In the show Caprica, they use several actors who also appeared in Battlestar Galactica. Caprica is supposed to have taken place at the very beginning of Cylon creation (well before the advent of human-form Cylons). Are they trying to tell us something we didn't know, such as Cylons outside of the '12' or were the creators simply using actors they knew and liked? If the latter is true, it seems a bit tortuous and demonstrates a blatant disregard for fans. They, surely, must have known that endless theories would be presented in an attempt to explain this.

  • Just a random speculation, but isn't it possible that when the cylons decided to create humanoid versions, they based their appearance on records of real people? Were the characters who these actors played "important" people in the context of the show's world (leaders, scientists etc.)? – Hypnosifl Jul 19 '14 at 19:36
  • @Hypnosifl The Zoe AI was to become the basis of the Number Six Cylons, who look nothing like her – Izkata Jul 19 '14 at 19:53
  • Then that would imply that the 'persons' we see in Galactica are Cylons; which is the point of my question. Otherwise how could 'real' people be walking around on Galactica later. – xXGrizZ Jul 19 '14 at 19:53
  • Just to clarify, the people in question were misc. people in Caprica who showed up in Galactica without ever being accused or assumed to be Cylons. – xXGrizZ Jul 19 '14 at 19:55
  • 1
    OK, I misunderstood--I thought when you talked about "actors who also appeared in Battlestar Galactic" you meant actors who played cylons on Galactica playing non-cylons on Caprica, but if you actually meant that non-cylons on Galactica also appeared as non-cylons on Caprica, I think this could just be a "Back to the Future III" type scenario where some character's ancestor is played by the same actor as the original character. – Hypnosifl Jul 19 '14 at 22:59

Ronald D. Moore spoke about the re-using of actors from BSG in Caprica. Although he doesn't specifically reference human-form cylons, the clear implication is that casting decisions are an out-of-universe decision and that fans shouldn't read any special significance into it.

Is the re-using of actors from Battlestar in Caprica, is it a direct reference to ancestry?

We're kind of being vague about that. We're not really specifically saying that those are the actual ancestors of the characters they played, but if the audience would like to think that, there's really no reason why they can't.

  • I suspected as much. Considering the time frame, them being secret Cylons is really out of the question. Basically, they liked those actors and he came up with an off the cuff answer to a question regarding the decision. Always the producer and a good one. Thanks for the answer. – xXGrizZ Jul 19 '14 at 20:03
  • Still though, I think it's a little disingenuous to use the same person in a universe where the whole idea is to notice people who look identical. – xXGrizZ Jul 19 '14 at 20:05
  • Out of 15 titled characters in "Blood and Chrome", 10 of them had already had roles in either BGS or Caprica. 7 had already had roles in both. – Valorum Jul 19 '14 at 20:06
  • 1
    Actually, just to clarify that point, a better analogy would be if the Borg hinted in the last episode of TNG that they might have created a Picard clone then in Voyager, Pat Stewart played a role and the creators just said, "It's merely a coincidence, pay no attention." – xXGrizZ Jul 19 '14 at 20:22
  • 1
    @xXGrizZ - They recycled Trek actors like you wouldn't believe. Jeffrey Combs had nine separate characters, including several episodes where he had roles opposite himself. – Valorum Jul 19 '14 at 20:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.