Re: Galactica 2003

> Multiple replies, and now With Spoilers, so...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> His character weak one way, strong another way, both of which grated
on
> me. He gave the picture of a somewhat insane genius, which is fine,
but
> too much of the base plot hinged on his fatal flaws, and his fatal
> flaws were only fatal to others. I _did_ chuckle when he happened to
be
> right about something he had no clue about.

I suspect the writers are trying to give him all the faults of the
people
who originally designed the Cylons.  His characterization is certainly
not
perfect, but look at the pilot for the original Star Trek or B5, both of
those required time and effort to perfect the characterizations by the
actors, and interplay between the characters.  BattleStar Galatica  has
real
potential, if sometimes annoying minor plot elements.

> >  I did, however, take issue with the way they drilled the
> > "By the way, he had sex with a Cylon"  Point every two
> > minutes...
>
> Ah, yes. This bugged me as well. Clearly this Baltar's extra flaky,
but
> the show plays as if "The Woman In the Red Dress" is every man's
> downfall.

What man hasn't fallen for at least one beautiful women who wasn't much
more
trouble then she was worth???  Fortunately, it doesn't usually result in
the
nuking of cities...

> > An interesting point, is that it implies that you will want to point
> > the
> > catapults the direction you want the fighters to go.
>
> _If_ fighters have cinematic components to their maneuver, that's not
> necessary. We really didn't see enough for me to be sure, but I think
> some of the large scale fighter maneuvers couldn't have been managed
> completely in vector. Or else the grav PSB component of fighter
> movement is simply preventing pilots and equipment from liquifying
> during 30 G vector maneuvers.

True, but you have the Raptor coasting to Caprica.  So I suspect that
what
they really want is cinematic vector movement...  Whatever that is... 
Ah, I
know.  It's the Hollywood Laws of Physics...

> > After retracting the bays for the first FTL jump... the FX shot
> > showing the
> > jump clearly has the bays extended!
> >
> > </continuity police>
>
> There's a gotcha!

Yes you did.  Well if this is the worst thing that happens to me this
week,
it's going to be a good week!  Now if only those streatwise girlscouts
don't
beat me up again this week...

> >> I'm not a big fan of the retractable landing bays. It seems like a
> >> purposeless plot device, but it looked cool.
> >
> > I suspect it is done for FTL, but it does seem a little corny...
>
> Yes, it was - though spindlier civilian ships didn't need to do any
> battening down to jump. My biggest problem with the retracting is the
> required void-space in the main hull for the connectors to withdraw
> into. Seems like poor design for a 'battlestation with drives'.

Agreed about the void space.  Maybe it's the Hollywood Laws of Volume...

> > Don't worry, they'll make more models Cylons if they need to...
>
> Exactly why we _should_ have seen more of the human designs. OTOH I
did
> like the rationale of the Cylons deciding to hunt down and destroy the
> last humans. It was only a few sentences of dialog, but their logic
> gave them a 'human, but not quite' quality I found refreshing.

Sure, it would be nice, but we don't have to try to keep the show on
budget
or write the next several scripts.  I agree about the Cylons dialog. 
They
know humans better then most humans...

ias