Related Sections: Interviews Movies News Syfy Channel
SDCC: Olmos on why The Plan leads to Blade Runner
Battlestar Galactica: The Plan director/star Edward James Olmos said that the franchise is a precursor and companion to the classic sci-fi movie Blade Runner, in which Olmos memorably played a role as Gaff, the multilingual police detective. The 1982 Ridley Scott movie featured a similar theme of artificial humans, called replicants; indeed, Battlestar co-opted one of the film's derisive terms for the humanoids: skinjobs, which Battlestar's Colonials used to refer to Cylons.
"Blade Runner has been known as one of the best, if not the best science fiction film ever created," Olmos told reporters at Comic-Con in San Diego on Saturday. "And I think that once we realized that, once the show was open, and I sat down and I realized that the very final moments of what Battlestar was all about, this had all happened before, and it was going to happen again, that led right into Blade Runner, like a glove."
Of course, Olmos said, "Neither Ron [Moore] nor David [Eick] will concede to it," referring to the co-creators of the re-imagined Battlestar, which was based on the 1970s TV series. "You can ask them, ... and they will not understand it. They'll say, 'Well, yeah, you can look at it that way.' They don't get it. They don't get that, when we came on board, that we wanted to walk into that world," Olmos said. "That's exactly what I told them. I want to walk into the world of Blade Runner. ... Nobody ever walked in there. So let's walk in there and understand the humanity for what it was. It was a brilliant piece of work, Blade Runner, and yet it was too intense. Nobody could even come close to it. Nobody even tried. So when we did try, and we succeeded, now you've laid down."
Olmos is no shrinking flower when it comes to expressing his opinion about things, and he is passionate about the show and its mythology. And he says that the upcoming Syfy prequel series Caprica will carry on the themes.
"That's what's great about Caprica," Olmos said. "Because Caprica succeeds it. Eventually, like Harry Potter, like the great writings of, you know, even Shakespeare. How they connect in their own way, ... even though they're distinct plays, and they're all different, ... you can read them all in a row, and you can really start to understand the humanity that he's looking at all the time. This is the same thing. Caprica, even if it lasts just one season or half a season or for seven years or for 10 years, you'll be able to lay it down, watch it and then watch all of Battlestar, and it will lead you right in to the Blade Runner. And you're going to sit there and go, 'Holy mackerel.'"
By Paul at 3:49 PM ON 07/26/09
EJO should just be happy to have been in two SF fan favorites. His idea about Blade Runner is silly.
By Bruce at 4:06 PM ON 07/26/09
His comment about Blade Runner isn't silly. He's just saying that Battlestar was informed by Blade Runner, explored many of the same themes, and the events that ultimately led to the creation of the Cylons by the Five exactly parallel what happened in the Blade Runner universe. Could BSG be the precursor to Blade Runner? Sure. Why not?
The thing I find so amazing about Blade Runner is that of all the movies made from books, it is practically the only one that is superior to its source material. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? was too idiosyncratic to have the same punch that the movie does. Already by the early Eighties Dick's late-Sixties novel seemed dated. On the other hand, the movie, almost thirty years later, stands up quite well.
I'd have to agree with Olmos' conclusion that Blade Runner is the best SF movie of all time.
By TVDIVA at 5:26 PM ON 07/26/09
I can see a link between BSG and Blade Runner as Olmos pointed out, but this is just his opinion and something for us to think about. To try and force others to see the same thing - especially Ron Moore is a little pushy. Having said that, I salute Olmos in spreaking his mind on his own philosophy of things.
By Melora at 5:34 PM ON 07/26/09
I don't think Olmos' comment about Galactica and Blade Runner is silly. He's not actually saying that Galactica is an official prequel in any way to Blade Runner, he's just saying that they share the same themes which (unofficially) seem to dovetail. When you see the end of Galactica when Earth humans are developing robots, and then look at Blade Runner where Earth humans in the 21st century have gone a step further and created robots that are sentient and are turning on their creators, Galactica's "all of this has happened before..." mantra begins to ring true. Even if it is in an unofficial way.
I don't agree Blade Runner is the best sci-fi film ever made (the visuals are great, but the script is a complete mess). I do think its ONE of the best ever made though.
By S.W. at 5:50 PM ON 07/26/09
Not only can I see a link between BSG and Blade Runner, but the Matrix as well. Tying the so-called "Second Renaissance" into the mythos wouldn't be an impossibility. In fact it would add an incredible sense of irony to the mix, for it would show that, despite the machines wanting peace, we continued to treat them as nothing more than heartless tools of labor, thus once more enabling the cycle of genocide to continue between the two races.
I could go on, although my tired brain is currently limiting my ability to write, so I will end it here saying that I agree with the words of TVDIVA and Bruce regarding Olmos' ability to speak his mind. I never really gave him much thought until I watched him in the role of Adama in BSG, and since then he has garnered an incredible respect from me; both as an actor, and as a human being. To quote TVDIVA "...I salute Olmos..."
By spaceage whizkid at 6:34 PM ON 07/26/09
so do we all... mostly.
By BlahBlah44 at 8:06 PM ON 07/26/09
Battle Star is total trash as envisioned by Ron Moore (Bore) and
Olmos. Hey Olmos, Battle Star is total crap, don't waste your
time even thinking about trying to compare that piece of dog crap
called Battle Rap (Star) to Blade Runner which is LIGHT YEARS
away from your show in quality and tone. I wish they would
run out of money so that the new instalment would not be shown.
By Muldfeld at 9:30 PM ON 07/26/09
I love Olmos. The guy is so amazingly gutsy in his willingness to be edgy. I guess he's saying that to imagine that Blade Runner comes after BSG is to say that the choice is not up in the air -- and, therefore, potentially hopeful -- because humans seem to have repeated the cycle of creating artificial intelligence in Blade Runner. So, there's a more depressing note to that view.
I haven't seen Blade Runner in over a decade and didn't get it the first time. I should rent it some time. I don't remember it being anywhere near as good as BSG, though.
By IsoTek at 11:19 PM ON 07/26/09
Well, I consider it silly but in a different vein. Olmos is trying to mesh the two into a blended narrative, as if it were ordained that way. That is silly, because anyone that knows "Blade Runner" knows about the original source material it comes from, and Battlestar could never attempt to be anywhere near as masterful. To those like Muldfeld that are overly enamored with BSG I suggest you read "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep" and ignore Bruce's comments too. That is the classic and the ground breaker here. Blade Runner though a favorite was nothing but a moving picture for the literary impared. An opiate for the masses to lazy to really read and digest the words of Dick on the printed page. The two stories share similar plots and some characters but the heart and soul of the two are completely different. To compare the BSG to Blade Runner is like saying "BSG is a companion piece to 2001 A Space Odyssey because you know, they take place in space with space ships and oh yeah... They involve Earth and AI's". Come on now, let's not throw ourselves over the cliff here hoping to find the imperial logic waiting for us at the bottom. The original BSG allowed us to enjoy the idea that the enemy wasn't a tired rehash of "Frankenstein's" monster. The demonic hellion of our bastard scienctific leanings and detached ethics. It alowed us to believe that somehow through mythology and ephemera that we of Earth were connected to Spaceborne relatives lightyears away and that a destiny of need was taking place. Moore once again dipped into the shallow end of scifi memes and threw a classic into the cesspool of banality when he made the Cylons yet another trite and jaded human creation that woud inevitably destroy its creator. Do Androids and even Blade Runner eshewed this pedantic allegory by changing the story to what it is to be human when you are designed as one but aren't one...technically. The pathos of the real humans trying to understand the plight of an automaton that will only live for a scant handful of years becomes real, the paranoia of not knowing who is your brother or who is an automaton palpable and what is empathy when you cannot feel for something that only wants to live as much as you. BSG has only the trace of that. It's too caught up in pseudo-religious agitprop and it smiles unconvincingly at its ragged and gritty underbelly. The plight of humanity spirals out of control so much that by it's end, the contrived ending is nothing more than a reset button for Moore and crew to mass erase so that there wouldn't be any need to explain to the audience. Frankly if any series (within the past 10 years) comes close to Blade Runner, it would have to be "Total Recall 2070". Though not perfect, the stories involved the exploration of what it meant to be human when machines were becoming better humans every second of the future. The characters dared explore their plights as real humans, not some spaceborne offshoots that were destined to fail. And the series allowed the possiblitiy that mankind would learn from its interactions with the artifical humans and form a bond, not merely screw up and succumb to a base desire and wind up doomed like in BSG. Sorry, Olmos. You shoud stick to acting and not pontificating on the ethos of scifi. If t there is one thing I will give Moore credit for, is that he didn't have the nerve to try to compare his works with the works of a master that came and conquered before him. I think they "get it" more than Olmos does, that if you want your work to mean something you just don't latch on to comparisons from another's work just because sprinkling of ideas happen to coexist between works.
By S.W. at 2:55 AM ON 07/27/09
BlahBlah44,
How do people like you even make it pass high school? At least IsoTek knows how to pontificate when he flames.
By wwrafter at 10:49 AM ON 07/27/09
@S.W. Please don't feed the trolls.
By Muldfeld at 2:25 PM ON 07/27/09
I think it's okay for BlahBlah44 to say what he said. When Abrams compares his shamelessly commercial work with shows I love like The X-Files and Star Trek (Deep Space Nine, anyway), as he regularly does, I get really mad and I post. BlahBlah loves Blade Runner, but doesn't like BSG. I don't agree because I think BSG is perhaps the greatest TV show or film ever, but allowing him to speak that way allows us all to about things we don't like.
Visit mobile.syfy.com/wire on your mobile device.
Muldfeld:
I think it's okay for BlahBlah44 to say what he said. When Abrams compares his shamelessly commercial work with sho...More »