Was Battlestar Galactica Star Trek Done Right?

  • Share
  • Read Later

Hey, I’m not the one suggesting it; I’m just asking the question after reading these comments from BSG showrunner (and former Star Trek writer) Ron Moore:

I think a lot of Battlestar was born at Deep Space Nine in that Deep Space started as much more episodic because of the nature of the show, it became more a continuing serialised structure. I really liked that, and I discovered I really liked that style of storytelling, and also particularly when we got into the later years of Deep Space, and we started telling the Dominion War story (1997-99), we would sit and argue and fight with the powers that be at Trek about making it a more realistic war, about making it grittier, and ugly; adding more ambiguity to the characters, and roughing it up a little bit, and I kept bumping my head against the strictures at Trek. What Star Trek is could not accommodate things that I wanted to do, so I
started to have this sort of pent up frustration about ‘well if we were really going to do it right’, these ideas would sit in the back of my head so when Battlestar came along, I could now do all of those things that I was never allowed to do at Deep Space.

There’s some sense of “Star Trek couldn’t do what I wanted it to do, so Battlestar is better” in Moore’s comments, I think that feels like it misses the point of Star Trek in some ways – Sure, it couldn’t do a realistic war story that’s gritty and ugly, but… Isn’t that kind of asking Trek to be something entirely different from what it is? Star Trek‘s strengths lie in its ultimate optimism and utopian view of science and the future, and also in a metaphorical approach to dealing with real world problems that inserting a brutality and realism would somehow undermine, surely. It’d be like complaining that 90210 doesn’t allow writers the chance to offer in depth investigations of the inherent corruptions within Baltimore social structure. That’s kind of why we have The Wire, you know?

But reading Moore’s comments hit a nerve. I loved BSG a lot – I even liked the series finale, which I realize makes me somewhat of a social pariah within nerd circles – but I also adore Star Trek so much that I liked all of Voyager and more than is strictly necessary of Enterprise, and I got to thinking: Which show is better? What follows is an entirely non-scientific consideration of the facts of this argument. Your mileage, as the saying goes, may vary.

  1. Previous
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3

BSG should have been adapted from the first tv series as the one that ran on Sci Fi was just crap missed the whole point of the first the whole back story for those who do not know was a lizard like race had created the robots "big metal did not look human" to help take over for them well the race was all but dead only one I think was still barely alive and was killed in error in one episode. the counsel  worked a deal with them for peace. Which being robots and not under standing emotions they did not see it that way as for them they would just wipe them out and remove any threat. very simple and as there is no opposition not trouble will be caused and the threat removed. This ran all through  the series the humans with there emotions vs emotionless logical machines. One of the counsel baltor sided with them they used him as much as he did them they tried to learn about humans and there emotions and how to defeat them. problem was as more advanced robots were made they started to develop emotions as well as can be seen in some of the later shows. The show delt with the battle of the sexes men and women being equal and loss as well. but at its core there was a balance of drama, action and adventure comedy was in the mix as well or course you had your sexy woman here and there and for the ladies the ball games were the men had nothing but small swimming like trucks on. Over all the old show was a bit dates with its 70's over tones and some of the more odd fashion choices. The thing that I likes the most was the uniforms from the old show had a Egyptian look and feel to them and was played up on the show. As for the revamped show which was 1984 I think was just bad all around think chips in space just a pile of crap. this leads to the next incarnation the Sci Fi space drama, sex space issues pile of crap. the only thing I can say I even liked was the space ships the battle stars everything else was trash tv at its finest. pure crap over dramatized situations and having the robots look like humans "to save money as cheaper no flashy robots" also so as to cause conspiracy so as no one can be trusted conditions. this has been so over done in the old one they knew who the enemy was and they banded together a rag tag fleet putting aside differences and views to over come them and for safety. there was differences with in the clans "which was names after the zodiac" which was kept some what in the last show. The fist show was about over coming great adversity and helping your fellow man and to be just and kind to those who you could help but also keep a watchful eye out for the wolves after the sheep. The last just missed it all the way around ok rant over.      


Star Trek has stood the test of Time. BSG won't be remembered in 30 years.