Fable Q&A

[Tolden]

Originally Posted by Siberys

The comparison wasn't the similarities between the plots of the two shows, but rather the fact that they're very unpopular but for some reason still around.

Yes, I've seen the first season of the original, and the current one playing on Sci Fi today.

As for TNG, I don't know what that is. My strict opinion is more or less based on how often I watch TV shows and movies, considering I watch a LOT of them, most shows and movies don't bode well with me and it actually takes some serious effort to impress me. Firefly is the only science fiction show to do this thus far, aside from the originals (such as Twilight Zone, Plan 9 from outer space [yes, this was actually good in my opinion, good for laughs], hitchhikers guide to the galaxy, war of the worlds [the book mostly, maybe the movie], and the original Doctor Who). Battlestar Galactica, the original and newer versions, just weren't appealing to me. Like buffy the vampire slayer and stargate SG1, the concepts were great, but it simply wasn't worth watching after the first, second, or maybe third season.

Well, hmm...

TNG is, of course, Star Trek: The Next Generation. A fun show, but not exactly hardcore Science Fiction.

I don't understand how you can say that BSG is unpopular though. Are the ratings for it incredible? No, but constantly switching the day and hour of airing combined with random breaks (this last one was over a year and that was before the WGA strike) can kill a standard viewing audience, as SCIFI is so fond of doing. BSG's real core lies in the computer-literate people (for obvious reasons) that aren't afraid to simply download a show through torrents or whatnot. I realize that it seems that majority of you don't watch television regularly, but a vast array of other shows are littered with references to BSG, proving (somewhat meekly, I admit) that it has a fairly solid base if it's worth referencing.

As far as critical popularity, this is where BSG really hits its stride. Battlestar Galactica (2004) is regularly mentioned on the top of critics' favored programs. Stolen from wikipedia, here's a short list of some of BSG's awards:

* 2005 Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form. "33" (episode one)
* 2005 American Film Institute's Top 10 Television Shows of the Year
* 2005 Time Magazine's Best of 2005: Television (Position: #1)[21]
* 2005 TV Guide's and TV Land's The 100 Most Unexpected TV Moments for "Kobol's Last Gleaming, Part 2" (Position: #98)
* 2005 Peabody Award[22]
* 2005 Spacey Awards Favorite Limited TV Series
* 2006 American Film Institute's Top 10 Television Shows of the Year
* 2006 Time Magazine's Best of 2006: Television (Position: #7)
* 2006 Scream Awards, Best Television Show
* 2006 Saturn Awards, Best Syndicated/Cable Television Series
* 2006 Spacey Awards Best Television show
* 2006 Saturn Awards, Best Supporting Actor on Television, James Callis
* 2006 Saturn Awards, Best Supporting Actress on Television, Katee Sackhoff
* 2007 RedEye, Best TV Character - 2007 - Kara Thrace aka Starbuck[23]
* 2007 Saturn Awards, Best Syndicated/Cable Television Series
* 2007 Emmy Awards, Outstanding Visual Effects for a Series

Winning Saturns, Peabodies, Spaceys, and Emmies isn't exactly nothing.


This show isn't the typical fluff, it's not just a vessel to show off neat graphics. BSG has touched, sometimes heavy handedly, on a huge number of pertinent and modern issues. It's fairly obvious that it's also constantly allegorical to the current political climate.

So again, if you simply don't care for the show, that's fine. Just don't brush it off.

As Dwight Schrute says
"Do you watch Battlestar Galactica?"
"No."
"Then you are an idiot."

[Lady Dragonfly]

Originally Posted by fable

Sorry that I don't match the standards you set for everybody, LD. Guess my wanting to do other things than watch television is just plain wrong. I should learn from you, the Mistress Of All Conformity!

Standards? What a strange word. Why would I, a cynical individualist, care to set standards? The only worthy standard I can think of is good manners.
I can't blame you for forgetting that the "Mistress of All Conformity" has mentioned many times before that she watches TV almost as often as you - I know that gods never pay attention. *sigh*

Now, you see, that's one thing none of us slumming gods ever did in Babylon: we never referred to ourselves in the third person plural.

So say we all is a quote from Battlestar Galactica. The third person plural? We?

[fable]

Originally Posted by Lady Dragonfly

Standards? What a strange word. Why would I, a cynical individualist, care to set standards? The only worthy standard I can think of is good manners.
I can't blame you for forgetting that the "Mistress of All Conformity" has mentioned many times before that she watches TV almost as often as you - I know that gods never pay attention. *sigh*

Ah, so you weren't suggesting that I was somehow being exclusivist in not watching television...? Because that was the impression I received from your delicate and mannerly comments. And as we all know, doing anything that others don't agree to, as a group, is considered a form of heresy in the United Religion of America.

So say we all is a quote from Battlestar Galactica. The third person plural? We?

But you are sooo regal! You're not going to tell us that "Lady" part is assumed, surely?

[Siberys]

@Tolden.

What makes you think I would trust what a reviewer would say or how many awards a show has gotten. Elder Scrolls 4 oblivion has received about a thousand 8 to 10 out of 10's, yet the game is mediocre by anyone with more than half a brain's standard.

Me saying it's unpopular doesn't include the entire world. I was more or less meaning in my area, as I have quite a few friends at my college, and a lot of them have had a conversation with BSG brought up, most of them mentioning how they hate it.

As for the ratings being incredible, yes, they are. Opinions are always incredible towards someone else's opinion, why would I trust the opinion of a complete stranger saying good things about the series over my own? Why should I? I'm not going to believe or agree with someone when they say a show, series, or hell even a religion is good or the best when I have no prior knowledge of the subject in question myself.

Winning Saturns, Peabodies, Spaceys, and Emmies isn't exactly nothing.

It's nothing worth mentioning if it has no merit to my opinion.

So again, if you simply don't care for the show, that's fine. Just don't brush it off.

Why not, if I don't care for a show I will brush it off because as said, I don't care for the show. That kind of goes hand in hand.

BSG has touched, sometimes heavy handedly, on a huge number of pertinent and modern issues.

If I had no prior knowledge of the show, that would immediately turn me off. What business does a science FICTION show have on parodying modern life situations, current events, and politics. This shows not only a lack of originality but a subliminal message of a potentially one sided viewpoint of the current situation, event, or politic parodied.

BSG's real core lies in the computer-literate people (for obvious reasons) that aren't afraid to simply download a show through torrents or whatnot.

Right...would that mean you download it?

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Siberys

Just for reference-

BSG = Battle Star Galactica, it's similar to the scary movie/epic movie/superhero movie saga. It's an ungodly crappy show but for some reason, the directors, writers, and producers seem to keep getting money.

Bah - Battlestar Galactica is one of the best series I've ever watched, and I usually do not watch many series. Can't wait for season 4 to get out on DVD so I can see it. You Heretic you.
It has some of the best character development in a series I've ever seen unlike the mind-numbingly simplistic types of series which seems to plague the market today.
Only Sci-fi series I think can compete better is Firefly, but it is a stretch because one season only ever was produced.

[Siberys]

Originally Posted by Xandax

Only Sci-fi series I think can compete better is Firefly, but it is a stretch because one season only ever was produced.

One season and a movie. Serenity.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Siberys

One season and a movie. Serenity.

Yes I know - but seeing as Serenity is not a series, I can't very well use that in a comparison on a series. And it means that still only one season of series was ever produced as Serenity wasn't a series.
Battlestar Galatica also has a movie out (Razor) and the "miniseries" movie which kicked off the season 1-4 etc....

So firefly: the series - is the only series which I feel can compete with the battle star series as a series. (keyword being series )

[Siberys]

Wait, so BSG has a series and a movie. Firefly has a series and a movie, but these two can't be compared? Umm.....how?

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Siberys

Wait, so BSG has a series and a movie. Firefly has a series and a movie, but these two can't be compared? Umm.....how?

Because I said:
Only Sci-fi series I think can compete better is Firefly, but it is a stretch because one season only ever was produced.
Again - keyword being "series".

The movies aren't a series.

[Tolden]

Originally Posted by Siberys

@Tolden.

What makes you think I would trust what a reviewer would say or how many awards a show has gotten. Elder Scrolls 4 oblivion has received about a thousand 8 to 10 out of 10's, yet the game is mediocre by anyone with more than half a brain's standard.

You said it was unpopular, I was showing that it was, in fact, popular with both circles of tv viewers, the audience and the critics, no matter what your personal opinions of them may be.

Originally Posted by Siberys

Me saying it's unpopular doesn't include the entire world. I was more or less meaning in my area, as I have quite a few friends at my college, and a lot of them have had a conversation with BSG brought up, most of them mentioning how they hate it.

You'll forgive me if I didn't assume you meant by saying a show wasn't popular you meant more than just your friends. Islam, tofu, and independent films aren't popular in my home city, but for me to bluntly say they aren't popular and trust that you'd know I was referring strictly to my town would be laughable.

Originally Posted by Siberys

As for the ratings being incredible, yes, they are. Opinions are always incredible towards someone else's opinion, why would I trust the opinion of a complete stranger saying good things about the series over my own? Why should I? I'm not going to believe or agree with someone when they say a show, series, or hell even a religion is good or the best when I have no prior knowledge of the subject in question myself.

My point here was that, hoping you were claiming it to be unpopular based on more than "a few friends," ratings (which are an outmoded and out of step of research in my opinion) are a poor indicator of 'popularity.'

Originally Posted by Siberys

It's nothing worth mentioning if it has no merit to my opinion.

So industry recognized awards, the highest of their fields, are worthless to all arguments just because you don't personally trust them? I was never asking you to trust them, to believe in the Hollywood system. I was just continuing to show you that the fame of BSG extended beyond just some people watching tv, but it was recgonized as quality by the people that usually tend to disagree with the average tv viewer anyway.

Originally Posted by Siberys

Why not, if I don't care for a show I will brush it off because as said, I don't care for the show. That kind of goes hand in hand.

Well, frankly, it doesn't matter if you don't like it. Attempting to devalue it is something else. I could sit here and claim that you never gave it a fair shot, which I believe you had your mind made up already, and that is a very close minded approach or I could just respect that you don't care for it. There's a difference there.

Originally Posted by Siberys

If I had no prior knowledge of the show, that would immediately turn me off. What business does a science FICTION show have on parodying modern life situations, current events, and politics. This shows not only a lack of originality but a subliminal message of a potentially one sided viewpoint of the current situation, event, or politic parodied.

Now here is where you really threw a curve ball. Assuming you remember earlier when I mentioned that BSG uses Science Fiction as a SETTING, not a STORY? The scifi part of BSG is merely a boat to deliver a message, a story. That's the great thing about it. What about commenting on important issues such as religion, morality, the very essence of humanity is unoriginal? Is a story about trying to get a ship out of a black hole because the hyperdrive broke more creative then intertwining a story where the 'good' guys are driven to such extremes to resort to suicide bombings? I'll take the story about how these people we've been following for years now are so desperate to do ANYTHING to lash out against their occupiers as to sacrifice themselves over technobabble anyday. Some of the characters support them, some of them try to remain neutral, and some are totally disgusted with those actions. Funny thing is, so are the viewers. That's quality. It brings up topics that actually matter and make you look at them, it's not saying "Oh suicide bombing is noble!" it's trying to make you understand WHY they resort to that, what makes people work in these situations. You may not care for that and it seems you don't, so I don't really know what else to say in regards to that.

Originally Posted by Siberys

Right...would that mean you download it?

Actually, no. I once downloaded a single episode of Heroes because I missed it due to work and I wasn't sure when the repeat was. Turns out Heroes can be viewed on nbc.com anyway. In theory, I don't have a problem with downloaders, I just wish the TV people would take advantage of this medium. Some are starting to and I think that's great.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Tolden

<snip>
Now here is where you really threw a curve ball. Assuming you remember earlier when I mentioned that BSG uses Science Fiction as a SETTING, not a STORY? The scifi part of BSG is merely a boat to deliver a message, a story. That's the great thing about it. What about commenting on important issues such as religion, morality, the very essence of humanity is unoriginal? Is a story about trying to get a ship out of a black hole because the hyperdrive broke more creative then intertwining a story where the 'good' guys are driven to such extremes to resort to suicide bombings? I'll take the story about how these people we've been following for years now are so desperate to do ANYTHING to lash out against their occupiers as to sacrifice themselves over technobabble anyday. Some of the characters support them, some of them try to remain neutral, and some are totally disgusted with those actions. Funny thing is, so are the viewers. That's quality. It brings up topics that actually matter and make you look at them, it's not saying "Oh suicide bombing is noble!" it's trying to make you understand WHY they resort to that, what makes people work in these situations. You may not care for that and it seems you don't, so I don't really know what else to say in regards to that.
<snip>

This is actually why I - and half the people at my job - loves the series.
The sci-fi of BSG is not just aliens running around in silly customes (hi StarTrek, nice to see you again) having superficial plots.
BSG is very much deeper then that, and is very much about character development and progress, and the choices facing the characters (both "good" guys and "bad" guys).
The religious themes, political struggles and "wartime behaviour" and all that are very much a part of BSG. It isn't just space ships going pew-pew with their lasers.
It is not dumped down for the lowest common denominator as happens with so much entertainment these days.

[Siberys]

Setting or Story, it doesn't matter, the fact is the name Science -Fiction-, the key word is fiction, as in not real, as in not coterminous with reality. I don't watch science fiction set or plotted shows wanting reality. I watch them to get away from reality and be entertained, which many shows including BSG, have failed to do.

Personally, I prefer plausibility over reality. With reality, the cause and effect situation compares the show (what happens in the show, the cause) with reality (what would be the result in reality, the effect), whereas plausibility keeps cause and effect simply within the show itself. Realism in shows tend to turn towards an education documentary rather than something entertaining. In SG1, I don't give a flying crap about how a hyperspace window works, I just want to know if it's faster than the enemies version and if not will it be an explosive escape.

This is why, just in my opinion, Michael Bay is a genius (except for pearl harbor). I don't care if the explosion of a building would be bigger or smaller due to the severity of the crash/bomb or what have you, all I need to know is there was an explosion, and what the characters are doing to DEAL with that explosion.

When BSG focuses on comparisons of politics, current events, or any situation, it's a realistic situation, it doesn't matter if they alter it to their story, the fact is it came from reality and I don't want to see that. THAT is why I hate most science fiction shows, as well as BSG.

[Tolden]

Originally Posted by Siberys

Setting or Story, it doesn't matter, the fact is the name Science -Fiction-, the key word is fiction, as in not real, as in not coterminous with reality. I don't watch science fiction set or plotted shows wanting reality. I watch them to get away from reality and be entertained, which many shows including BSG, have failed to do.

Personally, I prefer plausibility over reality. With reality, the cause and effect situation compares the show (what happens in the show, the cause) with reality (what would be the result in reality, the effect), whereas plausibility keeps cause and effect simply within the show itself. Realism in shows tend to turn towards an education documentary rather than something entertaining. In SG1, I don't give a flying crap about how a hyperspace window works, I just want to know if it's faster than the enemies version and if not will it be an explosive escape.

This is why, just in my opinion, Michael Bay is a genius (except for pearl harbor). I don't care if the explosion of a building would be bigger or smaller due to the severity of the crash/bomb or what have you, all I need to know is there was an explosion, and what the characters are doing to DEAL with that explosion.

When BSG focuses on comparisons of politics, current events, or any situation, it's a realistic situation, it doesn't matter if they alter it to their story, the fact is it came from reality and I don't want to see that. THAT is why I hate most science fiction shows, as well as BSG.

Well then, I conceed. If you are only interested in explosions and pretty graphics, we are speaking to different mindsets. You stress that you are interested in how the characters deal with a situation. It seems, though, that you are interested in how they literally deal with it. While you may be interested in which shield frequency they modulate over to or if they can hop on over to Pegasus and find an Ancient repository to develop another ARG and end there, I am more interested in how they personally deal with their situations. I want to care about the characters. I do that with BSG. I've watched SG1 for 10 years, it's a good fun show, but no where near BSG in, what I consider, quality. Remember though, BSG is a drama first and scifi second. The difference between using scifi as a setting and as a story is massive. I really, honestly hate to sound elitist, but if Michael Bay is your idea of a superior story teller, I guess I am.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Siberys

Setting or Story, it doesn't matter, the fact is the name Science -Fiction-, the key word is fiction, as in not real, as in not coterminous with reality. I don't watch science fiction set or plotted shows wanting reality. I watch them to get away from reality and be entertained, which many shows including BSG, have failed to do.

Personally, I prefer plausibility over reality. With reality, the cause and effect situation compares the show (what happens in the show, the cause) with reality (what would be the result in reality, the effect), whereas plausibility keeps cause and effect simply within the show itself. Realism in shows tend to turn towards an education documentary rather than something entertaining. In SG1, I don't give a flying crap about how a hyperspace window works, I just want to know if it's faster than the enemies version and if not will it be an explosive escape.

This is why, just in my opinion, Michael Bay is a genius (except for pearl harbor). I don't care if the explosion of a building would be bigger or smaller due to the severity of the crash/bomb or what have you, all I need to know is there was an explosion, and what the characters are doing to DEAL with that explosion.

When BSG focuses on comparisons of politics, current events, or any situation, it's a realistic situation, it doesn't matter if they alter it to their story, the fact is it came from reality and I don't want to see that. THAT is why I hate most science fiction shows, as well as BSG.

SG1 uses P90 submachine guns. It works and comes from a real setting - oh noes.
It takes place in a "contemporary" historical setting (meaning right now) and they have realistic problems with their characters - albeit simplified very much (aka dumped down) - even though they fight an alien race with their pew-pew as well.
Take the whole Replicator issue in StarGate series - and tell me that is not a "humanity inventing AI, turning on us" discussion just waiting to happen. A very common theme in Sci-fi (BSG as well). It is a storyline sprung from a realistic issue.
The entire Asgard and Goauld being Gods? Religious comments right there.
I've seen more then one show of SG1 where a character disobays orders from a superior ... well, human interest conflicts present.
And those fundamentals are actually utilized in BSG as well as they are in many other Sci-fi settings/series/movies.

So even series like SG1 and spin-offs carry their "realism" as well, although it looks very dumped down - but it is still there.

[Siberys]

So even series like SG1 and spin-offs carry their "realism" as well, although it looks very dumped down - but it is still there.

Yeah, I know. That's why I said I really didn't care for most of SG1. My point about the hyperspace window being an education thing is that they DID waste my time and explain how it works even though all I wanted was a cool explosive chase scene.