Which Series Do You Think is Greater Babylon 5 or Ron Moore's Battlestar Galactica ?

B

BAYLOR

There Are Always new Things to Learn.
Joined
Jun 29, 2014
Messages
24,121
Ive seen both and enjoyed both . But my question to you is which series do cinder to be greater and why ? :)
 
I was disappointed with the Galactica's relatively low Boxleitner score compared to B5. The Tron movies, for instance, have a much more acceptable Boxleitner index.
 
I enjoyed them both.

I think B5 was a more epic science fiction story which had a lot to it. Drama, comic relief, love and death. A story set on a greater scale that let the imagination run, perhaps? I loved the ship design, especially the more organic look of the Shadows, the Whitestar and the Vorlons, etc. It's not without fault and is very much a product of it's time. Some of the humour wasn't great and i think the hairstyles and costumes date it quite badly. Still, i'm waiting for my Blu-Ray copy to be delivered and a re-watch is in order. A fan of electronic music, i also enjoyed Christopher Franke's soundtrack.

BSG looked great but i think its strength lay in its tighter storytelling and flawed characters.

Babylon 5 is my personal favourite. Not better, just a preference.
 
Brian G Turner said:
The storytelling in Babylon 5 is second to none, though the special effects can look dated.
Click to expand...
It was novel for television and was well told . Yes the effect do look a bit dated but nit of that takes form the show at all.




Brian G Turner said:
The storytelling in BSG is pretty flawed, though the special effects look great.
Click to expand...
Yes a few flaws but, it a great story arcs like Pegasus , Life under Cylon Rule , The trial of Baltar and the Cylon Civil war and its aftermath. And yes, some very amazing special effects.
 
I've rewatched Babylon 5 many times (and am doing so again now) but never felt a desire to rewatch Battlestar Galatica.
 
I have a box set BG on disc and I've tried watching it several times and it is just boring and depressing.
I've tried from the start and stopped after the first disc.
Someone said start a season 2 [or maybe 3] when it "really gets going", 2 episodes in I found myself in the kitchen making a sandwich.
I've even tried watching it an episode a week in case it grew on me. Nothing has worked.
 
Glaysher said:
I've rewatched Babylon 5 many times (and am doing so again now) but never felt a desire to rewatch Battlestar Galatica.
Click to expand...
Of the two B5 is the the most re-watchable.
 
Ive been rewatching Babylon 5 . people say seasons one not the best quite frankly , it better the ns few series first season that I can think of.
 
My issue with BSG, both the original series and the remakes/spin-offs, is that they started off very well, but quickly devolved and failed to follow through on the original premise.
 
KiraAnn said:
My issue with BSG, both the original series and the remakes/spin-offs, is that they started off very well, but quickly devolved and failed to follow through on the original premise.
Click to expand...
The ratings were good but not great and at at one million dollar per episode , not enough to keep so prohibitively expensive of a series on the air. Other problems, Larson didn't really know what to do with the series once he got it on the air.
 
This is a bad comparison. The two series are totally different in scope and really aren't comparable as which was better even subjectively as the Op has asked. I enjoyed both equally.

Both shows had strengths and weaknesses.

B5 was campy at times, the sets, costumes and old gen CGI were generally pretty bad compared to anything recent. However, the story was epic and very original, the characters were deep, colorful and very well acted. I hope a total reboot does happen and the new incarnation is darker, more realistic in tone and execution with much better sets and state of the art CGI.

BSG was gritty, dark human character drama. It was an allegory to 911 and lot of the episodes played to the political issues of the real world at that time. Acting was excellent,scripts were brilliant. However, you can't get around the fact that it was indeed a reboot. That didn't lessen it, just loses points for originality. It also left a slightly sour taste in my mouth with the god and angles overtone but not strong enough for me not to have liked it. In fact I loved it and binge re-watch it about once a year. I didn't like the production design though. There were elements I thought RDM should've done better with. The Raptors were just terrible designs and the Vipers both Mk II and MK VII should have been designed with more emphasis on suspension of disbelief than they were. The whole flight pod retraction thing for the Galactica was just plain stupid and only served as a totally unnecessary plot device. I also didn't care for the CIC controls all concept. The Galatica should've had a proper navigation bridge with a separate CIC but that's just the scifi design artist in my talking preferences.
 
Sorceress 21 said:
This is a bad comparison. The two series are totally different in scope and really aren't comparable as which was better even subjectively as the Op has asked. I enjoyed both equally.

Both shows had strengths and weaknesses.

B5 was campy at times, the sets, costumes and old gen CGI were generally pretty bad compared to anything recent. However, the story was epic and very original, the characters were deep, colorful and very well acted. I hope a total reboot does happen and the new incarnation is darker, more realistic in tone and execution with much better sets and state of the art CGI.

BSG was gritty, dark human character drama. It was an allegory to 911 and lot of the episodes played to the political issues of the real world at that time. Acting was excellent,scripts were brilliant. However, you can't get around the fact that it was indeed a reboot. That didn't lessen it, just loses points for originality. It also left a slightly sour taste in my mouth with the god and angles overtone but not strong enough for me not to have liked it. In fact I loved it and binge re-watch it about once a year. I didn't like the production design though. There were elements I thought RDM should've done better with. The Raptors were just terrible designs and the Vipers both Mk II and MK VII should have been designed with more emphasis on suspension of disbelief than they were. The whole flight pod retraction thing for the Galactica was just plain stupid and only served as a totally unnecessary plot device. I also didn't care for the CIC controls all concept. The Galatica should've had a proper navigation bridge with a separate CIC but that's just the scifi design artist in my talking preferences.
Click to expand...

I do get fed up with people saying the CGI SFX in Babylon 5 were 'bad'. It's true they look less than slick by today's standards but for the time they were impressive, cutting edge stuff for a weekly TV show.
If nothing else it was refreshing to see space ships that would pivot around their own axis when changing path instead of banking like WW2 fighter planes. And there was a joy in seeing TV SF get away from having two ships meet nose to nose on the same plane like oil tankers which was the norm in the 2D Star Trek universe.

When Terry Gilliam was preparing Brasil he insisted on using model shots and practical effects because he knew that the CGI of the time would look dated very quickly. He was right.

Techniques evolve. Technology advances. Just because something is older doesn't mean it is bad.

Would anyone describe the animation in Disney's Snow White as 'bad' when compared with current animated films? I doubt it. It is of it's time just like the CGI in Babylon 5 is of its.
 
JunkMonkey said:
I do get fed up with people saying the CGI SFX in Babylon 5 were 'bad'. It's true they look less than slick by today's standards but for the time they were impressive, cutting edge stuff for a weekly TV show.
If nothing else it was refreshing to see space ships that would pivot around their own axis when changing path instead of banking like WW2 fighter planes. And there was a joy in seeing TV SF get away from having two ships meet nose to nose on the same plane like oil tankers which was the norm in the 2D Star Trek universe.

When Terry Gilliam was preparing Brasil he insisted on using model shots and practical effects because he knew that the CGI of the time would look dated very quickly. He was right.

Techniques evolve. Technology advances. Just because something is older doesn't mean it is bad.

Would anyone describe the animation in Disney's Snow White as 'bad' when compared with current animated films? I doubt it. It is of it's time just like the CGI in Babylon 5 is of its.
Click to expand...
I remember saying when The Matrix came out that it was an amazing film but in a few years when the SFX has moved on it will be seen as a bit Meh.
 
JunkMonkey said:
I do get fed up with people saying the CGI SFX in Babylon 5 were 'bad'. It's true they look less than slick by today's standards but for the time they were impressive, cutting edge stuff for a weekly TV show.
If nothing else it was refreshing to see space ships that would pivot around their own axis when changing path instead of banking like WW2 fighter planes. And there was a joy in seeing TV SF get away from having two ships meet nose to nose on the same plane like oil tankers which was the norm in the 2D Star Trek universe.

When Terry Gilliam was preparing Brasil he insisted on using model shots and practical effects because he knew that the CGI of the time would look dated very quickly. He was right.

Techniques evolve. Technology advances. Just because something is older doesn't mean it is bad.

Would anyone describe the animation in Disney's Snow White as 'bad' when compared with current animated films? I doubt it. It is of it's time just like the CGI in Babylon 5 is of its.
Click to expand...
This issue is not really whether the CGI was state of the art at the time or not, but whether CGI should have been used at all in preference to models. The original 1970s BSG still looks like real ships in space.
 
I read somewhere that Babylon 5 cost 60 million for the entire run and the TV movies. Quite the acheivement.

I never let the CGI in B5 bother me and actually rather liked them, and thought the Nebula and ship effects looked quite beautiful. I think the thing that dated B5 more than anything were the costumes and hairstyles.
 
I'm afraid I never found any of the characters in Babylon 5 at all engaging, whether they were human or alien. I did give it a chance, watching most of the 1st series before giving up, but it just didn't work for me.

BSG, however, caught me from the start, and the fact that I found my sympathies flipping from one side to another during the first couple of series was very captivating.
 
Rodders said:
I read somewhere that Babylon 5 cost 60 million for the entire run and the TV movies. Quite the acheivement.

I never let the CGI in B5 bother me and actually rather liked them, and thought the Nebula and ship effects looked quite beautiful. I think the thing that dated B5 more than anything were the costumes and hairstyles.
Click to expand...

The tv screens too look 1990's
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Qaraq1001 Launch on 10/01 of 1001 series Promotions 2
Moonbat Netflix - Animated Series and 'The Algorithm' General TV Discussion 1
HareBrain Indicating "series guaranteed written" on book cover Publishing 14
H Incorporating religious faith late on in a series Writing Discussion 6
Timben New Series: Titles Writing Discussion 14

Similar threads


Back
Top