A most gratifying note about S5
Joseph DeMartino
[ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
This was part of an e-mail I received from an old friend today - in
fact, the very old friend who got me to watch "B5" in the first place,
back when I had dismissed it as a no-budget "Trek" wannabe:
> Well, I just finished re-watching all 5 years of Babylon 5. In the past, we have argued over the ?quality? of the 5th season. Well, after watching to whole series again, at about an episode a day, I can say that Season 5 does hold up just as well as the other 4. In fact, watching everything in order, without the year-over-year gaps and other breaks, shows just how well the whole thing hangs together. You were right! <
Of course I already *knew* I was right, but it was so nice to see that
he'd finally figured it out. <g>
So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
altered on subsquent viewings?
Enquiring minds want to know...
Later,
Joe
Giovanni Wassen
> So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
> altered on subsquent viewings?
Nope, stil couldn't stand Byron. I love(d) the whole Centauri story though.
I never disliked it though, but I wasn't as good as the rest in my opinion.
--
Gio
http://www.watkijkikoptv.info
http://myanimelist.net/profile/extatix
http://watkijkikoptv.info/animeblog
wedgeski
> So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
> altered on subsquent viewings?
I would have to say not. The Byron arc is... well, there's no getting
around it, it's poorly written. It muddies the whole season for me. :(
Neil B
Dave Hayslett
Well, not me, but then I was never of the opinion that season 5 was
inferior to previous seasons. The whole Byron backlash thing has mystified
me from the beginning. And Londo's fate, culminating in The Fall of
Centauri Prime ... wow.
--
Dave (10/2/2009 8:35:54 AM)
There are three kinds of people in the world - those who can count, and
those who can't.
Jeffrey Kaplan
> So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
> altered on subsquent viewings?
>
> Enquiring minds want to know...
Nope. Still find the Byron arc annoyingly sappy and mostly out of
place as written, even though I do understand its purpose. The
development of Lyta could have been written better. (BTW, last night I
watched "Strange Relations".)
It seems to me that the root of the problem with s5 is s4.
IIRC, s4 was supposed to be a slower ride, ending with "Intersections
In Real Time", with "Rising Star" (or something like it) taking place
somewhere between a quarter and a third of the way into s5. But going
into the season, JMS wasn't sure there'd be a season 5 and so
compressed the season in order to finish up the open plot lines. This
naturally resulted in now having "empty space" in s5 that had to be
filled. And the result is what we got with Byron.
I do understand the need to slow the pace down, deal with "smaller"
issues, etc, after the culmination of the three wars in s4. But this
feels like it was artificially stretched and forced merely to take up
space in the programming schedule.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
Double ROT13 encoded for your protection
Peter's Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord, #77.
If I have a fit of temporary insanity and decide to give the hero the
chance to reject a job as my trusted lieutenant, I will retain enough
sanity to wait until my current trusted lieutenant is out of earshot
before making the offer.
Joseph DeMartino
>
> IIRC, s4 was supposed to be a slower ride, ending with "Intersections
> In Real Time", with "Rising Star" (or something like it) taking place
> somewhere between a quarter and a third of the way into s5. But going
> into the season, JMS wasn't sure there'd be a season 5 and so
> compressed the season in order to finish up the open plot lines. This
> naturally resulted in now having "empty space" in s5 that had to be
> filled. And the result is what we got with Byron.
It is certainly true that the uncertainty threw off the planned flow
of the story-telling, and yes, that made S5 less good than it might
have been, but I still don't think it was as bad as some people have
said. The assumption that S4 would be the last not only led JMS to
finish open plot lines, but to not open other plot lines that he knew
he'd never have time to finish. One of these was the Teep/Byron
story.
As originally envisioned, Byron and company would have quietly been
slipping aboard the station during the last part of S4, much as the
Rangers started showing up in the background early in S2, and their
colony would have been established while the Earth Civil War was still
going on - which would have made more sense in context, since B5
wasn't operating under Earth law anyway and Sheridan needed all the
allies he could get. The fact that S5 didn't open like the previous
seasons, with the first few episodes leading into the climax of the
*previous* season's major threads, did weaken it. Not having the Teep
Colony be an *organic* outgrowth of the Civil War was also a
problem.
There's no question that JMS had to "write himself out" of a corner he
hadn't anticipated, and given the time pressures of television some of
what he did was less successful than most of the series. This is one
of those rare instances where real-world stuff threw the story
slightly askew and some of the seams show where JMS had to paper over
the gap. But all things considered I think a "bad" episode of "B5" is
better than a good episode of a lot of other shows. The weakest of
the S5 episodes were no worse than the weakest of the S1 shows, and
almost any weak episode has its redeeming moments. "TKO" was a
routine "Rocky-in-space" story, but it also gave us insight into
Ivanova. "Grey 17 is Missing" had an odd plot and one of the worst
rubber monsters in SF TV history, but it also gave us the Marcus-
Neroon duel, which paid huge dividends in S4. "Infection" was a
standard generic SF "message" episode, but it introduced Earth Bio-
Weapons division and their hunger for alien tech. (I've often said
that the worst thing about "Infection" is that you could have changed
the names and a few other details and shot that script for *any* of
the "Trek" shows, "BSG" or the "Stargate" series - where it would have
ranked among the better episodes, not the worst ones. We expect
*more* of "B5", which I sometimes think makes us too critical when it
falls short even by a little.)
Regards,
Joe
Aleks A.-Lessmann
>So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
>altered on subsquent viewings?
Errr... No.
The whole "Telepathic Jesus and the Hippies from Outer Space" thing is a
badly performed good-to-so-so idea. It's like nails on a blackboard
every time I think of S5.
Add to it that Tracy Scoggins just. can't. act and you have most of what
makes S5 unbearable.
Oh, there's some good in S5: "A View from the Gallery", "Strange
Relations", "Day of the Dead" (I'm as much a fan on Neil Gaiman as I
am of JMS), "The Corps is Mother, the Corps is Father" and of course
"Sleeping in Light", which is not quite S5.
But really: TJATHFOS? No, oh Dog no. No way, no how.
And I restrained myself in writing my opinion
Well, a little bit
Aleks
Stile4aly
I agree with everything here, with one addendum. Because S4
compressed so many story lines, we had a solid 12 episodes where you
kept getting payoff after payoff. Every single week had to be seen
because if not you would miss major arc events, so it was a real joy
to see all these payoffs after years of waiting. Season 5 had to
start by setting up dominos again only to be knocked down half a dozen
episodes later.
Season 5 was a really good hamburger, but season 4 was beef
wellington. It's not that season 5 was bad, it's that season 4 was
just too good.
Amy Guskin
(in article <mt6cc5had3t2png31...@4ax.com>):
>
> Add to it that Tracy Scoggins just. can't. act and you have most of what
> makes S5 unbearable. <<
I never understand this comment when I hear it. I realize that taste is a
subjective thing, and one person's favorite actor might not be another
person's due to stylistic issues. But there's no question that Tracy
Scoggins is a competent, working actress who does her job just fine. In
fact, I think she hit the ground running WAY better than Claudia Christian in
_her_ first season. There are some Ivanova moments that have me squirming in
my seat, and I have _never_ squirmed over anything that Lochley has done
(anything attributable to the acting).
Amy
--
Ten Thousand Questions
A Question a Day for Journaling, Self-Discovery, and Transformation
"2009 is the Year of Questions"
tenthousandquestions.com
Joseph DeMartino
I'm sorry, but I'm really just too busy and distracted at work today
to try to translate a string of letters like that. Is that supposed
to be an episode? A well-worn phrase? An internet meme? Throw a dog
a bone, wouldja? <g>
Joe
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
> On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 13:31:30 -0700 (PDT), Joseph DeMartino wrote:
>
>>So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
>>altered on subsquent viewings?
>
> Errr... No.
>
> The whole "Telepathic Jesus and the Hippies from Outer Space" thing is a
> badly performed good-to-so-so idea. It's like nails on a blackboard
> every time I think of S5.
Though I still generally enjoy S5, the whole Byron arc always has me
rooting for his death. It's not good when you root for the death of a
main "good guy." It's just unbearable. And when they sing "and we
shall all come together in a better place" I just want to HURL!
--
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
Promote someone else.
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:00:13 -0400, Aleks A.-Lessmann wrote
> (in article <mt6cc5had3t2png31...@4ax.com>):
>
>>
>> Add to it that Tracy Scoggins just. can't. act and you have most of what
>> makes S5 unbearable. <<
>
> I never understand this comment when I hear it. I realize that taste is a
> subjective thing, and one person's favorite actor might not be another
> person's due to stylistic issues. But there's no question that Tracy
> Scoggins is a competent, working actress who does her job just fine. In
> fact, I think she hit the ground running WAY better than Claudia Christian in
> _her_ first season. There are some Ivanova moments that have me squirming in
> my seat, and I have _never_ squirmed over anything that Lochley has done
> (anything attributable to the acting).
I like Scoggins. I don't like the "surprise ex-wife" plot device.
Barf. :-)
Joseph DeMartino
<starf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Though I still generally enjoy S5, the whole Byron arc always has me
> rooting for his death. It's not good when you root for the death of a
> main "good guy."
But I don't think Byron ever was - or was ever intended to be - a
"main good guy." He was a cult leader with *very* mixed motives and
an agenda that even he hadn't worked out very well, playing with other
people's lives. He finally got in completely over his head and chose
a faux martyrdom to actually dealing with the issue. David Koresh and
Jim Jones didn't look like good guys to most people outside of *their*
groups, either, and I'm sure their songs were at least as annoying.
Point being that such people exist and they do attract followers. Now
imagine if one of them attracted a disciple with superpowers...
Regards,
Joe
Joseph DeMartino
<starf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I like Scoggins. I don't like the "surprise ex-wife" plot device.
> Barf. :-)
That didn't bother me because it wasn't really *used* as a plot device
except in the one episode where Delenn learns about it. And it did
help explain how Sheridan could have been so sure he could trust
Lochley despite her having remained loyal to EarthForce during the
war. A little soap opera, but hardly a major issue - at least for
me.
Joe
Amy Guskin
(in article
<8621364f-f3f9-4b66...@k17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>):
Took me a moment, too. He's referring to the long phrase he used earlier in
his own post: Telepathic Jesus and the Hippies from Outer Space. :-p
Amy Guskin
(in article <luw0idrxwhzd.4...@40tude.net>):
There's lots I don't like about the teep storyline, but I have to disagree on
one point: I don't see him as "a main good guy," and I don't think that was
the intention as written.
Mac Breck
You snipped it.
"Telepathic Jesus and the Hippies from Outer Space"
--
Mac Breck (KoshN)
-------------------------------
"Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999)
Durkani: It doesn't matter if they believe us. Sooner or later the
truth's going to come out. The truth is....
Kendarr: ....out of fashion.
Joseph DeMartino
>
> There's lots I don't like about the teep storyline, but I have to disagree on
> one point: I don't see him as "a main good guy," and I don't think that was
> the intention as written.
"Great minds..." <g>
Joseph DeMartino
> You snipped it.
>
> "Telepathic Jesus and the Hippies from Outer Space"
Oh, that. Thanks.
Joe
David E. Powell
The Zack/Byron/Lyta storyline was one of the best segments of S5. I
thought Byron sucked but that made it truer. Lyta saw that as what to
go to, while Zack offered her a plain but decent place to live, a good
heart and Pizza. If Maury were around in the 2250s it might have ended
up there, until the whole Psi Corps thing. Oh well. The
"understanding" thing, as Zack's _great_ line to Lyta in his quarters
pointed out.
Jan
Schultz says...
>
> And when they sing "and we
>shall all come together in a better place" I just want to HURL!
>
Which, if memory serves, they do all of *twice*, one of which was only partial
when he immolated them.
The above example being emblematic (to me) of the common overreaction to Season
5 by various people I'm too lazy to scroll up and quote. It wasn't poorly
written and if you'd've seen Tracy Scoggins in (I think it was) Dante's Cove you
wouldn't say that she can't act. Like Amy, I agree that Tracy did a far better
job of her first season than Claudia did.
IMO, if there was an error in how the telepath arc was handled, it was that
Byron's followers were all almost exclusively non-speaking parts until violence
erupted. Whereas, in "A Race Through Dark Places" we were instantly sympathetic
toward the teeps in the underground railroad just from hearing snippets of their
stories of persecution by the Corps. We never got that with Byron's followers
at all and when I was doing the Joe Cuts for the script books I noticed that a
number of small scenes where Byron was communing with his people were cut out.
Maybe if we'd had a reminder of what we saw in 'Race' or with just a little more
exposition work, even if people didn't care for Byron, they might have been more
sympathetic toward his group.
One other overreaction that always slightly annoys me...why do people fixate on
the teep's hair being A) long and B) clean? They're poor, folks, but nothing
said that they couldn't afford soap. They were able to afford to get to the
station on their own so obviously they weren't completely destitute.
Jan
--
�Shared pain is lessened; shared joy is increased; thus do we refute entropy�
--Spider Robinson
Check out http://wedreamforjeanne.blogspot.com/ for ways to help Jeanne Robinson
fight cancer.
Mac Breck
No, not radically. I always did love certain parts of Season 5, mainly
the Centauri arc, "Day of the Dead," and of course, "Sleeping in Light"
(the best TV show finale I've ever see.). My main problems were Byron
and his cult of telepaths, and Lochley/Scoggins.
Regarding Byron and the teeps, it seemed like the story was in
ventricular fibrillation. The teeps arrived, then Bester was going to
take them, then he wasn't, and then he was, and then they blew
themselves up sans Lyta (Whew!). Seemed like the story was going in
circles, treading water, padding for time, or that JMS didn't know where
they wanted to go with it (like "The X-Files" was for many years, and
like "Heroes" is now.).
I really wish they could have reshot the "Lochley with Ivanova's tightly
pulled back hairstyle" scenes. 8-O What looked *great* on Claudia
(especially in the closeups of her face when she was in the Great
Machine.) looked *ghastly* on Scoggins. Also, I agree with Aleks
A.-Lessmann regarding Scoggins ("Tracy Scoggins just. can't. act ").
IMHO, she was miscast, and needed a lot more time than one season to get
into the role. OTOH, I thought she did a pretty good job in "The River
of Souls."
--
Mac Breck (KoshN)
-------------------------------
"Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999) - "War Zone"
Galen (to Gideon): "I've been penalized before for helping other
people. I've been trying to decide whether or not I should risk it
again. If you were involved, I would consider it, ....if you should
ask."
Mac Breck
> In article <luw0idrxwhzd.4...@40tude.net>, Lance Corporal
> \"Hammer\" Schultz says...
>>
>> And when they sing "and we
>> shall all come together in a better place" I just want to HURL!
>>
>
> Which, if memory serves, they do all of *twice*, one of which was
> only partial when he immolated them.
*Once* was too much.
> .... Like
> Amy, I agree that Tracy did a far better job of her first season than
> Claudia did.
I don't.
Joseph DeMartino
> OTOH, I thought she did a pretty good job in "The River
> of Souls."
I thought she was just fine throughout, and especially good in "RoS",
"A Call to Arms" and - most of all - "The Day of the Dead".
I think too many viewers fail to realize that the actor may be playing
a character they don't like exactly as that character should be
played. Or can't see the difference between what the writer, producer
and director *want* from the actor and what the viewer thinks the
actor *should* have done.
Regards,
Joe
Mac Breck
> On Oct 2, 3:21 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> OTOH, I thought she did a pretty good job in "The River
>> of Souls."
>
> I thought she was just fine throughout, and especially good in "RoS",
> "A Call to Arms" and - most of all - "The Day of the Dead".
Yes, those last two as well.
I dunno. Claudia always seemed to *be* Ivanova, to me, and Tracy was
less believable.
> I think too many viewers fail to realize that the actor may be playing
> a character they don't like exactly as that character should be
> played. Or can't see the difference between what the writer,
> producer and director *want* from the actor and what the
> viewer thinks the actor *should* have done.
[It seems like the second part of that is merely a rephrasing of the
first part, and maybe should have been separate by "that is" (i.e.), not
"Or."]
True, that that probably has a lot to do with why I dislike Byron, and a
lot of Scoggins' performances as Lochley.
Dave Hayslett
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:35:01 -0400, Lance Corporal \Hammer\ Schultz wrote
> (in article <luw0idrxwhzd.4...@40tude.net>):
>
>> On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 19:00:13 +0200, Aleks A.-Lessmann wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 13:31:30 -0700 (PDT), Joseph DeMartino wrote:
>>>
>>>> So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
>>>> altered on subsquent viewings?
>>>
>>> Errr... No.
>>>
>>> The whole "Telepathic Jesus and the Hippies from Outer Space" thing is a
>>> badly performed good-to-so-so idea. It's like nails on a blackboard
>>> every time I think of S5.
>>
>> Though I still generally enjoy S5, the whole Byron arc always has me
>> rooting for his death. It's not good when you root for the death of a
>> main "good guy." It's just unbearable. And when they sing "and we
>> shall all come together in a better place" I just want to HURL! <<
>
> There's lots I don't like about the teep storyline, but I have to disagree on
> one point: I don't see him as "a main good guy," and I don't think that was
> the intention as written.
Okay. Maybe that's why I don't get much of the Byron reaction; I never saw
him that way either. (Or at least I remember seeing him that way.)
--
Dave (10/2/2009 5:48:47 PM)
Five-thirds of people are bad at fractions.
Dave Hayslett
....
> Okay. Maybe that's why I don't get much of the Byron reaction; I never saw
> him that way either. (Or at least I remember seeing him that way.)
Feh. *Don't* remember seeing him that way. *Don't*. Why do these things
get seen until they're sent out?
(Yes, I did that last one on purpose. :-) )
--
Dave (10/2/2009 5:52:25 PM)
Tour the world in a heavy metal band
but they run out of gas, the plane can never land.
Alan Dicey
Exactly.
I think Tracy Scoggins has overcome a Hollywood-unfriendly name and
acted Captain Lochley well throughout her time on Babylon 5 and Crusade.
I'm less happy with Claudia Christian's Ivanova, who I think delivers
some critical lines poorly. The "God sent me" rant, in particular, is
just too controlled and stilted - I think it should have been delivered
with fire and venom from someone who is greiving for friends lost and
wants to extract some payment from the captors of her leader and friend.
The lines as written have great power, but Claudia doesn't extract it
well.
But then I also think that Michael O'Hare does a very good job of
playing Jeffrey Sinclair as a tightly wound man on the edge of losing
control, and think he made a much better first impression than
Boxleitner did.
Cheryl Martin
How about some viewers just don't like the actor's work? Lots of folks
didn't like the job O'Hare did in the 1st season either.
Cheryl (not a fan of either Scoggins or Lochley or S5)
--
*Moderator: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated ,sci.space.moderated *
*http://www.grumpywitch.org http://dragonnette.livejournal.com *
*I am grey. I stand between the candle and the star. We are grey. *
*We stand between the darkness and the light. ---JMS *
Wes Struebing
wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:00:13 -0400, Aleks A.-Lessmann wrote
>(in article <mt6cc5had3t2png31...@4ax.com>):
>
>>
>> Add to it that Tracy Scoggins just. can't. act and you have most of what
>> makes S5 unbearable. <<
>
>I never understand this comment when I hear it. I realize that taste is a
>subjective thing, and one person's favorite actor might not be another
>person's due to stylistic issues. But there's no question that Tracy
>Scoggins is a competent, working actress who does her job just fine. In
>fact, I think she hit the ground running WAY better than Claudia Christian in
>_her_ first season. There are some Ivanova moments that have me squirming in
>my seat, and I have _never_ squirmed over anything that Lochley has done
>(anything attributable to the acting).
>
I think she *really* made her bones in Gaiman's "Day of the Dead."
THAT was impressive. In "Wheel of Fire" (I believe) when she
confronts Garibaldi about his drinking. Also a home run.
So, yes. she. can. act. (surprised the hell out of me, 'til I went
back and saw her in, "Lois and Clark" - she did a great job in that
one, too!)
Wes Struebing
wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:35:01 -0400, Lance Corporal \Hammer\ Schultz wrote
>(in article <luw0idrxwhzd.4...@40tude.net>):
>
>> On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 19:00:13 +0200, Aleks A.-Lessmann wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 13:31:30 -0700 (PDT), Joseph DeMartino wrote:
>>>
>>>> So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
>>>> altered on subsquent viewings?
>>>
>>> Errr... No.
>>>
>>> The whole "Telepathic Jesus and the Hippies from Outer Space" thing is a
>>> badly performed good-to-so-so idea. It's like nails on a blackboard
>>> every time I think of S5.
>>
>> Though I still generally enjoy S5, the whole Byron arc always has me
>> rooting for his death. It's not good when you root for the death of a
>> main "good guy." It's just unbearable. And when they sing "and we
>> shall all come together in a better place" I just want to HURL! <<
>
>There's lots I don't like about the teep storyline, but I have to disagree on
>one point: I don't see him as "a main good guy," and I don't think that was
>the intention as written.
>
Indeed. I don't think he was ever meant to be a "good guy", per se. I
think he was meant to be what we saw, a flawed person, thrust by
circumstance into some semblance of leadership, but never =, ever
really comfortable with it.
In that, Downes did a creditable job. (but at that, the *character*
was like fingernails on a blackboard for me)
Dennis (Icarus)
news:ha5jl...@drn.newsguy.com...
<snip>
>
> One other overreaction that always slightly annoys me...why do people
> fixate on
> the teep's hair being A) long and B) clean? They're poor, folks, but
> nothing
> said that they couldn't afford soap. They were able to afford to get to
> the
> station on their own so obviously they weren't completely destitute.
>
Presuming they actually paid their way. ;-)
After all, in "A View form the Gallery" they do manage to send one of the
hostiles on their way, without either fkiring a shot or otherwise attacking
them.....
Dennis
.
Jeffrey Kaplan
> I'm less happy with Claudia Christian's Ivanova, who I think delivers
> some critical lines poorly. The "God sent me" rant, in particular, is
> just too controlled and stilted - I think it should have been delivered
> with fire and venom from someone who is greiving for friends lost and
> wants to extract some payment from the captors of her leader and friend.
> The lines as written have great power, but Claudia doesn't extract it
> well.
I think she delivered that line very, very well. Ivanova is a
passionate person, but she's also a very controlled person. And what
she was feeling at that time went way beyond fiery fury all the way
back around the dial to icy, colder than the blackness of interstellar
space.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
Double ROT13 encoded for your protection
"No harm will come to you. The Tollan will guarantee it." "Is that a
"money back if you're not completely alive" guarantee?" - Narim and
Jack O'Neill, SG1
Amy Guskin
(in article
<cf702bd0-8f26-4c2a...@r31g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>):
Maury?
Amy Guskin
(in article <ytSdnZGnytVTz1vX...@supernews.com>):
>
> I really wish they could have reshot the "Lochley with Ivanova's tightly
> pulled back hairstyle" scenes. <<
I know some of you think that Claudia walks on water, but I do have to point
out that she didn't invent the ponytail. Nor the tightly pulled back
ponytail. You generally don't see too many military women with big poufy
teased ponytail-dos. They pull their hair back after washing it in the AM,
and if you don't tease and don't have naturally poufy hair, that's what a
ponytail looks like.
Amy (who has been known to have that look on busy days)
Andrew Swallow
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:00:13 -0400, Aleks A.-Lessmann wrote
> (in article <mt6cc5had3t2png31...@4ax.com>):
>
>> Add to it that Tracy Scoggins just. can't. act and you have most of what
>> makes S5 unbearable. <<
>
> I never understand this comment when I hear it. I realize that taste is a
> subjective thing, and one person's favorite actor might not be another
> person's due to stylistic issues. But there's no question that Tracy
> Scoggins is a competent, working actress who does her job just fine. In
> fact, I think she hit the ground running WAY better than Claudia Christian in
> _her_ first season. There are some Ivanova moments that have me squirming in
> my seat, and I have _never_ squirmed over anything that Lochley has done
> (anything attributable to the acting).
>
Tracy Scoggins can play the traditional woman's roles - the girl friend
and the whore. It is the male role of the military commander that
she cannot do - I cannot imagine following her into battle.
Andrew Swallow
Amy Guskin
(in article <PcOdnUf5nL18SlvX...@bt.com>):
This sounds to me like you'd seen her perform in other roles before Babylon
5, and that you're letting your expectations color your assessment.
Amy
Andrew Swallow
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:35:01 -0400, Lance Corporal \Hammer\ Schultz wrote
>> Though I still generally enjoy S5, the whole Byron arc always has me
>> rooting for his death. It's not good when you root for the death of a
>> main "good guy." It's just unbearable. And when they sing "and we
>> shall all come together in a better place" I just want to HURL! <<
>
> There's lots I don't like about the teep storyline, but I have to disagree on
> one point: I don't see him as "a main good guy," and I don't think that was
> the intention as written.
>
> Amy
For plot reasons Byron has to be a major "good guy" - the future teep
civilisation is to be built on his teachings. For that to be good
the foundations (=Byron) need to be good.
IMHO The person who does not think Byron is good is JMS. This comes
from JMS's personal history with a cult. We are all picking up on
this emotion and JMS's wish to warn us.
Andrew Swallow
Jeffrey Kaplan
> > The Zack/Byron/Lyta storyline was one of the best segments of S5. I
> > thought Byron sucked but that made it truer. Lyta saw that as what to
> > go to, while Zack offered her a plain but decent place to live, a good
> > heart and Pizza. If Maury were around in the 2250s it might have ended
> > up there, until the whole Psi Corps thing. Oh well. The
> > "understanding" thing, as Zack's _great_ line to Lyta in his quarters
> > pointed out. <<
>
> Maury?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maury_Povich
Personally, I'd have chosen Jerry Springer for it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jerry_Springer_Show
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
Double ROT13 encoded for your protection
If I Am Ever the Sidekick... 14. If the Hero sends me out on some
errand, I will go, perform the task, and return. I will not drop by
the tavern for a tankard of ale.
Mac Breck
The character was like fingernails on a blackboard for me as well.
Mac Breck
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 15:21:38 -0400, Mac Breck wrote
> (in article <ytSdnZGnytVTz1vX...@supernews.com>):
My KF seems to have gone AWOL. Dunno why. <shrug> Good ol' unreliable
Microshaft.
>> I really wish they could have reshot the "Lochley with Ivanova's
>> tightly pulled back hairstyle" scenes. <<
>
> I know some of you think that Claudia walks on water,
Not me, not by a long shot.
> but I do have
> to point out that she didn't invent the ponytail. Nor the tightly
> pulled back ponytail.
Never said she did.
> You generally don't see too many military
> women with big poufy teased ponytail-dos. They pull their hair back
> after washing it in the AM, and if you don't tease and don't have
> naturally poufy hair, that's what a ponytail looks like.
>
> Amy (who has been known to have that look on busy days)
You're missing the point. It's *not* poofy vs. non-poofy. It's that
Claudia has the *face* to look *great* in the tightly pulled back
ponytail, and Tracy *doesn't* . Claudia's face has the rounded features
to be *compatible* with that look, and Tracy doesn't. Tracy *rightly*
didn't want to wear that look (I think it's in one of the S5 DVD set
special features.). Most people know what makes them look good, and
Tracy knew this wasn't it. It makes her look severe, unfeminine and
unattractive, the look that other people likened to "Skeletor" (Since I
haven't been a comic book fan for the past 40 years, I had to look that
one up.). Most people who are trying to project power and authority,
are also going to want to do so without making themselves look bad.
It's not the look of the hair itself, it's what the tightly pulled back
part of it does to the face (accentuates the sharpness, the hard edges
of the facial bones.), and the extra emphasis that it puts *on* the face
(due to the reduced role of the hair.).
For a lot of years I was a photographer, and I'm a guy. We *see* these
things.
gabi
> >> On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 00:49:35 -0400, Andrew Swallow wrote
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Amy Guskin wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:00:13 -0400, Aleks A.-Lessmann wrote
>
> >>> Add to it that Tracy Scoggins just. can't. act and you have most of what
> >>> makes S5 unbearable. <<
>
> >> I never understand this comment when I hear it. I realize that taste is a
> >> subjective thing, and one person's favorite actor might not be another
> >> person's due to stylistic issues. But there's no question that Tracy
> >> Scoggins is a competent, working actress who does her job just fine. In
> >> fact, I think she hit the ground running WAY better than Claudia Christian
> >> in
> >> _her_ first season. There are some Ivanova moments that have me squirming
> >> in
> >> my seat, and I have _never_ squirmed over anything that Lochley has done
> >> (anything attributable to the acting).
>
> >> Amy
>
> > Tracy Scoggins can play the traditional woman's roles - the girl friend
> > and the whore. It is the male role of the military commander that
> > she cannot do - I cannot imagine following her into battle. <<
>
> This sounds to me like you'd seen her perform in other roles before Babylon
> 5, and that you're letting your expectations color your assessment.
>
to be fair tracy is an exceptionally beautiful women. something i
doubt very much the powers that were at the time of casting failed to
notice.
high ranking male officers do not have perfect, blemish free skin.
they sport crew cuts and express their authority thru strength of
character/personality. what always struck me as unfair (to her as an
actor) was the full face paint they put her in. the only nod to her
rank she was given to work with was a uniform and bad hair do.
combine that with a quite demeanor and you totally loose the fact that
she's supposed to be an experienced and competent soldier.
claudia on the other hand, while equally beautiful, does not have
features as striking. pull back her hair, even with full face paint,
and the look isn't as incongruous.
could she have pulled off 'the male role of the military commander?'
shrug, maybe. but was she really asked to?
g
Mac Breck
<snip>
> claudia on the other hand, while equally beautiful, does not have
> features as striking. pull back her hair, even with full face paint,
Full face paint? I could see her (cute) freckles in the closeup when
she's in the Great Machine. :-)
> and the look isn't as incongruous.
<snip>
Mel
Joseph DeMartino wrote:
> [ The following text is in the "windows-1252" character set. ]
> [ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
> [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
>
> This was part of an e-mail I received from an old friend today - in
> fact, the very old friend who got me to watch "B5" in the first place,
> back when I had dismissed it as a no-budget "Trek" wannabe:
>
>
>>Well, I just finished re-watching all 5 years of Babylon 5. In the past, we have argued over the ?quality? of the 5th season. Well, after watching to whole series again, at about an episode a day, I can say that Season 5 does hold up just as well as the other 4. In fact, watching everything in order, without the year-over-year gaps and other breaks, shows just how well the whole thing hangs together. You were right! <
>
>
> Of course I already *knew* I was right, but it was so nice to see that
> he'd finally figured it out. <g>
>
> So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
> altered on subsquent viewings?
>
> Enquiring minds want to know...
>
> Later,
>
> Joe
>
>
Watching Season 5 at my own pace at least made the horrible
telepath/Byron arc get over much more quickly :-)
Mel
voxwoman
> Amy Guskin wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 15:21:38 -0400, Mac Breck wrote
She looked OK as a Cardassian female...
-Wendy
Kay Shapero
am.sw...@btopenworld.com says...
> Amy Guskin wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:35:01 -0400, Lance Corporal \Hammer\ Schultz wrote
> {snip}
>
> >> Though I still generally enjoy S5, the whole Byron arc always has me
> >> rooting for his death. It's not good when you root for the death of a
> >> main "good guy." It's just unbearable. And when they sing "and we
> >> shall all come together in a better place" I just want to HURL! <<
> >
> > There's lots I don't like about the teep storyline, but I have to disagree on
> > one point: I don't see him as "a main good guy," and I don't think that was
> > the intention as written.
> >
> > Amy
>
> For plot reasons Byron has to be a major "good guy" - the future teep
> civilisation is to be built on his teachings. For that to be good
> the foundations (=Byron) need to be good.
Um, no; for plot reasons he has to be highly charismatic, and with
enough of a following for everybody else to try and negotiate with
instead of with his subset of teeps as a whole, who of course are going
to be every bit as individual as any other set of humans. This does not
require him to be good OR evil, merely central. What he is is a flawed
invidual who makes decisions for others, some good, some iffy and at
least one ruinous (I still have trouble believing in a telepath, even
one who spends most of his life trying to block out the eminations of
non-telepaths, who has so little comprehensive of human/human-like
nature as to go out of his way to make his group look simultaneously
dangerous and highly vulnerable.) The others followed him willingly,
and, alas, unthinkingly. A highly significant character who is neither
a good guy OR a bad guy may be rare, but that's what he is.
--
Kay Shapero
address munged, email kay at following domain
http://www.kayshapero.net
Josh Hill
>This was part of an e-mail I received from an old friend today - in
>fact, the very old friend who got me to watch "B5" in the first place,
>back when I had dismissed it as a no-budget "Trek" wannabe:
>
>> Well, I just finished re-watching all 5 years of Babylon 5. In the past, we have argued over the ?quality? of the 5th season. Well, after watching to whole series again, at about an episode a day, I can say that Season 5 does hold up just as well as the other 4. In fact, watching everything in order, without the year-over-year gaps and other breaks, shows just how well the whole thing hangs together. You were right! <
>
>Of course I already *knew* I was right, but it was so nice to see that
>he'd finally figured it out. <g>
>
>So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
>altered on subsquent viewings?
>
>Enquiring minds want to know...
No, but then I'm one of those who didn't think Season 5 was weak. The
problem I had with it was that as good as the stories were, they were
always a bit of an anticlimax because the Shadow War had ended, the
Old Ones were gone. I never had the sense that earth was a match for
Sheridan. Season 5 seemed, essentially, a mopping-up operation,
however strong some of the episodes and tense the situations.
I assume that had it not been for the uncertain fifth season renewal,
some of the story threads that appeared in Season 5 would have
antedated the end of the Shadow War, and dramatic tension would have
reached a peak some time in that season, with the retaking of earth
and Sheridan's presidency a satisfying coda. I thought the writing,
though, was as good as any in the show.
--
Josh
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex and more violent. It
takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction"
- Albert Einstein.
Josh Hill
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Joseph DeMartino wrote:
>> On Oct 2, 3:21 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OTOH, I thought she did a pretty good job in "The River
>>> of Souls."
>>
>> I thought she was just fine throughout, and especially good in "RoS",
>> "A Call to Arms" and - most of all - "The Day of the Dead".
>
>Yes, those last two as well.
>
>I dunno. Claudia always seemed to *be* Ivanova, to me, and Tracy was
>less believable.
I thought Claudia's character was a good deal richer. TS plays a
hardass. Claudia played a hardass with a sense of humor and a
humanizing capacity for self-deprecation. Some of that no doubt had to
do with the part as written, though as I understand it Claudia
influenced JMS's conception of the role. But whatever the source, it
made her a more sympathetic character, and it made her performances
richer and more dimensional.
Amy Guskin
(in article <70pec5dnuf9l0us25...@gordol.org>):
> Previously on rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated, Amy Guskin said:
>
>>> The Zack/Byron/Lyta storyline was one of the best segments of S5. I
>>> thought Byron sucked but that made it truer. Lyta saw that as what to
>>> go to, while Zack offered her a plain but decent place to live, a good
>>> heart and Pizza. If Maury were around in the 2250s it might have ended
>>> up there, until the whole Psi Corps thing. Oh well. The
>>> "understanding" thing, as Zack's _great_ line to Lyta in his quarters
>>> pointed out. <<
>>
>> Maury?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maury_Povich
>
> Personally, I'd have chosen Jerry Springer for it.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jerry_Springer_Show <<
Ah, yeah. I know who Maury Povich is. But I didn't get that that was your
reference, or why. I still don't quite get it. Are you saying that you
imagine a Jerry Springer-esque confrontation among Zach, Lyta and Byron?
Amy Guskin
(in article <QMKdnUt6FI_m7VrX...@supernews.com>):
To each his own. I don't have a problem with how she looked. As for missing
the point, I think _you_ did: my point was that every time this comes up,
someone (sometimes you) calls it "Claudia's ponytail hair style" or something
close to that. She didn't invent it. And, I repeat: it's very realistic for
a woman in a military capacity to have the 'no frills' ponytail that Tracy
was wearing in those scenes. I don't see how she looked any more or less
like Skeletor than anyone else. And your protestations of being a
photographer and a guy notwithstanding, this is a subjective matter. And I
disagree.
Amy
Amy Guskin
(in article <MPG.253162544...@news.west.earthlink.net>):
> In article <dM6dnfND-9DFQVvX...@bt.com>,
> am.sw...@btopenworld.com says...
>>
>> For plot reasons Byron has to be a major "good guy" - the future teep
>> civilisation is to be built on his teachings. For that to be good
>> the foundations (=Byron) need to be good.
>
> Um, no; for plot reasons he has to be highly charismatic, and with
> enough of a following for everybody else to try and negotiate with
> instead of with his subset of teeps as a whole, who of course are going
> to be every bit as individual as any other set of humans. This does not
> require him to be good OR evil, merely central. What he is is a flawed
> invidual who makes decisions for others, some good, some iffy and at
> least one ruinous (I still have trouble believing in a telepath, even
> one who spends most of his life trying to block out the eminations of
> non-telepaths, who has so little comprehensive of human/human-like
> nature as to go out of his way to make his group look simultaneously
> dangerous and highly vulnerable.) The others followed him willingly,
> and, alas, unthinkingly. A highly significant character who is neither
> a good guy OR a bad guy may be rare, but that's what he is. <<
Sorry to backquote all that for a one-liner, but: very well put, Kay.
Dennis (Icarus)
news:0001HW.C6ED552B...@news.eternal-september.org...
<snip>
>
>> For a lot of years I was a photographer, and I'm a guy. We *see* these
>> things. <<
>
> To each his own. I don't have a problem with how she looked. As for
> missing
> the point, I think _you_ did: my point was that every time this comes up,
> someone (sometimes you) calls it "Claudia's ponytail hair style" or
> something
> close to that. She didn't invent it. And, I repeat: it's very realistic
> for
> a woman in a military capacity to have the 'no frills' ponytail that Tracy
> was wearing in those scenes. I don't see how she looked any more or less
> like Skeletor than anyone else. And your protestations of being a
> photographer and a guy notwithstanding, this is a subjective matter. And
> I
> disagree.
>
For what it's worth, I'm a guy and I thought she looked good with the
ponytail.
It's very subjective.
Dennis
.
Dr Nancy's Sweetie
I don't like the Byron thread in S5 because it's so strange to me how
Lyta falls for it. She ran to the Vorlons because she was so touched
by Kosh, and then finds out that the Vorlons are cold-blooded thugs
happy to sit by doing nothing while the Shadows kill a few million here
or there, if by lying about what's happening they can get the younger
races to cooperate. When the younger races *do* cooperate, and
Sheridan delivers a terrific blow to the heart of the Shadow empire,
instead of taking a leading role in the Alliance the Vorlons decide to
just kill everybody who ever spoke to Morden or his associates. After
this experience, you'd think Lyta would be hesitant to give over her
allegiance to quickly to somebody else. But she gets good vibes from
Byron and falls the same line of nonsense *again*. Didn't she learn
anything from the first time out?
And Byron himself is so dumb; how can a telepath who spent years working
with Bester *not* see the disaster of throwing down a "we'll expose your
secrets if you don't help us" in public to a bunch of different
governments? Surely he should know that people in authority don't like
it when you give them an ultimatum? They *got* authority because of
bargaining and taking charge, not by humbly nodding when given orders?
Byron should have been smarter, and Lyta should have been smarter, and
the plotlines shouldn't have been given such a final ending. Yes, there
were scheduling problems, but that doesn't explain everything.
"Jan <janmsc...@aol.com>" wrote in message
> One other overreaction that always slightly annoys me...why do people
> fixate on the teep's hair being A) long and B) clean? They're poor,
> folks, but nothing said that they couldn't afford soap. They were able
> to afford to get to the station on their own so obviously they weren't
> completely destitute.
"Dennis (Icarus) <ala_di...@yahoo.com>" wrote:
> Presuming they actually paid their way. ;-)
>
> After all, in "A View form the Gallery" they do manage to send one of
> the hostiles on their way, without either fkiring a shot or otherwise
> attacking them.....
Well, not to get all Obi-Wan with power over the weak-minded, but I
suppose we could figure that ticket agents and people at the galactic
equivalent of CVS can be duped into thinking you've paid, but doctors
and the staff who manage controlled substances are harder to influence
and it's more dangerous to try.
Darren Provine ! kil...@elvis.rowan.edu ! http://www.rowan.edu/~kilroy
"No man is fit to command another that cannot command himself."
-- William Penn
Andrew Swallow
I did not put the roles together at the time. It is in Crusade that
I saw Tracy Scoggins playing the girlfriend and could believe it.
Andrew Swallow
Amy Guskin
(in article <ha7vt4$gc8$1...@pcls6.std.com>):
>
> I don't like the Byron thread in S5 because it's so strange to me how
> Lyta falls for it. She ran to the Vorlons because she was so touched
> by Kosh, and then finds out that the Vorlons are cold-blooded thugs
> happy to sit by doing nothing while the Shadows kill a few million here
> or there, if by lying about what's happening they can get the younger
> races to cooperate. When the younger races *do* cooperate, and
> Sheridan delivers a terrific blow to the heart of the Shadow empire,
> instead of taking a leading role in the Alliance the Vorlons decide to
> just kill everybody who ever spoke to Morden or his associates. After
> this experience, you'd think Lyta would be hesitant to give over her
> allegiance to quickly to somebody else. But she gets good vibes from
> Byron and falls the same line of nonsense *again*. Didn't she learn
> anything from the first time out? <<
This is not one of the things in season 5 with which I have a problem. This
is very different from her throwing her trust behind the Vorlons; these
people are _just like her_. And when you've felt marginalized for a really
long time, finding people like yourself -- or people you believe to be like
yourself -- can be very compelling.
If Lyta had just thrown in with another bunch of aliens I'd agree that you
have a point. But this kind of 'rebound relationship' was, IMHO, completely
understandable.
Now, if you want to talk about problems, how about season 5 G'Kar being
superstitious to the point of comical fear about the Brakiri Day of the Dead,
rather than eagerly embracing the idea and making absolutely _certain_ to be
in the Brakiri part of the station for the event?
Mac Breck
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 17:48:06 -0400, "Mac Breck"
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Joseph DeMartino wrote:
>>> On Oct 2, 3:21 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> OTOH, I thought she did a pretty good job in "The River
>>>> of Souls."
>>>
>>> I thought she was just fine throughout, and especially good in
>>> "RoS", "A Call to Arms" and - most of all - "The Day of the Dead".
>>
>> Yes, those last two as well.
>>
>> I dunno. Claudia always seemed to *be* Ivanova, to me, and Tracy was
>> less believable.
>
> I thought Claudia's character was a good deal richer. TS plays a
> hardass. Claudia played a hardass with a sense of humor and a
> humanizing capacity for self-deprecation. Some of that no doubt had to
> do with the part as written, though as I understand it Claudia
> influenced JMS's conception of the role. But whatever the source, it
> made her a more sympathetic character, and it made her performances
> richer and more dimensional.
Well, that was on the nose. Good explanation. :-)
Mac Breck
Peanut-head.
> She didn't invent it.
Calling it "Claudia's ponytail hair style" doesn't mean that she
invented it. It's just a way of describing something that brings the
image of Claudia in that hairstyle immediately to mind.
<snip>
David E. Powell
wrote:
> Joseph DeMartino wrote:
> > On Oct 2, 3:21 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> OTOH, I thought she did a pretty good job in "The River
> >> of Souls."
>
> > I thought she was just fine throughout, and especially good in "RoS",
> > "A Call to Arms" and - most of all - "The Day of the Dead".
>
> > a character they don't like exactly as that character should be
> > played. Or can't see the difference between what the writer, producer
> > and director *want* from the actor and what the viewer thinks the
> > actor *should* have done.
>
> Exactly.
>
> I think Tracy Scoggins has overcome a Hollywood-unfriendly name and
> acted Captain Lochley well throughout her time on Babylon 5 and Crusade.
>
> I'm less happy with Claudia Christian's Ivanova, who I think delivers
> some critical lines poorly. The "God sent me" rant, in particular, is
> just too controlled and stilted - I think it should have been delivered
> with fire and venom from someone who is greiving for friends lost and
> wants to extract some payment from the captors of her leader and friend.
> The lines as written have great power, but Claudia doesn't extract it
> well.
>
> playing Jeffrey Sinclair as a tightly wound man on the edge of losing
> control, and think he made a much better first impression than
> Boxleitner did.
I liked Michael O'Hare from the start, but B5 was the first thing I
ever saw him in.
For Bruce Boxleitner, I had been a fan of his when I was younger from
"The Gambler" and from a show called "Bring 'Em Back Alive" which my
dad absolutely loved because it reminded him of the Safari tales his
dad told him. So maybe I was biased, because I saw Bruce and thought
"Oh cool, this guy is gonna do good."
So, a different background for both from where I was concerned but I
think they both did alright, and Boxleitner had some truly sublime
moments. O'Hare as well, especially his work with Doyle and his War
Without End stuff.
David E. Powell
> >> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 14:40:16 -0400, David E. Powell wrote
>
> (in article
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 2, 2:28 pm, Joseph DeMartino <jdema...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> On Oct 2, 2:19 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>> You snipped it.
>
> >>> "Telepathic Jesus and the Hippies from Outer Space"
>
> >> Oh, that. Thanks.
>
> >> Joe
>
> > The Zack/Byron/Lyta storyline was one of the best segments of S5. I
> > thought Byron sucked but that made it truer. Lyta saw that as what to
> > go to, while Zack offered her a plain but decent place to live, a good
> > heart and Pizza. If Maury were around in the 2250s it might have ended
> > up there, until the whole Psi Corps thing. Oh well. The
> > "understanding" thing, as Zack's _great_ line to Lyta in his quarters
> > pointed out. <<
>
> Maury?
The Maury Povich show... Because I'm not sure how things would go on
Oprah, Jerry Springer would just be wrong, and because Dr. Phil trying
to psychoanalyse Lyta might not end well.
Duggy
> [ The following text is in the "windows-1252" character set. ]
> [ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
> [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
>
> fact, the very old friend who got me to watch "B5" in the first place,
> back when I had dismissed it as a no-budget "Trek" wannabe:
>
> > Well, I just finished re-watching all 5 years of Babylon 5. In the past, we have argued over the ?quality? of the 5th season. Well, after watching to whole series again, at about an episode a day, I can say that Season 5 does hold up just as well as the other 4. In fact, watching everything in order, without the year-over-year gaps and other breaks, shows just how well the whole thing hangs together. You were right! <
>
> Of course I already *knew* I was right, but it was so nice to see that
> he'd finally figured it out. <g>
>
> So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
> altered on subsquent viewings?
>
> Enquiring minds want to know...
My belief was there were too many filler episodes... or at least
episodes that seemed like filler, and towards the end the wide-down
goodbyes took too long.
Of course, in a weekly series those sort of things hurt a lot more
than on DVD when you can race through these things... an subplot that
takes a month or more you can knock over in a week.
A lot of shows work better on DVD because of pacing issues. I may
give Lost a chance on DVD one day. May.
I'm currently watching season 5 and I have to say my watching speed
has slowed down which is usually a sign of how much I'm enjoying
something.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> IIRC, s4 was supposed to be a slower ride, ending with "Intersections
> In Real Time",
Which I think is a strange place to end a season. Maybe my opinion is
coloured by being used to it in season, it's hard to say...
Ending with Sherdian's capture works as a normal series
cliffhanger.... an interogation episode... I don't know.
And is certainly wouldn't work as the first episode back...
However, since it didn't happen it's hard to say one way or the other
I guess.
> I do understand the need to slow the pace down, deal with "smaller"
> issues, etc, after the culmination of the three wars in s4. But this
> feels like it was artificially stretched and forced merely to take up
> space in the programming schedule.
That was my feel too.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> It is certainly true that the uncertainty threw off the planned flow
> of the story-telling, and yes, that made S5 less good than it might
> have been, but I still don't think it was as bad as some people have
> said.
Criticism is always easier and taken worse than praise.
I don't enjoy S5 as much, but that doesn't mean I think it is bad.
I'd rather watch it than a lot of other shows.
> As originally envisioned, Byron and company would have quietly been
> slipping aboard the station during the last part of S4, much as the
> Rangers started showing up in the background early in S2, and their
> colony would have been established while the Earth Civil War was still
> going on - which would have made more sense in context, since B5
> wasn't operating under Earth law anyway and Sheridan needed all the
> allies he could get. The fact that S5 didn't open like the previous
> seasons, with the first few episodes leading into the climax of the
> *previous* season's major threads, did weaken it. Not having the Teep
> Colony be an *organic* outgrowth of the Civil War was also a
> problem.
That does sound better.
> But all things considered I think a "bad" episode of "B5" is
> better than a good episode of a lot of other shows.
Once you get past season 1, sure.
> The weakest of
> the S5 episodes were no worse than the weakest of the S1 shows, and
> almost any weak episode has its redeeming moments.
I don't think there were many - possibly any - weak episodes, S5
didn't have a Grey 15 is Missing... I don't really enjoy The Long
Night of Londo Molari much but I don't think it is a weak episode.
However, as a season it isn't as strong. And that's where the
disatifaction comes from.
> "TKO" was a
> routine "Rocky-in-space" story, but it also gave us insight into
> Ivanova. "Grey 17 is Missing" had an odd plot and one of the worst
> rubber monsters in SF TV history, but it also gave us the Marcus-
> Neroon duel, which paid huge dividends in S4. "Infection" was a
> standard generic SF "message" episode, but it introduced Earth Bio-
> Weapons division and their hunger for alien tech. (I've often said
> that the worst thing about "Infection" is that you could have changed
> the names and a few other details and shot that script for *any* of
> the "Trek" shows, "BSG" or the "Stargate" series - where it would have
> ranked among the better episodes, not the worst ones.
I wouldn't say better... I think it would be above average Trek or
Stargate, but not one of the better.
And yes, every episode has redeeming features, but that doesn't stop
dissatifaction with the episodes.
> We expect *more* of "B5", which I sometimes think makes us too critical when it
> falls short even by a little.)
Criticism is comparison.
"I feel that the first & last seasons of B5 were the weakest" isn't
saying "I feel that S1 & S5 were crap, weakened the entire series and
should never have been made" it isn't saying "S1 & S5 make Space
Rangers look like an intellectual, quality product". It's saying "S1
& S5 aren't as good as S2 - 4."
It's easy to take it as harsh criticism, but that doesn't mean that it
is.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
consulting.com> wrote:
> Oh, there's some good in S5: "A View from the Gallery", "Strange
> Relations", "Day of the Dead" (I'm as much a fan on Neil Gaiman as I
> am of JMS), "The Corps is Mother, the Corps is Father" and of course
> "Sleeping in Light", which is not quite S5.
And most of those are the weakest ones arc-wise... now I'm a fan of
them all, but in a perfect world I'd prefer to see them spread out
over a number of seasons.
Not to say that there isn't arc material in those episodes... I'm just
saying that they aren't don't push the story forward like other
episodes.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> I think too many viewers fail to realize that the actor may be playing
> a character they don't like exactly as that character should be
> played. Or can't see the difference between what the writer, producer
> and director *want* from the actor and what the viewer thinks the
> actor *should* have done.
I've been thinking the same thing in this thread. It's not that Tracy
can't act it's that's she's playing a character who is naturally stand-
offish in a situation where she is the ultimate outsider (a new
comanding officer, the recent "enemy", and put in charge of a station
that falls under two juristictions) so she plays the character just
right. However, just right is "completely wooden".
I feel the same way about Martin Sheen in RoS... he's playing a
character that is completely alien and immature and thus it looks like
he doesn't know how he should be playing the character...
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> I think she *really* made her bones in Gaiman's "Day of the Dead."
> THAT was impressive. In "Wheel of Fire" (I believe) when she
> confronts Garibaldi about his drinking. Also a home run.
> So, yes. she. can. act. (surprised the hell out of me, 'til I went
> back and saw her in, "Lois and Clark" - she did a great job in that
> one, too!)
And I think that we were seeing Lochley with her guard down in those.
Lochley with an old friend, Lochley sharing a personal secret... hense
not the wooden Lochley, but rather the "real" Lochley.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> For plot reasons Byron has to be a major "good guy" - the future teep
> civilisation is to be built on his teachings. For that to be good
> the foundations (=Byron) need to be good.
Sheridan is just a man, but he is the foundation of the Alliance.
Sheridan is a good man but flawed like anyone else.
Byron is the same.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> I thought Claudia's character was a good deal richer. TS plays a
> hardass. Claudia played a hardass with a sense of humor and a
> humanizing capacity for self-deprecation. Some of that no doubt had to
> do with the part as written, though as I understand it Claudia
> influenced JMS's conception of the role.
Ivanova was also playing a second in command to a commander that she
repected and was respected by and leading a crew who knew her.
Lochley was the commander of a crew that mistrusted her.
> But whatever the source, it
> made her a more sympathetic character, and it made her performances
> richer and more dimensional.
We also had multiple episodes dealing with the death of her father and
one epsiode dealing with the death of Lochley's friend.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
wrote:
> I don't like the Byron thread in S5 because it's so strange to me how
> Lyta falls for it. She ran to the Vorlons because she was so touched
> by Kosh, and then finds out that the Vorlons are cold-blooded thugs
> happy to sit by doing nothing while the Shadows kill a few million here
> or there, if by lying about what's happening they can get the younger
> races to cooperate.
> this experience, you'd think Lyta would be hesitant to give over her
> allegiance to quickly to somebody else. But she gets good vibes from
> Byron and falls the same line of nonsense *again*. Didn't she learn
> anything from the first time out?
Many people fall into the same patterns time and time again and don't
"learn from it."
Maybe they're a "type" and live to be the victim, maybe people repeat
behaviour because once you do something one way that's how you always
do it, maybe some people are just unlucky.
The post-Vorlon Lyta was a person with a big chunk missing from her
life... Byron was offering her something to fill it.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
[Snipping Lyta stuff that I completely agree with]
> Now, if you want to talk about problems, how about season 5 G'Kar being
> superstitious to the point of comical fear about the Brakiri Day of the Dead,
> rather than eagerly embracing the idea and making absolutely _certain_ to be
> in the Brakiri part of the station for the event?
I don't have a problem with it.
G'Kar feared the return of creatures from the Book of G'Quan. And was
shown to be right to fear them.
And he wasn't afraid of the Brakiri ritual, rather anxious over the
things he'd heard about it, rather like advising someone against
becoming involved in certain Native American rituals - not from
supersitious fear, but rather because you've hear of people reacting
badly to peyote...
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> Well, that was on the nose. Good explanation. :-)
On the Nose = on the money or On the Nose = smelly/distasteful?
===
= DUG.
===
Josh Hill
I thought that was central to the Byron arc, that it was an
examination of how even well-intentioned leaders from a majority and
minority group can end up in conflict.
Josh Hill
<p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Ivanova was also playing a second in command to a commander that she
>repected and was respected by and leading a crew who knew her.
>
>Lochley was the commander of a crew that mistrusted her.
Yeah, I imagine it's harder to play the commander than the
second-in-command in that circumstance. And, of course, there were a
legion of fans who mistrusted her as well, not because of anything
she'd done but because she'd replaced not one but two popular
characters. In particular, Sheridan was a hard act to follow.
I think the hard-assed commander is a very hard role for an actress to
play for the same reason it is for women to play in life -- the same
hard-assed behavior that's considered OK or even admirable in men bugs
people in women. And some actresses can pull it off elegantly, but not
all, even if they're good -- they either play it like a man in drag
(Lochley, Janeway) which may be good acting but isn't sympathetic, or
they try but can't convey the bad-assness (Tasha Yar).
>We also had multiple episodes dealing with the death of her father and
>one epsiode dealing with the death of Lochley's friend.
Yes, I was wondering about that too. Ivanova definitely had more
development. But -- well, it's been a long time, but it seems to me
that when I first saw the Lochley character, I just didn't *like* her
very much.
Amy Guskin
(in article <0001HW.C6ED53DB...@news.eternal-september.org>):
>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 10:49:38 -0400, Jeffrey Kaplan wrote
> (in article <70pec5dnuf9l0us25...@gordol.org>):
>
>> Previously on rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated, Amy Guskin said:
>>
>>>> The Zack/Byron/Lyta storyline was one of the best segments of S5. I
>>>> thought Byron sucked but that made it truer. Lyta saw that as what to
>>>> go to, while Zack offered her a plain but decent place to live, a good
>>>> heart and Pizza. If Maury were around in the 2250s it might have ended
>>>> up there, until the whole Psi Corps thing. Oh well. The
>>>> "understanding" thing, as Zack's _great_ line to Lyta in his quarters
>>>> pointed out. <<
>>>
>>> Maury?
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maury_Povich
>>
>> Personally, I'd have chosen Jerry Springer for it.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jerry_Springer_Show <<
>
> Ah, yeah. I know who Maury Povich is. But I didn't get that that was your
> reference, or why. I still don't quite get it. Are you saying that you
> imagine a Jerry Springer-esque confrontation among Zach, Lyta and Byron? <<
Sorry, "your reference" should have been "his reference." I wasn't paying
attention to where the initial comment came from.
Amy Guskin
(in article
<e46cc7aa-d338-401a...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>):
> On Oct 2, 11:13 pm, Amy Guskin <aisl...@fjordstone.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 14:40:16 -0400, David E. Powell wrote
>>
>>
>>> The Zack/Byron/Lyta storyline was one of the best segments of S5. I
>>> thought Byron sucked but that made it truer. Lyta saw that as what to
>>> go to, while Zack offered her a plain but decent place to live, a good
>>> heart and Pizza. If Maury were around in the 2250s it might have ended
>>> up there, until the whole Psi Corps thing. Oh well. The
>>> "understanding" thing, as Zack's _great_ line to Lyta in his quarters
>>> pointed out. <<
>>
>> Maury?
>
> The Maury Povich show... Because I'm not sure how things would go on
> Oprah, Jerry Springer would just be wrong, and because Dr. Phil trying
> to psychoanalyse Lyta might not end well. <<
Yeah. Sorry, I do know who Maury Povich is; I just didn't follow that you
were trying to say that you thought they needed a Roman-arena style daytime
talk show environment. If you'd said "Springer" rather than "Maury," I'm
sure I would have gotten it immediately: he's so much more universaly
identifiable with that milieu.
Amy Guskin
(in article
<f59e819b-fe46-4a56...@x6g2000prc.googlegroups.com>):
> On Oct 4, 3:16 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Well, that was on the nose. Good explanation. :-)
>
> On the Nose = on the money or On the Nose = smelly/distasteful? <<
While I can't speak for Mac, the phrase here in the US is used to mean "on
the money" or "spot on" or "exactly correct." I've never heard it used to
mean the latter.
Jeffrey Kaplan
> >>> Maury?
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maury_Povich
> >>
> >> Personally, I'd have chosen Jerry Springer for it.
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jerry_Springer_Show <<
> >
> > Ah, yeah. I know who Maury Povich is. But I didn't get that that was your
> > reference, or why. I still don't quite get it. Are you saying that you
> > imagine a Jerry Springer-esque confrontation among Zach, Lyta and Byron? <<
>
> Sorry, "your reference" should have been "his reference." I wasn't paying
> attention to where the initial comment came from.
"Love triangles", especially dysfunctional ones, are perfect material
for such shows. So I do imaging that's what David had in mind.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
Double ROT13 encoded for your protection
"Just get out of her way, Doctor. We're doomed to be Entertained. It's
an obligation on both sides. The polite thing to do is sort of pretend
we're not here till she's ready for us." (Miles Vorkosigan [Lois
McMaster Bujold, "The Mountains of Mourning"])
Mac Breck
On the Nose = on the money.
Mac Breck
>>> On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:12:50 -0400, Duggy wrote
> (in article
> <f59e819b-fe46-4a56...@x6g2000prc.googlegroups.com>):
>
>> On Oct 4, 3:16 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Well, that was on the nose. Good explanation. :-)
>>
>> On the Nose = on the money or On the Nose = smelly/distasteful? <<
>
> mean "on the money" or "spot on" or "exactly correct."
BINGO!
Aleks A.-Lessmann
>>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:00:13 -0400, Aleks A.-Lessmann wrote
>(in article <mt6cc5had3t2png31...@4ax.com>):
>> Add to it that Tracy Scoggins just. can't. act and you have most of what
>> makes S5 unbearable. <<
>I never understand this comment when I hear it. I realize that taste is a
YMMV, but I saw her in one episode of Murder, She Wrote, and in
Nip/Tuck, and didn't like her in any of those. So I definitely don't
like her and think it's because she's not able to act.
Again, YMMV
Aleks
Aleks A.-Lessmann
>"understanding" thing, as Zack's _great_ line to Lyta in his quarters
I agree about the Zack/Lyta thing. Maybe because I've Ben this guy once.
or twice or thrice...
Aleks
Duggy
> Yeah, I imagine it's harder to play the commander than the
> second-in-command in that circumstance. And, of course, there were a
> legion of fans who mistrusted her as well, not because of anything
> she'd done but because she'd replaced not one but two popular
> characters. In particular, Sheridan was a hard act to follow.
I actually - still - have a problem seeing her as the commanding
officer... the fact that she replaced Ivanova and that Sheridan was
still there in a more superiour position has made it hard for me to
see her as the CO... much like I have difficulty see Zach as Head of
Security because for the most part Garibaldi is still there acting as
Head of Alliance Security...
> I think the hard-assed commander is a very hard role for an actress to
> play for the same reason it is for women to play in life -- the same
> hard-assed behavior that's considered OK or even admirable in men bugs
> people in women. And some actresses can pull it off elegantly, but not
> all, even if they're good -- they either play it like a man in drag
> (Lochley, Janeway) which may be good acting but isn't sympathetic, or
> they try but can't convey the bad-assness (Tasha Yar).
Agreed.
> >We also had multiple episodes dealing with the death of her father and
> >one epsiode dealing with the death of Lochley's friend.
> Yes, I was wondering about that too. Ivanova definitely had more
> development. But -- well, it's been a long time, but it seems to me
> that when I first saw the Lochley character, I just didn't *like* her
> very much.
I didn't like Tracy much... a hang on from Lois & Clark... but it's
hard to say beyond that what my original impressions were.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> While I can't speak for Mac, the phrase here in the US is used to mean "on
> the money" or "spot on" or "exactly correct." I've never heard it used to
> mean the latter.
Just did a quick Google search there are three links that seem to be
"smelly/distasteful" and they are all Australian...
Two of which seem to be headline deliberately connecting the
"distasteful/disliked" to smelly as online sub-editors can...
The rest seem to imply the "on the money" def (a game show ala The
Price is Right, shop title puns)...
So, once again, it seems like it's an Australian thing...
===
= DUG.
===
Josh Hill
<p.allan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I didn't like Tracy much... a hang on from Lois & Clark... but it's
>hard to say beyond that what my original impressions were.
I don't remember my impression from Lois and Clark, which I didn't
much like . .
Christian Hennecke
[ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 22:03:58 UTC, Alan Dicey
<al...@diceyhome.free-online.co.uk> wrote:
> I'm less happy with Claudia Christian's Ivanova, who I think delivers
> some critical lines poorly. The "God sent me" rant, in particular, is
> just too controlled and stilted - I think it should have been delivered
> with fire and venom from someone who is greiving for friends lost and
> wants to extract some payment from the captors of her leader and friend.
> The lines as written have great power, but Claudia doesn't extract it
> well.
While I don't like that line itself, I think she's delivered it quite
well. At that point, Ivanova has either gone beyond fire to where
numbness is or she channels fire by actually saying something over the
top like this.
> But then I also think that Michael O'Hare does a very good job of
> playing Jeffrey Sinclair as a tightly wound man on the edge of losing
> control, and think he made a much better first impression than
> Boxleitner did.
I certainly agree as Michael O'Hare is concerned. However, I think that
Bruce Boxleitner did make that impression because Sheridan was to
explicitely start as the cheerful sort of guy.
--
"I smell blood and an era of prominent madmen." - W.H. Auden
David E. Powell
> On Oct 4, 11:23 pm, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I imagine it's harder to play the commander than the
> > second-in-command in that circumstance. And, of course, there were a
> > legion of fans who mistrusted her as well, not because of anything
> > she'd done but because she'd replaced not one but two popular
> > characters. In particular, Sheridan was a hard act to follow.
>
> I actually - still - have a problem seeing her as the commanding
> officer... the fact that she replaced Ivanova and that Sheridan was
> still there in a more superiour position has made it hard for me to
> see her as the CO... much like I have difficulty see Zach as Head of
> Security because for the most part Garibaldi is still there acting as
> Head of Alliance Security...
Well, in a way B5 was the HQ of the alliance. Certainly if an Admiral
is commanding a fleet and has a flag ship, they are the most superior
officer. However, the ship still needs a captain.
Think of it like with, with Zach and Garibaldi. Garibaldi started out
as head of Security for B5 but was now dealing with stuff from
missions to the Drazi home world to chasing down all kinds of other
stuff about the Centauri, the Psi Corps, etc. (This isn't to mention
the other stuff he was fighting through in Season 5) that gives him
less time to worry about rivalries in Brown Sector, disptes between
merchants over floor space in the Zocalo, arguments over customs and
supply shipments to B5, etc.
So Zack is elevated to replace Garibaldi, who is in a new position.
Garibaldi knows Zack and is tight with him, which helps, and Zack
knows the station backwards and forwards, so everyone's happy. If
Garibaldi needs to check something on B5, Zack's right there to get
his back. If Garibaldi is busy elsewhere, no problem. Zack has B5
under his supervision, and Garibaldi is free to do Alliance stuff or
personal business elsewhere. It actually made sense because it was two
guys who had done well, each getting promotions for certain reasons.
(Also, Sheridan probably trusts Zack ever since the Night Watch
thing.)
As for Lochley, the explanation that Earth insisted on her has
precedent. The Minbari insisted on Sinclair as commander of B5, and
when he departed to be Ambassador to Minbar, Earth insisted on
Sheridan. There was a political element there for each occasion, as
the Minbari had a special view of Sinclair, and Earth felt Sheridan
would be a strong choice and also cheese off the Minbari. So now they
wanted a strong Earth choice for B5 Station Commander, and to assert a
little presence. There were some tensions which came out of that, and
Lochley (like Sheridan in S2) was aware that it might tweak some
people there. She went into by the book mode as a result, doing things
"The Navy Way*" as it were until she got settled in.
*There is an old saying, that there are three things to do something
in the US Navy - The right way, the wrong way, and the Navy way. Navy
way being down the line, by the book, in tripliacte etc.
> > I think the hard-assed commander is a very hard role for an actress to
> > play for the same reason it is for women to play in life -- the same
> > hard-assed behavior that's considered OK or even admirable in men bugs
> > people in women. And some actresses can pull it off elegantly, but not
> > all, even if they're good -- they either play it like a man in drag
> > (Lochley, Janeway) which may be good acting but isn't sympathetic, or
> > they try but can't convey the bad-assness (Tasha Yar).
>
> Agreed.
>
> > >We also had multiple episodes dealing with the death of her father and
> > >one epsiode dealing with the death of Lochley's friend.
> > Yes, I was wondering about that too. Ivanova definitely had more
> > development. But -- well, it's been a long time, but it seems to me
> > that when I first saw the Lochley character, I just didn't *like* her
> > very much.
>
> I didn't like Tracy much... a hang on from Lois & Clark... but it's
> hard to say beyond that what my original impressions were.
I haven't seen her in much, but her being a bit uneasy and straight
laced as the character made sense.
The stuff with CC wasn't really to do with her, it is always tough for
the new person coming in after that. They didn't fire the last person,
they just answered a job ad.
> ===
> = DUG.
> ===
Jeffrey Kaplan
> As for Lochley, the explanation that Earth insisted on her has
> precedent. The Minbari insisted on Sinclair as commander of B5, and
Earth didn't insist on her. Sheridan specifically requested her.
The Minbari didn't "insist" on Sinclair, they merely vetoed every one
nominated before him.
> when he departed to be Ambassador to Minbar, Earth insisted on
> Sheridan. There was a political element there for each occasion, as
Earth didn't insist on Sheridan, they merely assigned him as Sinclair's
replacement.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
Double ROT13 encoded for your protection
A modest man is usually admired; if people ever hear of him.
voxwoman
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:51:43 -0700 (PDT), Duggy
>
> >I didn't like Tracy much... a hang on from Lois & Clark... but it's
> >hard to say beyond that what my original impressions were.
>
> I don't remember my impression from Lois and Clark, which I didn't
> much like . .
She played a ditzy sex kitten. Those are quite challenging roles (do I
need a sarcasm tag?).
-Wendy
Josh Hill
wrote:
>She played a ditzy sex kitten. Those are quite challenging roles (do I
>need a sarcasm tag?).
Well, Sarah thinks so . . .
David E. Powell
> Previously on rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated, David E. Powell said:
>
> > As for Lochley, the explanation that Earth insisted on her has
> > precedent. The Minbari insisted on Sinclair as commander of B5, and
>
> Earth didn't insist on her. Sheridan specifically requested her.
Alright, my bad. Sheridan was picking her for a reason then, even if
she had fought on the other side.
> The Minbari didn't "insist" on Sinclair, they merely vetoed every one
> nominated before him.
Well, true, but it was sort of an end around way of insisting. A
diplomatic way, perhaps.
> > when he departed to be Ambassador to Minbar, Earth insisted on
> > Sheridan. There was a political element there for each occasion, as
>
> Earth didn't insist on Sheridan, they merely assigned him as Sinclair's
> replacement.
True, but knowing his history they picked him for a reason, the first
couple episodes were pretty focused on that. Especially the one with
the rogue Minbari cruiser.
David E. Powell
If the actress isn't really ditzy, it can be a challenge I'm sure!
Jeffrey Kaplan
> > > As for Lochley, the explanation that Earth insisted on her has
> > > precedent. The Minbari insisted on Sinclair as commander of B5, and
> >
> > Earth didn't insist on her. Sheridan specifically requested her.
>
> Alright, my bad. Sheridan was picking her for a reason then, even if
> she had fought on the other side.
Sheridan specifically requested her +because+ she fought on the other
side, not "even if" she did.
> > The Minbari didn't "insist" on Sinclair, they merely vetoed every one
> > nominated before him.
> Well, true, but it was sort of an end around way of insisting. A
> diplomatic way, perhaps.
More of a passive-aggressive method, I'd say. :)
> > > when he departed to be Ambassador to Minbar, Earth insisted on
> > > Sheridan. There was a political element there for each occasion, as
> >
> > Earth didn't insist on Sheridan, they merely assigned him as Sinclair's
> > replacement.
>
> True, but knowing his history they picked him for a reason, the first
> couple episodes were pretty focused on that. Especially the one with
> the rogue Minbari cruiser.
"Points of Departure", the s2 season premier. And his appointment was
clarified later in "All Alone In The Night" by Gen. Hague. Clarke only
knew of Sheridan's record as written, a highly competent commander who
managed to deliver the only actual battle victory in the war. Hague
and/or Santiago recommended him as the next commander of B5 for other
reasons.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
Double ROT13 encoded for your protection
Peter's Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord, #176.
I will add indelible dye to the moat. It won't stop anyone from
swimming across, but even dim-witted guards should be able to figure
out when someone has entered in this fashion.
Duggy
> On Oct 5, 7:51 pm,Duggy<p.allan.dug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I actually - still - have a problem seeing her as the commanding
> > officer... the fact that she replaced Ivanova and that Sheridan was
> > still there in a more superiour position has made it hard for me to
> > see her as the CO... much like I have difficulty see Zach as Head of
> > Security because for the most part Garibaldi is still there acting as
> > Head of Alliance Security...
> Well, in a way B5 was the HQ of the alliance. Certainly if an Admiral
> is commanding a fleet and has a flag ship, they are the most superior
> officer. However, the ship still needs a captain.
I understand how it works, it was just a mental block that makes me
have to think "oh yeah, she's not 2IC."
===
= DUG.
===
John W Kennedy
> The whole Byron backlash thing has mystified
> me from the beginning.
A large number of SF fans have a bias toward technolatry, the more
smart-ass sort of atheism, and Libertarianism. Consequently, a "dirty
hippie" like Byron is anathema to them. They also make the mistake of
assuming that JMS created Byron in the full expectation that he would
be accepted by the audience as a heroic, even messianic figure. (Of
course, he /did/ expect some of the audience to receive him that way,
just as he expected some of the audience to see a simple "Vorlons
Good, Shadows Bad" dichotomy. That's JMS's way.) Consequently, they
are blinded by a red haze.
David E. Powell
True, it was a different dynamic in S5, at least in that sense, and
the character was sort of stepping into that, too.
> ===
> = DUG.
> ===
David E. Powell
I agree.
Personally I thought Byron was a good mix of the things that were
admirable and some that were worrisome. There were times he was quite
impressive, and other times it went too far, similar to a lot of
figures in history that ended up in similar situations.
Ironically I started out not liking him but then saw a couple things
about him that were pretty cool, so I went from hating him to kind of
liking him, to wondering if he'd make it, and then kind of sad at the
end. Sort of like the "I'm gonna kill him" guy in "Shaun of the Dead."
Besides, anyway who was against Psi Corps and who was willing to put
themselves out there had to be admired for pure guts.
My favorite Byron moment was "A View From the Gallery" when this one
guy was like "Oh yeah it must be kick ass to be one of those pilots
out there" so Byron gave him a cockpit's eye view to show him what it
was really like. The classic "Be careful what you wish for..." it said
a lot about Byron, and was a really good moment for him.
Jeffrey Kaplan
> A large number of SF fans have a bias toward technolatry, the more
> smart-ass sort of atheism, and Libertarianism. Consequently, a "dirty
> hippie" like Byron is anathema to them. They also make the mistake of
> assuming that JMS created Byron in the full expectation that he would
> be accepted by the audience as a heroic, even messianic figure. (Of
> course, he /did/ expect some of the audience to receive him that way,
> just as he expected some of the audience to see a simple "Vorlons
> Good, Shadows Bad" dichotomy. That's JMS's way.) Consequently, they
> are blinded by a red haze.
I don't like Byron because I simply don't like Byron. I also don't
like Bester.
The difference to me is, I don't like Byron at all, but while I don't
like Bester as a person, I do like him as a character.
Maybe it's the way he was written. Maybe it's the way Robin Downs
played him, or maybe it's a combination of both.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
Double ROT13 encoded for your protection
DISCLAIMER: The most fundamental particles in this product are held
together by a 'Gluing' force about which little is currently known and
whose adhesive power can therefore not be permanently guaranteed.
First Circle of the Kha'Ri
love of Babylon 5, as did Lochley. One thing that hasn't been raised
is how poorly thought-out the political arrangement of the babylon 5
station really was - it was property of the Earth Alliance, but not
really, Sheridan had to get an Earth Alliance captain, who was kind of
in charge, but still with Sheridan calling the shots, even though
really he's supposed to look after this huge vast interstellar
alliance.
The whole legal framework was really poorly done - how Garibaldi
suddenly becomes the head of a cover intelligence organization and
suddenly has access to all this Earth Alliance info - even though all
of them ended on such a poor note with the Earth alliance military.
And he runs a covert intelligence with these broad connections across
the galaxy, yet he's the only one doing it, to the point where he has
to do field assignments.
It's just so amateurish and unrealistic. Within the context of a
military-run station, a lot of the things could be explained and
understood, but when you switch the playing field to where now this is
supposed to be the office of the executive officer of a huge
interstellar alliance, it suddenly looks really crappy. My local city
government has more administrators than apparently their whole
interstellar alliance.
I think JMS tried to fit the plot to season 5 and I don't believe when
he said he wrote the whole thing ahead of time and everything was
planned the way it happened. There is no way Season 5, with its
obvious differences with previous seasons, was intended. I also don't
really like how everything was rushed in Season 4 and we got some
really strange explanations of the future.
Might I also say that I hate the concept of "rangers" and their jedi/
lord of the rings hippy enforcer quality.
First Circle of the Kha'Ri
> � � [ The following text is in the "windows-1252" character set. ]
> � � [ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. �]
> � � [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
>
> This was part of an e-mail I received from an old friend today - in
> fact, the very old friend who got me to watch "B5" in the first place,
> back when I had dismissed it as a no-budget "Trek" wannabe:
>
> > Well, I just finished re-watching all 5 years of Babylon 5. �In the past, we have argued over the ?quality? of the 5th season. �Well, after watching to whole series again, at about an episode a day, I can say that Season 5 does hold up just as well as the other 4. �In fact, watching everything in order, without the year-over-year gaps and other breaks, shows just how well the whole thing hangs together. �You were right! <
>
> Of course I already *knew* I was right, but it was so nice to see that
> he'd finally figured it out. �<g>
>
> So, did anyone else out there find their opinion of S5 radically
> altered on subsquent viewings?
>
> Enquiring minds want to know...
>
> Later,
>
> Joe
I forgot to add another thing I hated - that Mars underground leader
woman who resurfaces in season 5. Talk about someone who can't act!!!!!
Amy Guskin
(in article
<15a2b88b-b8d3-427a...@a6g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>):
Sort of like the "I'm gonna kill him" guy in "Shaun of the Dead."<<
Okay, I've seen Shaun of the Dead three or four times, and I can't figure out
who you're talking about. Clarification?