I just wanted to update the people on here as to what Ron Moore and David Eick has being saying about the finale. On the Chicago Tribune feature blogs, there is a reporter that is a big fan and looks to be very connected to Ron Moore, because his aswers there were not the stock answers he gave in others I read. When asked about Kara, he stated :
MR: There's part of you that likes ticking off the fans a little bit, right? [laughs] Do you ever anticipate it? Are there moments when you go, "I'm OK with this development, it works for me, and I think it'll really tick people off!"
RDM: As long as I'm pretty secure in what it is and the reasons why we're doing it, as long as we're not doing it just to tick them off. This is very much in that ballpark. We had lots of discussions about it, we explored lots of different avenues, and they were just all unsatisfying. If she just sprouted wings and flew up to the clouds, it would not be a satisfying ending. It just wouldn't. We never heard and I have yet to hear a concrete definition of Kara Thrace that becomes more satisfying than what we have.
What we have a has a sort of poetry and mystery to it and preserves the mystery and sort of lets people debate and think and wonder what she meant and where she came from and what that was all about. And it's also clear that she was about getting them to their salvation. She was the harbinger of death, and brought them to that, and she was the harbinger of life and brought them to that as well.
MR: I know that you don't let yourself be guided by what you think the fan reaction might be, and you do what you feel is right for the show, but the ending of Kara - her just disappearing like that. That'll certainly be a starting point for debate.
RDM: Oh yeah, it'll be controversial. There will be people who will absolutely hate it and think that we failed in our mission. We debated it in the [writers] room, I thought about it a long time, and I had sort of the same answer. And the more I struggled to give definition to it, the less satisfying it became. There various avenues we went down, discussions, saying she's specifically this or that. And every time it felt uninteresting and kind of pedestrian.
It felt like, if she's truly connected to the Eternal, if she's connected to this other power, this other thing in the universe, as long as you know she's connected to it and she's fulfilled her destiny, brought us to this place, brought us to two Earths, really, that's enough. That should just be left to your imagination, left to your inquiry, left you to try to fill in the blanks we leave. That was my answer and I'm sure -- I know - people will debate it.
RDM: That's a legitimate way to look at it too. We talked about that, that is a legitimate way to read it.
MR: But the Head characters can't actually interact with the world, so it's not quite that.
RDM: This is a different thing, so it doesn't fit neatly into that category either.
MR: The more I think about it, the more I think the Starbuck debate might set the Internets on fire.
RDM: I have more than accepted the fact that there will be people who will never quite get over that.
Just some fun info for people still looking for answers, thought I would bring it to this forum. The main thing I got from it was she was the harbinger of death as she lead them to Earth 1 and the harbinger of life when she led the to Earth 2.