fan of TOS. I tried watching the new series, but I wanted to see scifi not a soap opera. I dislike the SF channels’ BSG almost as much as I disliked their Dune miniseries.

    We weren’t involved in an unpopular war in ’78, but don’t forget, we had only been out of Vietnam for 3 years, and it was still fresh in a lot of minds.

    I’m not saying the new BSG was junk, it just wasn’t what I wanted to watch. I did watch several episodes to make sure I wasn’t just catching a slow one, but they were ALL slow. If you like the new series, fine for you, but I just couldn’t get into it.