Toggle menu
Toggle preferences menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Editing User:Galactica1981/Galactica 1981 Reviews

From the only original and legitimate Battlestar Wiki: the free-as-in-beer, non-corporate, open-content encyclopedia, analytical reference, and episode guide on all things Battlestar Galactica. Accept neither subpar substitutes nor subpar clones.
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 37: Line 37:
'''Rating: Two stars out of five'''
'''Rating: Two stars out of five'''


After only two episodes, Battlestar Galactica's creative energy has fizzled out. This is the first of the so-called "bottled episodes." These episodes had few if any new special effects, enabling the producers to save money which would later be spent on the bigger, more extravagant "monster episodes." It's understandable that these "bottled" stories were necessary, but this is where rushing the show into production really hurt the series. The writers simply did not have time to create quality scripts. Of course, this would ultimately lead to the decline in ratings.
After only two episodes, Battlestar Galactica's creative energy has fizzled out. This is the first of the so-called "bottled episodes." These episodes had few if any new special effects, enabling the producers to save money which would later be spent on the bigger, more extravagant "monster episodes." It's understandable that these "bottled" stories were necessary, but this is where the rushing the show into production really hurt the series. The writers simply did not have time to create quality scripts. Of course, this would ultimately lead to the decline in ratings.


This kind of episode is tough to review because it's good but wrong. Based on the classic 1953 western film Shane, this actually makes a pretty decent western, but Battlestar Galactica is supposed to be a science fiction series. Sci-fi fans want science fiction, not half-hybrids of other shows (A mistake that Galactica 1980 would repeat). If I want to see a Western, I'd rather watch Bonanza. The only reason this gets two stars is because we get such a strong characterization of Apollo.  
This kind of episode is tough to review because it's good but wrong. Based on the classic 1953 western film Shane, this actually makes a pretty decent western, but Battlestar Galactica is supposed to be a science fiction series. Sci-fi fans want science fiction, not half-hybrids of other shows (A mistake that Galactica 1980 would repeat). If I want to see a Western, I'd rather watch Bonanza. The only reason this gets two stars is because we get such a strong characterization of Apollo.  

To edit this page, please enter the words that appear below in the box (more info):

Refresh
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

  [] · [[]] · [[|]] · {{}} · · “” ‘’ «» ‹› „“ ‚‘ · ~ | °   · ± × ÷ ² ³ ½ · §
     [[Category:]] · [[:File:]] · [[Special:MyLanguage/]] · <code></code> · <nowiki></nowiki> <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> · <syntaxhighlight></syntaxhighlight> · <includeonly></includeonly> · <noinclude></noinclude> · #REDIRECT[[]] · <translate></translate> · <languages/> · {{#translation:}} · <tvar|></> · {{DEFAULTSORT:}} · <categorytree></categorytree> · <div style="clear:both;"></div> <s></s> User page identification box: {{userpage}} Spammer identification box: {{spammer}}


Your changes will be visible immediately.
  • For testing, please use the sandbox instead.
  • On talk pages, please sign your comment by typing four tildes (~~~~).