BattleStar Galactica?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
If you're confused by this like I was, Netflix has the miniseries as the first two episodes of Season 1. They're labeled as such if you accessed the series via the Netflix web interface, but NOT labeled that way if you got to it via xbox 360.

there's also a bunch of webisodes and the "movie" between season 3 and 4, yeah? I'm kind of confused with the order.

one group of webisodes (all of these are found on the website) is between season 2.5 and 3--though it is almost completely useless. meaningless characters introduced then tossed to the dust bin--then the movie, which is a backstory, prior to season 4. (this is currently not working on Netflix via PS3. it keeps locking up for me. it is labeled as episode 1 under season 4).

Then, it seems that the second group of webisodes occurs between season 4 and 4.5? I endured a few spoilers trying to figure this crap out. Not sure how accurate that is...
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Well, I'm pretty sure I know where this is heading, and it isn't unique, really--or shocking in where the story has been going from the beginning.

The benefit of watching several seasons in the time of a few weeks is that you can see that the story is more cohesive than a lot of the long-time fans want to admit.

Agreed, at least I'm assuming you mean that the story flowed and meshed together properly throughout the entire series. If that is the case, I generally agree.

I actually thought each turn of the main plot arcs were incredibly well-done... a well-done story will usually push a few characters around, and viewers won't always agree or find certain things appropriate for a specific character.
It had it's mountains and valleys as a general story, and a few moments many fans don't think were well-done or enjoyable at all.

For instance, almost every single person hates Season 3. I loved that season. Not my favorite overall, but I find it hard to put any words together that says I like the other seasons more, without it also saying Season 3 was a let-down. Because it was fantastic imho, and almost an entirely different animal from the rest of the show - but the themes stood out just as well, which is what keeps the different plot arcs so beautifully weaved together.

I was just browsing the wiki page, looking for season information, and came across this section.
Throughout its run, the series earned critical acclaim from Time Magazine, National Review, Rolling Stone,[41][42] Newsday, The New York Times, The New Yorker, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Chicago Tribune, and Entertainment Weekly.[43]

Diane Werts of Newsday wrote: "You can look at this saga any way you want—as political drama, religious debate, psychological suspenser, sci-fi adventure, deep metaphor or just plain fun—and it's scintillating from every angle."[44] Robert Bianco of USA Today commented: "Driven by violence and rage, Galactica is perhaps the darkest space opera American TV has ever produced. In Galactica's future, humans are on the run, and if external enemies don't get us, internal divisions will... You'll understand them [the characters], their conflicts and their desires, because they're recognizable humans in all their glorious complexity. And that's what makes Galactica a great TV series."[45] Peter Suderman of National Review stated that the series is "arguably the most potent, dramatically vibrant series on television. ...t packs the power of a gut punch on screen. For that, much credit is due to the immensely compelling cast of characters... Battlestar Galactica burns with a combustive mixture of political turmoil and human drama that is as achingly real and relevant as anything on television.[46] Jeff Jensen of Entertainment Weekly wrote that the show "has distinguished itself as one of television's very best dramas — on a par with 24, The Wire, and Lost — because it so utterly transcends both its genre and its source material. ...[The] series' sophisticated stories have also attracted a distinctively new breed of fan, one who's not necessarily a sci-fi buff."[47]

Mary McNamara of the Los Angeles Times praises the show's ability to "anchor fantasy with vivid and recognizable human psychology" and declares that the series is "not just a cult hit but a significant piece of television."[48] Maureen Ryan of the Chicago Tribune describes it as a "sprawling, enthralling tale of human survival"[49] that is "full of political allegories and fascinating, multifaceted characters."[50] She finds, "Like Deadwood, Battlestar Galactica is interested in exploring how a society on the edge decides to govern itself. What rights and actions are sacrosanct, which are outlawed, when most of the human race is eliminated? ... Thanks to a stellar cast and brave writing, Battlestar soars."[51] Throughout its run, the series has often surprised reviewers with its many twists and turns. Ryan comments: "There’s nothing like a good Battlestar plot twist to make your head spin, but the “holy cow” moments aren’t the main point (though they’re one heck of a tasty side dish). The show and its twists and turns are grounded in deep curiosity about human nature, and how contradictory and confounding it can be."[52]

Matt Soergel of The Florida Times-Union states: "Its propulsive and complex storytelling is matched by, at best, just a handful of theatrical movies a year."[53] Tim Goodman of the San Francisco Chronicle opines, "Battlestar Galactica transcends the sci-fi genre; it competes, creatively, on the same level as any other top-tier drama."[54] Mark Perigard of the Boston Herald states: "A drama this gripping comes ’round rarely."[55] James Poniewozik of Time Magazine named it one of the 100 best TV shows of all time.[56] Time magazine also wrote in the spring of 2005 that the new show was one of the six best drama programs on television. It would proclaim the program the best show on television in December of the same year.[4] Television Without Pity describes Battlestar Galactica as "one of the finest, most beautifully written, expertly acted shows on television."[57] Alan Sepinwall of The Star-Ledger writes: "[W] hat makes Galactica so gripping is its emphasis on character over hardware. The explosions and the killer robots are cool, but they don't stack up to seeing fully-drawn people - brought to life by a great writing staff led by producer Ron Moore and an astonishing cast led by Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell - grapple with these life-or-death, genocide-level decisions."[58] Joshua Alston of Newsweek declares that the show "captures better than any other TV drama of the past eight years the fear, uncertainty and moral ambiguity of the post-9/11 world" and "always finds ways to challenge the audience's beliefs."[59]

The series also draws praise for having many strong and complex female characters.[60][61][62] The Seattle Post-Intelligencer's Melanie McFarland notes, "[Starbuck], played with a tomboyish swagger by Katee Sackhoff, is fast becoming the latest in a long line of feminist television icons."[63]

The series has also received favorable reviews from other writers. Stephen King wrote, "This is a beautifully written show, driven by character rather than effects...but the effects are damn good. And there's not a better acting troupe at work on television."[64] Joss Whedon commented: "I think it's so passionate, textured, complex, subversive and challenging that it dwarfs everything on TV."[65]


That about sums up my opinions of the show.

And in selecting a few of those, I am reminded of another quote:
[from Sandworms of Dune]
"Two people drift in a lifeboat on an uncharted sea. One says, "There! I see an island Our best chance is to go ashore, build a shelter, and await rescue." The other says, "No, we must go farther out to sea and hope to find the shipping lanes. That is our best chance." Unable to agree, the two fight, the lifeboat capsizes, and they drown.
That is the nature of humanity. Even if only two people are left in the entire universe, they will come to represent opposing factions."
 

erikistired

Diamond Member
Sep 27, 2000
9,739
0
0
i liked it. the last season (or half season i guess) was a little flaky, but overall it was an enjoyable series. i wish they had put more thought into the ending though.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,864
31,359
146
Agreed, at least I'm assuming you mean that the story flowed and meshed together properly throughout the entire series. If that is the case, I generally agree.

I actually thought each turn of the main plot arcs were incredibly well-done... a well-done story will usually push a few characters around, and viewers won't always agree or find certain things appropriate for a specific character.
It had it's mountains and valleys as a general story, and a few moments many fans don't think were well-done or enjoyable at all.

For instance, almost every single person hates Season 3. I loved that season. Not my favorite overall, but I find it hard to put any words together that says I like the other seasons more, without it also saying Season 3 was a let-down. Because it was fantastic imho, and almost an entirely different animal from the rest of the show - but the themes stood out just as well, which is what keeps the different plot arcs so beautifully weaved together.

I was just browsing the wiki page, looking for season information, and came across this section.


That about sums up my opinions of the show.

And in selecting a few of those, I am reminded of another quote:
[from Sandworms of Dune]
"Two people drift in a lifeboat on an uncharted sea. One says, "There! I see an island Our best chance is to go ashore, build a shelter, and await rescue." The other says, "No, we must go farther out to sea and hope to find the shipping lanes. That is our best chance." Unable to agree, the two fight, the lifeboat capsizes, and they drown.
That is the nature of humanity. Even if only two people are left in the entire universe, they will come to represent opposing factions."

I liked the beginning of Season 3 and the final few episodes, but felt that it lagged needlessly in the middle.

Current gripe:
Revealing 4 of the final 5 was so hashed together in the final two scenes of the final episode, that it honestly felt that a few of those were thrown in there for shits, and the writers weren't really sure who it was gonna be until midway through writing that season. It seemed kinda hackneyed to me, but I think Col Ty makes sense.

I imagine a lot of people got annoyed with the turns in the Col Ty character. I got kind of annoyed, too but I really came to enjoy his
insane ultra nationalism during and following the resistance, that he carried with him like smelly, beloved sock.
 

AstroManLuca

Lifer
Jun 24, 2004
15,628
5
81
I liked the beginning of Season 3 and the final few episodes, but felt that it lagged needlessly in the middle.

Current gripe:
Revealing 4 of the final 5 was so hashed together in the final two scenes of the final episode, that it honestly felt that a few of those were thrown in there for shits, and the writers weren't really sure who it was gonna be until midway through writing that season. It seemed kinda hackneyed to me, but I think Col Ty makes sense.

Ronald Moore actually said that they were making stuff up as they went along.