Moore: No Trek-like Films For BSG – But Yes For TV Prequel

Today brings lots of news on the future of Trek vet Ron Moore’s Battlestar Galactica franchise. The BSG co-creator tells The Hollywood Reporter that he doesn’t expect the show to follow in the footsteps of Trek to the big screen. However, the show will be finally getting the TV prequel announced two years, ago as Sci-Fi have given the greenlight fo the pilot of Moore’s Caprica.

No BSG movies…Trek movies show reason why
Ron Moore, who co-wrote the first two TNG films (Generations and First Contact) tells THR that his experience shows that Trek films lost something when they went to the big screen. Moore tells THR that BSG “works best as an ensemble TV drama” and he fears that on the big screen it would be a “different animal.” From the article:

Moore said he’s been that route with “Star Trek” and found that the movies become focused on one or two characters with the rest of the show’s characters mostly fading into the background. He said the “Next Generation” movies ended up focusing on Captain Jean-Luc Picard and Commander Data. The others, Moore said, did “one scene for their character and the rest of the time they were essentially support to Patrick (Stewart) and Brent (Spiner).”

Of course Moore has a point. One only needs to look at a the movie posters to see the Spiner/Stewart focus for the TNG films. But then again that is no different than the Shatner/Nimoy focus of the previous TOS films.

Picard and Data…where is everyone else?

Caprica is a go
Battlestar Galactica may not follow in the footsteps of Trek to the big screen, but it will follow in the footsteps of getting a prequel. Announced two years ago, Caprica has finally got the go ahead from the Sci-Fi Channel. According to The Hollywood Reporter, a backdoor pilot will begin production this Spring. The series is based 50 years before the events of Battlestar Galactica and before the first Cylon War. Here is a description from the original announcement two years ago:

Caprica would take place more than half a century before the events that play out in Battlestar Galactica. The people of the Twelve Colonies are at peace and living in a society not unlike our own, but where high technology has changed the lives of virtually everyone for the better.

But a startling breakthrough in robotics is about to occur, one that will bring to life the age-old dream of marrying artificial intelligence with a mechanical body to create the first living robot: a Cylon. Following the lives of two families, the Graystones and the Adamas (the family of William Adama, who will one day become the commander of the Battlestar Galactica), Caprica will weave together corporate intrigue, techno-action and sexual politics into television’s first science fiction family saga.

BSG v Trek recognition
Moore also talked to the LA Times about the recognition Battlestar Galactica has recieved and again drew a parallel with Trek:

I had been at ‘Star Trek’ for 10 years, and Patrick Stewart never even got a nomination for his work. You just get used to the idea that you’ll be ignored because of the genre. But this series cut hard against science-fiction cliches. It was a character drama piece, not escapism, that tackled complicated matters and challenged the audience to do more than just come along for the ride.

Battlestar was created by writers…and they have a plan
Before the BSG universe goes backward it still has to move to its inevitable end. The final season for Battlestar starts in the first week of April…and it would appear that, unlike Trek, this is really the end. Moore tells the LA Times they are not keeping the door open and the series will come to a definitive end, saying “the premise was that they were looking for Earth, and we had to pay that off.” However Moore tells THR they will not necessarily time up all the loose end and that “some would be ambiguous by design.”

More Moore at The Hollywood Reporter and The LA Times

Battlestar Season 4 is coming…starting April 4…here is a new promo:


Battlestar Season 3 on DVD out now
Battlestar Galactica – Season Three, featuing 15 hours of bonus features was released today (March 18th). It and all the rest of the new and TOS BSG DVDs are available at Amazon…



Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

All these initials BSG, TOS, TNG, DS9…………oooooh!

How could Stewart not get recorgnition for his work on trek, that is absurd. His work on trek was not only noteworthy but exceptional. He brought a such a level of intensity and sophistication and execellance the role he played How could snub him? That is not one bit fair! I never knew any of this, now I think I understand some of the issues that he has with not only next generation but with fandom as well.

Ron Moore is correct BSG would not work well on the big screen becasue it would be a totally different animal and it wouldn’t really be galactica. With regard to the ending of the series I hope that he doesn’t do a Soprano like ending because that would be a disappointment .


To name a few known abbreviations :P

I am exicted about the new season.

Not too sure about the pre-quel though, unless we get to see the war.

Normally, I just roll my eyes at mention of a remake or continuation of a remake, but if this news keeps Moore too busy from remaking Star Trek into something extremely grim and depressing like his interpretation of BSG then this is good news. Let him go nuts with BSG and Caprica if he wants stories where everyone is a jerk and life sucks. Leave Trek alone.

I’ve heard rumors (unsubstantiated) that Caprica will follow the adventures of a group of happy bunnies on their quest for a rainbow made entirely of gumdrops. They’re constantly thwarted in this quest, however, by a maurading pack of pastel-colored teddybears who continually waylay them, tickle them, and give them hugs.

A lot of TLAs here ;-)

Gosh Matt. So wonderful to have your enlightening comments.

BSG is a FANTASTIC TV show. Sometimes everything in life isn’t peaches and cream, particularly when the robots that your society has created have turned against you and have all but wiped out civilization. Life just might suck. Thank goodness Ron Moore has produced a show that isn’t a carbon copy of Star Trek. We already have that show. It’s called ” Star Trek”. All those people who have heaped praise and accollades upon the new BSG probably don’t know anything. Good thing we have Matt to set us straight.

Caprica sounds like it will be a great show too. I am so glad that it has been given the go-ahead. TV needs more BSG’s and less Knight Riders.

As much as I really respect Ron Moore, I do agree that BSG is rather dark indeed. It’s quite depressing to watch at times, I’m afraid, and, yes, I acknowledege that this is perhaps because Moore wants to show us stuff that we, as sci-fi people in the Trek tradition, may really need to see but do so too rarely. Moore’s particular take on fiction was evident even during DS9, which was accused during its run of turning Trek’s optimism on its head. Given that BSG does what it does so well, and given that DS9 has given us so many of Trek’s most sophisticated episodes, I am unable to really complain, except….

Except, I guess, that I really would like to be optimistic rather than realistic, strictly speaking. I guess I would prefer my Trek the Roddenberry way, in the final analysis. And by that I mean either the pre-utopian 1960’s Roddenberry OR the more politically correct 1980’s Roddenberry. Either of these approaches is just a tad more appealing than what we see in BSG, which — despite all its many fine features — seems to me to be a virtually uninterrupted cascade of unrelenting descents into desperation.

This is hardly a new debate, however, and I don’t want to rehash it. Much of what Moore says or implies — that serious fiction cannot be as optimistic as a lot of pre-DS9 Trek seems to be — strikes a note of truth and can hardly be denied. But I cannot help thinking that there must be a third way between the humanistic optimism of Classic Trek and the vaunted realism of more depressing but supposedly more realistic approaches to fiction.

As far as a BSG movie is concerned, I tend to think that the talents of those involved could surely make an ensemble movie work; the question, it seems to me, is whether such a movie could “make it” commercially in Hollywood, and this is where the wisdom of Moore’s words may be most apparent.

I don’t mind a little darkness, I liked DS9 just fine.
BSG, however, is just too much.
DS9, at least, lightened up a bit every now and then.

1. Harry Ballz – March 18, 2008

All these initials BSG, TOS, TNG, DS9…………oooooh!

Yes, these people must have worked in public schools or the military.

Well, Andy, that’s OK with me…

#9: I agree with most of what your post, except for one point of terminology: I describe Star Trek as optimistic/hopeful, BSG as pessimistic/cynical. I see the shows as being pretty much equidistant from the center line …

I’m not sure I can think of _any_ SF TV series I’d ever describe as “realistic” (not talking about physics, of course, but rather human behavior) for more than a few episodes at a stretch. I think Babylon 5 came pretty close in 2nd Season, but then drifted toward an undulating ribbon dipping in and out of optimism and pessimism as the show became more symbolic. But in 2nd Season I think B5 hit respectably close to the balance of delights and horrors that is real interaction between both groups and individuals.

Which isn’t to say I think 2nd Season B5 was “better” for it; I don’t conflate realism (or optimism, or pessimism) with quality, one way or another. It can all be exciting, thought-provoking, and emotionally solid.

10, I concur. DS9 was great. Part of what was great about it was Moore’s willingness to interact with fans. I think that “Ask RDM,” in which Moore took questions about DS9 posed by AOL subscribers on a weekly basis, even as the series was being produced, stands as one of the high water marks of franchise-fan relationships, along with JMS’s Internet-based Q&A’s about B5 (Babylon 5). I think that those of us who were active back then were very appreciative of both of these efforts because we came to see how deeply each of these creative forces cared about their work and how it was perceived by their audiences. I think that a similar spirit lives on in the interaction we see today between the producers of this upcoming Trek movie and the readers here.

I’ve heard that Moore continues a similar tradition with BSG, though I’ve not personally participated in these discussions. This latest news about his upcoming project is intriguing indeed and I certainly hope he maintains a strong and mutually beneficial communicative link with his fans in regard to Caprica as well.

Sort of OT but relevant….
Is Trek best suited for TV or film?
How can anyone say one or the other? Each has their pluses and their minuses. Add the obvious 3rd category- ie, Don’t know or Don’t care….. all Trek can be good Trek.

Another poll that makes me weep.

I like BSG in large doses, it’s one drug that you can’t OD on.

I’m excited about caprica. I would love to see a show that used sci fi ideas without sci fi conventions, even though I do love the effects shots, which are so tired on other shows(I think). I know that gene made the decision to make all the aliens human in appearance, and that to a large degree most star trek aliens are human in their philosophy and behaviour. It seems to me that if star trek is ultimately about people anyway, it’s more effective to have humans instead of poorly characterized aliens. I think it’s funny that people think that bsg is dark, given how many civilizations I saw slaughtered while watching star trek, though the effect was often diminished by scenarios that were too fantastical and ultimately unrelatable. Character work adds a lot and star trek is often too… Stiff… Like the embarassing way it handles sex, like we’re twelve.

I hate to combine those two because you get BS GOD which isn’t acceptable on a GOOD day…………

Vaguely on-topic.

I recently heard through the grapevine that far and away my favorite season of nuBSG, Season 3, was in fact critically panned and widely reviled. Is that true? It seemed to me that the show finally hit its stride when it started running tight, well-written episodic stories set within the overall arc as opposed to the overly-arc-y preceding years.

Am I right? Or insane?

Though ambivalent for a long time about Galactica, I think RDM is the bee’s knees, and plus he looks like Jesus (and, eerily, Gaius Baltar). Looking forward to Caprica.

As much faith as I have in Ron Moore and company, I’m not too hot on this prequel idea. Then again I never liked Battlestar Galactica unitl Ron Moore and David Eick came around.

#6 LOL thank you :)


I also think the complaints about Season 3 were unjustified. While it isn’t my favorite (Season 2 wins for me), I think Season 3 contained great character moments that we’d have otherwise missed in ‘arc-y’ previous seasons.

For example, everyone I know hates ‘Unfinished Business’ (the boxing episode) but it’s actually one of my favorites because I think it has some great interplay between the characters, to the point that you really feel the tension, the burdens that these characters are carrying on their shoulders. You truly feel for them, and I think that’s the mark of any well-written show.

So..we’ll get Battlestar Galactica: Dynasty (a.k.a. Caprica). :P

#18: I found season 3 exhausting but impressively intense. I think that’s the most honest description I can give :) It has me looking forward to S4 with a blend of excitement and dread.

I had a different take on the “episodic,” though … I found that, for my own tastes, S3 felt even more like a single piece hacked up into hours, mainly because the tone of the episodes was less variable (owing, perhaps inevitably, to where the story went).

I do know some other BSG fans that bailed entirely in S3. I didn’t (heck, even if I felt like doing so, my wife would never let us), but I know some that did.

I don’t know about the Caprica … prequels are WAY to overused and overrated IMO.
But Battlestar Galactica is just so much better than any Star Trek series or movies so far. Not happy to say, but Star Trek is just cool to watch because we knew it for so long and stuff. But from a neutral POV, they don’t stand a chance against BSG, or some other modern series like Lost or Heroes. I just hope Trek can finally make the jump to a competitive level with the new movie.

#24 “But from a neutral POV, [Trek] don’t stand a chance against BSG, or some other modern series like Lost or Heroes”

I have a lot of (not Trekker) friends that like both Trek and BSG. You may be right but Star Trek has to avoid the dark side of realism, war and heavy drama. It would simply not be Trek anymore.

I think Battlestar Galactica is the smartest show on TV. Period. (Not that I’ve seen everything mind you), but it has a textured and nuanced style that accurately reflects the conundrums of our lives today.

That said, I have been a Trek fan since the dry, desert-like ’70s when all there was was syndication. I love Star Trek and it needs to respect it optimistic view of the future. I would be as angry to see Trek reflect a dystopic Battlestar or even Babylon 5-style as I was happy to indulge in both shows. It sounds like JJ will keep that spirit intact and for that I send my blessings. If Trek reboots as a gritty BSG/B5 style drama or turns into a boom, boom, bang, bang shoot-em-up space opera a la Star Wars I hope it dies a quick death (to agree with Ron Moore a bit more I think the last TNG Treks went a bit too much down the latter route–practically all of the Treks ended with Picard fighting mano a mano with the villain de jure. Predictable. Boring. And slightly out of character. Of course, all of this came about because of the Hollywood desire to have a Die Hard, Rambo hero that could pack Non-Trekkies’ butts in the seats. Here is hoping JJ respects us more).

I tried watching BSG… Frankly I thought it was terrible. I kept watching it but it was just never really beleivable; the characters just never really seemed like real people. When I finally stopped watching in the middle of an episode (“act of contrition” I think it was called) from boredom and frustration that this show was not all it had been cracked up to be, I realised I didn’t really care what happened to all the people in the show. They all could have died and it wouldn’t have meant anything to me.

I really just don’t see how the show is so good in peoples eyes… Sure some of the plot lines were clever, but the plots of many other unwatchable things have been too…..

BTW, I H8 abbreviations 2, despite my use of them. When did everything become TWERGH 4 and SMP: LEES II. Yuk, we need a second dictionary just for the f’ng abbreviations sometimes.

Oh, and there must be a lot of Battlestar Galactica (I’ll refrain from the abbreviation) fans who are also Star Trek fans here, otherwise why post this note on the Star Trek site? (Despite the fact that the deceased official Star Trek site had the annoying habit of reporting about anyone remotely related to Trek: Bob Johnson who picked his nose as an extra in The Omega Glory has been cast as a nosepicker in the blockbuster Rambo XVIII due to premiere next month–sort of like the sad sacks from my nearly home state of Minnesota. There is a Minnesota connection to the Barack Obama phenomenon, once he had a slice of pizza at Pizza Luce and said it was good! Live film at 10 p.m.)

. . . and Star Trek would probably be better as TV than film. Star Trek has always been idea-driven (at its best) with action-adventure thrown in for good measure. Star Trek always has this desire to be a crossover hit at the movies (probably after the success of IV along those lines). The pressure often leads to bad choices: focusing on the action-adventure to the diminishing of the bigger ideas that Star Trek is all about.

I’d love to see JJ, if he does good, take this on as a series and forget the movies. But if it does become an epic blockbuster I’m sure Paramount will go the route of the big, movie dough.

Okay, I’ve got bloody work to do. Enough pontificating.

In response to the comparisons between ST and BSG:

I don’t know about everyone else but I first watch something to be entertained. I also want something that will challenge me to think about something in the real world after the entertainment has worn off. Thus, I choose to watch primarily sci-fi oriented films/shows since they can do this best (in my opinion versus endless incarnations of CSI and the like).

ST and BSG both do the above for me from different perspectives. Sometimes I want to be reminded of the optimistic opportunities we have in our future while other times I need to be reminded of a more pessimiistic direction things could take if we fail to act today.

Both perspectives can be very “realistic” in their portrayals of the future but too much saccharine or too much castor oil will make one sick after a while so a balance is always good and necessary for a healthy life.

As I said, I want to be entertained but I also want to walk away thinking about something that may cause me to think or act differently about bettering my little corner of the cosmos–I think ST and BSG each help me do this.

#6, I actually watch that! I don’t get into BSG at all… But Trek, Doctor Who and even Smallville, (all which I love) I’d think would welcome a funny, action-packed tale of bears vs bunnies! Throw in the, what, two hotties from BSG and it’s gold! And all the BS about Stewart not getting the respect he deserves is criminal! I love the TNG crew, but TV and film really are two different animals… You’d never see a Geordi/Crusher piece. But then again, STIV:TVH was a well-ballanced ensemble film…

Must have BSG…….. NOW!!!!

The challenge of BSG is to show some of us that its depressing aspects are justified. I think that many of us are impressed with BSG because it’s so different from Trek and presents so many twists and turns — if it does that, and if Trek is “too optimistic,” then it MUST be good, right?

I’d like to see someone parse the existential themes that are often so subtly presented in BSG. I’d like to see a reference work that drills down beyond the ever-present paranoia and sadness and desperation of a human tribe fighting its own that tells us how BSG advances the philosophic conversation that much of serious SF — including Trek — actually does cover and develop. (There are entire books about the philosophy of Trek and dissertations have been written about many of its ever-present themes.)

When I think of BSG, I think increasingly of the movie, Artificial Intelligence, whose melancholy nature belies similarly profound and largely unpopular existential themes about what it means to be human in an age of machine intelligence. Just as AI told us things about us that we didn’t necessarily want to see, so, too, does BSG.

But what are those things, precisely, and how might they be even further developed, particularly now that we have the chance for a new series?

By the way, the trajectory of BSG seems to match the early post-series fate of B5 in that a teledramatic method of further development was seen as preferable. A number of television movies were made after the last season of B5. The post-B5 series Crusade was generally well-received but apparently did not match the popularity of its predecessor.

#6 I would like to find that place as well, but I have a feeling that when you get there, it might not be what you expected.

I am a huge trek fan, but I must say the last 3 years of BSG have been awesome, (1st and 2nd slightly better than the 3rd) and like they say “its one of the best TV shows in years” and I completely agree, its awesome, and anything but boring. I know this is a trek board, but with the launch of season of BSG 3 DVD, (Which I purchased yesterday) and the release of season 4 in a couple of weeks, how could you not be excited. BSG is a television show for adults, and it’s not your ST TOS, but a realistic cerebral TV show for adults. As far as ANY show on TV right now, in my opinion, there is no better. I can’t wait for season 4 of BSG, and if you have not given the show a chance, watch the mini series and if you are open minded, I am sure you will be hooked, just rent it from Netflix. BSG is the type of show that can stand up on repeat viewings, and like ST TOS, TNG, and that’s how I can judge a great TV show.

If you want to talk about borning, then talk about Boston Legal and the like.

#9, Battlestar Galactica portrays a fight for survival inherent in the original premise.

Also, dispite all of the depressing and desperate realism, there is also hope portrayed.

The episode “33” ended with a birth, a number added to the number of humans who survived the Cylon attack. That’s HOPE.

I see Battlestar Galactica as having a realistick, gritty portrayal of human endurance and survival.

It may be depressing on the surface, but it is also a positive comment on the human capacity to survive and adapt even the most dire of circumstances.

Our worthiness of survival, and how we can survive and adapt as human beings is a central theme of the show.

I love both shows, Star Trek (been a fan since I was 2, sitting in front of the TV watching reruns from my mother’s lap, and making a “whoosh” sound as the Enterprise zooms past during the opening credits), and of the new Battlestar Galactica, as a late bloomer watching the Miniseries, followed by the first season on DVD.

Very different animals, but both fantastic television series.

I’m very doubtful that Moore can bring BSG to a satisfying end.
Now he’s even admitting there will be loose ends. That alone is indicative of painting one’s self into a corner. After last season’s absurd finale, I almost threw in the towel.
And if it ends up as, “the humans are REALLY the bad guys,” I’ll puke.
Caprica? I’ll pass.

Thank you to everyone, from S. John Ross onward, who commented on my messages here.

I do think, as I have said, that BSG is a profound and serious TV series and I respect Moore for all his creative efforts in connection with it. I also agree that BSG is one of the best TV series ever made — of any kind — and I say this as an admirer of police procedurals like Hill Street Blues. All I ask for, however, is a bit more clarity on what it is that BSG really stands for. I’m not asking for hope, necessarily, because, fundamentally, “hope” is simply too vague and facile a concept at this level of analysis. (It is for a similar reason that I distrust politicians, whether Democrat or Republican, who sell their platform on the basis of “hope,” or “change,” or “faith,” or “American values,” or “staying the course.”) I think I would like to be more clearly informed of how BSG illuminates the human condition and tells us something more than that existence can be difficult in the extreme.

I know that Moore has plans for BSG (although I know that this sounds very much like saying that the Cylons have a plan for humanity — but I say this jokingly!) and I know, in my heart of hearts, that Moore is interested in presenting themes in BSG that people like me — raised on Trek, warts and all — might find a refreshing change. But — and this is as much an admission as anything else — I simply don’t see what those themes are, and I wish Moore would be a little less coy about them.

Perhaps — and I freely admit this — this says more about me and people like me than it does about either BSG or Moore. Perhaps I am impatient to know just what it is that I’m supposed to learn. But I would very much like to understand what it is that we are to know, and somehow all the pain and suffering we see on screen as afflicted upon the good people of the Galactica and its charges have stood more as obstacles than as conduits to that understanding, at least to me.

Then again, there is something to be said for patience, and perhaps it is all too true that I very too little of it these days.

Like many others, I can only hope to learn the truth of the matter, whatever it may be.

Correction — as regards patience, I meant to say that perhaps it is all too true that I have too little of it these days.

I’ll certainly watch the first few Caprica’s and see if they grab me. I have to wonder at a non-space based show that’s kinda sudsy by nature. I’m not saying it can’t work, indeed it’s got the pedigree. And I can’t wait to see more super-hot fembots with their spines all aglow. All I’m saying is I may find myself longing for big ships to blow up stuff.

I don’t think Caprica is going to happen as a series. The pilot will happen, but it seems doubtful that the Scifi channel is going to commit money and resources to spin off of a show good as it is , whose numbers have been steadily declining year after year.

RE: 15.

I was just having this conversation the other day with a friend of mine. I have to land on the side of television. While the movies are great, Star Trek (at least, my personal take of it) works best as serialized fiction.

That is to say, Trek thrives when given the audience is given a chance to return home as it were to those characters, that bridge. Yes, the movies allow for advances in character that we normally won’t see on the television screen as television tends to support the status quo. SEE: Removal of LaForge’s VISOR; the emotion chip; Spock’s death and subsequent rebirth; the beginnings of lasting peace with the Klingons. These are all major breaks to the norm, and as such lend itself to dramatic storytelling.

But with television, we’re allowed to learn who these characters are. We’re allowed the chance to fall in love with them. In essence, television allows us to be one of the crew in an odd way. You like Kirk. You like Spock. You’re infatuated with Dax. And when someone asks, “Why?” The answer tends to be, “Well… because of that one scene, in that one episode where such-and-such happened” or something along those lines.

Serialized fiction allows the audience a greater appreciation for what’s being seen. It’s more like a long marriage. There are ups. There are downs. Sometimes you love ‘em, and sometimes you just want to beam them up, and scatter their molecules across the cold, deadness of space. Television allows us that sense of commitment as opposed to the movies which is more “wham-bam-thank ya’-ma’am.”

They can be fun, but when it’s all over, that’s that. But those are my two cents.

I’m available for a remake!!!


Gil Gerard

“Yes, the movies allow for advances in character that we normally won’t see on the television screen as television tends to support the status quo.”

That’s actually a limitation which does not exist for most new series (like Galactica, Lost, Heroes), and it’s probably one of the reasons why TV is so much better than cinema at the moment.

#37 I think Moore has addressed this in his podcasts. Ultimately, BSG doesn’t stand for anything. It is an existential universe, where there are difficult moral choices with no easy answers. It is up to the audience member to supply those. As an agnostic, I approve. I think BSG is one of the best things on TV, because it doesn’t spoonfeed a worldview (unlike ST, which I love and has a definite POV on the outcome of society, but also, as a consequence, it is incredibly vague about the details of its “utopia”: how does a world without money work, how does everyone have the ability to fulfill their potential, et. al.? Even, cut and dried precepts like the Prime Directive are often honored in the breech–because the world does easily fit a set of black and white rules). Ultimately, I think ST is modernist, while BSG falls in the post-modernist camp.

with regard to BSG i have one my own crazy theories about the show and where it will end. As to who the 12 Cylon is, im not sure i buy the notion it’s Kara, Im convinced that its Baltar,Why the whole Projection in his head of Six which Cylons seem to be able to do, but i think for some strange reason the Cylons don’t want him to find out who he really is. Here’s anotherwild theory, the coloniels are machnine decended, on Kobol, people created their own equivilent to the Cylons who in turn evolved and rebelled and masacred most of the human population of Kobol who most likly went to Earth(which is probably the real origin point not Kobol) the machines of Kobol forgot they were machines and left for the colonies. the final 5 were creators gods and shepards to them and most likely engineered them selves into the gene pool so that at certain key points in history they would constantly re occur. Now why this crazy theory? well the phase it has happened before and it will happen again, the cycles of history repeat, from what I am hearing of season 4 the Cylons are about to have their own little machine rebellion

UFO was a series that hit close to the mark of reality as well as dealing with war on a psychological level.

One of the most underrated series out there, I’d love to see UFO re-done by someone like Ron Moore.

The best part about Caprica is….

12 of the actors are already cast. ;)

I’m hoping Caprica will be a Heinleinian take on the BSG minus 50 era.

The 12 colonies are vibrant, successful and “expanding” well before the Cylon war. Heck, RDM could even introduce Ovions or some other *dead* alien race that turns up, and even suggest for later that humanity was being manipulated not just by the Cylon elements, but by something even larger. Sort of the matrushka-doll approach.

We might even have a bit of internal civil war with a colony or two. Caprica being the peace-arranging planet, etc.

Anyway…. will Adar and Adama be young pilots in Caprica methinks?

Dear Gil Gerard,

Please join William Shatner at Jenny Craig’s. Then we’ll talk about future projects.



44, I am afraid to acknowledge that you may be right — that BSG doesn’t stand for anything at all. If this is true, then it confirms, I think, the worst fears of many intellectuals — that life is truly a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. With the caveat, perhaps, that it’s a cold universe out there, and that we as a species or even as individuals must hold tight together…. But then again, isn’t this caveat fundamentally a departure from the postmodernist nihlism of which you have so ably spoken?

I think that many of us instinctively rebel against nihilism, for whatever reason. This may be a result of our childhoods — we are told even from a young age that stories have morals, that good triumphs against evil or adversity, etc., etc. Nihilists tell us that these are all merely just that — tales, and that there really IS no morality, no goodness, no metaphysical force for progress or understanding. The universe just… IS. That’s nihilism.

And it may even be true.

Many of us don’t want to believe that it’s true, because if we did, then what is the reason for us to do what we do? Why should we wake up in the morning? Why should we feed our children, or go to work, or do any of these things? Why not just simply… exist?

This touches upon the whole question of the search for meaning in life, a task made more difficult because, as BSG may teach, there really ISN’T such a meaning on a fundamental level. Not only is there not a fate, but — contrary to what T2 claims, there isn’t even a fate that we make for ourselves. It’s all just happenstance, and it means…. nothing.

That’s nihilism.

That’s not what I want to learn from BSG, and, darn it all … I hope Moore has something else up his sleeve and that the time I’ve spent watching BSG, as little as it has been lately, hasn’t been just as significant as the time I’ve spent watching some mindless reality show, both of which, in this analysis, mean exactly the same thing.

Thank you for a most thoughtful post!

It IS absurd that Stewart never got nominated. If I’m not mistaken though, Nimoy got Emmy nominations all three years TOS was on the air.