The Tuesday Videos: HISHE Edition

This week’s selection is a sampling from that wonderful fixer of other peoples’ pop culture, How It Should Have Ended. These guys take our most popular movies, poke their fingers through the plot holes, and fix ’em up with duct tape and sarcasm. You can probably understand the appeal this would have for me.

The first video is a send-up to the old Christopher Reeve Superman movie. (The first one, the one that didn’t suck.) The second part of it is my favorite, and shows us the flowering of a beautiful relationship.

This next one points up something that I have been ranting about for YEARS. It’s a giant, gaping hole in the Lord of the Rings… though it would have reduced the nine+ hour epic to about an hour and a half… (or the trilogy to a single 300 page book) so I’ve always eventually backed off. If nothing else, it’s good to see that I wasn’t the only one who felt that way about it.

The thing that gets me the most about the Star Wars: A New Hope ending is that it is exactly the same thing that my Granddad asked me when we left the theatre the first time I saw the movie thirty-three years ago. (I was ten, and didn’t really have a good answer. Much like I don’t now.)

Finally, to get ourselves a little more current, comes How Iron Man Should Have Ended… once more pointing out how practicality and common sense skewer Hollywood logic in everything it does.

56 Responses to The Tuesday Videos: HISHE Edition

  1. Bah, they could all take a lesson or two from the Comedian. Or Ozymandias for that matter.

      • And the world’s best mass murderer who got away with it*.

        Besides, he’s supposed to be tall, blond, muscled like a Greek statue and the big-genius thing. Mmm…

        *Well, at least for a time, but I hardly think anyone of import would take Rorschach’s journal seriously.

  2. Just you wait Pettway, some of the best minds on the Internet are even now plotting and scheming a little project called How H.O.L.E. Should Have Ended!

    • Maybe. The “redesigned” Death Star sure fired it’s main cannon at will during the final assault. Could’ve been a lower setting or it could’ve been the redesign… Of course, what do you think the result would be to a colony on the moon of a gas giant if you blew that gas giant up? I’m thinking that the second shot might be entirely superfluous.

      ALSO… the Death Star was capable of hyperspace travel. (Attained by traveling at great speeds.) In retrospect, I’m finding the whole notion of “ten minutes to fly around the planet” to be a bit incongruous.

      • Well according to the lore, Hyperdrive can’t be initiated in a gravity well…since the Death Star has it’s own rather large gravity (compared to most hyperspace-capable vehicles) it has to get further out from any nearby masses like planets and suns to be able to go hyper-active.

        As for not just blowing up Yavin, I belive the “official” reason given is that the superlaser can’t blow up gas giants because they’re too big…it’s only good for blowing up small rocky planets.

        Now if the story took place in the Trek universe, the deathstar equivalent would just warp around the planet in a few seconds, but it’s in the Warzverse so, despite the thousands of years they’ve had, they haven’t invented a faster than light drive that can be used for tactical maneuvering (I think the scientists in the Warzverse got lazy after they invented hyperdrive and just stopped working on space tech.)

      • Maybe it couldn’t “jump” too close to planets and once in normal space it was less than speedy.
        And I’m pretty sure they had it on a lower setting to blow up the rebel capital ships.

        Besides, you have any idea what the electrical bill for using that huge laser is? And you want it to shoot twice in one day?!

        About the LoTR, Ron’s link actually shows what’s wrong with the whole(very far from new or original, being on the “older than Orald*” level of discussions right with “Did the balrog have wings?”) idea.
        Frodo had to fortify his will and experience all that gay romance along the way with Sam to be able to cast the ring into the fire. And he still failed. Miserably so.

        *Orald actually means “very ancient” in the tongue of the people of the north, being their name for Tom Bombadil.

        • I just meant that if it had engines that would take it all the way up to hyperspace, it could probably go a little faster around the planet. Not “tactical hyper-jumps”, just enough to make it look like it was flying under it’s own power, and not simply in orbit.

          • At the risk of scaring myself even more with how much geek lore is stuck in this ol’ noggin’, I must point out that Star Wars vessels actually use two types of engines. One type is used only for sub-light speeds, and is usually some sort of conventional thrust-propulsion system. (and the Death Star would require a LOT of thrust, hence why they just settled into an orbit around Yavin).

            Hyperdrives are a completely different type of engine and are only capable of propelling the craft into hyperspace – which is actually a parallel dimension where time/distance is not the same as in realspace.

            There is no in-between speed.

          • They actually SAID “Orbiting the planet at maximum velocity” (which is weird in space…presumably they could have continued to accellerate…the only “Maximum velocity” in space is lightspeed)

            • Yeah, and they also refer to their weaponry as lasers – which clearly don’t behave like lasers. They also have sound effects in vacuum. 😉

              However, in this case “maximum velocity” probably refers to the fastest Yavin’s gravitational pull can slingshot the Death Star around the planet without ripping it apart.

              I keep telling myself I’m going to stop. But I can’t.

            • Maximum velocity WITHOUT being hurled OUT of the orbit. Technically, an orbiting object in a stable orbit is falling towards the planet, but the centripetal force acting outwards adds another vector, so you go round and round. The faster you go, the higher your orbit becomes, and if you go too fast, you drift away into space. So if you want to go around the planet on the shortest route, going faster is counterproductive.

              Of course, it still begs the question why they didn’t just enter the solar system and approach the planet from the side the moon would be at that time? But hey, maybe they didn’t know the exact position.

              Honestly, it never bothered me that much. STar Wars is Space Opera not Hard Science Fiction. Big Spaceships behave like ocean ships, small spaceships fly around like jets in an atmosphere. Planets all have a single biome (desert, swamp, forest, city) because they’re like different locations in a fantasy story, and getting from one to the other takes just a single scene change. Unless the heroes are ambushed by a random encounter, sorry, an asteroid field.

              The “blockade” of Naboo in the prequels was far FAR more ridiculous. Nevermind that a planet is a globe and completely surrounded by empty space in all directions. All you need to “blockade” it is a handful of ships, let’s say twenty ships. And you don’t position them at the poles and in equally spaced intervals around the planet (like, say, GPS satellites). Or, you know, buy millions of space mines and set up a mine field all around the planet, with sensors that detect any ship which doesnt have the proper passcode, which is much cheaper than keeping your trade ships hanging around doing nothing and accumulating dust. No, silly, you line your spaceships up one beside the other in a rectangular field, one or at most two ships deep, in a stationary orbit above the main city. Because the heroes cannot simply fly to the other side of the planet and fly off into space, no they have to fly straight at you to “break through” the blockade! Yeah. 🙄 And then you can try shooting at them, but you’ll miss anyway.

              • It reminds me of how Cheney tried to sell the idea to the American public that terrorists from Saudi-Arabia who want to do dastardly things to the USA need to go through Afghanistan first, or even through Iraq (what? Hey Dick, your old pal Saddam H. is on the phone!), as if Earth is flat and all the nations are positioned on it one behind the other like on a strip of paper (or a chessboard), with the Axis of Evil (Iran, Iraq, Mordor, the French, or alternatively Cuba, Russia, China, North Korea, and the French) all hanging out at the evil end and the Shining Defenders of Freedom (The United States of America a.k.a. God’s Own Country, Israel (God’s other country), Halliburton, and England) arrayed on the other end, ready to do battle. And to get from one end to the other you can’t take a plane, heavens no, you have to go through all the countries in the middle first. That’s why it’s called The Middle East, folks! Which is why America has to fight Them Over There lest They come Here[*]. It’s a bit like Monopoly. Only all the money goes to Halliburton.

                ([*] “Here” referring to the United States, of course, since they’re the center of the universe and thus the only reference point that counts. Greenwich being in England is just a geographical fluke. )

        • “Maybe it couldn’t “jump” too close to planets and once in normal space it was less than speedy.”

          This is actually true according to most SW lore – while hyperspace capable, the Death Star was still very slow compared to other hyperspace capable vessels. And in realspace, it maneuvers like a brick. A large, moon-sized brick. Stuck in molasses. In the middle of winter.

          And also what Elfguy referred to – engaging hyperdrives in a gravity well is dangerous, and planets project a “mass shadow” into hyperspace that forces hyperdrives to cut out, preventing hyperspace flight near planetary bodies.

          I’ll stop now, because I’m scaring myself.

      • Hubris is also a convenient explanation. Tarkin (who was warned earlier in the movie about the Death Star’s potential flaws) was so overconfident that he felt no need for haste.

        Yeah, I don’t buy it either.

        • Yeah, Tarkin was subject to impatience to a point but was far too disciplined to let it affect him much. Arrogance on the other hand seemed to be a failing in the empire. Almost all of the ranking imperials from the Empirer to Dooku had too much of it. Vader wasn’t as bad as the others. I think that it had to do with the fact that he knew just how screwed up things can get despite his efforts. Look at what happened to Padme.

  3. “It’s a giant, gaping hole in the Lord of the Rings…”
    This is a POV I’ve been gently battling against for ages. It’s one of the most common misconceptions about the story.
    True, one needs to read much of the other works (finished, unfinished and perhaps even some of his personal writings.) to get the larger picture, but it *is* there.

    Essentially it boils down to: The great eagles were beholden to one entity (Tolkien was quite specific about this) and one entity only, Manwe. He was, for want of a better title, King of the gods (angels, whatever) and Lord of the Eagles. Being “his” birds, and not technically “of” Middle Earth, the others didn’t even have the right to ask them to solve their problem. (Though it could be further argued that this was really the Middle Earth Elves’ mess to clean up and they really owed it to the other peoples to do the heavy lifting rather than some poor Hobbit…)

    Living in Valinor, it would seem that the eagles were one of his chief means of keeping informed of events in Middle Earth. At that time the Valar had a strict “hands off” policy (referred to during the Council of Elrond). Their previous attempts to overtly help Middle Earth had ended disastrously (if still technically victoriously) Other than that, they were entirely independent, just as any of the other races and nations. They are often shown assisting others, but always on their own terms. They never took orders from anyone. Occasionally, for reasons of their own such as self-preservation they would aid the other peoples (as at the Battle of Five Armies) The Eagles respected Gandalf for the respect he showed them, and for the aid he had given them on occasion as well as (perhaps) recognizing that he was an emissary of Manwe, and, thus were willing to assist him several times. It would also seem that they were occasionally free to “balance” the playing field a bit when the other side gained certain *types* of advantage: The peoples of Middle Earth were intended to solve their own problems by the time of the books. However, it was recognized that they were saddled with a few forces/problems (rogue maiar: Sauron, Balrogs, Saruman) that they were never originally intended to face alone. Which is why a limited form of aid was allowed (mostly through the five wizards). This *limited* aid and use of their native power was a subtle, yet very important detail, both to Tolkien and to the story as a whole. Similarly, it would seem that this had something to do with why the Eagles were free to aid at the battle before the Gates, but were neither inclined nor likely permitted to directly aid the quest itself.

    Anyhow, there it is…the jokes are still hilarious though.

    Thank you for indulging my wall of text. Well, perhaps it’s more of a picket fence…

      • Heh, I’m pleased to have been of service!

        I wear my “Tolkien Nerd” mantle with considerable pride.

        • I bet if he had taken a couple of days, Gandalf could have found an eagle willing to carry him. Well, he DID, he just waited till later.

          Really though, given all that Monday morning quarterbacking by Tolkien as to why the eagles didn’t pitch in until everyone else had already done all the heavy lifting, I think it’s a pretty serious flaw in the text that so many people misunderstood the eagles’ role. After all, Gandalf uses them like a personal taxi service in the movie, (I don’t recall that in the books) and the Hobbit certainly makes them seem more involved in worldly affairs than they are apparently supposed to be.

          • actually he DOES get help from the Eagles to get off Orthanc in the book.

            Apparently the Eagles can only act to “Save the day” in Tolkien…Rescuing the dwarves from the burning tree, the battle of five armies, Snatching Gandalf off Orthanc, and rescuing Sam and Frodo is pretty much the only things they actually do in his books.

            • What’s the thinking there? “I’ll help you out, but only if it’s basically menial and meaningless, like taxiing you around from someplace you just got done walking to… or super-important and dangerous, like you want me and my brethren to fight in a war with you. Anything in-between is strictly off limits.”

          • I’d agree that Tolkien was over reliant on his own background material at the expense of properly placed exposition. This, I suppose could be the greatest source of contention regarding whether or not he was a skilled writer. That said, I’m at least happy that there *do* exist proper, in-world explanations for nearly everything. He was noteworthy for being uncomfortable with inconsistencies and discontinuities (is that redundant?) and worked long at correcting them, as when he re-wrote portions of the Hobbit to better meld with LOTR. It was his misfortune (and a quite relevant point) to die before his works were “ready” and thus, all the “tie-in” stuff like the Silmarillion, doesn’t exist as he would have preferred. All we have to work with is what was there when he died. He was also an inveterate re-editor of his works. To the extent that, if he were alive today, I doubt anyone would be surprised to learn he was continuing to tweak and tinker with the thing.

            However, the nature of the eagles was long part of his earlier writings, The First Age stuff that occurs in Beleriand. To continue your football analogy; I’d say it’s not so much Monday night as, say, Thursday night quarterbacking…without telling us on game night.

            Gandalf is aided a few times in both the Hobbit and LOTR (as are the dwarves in Hobbit) In the Hobbit their reasons are given in the text. They dislike goblins, investigate, and find the party in danger. It also mentions that Gandalf had healed their king at one point. As for the Battle of Five Armies, it’s simply because the goblins are becoming more numerous, can climb to the eagles aeries, are expanding their territory and thus, are a potential threat. In that case they were acting in their own interest.

            As for helping Gandalf on Orthanc, and grabbing Sam and Frodo from Orodruin, aside from having reasons of their own, and their regard for Gandalf, I (personally) don’t find the willingness/permission/ability to aid an individual to be inconsistent with a general ban on involvement in the world’s affairs.

            Their presence at the battle at the Black Gate can easily be attributed to the permission to assist when the balance is in question. It was up to the peoples of the world to solve Middle Earth’s problems…however; they were facing powers beyond their abilities through no fault of their own. Elves, Dwarves and Men were never meant to have to fight a demi-god and his powerful magic minions (Nazgul) and they had nothing to do with its presence in their world. It seems (as when Gandalf fought the balrog utilizing much of his *actual* power) that in such cases, a little “fudging” is allowed just to keep things from being *too* lopsided.

            Anyway, I’m getting too geeky/preachy, so I’ll sum up with this thought: I can agree that if he’d only written Lord of the Rings, and not cleared this question up (whether it was internally consistent or not), then I could agree that this would represent a fairly big hole in an otherwise remarkable piece of work. However, he did intend to write more and have the entire work stand together. If he hadn’t died before it was completed, it’s entirely possible that we wouldn’t have the “why didn’t the eagles just do it” conversation. Well, except for those who hadn’t read the whole thing…and Tolkien could hardly be blamed for that. I don’t HAVE to watch Episode I, but it’s not Lucas’ fault if I don’t and then can’t understand a later reference …Or is it? Hmmm….

            I guess I just added several bricks to the text wall…
            Again, I thank you for your kind indulgence

    • Not to mention, if the Eagles had flown directly to Mount Doom while Sauron was still Lord in Mordor, he might have just burned them out of the sky, or sent hordes of flying monsters at them to regain the ring. The whole point of sending Frodo stealthily into Mordor was that Sauron was not supposed to notice the ring’s position otherwise he’d have reached out and taken it. At least that’s a speculation I read somewhere.

      • Exactly. After all, Sauron has all these hordes of flying crows, AND watches the country.

      • Sure. And if you’ll recall, that’s why Aragorn led what remained of the Armies of Gondor and Rohan to the Black Gate, in order to distract Sauron.

        So… what would have stopped anyone from doing that in the first place?

        I do love LotR, by the way. Books and movies. But I love them despite the whole eagle flap. (heh) Either the good guys are stupid for not finding another way to save the whole damn world than let a pair of hobbits go by themselves into Mordor with the weapon of Sauron, or the eagles are unbelievable pricks for forcing them into that position. Am I to think that the eagles would have preferred Sauron ruling the planet to giving a hobbit a ride?

        • Pray tell, what army would he have led to the Black Gates if he and others didn’t take the time to gather said army after having had to first defend their homes from Sauron’s first poke and Saruman’s treachery?
          Defeating the foe in one area doesn’t help that much if your home got burnt by marauding corsairs from Umbar while you were off fighting on the other front.

          And lets not forget that Aragorn has no real authority yet, he’s not the king, the steward is kinda prickly about the need for kings, and the other great ally, Theoden, begins the campaign under Saruman’s spells, with his army scattered and in disarray.

        • Rebuttal to the Rebuttal of the Rebuttal

          I’m really, REALLY gonna try to keep this shorter than the other posts…I promise! I don’t have much hope for success, but I’ll try.

          I’m consistently fascinated and bemused by how people can look at the same thing with such utterly disparate reactions…often entirely unrelated; “That ink blot looks like an airplane!” “No, it’s a raccoon!”

          I think there are several things going on here:

          “So… what would have stopped anyone from doing that in the first place?”

          As for why they didn’t try the distraction earlier, well there are numerous reasons. They would still have needed to travel to Gondor and/or Rohan through passes and routs that were being held against them (thus why they attempted the routs they did), so they really couldn’t have arrived any earlier than they did. Sauron still had several intact armies *until* they were individually defeated. Dol Guldur attacked Lothlorien and the Woodland King, Easterlings attacked the Lonely Mountain and Dale, The Haradrim and Morgul forces were in place to block passage to the Black Gates (before they attacked Gondor) If an attack on Mordor had been launched earlier, many of these forces would have been available to contain and counter attack the attackers. True, Aragorn hadn’t expected to succeed as anything other than a diversion in the first place, but if this were the case, I doubt even as a diversion that they’d have a chance…the fight would be over before they’d marched a few miles. There is also the wild card of Sarumans forces which needed to be dealt with (until which, Rohan couldn’t have been of any help to Gondor) and, let’s not forget, that without his actions through the book, Aragorn would have had a much more difficult time getting nations to follow him any earlier than he did.

          The Hobbit presents some problems, yet, surprisingly, some solutions as well. Having originally been a stand-alone children’s book, it required some amount of re-writing to be properly wedged in. There are still a few inconsistencies, naturally. However, at one point it’s stated that the Eagles are, “not kindly creatures”, so your assertion that they may have been being dicks at least has some grounding in the text.

          ‘…you want me and my brethren to fight in a war with you. Anything in-between is strictly off limits.” ‘

          I think I addressed this earlier, but to reiterate/streamline: It’s not that (as I understand things) it’s OK for them to fight a war for the others so much as, “We won’t join your army or be part of your offensive per-se, but we *are* allowed to interfere with a supernatural advantage you can’t compete against. Whether you win or loose is still up to you.” I’ll also point out that thousands of years before, the Valar, Maiar, Eagles etc. did take a more active role, and because of the results, the Valar decided it was no longer “OK” to do that, hence the prohibitions against active aid (most of the time).

          I think it’s also important to remember that much of the Eagles action (or rather inaction) is attributable to their being under orders. The Valar, knowing so much more about the fates of men and Elves, etc. were much more willing to let them reap the whirlwind of their actions…something the peoples of Middle Earth were often “unhappy” about. Can’t imagine why…so, perhaps the true “dicks” were the “angels” in the Undying Lands.

          One further thought, we know the Eagles had prohibitions on their actions, but we’re not clear on the *exact* parameters. Thus we don’t know for sure just *why* they show up at the Black Gates. I’ve already posited one rationale, but, since we don’t really know, it’s just as easy to assume that the King of the Eagles simply said, “Enough is enough, screw our orders, I don’t want Sauron running the show.”

          A further “further thought”: The Eagles didn’t “save the day” or “turn the tide” at the Black Gates, at best, they provided some distraction to the remaining Nazgul, *perhaps* interfering with their ability to terrorize the Rohirric-Gondorian forces. Beyond that, they were simply participants at the battle.

          A final (yeah right) “further thought”: It’s also clear that the theme of doing (or not doing) certain things for certain reasons, even if it seems to be in your best interest, was of great importance to Tolkien. His most powerful and knowledgeable characters repeatedly make this point. The prohibition on the wizards from using most of their real power and their instructions to guide rather than “lead”, are a fine example. Gandalf was faithful to his instructions and succeeded, whilst Saurman, well y’know… As far as Tolkien/ his characters are concerned, this is Important Stuff.

          Crap, not only was this post *not* short, I think it’s longer than the other two…yeesh. 🙄
          Thanks again for providing this venue! I appreciate your indulgence!

          P.S. “…the good guys are stupid for not finding another way to save the whole damn world than let a pair of hobbits go by themselves into Mordor with the weapon of Sauron, …”
          Y’know, Boromir thought the same thing, and look how he ended up… 😉

          • In retrospect, I think discussions like these are really *two* discussions:

            1. Is there an internally consistent explanation for “X” , Y/N?

            2. Was the execution sufficient to convey this information, Y?N?

            In the case of LOTR, I’d say; 1.= Yes, 2.= No, with the caveat that it’s really an unfinished work, but an explicit line from Gandalf or Elrond telling us the Eagles weren’t *allowed* to help in that manner wouldn’t have hurt…

          • So, in short, it was all Eru’s fault from the start.

            Eru created Morgoth and let him and his ilk(which he also created) play their little games.

            Thanks, Eru, for ruining it for everyone, you bastard.

            • “So, in short, it was all Eru’s fault…”

              Pretty much.

              And he wants people to just trust him that it’ll all work out OK.

              See, I just KNOW I’ve heard this somewhere else. If only I could remember where…

  4. I wonder if there’s a “How BSG Should Have Ended” somewhere. *grumble*

    On a related note, I’m still, uh, recovering my media library after the virus incident, and a central part of it is the 4 BSG seasons.
    We should totally have a poll here asking which of Gaius Baltar’s different hairdos is the sexiest.
    Personally, I vote for long hair, clean shave as in end of 2nd season, followed by long hair, full beard* as in end of 3rd season(like in his trial).

    *Hey, he’s just cute with that beard on, and I’m not even a beard enthusiast.

    • I didn’t watch the new BSG beyond the pilot. Changing the Cylons from the artifacts of a long dead civilization into Frankenstein Monster Software, and changing Baltar from a power-hungry politician into a duped Software mogul completely ruined any enjoyment I might have gotten out of it.

      It would be like saying ‘We’re going to do Lord of the Rings, but Gandalf made the ring, and Sauron is really a nice guy, but was tricked by Saruman into doing evil stuff.”

      • But, but Gaius is so cute! You must squee before the Gaius!

        OK, yea, I’d do Lee way before him, and most of the female cast as well, but he’s just so cute, in a cuddly little puppy
        sort of way.

        I understand you, Elfguy, if I had watched the old show I might’ve felt the same, but from everything I’ve read the old show was mostly a really cheesy Star Wars knock off(in style) with a decent-enough idea for a backstory.
        So I wouldn’t equate it to LoTR myself(mind you, almost all the changes made to the books by Jackson in his trilogy enrage me…I’m glad Tom Bombadil was out though), because LoTR’s source material is better than the adaptation.

        It’s not really about the plot so much as the deep characters, acting, writing and musical score that I adore the new show so much.
        Hell, they’ve still got loads of silly technobabble regarding the nature of “skinjob” Cylons, and their oh-so-merciful and loving one-true-god is so evil and callous that it’s a sad joke every time the writers try to make you believe that through various statements by supposedly all-knowing entities(like Head Six’s lame mantra…God is love…pshh, yea).
        Try “god is genocide, mass torture, pointless deaths etc”.

          • I’m not saying the new series might not be a great Sci Fi series…but Battlestar Galactica it ain’t! You don’t completely alter the entire setup, use all the same character names, and try to convince people it’s just a remake.

            Series should have either been renamed, or the premise should have remained the same.

            Female Starbuck: Fine. (More than Fine, actually)
            Human-Looking Cylons (Fine. The Cylons are smart enough to have come up with that idea)
            Human-ORIGIN for Cylons: Not Fine.
            Baltar’s really a good guy: Not Fine.

            And no, it’s NOT a “Star Trek Ripoff” – it is a completely different story, there are far fewer aliens, they’re not Exploring, they’re Running Away, for crying out loud!

            • “Female Starbuck: Fine. (More than Fine, actually)” – Hell yea she’s more than fine. 😀

              “And no, it’s NOT a “Star Trek Ripoff””
              No, I meant the visual style, the design and such, I’ve specifically said the plot-wise it’s different, and rather decent IMO.

              From all I’ve read it was first thought of as a way to reap the popularity of Star Wars(not Trek, thank the gods, that would’ve been just lame…I loath ST), and went out on screens just a year or two after A new Hope came out.
              I think they were even worried about a lawsuit by Lucas, but I could be mistaken.

            • Argh, my beautiful long post, all gone…It’s the damn BSG Wiki’ and its luring articles! I shall start again then.

              I said it’s a Star Wars* rip off, or more precisely, cash-in after A New Hope’s popularity. It’s not an accusation, just an observation.
              I also said it’s the style, i.e design, visuals etc. that is the ripped off part, not the plot, which, again, is rather decent.
              I understand the “purist” view of a favorite show being remade with drastic changes, but like I said, I’ve never watched the old show.

              Speaking of remakes and overhauls of franchises, in my endless boredom I admit to have watched Stargate SG-1&Atlantis, and they’re both rather comic, silly shows with more winks and jokes than seriousness(Atlantis in particular got tiresome about it), but its 3rd spin-off, Stargate Universe, has gone in the new BSG style: Dark, mature themes and atmosphere, as well as visuals(shaky cameras, anyone?).
              It too led to many(stupid, silly, immature) viewers complaining about the drastic changes(in attitude, not in-universe consistency), but they can all fuck off and go watch a cartoon on a kids’ channel.
              I’m calling it Stargate Galactica, and I highly recommend watching it(IDK if it’s BSG-worthy yet, but hell, it’s a huge leap in the right direction, believe me).

              *Gods protect us from ST rip offs, the original(and sequels&spin offs) show was bad enough, I shudder to think of some hasty rip-off of it.

            • Er, excuse me, what does BSG have to do with Star Trek??? Or Star Wars?

              For crying out loud, Star Wars is a fantasy Campbellian hero quest story: save the princess, battle monsters, use the Hero’s wisdom to overcome the Evil Dark Lord, bring peace to the world.

              Star Trek is (or was) about optimism, science, a technocratic future where post-scarcity society has acchieved world peace, it’s about mankind’s exploration of Space, the quest for the Final Frontier.

              BSG is the story of the Exodus, In Space. With robots. The old one was pretty campy, while the new one was full of religious metaphors (13 tribes? The quest for the Promised Land? The holy child?) and a story about human hubris and devisiveness. If you think the new Gaius Baltar was a “good guy”… um, sorry, what? He was narcissistic, neurotic, a womanizer, a coward and a habitual liar with delusions of grandeur. He was also a brilliant scientist, true, with charisma and a trahic backstory that made him sympathetic, because you could see what events and decisions had led him onto that path. But he was still a master in making the wrong decisions in life. I’m sorry that he wasn’t quite black-and-white evil villain enough for you. I thought the whole point of the new BSG was blurring the lines of who is good and who is evil. Really, most of the suffering the people in the Fleet had to endure they did to themselves because they could not stop hating, could not stop thinking in old terms (racism, nationalism, social hierarchies).

              orals wrote: “It too led to many(stupid, silly, immature) viewers complaining about the drastic changes(in attitude, not in-universe consistency), but they can all fuck off and go watch a cartoon on a kids’ channel.”

              As for Stargate Universe, it’s a tedious, boring, pretentious mess, and with every episode I found myself wishing anew that all these idiots (except Dr. Rush and Eli) would die a horrible death. Especially the soldiers and their little military dictatorship. But hey, I can see the buttons the show is pressing, and I can see why the show appeals to many American viewers precisely for that reason.

              But now I’m going to go watch some brain-dead kid’s cartoon, because apparently that’s what people like me prefer, according to orald.

              • Well, in fact, some cartoons are pretty awesome.
                I recall some “batman” episodes which, in 20 minutes times, had a way better story than most movies.

                And then, there’s season 2 of “Gargoyles”.

                But then, one can also say that, for exemple, sandman is silly, immature and for kids because it’s a fuckin’ comic book.

              • Argh, again, I never said it was a Star Wars rip off/inspired in content. The visual style and the idea to start the project were encouraged by the success of the first SW film. At least that’s what I’ve read, and the design similarities coupled with date of “birth” have convinced me it was indeed fathered by SW, but got it’s “character” somewhere else.

                Military dictatorship on SGU? It’s mostly a military expedition, and power-plays by certain power-hungry politicians who shall remain anonymous(they’re Chinese and female…but anonymous) when it’s really not a good time for such behaviour don’t exactly help the military guys loosen up.
                There’s been a lot of the “military-vs-civilian” theme on the franchise as a whole from the start…Personally I think the writers are obsessed with it.
                It’s not all that different than Roselin-vs-Adama on the first season, and Adama&co were harsher on their civilians by far. This is all the result of “social hierarchy” struggles you get when you put more than one person in the same room.

                BTW, I’m not an American…And was that a hint that Americans are militaristic and oppressive in nature?

                I’m sorry if you were offended by my view of certain Stargate fans, but did you like the 2 previous shows better and are saying this one has too much acting, feelings and not enough “action”? Because that’s what the idiots I despise say.
                They want the return of campy acting and stale “I’m so smart, everyone’s so dumb” jokes by Dr. Rodney McKay(he’s funny enough, but that’s half the dialog of any given episode).
                If you’re criticizing them for not going dark or deep enough(like you said, pretentious) then by all means, I’d love nothing more than it to get better. But if you’re hating it because it’s not campy and “explody” enough then my views still stand. I don’t want it to look and feel like Star Wars, TYVM.

                And about it being pretentious, I’ll admit some of the “touchy-feely” parts are annoying(but then, some of BSG’s scenes were too, and I think most such scenes in the media aren’t done well), but like I’ve said, they’re going the right way, even if they’re not always hitting the target, and compared to the previous 2 shows they’ve made significant improvements.
                That’s why I said “(IDK if it’s BSG-worthy yet, but hell, it’s a huge leap in the right direction, believe me).”

      • I’m sure it’s prickly and not all that nice up close, but it just looks so cute on him.

  5. I saw Star Wars: Epidsode IV in a drive in when I was eleven. I remember Jabba being a fat guy in fur (I prefer the slug). I saw Battlestar Galactica in the theater a little later. I can see where some would say that BSG is a Star Wars ripoff but I agree it was only in style. John Dykstra worked on the effects of both movies so that is not actually a suprise. I would like to point out that when I saw those movies it was the first run. I would also like to point out that pretty much anything to do with spaceships after that used much the same kinda effects (Buck Rodgers, anyone?). Until CG started changing things up that was the way things were done. Just because Star Wars started all this does not make everything subsequent a ripoff. Has anyone seen Logan’s Run? I love that movie ’till this day but the effects compared to Star Wars were laughable in comparison. After Star Wars came out, it was simply bad business to use special effects that couldn’t at least compare to it. You would have been laughed at. C’mon people, we all know Star Wars broke the mold in more ways than one. Let’s try to give subsequent SF credit for trying to keep up. One last thing, I was a huge fan of the new BSG and wasn’t bothered much by how they changed it around. I stopped watching when I realised everybody, excluding any dogs, was secretly ANOTHER FUCKING CYLON!!!!!! AAAAARGH!!!! Sorry, I’ve been wanting to get that off my chest for some time now.