It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find it.

As a non 'fan-boy' of the series, although having seen the original series several times, I have only seen Razor, The Plan & Blood & Chrome of the new series - B & C being the most recent.Frankly, I was not impressed, especially when compared to Razor. It suffers from some really juvenile script-writing, in fact the entire plot is a bit silly and unbelievable. On the one hand, we have the Cylon force, although capable of decimating an entire Resistance fleet, is then incapable of downing a single slow-as-hell bucket of a ship - all because of the remarkable flying prowess of our 'hero'. Who incidentally, is annoying as hell! Sure, he's supposed to be cocky, but it comes across as just poor acting.The 'twist' at the end is equally unbelievable as well.What really gets my goat is all the 9/10 star-ratings for this poorly written offering. It's pointless rating something like this as deserving 10-stars, as it masks what is truly good from a prospective viewers perspective. For instance, Razor is much better than B & C, yet these inflated reviews would have you believe that they are equally good. Even The Plan is much better than B & C, having a much more thought-provoking script - less CG graphics but a better story line overall.So, while C & S is not a total loss, it is definitely sub-par in comparison and in no way deserving of 10-star reviews.

I was happy with the prequel web-miniseries "Battlestar Galactica: Blood and Chrome" (2012) – it really seemed like a return to form to the immensely popular first two seasons of the TV show. I'd give it an 8 out of 10. Gone are the weird and confusing plot lines involving divine intervention and … (sigh) angels. Instead we're treated to a decent, escapist and gratifying sci-fi war-adventure story, with a few gritty horror elements thrown in to remind us that this is still Ron Moore's unique Battlestar Galactica universe. It seemed to consciously emulate "Aliens" (1986), which is a direction I think a lot of BSG fans would have been thrilled with. (I'm a little confused about whether the SyFy Channel intended this as a possible pilot for a regular TV series … it seems that way, from how it's written.)There are also nice nods to the series, its followup prequel series, "Caprica," and even the original 1970's TV show. I loved how one key actor/actress appeared to lend his/her voice to really nail a nice surprise in the finale. That's some damn fun continuity right there, and awesome fan service.It's a shaky pilot (?) in some ways. Young William Adama is a two- dimensional clone of "Starship Troopers'" Johnny Rico, though he does grow a bit by the end of the story. There are also other clichés – at one point a commander states something along the lines of "the fate of the entire war hinging on this battle!!" Ugh. Another flaw was its inclusion of actors from the series – in different roles. It was probably cool for Moore to keep it in the family and give these talented people additional high-profile work. (My personal favorite is the great, underused character actor Ty Olsson.) But it's jarring, and takes you right out of the story – sometimes you're too busy saying, "Hey! It's THAT guy!" to get immersed in the show.Still, this was cool and exciting and fun. What a shame it's (apparently) not turning into a regular series.

BSG's success was based at least as much on good writing as it was on realistic CGI, good acting and photography. All these ingredients are missing here. The main weakness of the movie is its plot, which is basically nonsensical. Other reviews already pointed out in how many ways it is flawed, so I won't repeat it here. The usage of flares and camera shakes is exaggerated, at times irritating. The romantic storyline does not add anything to the movie, it is not central for the development of the plot and almost certainly does not contribute to the artistic value of the film. There is something of the spirit of BSG in this prequel, but it's kind of washed away. It feels like BSG might have felt after becoming an overstretched and bored production, which luckily for us it never became.

This is going to be different from a regular review because I'm a Battlestar Galactica/BSG fan. So, I won't simply make the detached commentary but express some genuine concerns for the future of this franchise and all the people that make the magic.The Syfy channel's re-imagined BSG has a strong fan following and deservedly so. It seems that most true fans will remain loyal. This loyalty allows them to forgive some truly unwatchable, cringing, and mood destroying moments of bad writing and acting indicative of some shows. They do so because of an uncontrollable hunger for the next project which can only be satisfied with the next movie or episode. It's analogous to people that prefer a favorite restaurant based on the name alone. However, some fans have a more discriminating judgment and taste. That's the type of fan I am. I need more than a full belly. I need taste, polite and expedient service, and ambiance. The entire experience must be enjoyable. If not, I rarely come back unless there's an expectation of a better experience next time because I know that the staff are capable of doing better based on their reputation. Or I have such a strong emotional tie that I simply want to see them do better.In 2003 Ronald (Ron) Moore and David Eick of R&D TV raised the bar on weekly sci-fi TV dialogue with the BSG miniseries. The scripts were as highly detailed as the work from their award-winning CGI artist. They beat the odds and overcame obstacles as well such as, overzealous fans of the original BSG version from the 70's and Syfy channel's horrible productions at that time. In fact I missed the 2003 launch and didn't watch the pilot till the 2005 series launch. Admittedly I've been slow to warm up. But I've been hooked ever since thoroughly enjoying Ron and David's continuous rising of the standards not just on their own series, but on the entire sci-fi genre. And of course I heard the protractors, some of who I know that are still stuck in the late 70s, longing to see the cigar chomping caped Starbuck with his hairdryer like Ray gun. Surprisingly most of these naysayers are about 15 to 20 years younger than I. Obviously they're victims of brainwashing parents. However, my loyalty was vindicated as R&D TV earned many awards and accolades including, Emmys and Rolling Stone magazine's endorsement as the best show on TV, even when compared to entertainment other than sci-fi. To no lesser a degree I enjoyed Caprica as well and I'm still disappointed that a second season wasn't produced. The latest BSG project, Blood and Chrome is a prequel where we see a young Galactica and a young Adama both in their prime and with their war faces on. The CGI geniuses upstaged themselves yet again with a fresh from the factory, full metal jacketed Galactica bristling with turrets that hopefully we'll see used in later missions. Neither is any detail spared in the interior. We are treated to a multileveled, fully populated and mechanically complex hangar deck and we see the old style rail-like shuttle which is an obvious wink/nod to the old series. Other ships in the Colonial and Cylon fleet are modeled maintaining the BSG theme while expressing the level of evolution to the timeline depicted. The premise can't be better in my opinion. A fresh from the Academy, William Adama working his way up the ranks is an excellent idea that genuinely caught me by surprise. Hopefully this direction will inspire a new series with infinite possibilities and many seasons. Fans of BSG and Caprica will enjoy some familiar faces working again. As I recall from podcasts commentary during Caprica, the explanation for such appearances were: they're the grandparents or other miscellaneous relatives of the later characters. I found this to be a more acceptable than just a convenient explanation. Will we see Nicki Clyne and Kandyse McClure find a role in future of BSG projects? Pleeeeeease?And yet the dialogue this time seems to be out of step with proved BSG standards. It turns out Ron Moore wasn't involved this time leaving David to fend for himself. Could this be the missing ingredient? It would seem that such a behemoth as BSG fares better with more than one helmsman at the controls. Of course that's just my hypothesis based on observations as an eight year fan. I'm not privy to the inner workings of the decision-making outside of what's revealed in standard commentary. Whatever the reason I have to say, sadly of course, that the dialogue this time was a definite fluctuation in the steady stream of excellence R&D has produced in the past. I definitely can't agree with the protractors and their knee-jerk attacks. Nor can I go along what the blind faithful. R&D and its entire staff deserve a more critical thinking/analysis than that. And that's entirely their fault for they set a standard that doesn't allow me to watch any sci-fi with much compromise no matter how good the CGI is. But my hunger for more quality BSG is still there stronger than ever. So back to the kitchen, fire or hire as many chefs as it takes to give us BSG fans the same high-quality cuisine that we know you're capable of, thank you.Special Features: A little on the light side in my opinion because I feel I never get enough of the behind the scenes featurettes. The CGI artist and supervisors give us a fairly good overview of their latest magic. The new BSG has always hired the best and brightest and I've heard Ron Moore himself sing their praises. There's an interview with David Eick as well.