The New Yorker on Battlestar Galactica

Jan 17, 12:42 by Bluejack

I have heard the new Battlestar Galactica described as "Science Fiction for people who don't like Science Fiction."

Apparently, the New Yorker agrees.

Personally, I am disappointed that the Sci Fi channel took a television series that was purely for kids and turned it into a series that's purely for adults. On the other hand, I think it's a pretty good series, so there's a bit of tension there.
Jan 19, 16:22 by Allan Rosewarne
This is totally off topic to BSG; however, lots of fans have said the same (taking a kids series and making into something for adults) about the new Dr. Who series
Aug 17, 12:13 by Seth Merki
My brother bought season 1 and 2, which is a good thing because I would never have bothered with it otherwise. For some reason, I was steering clear of it because I didn't like the original and I guess I expected this one to be terrible. But I was so surprised - it takes itself seriously, but not overly serious. I agree with the New Yorker article's comments about the sense of realism as well - I believe everything that's going on.

My wife, an ardent anti-SFer, still thinks the names of the twelve colonies are silly, but she's as hooked as I am on the show (though, of course, she won't admit it). I haven't finished watching the third season yet, but it's shaping up to be, once again, very good. I really like the 'searching for a home' theme. It lends the series an alternatively sense of desperation and poignency.
Oct 16, 23:20 by mikwitot2910@gmail.com
Thanks a lot for this information


honestly discussed
   

Want to Post? Evil spammers have forced us to require login:

Sign In

Email:

Password:

 

NOTE: IRoSF no longer requires a 'username' -- why try to remember anything other than your own email address?

Not a subscriber? Subscribe now!

Problems logging in? Try our Problem Solver