Editing Talk:Black Market/Archive 1
Discussion page of Black Market/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Analysis== | ==Analysis== | ||
The criticism here needs to be toned down drastically. I personally enjoyed this episode much more than I had been expecting to. --[[User: | The criticism here needs to be toned down drastically. I personally enjoyed this episode much more than I had been expecting to. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 02:16, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ||
: I don't know exactly how to feel about this episode. Honestly, it wasn't all that bad -- it could have been much better executed, however. I can't really disagree with any of the critisms leveled at this episode, primarily because I hold them to be evident as well. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 09:45, 28 January 2006 (EST) | : I don't know exactly how to feel about this episode. Honestly, it wasn't all that bad -- it could have been much better executed, however. I can't really disagree with any of the critisms leveled at this episode, primarily because I hold them to be evident as well. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 09:45, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ||
::I'm in agreement, the analysis section does need to be toned down a little. Some of the criticisms are totally justified, while other parts seem unduly harsh. It wasn't a great episode but despite its flaws in did tell an interesting story. --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 10:12, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ::I'm in agreement, the analysis section does need to be toned down a little. Some of the criticisms are totally justified, while other parts seem unduly harsh. It wasn't a great episode but despite its flaws in did tell an interesting story. --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 10:12, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
: I actually pared it down a bit, and made it more chronologically correct. Any hint of analysis or reasoning in the Summary's content is not my doing -- I try to keep a very sterile "This happened, then that" approach in writing. I'm sure that a few "steps" can be condensed further, but looking it over at this point, it looks like it describes what transcended fairly well. -- [[User:Hawke|Hawke]] 20:56, 28 January 2006 (EST) | : I actually pared it down a bit, and made it more chronologically correct. Any hint of analysis or reasoning in the Summary's content is not my doing -- I try to keep a very sterile "This happened, then that" approach in writing. I'm sure that a few "steps" can be condensed further, but looking it over at this point, it looks like it describes what transcended fairly well. -- [[User:Hawke|Hawke]] 20:56, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ||
: Got rid of a few analysis points myself, looks a lot better now. --[[User:Bane Grievver|Bane Grievver]] 16:10, 29 January 2006 (EST) | |||
I don't know if the flashbacks of Apollo's relationship from before the attack should be characterized as an "interesting turn." "Contrived" would make more sense. We've heard next to nothing about Apollo's relationships for 26 episodes, not to mention the miniseries, and all of a sudden he has a pregnant girlfriend that he misses terribly? I can excuse someone like Wallace Grey appearing out of nowhere, but this is just too much, and I think the analysis should reflect that. --[[User:Drumstick|Drumstick]] 13:37, 29 January 2006 (EST) | I don't know if the flashbacks of Apollo's relationship from before the attack should be characterized as an "interesting turn." "Contrived" would make more sense. We've heard next to nothing about Apollo's relationships for 26 episodes, not to mention the miniseries, and all of a sudden he has a pregnant girlfriend that he misses terribly? I can excuse someone like Wallace Grey appearing out of nowhere, but this is just too much, and I think the analysis should reflect that. --[[User:Drumstick|Drumstick]] 13:37, 29 January 2006 (EST) | ||
== Regular vs. Guest Star == | == Regular vs. Guest Star == | ||
I noticed that someone edited this and said that they "included Leah Cairns (Racetrack)" as a Guest Star. At what point are characters considered "regulars" versus just being a spot-on "guest star"? Personally, I consider characters like Racetrack, Cat, and Hot Dog as regulars by now, albeit in the minor, second-tier category. They are existing in the "Wedge factor"... or, to put it better, they are in that role that [[Boomer (TOS)|Boomer]] and [[Jolly (TOS)|Jolly]] held in The Old Series -- that of a regularly re-occuring peripheral character that the fan can follow, and aren't getting killed off every episode like the Star Trek "Redshirt". -- [[User:Hawke|Hawke]] 10:50, 28 January 2006 (CST) | I noticed that someone edited this and said that they "included Leah Cairns (Racetrack)" as a Guest Star. At what point are characters considered "regulars" versus just being a spot-on "guest star"? Personally, I consider characters like Racetrack, Cat, and Hot Dog as regulars by now, albeit in the minor, second-tier category. They are existing in the "Wedge factor"... or, to put it better, they are in that role that [[Boomer (TOS)|Boomer]] and [[Jolly (TOS)|Jolly]] held in The Old Series -- that of a regularly re-occuring peripheral character that the fan can follow, and aren't getting killed off every episode like the Star Trek "Redshirt". -- [[User:Hawke|Hawke]] 10:50, 28 January 2006 (CST) | ||
:There are seven regulars - Edward James Olmos, Mary McDonnell, James Callis, Tricia Helfer, Jamie Bamber, Katee Sakhoff, and Grace Park. They are contracted on a per-season basis. Everyone else is a guest star, paid on a per-episode basis. There are two types of guest star - those listed during the opening of Act 1, after the intro sequence, and those listed in the credits at the end of the episode. I'm not entirely sure what the difference is, but the larger roles tend to be the ones listed earlier. --[[User: | :There are seven regulars - Edward James Olmos, Mary McDonnell, James Callis, Tricia Helfer, Jamie Bamber, Katee Sakhoff, and Grace Park. They are contracted on a per-season basis. Everyone else is a guest star, paid on a per-episode basis. There are two types of guest star - those listed during the opening of Act 1, after the intro sequence, and those listed in the credits at the end of the episode. I'm not entirely sure what the difference is, but the larger roles tend to be the ones listed earlier. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 12:56, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ||
:It's a bit of a grey area; officially, there are 7 "regular cast" members, as stated above. There's also "recurring characters", in legalize, these are "guest stars" that appear in most episodes. Case in point, Colonel Tigh has been in every episode but ins't counted as a main cast member (something to do with salaries, etc) and Chief Tyrol has appeard in all but two episodes (he grew more as they went along), so he's kind of also a recurring character too. Cally kind of also grew into that, as well. So the line between "regular" and "recurring" is blurry for Col. Tigh and Tyrol. Similarly, there is a blurry line between "guest" and "recurring". Several "guest" characters reappear more than once (Elosh, Dr. Cottle, Cain and Fisk I guess). Meanwhile, Kat and Hot Dog were originally intended as one-shot guests, but according to the DVD commentary, RDM was surprised that other writers would then script them in whenever "another pilot" was required, and they've been building up Kat. Likewise, Racetrack was just a "guest" but I think has advanced to "recurring" becase of all the character development she got in Final Cut and Flight of the Phoenix and she's also appeared alot. At any rate, there's a blurry line and it's really subjective. | :It's a bit of a grey area; officially, there are 7 "regular cast" members, as stated above. There's also "recurring characters", in legalize, these are "guest stars" that appear in most episodes. Case in point, Colonel Tigh has been in every episode but ins't counted as a main cast member (something to do with salaries, etc) and Chief Tyrol has appeard in all but two episodes (he grew more as they went along), so he's kind of also a recurring character too. Cally kind of also grew into that, as well. So the line between "regular" and "recurring" is blurry for Col. Tigh and Tyrol. Similarly, there is a blurry line between "guest" and "recurring". Several "guest" characters reappear more than once (Elosh, Dr. Cottle, Cain and Fisk I guess). Meanwhile, Kat and Hot Dog were originally intended as one-shot guests, but according to the DVD commentary, RDM was surprised that other writers would then script them in whenever "another pilot" was required, and they've been building up Kat. Likewise, Racetrack was just a "guest" but I think has advanced to "recurring" becase of all the character development she got in Final Cut and Flight of the Phoenix and she's also appeared alot. At any rate, there's a blurry line and it's really subjective. | ||
| Line 33: | Line 27: | ||
::BSG also makes the distinction of "co-stars" which appear at the beginning of Act 1 but without the heading of "Guest Star" that all the other guest stars do. I think Racetrack, Kat, and Hot Dog are still listed as actual guest stars, though. --[[User:Redwall|Redwall]] 13:26, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ::BSG also makes the distinction of "co-stars" which appear at the beginning of Act 1 but without the heading of "Guest Star" that all the other guest stars do. I think Racetrack, Kat, and Hot Dog are still listed as actual guest stars, though. --[[User:Redwall|Redwall]] 13:26, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ||
::I still disagree. There's no expectation that guest characters like Helo and Tyrol will appear in every episode, so their absence here is really unremarkable. --[[User: | ::I still disagree. There's no expectation that guest characters like Helo and Tyrol will appear in every episode, so their absence here is really unremarkable. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 19:00, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ||
:::Given that both of them have each appeared in all but one of the previous episodes, I would actually find it ''quite'' remarkable. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 20:06, 28 January 2006 (EST) | :::Given that both of them have each appeared in all but one of the previous episodes, I would actually find it ''quite'' remarkable. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 20:06, 28 January 2006 (EST) | ||
== Baltar's Treason == | == Baltar's Treason == | ||
| Line 54: | Line 47: | ||
::::: Baltar could even confirm every single fact Roselyn might offer, yet still realistically claim innocence. The simple facts are that, while there is something fishy going on, no one has any real evidence that Baltar is guilty of anything. And I still suspect he's going to end up in a real sense saving the day--because life is like that. Some of the greatest leaders have had repellant qualities while sometimes those with nothing but good intentions really frak things up. Besides, look at it this way. This war has only three possible ends: (1) Humanity is wiped out, very possible. (2) The Cylons are wiped out, highly unlikely. (3) Cylons and Humans find a way to share the universe. Between them, Baltar seems to be working for option number three. | ::::: Baltar could even confirm every single fact Roselyn might offer, yet still realistically claim innocence. The simple facts are that, while there is something fishy going on, no one has any real evidence that Baltar is guilty of anything. And I still suspect he's going to end up in a real sense saving the day--because life is like that. Some of the greatest leaders have had repellant qualities while sometimes those with nothing but good intentions really frak things up. Besides, look at it this way. This war has only three possible ends: (1) Humanity is wiped out, very possible. (2) The Cylons are wiped out, highly unlikely. (3) Cylons and Humans find a way to share the universe. Between them, Baltar seems to be working for option number three. | ||