Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
How to take a legendary show and wreck it
Published on December 8, 2003 By Draginol In Movies & TV & Books

Well that sucked.

Remaking Battlestar Galactica was always a risky proposition under ideal circumstances. But these circumstances weren't ideal due to a series of seemingly arbitrary changes that eliminated a lot of the good will of the original fans.

By arbitrary I mean making Star Buck a girl. Making Boomer a girl. Hey, if you want to have girl power, put in new characters. The biggest arbitrary and I believe ultimately disastrous change was making the Cylons creations of the humans.  Look, by the time we have that kind of technology, I think it's safe to say we'd be pretty damn careful about making them not turn on us. And if we're too stupid to keep that from happening then sign me up as the first Cylon slaveling. Good grief. It's been done.

But alienating the original series fans is only the beginning of this show's journey to drek. Let's list off the things that help make this show a fraction of what it might have been...

  1. Terrible directing. The camera work is awful.
  2. Unlikeable characters.  Star buck in the original was a funny and charming character. The new one is a bitch. Apollo was a good hearted soul. The new one is a spoiled kid. Boomer was a confident solid figure. The new boomer (now a girl) is just weak.
  3. Ruining the Cylons. Whether it be their ugly ships or their change of the infamous red signal light sound effect zipping back and forth (except on the ships) the Cylons suck. But having human like Cylons really takes the cake. Human enough that one could have sex with one and not know it? Think about that when you watch it. The Cylons apparently have technology to essentially create human beings and yet they're firing missiles. MISSILES.
  4. Bad science. The new show's creators bragged about how they wanted to be more realistic. The problem is that when you do that, you can't just pick and choose. This is especially bad when the parts where they attempted to be "realistic" make the combat scenes far less enjoyable.  For example, gone are the great dog fights because they wanted to have the "asteroids arcade game" type affect where little thrusters have to be fired to maneuver a ship. They also pick and choose which sounds we get to hear in space. This nonsense that there's no sound in space is foolish because it all depends on your perspective and your definition of what is "sound".  A whole article could be dedicated to that but let's bear in mind that piddly things like no sound in space (so battles are largely soundless and thus boring) are chosen while ignoring that we have ships traveling through interstellar space seemingly beyond the speed of light using rockets (next week we get to see "Hyperlight" apparently).
  5. Arbitrary choices of bad science.  So when there's an opportunity to make use of science to explain a bad special effect or a boring action sequence, they take it. But bear in mind, they have artificial gravity under control apparently. And the thing about that is, once you have artificial gravity, you might as well just toss out feeling obligated to put micro thrusters on ships for maneuvering. You can just channel gravity and move ships in precision dog fighting in space just fine. At least it makes things interesting.
  6. The story was incredibly plodding in pacing while jumpy. Bad editing?
  7. The ships are terribly ugly. One of the best things about the original was how massive a battlestar looked. The new one looks crummy. The ships are generally fairly crummy looking too. They should have stuck with the originals rather than making them look so video-game-ish.

All that said, if they had not called it Battlestar Galactica, I would say it's a decent, those mediocre sci-fi drama.  But when you have such excellent source material to work with, there's no excuse to have such drek as the result.

I would give this 2 stars out of 5.


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Dec 11, 2003
Timmy: IIRC, Adama was still just a fighter jock in the first Cylon war. The Viper (mk 2, I believe?) that they brought into the Galactica to be the highlight of that (sad little,) flyby during the decomissioning ceremony was Adama's own viper, after all.

That being said - I too grew up with the original Galactica series - and I too have many fond memories of it, no matter how hideous the show really is/was - and yet... I don't mind the new reimaging at all. In fact - I /liked/ it.

Starbuck was a typical representation of a hotshot young fighter jock. If Starbuck had been a guy, not a single person would have probably batted a lash - but since they decided to make Starbuck a woman, people are suddenly finding it as an attempt at 'girl power' or some other ridiculousness. Isn't it time we grew up and moved beyond that?

Yup, I liked it. I don't care that they took many things from the original show and changed them around. WHY SHOULD I? It's creative license. Expecting something to remain 100% original to the, er, original is simply ludicrous.

It's really one of the best classic space-operas that TV or movie has managed to give us so far. Yes, it's full of cliche, but what of it? Good storytelling is -built- around cliche - and honestly, no matter /what/ they had done, there would have been a way to argue that it was full of cliches anyway.
on Dec 12, 2003
Draginol,
So what's wrong with missiles? Old school doesn't mean bad school. Use the right tool for the job. The technology available to the characters is not explained, we can only surmise based on our own assumptions of technological advance. Why, after 100 years of flight, do we not have flying cars? Because as cool as a flying car might be, wheels are more intuitive and practical. Missiles and bullets. Kinetic energy weapons? Particle beams? They need complex powersupplies and can't fire around a corner or over a hill. You can steer a missile. Ground artillery can lob a warhead over a hill and far away. Bullets use a cheap and proven powersource. Gotta use what works.

Artificial gravity? Who says it will fit in a viper?

Sound in space? I thought it was a nice change. Sure, "soft whoosh" is no more real than "f*****g ZOOM!" in space, but it gave the battles a different feel that was refreshing.

Cylons as "human"? I agree with you there. Shoulda stuck with the robots (actually, in the BG novel, Glen Larson said they were biological under the armor--the producers went with machines because you can shoot and kill all the machines you want, but even slimey lizards in armor have rights). I suppose the producers felt the need to create tension and suspicion (sleeping with the enemy, as it were). On the other hand, a war with machines starts up "unwelcome" discussions of sentience and existence. A show that provokes "thoughts"? EEEKK! Save me.

I thought the opening scene with the camera that gets knocked by debris was cute. An obvious bid for credibility. The director trying too hard to bridge the gulf between fantasy and reality. Better to just let the characters speak for themselves than to force the issue. The smash zooms and seeking cameras in space, straight out of sports TV coverage, also an attempt to bridge the gulf. All these things do is draw attention to themselves. It brings us out of the movie. It stands up and says: "Hey! here I am! I'm like, real, eh?" The original Star Trek created reality and real honest pathos despite sets seemingly made of cardboard. The unfortunate result of good writing and good acting (Shatner bashers, sit down! Compare Kirk and Shatner: They are two different people. Kirk is the quintessential dashing young hero. Shatner is...well, Shatner. If that isn't great acting, I don't know what is.)

The success of any show, is completely dependant on how much you care about the characters. Even the villians. It is one thing to like a character. It is also one thing to despise a character (notice I said "character"; like them or hate them, you must believe in them). It is another thing entirely to not care.

Some of the show was OK. There were many interesting moments, but all too many uninteresting ones. I would probably watch a few episodes if it were a series, but not many more.

But I wouldn't call it crap.
on Dec 15, 2003
Well, I caught about the last 15-20 minutes of the first half, and all the second (upgrading a RAID and incidental backup/restore will leave you time on your hands).

I think I'd buy the DVD of it - It wasn't the original BG (and I missed most of the first half-which is where Draginol apparently had his doubts of it).

OTOH, I *liked* the new Starbuck; thought Apollo was way too quiet and non-assertive; and am really interested in the Dr. Bargas (?) character and his flirtations with evil and the Cylons - I found myself *caring* what was going to happen to him, even though he's quite obviously responsible for the failure of the defenses...

If it went on to be a full-time show, I'd watch it, despite the negatives. There just isn't that much good stuff on (and the last good thing I found, 24, I couldn't make the time to keep up with).
on Dec 15, 2003
I loved the orginal seriies but anyone being objective one has to admit it was EXTREMELY shallow. The new serious is vastly deeper and if you have an opend mind you can see that it ROCKS. Why remake something and make it the same? That would be far more insulting to the original. Give credit where it's due you loser!
on Dec 17, 2003
Well I have to say I remember how much I like the old series, I mean I jumped at the chance to own the box set. Oh then I remembered I was not 6 or 7 anymore and I didn't have to ask my parents to stay up and watch it. I feel that memory of the old series was better then the show itself. I really liked the new version, and yes it ran slow in places. I feel it gave a lot more (possible depth) then just another wagon train remake. I will watch the new series no problem but it is conditional, No Triad outfits from the old series. There we go I am a happy.
on Dec 17, 2003
im 18 and have only seen several of the original series and let me tell u they sucked. i enjoy watching them sometimes but they were corny. come on there at war and everyone is all happy and merry. the new one is better because it shows what real humans would act like in a war situation. has far as all the kissing goes be real here if u nearly died wouldn't u find the nearest person whose opposite your sex and makeout i would. Starbuck and Boomer females big deal there are women pilots in the military today what a surprise there are women pilots in the future. and if im not mistaken there was like an entire squadron of female pilots in the original and no one bitched then. i hate space operas and making the new BSG more realistic is a definite improvment. if SciFi makes this into a real series i'll watch ever episode.
on Dec 18, 2003
Either you like it, or you hate it. That's human nature.
"Give credit where it's due you loser!" - Hey Smither, your whole comment (which had some relevance) was completely tossed out the window by your last sentence.
How can your opinion have any value now? Le sigh.


As for the BG series..it's hard to re-make the original and please everyone. Look at it this way, which generation will spend more time and money watching the new stuff? The younger generation. So if they don't cater to the 'original' series fans..I don't think it breaks too many hearts in the production office.

I could be wrong.
on Dec 19, 2003
The new BG was good for one thing: proving yet again that a mixed-gender military is the worst idea since "don't ask, don't tell." (yes, there were female "warriors" in the orignal, because they were desperately short of manpower). Oh, and it was total crap, too.
on Jan 03, 2004
Another reason I say it was total crap: The characters were universally unlikeable.

In the original, all of the characters were good guys. They were different in different ways but they were people that you rooted for.

In the new one, I couldn't help but think that the Cylons were just putting thise sad sacks out of their misery.
on Jan 04, 2004
What? Is this a syndicated show or something? I@have never even heard of it.

Oh well, my parents wouldn't let me watch the original series anyway. They made me watch "60 Minutes." How sad!

Have a Battlestar-Happy Day!
on Jan 06, 2004
I agree with another poster. The new galactica sucks. The female starbuck was a bitch. Apollo was lousy as well. I haven't seen such a terrible show in many years. It really stunk! They should have created a new ship with different enemys other than the cylons. I have some good advice for todays writers and producers. Don't try to beat a classic because you'll get burned every time. Create your own material and leave the old classics alone. That's a real big problem with today's writers and producers. Their no good at what they do. They just can't cut the mustard. It reminds me of one of those old japanese movies. You remember? The one's that had extreamly cheap graphics. You would think with all these new computers we could make better movies, but i'm beginning to think the old movies had much better graphics. Even the old cartoons had better graphics as well.

By the way, I only seen two Battlestar Galactica shows and suddenly it was over. They left people wondering, what the hell happened next? Did they find earth, did a huge meteor crash into the galactia killing all on board? Did they suddenly run out of food and then starved to death in the dark vastness of space? Did the female starbuck dose off with a cigar causing an out of control fire that engulfed them all? Did they suddenly come upon the Enterprise when a nervous out of control James T Kirk shot first, and then asked questions later, something like, "who the hell was that?!!" Or did they run out of fuel middle ways, between their home planet and earth. Then they all perished while looking for a tow. Or maybe they chose planet Kling by mistake, thinking it was earth, and much like General Custer with a horde of raging Indians, the Klingons massacred the whole crew? Or maybe they came across the Borg and was a simulated into their weird hive....Course they could have jumped into light speed, and met themselves in another dimention, and then they died of mere shock from the experience of it all. What ever happened to the Galactica and it's gallant crew was left a mystery. They left everyone hanging.....
on Jan 18, 2004
The new BSG mini-series was pretty good as a teaser for a series so hopefully they will make one. I think that it will be a good series if that is the case. If there is no series, then I wish that they would have added some more battle scenes, shown more of the destruction of the 12 colonies and the battlestars. It might have cost some money but that's what we wanted to see.

The changing of the characters gender and race was a pretty good idea as it made it more modern and interesting.

Overall, not bad but I'd love to see more.
on Jan 23, 2004
I LOVED IT... yes I loved the remake.. Lightyears (no pun intended) ahead of the original... If you want to criticize directing and acting, you ll have a feild day with the original. The only 3 things that saved the origianl was Lorne Green, John Colicos, And the special effects ( for their time, were pretty good). BUT what was bad with the original... scripts, directing, editing, acting, just look at Richard Hatch acting in the original, and Terry Carter ( col Tigh) : talk about no talent... at least in the remake you have fairly decent acting, Edward James Olmos Is outstanding as the new Adama, and the CGI is beyond belief. The fact that the the main characters such as Starbuck and Boomer are now females should be applaudes, not shunned. In the original the females were all weak willed, or sexual objects ( and dont tell me it was the 70s because back then there were strong female role portrayed on TV). The camera direction is a little distracting, but you get used to it.
I generally felt for the characters, especialy when the president has to make that decision of leaving behind the non FTL ships.
Dont tell me that the scripts from the original even came close to that type of story telling.
For everyone who says that the remake was terrible.. I would hope you would take the time and watch it again.
PLEASE CONTINUE MAKING THE SERIES!!!!!!
on Jan 30, 2004
you're a kook. this show was great. have you even seen the original lately? i loved it too when i was young, but hey, it really does NOT stand the test of time. and i LOVE starbuck being a chick! her and boomer are HOT!! the old series was very male chauvenistic. it couldn't possibly have been made in these enlightened days we live in. anyhoo, that's it. -bobby
2 Pages1 2