Battlestar Galactica The Greatest Scif show? or Babylon 5 [Spoilers for BSG S4]

[Garovorkin]

I have outlined some of the problems that BSG has, is it as good a show as B5, no it is not, should it be considered in the same league as B5? yes it should , because it does have some outstanding writing but b5 has an edge in the writing department. JMS did a far better job of plotting and mapping out his series then did Ron Moore, that is evident. He addressed the technical and scientific aspects of his show far better and Harlan Ellison as the creative consultant was definitely a plus as well. In terms of character and character development, both shows are very close in that department. The characters are 3 dimensional and believable and very flawed people. They act like real people would which was not the case in so may other science fiction series. Also BSG did win the Peabody award which is no small feat. But which show had more impact? B5 of course because without it, we would not have Ds9 or BSG. B5 was the first show to give trek serious competition for the minds and hearts of science fiction fans.

 

[Jade Jaguar]

My own take.

We'll set aside the mechanical specifics and look at some general attributes that make for good lasting science fiction.

1. Do the characters have distinct personalities that will become recognizable culture cliches?

2. Do we have a recognizable story setting that we instantly recognize just from a visual cue.

The above attributes count strongly against a work of fiction, to me. But, I will admit that they help to make a show more of a popular success. To me, the vast majority of TV shows that are a popular success are utter crap.

 

[thinker2222]

I have outlined some of the problems that BSG has, is it as good a show as B5, no it is not, should it be considered in the same league as B5? yes it should , because it does have some outstanding writing but b5 has an edge in the writing department. JMS did a far better job of plotting and mapping out his series then did Ron Moore, that is evident. He addressed the technical and scientific aspects of his show far better and Harlan Ellison as the creative consultant was definitely a plus as well. In terms of character and character development, both shows are very close in that department. The characters are 3 dimensional and believable and very flawed people. They act like real people would which was not the case in so may other science fiction series. Also BSG did win the Peabody award which is no small feat. But which show had more impact? B5 of course because without it, we would not have Ds9 or BSG. B5 was the first show to give trek serious competition for the minds and hearts of science fiction fans.

Okay lets test that hypothesis by taking two "similar characters" the central villains of Babylon 5 and GINO.

In twenty words or less describe Londo Mollari.

In twenty words or less describe Gaius Baltar.

After your attempt, I'll give it a crack myself.

If the charactetrs are well written you should find this exercise SIMPLE.

The above attributes count strongly against a work of fiction, to me. But, I will admit that they help to make a show more of a popular success. To me, the vast majority of TV shows that are a popular success are utter crap.

You'll find the same test works to prove/disprove the second hypothesis.

T.

 

[Jade Jaguar]

You'll find the same test works to prove/disprove the second hypothesis.

T.

Huh?

 

[Triple F]

JMS did a far better job of plotting and mapping out his series then did Ron Moore, that is evident. He addressed the technical and scientific aspects of his show far better and Harlan Ellison as the creative consultant was definitely a plus as well. In

Depends what you mean by addressed I suppose.

It would be more than a little wrong to imply that jms had a major hand in the specific visual detailed look of the show. General approach ‘maybe’, in some areas. But jms wanted to add tractor beams to the B5 station, had to be convinced that a more realistic approach to space flight would be a good idea, did not introduce organ tech to the ‘verse. Other people had those ideas and implemented the style, along with costumes, scene dressing, etc.

 

[thinker2222]

Huh?

Exactly.

Can you summarize something specific about GINO that makes it a great series in twenty words or less?

THAT is a standard test for the IMPACT of a great work of art.

Mona Lisa.

The smile means different things to each person who sees it.

Londo Mollari.

This character is the chief left-hand example of the moral dilemma that confronts those who seek power on Babylon 5.

 

[Chilli]

You're equating cultural impact with artistic merit. By that logic, Knight Rider is a masterpiece.

That's stupid.

 

[Garovorkin]

Thinker you defined Mollari better and in far fewer worlds then I could have. I doubt my answer on Baltar will satisfy either you or the standard impact test, but here goes. Baltar's an example of the consequences of blinding oneself to personal responsibilities for actions committed that have tragically impacted others. Not perfect definition, maybe not even a definition but i tried. I am curious about one thing, what does the Mona Lisa Smile mean to you?

 

[Garovorkin]

Triple F He did write the vast majority of the of the stories for the series , in that context he would have had to have mapped out things out before hand . I have heard the story about the tractor beams by the way glad that one did not make the final cut

 

[Garovorkin]

Thinker the whole problem with standard impact definitions is that as guidelines for judging excellence,they are really of no use at all other then what someone thought should be a standard for defining excellence. It' kind of like the definition of a theologian, I know the standard definition, the layman's definition for theologian is a person who studies what other people say bout about God. Same with a critic, he or she studies definitions of excellence created by someone else. I am not saying critics and reviewers are wrong in everything they say, but what they say is opinion and not necessarily the definitive truth . If Art were based on strict by the book definition of art or excellence, that would probably exclude a great deal of the art and even great literature produced. By the way you are aware that those static standard definitions your so fond of do change with the times?

 

[KoshFan]

Firefly would have been the best SF ever, had it been allowed to live. It might also have been the greatest western. It's just that good.

But alas, it was felled too quickly, and now we'll have to wait and see if Joss can do anything better.

 

[Garovorkin]

Kosh fan Firefly is a good show but I think the topic here is BSG VS B5.

 

[Jade Jaguar]

Exactly.

Can you summarize something specific about GINO that makes it a great series in twenty words or less?

THAT is a standard test for the IMPACT of a great work of art.

Mona Lisa.

The smile means different things to each person who sees it.

Londo Mollari.

This character is the chief left-hand example of the moral dilemma that confronts those who seek power on Babylon 5.

I am not defending BSG, I don't watch it. But, your standard test is BS. That's as if the quality of a work depended on being able to make a good Hollywood pitch summary of it. I'd say, at least to my taste, that is the opposite of the truth. You seem to favor the simple, clear, and familiar. I prefer the complex, obscure, and unusual. Compared to most TV, B5 is complex, obscure, and unusual.

When you say "Impact of a great work of art," you are talking about mass appeal. Your test has some validity for that. But, that is just a measure of popularity, not quality.

 

[thinker2222]

You're equating cultural impact with artistic merit. By that logic, Knight Rider is a masterpiece.

That's stupid.

No it isn't, if you add the TIME factor to it which was implicit in the examples chosen. Try to extrapolate from data please instead of leaping to conclusions based on your own ego bias.. Great art isn't your memory of what is art, Its the COLLECTIVE Human memory of what is art.

T.

 

[thinker2222]

Thinker you defined Mollari better and in far fewer worlds then I could have. I doubt my answer on Baltar will satisfy either you or the standard impact test, but here goes. Baltar's an example of the consequences of blinding oneself to personal responsibilities for actions committed that have tragically impacted others. Not perfect definition, maybe not even a definition but i tried. I am curious about one thing, what does the Mona Lisa Smile mean to you?

"Enigma."

How is that for a twenty word or less description? Of course that is my own ego bias kicking in, but hey, I can't be objective ALL the time.

As for Baltar? "Narcissistic egomaniac inefficient cretin psychotic" is the best I can do. He just doesn't character function at all except as a Gummiattrappe in a Ron Moore universe where the standard for sanity is a machine yakking in your head urging you onward to get your face smashed in by a youngster with a rifle-all of this so that you can overthrow "the old gods".

I mean......."Come on!"

T.

 

[Garovorkin]

Thinker its funny but a lot of critics and reviewers would not agree with your definition of what is good. lets look at the fact that Ron Moore is a famous producer, writer of a hit science fiction series, which is the darling of a rather substantial portion of the critics , its won a Peabody award ,a fact seems to be lost on you for some reason. They don't give that award out to garbage shows, another fact that seems to be lost on you. Im sure Ron Moore doesn't give a damn about what you think of his show because he's famous and succesful and your not.

 

[thinker2222]

I am not defending BSG, I don't watch it. But, your standard test is BS. That's as if the quality of a work depended on being able to make a good Hollywood pitch summary of it. I'd say, at least to my taste, that is the opposite of the truth. You seem to favor the simple, clear, and familiar. I prefer the complex, obscure, and unusual. Compared to most TV, B5 is complex, obscure, and unusual.

When you say "Impact of a great work of art," you are talking about mass appeal. Your test has some validity for that. But, that is just a measure of popularity, not quality.

1. The standard test is there for a reason; for clarity to focus you on the important mains or points of discussion
2. I can swear like a guttersnipe or Marine; if I have to do so. That doesn't mean I think like one, or talk, or write like one when I discuss unless provoked..
3. I doubt you even begin to appreciate the complexity of B-5. Explain for example; the metaphor of turning Centauri into flutes. Hint "I'll play music on your bones."

T.

 

[thinker2222]

Thinker its funny but a lot of critics and reviewers would not agree with your definition of what is good. lets look at the fact that Ron Moore is a famous producer, writer of a hit science fiction series, which is the darling of a rather substantial portion of the critics , its won a Peabody award ,a fact seems to be lost on you for some reason. They don't give that award out to garbage shows, another fact that seems to be lost on you. Im sure Ron Moore doesn't give a damn about what you think of his show because he's famous and succesful and your not.

You do know Rick Berman and what a piece of work he was, right?

Guess who fired Ron Moore off Star Trek for incompetence? Yeah Rick fired Ron.

Winning a Peabody award against ZERO competition in the year category is worth exactly.....................ZERO.

I could care less what Ron Moore thinks of me. He must have read something from someone though.

Because he duplicated "Inkblot" in "Maelstrom".

http://www.b5tech.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1700

I don't need to be famous, just good enough.

T.

 

[Garovorkin]

Okay thinker we've gone off the deep end with this topic, it BSG Vs B5. You've managed to turn it into a one sided bashing of BSG and its getting rather silly, don't you think. You have done everything your power to turn this thread into a one man war against BSG. I started this thread and Im asking you to put a lid on your little diatribe . You got something constructive to add to this discussion fine, other wise Muzzle it ! This isn't your thread it's mine !

 

[Jade Jaguar]

"Enigma."

How is that for a twenty word or less description? Of course that is my own ego bias kicking in, but hey, I can't be objective ALL the time.

Well, your posts certainly contain plenty of ego, and bias. But I would say rather regurgitation kicking in. "Enigmatic" is surely the single most common descriptor for the Mona Lisa's smile. That's what everyone always says...