SF Signal: Set your Tivos

I saw the 'making of' last night - ack!

Starbuck is now a chick.

Boomer is now a chick.

Cylons have 'evolved' into near-human appearance.

The red floating eye is now on the cylron raider ship it self (which looks disturbingly like batman's airplane) rather than on the cylons.

Uh, Houston, we have a problem.

Posted by Scott on Monday December 08, 2003 at 2:23 PM

Oh dang, I missed 28 minutes of it already. I was really looking forward to seeing that She-Cylon too. I guess I'll have to wait for the DVDs.

Posted by Peter on Monday December 08, 2003 at 8:29 PM

Hmm, well, all I'll say right now is:

It's not Battlestar Galactica, although its called that. However, I thought it was decent enough. Fanboys need not apply. More later.

Oh, that Tricia Helfer is hot. Literally! Wouldn't Baltar notice something aflame, err, amiss? Maybe he was too busy at the time...

Posted by JP on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 12:31 AM

First, I haven't actually watched it completely, but I am recording it. So, I understand that this is not like the old (crappy) Battlestar Galactica of our youth. It was never intended to be an exact remake of that old show with updated CGI. Personally, I would have been more depressed if it had been. And what if they chose to give everything a different name - would it have been better?

Just wondering...

Oh and yeah if all Cylons looked like that - you can have my planet...

Posted by Tim on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 9:00 AM

It wasn't bad. I would watch a TV series based on this, but only if the stories were good. What did annoy my was the use of the CGI zoom during the space battles. Bah.

Oh, maybe they'll fix this tonight, but I didn't think they did a good job of presenting the enormity of the 12 colonies being destroyed. It just didn't feel big. The original movie had death and destruction everywhere. This one showed a planet from space being nuked in several places, a mushroom cloud as seen from the ground (lame-o) and a couple of piddly space battles. I think they dropped the ball here. We'll see if they fix it tonight.

Posted by JP on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 9:05 AM

I missed it, but check out the post-review at CNN...especially the Richard Hatch paragraph:

"I had a lot of anger and frustration because I saw a studio not on any level being receptive to what the vast majority of fans wanted," the actor says in his small apartment littered with "Battlestar" paraphernalia, including a lunchbox, posters and videos.

Sad. Very sad.

Posted by John on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 9:35 AM

Replaying?!?!? Now you tell me...

Actually, Robert told me about the replays and I did set my TiVo for them. It's only two parts, right??

Posted by Peter on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 10:58 AM

Sad is the way Richard Hatch is acting. I mean really he is probably more bitter that they didn't do his version that he spent years trying to work up. I saw the making of on Sci Fi last week and he was interviewed on it, and he didnt seem that bitter at the time.

Posted by Tim on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 11:38 AM

As I've said before, there is a reason BG:TOS didn't last long. It wasn't good. Why would anyone stick to a proven, losing formula? Hatch did seem more receptive, as Tim said, in the the featurette, but the BG fan boys need to get over it. BG:TOS had a couple of decent shows, but otherwise, it sucked dingo's kidneys.....

Posted by JP on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 1:57 PM

They should do a revamp of the old Buck Rogers series complete with the babes of today with the skimpy outfits of yesteryear...

Posted by Peter on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 2:02 PM

I wast 10 years old when BG came out - I thought it kicked ass. It was Star Wars on the small screen. I loved it.

That said, seeing reruns made me realize that the show was pretty poor. I think they should have let sleeping dogs lie, create a new series based on a similar idea (humans running from the computers they created) and just not called it BG. Instead, they are trying to cash in on BG's fame (which in all honesty it really has, despite the show not being that good.)

I was surprised to hear that it only lasted one season according to the featurette. They completely ignored Galactica 1980 (only 6 episodes where shown) where they ended up on Earth. Trivia - did you know that Patrick Stuart appeared on Galatica 1980 - he was a regular character named Dr. Zee who turned out to be the child of an extra-dimensional being helped off a dying planet by Starbuck (when he was still alive - he's gone in the timelien that is G1980.)

Oh, and the BattlestarGalactica.com domain is owned by Richard Hatch - and he maintains the web site. Is Hatch what Wil Wheaton will become in a few years?

Posted by Scott on Tuesday December 09, 2003 at 3:29 PM