Mr S and I both share slightly obsessive-compulsive
tendencies when it comes to watching television. When we come across something
we like, we watch it to the exclusion of anything else, with sessions of two or
three episodes once or twice a week (we are also impatient, and prefer to leave
the minimum amount of time between cliffhangers) until we have exhausted the
entire series. This is probably one of the reasons why we don't have a TV, but
we do have a Netflix subscription. Our latest addiction has been to Battlestar
Galactica - not the one from the 1970's with the wonderful and
ridiculous 1970's costumes, but the 2003-2009 remake.
 |
| Capes just seem a bit impractical for space fights. |
I first came to science-fiction television through Star
Trek, by which I mean I was pretty much raised on a steady diet of Next
Generation, followed by Deep Space Nine, followed by Voyager,
and rounded off by Enterprise which, due to coming out when I
was in my early teens and starring several wonderfully chiselled jaws, ended up
being the focus of my earliest fantasy 'crushes'. So the Star Trek universe has
always been something of a ballpark against which I measure other
science fiction. To be honest, this does not exactly disadvantage the rest of
the genre.
One of the things which both makes Star Trek compelling watching and yet also removes its potential to really sting its viewers into sitting up straight with excitement is, well, its morality. Gene Roddenberry, its creator, wanted to portray an optimistic - some might say, idealistic - vision of the future. Conflict within episodes was to come from external sources, rather than occurring between characters, as he believed that 'by the 24th century, humanity had transcended petty conflict, and... arguments in the same way it had gone beyond poverty and disease and wars'.[1] These rules were not, of course, always strictly followed throughout different incarnations of the show (part of the drama of Voyager, of course, came from the potential for internal disagreements between a group of people stuck on a ship decades away from home), but the basic message underlying most of Star Trek is: humans are okay, really, and things will come right in the end.
One of the things which both makes Star Trek compelling watching and yet also removes its potential to really sting its viewers into sitting up straight with excitement is, well, its morality. Gene Roddenberry, its creator, wanted to portray an optimistic - some might say, idealistic - vision of the future. Conflict within episodes was to come from external sources, rather than occurring between characters, as he believed that 'by the 24th century, humanity had transcended petty conflict, and... arguments in the same way it had gone beyond poverty and disease and wars'.[1] These rules were not, of course, always strictly followed throughout different incarnations of the show (part of the drama of Voyager, of course, came from the potential for internal disagreements between a group of people stuck on a ship decades away from home), but the basic message underlying most of Star Trek is: humans are okay, really, and things will come right in the end.
Which is why it is
sometimes refreshing to encounter science fiction that takes a slightly less
rosy view of things. Hence my enjoyment of the new Battlestar Galactica.
To call the show 'dark' would perhaps be a mild understatement. I don't think
it would be spoiling anything for those who have never seen the show to say
that the first episode starts by almost all of humanity being wiped out in a
nuclear attack by 'the Cylons' upon the Twelve Colonies, given that this is the
basic premise of the show and is noted in the first sentence of pretty much any
online synopsis you'll find. But anyway: it's stark. And the writers give some
much harsher answers than Gene Roddenberry would have done to the question of
what would happen to a group of 50,000 humans stuck in cramped conditions on a
group of surviving ships as they run for their lives. They bicker.
They riot. They complain about food rations. They sleep with people they
shouldn't sleep with. They make really, really bad calls.
 |
| Especially this character. She had me shouting at the screen in sheer exasperation a few times. |
Like most successful
science-fiction shows (and I use 'successful' in the sense of 'had a full run
of seasons', unlike, sniff, Firefly), Battlestar Galactica has
left fans and critics deeply divided. One blogger, following up on a post and
epic comment thread which lasted approximately 4 years (!), concluded that he
would recommend the show to a friend, but with serious reservations.
This conclusion was largely due to the finale, which did, admittedly, contain
some plot holes big enough to manoeuvre a battlestar through.[2] My
own take on it is that the finale was, at the very least, more emotionally
satisfying than many a finale, and that an entire series should certainly not
be judged on the basis of its last three episodes.
So, the question for me is not so much would I recommend BG (as Mr S and I got to affectionately calling it) to a friend, but why would I recommend it. As I hinted at above, the conflicts and issues raised by the premise of a near-extinct human race fleeing from their enemies are fascinating. Issues of how justice, democracy, and social mobility would work within such a limited and, let's face it, terrified population are all considered and, I think, dealt with in a realistic and compelling fashion. Then there's the question of the Cylons. The Cylons were created by man, and the destruction of the Twelve Colonies is their revenge for what they see as their previous enslavement. Throughout the show, the question of what constitutes humanity is asked. If the Cylons can feel love, grief, and pain, are they human, or at the very least deserving of humane treatment? However, what really makes the show are the characters, and the actors who portray them. You might despise some of them at times, but they are all of them believable and complex, from the strict, gruff, angry but ultimately warm-hearted Commander Adama, to the crazy-I-really-want-to-have-abs-like-hers Kara 'Starbuck' Thrace.[3] You really want them all to survive and, in a show in which survival is constantly at question, it's that desire that keeps you coming back week after week - or, in our case, letting Netflix tick onto the next episode, and the next, and the next...
I could go on more, but instead I'll just say: if you enjoy science-fiction, and enjoy television that makes you think (and occasionally shout at the screen), you should give Battlestar Galactica a go.[4] Regardless of the ending, and perhaps appropriately enough for a show which is essentially about getting from point A to point B, the journey is entirely worth it.
So, the question for me is not so much would I recommend BG (as Mr S and I got to affectionately calling it) to a friend, but why would I recommend it. As I hinted at above, the conflicts and issues raised by the premise of a near-extinct human race fleeing from their enemies are fascinating. Issues of how justice, democracy, and social mobility would work within such a limited and, let's face it, terrified population are all considered and, I think, dealt with in a realistic and compelling fashion. Then there's the question of the Cylons. The Cylons were created by man, and the destruction of the Twelve Colonies is their revenge for what they see as their previous enslavement. Throughout the show, the question of what constitutes humanity is asked. If the Cylons can feel love, grief, and pain, are they human, or at the very least deserving of humane treatment? However, what really makes the show are the characters, and the actors who portray them. You might despise some of them at times, but they are all of them believable and complex, from the strict, gruff, angry but ultimately warm-hearted Commander Adama, to the crazy-I-really-want-to-have-abs-like-hers Kara 'Starbuck' Thrace.[3] You really want them all to survive and, in a show in which survival is constantly at question, it's that desire that keeps you coming back week after week - or, in our case, letting Netflix tick onto the next episode, and the next, and the next...
I could go on more, but instead I'll just say: if you enjoy science-fiction, and enjoy television that makes you think (and occasionally shout at the screen), you should give Battlestar Galactica a go.[4] Regardless of the ending, and perhaps appropriately enough for a show which is essentially about getting from point A to point B, the journey is entirely worth it.
 |
| Also, I love the design of the Galactica (the eponymous main ship). It's hulking and huge and seems kind of like a comforting old dog. |
[3]
Starbuck was a man in the original. The actor who portrayed him wrote a protest
against the 'castration' of his character which I think does more to indict him than it does the choices of the directors of the remake.
[4]
If you’re a newcomer to BG, you have the advantage of everything – interim webisodes
etc – available to watch in the best possible order. This guide might be handy,
though I wouldn’t agree with his suggestion of leaving any episodes out!
No comments:
Post a Comment