[…] Read our in-depth interview with Kevin R. Grazier here […]

[…] caught up with Kevin Grazier who we interviewed and the rest of the panel for some pictures exclusive for ScriptPhD.com, including a group shot […]

[…] ScriptPhD.com has an interview up with Kevin Grazier, the science advisor for the show.  If you’re like me and love science as much as the creative process, you’ll definitely want to check this out. […]

“there is a HUGE difference between automatically dissing somebody becasue they didn’t like the finale (which was absolutely not the case in this interview), and criticizing some of the arguments and motivations of some who, themselves, UNFAIRLY criticized the finale.”

This is my problem: how can someone possibly know the motivations of people who criticized the finale? There seems to be quite a bit of mindreading going on in this interview, not to mention sweeping generalizations. Shippers (though hardly the only group who voiced strong objections, as noted above) didn’t like Kara’s ending because they don’t like being ‘forced to think’? People wrote negative essays because they were already biased? That’s attacking the person, not the argument. It’s doesn’t do anything to advance his point.

We all have our own opinions, and we can choose to support them with detailed explanations or not; but in terms of dramatic rather than scientific choices like Kara’s poof ending, they’re not right or wrong — they’re entirely subjective. We can express disagreement about that, but we can’t tell other viewers what’s fair to feel (or assume we know the ‘real’ reason why they feel it).

Dr. Grazier can and should express his love and defense of the finale, but if he wanted to rebut his critics, I wish he’d responded to arguments about the science on the show instead of engaging in the kind of ad hominem attacks he claims he deplores.

I would like to kindly point out that there is a HUGE difference between automatically dissing somebody becasue they didn’t like the finale (which was absolutely not the case in this interview), and criticizing some of the arguments and motivations of some who, themselves, UNFAIRLY criticized the finale.

Just as fans have been given an outlet on multitudinous portals on the internet to voice their opinions (comprising a wide spectrum), so, too, does the creative talent responsible for giving us these shows deserve an opportunity to voice their interpretation of their creation.

We are grateful to Dr. Grazier for his time and are grateful to you, the fans, for following the show and leaving us your comments!

Glad this guy liked the ending, I guess he is the type that believes if he liked it then everyone else should like it as well.
Hate to tell him but there are many more than just a few”shippers” that disliked the finale.

Thank you for a great interview. You touched on several interesting topics and Dr. Grazier’s comments were very informative. And of course I am now intrigued by the forth coming book.

I will say that I am disappointed by the way that Dr Grazier and others associated with Battlestar Galactica continue to dismiss anyone who didn’t love the finale.

Great interview, and thanks so much for answering my question!

I think “if you take out the thrusters…” is the sort of thing that needed to have been onscreen to be 100% believable, but it does make much more sense than the Colony being pushed in by the nukes (but then, why don’t all the rocks and gas, which obviously don’t have thrusters to make constant adjustments with, fall into the singularity as well? And why weren’t Galactica and the Vipers making constant adjustments in order to stay out of it? Oh, well, it’s probably time to stop overthinking this! 🙂

Hopefully the DVD will have some extra footage for that scene… I’d love to see some spiffy CGI for the Colony’s demise!

Fabulous! What a broad-based interview, really hit on so much more than I could’ve ever hoped for.