I've been vaguely interested in the new version of BG, put of fby memories of how little the original lived up to my expectations. Despite being stoney I couldn't resist buying the first three seasons from British Heart Foundation this morning, though I'm shocked to discover that series three seems to be only two days old. Was it really only released on Monday?
Anyway, good buy? Without treading into spoiler-city (Wiki spoiled the end on the mini series) have I spent £30 wisely? And should I wait for the mini-series to arrive from Play?
wait for Mini-series!!!! it worth it!
Also I am try to get Series 3, but do you know anyplace it very cheap????
I'm into the last 7 of S3: excellent. Great cast, amazing effects - best space battles on small or big screen, ever - spread the word.
Generally speaking I loathe yankee sci-fi (no offence, american boarders). Trek, Wars, Babylon 5, Stargate, Farscape - embarassing tosh all. I couldn't get into a single one and would never even have contemplated buying any on DVD.
BSG is the exception. I'd always liked the premise of the original (rag-tag fleet, remnants of humanity, etc) even if not the actual series, so I took the plunge early this year after hearing good things on the board and haven't been sorry. Barring some weak episodes in the middle of series 2, it's been one of the most gripping series - sci-fi or otherwise - I think I've ever seen. It is for me what so many others seem to find in Lost and Heroes, shows I can't seem to get as excited about as the zeitgeist says I should.
Yes, series 3 did just come out on Monday, and yes, you should wait and watch the mini-series first.
Very po-faced, the backstory doesn't hold up to scrutiny, the physics are underthought for a supposedly 'realistic' show, it's main plot thread of evil robot doubles is poorly-realised onscreen (argueably misogynistic in places) and there's an odd absence of African-American actors for a show whose original iteration boasted a black character in 'the big three' and a black guy as second in command of the space-guns under Him Off Bonanza - the only black person on the main cast of the new series is a carbon-copy of Uhura from Star Trek; go affirmative action! Though it's damning with faint praise, BSG is still the best sci-fi show of recent years, even if only because Firefly got kneecapped before it could become a decent franchise.
The miniseries is pretty weak and overlong, but it's probably a good idea to watch it before the actual show, as the first episode of series one - '33' - is a fine piece of television, and possibly sets too high a bar for much of what follows. Series three drags terribly in the middle, too, as the opening episodes are belters, and the less said about the pretentious guff that ended s3 the better.
That all reads very negatively, but the show still stands up well and is definately worth watching.
Blimey. Somebody has charitised a D.V.D within forty eight hours of it's release. Stonking. Could be a reviewers, perhaps?
Writing this through hot tears over Jimbo's Nationalistic dismissal of my country's SF ouvre. Any man who hates Firefly must hate freedom and want the terrorists to win.
BSG absolutely worth it. You will hear mutterings over Season 3 (some of that muttering may even come from me). I believe that's due to the beginning of the season just rocked the socks off all viewers so that the rest seemed pretty paltry in comparison.
Writing this through hot tears over Jimbo's Nationalistic dismissal of my country's SF ouvre. Any man who hates Firefly must hate freedom and want the terrorists to win.
Oop! I forgot Firefly. Yeah, that surprised me by being utterly bloody good, yet didn't feel the need to be quite so relentlessly dark as BSG.
No offence meant, American Scifi (generalising hugely here) just doesn't seem to speak much to me. When I think of my favourite SF it's generally homegrown stuff like H.G. Wells, John Wyndham, Quatermass, Doctor Who and Tooth, of course. It's all just more in my idiom, I guess.
Go terrorists!
I love Firefly - such a huge, crying shame that it got taken into the desert just outside Vegas and buried alive. (Mind you, it went out on a high - if you ignore the movie.)
BSG is very good - a lot better than most of the stuff DJ lists. Mind you, I've a real soft spot for original series Star Trek, and I got totally addicted to Farscape. Oddly, seeing recent repeats, it seems far too loud and obnoxious. Must have been a timing thing.
**No offence meant**
Deeply offended!!
No, no, it's true Wars, Babylon 5, Stargate, Farscape are tosh. Not embarassing tosh mind you, just tosh. The old Trek I find deeply enjoyable tosh.
Without any intention of doing so I've probably read or watched more British Sci Fi than my own country's.
Do you guys get Eureka? That is some benign and affable tosh, indeed.
Battlestar Galactica? Focus grouped, US Centric aul bollox, designed for people who can't bring themselves to admit they are watching a "sci-fi" show. If you've ever watched any other SF programme you'll recognise the tired cliches albeit tarted up for the mainstream. The robots have assumed human form (gasp), they have a president who has a blue and white ship called Colonial One, the "banter" between the pilots is sub Top Gun. While the original BG was bollox it was unpretentious bollox, it never pretended to be commentary on the human condition or current US foreign policy. But worst of all is that they don't use the original fucking theme tune.
Noo-BSG: Good overall, awesome in places, stretched in others (For example: "This week, Apollo dates a hooker!", has very little interest in yer actual SF concepts, but a good sense of drama and impending doom.
Firefly: Funt, your mouth is full of strange - why you no like Serenity-movie, Funt? Good compromise, me thought.
I always thought Farscape was Australian. Oh well.
Still not got round to watching BSG. Must give it a try some day if I can find them in a charity shop.
Firefly was alright but vastly overrated. It would have been more interesting if at least one of the 97 crew members had been properly bad.
Bring back Lexx I say.
Always thought it was curious that new BSG's quality dips notably when it lowers itself to try actual sci-fi in it's stories, like the pseudo-mystical search for Earth - the bit where they follow a prophecy to old ruins was embarrassing to watch in a way that even the original's creepy space-monkey-dog never was.
And I disagree that BSG is focus-group-led. If it was, there'd be a gay or black guy on the cast - although he'd be a bit lonely. If anything, I'd say it was just two-dimensional and lacking in any character depth, but you can blame that on the original miniseries, which had to be sufficiently dumbed-down (and cleansed of any ethnic presence that couldn't do an FHM photoshoot) in order to get the Sci-Fi Channel to foot the bill for it - don't forget that the only reason the series that followed was made was because Sky (UK) - not the Sci-Fi Channel (US) - was willing to pay for it.
If you watch the Sci-Fi Channel version of Earthsea, you may also be surprised how white a great many of the black characters from the original stories now are.
::"Funt, your mouth is full of strange"
I do like the Firefly movie - but I love the series. (I guess, through necessity, the movie format has to alter the pace of things - but for all that it's quite good fun, I could live without it.)
Put it this way - I've watched the series on DVD several times - but the movie only twice.
I really liked the first two seasons of Battlestar Galactica, although I haven't seen anything of season three.
Go for it, David!
- Trout
"Put it this way - I've watched the series on DVD several times - but the movie only twice."
Putting it that way, so have I...
Is series 3 worth to buy? and knows anywhere that very cheap?????
A mate is going to lend me BSG series 1-3 in return for me indoctrinating him into the Sopranos in time for the last 9 episodes.
He rates it very high and the inestimable Charley Brooker has said good things about it,so I'm looking forward to it.
But the mini series first you say?
M.
You can get away without watching the mini-series first, but I wouldn't advise it.
The mini-series basically covers why the rag-tag fleet is on the hoof and introduces the main characters, so the series proper can get on with it's job.
and i like that last battle scene in Mini-series, that was nice view of Battlestar Galactica arrives and turns around and turn all guns on. And let other ships escapes, that shows why One Battlestar is still best than lots of Toasters's BaseStars. :)
New Battlestar Galactica is pretty awesome, best show on television. And I must echo, watch it from the beginning. AKA, the Pilot Mini-Series. It's a serial show, not an episodic one, it should be watched in order from the beginning just so you can watch the story build.
Also, you Brits are so lucky to have Season 3 on DVD already, us Americans are still waiting on it. It probably won't be released until the BSG: Razors Mini-series in November.
"there's an odd absence of African-American actors for a show whose original iteration boasted a black character in 'the big three' and a black guy as second in command"
I'm genuinely curious: does this really impact on your enjoyment of a show? Are you anxiously scanning an episode to make sure they've represented everyone?
Does it really matter if the story - this story - is well-told?
"argueably misogynistic in places"
Please argue it, then. I read a piece in the Sunday Times which, while trying to make out that tv SF remains a final frontier for women, reluctantly acknowledged BSG was unusually generous in its female roles. They also thought it notable that it had an Asian-American prominent. Me, I just think she's both gorgeous & a decent actor; but I ain't out tickin' boxes.
"the physics are underthought for a supposedly 'realistic' show"
The physics are perfectly in keeping with TV space opera, if not slightly better, with vernier jets etc on show.
Enjoyed the mini-series and the first series of BSG. Thought the second series sagged a bit about two-thirds of the way through (disc 4 can and should be avoided). The webisodes if you can still find them are excellent and series 3 doesn't quite live up to the promise of its brilliant start.
For those looking for prices for series 3, below is the link for find-dvd.co.uk.
Link: BSG3 price comparison
I think old Battlestar Galactica, on the whole, is rubbish.
And new Battlestar is a well produced, well acted, grown up SF show.
So if you don't like the old one, this is good stuff, and I know people who do like the old one and still enjoy this.
Definitely worth a try, give the mini-series a go, which preceeds season one. That'll be a good indicator.
"I'm genuinely curious: does this really impact on your enjoyment of a show? Are you anxiously scanning an episode to make sure they've represented everyone?"
Not at all. I was responding to your comment that it was focus-group led, and if that was the case, there'd be more tokenistic casting. Though I think that black actors were more a token casting thing in the 1980s, followed by gay characters in the 1990s, and latino characters in the 2000s - with a late showing for characters of arabian descent.
I'm pretty sure the people who make Scrubs commissioned a report a couple of years ago on the effects of affirmative action in casting tv shows, and they discovered that casting a black guy in a supporting role in a prominently white cast doesn't entice black audiences to watch. Maybe they just don't do the affirmative action casting thing anymore and I notice it more on BSG because there were a couple of black guys in the cast of the original, yet there's none in the new one. Doesn't affect my enjoyment of the show, though it goes without saying that these things are all subjective anyway. There are people who will look you in the eye and tell you Smallville is quality drama - not out of maliciousness, it's just their opinion..
"I read a piece in the Sunday Times which, while trying to make out that tv SF remains a final frontier for women, reluctantly acknowledged BSG was unusually generous in its female roles."
The Sunday Times, you say? ahem...
Number Six - femme fatale who uses sex to manipulate.
Boomer - ditto, later replaced by another Boomer who just wanted to be a mum. Bless.
Donnie Darko's mum - aptly, a mumsy foil for daddy Adama.
Xena - see Number Six.
Starbuck - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue#.22Angsty.22_Sue
but like I say, it's all subjective - possibly I got the wrong impresion when Number Six started off the miniseries shagging some diplomat before being blown up by her own people. Still don't know why that happened, but it seemed to set the tone for me.
I should probably point out the men aren't much better in their portrayal. I'm still waiting for Apollo to get a character, and the show finishes next year.
"They also thought it notable that it had an Asian-American prominent."
Adama is played by an actor of Latin-American descent, though I'm not sure if I'm making your point or my own there. As for the physics, you can't use bullets in space, and ships launching missiles would be tossed around like ragdolls by the recoil, or torn apart by counterforces if they tried to stabilise in realtime with jets or thrusters. And everyone smokes on the spaceships, which isn't so much unrealistic because of air recycling and recirculation, and more unrealistic because they don't let you smoke in public RIGHT NOW - why would they let you smoke on a spaceship just because it's the future?
**GEEKERY WARNING: THE BELOW CONTAINS OVERLY-ANAL OBSERVATIONS ABOUT A MADE-UP SHOW WITH SPACESHIPS**
Someone on another forum also pointed out that things like CDs, CD players, pens, pencils and even paper and clipboards and spiral-bound notebooks with lines on the paper aren't likely to appear on other planets as they're the result of specific creative processes. I wonder does that go for relative concepts of time as well? Do they have the same measurements for minutes, hours and days as we do, for instance? Or seasons?
When you point out that the men aren't portrayed particularly differently from the women, aren't you then saying that the show is misanthropic?
By selecting only the negative traits attributed to women, and not those (equally, arguably) attributed to the men, aren't you the one being prejudiced? Have you placed yourself in the role of the knight in shining armour that must save the damsels in distress, thus reducing their worth by intimating that they require rescue?
I do wonder, given your list - what sort of traits your fictional woman is allowed to have in order to be an acceptable character. Plus, of course, you've provided a very one-sided list, which (for example) ignores the fact that Laura Roslin is the president of humanity, or that the weakest, most cowardly member of the cast is Gaius Baltar.
---
As for sci-fi realism. Come off it. You can use the same arguments to dismiss pretty much ALL television and movie sci-fi. It's hardly unique to BSG.
I did point out that the opening scene of the miniseries had me viewing the whole thing in a certain light, and that it was a subjective opinion and I was quite well aware of how I came about it in the opening moments of the show. Why did that character need to sex up that guy and then get blown up? Why not just shoot the spacestation and move on? I can't fathom the meaning of this scene beyond the need to explicitly establish that Cylons are crafty sexbots (which in the following series, they are), and once that's established, you can't really blame me for assuming the writers apply the same standards or thinking to other characters, be they male *or* female and then go looking for proof. Whatever else you can say about new BSG, the bar for criticism is set higher for it than it was for the original - am I going on about the portrayal of women in the 1978 version? Of course not - BSG circa 1978 is a heroic fantasy aimed at adolescent boys and it will forever be judged on that puerile level. New BSG, however, is being marketed as 'adult' drama worthy of evaluation as an allegorical commentary on contemporary issues, rather than simply dismissed as an adventure-romp, so I don't see why it shouldn't be judged on that level if that's what the producers actually want us to do.
I do take your point about it being misanthropic rather than misogynistic - I have googled this term and shall add it to my vocabulary forthwith. Are you a teacher, perchance? If so, you should be paid more!
Gaius Baltar is weak and cowardly, I'll admit - but he's had his moments where both the man and the hour has come, and he's probably the most interesting member of the cast (late season 3 developments aside). He's certainly *got* a character where you know why he's acting in a certain way or doing a certain thing - I still have no idea why Apollo was seeing a hooker, for instance, or why Tigh killed his wife, or why Apollo was all grumpy after he was out in space for a bit, or why Boomer's husband - a character so bland his name permanently eludes me - seems incapable of making a decision on his own despite being a high-ranking military officer. Some of these you can justify as being necessary for the story, but they just don't ring true as character moments.
Easily my favourite thing on tv, really addictive viewing. Definitely watch the mini-series first, reckon it really invests you in the characters and the rest of the show will be a lot more enjoyable for you.
Did anyone else benefit from HMV's slip up with their season 3 box set ad? On monday they misprinted the cost as £13 in the Metro so for the rest of the day anyone who mentioned the ad had to get it for that price(as opposed to the £40 it should have been). Huzzah!
Chiefly, it was the misanthropic/misogynistic point I was making. I just spent a long time making it, is all.
Why shouldn't Apollo be seeing a hooker? Anyway, his and Starbuck's self-destructive personality traits are due to their feelings of guilt and self-loathing over the (historical, and therefore not really a spoiler) death of his brother. Also, to complicate matters, they're in love with each other - and yet both feel that they can never successfully realise that love. You can argue that's all very trite if you wish, but you can't argue that there's no reason behind their behaviour.
Tigh killed his wife because it was his military duty, as she betrayed the rebel army. As leader, his only other choice was to stand down, and anyway, he knew that his second in command would kill her if he didn't.
Boomer's husband, callsign Helo, is a bit of a blank slate - I'll give you that.
There's no point mentioning his name. As soon as I navigate away from this page, it'll be forgotten.
SPOILERS BELOW (can't do tags off the top of me head)
I understand that much about Tigh supposedly needing to kill his wife, but I find the reasoning a bit off. She was passing information on in order to save the life of the ringleader of the rebellion - it might be hard to swallow for a great many people after the fact, but it's not indefensible. Given Tigh's character was one used to isolation even before the rebirth of the mutually-destructive relationship with his wife (and he was notoriously contrary bastard), and the colonists were just about to make an all-or-nothing escape attempt, it seems too much to suggest he wasn't the kind of person prepared to ride the river with his wife once her collaborating became public knowledge - to date, he'd already given up his career for her.
The suicide bombing was a weak bit, too. There was a suicide bombing, and everyone said it was a bad thing. Then they said no more about it. I was rather hoping they'd say a bit more about it - the 'family man who loses his family' angle seemed a bit too pat, but I can certainly understand why they didn't go into this in any depth.
"I was responding to your comment that it was focus-group led"
That was philtâ??s post, not mine, and you posted: "there's an odd absence of African-American actors for a show whose original iteration boasted a black character in 'the big three' and a black guy as second in command" *before* he mentioned focus groups.
"The Sunday Times, you say? ahem..."
Well, quite. It was a very poor article, and the only reason I mention it is because it was trying to make cheap and weak points about the show, for example: the actor who plays Starbuck find it tiring to be angry all the time; Mary McDonnell has to fight to change her lines sometimes -- none of which is exclusive to women actors -- but which the article was trying to say was typical of the raw deal women face in television science fiction. The point being that even they couldn't detect misogyny, despite their obvious agenda.
You haven't been able to give examples of misogyny either (pretty much all of the characters do both good and bad things in the show, male or female), although it seems from a later post that you are backpedalling away from that somewhat.
While I don't like to see them using Humvees, MP5s, Skorpion machine pistols etc it goes hand-in-hand with less-than-authentic physics in a TV show; I think we're meant to see them as analogues while simultaneously understanding there are budget constraints.
Let me get this strait. There are people here complaining about the space physics of BSG? BSG has the most awesome space battles of any sci-fi show ever. The Newtonian physics and physical ballistic weapons are a big part of that.
I mean, dudes.
the (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/the)
No it doesn't. The assault on Babylon 5 by Clark's forces in "Severed Dreams" set the base mark for TV SF battles. BG's battles simply mimic what B5 did 10 years ago. Just like everything else about Battlestar Galactica, someone did it before and did it better.
S P O I L E R S
::"I understand that much about Tigh supposedly needing to kill his wife,"
And yet in your previous post you said that you had literally "no idea" of his motivation. So, now you're saying you did realise his motivation but disagreed with it. There's a big fucking difference.
Why don't you make up your mind what you really think before you post. These moving goal posts are making my head spin.
philt, you're forgetting one important FACT:
"Babylon 5's a piece of shit."
or "Babylon 5's a big pile of shit"
You know I don't mean it! I never got into B-5, but one of my pals was a hardcore fan - very passionate about it. I think it must have been like Farscape was for me. Brilliantly long story arcs and a hardcore fanbase, but (after a while) a bit inaccessible for new viewers.
So, I never saw the battle scene you're talking about.
At least we both enjoyed Spaced.
::"As for the physics, you can't use bullets in space"
Tell that to the Russians. Their Salyut 3 military space station apparently destroyed a satellite using an onbaord aircraft cannon.
(Also: see "creative license".)
+At least we both enjoyed Spaced+
Quality programme. "Defending the fantasy genre with terminal intensity"
"Babylon 5's a piece of shit."
or "Babylon 5's a big pile of shit"You're both very very wrong. It's not the best, and it actually has not aged particularly well. But it's still an excellent series.
The Last 10 or 15 years have been pretty good for space based sci-fi shows.
Babylon 5
Space: Above and Beyond
Battlestar Galactica
Stargate SG-1
Firefly
Doctor WhoAnd various anime series (actually not as many spaced based sci-fi ones though. Ultimately you can't beat
Super Dimension Fortress Macross I guess.)
Link: Did I mention Macross kicks ass?
"Babylon 5's a piece of shit."
or "Babylon 5's a big pile of shit"
Adventurer, you've missed the Spaced reference.
This is what Simon Pegg's character says to his new boss to get sacked and go back to his old job.
Just to clarify I think B5 is the second best TV show I've ever seen. Edge of Darkness just shading it.
Spaced is fantastic. If you haven't seen it I unreservedly recommend it
"Space: Above and Beyond"
God, I can't believe someone else remembers that. :) How I loved it so......
"No it doesn't. The assault on Babylon 5 by Clark's forces in "Severed Dreams" set the base mark for TV SF battles."
It did indeed. None of this "Shields at 40%" rubbish, just fucking great spaceships manoeuvring round each like Elizabethan warships tryng to get into the best position for a broadside.
Absolutely fantastic.
Cheers
Jim
"And yet in your previous post you said that you had literally "no idea" of his motivation. So, now you're saying you did realise his motivation but disagreed with it. There's a big fucking difference. Why don't you make up your mind what you really think before you post. These moving goal posts are making my head spin."
Seriously, man - it's only a TV show. Calm down.
You're right, of course, as I pretty much moved the goalposts rather than just explain myself - I was watching the show so I know what Tigh's onscreen motivation was, but wasn't convinced to the point where I could say I knew why he did what he did, just like I know Apollo was seeing a hooker in order to gratify himself sexually in exchange for monetary recompense - but I don't know why that was happening in the context of the (admittedly slight) character. Unless I'm convinced of motivation, I can't really say after the fact that I know why a character acts in the way they do - perhaps I should have gone into more depth and explained as much in my earlier post, so sorry if it's wound you up.
"That was philt�s post, not mine,"
Whoopsy daisy - sorry, Eldrich. And I was indeed backpeddling like a motherfucker - because - as above - I admit my initial words were poorly-chosen and my post badly worded (I'm famous as the only guy on the internet who doesn't think things through before posting on a forum). 'Misogynistic' was a step too far on my part - misanthropy ('chauvinism' at a push) probably being closer to the mark, and even then, only really applicable in this context because BSG claims a higher standard than other sci-fi shows. I wouldn't, for instance, lay the same claims at the feet of Bikini Cyborg 5 with a straight face.
As for the 'realism' thing, I did say they were geeky things to be pointing out - in upper-case lettering, no less. I'm vaguely curious how they have a collective idea of days and hours and stuff across different planets, but it won't keep me up nights, and it's probably something like they got together in a Battlestar Galactica version of the EU and standardised everything after lengthy debates. I don't really want to watch a tv show about that, though. One Children Of Dune was enough.
And because someone WILL - don't bother checking Amazon or IMDB, because Bikini Cyborg 5 isn't a real film.
Has any of this had any influence on you DXB?
It's a bit late now, but can we all watch the spoilers, even the teensy tiny ones? Not that I'll be touching the thread from here on till I watch Season 3, but even so...
Bikini Cyborg 5 isn't a real film.
Isn't it the new Uwe Boll film then. ;)
No harm done. You made what I thought were spurious, politically correct & insubstantial points which you have â?? to your credit - cheerfully admitted to be hollow. I respect that.
I second the "Severed Dreams" episode as the best space battle yet filmed. Astonishingly visceral, still impressive & packing an emotional wallop 11 years later.
and those too from Deep Space Nine, when they battle to re-take the Deep Space Nine station, and guess what? many ships here dont used the shields!!! how weird!
Link: Battle to re-take DS9
Oh god, I'm about to shamelessly geek out here, so normal people may leave the thread - the shields on the ships in DS9 were supposed to be ineffective against Dominion - then later Breen - weaponry, which I suppose was an effort by producers to downsize Starfleet and make the Dominion a credible threat against a centuries-old military force. The spacefights were good fun, though, even if they did cop out a bit by shamelessly reusing quite a lot of footage in the final episode - even some stuff from the movies- but I imagine they needed to have as many whizzes and bangs as possible by that point.
Stargate has had some decent space-borne carnage. The season 9 finale was good.
Stargate season 9 finale was really good
Link: Stargate season 9 finale
"None of this "Shields at 40%" rubbish, just fucking great spaceships manoeuvring round each like Elizabethan warships tryng to get into the best position for a broadside."
While lots of B5 was hard to swallow, when it was good it was unmatched. No Surrender, No Retreat is my absolute high watermark for edge-of-the-seat TV space battles, the ships looked and felt solid, the tragedy dial was set to 11, the motivations of all the characters were crystal clear, anything could happen... what a payoff for four years of build-up. And then there was Season 5. Ah well.
::"No Surrender, No Retreat"
I notice from the clip provided above that one side retreats.
That said, show me a better example of dramatic tension in TV SF than BSG's opener "33".
oh shite! i so so totally forgot about BSG "33"! That was so brilliant episode!!! Have to watch it again!!!
Battle to re-take DS9
You've got the entire vastness of space to maneuver in, but instead you pack your entire fleet in like sardines so they can't maneuver. Great strategy guys.
A brand new DVD available in a charity shop.
Blimey.. good find D30B!!
The DS9 thing was one group of ships moving to a specific point in space (to retake DS9) from another point in space to a tight deadline - intercepting them wasn't going to be difficult.
Pilot mini and first eleven proper episodes down, money well spent.
Some, Paul. A little. What I could read whilst avoiding spoilage.
Nicks been off sick for the first three days of the week. We finished one on Saturday and are two eps into series three now.
And it's great. It's also nice to have something we can watch together that the other one isn't tolerating. I'm never going to be as keen as Sex and the City and Ugly Betty as she is and for some reason she doesn't like Antiques Roadshow or Last of the Summer Wine.
Sadly my internettery has spoiled part of the three resolution by revealing two of the hidden Cylons. Fucker-pokery.