Recommend me something to watch

[Oerwinde]

So stories that deal with unattractive concepts and unlikeable anti-heroes aren't fit for films?

 

What a grey life you must lead.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I was just really disappointed in the film. It was hyped up as this amazing movie, then I saw it and it was boring, with little to no plot, boring characters, and just generally not a very interesting film. It may be well acted and well directed, but that doesn't redeem a terrible script. Like Lost in Translation, well acted, well directed, but a script that shouldn't have been turned into a fully fledged movie to begin with.

[Pidesco]

The script is one of the best things ever written about rage and rebellion. And how can you call Travis Bickle a boring character?

 

And now you're putting down Lost In Translation, too?

 

 

I guess I shouldn't argue with someone who has Con Air on DVD. :ph34r:

[Plano Skywalker]

....(As I remember, the BSG crew actually did find Earth, but decided against populating it for fear that the Cylons would follow their trail and literally decimate Earth, since our technology is far more primitive than theirs and even one Battlestar couldn't defend against an entire fleet of Cylon Base Ships, which the Cylons would most likely send to Earth for a full scale invasion,  though I think in one episode of the old version, they were pretty much destroyed in a big battle.) or new enemies(A mutinous crew and fake human androids Cylons? Come on...).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

you are referring to Galactica 1980 which was an insincere attempt by corporate executives to create a "kid's show" for the 7pm timeslot. They basically just ripped off the name and created something that producer Glen Larson regrets doing.

 

having said that, the shows aren't that bad if you treat them in their own right....but that is NOT Battlestar Galactica (not even classic BSG).

 

I like the rich backstory of the new BSG and how it goes into some of the differences between the 12 colonies. I also like the backstory on Cylons--they were created primarily so the 12 colonies could wage war on each other. Now that has plausibility, not some far-fetched notion that they were created by a now-extinct lizard-like race and forgot the war is over. I also like the overtly religious nature of the show. That is one thing that is hard to do in science fiction and the new BSG pulls it off.

 

I like classic BSG much like I do classic Star Trek. But I think Picard's ST is much better than Kirk's. And I think Olmos's BSG is much better than Greene's.

[metadigital]

Actually there are some excellent philosophical quodlibets: the love-hate relationship of the created (Cylons) and their makers; the religious verisimiltudes of that; the fact that the Cylons seem incapable of managing their newly aquired emotions; the fact that

the XO's wife Ellen Tigh (Kate Vernon)

is far more evil than practically ANY of the Cylons.

 

In short, by avoiding the SF clich

[jodo kast 5]

....(As I remember, the BSG crew actually did find Earth, but decided against populating it for fear that the Cylons would follow their trail and literally decimate Earth, since our technology is far more primitive than theirs and even one Battlestar couldn't defend against an entire fleet of Cylon Base Ships, which the Cylons would most likely send to Earth for a full scale invasion,  though I think in one episode of the old version, they were pretty much destroyed in a big battle.) or new enemies(A mutinous crew and fake human androids Cylons? Come on...).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

you are referring to Galactica 1980 which was an insincere attempt by corporate executives to create a "kid's show" for the 7pm timeslot. They basically just ripped off the name and created something that producer Glen Larson regrets doing.

 

having said that, the shows aren't that bad if you treat them in their own right....but that is NOT Battlestar Galactica (not even classic BSG).

 

I like the rich backstory of the new BSG and how it goes into some of the differences between the 12 colonies. I also like the backstory on Cylons--they were created primarily so the 12 colonies could wage war on each other. Now that has plausibility, not some far-fetched notion that they were created by a now-extinct lizard-like race and forgot the war is over. I also like the overtly religious nature of the show. That is one thing that is hard to do in science fiction and the new BSG pulls it off.

 

I like classic BSG much like I do classic Star Trek. But I think Picard's ST is much better than Kirk's. And I think Olmos's BSG is much better than Greene's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whatever floats your boat, I still hate the new BSG. And I can agree with you about TSG Star Trek, but I wouldn't exactly call the new BSG's backstory 'rich', because I honestly just think the series is a cheap knockoff of the old one. thats my 2 cents on the entire thing. You guys have your new one, I have my old one.

[Plano Skywalker]

....I honestly just think the series is a cheap knockoff of the old one. thats my 2 cents on the entire thing. You guys have your new one, I have my old one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

everything is a knockoff of something else. Classic BSG is a knockoff of Wagon Train.

 

it is a great premise: survival as in the main story is about survival. if you wanted to do a sci-fi show that has as much "believability" as possible, it would have to be one centered around survival.

 

Classic BSG had an enemy that was woefully incompetent and provided no real justification for Baltar's betrayal and many other silly mistakes such as the Cylon "Welcoming Party" in the pilot episode that was obviously an all-out assault on the home worlds. Not to mention the casino planet and it blowing up (obvious SW ripoffs).

 

I like Classic BSG but the new one is much better, IMO. Classic BSG did have some fine acting, though, especially from Richard Hatch, Dirk Benedict and Lorne Greene.

[metadigital]

Whatever floats your boat, I still hate the new BSG. And I can agree with you about TSG Star Trek, but  I wouldn't exactly call the new BSG's backstory 'rich', because I honestly just think the series is a cheap knockoff of the old one. thats my 2 cents on the entire thing. You guys have your new one, I have my old one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Please, tell me! What was the "rich backstory" of the original series?

 

If you can't see the depth of the new series, then you aren't looking.

[Dark_Raven]

The original series sucked! It was sooooooo seventies. Yuck!

[jodo kast 5]

....I honestly just think the series is a cheap knockoff of the old one. thats my 2 cents on the entire thing. You guys have your new one, I have my old one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

everything is a knockoff of something else. Classic BSG is a knockoff of Wagon Train.

 

it is a great premise: survival as in the main story is about survival. if you wanted to do a sci-fi show that has as much "believability" as possible, it would have to be one centered around survival.

 

Classic BSG had an enemy that was woefully incompetent and provided no real justification for Baltar's betrayal and many other silly mistakes such as the Cylon "Welcoming Party" in the pilot episode that was obviously an all-out assault on the home worlds. Not to mention the casino planet and it blowing up (obvious SW ripoffs).

 

I like Classic BSG but the new one is much better, IMO. Classic BSG did have some fine acting, though, especially from Richard Hatch, Dirk Benedict and Lorne Greene.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Woefully incompentent? Funny, considering they managed to destroy entire worlds full of humans, and literally reduced a fleet of Battlestars to just two surviving battlestars, and a rag tag fleet of defensless freighters. I suppose you're going to say that the Terrorists and Alquaeda are 'woefully incompent', even though they managed to destroy the Twin Towers and wound the Pentagon? Don't make me laugh. And the acting in the original BSG is a hell of alot better than what I've seen in the new one, atleast the Original was convincing.

Edited October 12, 2006 by jodo kast 5

[jodo kast 5]

Whatever floats your boat, I still hate the new BSG. And I can agree with you about TSG Star Trek, but  I wouldn't exactly call the new BSG's backstory 'rich', because I honestly just think the series is a cheap knockoff of the old one. thats my 2 cents on the entire thing. You guys have your new one, I have my old one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Please, tell me! What was the "rich backstory" of the original series?

 

If you can't see the depth of the new series, then you aren't looking.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They were trying to find a new safe haven while trying to avoid being destroyed by the Cylons and other enemies, while keeping an entire rag-tag fleet of citizens and supplies safe from Pirates and any other things that were trying to kill them and rying to keep rebellions from happening across the disgruntled citizens in the fleet. They also had some damn good subplots along with believable acting to support it. Basically, it's survival, not some stupid soap opra thats just abunch of bad drama.

 

Now why don't you tell me the so-called 'rich backstory' of the new series, meta?

 

And I have looked, and I don't like what Ive seen. Thats why I don't watch it.

 

 

Dark_Raven: So? The OT was made in the 70's/early 80's, and A LOT of people say it's better than the Prequels. Are you saying that , say, Jar Jar Binks or Anakin Skywalker are better than Luke Skywalker? Or Han Solo for that matter? Sure, the PT had some very good acting in it (Ewan, SLJ, Liam Neeson, Christopher Lee, Ian McDiarmind.), but even that couldn't save it with all the other horrible acting around it. I found the 'Love Dialouge' in AOTC and ROTS to be very wooden and not very convincing, where in the OT, the dialouge between Leia and Han are top notch and shows some deep feelings between the two.

 

The point is that a new version of an old movie may have good graphics, but may suck when it comes to acting, plot, etc..

 

At any rate, again, whatever floats your boat. I'm too tired to keep arguing and neither one of us will back down, so it's a wasted argument. You guys(And gals.) will always have your new BSG, and I'll always have my Original BSG.

Edited October 12, 2006 by jodo kast 5

[Oerwinde]

The point is that a new version of an old movie may have good graphics, but may suck when it comes to acting, plot, etc..

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Which isn't the case with new BSG, which has excellent acting and a plot that just keeps getting better and better leaving you wanting more at the end of every episode.

 

Theres a reason its regarded as the best show on TV by critics and fans.

[Plano Skywalker]

Woefully incompentent?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

yes, woefully incompetent means having to fight a battle of attrition every time....sure, you might win some battles, but only because of overwhelming numbers.

 

did you see the episode (new BSG) where the Cylons boarded the Galactica and the Colonials had to fight them toe-to-toe? Now them there is some creepy monsters!

 

you also mentioned terrorist tactics...the new Cylons do that...the old ones did not.

[astr0creep]

And I have looked, and I don't like what Ive seen. Thats why I don't watch it.

 

You know, everyone is entitled to their opinions, and personal taste is, well, personal.

 

But the OP asked for recommendations on something to watch, not recommendations of things not to watch.

 

If you hate BSG so much thats fine. It gets good ratings but not 100% so of course it's not for everyone.

 

Don't you agree though that the OP should watch at least just a few episodes to make up his own mind?

 

[jodo kast 5]

No. And like I said before, everyone's entitled to their own opinions. And my opion, is that the new BSG isn't good. Simple as that. You want to flame me or say I'm blind or stupid for not liking it? Be my guest, you can flame me till the cows come home, but I stand by my decision.

 

you also mentioned terrorist tactics...the new Cylons do that...the old ones did not.

So I suppose them attacking an entire fleet of somewhat defensive Battlestars while, apparently, negotiating, isn't a terrorist tactic? Funny, considering back in the early 40's, the Japanese were 'negotiating' to get their oil back, and then attacked Pearl Harbor, which is still considered to by most Politicians and war veterans, to be almost the same as 9/11(With different goals and tactics.). Are you going to say that in SW EP2, that even though the Seperatists were in negotiations with the Republic and tried to assassinate a Republic Senator, which is almost exactly the same thing the Cylons were doing, but on a much larger scale, were not using terrorist tactics? Again, don't make me laugh, terrorist tactics can be used by anyone or anything(Robots, Droids.), just as long as they plan it right.

Edited October 12, 2006 by jodo kast 5

[astr0creep]

Nobody's flamin' Jodo. We're just exchanging opinions.

 

It's not like BSG is used by the US as a battle plan to invade France... It's just a TV show.

[Pidesco]

Nobody's flamin' Jodo. We're just exchanging opinions.

 

It's not like BSG is used by the US as a battle plan to invade France... It's just a TV show.

 

That's what they want you to think.

[jodo kast 5]

Nobody's flamin' Jodo. We're just exchanging opinions.

 

It's not like BSG is used by the US as a battle plan to invade France... It's just a TV show.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know. But trust me, these people keep asking me if Ive looked, and I have, and like I said before, I don't like what Ive seen, which is why I don't watch it.

[astr0creep]

So what do you recommend then?

 

The Shield if I remember correctly?

[Pop]

So what do you recommend then?

 

The Shield if I remember correctly?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't knock on a good thing.

 

BSG is good. I don't know about "Best Show on TV" good, though. Seems like a lot of people are split between the Wire and BSG. I prefer the Wire, myself.

[LadyCrimson]

Rome is the best show on TV. Too bad it won't live for 10 seasons. :D

 

I have fond memories of the original BSG but not because it was a really good example of TV-creation. The current BSG, while not perfect or entirely to my tastes, is miles better in every way. imo.

[jodo kast 5]

So what do you recommend then?

 

The Shield if I remember correctly?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I didn't recommend anything. I just added my opinion that I didn't like the BSG. And no, you don't remember correctly.

 

The Shield is a pretty good show, though there are a few shows I like. I don't really watch T.V. that much, but I watched the entire first season of BSG, saw the first episode, didn't like it, but hoped that the show would somehow improve. Gave up on it after the first season was up, which is what I shouldve done in the first place.

[Oerwinde]

Rome is the best show on TV. Too bad it won't live for 10 seasons. :D

 

I have fond memories of the original BSG but not because it was a really good example of TV-creation. The current BSG, while not perfect or entirely to my tastes, is miles better in every way. imo.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

2nd season will be the last. Which is disappointing. I guess they must be going to end it with Octavius becoming the first emperor.

[Plano Skywalker]

I keep seeing The Shield mentioned. How is that better that any of the other crime shows (Law and Order, CSI, etc)?

[Pop]

I keep seeing The Shield mentioned.  How is that better that any of the other crime shows (Law and Order, CSI, etc)?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

L&O and CSI are procedurals, and they tend to be self-contained in their episode arcs. The Shield is a serial, narrative show, with storylines that can last much longer and much more chance for character development. The detectives will spend several episodes tracking down rapists or murderers, and it's much more dramatic when they get caught. Some story arcs will be limited to a single episode, some will be addressed over a few weeks, and some (like the murder in the first episode) will keep coming up throughout the whole series. But the focus of the show, obviously, is the fact that the main characters are dirty cops, and the best parts of the show are the ones in which they're in danger of exposing themselves or getting in over their heads. I like to think of it as L&O:SVU if that show had more balls and a cynical view of the law process. The ensemble cast is also very good, as are the characters they play.

 

The first season was kind of meh, the second and third seasons were good, but the 4th season was when the show started getting really good, largely on the strength of Glenn Close, and later Forest Whitaker in the 5th season (and for a few episodes of the upcoming 6th)

Edited October 15, 2006 by Pop

[chris the jedi killer]

Halloween 4