Ralph Breaks the Internet
Mission: Impossible - Fallout
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
Tomatometer Not Available...
No consensus yet.
There are no critic reviews yet for Battlestar Galactica: Blood & Chrome. Keep checking Rotten Tomatoes for updates!
Battlestar Galactica: Blood & Chrome is a poorly made sci-fi film that adds absolutely nothing to the series. The story follows a young Bill Adama during the First Cylon War as he embarks on a secret mission to transport a scientist who has critical information about the Cylons. The acting is awful and is almost unbearable to watch. The writing is also really poor; jumping around from scene to scene without much of a through-line holding it together. And the CGI is hit and miss; as some scenes are extremely good and others are terrible. Still, the film delivers some exciting action and tries to say something about the gritty reality of war. Incredibly disappointing, Battlestar Galactica: Blood & Chrome is a half-assed effort that fails to live up of the vision of Ronald D. Moore's reimagined series.
Much of the production team from the incredible Battlestar Galactica series - executive producers, writers, visual effects supervisor, composer - are on hand to bring this lavish, adrenaline-fueled movie set 10 years into the first Cylon War. Conspicuously absent though is the man who gave the show its true heart & soul, Ronald D. Moore. The followup Caprica series was not as well received by fans for its cerebral storytelling, so they went in the opposite direction with Blood and Chrome - this thing is almost all action. There are some dazzling sequences but some are too cluttered and chaotic. I never had trouble following the docu-style shaky cams during the series, but this new director doesn't possess the same skill level with the technique. I also tend to think they used a new effects studio as some of them weren't nearly as special as what we saw in the series. The sheer volume of effects sequences possibly required some cost-cutting measures.
Another problem is the portrayal of Bill Adama as a young cadet who is an asshole right out of the box. I suppose they want to show his growth in maturity from a reckless hotshot, providing a Blood and Chrome series is on the way, but they went too far in creating a character who is by and large incongruous with the older Adama. I started to think of him as Chad Adama, Bill's misfit brother, and it worked much better. I liked much of the rest of he cast though, particularly Ben Cotton as raptor co-pilot Coker.
All in all, it was great donning a flightsuit and manning a Viper once again, and the first sight of the Galactica brought a lump to the throat proving that there are many stories left worth exploring in the BSG universe.
The latest offering in the Battlestar Galactica saga is a William Adama origin story that tells of his first mission flying as a pilot for the colonial fleet. The reason the reboot of Battlestar Galactica worked so well was because of its adult themes, sophisticated characterisation and involving story arcs, performed by a cast of very talented actors. What we have in Blood & Chrome is none of these things. It's essentially a rather amateurish version of Top Gun in space featuring Luke Pasqualino (who is more Wesley Crusher than William Adama) earnestly "doing the right thing" in front of an unconvincing green screen. Even the cylons don't look like cylons, instead resembling a cross between a terminator and a transformer. I can only assume that this substandard, humourless clone of a mediocre episode of Stargate SG-1 was intended to hook a younger (and stupider) audience than the original series because aside from some of the spaceships, it has nothing at all in common with it.
There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.