33

I am writing this review, and i have seen the complete show carefully and many times now. First i want to say that the bad comments and reviews i've read before on IMDb, all over the show, I truly believe that they all never really got the big picture here. This wasn't meant for them to understand(yet)?! But there were plenty of reviews that i cannot compare to yet. They confirmed just the things i knew already. This is the best 4 year movie the human race has ever met/made. And yes, it is a drama in the first place and the science fiction, well, you get that for free with it. You have to have a deep soul to watch this, cause it makes you cry for sure at times. But it is that what makes it so damn good. It is not just a show. it is just art in its purest form. It does let you almost feel as if you are on the Battlestar Galactica yourself.

This is the award that made me lose all respects for the Hugos.

If such a "distinguished" panel can't see or care about the obvious story-telling problems of Battlestar Galactica, then what worth is their award? The answer: not much.

Award-winning shows should be examples of creativity and excellence, neither of which are in evidence in BG, in this episode or any other that I've seen.

Shooting in drab video is not "artistic", it's just cheap. Shaking the camera is not "creative" it's vomit-inducing and lazy as can be.

All BG has shown is how corrupt most award-giving "academies" really are and how easy it is to buy awards with a lot of PR money.

The poor reviews posted here seem to be based on a common misunderstanding: that this is a nonsensical and boring introduction to a supposedly highly praised series. This is due to a huge flaw in the way in which Battlestar Galactica is presented on IMDb and on streaming services. "33" is technically not the first episode of the series. In actual fact, there is a two-part pilot miniseries (running 180 minutes) which sets up the events of the series. It's typically packaged separately, which causes a great deal of confusion for those who are not aware of the proper viewing order. A serious flaw on the part of the creators, to be sure. But one might understand better if the series is viewed from the proper beginning.

Additionally, one should also be aware that this is not a traditional sci-fi. If you're looking for blinking lights and transporters and long-winded conversation about fancy futuristic technology... look somewhere else. This show is about human behavior and the human condition. It's about people first and foremost; it just happens to take place in space. In the same way that a show taking place in the western United States doesn't automatically make it a Western genre series about the Wild West. Do Battlestar fans consider it sci-fi? Absolutely. But it's a reinvention of sci-fi.

Those who take issue with the mention of god/gods have clearly missed the point of the underlying social commentary. They've also overlooked the obvious possibility for sci-fi to put science and reason to the concept of gods and higher powers, or to view all of these concepts from a philosophical view, which is where Battlestar differs from sci-fi of the past. While previous shows in this genre took a more literal approach with "cool technology" and gimmicks, Battlestar sets the stage with how people react emotionally to fear, and war, and loss, and trauma, and all of the flaws in the human condition. It makes us think about our own humanity-and what makes us human. One needs only to look at present day sci-fi to see how Battlestar influenced the genre and changed everything (even current Stark Trek incarnations) to embrace serialized dramatic storytelling with darker tones and more human substance, now preferring that structure over old-fashioned isolated, self-contained episodes in which everything resets back to normal at the end of the hour.

This was dreadfully slow. There wasn't any explanation as to what was happening except one character saying something like 'why do the cylons come every 33 minutes'. They were writing on a dry erase board and one guy was wearing a shirt and tie??? This is supposed to be Sci Fi??? I got so bored I fell asleep 33 minutes in. THAT should be why it's called 33.

The crew of Galactica is exhausted after 237 consecutive jumps in intervals of 33 minutes and 132.25 hour without sleep to escape from the Cylons. When Galactica is contacted by the Olympic Carrier, a vessel with more than 1,300 persons, Commander William Adama (Edward James Olmos) and (Mary McDonnell) are advised that there is a traitor on board. However, Dr. Gaius Baltar (James Callis) convinces both leaders that the Olympic Carrier is a menace to the refugee fleet led by Galactica.

In the end of the 70's, "Battlestar Galactica" was a charming series with Capt. Apollo, Lt. Starbuck, Cmdr. Adama and the crew and survivors in this warship. This "updated remake" is reasonable, with a female "Starbuck" and better special effects, but without charismatic characters and the charm of the original show. President Laura Roslin is an awfully ridiculous, useless and inconsistent character, since the hopeless woman has cancer and is a secretary of education that hates politics, but suddenly she thinks that she is a military strategist, sharing the leadership of the survivors with experienced military commanders in times of war. With regard to "33", I am still trying to understand why the Cylons have not simply destroyed the vessel to protect the despicable Gaius. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "33"