I listened to the Battlestar podcast this morning and the difference between Battlestar and shows like Star Trek really struck me. In last weeks episode the Cylons found a beacon in space that had a virus on it that wiped out their ship. Later the humans found the ship and the beacon.
The head writer went on to explain that the beacon wasn't the focus of the show, so they left it on the ship and blew it up. He said that otherwise they would have spent the bulk of that show demonstrating how they were doing science work on it, and what they found and what not. Instead they covered the ramifications of a Cylon plague and dug into issues of genocide.
That's exactly, to me, the difference between Star Trek and Battlestar. Star Trek would have geeked on the science minutiae instead of dealing with the hard topic of genocide. Which is to me why Battlestar is the far better show.
Posted by jherr at November 13, 2006 09:51 AMThanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)