Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
TV
Byrne Robotics > TV << Prev Page of 3 Next >>
Topic: Battlestar Galactica (1978-79) - 40 Years Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Bill Mimbu
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 April 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6976
Posted: 19 September 2018 at 2:49pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

Brian: Just for the record, I wasn't saying the GALACTICA 1980 pilot was worthwhile.

***

Gotcha Brian.

There also was an attraction based upon the TOS Galactica at Universal Studios Hollywood, portions of which showed up in THE NUDE BOMB movie (aka "The Return of Maxwell Smart"):

TheStudioTour.com
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 7871
Posted: 19 September 2018 at 2:57pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

Greg, it might be possible for someone to write a more off-base, one-sided account of the two Galacticas than the blog you reference, but it would take serious effort. At this point, I don't know if you can unplug from the outrage and counter-outrage involved and just enjoy Ron Moore's reboot for what it has to offer, but it remains worth the attempt, should you choose to make it.

I agree that there was manipulation of fan expectations in making Starbuck female and Boomer Asian (and also female.) Public perception was apparently a factor in not making the new Colonel Tigh black, since the writers intended to make that character seriously flawed and alcoholic.

However, to mis-characterize those decisions as solely manipulative and made in favor of some conspiratorial agenda is warped. Starbuck's a woman because we hadn't seen a cigar-smoking loose cannon female lead on television yet, and it was sexually provocative to tease the possibility of her and Apollo as a couple. Did it tweak the noses of the original fans to do so? Undoubtedly, but they hardly comprised the majority of the audience. 

Over in the "Shazam" thread I mention that the new guard at DC may have changed the character's name in part to razz the fans who've stuck around too long (like myself,) and I believe they did, but even in that case those fans are not the primary audience. Offending them gets you some controversy and press, but to say that is the only reason to do so is absurd. "Shazam" is still a name that sells comics, whether it is rightly or wrongly associated with the main character. Going with it as the new name for the hero was the path of least resistance. Bugging fans who'd be upset about such a thing (as I am) is just a bonus and an exceedingly minor one at that.

Starbuck's a woman in the new show because she's hot and viewers hadn't seen a drunken, card-table kicking character like that before. Boomer's female so she can stir the cauldron of sexual tension as well. Could they have promoted Athena to fighter pilot instead and had her be the one having sex with the crew chief? Maybe, but again, confounding expectations is a creative choice and not solely a political one. There was going to be a Boomer somewhere on the show. There was also going to be someone having sex with Tyrol. Why not square that circle and combine the two? To thwart some hated political agenda which was in its nascent form when the show was being created? To stand tall by the fundamental ethic of fidelity to source material? 

No one does that. At all. Anywhere*. No one sets out to do this new thing exactly like the original thing, with no changes because, damn it, change is wrong and bad, and "we want no credit for any contribution we might have, but elected not to make." Only twice in recent memory can I recall any significant attempt at such a goal; One was Sin City, which referred back to the original comic as storyboards. The results were pretty good since the comic was conceived as an exercise in cinema on paper to begin with. The other was the shot-for-shot remake of Psycho (which did go ahead and hold frame to include a butt shot the original cut) The results were not so good. 

Other than those two (out of how many adaptations in the past thirty years?), no one came to Hollywood to be a stenographer. Even those who made those two films didn't stick with the imitation game and continue to define their careers by carefully coloring inside the lines. Ron Moore and company looked at the material they had and tried to make it as relevant and edgy as they could. The central theme they conceived was the question of whether or not humanity deserved to survive the Cylon attack, and they explored the question in an often brutal and ugly fashion. Terrorism, suicide bombings, genocide, murder, lying, torture, and political corruption are not Social Justice issues. They're actual issues. The writer of that blog apparently cannot see beyond his exceedingly narrow P.O.V. to discern them as such. 

Women on the new Galactica were not Mary Sues. Minorities were not righteously held above criticism (although they did veer sharply in that direction initially by changing Tigh.) Stories were not sanitized so that only the designated targets of social criticism suffered while all others were praised and empowered. The new Galactica told an ugly, harsh, and often surprising story of humanity doing its level best to outrun a murderous force looking to end its existence. That it managed humor and insight at the same time was one of its biggest surprises.

And yes, they did run out of ideas, and the conclusion of the series was either disappointing or claw-your-own-face-off-god-awful depending upon your level of investment, but not for any reason having to do with Social Justice. They made themselves a comfy rabbit hole with their notion of a "Final Five" and buried themselves inside it, taking the show down with them. Hard.

Speaking of rabbit holes, the fellow writing that blog has gotten far too deeply into his own angry theories to speak rationally on this topic. Any point he may have once had in opposing Political Correctness is now lost in his rhetoric, media conspiracies, and bile. His agenda seems far more reactionary and nonsensical than any his despised SJW conspiracies may have conjured.

I'd recommend giving the new Galactica series a try, Greg. The first mini-series is short, so your investment does not have to be great. Try to relax past the SJW sturm-und-drang and allow the show to define itself, rather than imposing viewpoints over the top of it. It might surprise you. 

* Statistically speaking. Those vanishingly small few who might attempt to do so pose no numerical threat to the rest of the world. Fortunately.


Edited by Brian Hague on 19 September 2018 at 3:16pm
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Rebecca Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 1198
Posted: 19 September 2018 at 4:26pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

I went through that tour thing the year it opened, 1979, I could swear we had at least three Viper pilots 'rescue' us though. That #7 comic book would have been new out. We have some decent still photos taken of the entrance but inside it was too dark without a flash on the camera.

TheStudioTour.com


Edited by Rebecca Jansen on 19 September 2018 at 4:27pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Neil Lindholm
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: Macau
Posts: 4451
Posted: 19 September 2018 at 6:56pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

DId some searching and it doesn't look like the original run of Battlestar Galactica from Marvel was ever reprinted in a trade form. Think I will have to start searching for the originals. Good thing they are not expensive. 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12187
Posted: 20 September 2018 at 5:58am | IP Logged | 5 post reply

That's a shame. I wouldn't mind revisiting it. The one strip I read in a pocketbook reprint is pretty good! 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Tim O'Neill
Byrne Robotics Security


Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9548
Posted: 20 September 2018 at 8:59am | IP Logged | 6 post reply



Brian H:  ďSpeaking of rabbit holes, the fellow writing that blog has gotten far too deeply into his own angry theories to speak rationally on this topic. Any point he may have once had in opposing Political Correctness is now lost in his rhetoric, media conspiracies, and bile. His agenda seems far more reactionary and nonsensical than any his despised SJW conspiracies may have conjured.Ē

*****

I agree, Brian - the whole article left me cold.  I think the reboot was the best possible path for BATTLESTAR GALACTICA.  I loved the show as a kid, but it doesnít hold up at all.  The reboot was smart, thoughtful, and had a sense of humor.


Back to Top profile | search
 
Tim O'Neill
Byrne Robotics Security


Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9548
Posted: 20 September 2018 at 9:05am | IP Logged | 7 post reply



Neil L:  ďDId some searching and it doesn't look like the original run of Battlestar Galactica from Marvel was ever reprinted in a trade form. Think I will have to start searching for the originals. Good thing they are not expendive.Ē

****

I stumbled on one earlier this year in a used bookshop and it was a fantastic read.  It was published by Titan Books in 2005, and itís called ďThe Memory MachineĒ, collecting issues #6-13, with an introduction by Richard Hatch.  I paid six bucks for it.

I loved the show as a kid and was lukewarm on the comics.  After reading this trade, I enjoyed the comics from back then more than watching repeats of the original show!  Itís a great collection if you can snag a copy.  It looks like Titan also published a trade with the first issues as well.

And I believe Dynamite published a Walt Simonson art edition of his work on the series - I havenít seen a copy, but I would really want to get my hands on one of those someday.


Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113328
Posted: 20 September 2018 at 9:38am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

Walter very kindly sent me a copy of that Artistís Edition. Quite gorgeous ó as if that needs saying!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15362
Posted: 20 September 2018 at 11:08am | IP Logged | 9 post reply

Iíve heard it both waysóthe reboot insultingly discarded or altered many of the originalís elements, or it was a major improvement on the concept. Maybe even one of the greatest sci-if shows of all time. Iíve been reading opinions from both ends of the spectrum. There are people who love the reboot and people who hate it.

In the article Shawn linked to, Mark A. Altman positively gushes over NuBSG, and says it stands alongside STAR TREK and THE TWILIGHT ZONE as one of the top three sci-fi shows of all time. Those are bold words! 

I donít really have a dog in this race, but maybe Iíll check the reboot out at some point. I can see the value in trying to improve upon flawed source material, but, at the same time, the originalís wacky charm has found a nice little spot in my heart. Maybe thereís room for both versions. I dunno!


Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Rebecca Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 1198
Posted: 20 September 2018 at 11:51am | IP Logged | 10 post reply

You can see a lot of the Dynamite book here...

https://aeindex.org/reviews/walter-simonsons-battlestar-gala ctica-art-edition/


Klaus Janson inks a lot of it but there is enough all Simonson too (love his Dr. Fate and Metal Men from a little earlier).

If I remember this correctly, in the Marvel comic it diverges from the broadcast series with #5. I saw the first two episodes of the tv series in the movie theater before it began on tv so to me #1-3 are the 'movie' and #4 is the first tv episode (with the female pilots filling in for the ill male ones).
Back to Top profile | search
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4706
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 12:46am | IP Logged | 11 post reply

Wow, Greg, I am amazed you have not seen the BG reboot.

It really is one of the best SF shows on TV. But not just an SF show. It was a very interesting commentary about real world events such as the Iraq/Afghanistan wars that were going on at the time, particularly on things like 'How far can you go in an insurrection against an occupying force'? It doesn't shy away from very hard questions, including suicide bombing.

At times, it was a hard watch, due to the subject matter. Characters had depth and it didn't keep hitting the reset button.

I know a lot of people think it lost it during its last season, but I think the whole outweighs the negatives.

I do think Douglas Adams would have something to say were he still alive though.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15362
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 1:15am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Wow, Greg, I am amazed you have not seen the BG reboot.
+++++++

My life as a nerd is a constant, exhausting struggle between quantity and quality. I can either go hardcore into a few specific properties, or I can try and sample as many different properties as possible. BSGóeither flavorówas on my low-priority list for many years, until the opportunity came to watch the original on MeTV, last year. Some shows Iíll take pains to seek out, while others Iíll wait for until they conveniently come to me. 

For example, Iím been itching to buy THE TWILIGHT ZONE on Blu and deep-dive into that show for the first time (having only seen various random episodes, over the years), but Iím also on-demanding THE SOPRANOS and watching the 60s BATMAN on Blu. I also now have an itch to binge THE X-FILES, thanks to BBC Americaís recent marathon. And I have nearly all of STAR TREK: DS9 on my DVR (with VOYAGER soon to come), thanks to Heroes & Icons Channel. I also have an urge to revisit THE INCREDIBLE HULK. 

To say nothing of all the Blu-Ray movies on my shelf, the many comics in my longboxes, podcasts on my iPod, books on my bookshelves, and hobby projects on my bench. 


Iím constantly juggling shows, man. Itís an endless race to both revisit beloved favorites and try out new properties I have yet to experience. 

I honestly donít know how some people consume so much media, seemingly with such ease. I can only assume that theyíre independently wealthy, with no need to work and no pesky spouses/families to get in the way. Or, they live in isolated pockets of reality where time is frozen.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12363
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 1:54am | IP Logged | 13 post reply


 QUOTE:
alongside STAR TREK and THE TWILIGHT ZONE as one of the top three sci-fi shows of all time

It's ironic that both Gene Roddenberry and Rod Serling were progressives with a progressive agenda telling political stories through allegory. They'd most certainly be labeled SJWs in today's environment. I mean, TWILIGHT ZONE was born out of Serling's frustrations with censorship in his attempts to write a story about the Emmett Till case.


 QUOTE:
It was a very interesting commentary about real world events such as the Iraq/Afghanistan wars that were going on at the time, particularly on things like 'How far can you go in an insurrection against an occupying force'? It doesn't shy away from very hard questions, including suicide bombing.

I'd say the pilot and first season captured the fear and uncertainty after 9/11, the second and third season became commentary on the War on Terror, and the last half of the final season took a weird left turn into focusing on philosophy of mind and spirituality (not a criticism, by the way).


Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15362
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 9:53am | IP Logged | 14 post reply

The difference between then and now is that Roddenberry and Serling respected the intelligence and opinions of their audience, and didnít call them names when people disagreed or were critical. They also knew that they were producing escapist entertainment for the masses, and didnít force ideologies down the audienceís throats. Or deflect legitimately terrible writing by generating an ďUs vs. ThemĒ atmosphere.

The broad appeal of both STAR TREK and THE TWILIGHT ZONE comes down to the fact that they had aspects which appealed to a very broad variety of people, across the entire sociopolitical spectrum. These were stories about people and ideas, not preaching. And about asking questions, not pushing particular answers.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113328
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 2:33pm | IP Logged | 15 post reply

The difference between then and now is that Roddenberry and Serling respected the intelligence and opinions of their audience, and didnít call them names when people disagreed or were critical. They also knew that they were producing escapist entertainment for the masses, and didnít force ideologies down the audienceís throats. Or deflect legitimately terrible writing by generating an ďUs vs. ThemĒ atmosphere.

ēē

"Haters gotta hate." The official END of Intelligent Discourse.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12363
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 3:34pm | IP Logged | 16 post reply


 QUOTE:
The difference between then and now is that Roddenberry and Serling respected the intelligence and opinions of their audience, and didnít call them names when people disagreed or were critical. They also knew that they were producing escapist entertainment for the masses, and didnít force ideologies down the audienceís throats. Or deflect legitimately terrible writing by generating an ďUs vs. ThemĒ atmosphere.

Well, sure, because there was no internet back then. And sorry, the ďUs vs ThemĒ environment is not being generated by creators alone. I mean, take a look in the mirror. Youíve been inserting complaints about social agendas in every discussion lately, even when no oneís been discussing it.


 QUOTE:
The broad appeal of both STAR TREK and THE TWILIGHT ZONE comes down to the fact that they had aspects which appealed to a very broad variety of people, across the entire sociopolitical spectrum. These were stories about people and ideas, not preaching. And about asking questions, not pushing particular answers.

Really? Because both STAR TREK and TWILIGHT ZONE could be pretty damn preachy. I think their success was being able to hide their messages in allegory so that the people they were preaching against could overlook them.  Watching Twilight Zone, Serlingís antiwar and racial equality stances are pretty clear to me. If the internet were around back then, there would be people breaking down certain episodes, complaining how Serling was shoving his pinko commie agenda down everyoneís throats.  
Back to Top profile | search
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4706
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 4:57pm | IP Logged | 17 post reply

I hear you Greg. I have obsessive/compulsive  tendencies & have to be carful with what I get into.
When I find something I like, I tend to have to know everything there is to know about it. I was buying making of King Kong books (the 1933 one & the 1976 one) when I was seven years old, & the less said about Star Wars, the better.

So I tend to either get into a TV show from the start, as it airs, or miss it entirely. I dipped in & out of Babylon 5 but couldnít make the weekly commitment @ the time & then around half way through season 2 I saw an episode that flicked the switch & that was it - I tracked down recordings of every episode up to that point & binge watched them, back when binge watching or box sets were called marathons.

The only similar occurrence I remember was 24 where, again, I know I couldnít commit. My wife heard me bemoaning that Iíd missed something I really wanted to watch & bought the box set for Christmas. Straight through in two days, the pair of us. Not good for productivity. So yeah, I have to be careful. Which means I miss an awe full lot of long form TV.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Steven Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5183
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 8:55pm | IP Logged | 18 post reply

I loved the original series at the time. But I was 9 and a Star Wars junkie. I was given most of the comic series by a girl in my class who ordered a subscription but didn't understand the comic. I even read the novelization back then. But the show isn't really great. I remember my parents complaining about how it suddenly got weird, with the ships of light and stuff. In hindsight, I think they were trying to be Star Trek all of a sudden.

Anyway, the reboot was interesting, but fell apart in the end. Too many "twists" that were obviously made up on the fly, and the main characters...well, really all the refugees, become so unlikeable it's hard to root for them in the end.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15362
Posted: 21 September 2018 at 9:24pm | IP Logged | 19 post reply

Well, sure, because there was no internet back then. And sorry, the ďUs vs ThemĒ environment is not being generated by creators alone. I mean, take a look in the mirror. Youíve been inserting complaints about social agendas in every discussion lately, even when no oneís been discussing it.
+++++++

Because itís a topic which I find both frustrating and disturbing, and so itís often on my mind. Iíve grown very tired of watching escapist entertainment becoming politicized and being used as the battleground for a culture-war. 

And youíre in no position to dictate what I can or cannot talk about in this forum. That is the job of the moderators, and Iíll abide by their wishes.


Anyway, I canít imagine that, if social media had existed in the 50s and 60s, that Roddenberry or Serling would resort to publicly calling dissenting viewers ďmanbabiesĒ, or drinking out of mugs labeled ďfanboy tearsĒ. By and large, they conducted themselves with professionalism when dealing with the media and the public. Behind closed doors may well have been another thing, of course.

More importantly, their shows still functioned exceptionally well on the surface level as escapist entertainment. Both shows could be preachy, yes, but their social commentary subtext was not the sole reason for their existence, nor their sole function. 


But, yíknow what? Iím fucking done with this. I wrote the following post many months ago, and I just knew Iíd eventually have reason make use of it.


Dear Michael Roberts,



This was written ahead of time, in anticipation of your inevitable participation in this thread. Iíve had my fill. Iíve tried to be polite, Iíve tried to be civil, and Iíve tried to be patient, but Iíve had my fill. You have an ongoing tendency to question my opinions and wag your finger at people who donít agree with you. Iím here for polite and civil discourse (with the occasional respectful disagreement). I am not here to be talked down to. 


Many months ago, you accused me of ďdrinking alt-Right Kool-AidĒ. It was then that I realized what I was dealing with. Someone with an attitude and an axe to grind. In point of fact, I identify as neither a Republican or a Democrat. If anything, Iím a moderate. I very nearly threw up the night Trump was elected, and I have no love for the GOP. I was genuinely hurt and taken aback by your comment. 


Iíve subsequently noted that this is your methodology: hop onto the moral high horse and condescend to people who donít think like you. Well, thatís not how I roll. I love this forum. I try not to belittle people with whom I disagree, and to understand and respect the opinions of the very broad spectrum of people who post here. Weíre all part of the same team, and maybe we should try looking at things from less of an ďUs vs. ThemĒ perspective. At the same time, however, vigilance and asking questions is important. If you actually knew me in civilian life, youíd find that I try my best to treat all people from all walks of life with kindness, politeness, and compassion. And Iíve paid dearly for my compassion and faith in people, trust me. In ways youíll never know about. There are days when it would be far easier to take the low road.


So, sorry to disappoint, but I am not an alt-Right Nazi. I do not hate women and minorities. I do, however, hold my popular fiction to a high standard, and have slowly watched good storytelling and characterization erode away, only to be replaced by terrible writing which hides behind a veneer of virtue-signaling and accusations of racism and sexism. Three of the cornerstones of my life as a nerdóSTAR WARS, STAR TREK, and Marvel Comicsóhave been taken over by people who have completely mangled the the name of ďsocial justiceĒ. These properties were once used to bring people together with subtext instead of sledgehammers. Now, they tear people and fandoms apart. 


In recent times, Iíve found myself walking on eggshells and thinking twice before posting in this forum, because Iíve come to anticipate your inevitable moral-bulldog nitpicking of my discussion points and personal opinions. I donít want to argue. Respectful disagreement is one thing, but Iíll not be talked down to or labeled as a Nazi. Thatís not why Iím here. The best I can do is state my opinions honestly and articulately (with the occasional dollops of my usual dark and/or off-color humor). I believe in the Golden Rule: treat others as you wish to be treated. I try to keep that in mind during all of my interactions in this forum.


I knew, beyond all doubt, that you would seize any opportunity to attack the points IĎve made in this thread. STAR WARS is a passionate subject for me, but Iíve avoided talking about it here for months, because I just donít want the headache of having to defend myself again and again. You see, unlike the SJW-types who have infested my favorite franchises, I donít feel compelled to attack and talk down to people who donít think like me.I donít bully people on social media, nor do I resort to insults. I may try to persuade people to see my point of view, and may question the tastes of people with whom I disagree, but itís not in my nature to attack people for liking what they like and believing what they believe.


Iím done walking on eggshells. Youíre clearly a highly intelligent, articulate, and passionate person, and those are traits which I value. However, Iím done playing this game. Time to respectfully disagree and part ways. 


To that end, allow me to convey upon you a singular honor: you are the first and only person ever (after my 12 years of membership in this forum) to go on my ďignoreĒ list. Since my opinions seem to bother you so much, perhaps you should consider doing to same to me, and find a new hobby.


Best wishes, and please remember in the future to be kind, patient, and tolerant.


XOXO


- G



Showís over, folks. Sorry about the trouble. Please resume BSG discussion.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12363
Posted: 22 September 2018 at 1:11am | IP Logged | 20 post reply

Well, hopefully the mods will come along and delete these posts, because honestly, they're a bit cringy and I feel embarrassed for Greg. Until then, I'll just how much I miss pre-2015 Greg and hope that guy comes back. I feel he had a little more self-awareness.

The irony of this statement:


 QUOTE:
I donít feel compelled to attack and talk down to people who donít think like me. I donít bully people on social media, nor do I resort to insults. I may try to persuade people to see my point of view, and may question the tastes of people with whom I disagree, but itís not in my nature to attack people for liking what they like and believing what they believe.

Beginning with this statement:


 QUOTE:
You see, unlike the SJW-types who have infested my favorite franchises...

No insulting or talking down there.

The irony of accusing someone of having to axe to grind, while defending their axe-grinding:


 QUOTE:
Youíve been inserting complaints about social agendas in every discussion lately, even when no oneís been discussing it.

+++++++

Because itís a topic which I find both frustrating and disturbing, and so itís often on my mind. Iíve grown very tired of watching escapist entertainment becoming politicized and being used as the battleground for a culture-war. 

I get that Greg was hurt by the alt-Right comment, but when he continually echoes their talking points and uses their terminology like "SJW" and "virtue-signaling", are you supposed to stay silent? I see now that Brian Hague is being attacked on the StarWarsGate (seriously?) blog that Greg linked to. Who's responsible for bringing that toxicity to the boards?

I'm concerned more of that GamerGate/ComicsGate/BullshitGate rhetoric is going to start showing up on the boards now, and I just hope the mods can keep the forum free from that.

Hopefully this and the last post will be gone tomorrow. Where are ya, Matt Reed?





Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 32777
Posted: 22 September 2018 at 2:36am | IP Logged | 21 post reply

 Greg Kirkman wrote:
I havenít seen the rebooted series, but Iíve heard mixed reviews. The usual race/gender-swapping and darkening of the original concept doesnít exactly fill me with confidence, but I do have a lot of respect for Ron Moore as a writer and producer, based on his STAR TREK work.

Watch it and form your own opinion.  I think the reboot was an amazing achievement born out of a series that was limited in scope due to any of a number of different reasons. 

I know you're all "Mary Sue" this and "SJW" that recently, which I don't really get, but this has none of that.  It's a straight-up reboot of a series that was essentially dead-in-the-water that made its themes and characters more than a sad ripoff of Star Wars.  Note that I say this as a fan of the original series but one who understands its origins and limitations. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 32777
Posted: 22 September 2018 at 3:02am | IP Logged | 22 post reply

 Greg Kirkman wrote:
And youíre in no position to dictate what I can or cannot talk about in this forum. That is the job of the moderators, and Iíll abide by their wishes.

That is correct.  You can discuss whatever you wish to discuss in whatever manner it pleases you as long as it doesn't disparage others.

THAT SAID you have taken a tact recently that has swerved to the political even though you think it does not.  Comments deleted or left unanswered where you rail against all types of perceived injustices lumped together under a single banner.  That tact has also left you rightfully vulnerable to members who read your posts as being what they are: an attack.  It may be skillfully written.  It may appear as though it's a thoughtful critique void of any political commentary, but dig just a hair deeper and they are full of the very same agenda you have railed against in this and many other threads over the past year or so.  

I say this as a friend, Greg, but where I used to enjoy your views and reviews on pop culture I've increasingly found them tinged with political elements heretofore avoided.  And they're brought up even when the discussion has absolutely nothing to do with politics at all.  Your go-to recently has been SJW for damn near everything without considering that, in this specific discussion, BSG premiered over a decade ago. You're using the pejorative SJW that was considered coined in 2011.  That's a recent internet creation dismissively born of a particular political bent that you toss around here willy-nilly.  Prior to 2011, SJW was used as a primarily positive term. To say that using it has no ties to politics and is neither an attack nor a admonishment is absolutely absurd.  It's very nature and use is political.  SJW is not verbiage commonly used by anyone other than those of a particular political affiliation. It's just not.  Neither is the phrase "virtue-signaling".  You can't honestly stand aghast that someone would call you on those phrases, Greg, if you're being completely honest with yourself.

I see you've posted a long screed to and about Michael Roberts. Unlike other posts you've made recently, DO NOT DELETE THIS ONE. You've said it.  You've posted it.  Own it.  I'll say this: I've never met Michael.  I don't know him personally.  But I hold him in the highest regard.  I respect his opinions even if I don't always agree with them.  Your characterization of him is wildly off-base and entirely defensive.  Your continued use of SJW as a negative is disturbing at best and the notion that you are unfairly singled out by Michael or anyone for "attack" is patently absurd. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 32777
Posted: 22 September 2018 at 3:05am | IP Logged | 23 post reply

 Greg Kirkman wrote:
Showís over, folks. Sorry about the trouble. Please resume BSG discussion.

Sorry, but you don't get to determine when a discussion is over. You also can't shut out a rebuttal. You opened the door.  Live with what comes out.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Bill Mimbu
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 April 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6976
Posted: 22 September 2018 at 9:23am | IP Logged | 24 post reply

Edit: Had to remove what I posted previously... Contained a spoiler for those who haven't seen the reimagined series yet...

;)



Edited by Bill Mimbu on 22 September 2018 at 9:32am
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113328
Posted: 22 September 2018 at 9:44am | IP Logged | 25 post reply

OT: I would hesitate to shop at the ďBloor Meat MarketĒ!
Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 3 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login