wdrr
Joined Apr 2002
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews8
wdrr's rating
I have been watching this show since the mini-series and have not missed an episode yet. I also own the DVD's and I am just not understanding the terrible reviews.
I watched the original Battlestar Galactica when it aired in the 70's and I primarily watched the show because it was either that or "Hee-Haw." When combined with my penchant for Star Wars, I found the original BSG to be bland. I wanted to like it because it had a cool story, cool look, and reasonably cool special effects (for the 1970's anyway).
In reality; however, I always thought the original show sucked! It had terrible writing, some really silly scenarios, and the characters were wooden & underdeveloped (you couldn't love/hate them because they were uninteresting). That being said, it was still certainly a better alternative than "Hee-Haw." Now here we are over 25 years later and Battlestar Galactica is everything that it should have been in the 70's. The characters are rich & interesting, the story lines are serious & compelling, and the Special FX are far superior to a lot of the other crap on Sci-Fi. What I don't understand is how people can rate this show as terrible compared to the original? This show has some of the better writing on TV today, and has taken some wonderful steps at making it engaging (webisodes, Razor, etc) and wraps it into a nice package that accurately describes how messy human life can be. There is real drama where there was none before and it has a darker more serious tone. What exactly is not to like about it? (Granted they could really screw things up with some stupid writing twists in the upcoming season - but I am talking about up to this point).
Unlike the wimpy Star Trek crap, where they tip-toe around peril, and dance the Bossa Nova through space... this show actually gives a sense of despair, victimization, and danger. Who actually wants to go back to pickin' & grinnin' by settling for a "Hee-Haw" substitute when you have great characters, great writing, great special FX, and a show that is unapologetically about misery, suffering, sacrifice, and hope in trying times? Do I like everything about the new BSG? No. There are some things that bug me; however, this is an overall good re-imagining. Would you really rather the show not be available and instead go watch Oprah or Ellen? (Help us if you do).
... and to all of you original BSG fans. This is not meant to be a knock on the original BSG (because it was a product of the times and studio funding). I agree that it is a great concept and always was (but lets face it, it never lived up to its potential). I just find the new version to be far more interesting, engaging, and suspenseful.
I watched the original Battlestar Galactica when it aired in the 70's and I primarily watched the show because it was either that or "Hee-Haw." When combined with my penchant for Star Wars, I found the original BSG to be bland. I wanted to like it because it had a cool story, cool look, and reasonably cool special effects (for the 1970's anyway).
In reality; however, I always thought the original show sucked! It had terrible writing, some really silly scenarios, and the characters were wooden & underdeveloped (you couldn't love/hate them because they were uninteresting). That being said, it was still certainly a better alternative than "Hee-Haw." Now here we are over 25 years later and Battlestar Galactica is everything that it should have been in the 70's. The characters are rich & interesting, the story lines are serious & compelling, and the Special FX are far superior to a lot of the other crap on Sci-Fi. What I don't understand is how people can rate this show as terrible compared to the original? This show has some of the better writing on TV today, and has taken some wonderful steps at making it engaging (webisodes, Razor, etc) and wraps it into a nice package that accurately describes how messy human life can be. There is real drama where there was none before and it has a darker more serious tone. What exactly is not to like about it? (Granted they could really screw things up with some stupid writing twists in the upcoming season - but I am talking about up to this point).
Unlike the wimpy Star Trek crap, where they tip-toe around peril, and dance the Bossa Nova through space... this show actually gives a sense of despair, victimization, and danger. Who actually wants to go back to pickin' & grinnin' by settling for a "Hee-Haw" substitute when you have great characters, great writing, great special FX, and a show that is unapologetically about misery, suffering, sacrifice, and hope in trying times? Do I like everything about the new BSG? No. There are some things that bug me; however, this is an overall good re-imagining. Would you really rather the show not be available and instead go watch Oprah or Ellen? (Help us if you do).
... and to all of you original BSG fans. This is not meant to be a knock on the original BSG (because it was a product of the times and studio funding). I agree that it is a great concept and always was (but lets face it, it never lived up to its potential). I just find the new version to be far more interesting, engaging, and suspenseful.
This show had potential and decided to squander it. Instead of being a science fiction show meant to entertain, it became a liberal mouthpiece and completely intolerable to watch. The only thing missing was having them hold hands at the end of each episode and sing "Kumbaya."
That is not to say that it didn't have moments of brilliance (i.e. "The Best of Both Worlds") but those moments were few & far between. Star Trek should be completely shelved for another 20-30 years and come back (re-imagined) when Hollywood has had an enema.
Save yourself the grief and the waste of time. Invest your time in something with real talent.
That is not to say that it didn't have moments of brilliance (i.e. "The Best of Both Worlds") but those moments were few & far between. Star Trek should be completely shelved for another 20-30 years and come back (re-imagined) when Hollywood has had an enema.
Save yourself the grief and the waste of time. Invest your time in something with real talent.