Battlestar Galactica

Yeah, I know: a superlative. Curses to you both Ron Moore and David Eich- you have made it impossible for me to watch "Star Trek" again. Not since the first "Matrix" film in '99 have I sat at a screen and gaped in awe at the push my brain was given.

In three hours, we are introduced to a world, and a cast of characters, that are unrivaled in depth and seriousness. The story is compelling beyond belief. We are really there. We really care.

Topical, directed with talent and passion, and acted by people who deeply care about what they are creating, Battlestar Galactica sets the standard by which any filmed drama must be measured.

Nothing else will satisfy again. May BSG reign for years to come.

I've read a lot of your comments, and it amazes me how some people seem to think that the function of this mini-series (and hopefully series) is to cater to the whims of the fans of the original series. Sorry, that's not it.

The die-hard types -- the "fans" (and I am one, of BSG, BSG2003, Trek, B5, etc.) -- are never going to be more than a small fraction of the viewership of any television program. It must appeal to a broader audience, or it is DOOMED.

Ronald D. Moore -- in my opinion, one of the better writer-producers in sci-fi today -- took a concept that pleased just about nobody but the fans and reproduced it in a manner that made it interesting and watchable to a modern audience. And if you step outside of your "I want Lorne Greene, Richard Hatch, and Dirk Benedict" temper tantrums, you will find it interesting and watchable as well.

As for some of the main cast members -- like the Adamas pere et fils -- being stiff and inhuman...my friends, welcome to career military officer types. I would bet you're the same people who complained about Commander Jeffrey Sinclair in the first season of Babylon 5 as well. These are TRUE TO LIFE heroes, not the Saturday morning cartoon comic book heroes.

As for remolding Starbuck (does she drink a lot of coffee? ;-) and Boomer into women... well, I had my doubts at first, but I thought they did a magnificent job. As for the Cylons looking like humans now... well, only some of them do. And, to be perfectly honest, it makes a lot of sense for them to be able to blend in with their enemies. Anyone who has knowledge of terrorists in the Middle East knows that the reason they can get in to major civilian population centers and cause hideously evil damage and destruction is because THEY BLEND IN. Use some logic, people!

Much like when going to see a movie based on one of Tom Clancy's novels, I didn't go into this expecting to see the original. I went into it expecting to see something new and interesting with some similarities at the plot level. And I was not disappointed.

Since ENTERPRISE seems to be killing the Trek franchise -- and I admit, I enjoy ENTERPRISE a lot of the time, but a lot of people don't, and I can see why -- I am in high hopes a series based on BSG2003 can revitalize hope for on-going TV science fiction. I don't see why it shouldn't as long as people stop thinking they're going to get Lorne Greene. They're getting Edward James Olmos, one of the most brilliant actors in Hollywood, coming BACK to TV after a successful movie career... and how often does THAT happen?!?

Those who are used to SciFi's standard fare are likely to be a bit bored by the realism, character development, intelligent dialog, and lack of explosions, mutant organisms and/or poor special effects. This is REAL science fiction, not cheap shock effects strung together with a mediocre plot. Hand-held photography- pioneered in groundbreaking series like ER and Firefly - has started to become cliché. Nevertheless, it works in this film partly because it is not overdone. The shots alternate between a hand-held documentary feel and a more standard dramatic presentation.

I was never a big fan of the original Battlestar Galactica TV show, and I have only seen a few SciFi originals which did not embarrass me on behalf of the entire genre of science fiction (Farscape and both Dune Mini-series being the exceptions). SciFi hypes their productions heavily, and they are almost always disappointingly silly. So, I was not inclined to go into this with an open mind. If anything convinced me to give it a shot, it was the fact that E J Olmos was hired to play Adama and that Mary MacDonnell was on-board. To say the least, I was very pleasantly surprised by the production quality, intelligent script, and the cast. This is more than a reinvention of BSG, it is a vast improvement over the silly cowboy histrionics the first series devolved into.

The story begins just before an invasion of 12 planets colonized by humans. The invading force has infiltrated all of the defense networks by positioning key agents in positions where they can easily exploit vulnerabilities, and has basically disabled all planetary defenses, leaving everybody and everything vulnerable. There is no battle. The few vestiges left of the once thriving human population are those who were fortunate enough to have been in space at the time of the attack. From this dire premise, Battlestar Galactica proceeds.

All considered, this is a film about the human will to survive, redemption and the spirit of hope. Though dark, moody, and as fragmented as life often is, BSG is also driven, suspenseful, and very well written. The cast is as talented as it is visually striking - mixing weird beauty, youthful energy, and hard-edged agedness. None of the actors misstep, and each seems to know their character particularly well. This is an unusual quality for SciFi originals, and shows that the network invested in quality directing talent and worked with reasonable production deadlines (as opposed to rush-jobs).

I strongly recommend this film for serious science fiction fans.

Viewers either love this programme, or else they completely hate it. It seems there's no middle ground.

This incarnation does deviate from the standard format of BattleStar Galactica -- and indeed, from every single episode of every series produced in the 80s by Glen A Larson. The first scene has one of the leading roles played by a woman, the source of about half the griping. Apparently, women aren't supposed to be tough, nor fully-dressed, in space.

Also, no one's perfect. It's hard to faithfully jump in and worship the 2-3 main characters, like we're used to doing as children. Back then, the main characters flashed their CHiPs smiles, fired their blasters from the hip and got all the girls, even if they were blue. The main characters saved the day, reliably and on time, each and every week. By comparison, the characters in this series are barely keeping themselves together and obviously suffering from their environment, let alone trotting out the whitened smiles for the final chuckle at the 44th minute freeze-frame. The characters in this series, faithful to the style of modern scifi series like FireFly, are as realistic, as flawed and ultimately as believable as it gets, warts and all. The stories are generally well-written, well-acted and consistently cruel to the characters we want so dearly to like.

Be forewarned: This new BattleStar Galactica requires thought and some attention to detail. It's not metal chewing gum, and it doesn't suck up to the audience nor offer the safe and predictably mindless entertainment we're used to seeing in a space opera. But if you can stand occasionally hating your heroes, and if saccharine leaves a taste in your mouth, then you may just become a fan.

After Firefly was aborted in 2003, I lost interest in investing in "fringe" TV... At any time, loved characters could be axed and heartfelt universes unwritten...

So when BSG was released, I didn't even bother to watch and assumed that it would be canned after a couple of episodes.

When a third year was confirmed, however, I changed my mind and decided to start to watch it.

It was 2005 when I first saw Adama walk down the corridor and decry all networked computers. And I loved it.

Now, 13 years later I am rewatching it...

13 years.

Imagine that. That is the difference between 1987 and 2000...

That is the difference between: Superman IV The Quest For Peace, Inner Space, Masters of the the Universe, Predator and The Running Man

VS

The Matrix (Japan Release) Existenz and the X-Men.

13 years is a LONG TIME in terms of Sci Fi...

And yet, 13 years later, I'm rewatching Battlestar Galactica.

When I first watched it back in the day, I was unmarried, did not own a home and had no children... Now, I'm married, have two beautiful children and own an apartment.

Yet watching it today, it's as fresh and vibrant as it was all the way back then.

Moreover, I still view this as one of the finest pieces of "hard" science fiction ever aired. The science, the characterisations, the situations, the politics, the religious commentary, the ramifications of hubris and the sheer edge of seat drama is absolutely spot on.

13 years later and in an age where science fiction and fantasy are mainstream now, and are as acceptable as a crime and comedy, but still this story takes no prisoners.

Recently, The 100, Killjoys, Altered Carbon, Star Trek Discovery and the closest yet, of course, The Expanse, have all shown their mettle and revealed appealing dystopias or post apocalyptic charms, but at the end of the day, only one show has really covered all bases so satisfactorily...

Battlestar Galactica.