I am the Sci-Fi channel's dream viewer in that I will watch pretty much anything that they can chum the waters with - and we ARE talking about some programming with more in common with fermented fish guts than with anything that could reasonably be called drama. But I still watch. During the week, throughout the day, it's the same 10-11 episodes of the same 5-8 canceled TV series, over and over again - FOR YEARS! (I believe that I have seen enough "Tru Calling" to recite the dialog along with the actors, the same way we used to at midnight showings of "Rocky Horror.) During the week, prime time, we get maybe one new episode of a current show, ramped up to by old episodes of the same show. Then comes the weekend. Cobras, boas, anacondas, copperheads, (Apparently snakes are easy to do CGI.) giant rapacious sharks, carnivorous locusts, dragons, cursed angels...all paraded past us in indifferently written, cheaply produced fashion. But I still watch, and for the most part, enjoy. I enjoy because I think that most of us who started watching televised science fiction (When there were really only three channels, when the creatures were usually enlarged garden denizens, large bug-like sculptures, or just some guy wearing something that looked like one of your auntie's failed quilting projects, and when any sci-fi tended to be broadcast long after our parents had been safely tucked into bed and Johnny Carson had signed off.) learned early on that a little artistic honesty and a sense of humor are far more important than overly dramatic posturing to any show's success as entertainment. Most of Skiffy's creature-feature programs are undeniably bad science fiction, and not worth a second look or thought, but succeed nonetheless as entertainment, which is something that they share with undeniably good science fiction like "Babylon 5". What they also share with "Babylon 5" is that they are all better than "Battlestar Galactica".

When I heard that they were "re-imagining" "Battlestar Galactica", I was giddy with the anticipation. The original show had been one of my favorites, but I have always felt that it never achieved its full potential. The premise was an excellent combination of the Biblical Exodus with a holocaust allegory and there was access to some good post "Star Wars" special effects, along with the potential for some good story lines as the rag tag fleet made its way to Earth, kicking some Cylon butt along the way. In the end, while the premise remained solid, the story lines faltered and became a bit campy (space angels?), and a limited effects budget gave us the same shot of the Cylon fighters doing their trademarked twist and dive maneuver over and over again. The show was canceled, which was bad enough for its scifi-starved fans, but to add insult to injury, was followed up with the abysmal "Galactica 1980" which retained none of the original vision, but the worst of the campiness.

I watched the obligatory "making of" promo for the new series and was very impressed. I didn't really see the need for trans-gendering the Boomer and Starbuck characters, but what the frack? After all, we're "re-imagining" here, aren't we? Then came the miniseries and I took heart. Same great premise as the original with better special effects. So the characters are unnecessarily dark, most of the dialog is delivered at a mumble, and the camera work looks like it's being done by the guy who DIDN"T get the "Blair Witch Project" job. "Re-imagining", right? Then came the series. What a hulking, pretentious, brooding load of festering felgercarb! I went through all of the stages of dying before the third season ended, lingering a little longer at "anger" and "denial" than I think I will when the time actually does come. "Re-imagining", my ass! The only thing that has been re-imagined here is what might go into making a decent science fiction show.

1. If you are only going to produce a limited number of episodes per season, with wide time gaps between those seasons, you might "re-imagine" something actually happening during the course of those episodes. The main story line moves way too slowly, and there are only just so many times that Starbuck can get drunk and beat up Col. Tigh in order to distract from the fact that nothing much has changed in the story line.

2. "Re-imagine" that at least one of your characters is likable. Yes, it's true that characters with flaws tend to be more interesting, but that does not mean that your characters should consist only of their flaws. There should be at least one character that the average viewer might want to invite over to dinner or share a beer with. As it stands, the only one of these people I would even allow in my house would be #6, and then only because I am intrigued by that glowy thing she does with her spine during intercourse.

3. "Re-imagine" that it's OK for your villains to be just that. Indeed, it would be refreshing to see ANY show do that for a change. The "Oh Gosh, they're really just like us, after all!" approach to villain building is today just as trite as were the baby-eating Nazis of the 40's and 50's. Make them as complicated as you want, but keep the venom, and by the Lords of Kobol, make sure that they are just a little less likable than your protagonists!

4. "Re-imagine" that your audience wants to give a frack. As it stands now, I hate these drunken, whiny, morose sons of bitches. I don't even want them escape the Cylon menace. In fact it's obvious that Earth would be far better off if we never meet our dysfunctional space cousins.

Edward James Olmos has said that the series' finale will be "brutal" (Duh!). I can only hope that it is also truly final.