My Review Of The New Mini Series

[ravesholpulsar]

Well, I saw it.



After seeing the "preview" of Battlestar Galactica, I suspected it would be a boring. However I was stunned to learn that it was astonishingly utterly boring.

The contempt that corporations within the media have for fans and public alike, were clearly demonstrated this evening. Although I am not a major fan of Galactica, there was a scope and scale to the original which captured a "sense of wonderment" about the universe and humanity's place in the cosmos. Granted, this "man's place in the cosmos" idea doesn't make for good box office but for the medium of televison, it's just right.

Back to the remake.

After seeing Ronald Moore's idea of what writing is, I thought as I watched the show how much of this mediocrity he considered valid. The remake resembles nothing excpet it repeats the same ideas found in military movies and not particulalrly in any original way, especially when you consider what the original was about.

Yes, we already know the sci-fi channel wanted to use the title "Battlestar Galactica" because it's a cool sounding name. But they had to figure out how to remake this show without actually remaking this show. So, somewhere within the bowels of the sci-fi channel, it must have been decided to grab the cool sounding Galactica name and write "robots conquer humans" story. All that was needed to be done was use the names from the original series and voila, you have a show that has nothing to do with Galactica but you get to use the Galatica name. Brilliant marketing on their part indeed.

If you had removed the title "Battlestar Galatica" and called it "Stellar Warriors" (or something equally tacky), you'd never know this was based on Galactica. But hey, when it comes to suckering the public, it's just business.

Now to the so called "special effects" which the "filmmakers" claim would be special. Well, let me point out they're not. All the camera moves, the "hand held shots" all reminded me of Babylon 5, a show, which by the way in its heyday created SPECTACULAR space battles with EXACTLY the same technique. Only the Babylon 5 space battles for their limited budget managed to convey a scale of epic proporations which for television still have been unmatched in the last few years. The effects worked because the characters worked. Both writing and creative technique worked hand in hand to form a truly unique experience for sci-fi television.

The new effects for Galactica look like.... effects. The "ooo and ahhh" are replaced with a technique that cries "ain't it cool?" instead of having us being moved emotionally.

The music... Ive been collecting soundtracks for over 26 years and this is the most uninspired piece of music for television I've heard. I don't blame the composer, after all he's been TOLD what to convey. Understated music is used for "ambience" which is what's happened here.

The cast... well, good looking casts are not a crime. But for all the claims that we viewers were going to see sci-fi approached in a new way, this is the LEAST original way to do it.

To the makers of the new Galactica and to the sci-fi channel:

Please stop. Please stop pretending these shows and miniseries you're creating are actually good because we know they're not. You suckered us with good looking promos which last 30 seconds. So here's a suggestion: Why not make 30 second shows? At least this way we won't have to sit and have our senses assaulted with the badly executed programs you consistently produce. And one other thing, STOP claiming the stupid films you show are "a sci-fi premiere" when most of the time they're direct to video releases. You make it sound as if these boring films were nade for your boring channel.

To Ronald D. Moore: I'd KILL to be in your shoes. You're writing exemplifies what's wrong with the state of television (and sci-fi in particularl) and YOU GOT PAID. If I performed as poorly as you did at MY JOB, they'd can my ass. But you came out smelling sweet. Congrads are in order. But every writer (the boring ones), are found out for what they truly are. So save up your dinero my friend. At least you'll be able to retire a milliionaire and not give a damn about what us poor viewers think about your writing.

Not that you care now of course.

Regards

Rich

[dec5]

I think it went a step above my beloved B5 by miles....

And I have to disagree...the effects were down right gut wrenching.......seeing the contrast between the mushroom clouds and the lush green fields of Caprica was a vision that brought serious thought and feeling......this show is not a simple fairy tale.......the hand held camera effects were totally gripping. There was no dramatic background music to the most violent scenes...just silence......and explosions....

Again this show was not trivial in it's depictions.....it was very serious........and thought provoking.......


This show was far from boring.......It is a pleasant suprise I had not expected at all........

[jewels]

Ravelsholpulsar: just moved you so all the reviews are in the same forum.

[Commander Cain]

I thought the battle scenes were very small. Vipers shooting bullets instead of laser cannons. Very narrow angle. Odd viper manueverability for lack of a better word. Cant really tell whats is going on in the battle. No turrets on the Galactica. I could go on. Maybe I will.LOL
Whining, bitter, hateful,drunk, obnoxious characters. Conflicted, bitter people... of course that is how the Hollywood left in this country see the world. They think we will all relate to that crap too.
Good Stuff:
Having seen it now, the idea of the Humans creating the Cylons works ok I think. It creates a lot more possibilities in explaining the war in the first place. I do think the idea of its the humans fault they are hated smacks of the hate America first crowd's "it's our fault radical islam wants us dead." Good vs. Evil is a great story because there is evil in the world. Its not all grey. Lord of the Rings is a great example. So was the original bsg. I don't want to understand the Cylons or why they kill babies and nuke 12 planets. Why is irrelevent. The writers shoudn't try to make me sympathetic to the Cylons.
After seeing Caprica, I could tolerate a remake from the beginning if the story was true to the original. Perhaps flashback episodes(prewar). Seeing the potential of this, I could possibly even give up original cast if it was remade correctly. That ought to get a rise from some folks.

[LadySylvia]

From the first moment, when that female Cylon kissed that Colonial diplomat, I found myself wondering what the hell did I get myself into? And then I discovered . . . much to my disappointment.

It isn't terrible. Not at all. It simply lacked the magic, the great music and cheesy fun of the original series. The character, Starbuck, is a walking cliche of the macho female character (I wonder what Dirk Benedict is thinking). Grace Park's Boomer is cute, but she reminds me more of the Ensign Mayweather character in ENTERPRISE, instead of Herb Jefferson Jr.'s cool and mellow portrayal. And Apollo (aka Lee Adama - God, help me!) is simply anal. And what the hell is Mary McDonnell doing there? Besides wasting air time? Well, thank goodness for James Edward Olmos, who almost saved it for me.

Ronald Moore's creative contributions certainly didn't.

[ravesholpulsar]

Can you imagine is Edward James Olmos had replaced Lorne Greene's Adama in a remake of Battlestar Galactica with the ORIGINAL CAST??

It would have been FANTASTIC!! Even in this boring, lackluster remake this actor manages to convey a sense of reality and empathy.

He truly is a remarkable actor who doesn't bullsh*t from anyone.

As Adama, I would have loved to see a Galactica remake with the original cast and have James Olmos.

Even if he hadn't been Adama, he could have been the next commander of the Galatica and delivered a performance that would have MADE the show.

I agree this miniseries may not be the worst (remember Sci-fi channel's DUNE anyone?)

As I stated, this miniseries should not have been called Battlestar Galactica. If just as easily could have NOT BEEN and you wouldn't have to change much. But again, sci-fi channel wants NAME RECOGNITION. Nothing more. They just took names from a familiar show and forced fed it into another machine versus man plot.

The effects wern't emotional. I tell people if you wish to see great tv cgi effects with spectacular battles that are gripping, watch the final battles in the last few episodes of Babylon 5.

Or Watch the Babylon5 telefilm IN THE BEGINING. If you've seen it, you know there's more emotion, more plot and it's one of the finest examples of quality sci-fi writing. What I saw on this new Battlestar Galactica was nothing short of an astonishngly ineptitude that god willing, will cause the sci-fi channel to think twice before screwing with another franchise.

Compared side by side, I cared more deeply for the characters in the cgi ships on Babylon 5 in spite of the fact I knew I was watching low-tech effects. But the visceral quality was astonishing.

Handheld space shots are fine. Zooming in and out camera angles in space .... it's been done before and infinitely better.

However, we'll see what the ratings are. MOST people watching the channel aren't Galactica fans -- which the sci-fi channel is hoping for. They are the masses and massess decide what comes and goes when it comes to television.

Rich

[Dark_Man]

sorry but compiaring this stupid mini to B5 is just silly. B5 is 10 tiems better than this new BSG could EVER be. even if taken to series and "fixed".

At this point I'm just still in shock I guess. For everyhting Moore got right he screwed up 2-3 things. More importantly the screw ups were far more evedent than the good things.

Welp I'm over it. If they make a series of this then I think I might just stop watching tv all together.

[dvo47p]

Originally posted by ravesholpulsar Yes, we already know the sci-fi channel wanted to use the title "Battlestar Galactica" because it's a cool sounding name. But they had to figure out how to remake this show without actually remaking this show. So, somewhere within the bowels of the sci-fi channel, it must have been decided to grab the cool sounding Galactica name and write "robots conquer humans" story. All that was needed to be done was use the names from the original series and voila, you have a show that has nothing to do with Galactica but you get to use the Galatica name. Brilliant marketing on their part indeed.

If you had removed the title "Battlestar Galatica" and called it "Stellar Warriors" (or something equally tacky), you'd never know this was based on Galactica. But hey, when it comes to suckering the public, it's just business.
Rich

This mini was called Battlestar Galactica, "to maintain the franchise" Bonnie Hammer in Cinemascape: http://www.cinescape.com/0/Editorial...e&obj_id=35364

[jeditemple]

Originally posted by Dark_Man
sorry but compiaring this stupid mini to B5 is just silly. B5 is 10 tiems better than this new BSG could EVER be. even if taken to series and "fixed".

I agree. If anything, this BSG miniseries borrowed HEAVILY from Babylon 5...from the uniforms to the way the Starfurry maneuvers in space. I also so some wholesale ripoffs from Wing Commander, but that's not a compliment to this show (Kilrathi designs, ballistic weapons, use of missiles).

[ravesholpulsar]

Originally posted by dvo47p
This mini was called Battlestar Galactica, "to maintain the franchise" Bonnie Hammer in Cinemascape: http://www.cinescape.com/0/Editorial...e&obj_id=35364

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that the quote from Bonnie Hammer in Cinescape is something that should be accepted as a truthful statement?

My belief is that she made this statement about keeping the franchise alive when by franchise she meant the name. Updated or not, this mini series had nothing related to battlestar galactica except in name only.

I didn't mean to compare this mini against babylon 5. I only meant to explain that it reminded me of babylon 5's look and feel -- without the scope and scale and great storytelling ability.

I for one hope there are no more "remakes" "Reimaginings" "paying homage" or whatever wordy excuse untalented, unimagintive producers and writers like to use when re-creating ANYTHING. My personal belief is to tell them CREATE SOMETHING ON YOUR OWN and stop living off the successes of others. Television is the last place to be making a stand of originality, I know.

ANyway, perhaps we'll see Galactica one day with the awe and wonder it deserves.

Rich

[dvo47p]

Originally posted by ravesholpulsar
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that the quote from Bonnie Hammer in Cinescape is something that should be accepted as a truthful statement? Rich

Nope Rich, the Battlestar Galactica franchise was involved in a lawsuit, the creator Glen A. Lason sued Universal Studios. His intent was to remake Battlestar Galactica on TV. Alas Larson lost this part of the suit, thereby begeting the rush by The Scifi Channel owned by Universal to make a Battlestar Galactica on TV. If Universal had not done so the franchise would belong to Larson by default. Larson may now do a Battlestar movie.

Catch my drift, Rich?

[repcisg]

When all is said and done SciFi has gained very little. When Bonnie Hammer said "to maintain the franchise" she was saying the reimagine was to secure for Universal all rights to the Battlestar Galactica story and disenfranchise Glen Larson and his copyright. So despite all the protests from the fans off she went and spent Millions making a new mini. Glen remained strangely silent during this time.

Then just days before the initial broad cast Glen walks in with SAG (Screen actors Guild) support claiming “Original story by”, “written by” credit and demanding “a special consultant” credit & payment before the new mini could be aired.

He got it all!

Bonnie and the broadcast rights to a new series are right back into the soup.

[shiningstar]

I liked B5 and unlike the MINI ................
B5 never carried a TV14 rating preventing
my mother-in-law from watching it on her
new TV.

[malachi42]

I found that whole WGA/Glen Larson issue very interesting. The decision by the WGA came down about a week before the air date.
GL asked for story consultant and consulting producer credit, which they granted without any argument from the SCi Fi writers and producers. He then asked for shared screenwriting credit, alltough not a word of the script that he found objectionalble, was his, that was also granted. And then he took the writing credit under an assumed name, creating the impression that some unknown writer had helped write the script or was brought in to fix Ron Moores script. An interesting approach.