Battlestar Nine
Really, if I posted more often I wouldn't need to combine so many disparate ideas into one entry... but what the hell - its how my mind works. I skip around between ideas - sometimes finding connections, sometimes not, not caring either way. Apparently, that's pretty common of my personality typ: ENTP [another profile of ENTPs is available here].
Anyways.
I just finished watching the penultimate episode of Battlestar Galactica (courtesty of bittorrent). I must say, I am enjoying it as guilty escapism. Curious, the episode was director by Michael Rymer who "directed" Angel Baby. The show has just started playing in the US and has met with mixed reviews. The hard core science fiction nuts are being critical, as usual, of its science. One reviewer complained that it wasn't realistic that space-faring civilisation wouldn't have a cure for cancer. Ergh! I hate that attitude. I do have a fondness for sci-fi, but I don't read nor watch the stuff for the science - I watch it for the implications of the science. I think BSG works as realistic science fiction, because it actually focuses on the *characters* and their predicament. Star Trek wasn't unreal because of its magical technology, but because it essentially homogonised humanity. The world was cured of cancer, poverty, war, capitalism and communism. Because Star Trek cured humanity of its vices it had to create artificial conflict with alien species in order to produce something approaching entertainment. If you make humanity perfect then you get rid of all the fucking drama.... which is what brings us to BSG.
BSG (reimagined) is being run by Ronald D. Moore who was (effectively) the showrunner of Stark Trek: Deep Space Nine. DS9 was my fave of all the star trek shows, because it was actually -interesting-. Characters were forced to make decisions with real consequences, not with the reset-switch common to most TV. More importantly, DS9 showed the Federation as a Roman-like empire rotting at the core but blinded by its own preachiness. Besides being interesting TV, that kind of world is what I imagine humanity will build. It was the *people* that made and makes DS9 more realistic than most sci-fi, especially its Star Trek brethern.
After DS9 finished its awesome run, Ronald D. Moore was sent over to Voyager - the weakest of the entire Star Trek franchise. Ronald quit Voyager in disgust. It was everything he hated: nothing the characters did actually had consequences and idealism always triumphed. In particular, Ronald accused Voyager of betraying its very premise of being lost in foreign space, along way from home. That kind of scenario changes people. In many ways, BSG is Voyager as Ronald would have imagined it. Mistrust, paranoia and fatigue rule the lives of the crew. Water ratios provoke riots.... and the leadership isn't trusted.... and some of them even suffer from delusions of grandeur (like believing you are fulfilling a religious destiny known as the New American Century... oh wait, the New Kobol Century.). It mightn't be accurate, but its realistic... and that appeals to me.
Its also what appeals about the BBC's Spooks. For exampole, an entire episode was dedicated to an agent being asked to do wetwork for the first time. A lesser show would have focused on the actual -act- of assassination, but in Spooks it was the internal conflict which was the focus. It makes for riveting TV. The informed background of world and domestic politics merely adds more texture to the show - especially the discussions vis a vis placing intelligence departments under ministerial supervision and how that amounts to the creation of Stasi-like organisations.
Hmm. Bed time. I'll post new messages tomorrow. Much to discuss!
Anyways.
I just finished watching the penultimate episode of Battlestar Galactica (courtesty of bittorrent). I must say, I am enjoying it as guilty escapism. Curious, the episode was director by Michael Rymer who "directed" Angel Baby. The show has just started playing in the US and has met with mixed reviews. The hard core science fiction nuts are being critical, as usual, of its science. One reviewer complained that it wasn't realistic that space-faring civilisation wouldn't have a cure for cancer. Ergh! I hate that attitude. I do have a fondness for sci-fi, but I don't read nor watch the stuff for the science - I watch it for the implications of the science. I think BSG works as realistic science fiction, because it actually focuses on the *characters* and their predicament. Star Trek wasn't unreal because of its magical technology, but because it essentially homogonised humanity. The world was cured of cancer, poverty, war, capitalism and communism. Because Star Trek cured humanity of its vices it had to create artificial conflict with alien species in order to produce something approaching entertainment. If you make humanity perfect then you get rid of all the fucking drama.... which is what brings us to BSG.
BSG (reimagined) is being run by Ronald D. Moore who was (effectively) the showrunner of Stark Trek: Deep Space Nine. DS9 was my fave of all the star trek shows, because it was actually -interesting-. Characters were forced to make decisions with real consequences, not with the reset-switch common to most TV. More importantly, DS9 showed the Federation as a Roman-like empire rotting at the core but blinded by its own preachiness. Besides being interesting TV, that kind of world is what I imagine humanity will build. It was the *people* that made and makes DS9 more realistic than most sci-fi, especially its Star Trek brethern.
After DS9 finished its awesome run, Ronald D. Moore was sent over to Voyager - the weakest of the entire Star Trek franchise. Ronald quit Voyager in disgust. It was everything he hated: nothing the characters did actually had consequences and idealism always triumphed. In particular, Ronald accused Voyager of betraying its very premise of being lost in foreign space, along way from home. That kind of scenario changes people. In many ways, BSG is Voyager as Ronald would have imagined it. Mistrust, paranoia and fatigue rule the lives of the crew. Water ratios provoke riots.... and the leadership isn't trusted.... and some of them even suffer from delusions of grandeur (like believing you are fulfilling a religious destiny known as the New American Century... oh wait, the New Kobol Century.). It mightn't be accurate, but its realistic... and that appeals to me.
Its also what appeals about the BBC's Spooks. For exampole, an entire episode was dedicated to an agent being asked to do wetwork for the first time. A lesser show would have focused on the actual -act- of assassination, but in Spooks it was the internal conflict which was the focus. It makes for riveting TV. The informed background of world and domestic politics merely adds more texture to the show - especially the discussions vis a vis placing intelligence departments under ministerial supervision and how that amounts to the creation of Stasi-like organisations.
Hmm. Bed time. I'll post new messages tomorrow. Much to discuss!
posted by stu willis at
1:23 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home