Here's the text for those the link might not be working for:
Battlestar Galactica: Naturalistic Science Fiction
or Taking the Opera out of Space Opera
Our goal is nothing less than the reinvention of the science fiction television series. We take as a given the idea that the traditional space opera, with its stock characters, techno-double-talk, bumpy-headed aliens, thespian histrionics, and empty heroics has run its course and a new approach is required. That approach is to introduce realism into what has heretofore been an aggressively unrealistic genre.
Call it " Naturalistic Science Fiction."
This idea, the presentation of a fantastical situation in naturalistic terms, will permeate every aspect of our series:
Visual. The first thing that will leap out at viewers is the dynamic use of the documentary or cinema verite style. Through the extensive use of hand-held cameras, practical lighting, and functional set design, the battlestar Galactica will feel on every level like a real place.
This shift in tone and look cannot be overemphasized. It is our intention to deliver a show that does not look like any other science fiction series ever produced. A casual viewer should for a moment feel like he or she has accidentally surfed onto a "60 Minutes" documentary piece about life aboard an aircraft carrier until someone starts talking about Cylons and battlestars.
That is not to say we're shooting on videotape under fluorescent lights, but we will be striving for a verisimilitude that is sorely lacking in virtually every other science fiction series ever attempted. We're looking for filmic truth, not manufactured " pretty pictures" or the "way cool" factor.
Perhaps nowhere will this be more surprising than in our visual effects shots. Our ships will be treated like real ships that someone had to go out and film with a real camera. That means no 3-D "hero" shots panning and zooming wildly with the touch of a mousepad. The questions we will ask before every VFX shot are things like: "How did we get this shot? Where is the camera? Who's holding it? Is the cameraman in another spacecraft? Is the camera mounted on the wing?" This philosophy will generate images that will present an audience jaded and bored with the same old "Wow -- it's a CGI shot!" with a different texture and a different cinematic language that will force them to re-evaluate their notions of science fiction.
Another way to challenge the audience visually will be our extensive use of the multi-split screen format. By combining multiple angles during dogfights, for example, we will be able to present an entirely new take on what has become a tired and familiar sequence that has not changed materially since George Lucas established it in the mid 1970s.
Finally, our visual style will also capitalize on the possibilities inherent in the series concept itself to deliver unusual imagery not typically seen in this genre. That is, the inclusion of a variety of civilian ships each of which will have unique properties and visual references that can be in stark contrast to the military life aboard Galactica. For example, we have a vessel in our rag-tag fleet which was designed to be a space-going marketplace or "City Walk" environment. The juxtaposition of this high-gloss, sexy atmosphere against the gritty reality of a story for survival will give us more textures and levels to play than in typical genre fare.
Editorial. Our style will avoid the now clichéd MTV fast-cutting while at the same time foregoing Star Trek's somewhat ponderous and lugubrious "master, two-shot, close-up, close-up, two-shot, back to master" pattern. If there is a model here, it would be vaguely Hitchcockian -- that is, a sense of building suspense and dramatic tension through the use of extending takes and long masters which pull the audience into the reality of the action rather than the distract through the use of ostentatious cutting patterns.
Story. We will eschew the usual stories about parallel (continued...)
I believe that this was an internal memo, not intended for outside release. It's the memo mentioned in that NYT piece.
Internal memo or not, when it was written, or at least distributed, Firefly was airing doing most of the things he talks about.
Right. That's the mission statement from early 2002, or part of it. It was included with the original pitch to the network. Not a press release, not intended as promotional material.
most of his points are things Firefly was doing/had just done makes him sound like a pompous ass, regardless of whether he decided to do this before Firefly aired or not.
Except as noted, Firefly was just a gleam in Whedon's eye at that point. If you really don't think it matters when it was written, I take it that you'd find it pompous if that was part of the Firefly pitch instead?
So was it leaked without authorization? Otherwise, it was distributed somehow through official channels at a time when it was no longer valid.
Did you read the blurb at the top?
It's been a long time since Mister X came forward with something juicy. Long time readers know he has uncanny timing when it comes to his appearances. That X has provided inside information on projects from several different studios, I can be assured he is not a plant for one specific company. Today, Mister X sent me an interesting document, one purported to be from the hand of Ronald D. Moore himself, that accompanied the teleplay to the powers that be at Studio USA and the Sci-Fi Channel and helped get the greenlight for the project. And yes, the miniseries is greenlit, folks. So, without further ado, Mr. Moore's Battlestar Galactica mission statement...
The part about "helping get the greenlight" should have clued somebody in that this was written before Firefly had starting shooting, much less aired.
I don't know what "official channels" you're talking about.
I was asking a question (which admittedly I would have found the answer to had I read more carefully). Since it's apparent it was an unauthorized leak, then there were no official channels.
When I read the article in the NYT about BSG it seemed pretty clear that the BSG guy and Joss came to the same conclusions about the space ship shows that had been aired previous to their own and what was wrong with them.
I don't think that means that either copied off the other or that these shows are very much alike at all.
If you really don't think it matters when it was written, I take it that you'd find it pompous if that was part of the Firefly pitch instead?
The point I was trying to make was if he wrote this or was showing it to people/studios after Firefly was already airing, then it is pompous and/or ignorant to talk about how you're going to revolutionize sci-fi by doing the exact same things as a series that was currently airing. If this was written/distributed before Firefly hit the air waves, then no harm, no foul.
Unfortunately we don't know when it was written/distributed. We only know when it was leaked, which was at the end of Firefly's run on the air. (And my mistake for not reading the rest of the article and seeing that it was in fact a leak and not a press release. I was only trying to find the mission statement and linked it as soon as I found it.) So I guess it's a moot point.
I think written versus distributed is actually kind of key here. At the time of writing, how would RM have known about FF? I mean, you know, unless he and Joss are buds.
I can see if people thought he'd written that memo specifically for public consumption and after FF aired that it would chafe (and perhaps that's what people thought at the time), but... I mean, that's not the case, if I'm understanding correctly the timeline Strega mentions. Its release was unfortunate, but I can't blame RM for that (unless he did it, which, I'm guessing not).
Anyway - my main point is the same. I suspect Ron Moore and David Eick don't attribute inspiration for BSG to FF because they didn't get their inspiration for BSG from FF. Betcha they think it's a great show, though.