Talk:Faith/Archive 1

Writer and director source

The infobox says Michael Nankin has directed "Faith", and that Seamus Kevin Fahey has written it. What's our source for this? Also note that Edward James Olmos has said he'd direct "episode six". Of course he could also be counting "Razor" as an episode and mean Into the West, or there could've been a change of plans... --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 13:01, 17 November 2007 (CST)

Obviously the article where the story information comes from (footnote 2): http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/entertainment_tv/2007/09/battlestar-ga-1.html --Serenity 13:08, 17 November 2007 (CST)

¡Very intense!

This is at least one of the top 5 episode in the series. Unfortunately, this is not an Encyclopædic observation. One of us shall figure out how to summarize it properly.

Perhaps you would be interested in commenting on the battlestar forum? OTW 09:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Name spelling

We need to determine Emily Kowalski's proper spelling. I believe I have it right in the initial ep summary; the other spelling is grammatically off. --Spencerian 14:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Just checked the credits on Hulu. It's "Kowalski". The other spelling came from a certain septic system. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 22:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Location-based summary?

I think a location-based summary (i.e. "On Demetrius", "On a baseship" and "On Galactica") makes more sense than an act-based summary for this episode. --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 14:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that would be better here. Any other opinions?

I know things seem weird with acts vs. locations. It's a toss-up. Acts allow a reader to know how things move in an episode as they are revealed chronologically to the airing. Locations are less confusing to define what happens at a specific place, but destroy the when in relation to other locations, and even sometimes itself. I also find it easier to write ep summaries as they play.

If we go location on this, it's important that the narrative language keep to strong emphasis on when things happen and approximately how long between events so readers don't think that, for instance, a small time passed before the Hybrid directly addressed Kara when the episode showed (through breaks and Galactica scenes) that some time passed. --Spencerian 19:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Gas Giant

I don't recall seeing any rings around the gas giant, and last episode Starbuck painted a very different gas giant with visible rings. We know what the comet is, but it looks like her "giant gas planet with rings" is still up for grabs. INH 00:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It's an artistic depiction... doesn't make it accurate. Also, her clarity and mental status is questionable, at best. Like the people on Demetrius, we can't place our full trust in Thrace or anything she has to say. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus} 00:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Possible Ship of Lights reference?

When Starbuck sees the Basestar near the Gas Giant I can't help but notice the startling similarity to that and the Ship of Lights from the original series. If I recall correctly the Ship of Light was responsible for ressurrecting Apollo. The pilots in the orginal series would also hear music similar to how Starbuck could hear the music. They are both visually similar. Being both shown as emitting blue light. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Adamgnome (talk • contribs).

I though that from the painting already. But I don't put any deeper meaning whatsoever in it. For me, it's a visual homage at most -- Serenity 11:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The ship Aurora in the fleet after New Caprica

I heard Emily mention the Aurora when she gave the bandana to Roslin. Can we add that in or shall I now?--User:CoreyDanian 1.36 CST May 12 2008

It's already noted on the ship page and doesn't really add anything here.

Death count

I may have missed it in other comments, but should it not be 2. We lost both Emily Kowalski and Jean.

The population count for Guess What's Coming to Dinner? will probably fall by two to account for this. I can't see where in this article it's inaccurate. OTW 09:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The article is flawless, what i meant was the change in the popluation. I am new here, so the population count reflects the last episode. The-Dude 10.24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The count reflects the one in the opening credits, which only accounts for deaths up to and including the teaser. For a somewhat more accurate one see survivor count -- Serenity 10:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment by Leoben re. Harbringer of Death

OK, I added a comment after the first time viewing this episode that Leoben appeared to directly mention the hybrid's "harbringer" line at the start of Act 4, as a subnote to the question section about whether Kara will tell anyone about the line (no need to tell if they already heard). I watched the episode a second time and he clearly states something about Kara leading them all to their death, although it was very quiet so it was difficult to make out every word. Yet I noticed today my note has been deleted. Is there a reason why? I don't see anything in the discussion section about it...thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MathewBurrack (talk • contribs).

I checked the scene(s) and didn't hear anything, but maybe it's there after all. A timestamp would be good. Still, the question section is for questions only and shouldn't contain elaborations or comments such at that. That's what Analysis, or maybe Notes (if it's self-evident) is for. -- Serenity 20:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Billy ?

During Roslin's vision, I wondered if the tall blurry guy in a brown suit could have been Billy. Am I completely wrong, or did anyone think the same ? --Vnz 12:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

FTL system plot hole

It seems awfully contrived that the Cylons needed to use the Rader's FTL system. IMO the most likely possibilities are that Leoben's Raider was the only FTL-capable Raider which wasn't destroyed in the battle, or that the other FTL-capable raiders had their FTL computers rendered inoperable (or at least unreliable) due to EMP damage. -- Gordon Ecker 07:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

All of their Raiders might have been destroyed in the battle. Why else did the Raptor approach the damaged battlestar unchallenged by a patrol? With no Raiders and a damaged FTL, Cavil's baseship might have decided to leave what's left of them behind for dead.-- Fredmdbud 07:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Given their behaviour in He That Believeth In Me, it seems likely that the non-lobotomized Raiders would once again retreat if ordered to attack the Cavil faction's Basestars and Raiders. -- Gordon Ecker 08:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

But that assumes that the Raiders have no sense of self-preservation. I agree, non-lobotmized Raiders wouldn't attack other Cylons unprovoked, but when it's being fired upon? -- Fredmdbud 19:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Water depth markers on the ferry

Saw this mentioned somewhere. The Roslin ferry scene - the ferry as the depth markers 12-11-10-9 on the bow. Just another Admiral Tigh incident (doesn't really mean anything), but interesting. -- FrankieG 20:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with those markers? --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 20:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

The fact that four numbers of twelve are visible above the waterline seems like a clear reference to the four Cylons revealed in "Crossroads, Part II", but the significance eludes me. The Four are visible in some way that the Seven and the One is not? That doesn't seem to make sense. "Number Eight" is just below the surface? But we know who she is. And what of the placement in Roslin's dream, a plotline mostly unconnected to the Cylon mythology? I suppose it was probably a neat-looking throwaway, and that analyzing it as a plot clue is probably going to be fruitless. --April Arcus 20:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Right. I thought this was pointed out as an Admiral Tigh kind of mistake where 12 m (or 12 ft) would be ridiculously long/short. Trying to interpret it in terms of Cylon numbers doesn't make much sense. --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 21:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

The reason that I mention it is that likely someone sometime will try to make a big deal about when, like Admiral Tigh, it means nothing. A preemptive strike. -- FrankieG 23:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Religious Parallels

The page mentions that Baltar's use of the river imagery for the passage to death "also parallels the rise of Christianity, which adopted things from other religions, including some rites of the established Roman polytheistic religions." This seems unsubstantiated, can we get a specific parallel? -- Turambar29 03:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Christianity hasn't a lock on such paths. At the least, it's too general, and I agree it's unsubstantiated. Feel free to modify as you like to correct for the overgeneralization. --Spencerian 22:20, 15 November 2008 (UTC)