|
|
|
Battlestar Galactica #0
Book Released: 01 June 2006
Review posted: 04 June 2006
Writer: Greg Pak
Artist: Nigel Raynor
Colors: David Curiel
Publisher: Dynamite Entertainment
3.75 out of 5 Stars
Reviewed by Matt Rawson
|
|
I usually don’t view licensed or adapted comics very
favorably. Generally, if they are not outright terrible, they are just
rehashes of what went on in the TV show/movie/novel, and I can’t think
of anything more boring. I picked up Battlestar Galactic #0
primarily because it costs only a quarter, and I figured that I would at
least get my money’s worth. Well, I was pleasantly surprised after
finishing it that the end product was neither poorly written nor just a
rehash. Actually, it was a pretty decent comic!
Battlestar Galactica #0 is definitely geared towards fans of
the show. Greg Pak doesn’t bog the limited space down with a
summary of everything that has happened before or dull exposition about all
the characters we already know. Instead, Pak does a fine job nailing the
personalities and showing (rather than telling)
The primary elements of Battlestar Galactica are the same ones that make
the show the best damn thing on TV: character dynamics first, action second.
|
where all the characters
stand. The primary elements of this comic are the same ones that make
the show the best damn thing on TV: character dynamics first, action
second. On the inside cover there is a little blurb informing you when this
event occurred in the span of the overall continuity, so this is not
fanciful writing like that of the original Marvel Star Wars series where events were speculated and then later disregarded. Whereas the
events in the comicbook series Battlestar Galactica won’t be affecting the
outcome of the show, we can at least take comfort in the notion that
these events are within continuity and give us a deeper view into the lives
of the characters.
The first mar to this comic, I’m sad to say, is the art. Nigel
Raynor’s storytelling skill is just fine, and does the job, but the
character designs and overall style are a little too 1990’s for my
taste. There is too much pointless detail, characters posing instead of
moving, and the dynamics are less than effective. He also took
some liberties with the looks of the characters — not outright changing
them, per se, but more like he was drawing the actors’ features
from memory instead of reference. Drawing likenesses is a totally
separate skill from drawing dynamic action, but on a project like
Battlestar Galactica, the combination of these skills should be a
prerequisite. That being said, the art is not too bad; it didn’t
put me off of the story. Comicbooks require visual storytelling, however,
and if the visuals don’t hold as much weight as the storytelling
then that brings down the book as a whole.
The second thing that brought the score down is Dynamic
Entertainment’s penchant for that most annoying of gimmicks: the multiple cover. I
hate multiple covers with a passion.
If you are a fan of the TV show then I recommend picking up Battlestar
Galactica #0.
|
Not only is it confusing and
frustrating when you go into the shop and see a cover you are unfamiliar
with only to later find that it’s not the new issue but just a repackaged
release of the same one you already have. Multiple covers take the emphasis off of what is
truly important: what is between the covers.
Bottom line: if you are a fan of the TV show (and if you are not,
you damn well should be), then I recommend picking up Battlestar
Galactica #0. You may come to a different conclusion than I did, but hey,
you’re only gonna be out a quarter! I am certainly onboard for #1 — but
I don’t give a damn what cover I get.
—CCdC—
Cover image used without explicit permission in accordance with the "Fair Use" provision of US copyright law.
|
|
