One of the lingering questions from the series finale of “Battlestar Galactica” is just what the frak happened to Starbuck.
This weekend, producer and writer Ronald Moore finally offered confirmation of what exactly happened.
“I think she was a representative of an entity that didn’t like to be called God, but everybody else talked about it in godlike terms. If you want to call her an angel, you could say that. She went through a resurrection story that was very Christlike. And you know, what are the implications of that? I felt, as I went into the finale, that the more I defined exactly what she was, the less interesting she became,” he tells io9.
Knowing that are you more or less satisfied with the finale or do you feel about the same?
Bleh! We didn’t know she was resurrected. She didn’t know she was resurrected. So, why? How was it meaningful?
Was she a representative of that entity before the resurrection? Did the entity kill her so that she could become its representative? Or did another entity kill her? Or was her death an accident that this entity took advantage of?
Or was this more spiritual? Did she die for others’ sins? Did she die for her sins?
Ron’s explanation wasn’t very helpful.
Count me in the “the BSG ending ruined the series” camp.
–Larry
I don’t really care. All he did was confirm the most likely speculation.
Oh, and from the miniseries BSG established the presence of the divine. Just because people chose not to accept it at face value doesn’t mean the ending ruined it. The ending was the direct payoff to what was begun in the beginning.
Lost had a much better doppelganger 🙂
OMG! After all this time we’re going to finally find out..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
I’m with Indiana Jim on this one. The Battlestar Galactica mythos — both in original and reboot formats — has always had its roots in religion and divinity. This new version just wrapped the subject in a tasty military sci-fi candy coating, but the packaging clearly stated the contents.
It’s not the show runner’s fault if you couldn’t see that.
My personal opinion: Starbuck’s arc worked quite well, although the execution was lacking near the end. She started out as a reluctant believer in the Gods, praying to them only when it suited her. It seems only fitting to me that she become the messenger that lead humanity to its salvation.
He didn’t anything was divine just said ” everybody else talked about it in godlike terms.” So it was some entity, perhaps like a Q but not as powerful. An entity that didn’t have the power to stop genocide or creatures killing in its name but with a few well placed hallucinations and inspired actions here and there, one tiny shred of humanity and cylonity was able to live on. This thing had to use whatever substandard materials were handy (i.e. Baltar). If you try to think of it as a moral god-creature then Baltar betrays all of humanity and is rewarded with lots of sex and supposedly true love. It was liking having an invisible character with no clue of motivation, why did this thing care about people or Cylons at all?
“I felt, as I went into the finale, that the more I defined exactly what she was, the less interesting she became” That’s just a writing short coming. Check Orson Scott Card’s “Xenocide” or Babylon 5 for examples of explaining exactly what something is yet still containing a sense of wonder and awe.
Skiznot, why does it have to be the modern “pinnacle of morality” god? Why not a Greek or Roman god like Zeus that has a “plan” or motivation to get things done, but really doesn’t care how it gets there?
Not all mythological dieties are the epitome of morality and goodness. While Glen Larson’s BSG was based on the Mormon view of God, I don’t recall any indication as to what model of deity Ronald Moore patterned the modern BSG on.
Pretty much what I figured when I originally watched it. I was convinced it wasn’t our real Starbuck any longer but some spiritualized version.
Wait . . . a beloved character is wiped out and replaced with some other entity and everyone is OK with that?
Is she still a rough and tumble kind of person, or is she now all mystical-like? Because, you know, if she’s not like she was, odd are it’s not really her.
Yeah, I suppose I could watch the series and find out, but it would likely just piss me off. I mean, I too would not mind coming back, but not if there’s someone else in my body.
There was something about Starbucks arc that never sat right with me. I didn’t think the finale ruined the entire series; though it didn’t help the show much, but I did think Starbuck’s story was getting weaker as the series neared its conclusion. Instead of being mysterious or spiritually intriguing it was just kinda “meh.” This was a defect in the writing.
I also agree with ejdalise. I knew the resurrected Starbuck wasn’t the original and it did bug me that I didn’t know who she really was as an individual anymore.
Wha?!?! Actually, that just kinda ruined it for me. Ok, let me just fix this for you. Moore is wrong. She was a Muse.
That was the only explanation for me…I thought Siren for a while, and expected her to try to lead them to destruction, but ultimately she worked like a “Muse” to bring about unexpected results.
That’s funny. When I saw the dead Starbuck, I thought for sure that she was a cylon all that time. It just seemed to fit. I never associated her with the “angels” of the original series.