Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
Oh god, I don't agree with this guy at all, but please let's not start with the "Oh if you don't like this, then I guess you probably think Hanna Montana is good TV!", or assuming anyone with a contrary opinion must be trolling. This isn't fucking imdb.
BlueLouBoyle, I saw the...Miniseries! Just Horrible. Even Star Trek: Voyager and Enterprise topped Ron Moore's Galactica! Watching paint dry would be more exciting. Moore's Galactica is...GINO, aka...Galactica In Name Only! Heck give me...Galactica 1980, over Moore's Trash.
Moore's Galactica is...GINO, aka...Galactica In Name Only!
This is a big reason I didn't watch it at the start. I never imagined something good could come from the original Battlestar Galactica. Ron Moore proved me wrong.
Quote:
Olmos is superb in the stoic military hardass role (only time he really embarasses himself is when Adama has his lolzy emotional breakdowns),
I have to quibble about this. I know I'm not going to change your opinion, but I can't let a statement like that pass without offering a rebuttal. I usually hate when actors have big dramatic breakdown moments. I've argued with many people about a scene in "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" where Avery Brooks is supposed to have a nervous breakdown. Most folks seemed to think it was brilliant and moving while I found it laughably corny, over-the-top, forced, and just embarrassing to watch.
Olmos nailed that shit, though. Any time he did a scene where he was devastated, bawling, and tearing the place apart, I could really feel his pain. I believe he brought tremendous power and emotional weight to his vulnerable scenes, especially after spending so much time as a supremely stoic character. The contrast was jarring, but convincing. I guess your mileage may vary, but I found those scenes superbly acted and I think many fans of the show would agree.
Quote:
I've argued with many people about a scene in "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" where Avery Brooks is supposed to have a nervous breakdown. Most folks seemed to think it was brilliant and moving while I found it laughably corny, over-the-top, forced, and just embarrassing to watch.
Haha that wouldn't be the one set in the 40's where he's a sci-fi writer would it? Brooks engaging in Nic Cage-style "mega-acting". Unintentionally hilarious!
Quote:
I have to quibble about this. I know I'm not going to change your opinion, but I can't let a statement like that pass without offering a rebuttal. I usually hate when actors have big dramatic breakdown moments. I've argued with many people about a scene in "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" where Avery Brooks is supposed to have a nervous breakdown. Most folks seemed to think it was brilliant and moving while I found it laughably corny, over-the-top, forced, and just embarrassing to watch.
Olmos nailed that shit, though. Any time he did a scene where he was devastated, bawling, and tearing the place apart, I could really feel his pain. I believe he brought tremendous power and emotional weight to his vulnerable scenes, especially after spending so much time as a supremely stoic character. The contrast was jarring, but convincing. I guess your mileage may vary, but I found those scenes superbly acted and I think many fans of the show would agree.
IMO, spot on.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I am guessing that you are referring to the BSG/Olmos scene where in a fit of improv'd grief, destroyed the model ship...the one the was a $100K antique rental that wasn't supposed to be destroyed.
Quote:
Sorry, wasn't thinking. Hopefully got my edit in on time.
As for your other points:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Very true. I think we'd be in agreement that they didn't exactly stick the landing. I guess my main issue is just with people complaining about the mysticism turning out to be true, as opposed to the show offering some random explanation for it all (I'm not saying aliens, but aliens.) I don't know, just because I don't believe in a god, doesn't mean I can't accept a fiction where god exists.
Although, to be sure, for the side of the audience-base who feels the same way, Ronald Moore did pretty strongly insinuate in the finale that
...the "spirits" (Head Baltar and Head Six) were in fact highly-evolved NTIs, working for another, even more advanced alien entity, testing humanity, etc. That's more or less how I stand on the ending, and I was quite pleased to see this possibility established.
Quote:
BlueLouBoyle, I saw the...Miniseries! Just Horrible. Even Star Trek: Voyager and Enterprise topped Ron Moore's Galactica! Watching paint dry would be more exciting. Moore's Galactica is...GINO, aka...Galactica In Name Only! Heck give me...Galactica 1980, over Moore's Trash.
Be warned, though, that is essentially the, "What-if-Ron-Moore-had-remade-Galactica 1980-next-and-made-it-AWESOME?" version of that particular storyline.
It's funny...back when ST: Voyager first hit the airwaves, some critic mentioned that it could turn out to be "Battlestar with actual balls."
Too bad we had to wait another nine years for Moore to finally give us the show many now call, "Voyager with balls."
SPOILERS
If I remember correctly, the "model ship" moment was an outburst of anger and frustration at the end of a rather heavy episode, and I had no problem with it. But one or two of the later breakdowns, especially that bit where he was crying and throwing white paint around the toilet just cracked me up. I'm sorry, but I think there are certain pained faces that Olmos was never meant to make on screen.
In my opinion, emotion from Olmos works much better when he reins himself in. Like that scene in season 1 where he says that if it was Lee stuck down on that planet instead of Starbuck, he "would never leave". And of course when father and son say goodbye in the final episode.
I think we need to know what your opinion of what a "good" show is in order for your criticisms to hold any weight.
This can be just as applicable with music and movies....if you criticize...for example, the band 'Nirvana'....but you think that 'Limp Bizkit' or 'Britney Spears' produce the best music ever....well, I for one, will call into question the ability for that individual to determine what is considered "good" or "bad".
Then again, the word 'troll' could be just as valid....
Absolutely not. It's perfectly acceptable to judge a show based on the criteria and standards of a genre. It can stand on it's own merits. That's a slippery slope that wanna be critics always slide down, just because a show is not as "good" as show A or show B, does not mean that it is not a good show. And vice versa.
Then again, the word "tool" or "asshole" could be just as valid....
Oh god, I don't agree with this guy at all, but please let's not start with the "Oh if you don't like this, then I guess you probably think Hanna Montana is good TV!", or assuming anyone with a contrary opinion must be trolling. This isn't fucking imdb.
Thanks, I was beginning to think I was in a different site.
Absolutely not. It's perfectly acceptable to judge a show based on the criteria and standards of a genre. It can stand on it's own merits. That's a slippery slope that wanna be critics always slide down, just because a show is not as "good" as show A or show B, does not mean that it is not a good show. And vice versa.
Then again, the word "tool" or "asshole" could be just as valid....
What's so difficult about enlightening us as to your preferred choice of "good" scifi tv/movies.....? DS9 ? Firefly ? The Starlost ? Automan?.......
But ....if you choose not to set a baseline for your opinions (embarrassment ?), I will choose to lump you into the "Limp Bizkit" / "Street Hawk" camp when it comes to excellent music/TV.
What show were you watching? I haven't seen the "modern" BSG since it aired, but I certainly don't recall a driving force of the plot being who could sleep with who. When I think of something akin to the WB, I immediately jump to something like the upcoming Hunger Games movie, not BSG. I mean, its not like there are a whole lot of pretty people running around in this thing. It is dark and gritty, but that tone suited the concept of the show - a fight against the extinsion of humanity.
Shaky cam? Sure, it got tiresome. Artiifically contrived plotlines? Heck yeah, happens on every single mid- to long-term running show in existence. But characters being "utterly despicable and depraved"? Which ones? Low IQ/mass marketed sci-fi? Couldn't agree less, this was not by any means a project designed to hit all four marketing quadrants.
Out of curiosity, what is your high IQ sci-fi show of record? Yes, yes, I know you said you didn;t want to get into the whole "Show A is better" thing, but I can't help but ask.
Just let me clarify in case any one was offended. When I used the term "low IQ" I was referring strictly to the show and NOT in any way to people who watched it. Plenty of people liked it and that's fine, I in no way plan on insulting them or even think there is a need to insult them. I just didn't like it.
Not a whole lot of pretty people? Are you kidding? Was there a female character that didn't have a spread in Maxim/FHM. I didn't say sex was a driving force, it was just in the fore front. Listen, I'm no prude by a long shot, but sometimes even I was just yelling at the screen for them to just keep it in their pants for once.
I too haven't seen the show in a while, I just found it difficult to get behind or care about anyone. Besides the obvious aggressive robots trying to kill them, how many of their problems were their own fault. They constantly made terrible decisions one after the other making the situation worse. I got tiresome.
I like lots of different shows from lots of different genres, my DVD collection is quite varied. I'm not comparing it to other shows, I'm judging it on it's own merits.
Yes, well it had space battles and robots and there certainly wasn't any high schools ... so sorry, I was wrong. It was nothing like a teen drama.
What's so difficult about enlightening us as to your preferred choice of "good" scifi tv/movies.....? DS9 ? Firefly ? The Starlost ? Automan?.......
But ....if you choose not to set a baseline for your opinions (embarrassment ?), I will choose to lump you into the "Limp Bizkit" / "Street Hawk" camp when it comes to excellent music/TV.
There you go again trying to throw around petty insults. You really have an emotional attachment to this show huh? Did I hurt your feelings?
This is exactly the kind of argument I was trying to avoid. So I list some shows that I like, then you grab on to one and tell me how much that show sucked and since I liked that piece of crap I can't have an opinion. We go back and forth in fan boy idiocy and derail the whole thread. I don't think anybody is interested in that.
Someone asked for opinions, I gave mine the best I can without spoiling the entire thing for him.
Perhaps we should retitle this thread "So Say We Some".
dp
There you go again trying to throw around petty insults. You really have an emotional attachment to this show huh? Did I hurt your feelings?
This is exactly the kind of argument I was trying to avoid. So I list some shows that I like, then you grab on to one and tell me how much that show sucked and since I liked that piece of crap I can't have an opinion. We go back and forth in fan boy idiocy and derail the whole thread. I don't think anybody is interested in that.
Someone asked for opinions, I gave mine the best I can without spoiling the entire thing for him.
No feelings hurt here...I'm more than willing to admit that BSG had it's flaws....
Was it perfect, no.
Could BSG have been better....perhaps.
Did I like how it ended.....?
But to call it, as you so ineloquently put it:
If you were trying to avoid an argument, maybe something a little less "troll-y" than the simplistic dismissal of a TV series that has won it's fair share of critical awards (Peabody being the most notable) and seems to still be looked upon with a good deal of consideration even after ending several years ago.
All I was initially asking for was a baseline so I could determine what your scale is with regards to what you consider "is" or "is not" "garbage".
Hell, it might even have helped the originator of this thread to determine if he/she has the same tastes as you do....which would have helped to make up his/her mind as to spend the time watching the series.
so....."Homeboys in Outer Space"..."complete garbage" just like BSG?
Perhaps BoatMan is a "Backwards Man" for whom 'yes' means 'no', 'hello' means 'goodbye', & 'complete garbage' means 'complete awesome!'.
so....."Homeboys in Outer Space"..."complete garbage" just like BSG?
"BSG" is like a Filet Mignon, cooked rare, while "Homeboys from Outer Space" is more like a souffle!
Honestly, I think BoatMan may have watched a different show by accident. Unless I missed Mary McDonnell and Michells Forbes' Maxim spreads.
Honestly, I think BoatMan may have watched a different show by accident. Unless I missed Mary McDonnell and Michells Forbes' Maxim spreads.
You are correct, they did not have a spread. So you are saying they both weren't "pretty people" then?
Perhaps BoatMan is a "Backwards Man" for whom 'yes' means 'no', 'hello' means 'goodbye', & 'complete garbage' means 'complete awesome!'.
Well I was going to argue your point, but you bolded your entire statement so I guess you win and I have nothing to say.
Well played sir!
You are correct, they did not have a spread. So you are saying they both weren't "pretty people" then?
I don't think they were cast for their looks, no. I think you've made an initial outlandish set of statements in this thread and rather than saying "maybe I was being overly harsh back then..." you're now desparately trying to justify calling this show "utter garbage".
So. Tricia Helfer would be classed as hot. That was kind of the point of her model, no? Did you actually *watch* the show? Because regardless of how many Maxim spreads she or Grace Park did, they both act the fuck out of the material. A show which involves considered, prescient debates on topics such as abortion, electoral fraud, the occupation of foreign territory, the role of the military in society, religion, and the overreach of technology, to name but a few, is not "garbage". I can understand finding the show's bleak outlook not to your tastes, but to dismiss the show as outright bad for the reasons you've listed absolutely does make me question your taste.
No feelings hurt here...I'm more than willing to admit that BSG had it's flaws....
Was it perfect, no.
Could BSG have been better....perhaps.
Did I like how it ended.....?
But to call it, as you so ineloquently put it:
If you were trying to avoid an argument, maybe something a little less "troll-y" than the simplistic dismissal of a TV series that has won it's fair share of critical awards (Peabody being the most notable) and seems to still be looked upon with a good deal of consideration even after ending several years ago.
All I was initially asking for was a baseline so I could determine what your scale is with regards to what you consider "is" or "is not" "garbage".
Hell, it might even have helped the originator of this thread to determine if he/she has the same tastes as you do....which would have helped to make up his/her mind as to spend the time watching the series.
so....."Homeboys in Outer Space"..."complete garbage" just like BSG?
You just can't help but to lob insults at me. I feel like I'm arguing with a little girl over Justin Beiber. I insulted a TV SHOW, you have many times insulted me. Who's acting like the troll?
Looking for an argument, no. Maybe trying to spark a debate, sure. Did I maybe come on too strong for some people, obviously. But then again I was talking about a simple tv show, I wasn't expecting to deal with some tool bag trying to insult me because I disagree with his beloved BSG.
I felt BSG was nothing more then a mainstream space action show. Which is fine. I have no problems with that, and sometimes I even look for it. But people prop it up as some existential or metaphysical masterpiece of science fiction, which I disagree with. I would make the same argument over the new Star Trek movie. It was a mainstream space action movie, sometimes entertaining with great performances but ultimately hollow. Good movie, mediocre science fiction, piss poor Star Trek.
I don't know what else to tell you. Why don't you tell me why it was so great.
No-one's insulting you. Jesus, grow a pair.
Okay, THAT was an insult.
That you compare this to the 2009 STAR TREK *really* makes me think you haven't watched the show properly.
Watched the first and part of the second season and kind of gave up.
I get what they were trying to achive but it just wasn't for me.
Loved the show, although the tight pacing and through-line plot of the first two seasons is totally thrown by the abrupt lingering at the beginning of season 3.
Also, I know it was to serve a purpose, but fat Apollo and Adama-stache were hilarious at the time and embarrassing to look back on now.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
"All Along the Watchtower" also never worked for me as a plot device.
Guys, I was wrong yesterday about it being $109.99 on Amazon today.
It's $94.99 on Amazon today.
For Blu-ray, including the movies. The silver box complete series, Lightning Deal, today only. GET IT!
No-one's insulting you. Jesus, grow a pair.
Okay, THAT was an insult.
That you compare this to the 2009 STAR TREK *really* makes me think you haven't watched the show properly.
I did not compare it directly to Star Trek. I made a comparison to the base argument I was making. Trying to give a perspective to where I was coming from. Go back and try to read it a few more times, maybe much slower this time. It's called reading comprehension, work on it.
I am curious though, how to watch a show properly. Please, do tell.
Well, trying to digest what's going on beyond "pretty people in spaceships fighting robots" seems to be a stumbling block.
Ken gets this. I fully appreciate that it's not for him, and he understands that while it didn't work for him it's in no way an objectively bad piece of television.
I felt BSG was nothing more then a mainstream space action show. Which is fine. I have no problems with that, and sometimes I even look for it. But people prop it up as some existential or metaphysical masterpiece of science fiction, which I disagree with. I would make the same argument over the new Star Trek movie. It was a mainstream space action movie, sometimes entertaining with great performances but ultimately hollow. Good movie, mediocre science fiction, piss poor Star Trek.
Given that you're being a massive dick over your widely derided opinion, let's just look at what you said regarding BSG and STAR TREK '09, shall we?
There's a clear comparison here. You say both are mainstream "space action". Ultimately hollow. I, on the other hand, and almost everyone else in this thread, am arguing that a show which successfully debates religion's place in politics, military overreach, the Iraq War occupation, and on and on and on is in no way hollow. Hence me thinking you have a problem seeing the subtext.
Quote:
IMO, spot on.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I am guessing that you are referring to the BSG/Olmos scene where in a fit of improv'd grief, destroyed the model ship...the one the was a $100K antique rental that wasn't supposed to be destroyed.
Yeah, that was the one I thought had the most visceral impact, but I found all of those Olmos scenes effective, rather than laughable. Even the paint one.
Well, trying to digest what's going on beyond "pretty people in spaceships fighting robots" seems to be a stumbling block.
Ken gets this. I fully appreciate that it's not for him, and he understands that while it didn't work for him it's in no way an objectively bad piece of television.
Thanks man.
As a concept, I actually think it was a brave and clever one. However As the show went on I found myself caring less about the characters on both sides, which ultimately meant I lost interest in the show. And i must have gotten further along than the second series because it turns out I lost interest
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)Around the time the skipped ahead to the Cylon occupation of new Caprica.
I have a mixed relationship with BSG. Yes, it's absolutely some of the most brilliant sci fi TV ever produced, and certainly stands as one of my favorite series of all time. With that said, coming off the season 2 part 1 finale, I had extremely high hopes for the future. Every week I was on pins and needles waiting for new episodes, and endlessly rewatching what had already aired in order to pass the time between seasons. While the show always remained strong, at times in the later years I felt that the show sadly was suffering from LOSTitis, where the plot seemed a bit random and unconvincing, and that the Cylon's grand plan may not have been as thought out as we'd previously hoped. I feel the show suffered a great loss when Ronald D Moore began to turn his attention elsewhere, and it's a shame because other than a paycheck, there is nothing he accomplished from those years that will stand the test of time the way GALACTICA had a chance to
The ending I also pretty much loath, but I guess when the over all quality of the product is as high as it is with BSG, you need to take what you can get and leave the complaints at the door, to some degree
So yes, by all means watch it. The show will move you, and is at times as thrilling as any TV ever produced. BTW: for being a "cable show", the scope of the action is at times awe inspiring, and certain space combat sequences have to be seen to be believed
MVPs: OLMOS, MACDONALD, SACKHOFF
One thing though: START WITH THE MINI SERIES
This is absolutely essential. It's good TV, but the thing is that it also isn't quite enough to give you the flavor of the show once they're living life hunted and on the run. Watch the mini and then the pilot, and then you'll be able to accurately measure your interest in going further
SPOILERS FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE SEEN THEM:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Death of Pegasus, and the Galactica's orbit drop towards the beginning of S3 are virtuoso sequences
Kate, best use the spolier button there.
Kate, best use the spolier button there.
I didn't know where it was till just now! But I updated the post with the button
Thanks man.
As a concept, I actually think it was a brave and clever one. However As the show went on I found myself caring less about the characters on both sides, which ultimately meant I lost interest in the show. And i must have gotten further along than the second series because it turns out I lost interest
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)Around the time the skipped ahead to the Cylon occupation of new Caprica.
Curious as to exactly where you lost interest. Once that arc started, or after it concluded? I feel that whole story was one of the best things the show ever did. Honestly, it was the only time I was able to get a few friends to even watch the show, but once it ended they promptly lost interest, and it was the first time I started to get actively frustrated with the show.
He was involved much less with seasons 3 + 4, as he himself would admit. Much of the writing and outline of the seasons was drafted without his direct involvement, except in the broadest way. Where as seasons one, two and the mini were projects he was giving his full creative attentions towards
The problem, Princess, is that from what I understand the parts he was in charge of were the ones that drug down the final season (i.e. everything with the Final Five).
The problem, Princess, is that from what I understand the parts he was in charge of were the ones that drug down the final season (i.e. pretty much everything with the Final Five).
Well if that's the case I don't know what to say, because...
SPOILERS
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I still hate the answer to the final five. I hate how it involved upending our entire understanding of the history of the first cylon war ETC. I hate that Tigh is a Cylon. Worst of all, I hate that Gaeta isn't one (he so clearly handed Boomer a gun in the S1 finale! Yeesh! He spent all that time too, talking about how he felt like he was always destined to join the military)
The only thing I can say is perhaps it wouldn't have ended that way if Moore had been on the ball all along, and maybe they would have built to a better ending rather than spinning their wheels for 85% of season 3 (for the record I really like the New Caprica stuff in S3, and the rescue)
There's approximately one part of the Final Five that works for me, and that's
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)Tory embracing it as an excuse to be evil. Hatehatehate what it did to the Tighs and how it undid the gutpunch of what he did to Ellen.
Honestly, I don't know how they could've done it differently without completely redoing the entire season, except that they could've accomplished most of the same stuff by making it the Final Three. We were getting way short on surviving, sympathetic human characters at the end.
There's approximately one part of the Final Five that works for me, and that's
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)Tory embracing it as an excuse to be evil. Hatehatehate what it did to the Tighs and how it undid the gutpunch of what he did to Ellen.
Honestly, I don't know how they could've done it differently without completely redoing the entire season, except that they could've accomplished most of the same stuff by making it the Final Three. We were getting way short on surviving, sympathetic human characters at the end.
Could not have said it better myself
Haha that wouldn't be the one set in the 40's where he's a sci-fi writer would it? Brooks engaging in Nic Cage-style "mega-acting". Unintentionally hilarious!
Sorry to derail, should have replied to this earlier, but I gotta tie up this loose end. Yes, that's what I was referring to. The DS9 episode set in the past with all the characters out of their Star Trek uniforms/costumes/alien make-up was actually quite interesting for much of its duration, but the big dramatic Brooks moments were just awful.
His breakdown scene and his monologue at the end were ridiculous. Again, to sort of get this back on topic, when it comes to huge emotional beats Olmos > Brooks. But I love some of the more quiet work Olmos did on BSG too. This isn't a spoiler because I'm not revealing its context, but at one point he simply says, "about time" and it's one of the most perfect, beautifully moving moments I've ever seen in any TV show or movie. For someone who was so cold all the time, his character could be really endearing too.
You just can't help but to lob insults at me. I feel like I'm arguing with a little girl over Justin Beiber. I insulted a TV SHOW, you have many times insulted me. Who's acting like the troll?
Looking for an argument, no. Maybe trying to spark a debate, sure. Did I maybe come on too strong for some people, obviously. But then again I was talking about a simple tv show, I wasn't expecting to deal with some tool bag trying to insult me because I disagree with his beloved BSG.
I felt BSG was nothing more then a mainstream space action show. Which is fine. I have no problems with that, and sometimes I even look for it. But people prop it up as some existential or metaphysical masterpiece of science fiction, which I disagree with. I would make the same argument over the new Star Trek movie. It was a mainstream space action movie, sometimes entertaining with great performances but ultimately hollow. Good movie, mediocre science fiction, piss poor Star Trek.
I don't know what else to tell you. Why don't you tell me why it was so great.
the original post asked for opinions of BSG....if you think that the show is "garbage", why not offer up a "better" alternative for him/her to watch instead
a simple solution to all this banter would be for you to give us an example of a TV show that you happen to find intellectually intriguing.....Babylon 5, ST-TNG, Dr. Who, X-Files, Firefly...?
here ya go Boat, maybe this is more your speed....(ironically, also with the involvement of Glen Larson)
also...IMO, the recent ST movie was just OK.........it was great if you like 'lens flares'. 
Originally Posted by Naisu Baddi
Sorry to derail, should have replied to this earlier, but I gotta tie up this loose end. Yes, that's what I was referring to. The DS9 episode set in the past with all the characters out of their Star Trek uniforms/costumes/alien make-up was actually quite interesting for much of its duration, but the big dramatic Brooks moments were just awful.
Yeah it was almost a great episode and was certainly well meaning, but it really didn't need Brooks dialing it up to 11.
Yeah it was almost a great episode and was certainly well meaning, but it really didn't need Brooks dialing it up to 11.
I think he tried....unsuccessfully...to push it to "12" in that scene.
That being said, Brooks plays the silent, somber type much better....I can't recall ever seeing him pull off the 'heavy emotion' acting in anything he's done.
He was good in American History X....
Not to take this too far afield from BSG, but:
The biggest problem with DS9's "Far Beyond the Stars" is that the original scriptwriter was not on-set or available during shooting, and the script was largely rewritten by the staff, and then further gutted by the director (Brooks), who was far more interested in reviling race-prejudice in the fifties (as he perceived it) than in telling a good story...this is why the script is unresolved, and has no concrete ending, no specific statement.
Apart from Sisko's ending-meltdown, it was interesting to watch, and the art department did a bang-up job, but it could have been a great deal more than it was, with only a bit of competent attention, or at least a few leashes on appropriate director(s) and production staff. Brooks was less than ten years old in the mid-'50s -- does anyone know if he ever even visited New York City?
(It's a cinch he didn't grow up reading pulp SF, or ever actually research the subject...)
