BSG finale [Combined thread] (SPOILERS)

[SouthtownKid]

In the Baltar/Cavil exchange, Baltar represents the writers and Cavil represents angry nerds. Cavil is obsessed with the how's and why's, and Baltar is telling him to get over it already because it just doesn't matter what the explanation is.

Hopefully, the angry nerds then say, "Frak it," the way Cavil did.

 

[Snuh]

Finale was cool for the most part but...

Wth is up with Starbuck?

1. why was she dead and back? Was this ever explained?

2. Why did she go poof?

 

[payment_due]

Finale was cool for the most part but...

Wth is up with Starbuck?

1. why was she dead and back? Was this ever explained?

2. Why did she go poof?

The discussion in this thread has been talking about that. Starbuck, Head Gaius and Head Six were 'agents' of the force calling the shots. Call it God, call it a SuperUser, whatever.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

What you call visions, I call transmissions or implanted memories. Some humans had them too, like Roslyn. I'm not convinced that the humans in the show were any less Cylon than the Cylons they created. The endless cycle always has a point where humans and Cylons end up coming together and having kids, just like it did in this case. If so, those kids have Cylon blood, and therefore the ability to carry ancient memories passed down by their parents and receive transmissions from "God".

Now, you assume what they call "God" is somehow spiritual. Note the line from "ghost" (no) Baltar at the very end when "ghost" Caprica refers to "God":

"It hates that name."

It? You think a spiritual God in the classical sense would be referred to by its subjects as "it"?

Your interpretation is narrow. It's apparent that there's some type of force at work here, but in no way is it confirmed to be spiritual, and the finale leaves enough unresolved to let people lean either way. In the Baltar/Cavil exchange, Baltar represents the writers and Cavil represents angry nerds. Cavil is obsessed with the how's and why's, and Baltar is telling him to get over it already because it just doesn't matter what the explanation is.

Contrary to what you've stated, there was no explanation either way. That's why it's so brilliant, and that's why it couldn't have ended better.

I'm imagining a show like The Prisoner being broadcast today and a bunch of angsty nerds calling the last episode bullshit because they don't get it.

I don't think my interpretation is narrow at all. Here's the thing: we're shown what can only be supernatural versions of Baltar and Caprica. They talk about god, straight up, with no room for reinterpretation.

There is no other explaination given for why people have visions, why Starbuck knew what she knew, nothing. So, because I'm really only given one viable answer, that's the one I'm going to assume is correct.

This wasn't like the end of the Sopranos where you could argue whether (spoiler ahead, natch) Tony gets shot or not after the fade to black. The only thing we're given here is that god did it, and that's it.

At no point is there any other viable explaination for anything. Now, now that I'm realizing this now, I'm thinking that I should have been a lot less surprised by the ending, but there it is.

I really don't think there's any room for alternate theories here. The series ended saying "Tecnology bad, god good," more or less. And I think it was utterly awful on pretty much every level. Not much more to it than that.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

I never realized your total revulsion to GOD all this time Ninny, but to each their own I guess. As for the VOTOMS connection, I'm not saying they ripped off the whole series, but there were more than a few similarities. I'm assuming you've never watched the original 52 episode AT: VOTOMS tv series right? Well if not ***SPOILERS For that show after this***

...then you'll be happy to know that the protagonist Chirico Cuvie turns on everyone who's been his friend, shoots at his lover (a "Perfect Soldier" that was a rip off of a *Replicant*) and climbs the tower within Wiseman and accepts his position of the next step in evolution of the "Supreme Survivor" status that was 3,000 years of natural selection in a universe riddled by strife and intergalactic war, all orchestrated by Wiseman... and "accepts" Wiseman's gift to become a living, walking GOD in the Astragius Galaxy, since Wiseman is the collective mind of thousands of Overmen and the knowledge of known time and space but does not have a body, THEN KILLS GOD! Yeah you read that right.

Chirico lies on this techno slab/bed, about to be injected with some Sirit/technological nanobots full of power and supreme intellect and just as he's about to be injected, uses a Bauhauser Armor Magnum to shoot what is revered as GOD, with a .30mm armor piercing anti AT gun at GOD's only vulnerable moment. With Both sides of a galactic federation who never knew GOD but wanted to know him, they feel cheated, and the Secret Society who was doing the bidding of Wiseman is enraged. Chirico finds his lover, whom he was trying to protect and they put themselves into Cryogenic sleep to float in space forever and not be "used" by anyone. "He literally makes the entire universe a much more volatile place after he says" Not Even GOD controls me! and killed GOD.

This leads to the 5-Part 1994 OVA series "The Heretic Saint" more
commonly known as The Shinning Heresy where the entire galaxy
is ruled by what is basically the Catholic Church and Chirico is seen as
"the devil" for what he did. His cold coffin is found and he's revived by
The Church of Marteal, and they hold Fyana hostage, pissed he
wars with this new church some 45 years later, AND KILLS THE POPE
while storming the equivalent of the Vatican in a DANGERDOG A.T. laying
everything and everyone to waste. ***This is the main reason the 1994
series never got released officially in the USA or anywhere else outside of
Japan I'm sure. The Catholics would be in an uproar.

Do you feel better now? There's someone out there who shares your
sentiment and decided to use a show to kill the concept of GOD.

Damn man, that series sounds pretty cool. Maybe I'll check it out sometime.

Anyways, I guess I was a bit hasty going off about god and whatnot. I was just a bit pissed off by the whole thing — it's pretty much my fault for not seeing it coming, but the whole god ending felt force fed to me, that's all.

I don't believe in god. But I hardly find the notion repulsive (a good friend of mine is a Catholic and everything ).

 

[thirdkind]

Hopefully, the angry nerds then say, "Frak it," the way Cavil did.

Angry nerds are like Vader. They thrive on the hate, allowing it to ruin any enjoyment they might experience and doing their best to pass it along to others so it's ruined for them too.

I really don't think there's any room for alternate theories here. The series ended saying "Tecnology bad, god good," more or less. And I think it was utterly awful on pretty much every level. Not much more to it than that.

There's a whole thread full of people here who seem to have no problem accepting alternate theories, and if this statement is how you sum up the finale and the series, your interpretation is most definitely flat. As in "flat Earth" flat.

 

[SouthtownKid]

Here are a few things we know by the end of the series:

- There is an intelligence -- a sentience -- trying to guide the path of the humans and Cylons.

- The cycle of rebirth leading to war and disaster has been repeated over and over. Since in every cycle, the sentience is trying to lead humans and Cylons away from this disaster -- unsuccessfully -- it is not unsafe to assume that the sentience might not be omnipotent.

- The sentience hates being called "god".

It's also worth pointing out that at no point during the course of the series is it ever suggested to us one way or the other that this sentience had anything at all to do with the creation of the universe.


Nor is this really a case of "religion versus science." Nowhere do we see an example of their existing science being proven untrue. There is no reason to assume the sentience or its emissaries (or whatever you want to call them) do not exist due to and abide by the scientific laws of the universe, regardless of whether humans at that point are aware of those laws.

Not being aware of the scientific laws that govern something's existence do not make that thing "supernatural". They maybe make the thing seem "supernatural" to the small-minded, but that's it. All it does for everyone else is make them ask questions. Think of all the things the human race was not aware of only a century ago. The spectra we not only couldn't see in, but were beyond our imagination. The concept of the atom was only able to be proven in the early 20th century, and now look at all we know about them. Our first look at the structure of DNA didn't come along until the 1930s. Now we can clone things or identify people by a loose strand of hair.

None of those things were "supernatural" just because we didn't understand them a century ago. Nor are any of the things we will discover in the next 100, 1000 or 10000 years. They just operate according to scientific principles of which we are not yet aware.

 

[Snuh]

What I find interesting in the last scene is that they imply that modern human mitochondrial DNA is Cylon. Also, would that mean that Asian people have more Cylon DNA in general, being as Hera's mother, Athena is I guess, the Cylon equivalent of Asian?

 

[HeartlessNinny]

Here are a few things we know by the end of the series:

- There is an intelligence -- a sentience -- trying to guide the path of the humans and Cylons.

- The cycle of rebirth leading to war and disaster has been repeated over and over. Since in every cycle, the sentience is trying to lead humans and Cylons away from this disaster -- unsuccessfully -- it is not unsafe to assume that the sentience might not be omnipotent.

- The sentience hates being called "god".

It's also worth pointing out that at no point during the course of the series is it ever suggested to us one way or the other that this sentience had anything at all to do with the creation of the universe.


Nor is this really a case of "religion versus science." Nowhere do we see an example of their existing science being proven untrue. There is no reason to assume the sentience or its emissaries (or whatever you want to call them) do not exist due to and abide by the scientific laws of the universe, regardless of whether humans at that point are aware of those laws.

Not being aware of the scientific laws that govern something's existence do not make that thing "supernatural". They maybe make the thing seem "supernatural" to the small-minded, but that's it. All it does for everyone else is make them ask questions. Think of all the things the human race was not aware of only a century ago. The spectra we not only couldn't see in, but were beyond our imagination. The concept of the atom was only able to be proven in the early 20th century, and now look at all we know about them. Our first look at the structure of DNA didn't come along until the 1930s. Now we can clone things or identify people by a loose strand of hair.

None of those things were "supernatural" just because we didn't understand them a century ago. Nor are any of the things we will discover in the next 100, 1000 or 10000 years. They just operate according to scientific principles of which we are not yet aware.

I don't think this is an issue of religion versus science either. I just think it's an unsatisfying way to end an otherwise fascinating series.

There's a whole thread full of people here who seem to have no problem accepting alternate theories, and if this statement is how you sum up the finale and the series, your interpretation is most definitely flat. As in "flat Earth" flat.

I don't begrudge you coming up with whatever you like to explain the end of the series. That's you perogative. But I think you're dead wrong, and once again, I'll say why: there is absolutely no evidence given for any other alternative theories. The only explanation we're given is god. Whatever the nature of that god is, well, fine, we can debate that.

But that entity exists in no uncertain terms in this series, and it's had a hand in controlling events. That's not up for debate as far as I'm concerned. You can call me small minded all you like, but there's not one whit of evidence to prove another theory. If you can come up with one single thing that was within the series -- and I'm not talking something you just made up here -- then fine. But I don't think it exists.

 

[SouthtownKid]

What I find interesting in the last scene is that they imply that modern human mitochondrial DNA is Cylon. Also, would that mean that Asian people have more Cylon DNA in general, being as Hera's mother, Athena is I guess, the Cylon equivalent of Asian?

There were obviously also "Asian" humans living in the colonies, otherwise Boomer wouldn't have blended in very well.

There's also nothing in the finale to suggest there aren't already early humans living in Asia on the new Earth. We only see one area of the planet in the episode. And the Chief says he found an island to retire to with no people. The fact he specifies the lack of people suggests there are people wandering around the planet other places.

 

[thirdkind]

But that entity exists in no uncertain terms in this series, and it's had a hand in controlling events. That's not up for debate as far as I'm concerned.

I don't debate that either. The question is whether this entity is a spiritual "God" or, as STK describes, a sentience that is not omnipotent and must abide by the same laws of the universe as the rest of us.

Baltar describes "God" as a "force of nature". That's probably the best description we could have. The BSG "God" is a product of the universe, not its creator. That being true, there's nothing spiritual about this being. Its scientific understanding is simply greater than that of humans or Cylons.

I'd write more, but STK already nailed it.

 

[SouthtownKid]

Well, I'm not necessarily suggesting there is no spiritual aspect to the sentience. Because to my thinking, there's nothing preventing what we think of as "spiritual" from relating to some branch of science we aren't yet aware of, the same way we weren't aware of sub-atomic particles not long ago.

Go back a thousand years, and the ability to harness the power of the atom, or the Sun, or a thousand other things we take for granted today, couldn't be thought of as anything other than "supernatural". But obviously, those things aren't and never were. I don't think it's a stretch to assume that 1000 years from now, there will be many more things and ideas the people of the future will take for granted that aren't just improved versions of things we have today, but are concepts completely beyond our imagination now. New ways of thinking, new ways of traveling, new ways of transmitting energy, etc., etc. New spectra and maybe even new dimensions to explore.

Gah, people complaining about the supernatural or the spiritual really drive me nuts. I'm not asking anyone to believe in stupid ghost stories or to follow organized religion. But the people who are so sure there is nothing beyond what we humans can perceive RIGHT NOW -- at this particular moment in history -- sound as dumb to me as an ancient mariner who is absolutely positive the world is flat and drops off at the horizon if you sail your ship too far out. I know I'm repeating myself, but look at all the scientific things we accept and understand today that were utterly beyond human perception such a short time ago. I can't understand what it is about human ego that makes us think we are any real degree closer to understanding everything today than we were 100 or even 1000 years ago. You read about people living in the late 1800s or earlier, and clearly, many of them felt the same way -- that they were sooo enlightened. And they were a pack of idiots compared to us. Why can't we accept we're still idiots?

 

[thirdkind]

For the sake of argument, I think it's safe to assume that the typical definition of a "spiritual" being, and the one being referenced in the BSG religion vs. science debate, is one that is not bound by the laws of the universe. It assumes there's this realm that is beyond the grasp of science, something you can't achieve through the acquisition of knowledge. This is the land where the classic definition of "God" exists. If you asked a true Christian whether they could ever achieve God status if they learned enough and had enough technology, they would say firmly, "No. Never." God, in that sense, is beyond understanding. God just is.

If you alter that God definition to include evolved species with high intelligence, then Q from Star Trek is a god. I certainly don't consider him one, though.

Since the BSG God seems to be one of advanced intelligence and not one of supernatural powers, I find it frustrating that nerds are so up in arms about it all. The BSG finale is NOT a win for religion, far from it.

 

[SouthtownKid]

For the sake of argument, I think it's safe to assume that the typical definition of a "spiritual" being, and the one being referenced in the BSG religion vs. science debate, is one that is not bound by the laws of the universe. It assumes there's this realm that is beyond the grasp of science, something you can't achieve through the acquisition of knowledge. This is the land where the classic definition of "God" exists. If you asked a true Christian whether they could ever achieve God status if they learned enough and had enough technology, they would say firmly, "No. Never." God, in that sense, is beyond understanding. God just is.

I don't know that I ever thought that way. I haven't been to church outside of weddings or the occasional funeral since I was around 12 or so, but even as a little kid being taken to Sunday School, it always seemed natural to me to figure God had created the laws of science (the observable and the not yet observed), so why wouldn't he have used them to create the Earth, life, etc.? I don't think I ever saw God as being in opposition to science, as much as being the ultimate expression of it.

As far as "true" Christians and whatnot, you're getting into organized religion, which is often (Vatican, I'm looking at you) a lot more about manipulating the masses for political power than it ever was about exploring spiritual matters. And the big organized religions tend to be well-known as information misers going back as far as history records.

But as far as things that are provable or at least theorized today, we now have the Big Bang (another thing we have only gotten as recently as the early 20th century -- it really makes you wonder what people had been thinking before that). Scientists have been doing a good job trying to fill in gaps of the theory with observable evidence, and generally speaking, from what very little I know about it, the Big Bang sounds like a pretty good guess to me. But what caused the bang? You go back far enough and you have the primordial elements, or chemicals, or matter and anti-matter or whatever that induced the bang, and that's great. But you go back far enough, and there has to be some point at which the elements existed, and before which, didn't. Where did they come from? What force or phenomenon -- as yet unknown -- created them? Was the force sentient? If it was, is it still around? Was the creation of the universe purposeful or an accident?

And this is all before we get to the kind of existential questions like, are you all characters in a dream I'm having, or am I a character in a dream of one of you? Is our entire universe a sub-atomic particle in a single cell organism in a petri dish being observed by a scientist living in an infinitely larger universe outside the dish?

I think it's better to be asking questions, no matter how ridiculous they sound, rather than being absolutely sure that no, there is absolutely nothing at work in the universe beyond what the human race is able to observe at this moment, right now.

 

[thirdkind]

I'm not debating anything you're saying. What I'm saying is that there's a lot more going into your definition of "God" than the one being tossed around here and in BSG.

Yes, God may have created the universe and its laws, but the point is that God--again, the classical definition--is not bound by those same laws.

I know exactly where you're coming from because I also stopped going to church at 13 when I was old enough to decide that I didn't have to go anymore. I walk around every day staring at people in their cars, talking on their phones, yammering about whatever, knowing that they don't have any concept as to how clueless and insignificant they really are.

Again, I think your definition of "God" isn't quite in line with the storytelling device that is "God" in BSG.

 

[SouthtownKid]

Again, I think your definition of "God" isn't quite in line with the storytelling device that is "God" in BSG.

Possibly not. As far as BSG goes, I'm just saying I don't think anything affirms or denies a spiritual aspect, or that any "god" in the show is bound to classical definitions.

 

[thirdkind]

As far as BSG goes, I'm just saying I don't think anything affirms or denies a spiritual aspect, or that any "god" in the show is bound to classical definitions.

Exactly what I'm saying, which is why all the nerd rage is so silly. It's ambiguous, despite claims to the contrary.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

Exactly what I'm saying, which is why all the nerd rage is so silly. It's ambiguous, despite claims to the contrary.

Normally I find nerd rage silly too, but in this case, I think it's a bit justified. Now, before I go on, let me just say that I don't really disagree with you and STK on the principle of all this. They certainly don't try and tell us just what this 'god' is supposed to be.

But in the face of no evidence whatsoever except that Baltar goes on about angels and whatnot, and the fact that this god clearly is trying to help the Colonists in some way... Well, you have to admit that it bears some resemblance to the Judeo-Christian god, at least in concept.

My point is I don't really have much reason to speculate about what this god is about. Hell, they call it "God," straight up, presumably with a capital 'g'. When you start throwing that kind of language around, it's only natural that people start thinking about the Judeo-Christian god.

And at any rate, to me, this is all moot. I just thought the whole 'god did it' finale was indeed a cop-out. It was an unsatisfying ending. To me it was like a giant (literal) deus ex machina came along and fixed everything. It didn't feel like the humans and Cylons were the ones who earned the victory, because Earth was revealed to Starbuck by god. Bleh. If that hadn't have happened, they would have been fucked. If god hadn't intervened, they never would have made it past the first season. I just find that to be stupid.

I don't think this is an issue of science versus religion at all. I just thought it was an incredibly stupid way to end an otherwise magnificent series. Nothing more.

(P.S. @ STK: I don't think people from the past were in any way 'stupid.' At the most, you could say they were more ignorant than us. It's something of a modern egotism to assume we're smarter than our ancestors, or even that our descendants will be smarter than us.)

 

[SouthtownKid]

My point is I don't really have much reason to speculate about what this god is about. Hell, they call it "God," straight up, presumably with a capital 'g'. When you start throwing that kind of language around, it's only natural that people start thinking about the Judeo-Christian god.

Even if that being, whatever it is, doesn't like to be called "god"?

(P.S. @ STK: I don't think people from the past were in any way 'stupid.' At the most, you could say they were more ignorant than us.

Yeah, I tend to use 'stupid' and 'ignorant' interchangeably. Maybe I shouldn't, but hopefully you know what I mean.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

Even if that being, whatever it is, doesn't like to be called "god"?

I'm not sure what difference that's supposed to make. Whatever the BSG's god's opinion on itself is, the fact remains that it is for all intents and purposes an architect of humanity's (and the Cylons') fate. That's the notion I have a problem with.

Yeah, I tend to use 'stupid' and 'ignorant' interchangeably. Maybe I shouldn't, but hopefully you know what I mean.

Fair enough.

 

[SouthtownKid]

I'm not sure what difference that's supposed to make. Whatever the BSG's god's opinion on itself is, the fact remains that it is for all intents and purposes an architect of humanity's (and the Cylons') fate.

Yeah, but that's it right there: "an" architect, not "the" architect. Even then, more accurate would be "attempted architect," since there were apparently numerous botched tries.

 

[Mike Shagohod]

And this is all before we get to the kind of existential questions like, are you all characters in a dream I'm having, or am I a character in a dream of one of you? Is our entire universe a sub-atomic particle in a single cell organism in a petri dish being observed by a scientist living in an infinitely larger universe outside the dish?

MAN, you just brought up the point of WOLF 359 (1964) from the second season of "The Outer Limits" here. Basically this is exactly what is happening, except a human scientist recreates an alien world in lab here on Earth, but things go radically wrong for the observer as a force/power/sentient being evolves into something unknown. Gotta love the closing narration to:

***There is a theory that Earth and sun and galaxy and all the known universes are only a dust mote on some policeman's uniform in some gigantic super-world. Couldn't we be under some super-microscope, right now?***

As for the whole simulation thing, well it also brings to mind "The Outer Limits" in Season One (I own both DVD sets, fucking love this show) called NIGHTMARE! (1963). That one is more of an observation but lends itself to the whole "are we in a simulation?" question raised in BSG as well.

 

[SouthtownKid]

Obama Depressed, Distant Since BSG Finale

 

[HeartlessNinny]

Obama Depressed, Distant Since BSG Finale

(P.S. Why are Onion articles so long? Usually the headline is the punchline, so having a 500 word article attached seems like a waste of time. Who reads every word all the time? Not me.)