Email me at

In the bloopers section of your Saga of a Star World page, I think blooper 4 may not be a bona fide cock-up. There is a possible explanation for Apollo being able to know that Adama was the last remaining member of the Council before they knew all the Battlestars were destroyed. At the beginning of the story all members of the Council were aboard the Atlantia. The Galactica bridge crew saw the Atlantia destroyed before leaving the fleet to go to Caprica. If Adama was the first of the Council to leave the Atlantia, and (despite the "anxious to get back to your ships" line) the other Councillors had not left by the time she was destroyed, it is possible that they could all be "known" to be dead (until Baltar turns up alive) before Galactica left the fleet. Stumpy. -- R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand That's an intriguing explanation you came up with, and it definitely could be true. Still, I think it's likely that the other council members had left the Atlantia. Even if they hadn't, it's unlikely that Apollo and the others would have known for certain. Like you I was skeptical of the planned remake. But as time moves on I'm willing to give it a chance. I've talked to a few people offline who would rather see a remake. They grew up watching the original but are interested in the idea of the remake, as long as it's well written, produced, and acted. Just thought I'd let you know that you're not alone. Once again, thanks for the great website-especially Sheba's Galaxy. When I was a little kid back in the fall of 1978, BG was the only thing I liked about Sunday nights, otherwise I hated Sunday nights because I had to go to school the next morning. As explained in the Series, the 13th Tribe is the one that departed Kobol and colonized Earth. So if the inhabitants of Earth originated from Kobol, (like the Colonial Nation of twelve planets) then why was their technology so much more primative than the Colonial's? I seems that they should've had similiar technology. I realize I'm just going on the strength of G-1980, but I was wondering your thoughts on this. I also really enjoyed how the BG site also touched a little on Buck Rogers. I enjoyed reading your piece on Buck. But BG and Buck Rogers are like night and day. BG is a very serious, well-written space saga. Buck Rogers is just a space romp for the most part. But in "Awakening", I thought Gil Gerard's performance when he was under the influence of the Draconian "anti-pain drug" was very good. I also like the design of the Directorate Starfighter better than the Viper or the X-wing from Star Wars. Thanks again. You ask in one of your "Battlestar" synopses about the name of the hockey game where you send a puck from end to end. Anticlimactically, I think it's called just "air hockey". Hello again, I read your artical about the Sciography show that pertained to Battlestar Galactica and can not decide to agree or disagree with you. Sciography was cancelled after only 2 episodes. I would have liked to see more of it, especially the episode that would have delt with Babylon 5. The producers of Babylon 5 would have had to explain why they decided to get rid of Michael O'Hare and replace him with Bruce Boxleitner. I would have loved to see that. Getting back to Galactica, Glen Larson gave many excuses why the show didn't work. He even stated that Lorne Greene was saddened by his exclusion from Galactica 1980. Sadly Lorne had passed away and couldn't reply to Larson's statements on the subject. Thats all for now. All the best, Paul Pisano Hi There I never read the book on this episode but I think it's the most touching of all episodes. It's very mysterious and almost lurking gives you a very eerie delivery by the end. And Anne Lockharts performance as well as Patrick Mcnee's I think is what makes the episode so powerful. My question to you is when Apollo & Starbuck look inside the spacecraft wreckage what do you think they see? What is it that confirms their fears are true? I can only speculate but I think It might be the body of Count Iblis that's why they know they are not dealing with a living being but the Prince of Darkness. Please let me know what you think. Jeff The writers have said that what Starbuck and Apollo see are tall, cloven-hoofed horned beings with tails. I go into detail about this in my episode review. It's hard to disagree with what the writers say was planned, although it might have been better if they had said nothing and left the entire thing mysterious. John Hello, I love your site and visit often. Keep it up. I particularly liked the way you compared Star Wars and Battlestar, but I have a few points of contention: Han Solo wasn't a gambler or womanizer: In the workprint of A New Hope when we first see Han at the cantina he is sitting with his arm draped around an attractive woman and he dismisses her casually("Business, sweetheart.") when Luke and Ben approach the table. I think the indication is he's a slick, gunslinger type who has a way with women as well as the criminal life. This is certainly made clear in various novelezations in Star Wars. As for not being a gambler, he won the Millennium Falcon from Lando Calrissian in a game of Sabaac which is a card game. Lando was an expert at this game so Han must of had some experience at it to beat him. Return of the Jedi didn't contain stock footage: On the contrary, Lucas is just better at hiding it. One of the very first shots(the side view of Vader's shuttle entering the new Death Star) is the same shot from A New Hope, except it was the Falcon going in. They also added various items into the scene like cranes and hardware to disguise the fact. The control room footage of firing the new Death Star was also reused from ANH, it's just reversed into a mirror image! Also, Vader standing at the viewport of the Executor(his flagship you mentioned) and then turning around was lifted from The Empire Strikes Back. So Lucas isn't above simple tricks either. Watch all the films in a row and see if I'm wrong. I hope to hear your reply. Thanks. -Mark Hi, Mark! Thanks for the info! That's a good point about Lucas re-using footage in different ways. I never thought to mention that. At least BG had a good excuse for re-using footage. As far as Han Solo goes, he was nowhere near the gambler or womanizer that Starbuck was. I'm not sure what you mean by "workprint", but I have to go by what we actually saw on the screen. If you read the Lando Calrissian novels, they show him to be a true gambler. Solo was a smuggler. Bottom line, I consider Han Solo and Starbuck to be considerably different, so I think the criticism of Starbuck being a clone of Han Solo was ridiculous. Thanks again! And please let me know what you think of the other parts of the site! I highly recommend Matthew Wharmby's Galactica 1980 reviews (hilarious stuff!) as well as Sharon Monroe's fan fiction stories! John, I've been meaning to ask you something. Not that your would remember, but I've kidded you on this site before about you knowing BG as well as me. However, one thing I never knew was that according to you, Glen Larson had nothing to do with any of the novelizations? Is this true and where did you get your information? Shawn L. Scialo At the 15 yahren reunion, Glen Larson was asked about the number of battlestars being 12 or not and what there names were. He was fuzzy on the correct answer but did say that just because there were 12 colonies didn't mean there were 12 battlestars. He pretty much suggested that there were just the five we saw on film. However, we later learned of the Pegasus which would have made 6. The Pegasus had been lost for 2 yahrens according to Apollo in the "Living Legend". So, the only thing we know for sure is that there were 6 battlestars just 2 yahrens prior to the tv pilot. Now, as fans, I think we have all adopted the idea that it just makes a whole lot of sense for there to be 12 battlestars. One battlestar to represent each colony. I would have to go back and watch my video of the reunion to give you andy more detail than that. Shawn L. Scialo Kudos for bringing the work of Galactica's best fanfic author, Sharon Monroe, to your website. I first discovered her writing when I was at the 15 yahren reunion and thought it was great. I bought "Second Coming" which is part of the "Pegasus Chronicles". I was shocked at how good it was. I mean, up to that point, I thought I was the only Battlestar fan in the world for all I knew. Now, I'll have the chance to enjoy all of her work. I just finished " The Battle of Molecay" and I thought it was excellent! I think I like it better than "Second Coming". Sharon obviously knows the material very well as she brings her audience back to that universe of Battlestar Galactica that a lot of us grew up with. As a fledgling fanfic author myself, I've set Sharon Monroe as the standard of what I want to shoot for as far as quality and creativity while remaining true to classic BSG. I think there are other good authors and BSG stories out there, but they are few and far between. Sharon has the most consistantly entertaining and best writing quality that you will find. Great idea to bring her aboard!!! Shawn L. Scialo October 5, 2001

What Direction Should The New Galactica Series Go?

Right now we have little info about what direction the new series is going in, but I'm getting the impression that the original cast will not be used. I feel bad for Richard Hatch after all the work and effort he has put into the Galactica revival, but I think it might be for the best. I know a lot of fans don't want to hear this, but it doesn't really matter if most Galactica fans want to see the original cast as far as the success of the new show is concerned. Considering that the Galactica fanbase was too small to support either the Maximum Press or Realm Press comic books, it won't make much difference in the ratings whether or not they support the new show.

In order for the new show to succeed, it will have to attract a mass audience that is either not familiar with the original series or remembers very little about it. Having a cast cluttered with 50 year-olds is not the best way to attract mainstream American viewers (sad to say, but true). I personally am less than thrilled with the idea of having the original actors. I think it would be similar to watching The Dukes Of Hazzard reunion shows, or the CHiPs reunion show. They're fun to watch for nostalgia's sake, but hard to really take serious.

This begs the question - What direction should the new series take? The following would be my suggestion:

I think the new show should probably take place at least a generation after the original characters have passed on. In the opening episode, we learn that the Colonials eventually tired of living in the horrible conditions of the ragtag fleet and decided to settle on a planet after they eluded the Cylons for a long period of time or after a big final battle amongst which the original charcters were lost. It could be a mystery as to what actually happened to them. This would be similar to what happened with Galactica 1980 (which was actually one of the most interesting aspects of G80).

The Galactica is docked on the planet and a special camoflauge screen was created to prevent anyone from noticing that the planet was inhabited (similar to force field surrounding the war-stricken planet in the Berkley novel "Apollo's War"). The Colonials constructed a city called New Caprica and settled into a new way of life. The military kept training in preparation for possible attack. In the first episode, the Cylons discover the Colonials after an accidental breach in the force field. The Colonials are forced to flee the planet into space and the decision is made to seek out Earth once again using the coordinates given to them by the beings from the Ship of Lights.

If the new show is successful, it could possibly make way for an animated Galactica series that features the original characters. I would really enjoy seeing an animated series that begins after the events of "The Hand of God" with the original characters at their original ages, not 20-plus years later. Perhaps such a cartoon could be done with the same CGI special effects used for other sci-fi shows.

I'm curious to hear what people think about this scenario. Please e-mail me and let me know.

March 15, 2001

Richard Hatch - A Class Act All The Way Through

Everyone must have heard by now that the revival of Battlestar Galactica is official. It is DEFINITELY happening, much to the joy of some and dismay of others. Personally, I'm very happy it is coming back and am more than willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. Hopefully, the show will be guaranteed to run for two years, since the first year is always a bit tumultuous (although there certainly won't be the kind of problems that plagued the original series back in 1978).

Like most people, I was very curious to hear what Richard Hatch's reaction would be, especially since Glen Larson's involvement in the new series makes it virtually certain that none of the original characters will return. Hatch had nothing but positive things to say about Bryan Singer and wished him the best of luck in his efforts. I think we should take our hats off to Richard for doing this. While I'm sure he's happy the show is coming back, Richard must undoubtedly be at least a little dissapointed that his own vision of the show will probably never happen. While I've never been Richard's biggest supporter in that I'm not crazy about seeing the original characters 20 years later, I was was still amazed by his Galactica trailer and was rooting for him to succeed. I believe Richard's efforts to revive the show greatly contributed to Bryan Singer getting the go-ahead for a new series, and I hope Richard believes that, too.

In my opinion, Glen Larson has not been as noble. While I can understand him wanting to control Galactica's fate since he was the creator, some of the public shots he has taken at Richard (such as on the Sciography documentary) were a little out of line.

Anyway, I'd like to personally commend Richard for his tremendous faith and effort over the past several years to bring back the show we all love.

Thanks, Richard!

The revival would have never happened without you!

February 22, 2001

NEWSFLASH!!! Galactica really IS Back!!! Or is it?

All the Revival rumours that have been pouring out and then ever so quickly snuffed during the past two months are enough to make you pull your hair out. However, an article on looks like a Galactica revival may finally be here:

Bryan Singer isn't just solely focusing his attention on X-Men 2. He's also spearheading a relaunch of the Battlestar Galactica TV series.

According to Variety columnist Michael Fleming, Singer has struck a deal with USA Studios to reinvent the '70s TV series. Singer will also act as an executive producer of the program along with his X-Men partner Tom DeSanto. Beyond that, as long as it doesn't clash with his X-Men 2 duties, the helmer is planning to direct the pilot episode as well.

While talking to Fleming, Singer stated his intentions for this new Galactica, saying, "The lesson I learned on X-Men is to have a healthy respect for the fan base of sci-fi fantasy franchises, and I'm confident that the Galactica brand is a sleeping giant. It was a show I watched during its initial run, from the pilot to the final episode. The essence and the brand name is quite potent in a climate where there's a great deficit of scifi programming."

USA Television Production Group president David Kissinger sounds almost shocked regarding Singer's involvement in the project, saying, "I never dreamed a filmmaker of Bryan's stature would be enough of a hardcore fan that he saw this as a franchise that could be reinvented. In the initial meeting, I was wary that he might be just another feature guy looking to slap his name on a TV project, but it was immediately clear this wasn't so. He's got a whole mythology and arc for the series already worked out."

"We'll shop it right away with the goal of having it in a prime time slot on a network, but it's possible that we might be able to do a dual window scenario with the SciFi Channel," Kissinger adds. "With Bryan's vision and a brand name which has international appeal, we're optimistic we'll be able to make it on the grand scale he imagines. The visual imagery he's talking about is unprecedented in its effects and scope."

Word has it that the recent problems with the Confessions of a Dangerous Mind project are what allowed Singer to direct some of his energy towards this newly forged Galactica project.

Meanwhile, X-Men 2 is firmly in place to start up production in early 2002 with a holiday 2002 release date planned.

Is it really true? Could Galactica really be coming back? I'm hesitant to give it a definite yes at this point, but I can't help but think that this just might be the real deal. Keep your fingers crossed!

February 16, 2001

Another False Revival Rumour - Sci-Fi Channel Is NOT In Pre-Production To Do A New Battlestar Galactica Series

In my previous commentary, I talked about the prospects of a Galactica series from the Sci-Fi Channel and said, "The original will always be the best, but for now I guess I'm willing to give Sci-Fi Channel the benefit of the doubt."

I take it back.

This turned out to be another false rumour, although one that the Sci-Fi Channel started with a message on its website. Sci-Fi soon issued a statement saying it was not true.

It's just as well. I've just heard that the tentative plans were to create new enemies and not use the Cylons at all. It appears Sci-Fi Channel simply wanted to cash in on the Galactica brand name (A deplorable tactic as far as any true Galactica fan is concerned).

I'm starting to get the impression that someone high up at Universal must not like Galactica. That must be the only credible reason for not bringing it back, especially if Richard Hatch has gathered investors to fund the entire project (and thus removing Universal from any financial risk).

Oh, well, we'll always have fan fiction...

January 14, 2001

Another Revival Rumour - Sci-Fi Channel May Already Be In Pre-Production To Do A New Battlestar Galactica Series

Rumours about a Galactica revival have popped up so many times over the years, you normally have to take them with a grain of salt. However, some strong sources (including Michael Faeries of have in the last few days announced that the Sci-Fi Channel may in fact be planning to revive the show and may already be in the pre-production stages.

Is this true? I give it a 50/50 chance - which is more than I've given any other Revival rumour I've heard. It's been said that Sci-Fi Channel plans to use a brand new cast rather than the original one. I realize I may be offending the die-hard fans, but it is probably the best decision. Bottom line, the hard-core Galactica fans are far too small in number to make a difference as to whether a new show will succeed or not. If a new Galactica is to succeed, it will have to draw in a large number of casual viewers who probably would not be all that interested if the cast was largely comprised of actors in their forties and fifties.

This doesn't actually bother me all that much. As I said in my previous commentary, I think the fates of the original characters are better left mysterious. What is more troubling is that they're saying Sci-Fi Channel is considering not even having the actual Galactica ship in the series! I find this difficult to believe. How can you have Battlestar Galactica without having the Battlestar Galactica in it? Again, I have doubts that anyone would do this.

Laurette Spang summed it up best in a recent Starlog interview when she said that Battlestar Galactica will never happen again the way it was. Perhaps a next generation approach is the best shot to get a sizable audience. The original will always be the best, but for now I guess I'm willing to give Sci-Fi Channel the benefit of the doubt.

January 4, 2001

Why Galactica 1980 Doesn't Quite Totally Suck

It's been interesting getting feedback about my new Galactica 1980 Photo Gallery. Responses have ranged from "The pics are great!" to "Yuck! It brings back horrible memories" to "Robbie Rist looks like a monkey!"

Some may wonder why I would want to put up a Galactica 1980 Photo Gallery (or even have anything at all about the show), and there are actually several reasons. First, although I admit Galactica 1980 was a terrible show and should not be considered canon (except for the last episode), it is certainly good for a lot of laughs (And it doesn't get much funnier than Matthew Wharmby's G1980 episode reviews!). To be honest, Galactica 1980 is so bad, it's entertaining! This is a show that is actually fun to watch just to see how bad it can get. It is especially fun to pick out all the educational dialogue that was required by its Sunday 7pm family hour timeslot.

And then there is The Return Of Starbuck, a truly magnificent piece of television that far surpasses even most of the original series' episodes. There are no words to describe how much I love this story. Although a similar version of the story would likely have been done if BG had gone a second season, it would not have been anywhere near as great as this turned out. This alone is almost enough for me to forgive Galactica 1980. Another reason I've got so much G1980 info is that I want to differentiate my site from the other Galactica sites, and I'm willing to bet there are people out there who are at least a little curious to learn about the series.

Most of all, to be perfectly honest, I've always been strangely fascinated with Galactica 1980. To me, what makes the show interesting are the mysteries of what happened to the original characters (Starbuck and Apollo most of all). Galactica 1980 may have been the most scitzophrenic series ever made - in two ways. First, the premise of the show changed with every episode. Second, it was completely hokey and ludicrous, and yet still had dark and tragic overtones since most of the beloved original characters apparently died (Of course, you could also say it was tragic in the sense that ABC actually tried to pass such garbage off as the legitimate heir to Battlestar Galactica). Now, if you want to know "what really happened" to Starbuck, you can find out by reading the unproduced Wheel Of Fire script. Or you can read Eric J. Paddon's ambitious Galactica 1980 sequel stories which build off The Wheel Of Fire and provide answers to what happened to all the original characters. While I actually enjoyed these stories (well, mostly), I have to say it's a bit disappointing to learn answers to so many of Galactica 1980's questions. Why? Because all mysteries lose their power once they are solved. Why do you think the great magicians never reveal how they perform their tricks? This applies to the ending of the original series as well.

Is There Anything Good That Came Out Of The Original Series' Cancellation?

I happen to like the open-ended finish to The Return Of Starbuck since it allows the individual to imagine for himself what Starbuck's ultimate fate was. The same goes for The Hand Of God, the final episode of the original series. Although I regret that the original series was canceled after only one season, I think there is a benefit to the open-ended way it finished. What is good is that it leaves the fates of Starbuck, Apollo, Sheba, Cassiopea and the rest of the rag tag fleet mysterious, and I think these unanswered questions have helped keep BG fandom alive for these many years. It all adds a certain mystique to the Battlestar Galactica saga. Everyone wants to know what happened to the characters, but I think maybe some questions are better left unanswered. Whenever a show lasts for a long period of time, it often takes turns that disappoint the fans (Xena and the X-Files are probably good examples of this). Also, Return Of The Jedi, the conclusion to the Star Wars trilogy, was disappointing on a number of levels to myself and a good number of other fans. And as much as I respect Richard Hatch's attempt to revive the show, I simply cannot accept his novels as canon. His story is not the direction I envisioned the show would take (Perhaps the best possible ending to the series would be the fan novel The Race For Earth from Clean Slate Press!). As much as I'd like to see a revival, I'm unfortunately going to feel this way regardless of how any revival is done.

So although it will always be sad the original show was ended so soon, I think there are some benefits. At least the BG saga hasn't been constantly rehashed to the point of ad nausiem (a la Star Trek) or given an ending that is conclusive yet not completely satisfying (a la Return Of The Jedi). Fans will always wonder what happened to the original characters, and that mystique is what will always make Galactica unique and different from the rest. And as for how the Battlestar Galactica saga actually ends - you can decide that for yourself.

November 28, 2000

The New Controversy: Who REALLY created Battlestar Galactica?

One of the more interesting debates that has recently begun to catch fire are the recent allegations that Glen Larson is not the creator of Battlestar Galactica or the writer of the pilot (Saga Of A Star World). A website called Battlestar Zone recently conducted an interview with Alan J. Levi (one of two directors who filmed the pilot), and he casually mentioned that Leslie Stevens created BG and wrote the script for the pilot. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Leslie Stevens actually did write the pilot. When you think about it, it's a little hard to swallow that Larson could write something as good as Saga Of A Star World (not to mention The Living Legend and War Of The Gods) and then go on to do such a horrible job writing Galactica 1980. One should also take into account that Larson was able to get partial credit for writing each of the 14 Berkley Galactica novels even though he never contributed as much as a word.

The winter 1978 issue of a magazine called Star Battles has an article on BG in which Glen Larson is interviewed. In the article, Larson actually doesn't take complete credit for creating the series. First off, the article says: "(Larson) recalled how he got the ideas for Galactica while working with the late Gene L. Coon. "Gene was a wonderful guy to work with, a superb writer and a fine producer. He had come over to It Takes A Thief from Star Trek and it was Coon's ideas about space I remembered when we were doing this new series."

Then, amazingly, in the very next paragraph, the article gives Leslie Stevens partial credit for creating the show! "There are those at 20th Century Fox, however, who believe Larson and executive producer Leslie (Outer Limits) Stevens were remembering Star Wars, not Star Trek, in the creation of Galactica."

This is certainly fascinating. Unfortunately, figuring out who should be credited with the creation of Battlestar Galactica is not as simple as figuring out who wrote the pilot script. Stevens may very well have written the pilot. But how can we ever know how much of Galactica's premise came from Larson and how much came from Stevens? It's safe to assume that Larson at least contributed ideas to the direction of the pilot script. Also, as producer, Larson oversaw many aspects of the show: sets, costuming, special effects, casting. Even if Leslie Stevens did write the pilot and most of it came solely from him, Larson certainly played a huge role in the series and in the way the final product turned out. Therefore, I think Larson deserves at least half credit for the creation of Galactica regardless of how much Leslie Stevens may have contributed.

I'm hoping we'll learn more evidence regarding the issue soon. If you want to read the interview conducted by Susan Paxton with Alan J. Levi, then check out Battlestar Zone.

November 27, 2000

There is a new front to the campaign to bring back Galactica. Everyone is urged to post a message to Universal's own posting board at

If you really want to see Galactica come back, then please pitch in along with everyone else and let Universal know how you feel!

November 21, 2000

Your Questions, My Non-Answers

If you would like to ask a question about Battlestar Galactica, then send it to or something. I'm sick of them.

Really, who cares what happened to Noah Hathaway, or what Starbuck's favorite color is, or why the Cylons needed 3 pilots to fly one stinkin' ship. So before submitting a question, make sure you browse through every single section of this site. You might find an answer to what you're looking for, you might not, but at least I'll get credit for all those hits.

Please include your first and last name and the city and state (or province/country) along with your telephone number, and those of all your relatives and friends when you e-mail me questions. I am compiling a list I'm going to sell to some fly-by-night credit card company.

1. James Morton of Phoenix, AZ asks:

Did Cassiopea ever trade favors for special privileges on the Galactica?

John's answer:

That, sir, is none of your business.


2. Rick Sayer of White Plains, NY asks:

Can you compile a list ranking the top ten sci-fi actors of the 70s based on the use of the drug Ecstasy?

John's answer:

What, are you kidding? I'd get sued for sure. Why would you ask something like that?


3. Tom Mitchell of Medulla, RI asks:

I'm curious - Whatever happened to Lorne Greene?

John's answer:

He's dead.


4. Steve Ditzo of Miami Beach, FL asks:

First off, I just want to say that your site is the best Galactica site I've ever seen. I've been getting into BG for the first time since the show aired, and I just recently saw all the re-runs on the Sci-Fi channel. I'm confused, though. I seem to remember them eventually finding Earth. Did that really happen?

John's answer:

Someone get my gun.


5. Jackie Linfanton of Colletta, WV asks:

Back in September 1978, I could have sworn I rode in a taxi driven by Dirk Benedict who I saw on BG two days later. How could that be?

John's answer:

I have no idea.


6. Garth Allred of Rockland, NY asks:

I'm amazed at the depth of your site. Is it true that all you webmasters have absolutely no life?

John's answer:

That insinuation is so unfair.


7. Brad Havok of Stone Mountain, GA asks:

I want to commend you on your honesty, integrity, and accuracy in reporting news about the revival. I recall reading an article posted on a website awhile back that said Richard Hatch wants to redo Galactica 1980. Is this true?

John's answer:

Yes, it's absolutely true.


8. Artie Simeck of Scnell, Ont. asks:

I've always been fascinated with alien species, and I'm curious, how exactly did the Ovions procreate?

John's answer:

You, sir, need some serious help.


9. Shane Leonard of Niagra Falls, NY asks:

Can you give me a list of films where actresses from Galactica appear and actually show some skin?

John's answer:

Well, actually, there were several, uh... Gosh, I really don't know.


10. David Benick of Somerset, NJ asks:

In Saga Of A Star World, after the Cylon attack, it was reported that there were 67 vipers left. Yet in The Hand Of God it is said that the Cylon base star has 300 fighters, and Adama tells the pilots they will be outnumbered 2 to 1. If this is true, then that means there are 150 vipers. How can this be? And why would the battlestars leave the Colonies completely defenseless? And how could there have been only 1 battlestar for each planet? Actually, we only see 5 battlestars total. Wouldn't the Colonies have some other defense systems in place?

John's answer:

Um, can't you ask me something else, like what's Starbuck's favorite color?


11. Glen Larson from Los Angeles, CA asks:

How much money do you make a year? Do you have any kind of life? Do you have any writing ability whatsoever? It's not my fault Galactica 1980 stunk, you asshole!

John's answer:

That's none of your damn business.


What's the matter with you people? These questions are insane!


November 11, 2000

Well, it's been a good 15 months now since Sheba's Galaxy became a part of the Battlestar Galactica universe, and only a week ago we received our 10,000th visitor! I'd like to say that I am very proud of the way this website has turned out. In terms of pure information, I'll risk tooting my own horn and saying I think this has developed into the best Galactica site on the net (Okay, visually it sucks, but aren't you glad you don't have to wait forever for each friggin' page to load?).

Anyway, I'd like to extend an invitation for article submissions to anyone out there who might be interested. I've put many hours into adding layer after layer of info, but I could definitely use a hand! I can't thank fellow Galactica fan Matthew Wharmby enough for all his contributions. His Galactica 1980 episode reviews have got to be the funniest Galactica stuff I have ever read. So if anyone would like to contribute, please do, whether it be episode reviews or general articles on the series.

A lot of people these days are wondering about the status of the revival. Well, I certainly am not privy to any inside information, but I don't think it looks good that nothing has happened after all this time. For what it's worth, Glen Larson has recently said that he has created an IMAX trailer to help sell his own idea for a Battlestar production. Anyway, I have to admit that I'm much more into the original series (and Galactica 1980 - Come on, it's good for laughs) than the revival movement. Personally, I'm not all that keen on seeing the original characters 20 years later (Starbuck in his 50s? He couldn't quite be the ladies man now!). But that's okay. Even if Battlestar Galactica never comes back, I'm sure the characters and concepts will live on in the hearts and minds of its fans forever. For me personally, it never ends! (but, fortunately, some things do. This piece for starters!)

Enter Sheba's Galaxy