JMS at SDCC - Who's going?
Jan
schedules. I see JMS's writing panel on Thursday, the only day posted so far.
So anybody else going to be here?
JMS, are you going to be able to make the announcement that's "Near and dear to
everyone's heart" yet? Can you give us the rest of your schedule?
Jan
--
I try never to get involved in my own life. Too much trouble.
Charlie E.
>Comic-Con is less than two weeks away now they're starting to post the daily
>schedules. I see JMS's writing panel on Thursday, the only day posted so far.
>
>So anybody else going to be here?
>
>JMS, are you going to be able to make the announcement that's "Near and dear to
>everyone's heart" yet? Can you give us the rest of your schedule?
>
>Jan
I will be there, but I might miss the writing panel. It conflicts
with the Dr. Who and Torchwood panels. Biggest problem with
Comic-Con, you need to be in two (or more!) places at once!
--
Charlie Edmondson
Edmondson Engineering Inc
www.edmondsonengineering.com
Jan
>
>I will be there, but I might miss the writing panel. It conflicts
>with the Dr. Who and Torchwood panels. Biggest problem with
>Comic-Con, you need to be in two (or more!) places at once!
>
Ain't that the truth! The full schedule of panels is up now. JMS' spotlight
panel is on Saturday:
>4:45-5:45 Spotlight on J. Michael Straczynski— Yes, it's him again. Somehow—we
>>have no idea how—he's gone from writing comics and TV to working with Tom
>>Cruise, Clint Eastwood, Ron Howard, Paul Greengrass, Tom Hanks, the Wachowski
>>Brothers, and Angelina Jolie. His long career (he's also known for Babylon 5,
>>Twilight Zone, and others) stands as proof positive that there is no such
>>thing as a just God. What's he up to now? What's coming next? What secrets
>>remain yet untold? How did he achieve this (well, okay, we know that and let's
>>just say it has something to do with a contract signed with Ba'al)? Come and
>>ask the man responsible—J. Michael Straczynski—for Thor, The Twelve, and such
>>upcoming movies as Changeling, World War Z, Proving Ground, The Flickering
>>Light, The Grays, and Lensman. Room 6B
Slitheen
news:g5679...@drn.newsguy.com...
> Comic-Con is less than two weeks away now they're starting to post the
> daily
> schedules. I see JMS's writing panel on Thursday, the only day posted so
> far.
>
> So anybody else going to be here?
>
> JMS, are you going to be able to make the announcement that's "Near and
> dear to
> everyone's heart" yet?
I'm particularly interested in this announcement. It has had my head in a
whirl since I heard it first mentioned.
[ Mmmmmm.....scratches his chin and goes into serious ponder mode..... :) ]
--
Slitheen.
"I've searched the phrase 'I shall walk the Earth and my hunger shall know
no bounds', but I keep getting redirected to Weight Watchers!"
Ianto Jones, Torchwood.
jms...@aol.com
in a quick fashion....
Several things just to update folks.
First, many thanks to all those who sent along research suggestions
and offerings to be of assistance on the project I can't talk about.
I've been swamped with deadlines and unable to reply to any of the
public notes and private emails, but as soon as I can get my head
above water, be assured that I'll be in touch with many of you.
Second, as noted in the original thread before I hijacked it, yes, the
plan at the moment is that I will be at Comic Con San Diego this year,
primarily doing my thing on Thursday and Saturday afternoons.
There is a *chance* -- mind you, it's just a slim chance but to be
honorable I must mention it -- that a work situation *may* preclude my
appearance there. Or it may not. I'll know more by the end of next
week, and for now as far as I know, everything's on target for me to
be at SDCC. If that changes, I'll be sure to let everyone know as far
in advance as possible.
One final note re: recent discussions on TMoS and more Lost Tales.
B5:TLT was commissioned at a $2 million budget to, yet one more time,
"test the waters" for B5. We did what we could with that, and that
was that. As we did with Rangers, which also suffered from not having
a lot of money because of concerns about "is there really a B5
audience?" Which is, of course, a foolish question from a studio that
has never really understood what it has in B5.
Of late, there have been more discussions from WB about doing more
DVDs, again at a low cost, or a cable thing, again with minimal
investment.
So for the last few months, I've been giving this whole subject a lot
of quiet thought. And I've come to a conclusion.
B5 as a five year story stands beautifully on its own. If anything
else is to be continued from that story, it should be something that
adds to the legacy of B5, rather than subtracts from it.
As well intentioned as Rangers and TLT were, as enticing as it was to
return to those familiar waters, in the end I think they did more to
subtract from the legacy than add to it. I don't regret having made
them, because I needed to go through that to get to the point where I
am now psychologically, but from where I sit now, I wouldn't make them
again.
So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
featured, big-budget feature film.
It's that or nothing.
And if it's nothing, I'm totally cool with that because the original
story stands on its own just fine. I'm not lobbying for it, I'm not
asking fans to write in about it (nor should you) because such
campaigns never really have much impact...that's simply the position
I've taken up here. Lord knows I don't lack for other things to do
these days. I'm busier on more prestige projects with terrific people
and great film-makers than at any other time in my career.
At the end of the day, for me, it's not just a matter of getting more
B5. It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
action. The original show deserves better than that, the surviving
cast members deserve better than that, and the fans who have supported
it over the years definitely deserve better than that. A lot better.
So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on whichever
side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
'cause it's your show too.
jms
Jan
jms...@aol.com says...
>
>So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
>more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
>cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
>interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
>featured, big-budget feature film.
>
>It's that or nothing.
>
I'm not at all sorry to hear this. It's about time WB put up or shut up.
Brian Harvey
>At the end of the day, for me, it's not just a matter of getting more
>B5. It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
>before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
>action.
Fwiw, I think that's the right decision, especially the part about "respects
what came before it."
But, supposing you win that battle, these days there'll be /another/ studio
battle to be fought: avoiding making a film that stars the special effects.
To me, what made B5 such a huge /technical/ success was that, although it
was full of amazing CGI, I never noticed unless I was specifically trying to
study how it was made. No arrows moving through the air in slow-motion.
Nobody melting into mercury. Nobody even walking though walls. Just
perfectly natural-looking walks through five-mile-long corridors.
If you do make a big-budget B5 movie, please don't let the special effects
people show off.
Andrew Swallow
[snip]
A great pity. I was looking forward to watching some more Babylon 5
videos.
Andrew Swallow
Duggy
> One final note re: recent discussions on TMoS and more Lost Tales.
A rather large note.
> So for the last few months, I've been giving this whole subject a lot
> of quiet thought. And I've come to a conclusion.
> B5 as a five year story stands beautifully on its own. If anything
> else is to be continued from that story, it should be something that
> adds to the legacy of B5, rather than subtracts from it.
> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
> It's that or nothing.
> And if it's nothing, I'm totally cool with that because the original
> story stands on its own just fine. I'm not lobbying for it, I'm not
> asking fans to write in about it (nor should you) because such
> campaigns never really have much impact...that's simply the position
> I've taken up here. Lord knows I don't lack for other things to do
> these days. I'm busier on more prestige projects with terrific people
> and great film-makers than at any other time in my career.
> So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on whichever
> side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
> 'cause it's your show too.
I understand completely. There are so many things that I want to see
more of but am afraid they'll ruin.
Glad to here that you're in a position where you can make this
decision without regrets.
===
= DUG.
===
James A. Robbins
news:7ea6c682-3835-48b3...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on whichever
> side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
> 'cause it's your show too.
>
> jms
Joe,
Thank you for B5. If something more along that line happens then
that would be great, but thanks for what we've got.
And good luck on all your current endeavors. It couldn't have happened
to a nicer guy. Just don't work yourself to death, it's not worth it.
--
James A. Robbins
johndun...@gmail.com
>In article <7ea6c682-3835-48b3...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>,
>jms...@aol.com says...
>>
>>So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
>>more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
>>cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
>>interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
>>featured, big-budget feature film.
>>
>>It's that or nothing.
>>
>
>I'm not at all sorry to hear this. It's about time WB put up or shut up.
>
They had better hurry while they still can afford him.
johndun...@gmail.com
>
>Second, as noted in the original thread before I hijacked it, yes, the
>plan at the moment is that I will be at Comic Con San Diego this year,
>primarily doing my thing on Thursday and Saturday afternoons.
>
>There is a *chance* -- mind you, it's just a slim chance but to be
>honorable I must mention it -- that a work situation *may* preclude my
>appearance there. Or it may not. I'll know more by the end of next
>week, and for now as far as I know, everything's on target for me to
>be at SDCC. If that changes, I'll be sure to let everyone know as far
>in advance as possible.
>
I just found this thumbnail bio of JMS on the San Diego Comic Con web site.
http://www.comic-con.org/cci/cci_guests.shtml#Straczynski
Is it just me or is JMS dressed a Terry Pratchett in this picture?
I just hope DC actually gets the podcasts posted for their panels. I want to hear what to expect
with JMS's The Brave and The Bold. JMS has the whole DC sandbox to play in with I hope all the
action figures.
-
John Duncan Yoyo
------------------------------o)
Local residents upset with the current weather pattern are encouraged to walk outside
their homes and shake their fists at the sky while exclaiming, "I am displeased!"
Jon Schild
jms...@aol.com wrote:
> Putting this on a recent thread here where it's more likely to be seen
> in a quick fashion....
>
...
>
> At the end of the day, for me, it's not just a matter of getting more
> B5. It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
> before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
> action. The original show deserves better than that, the surviving
> cast members deserve better than that, and the fans who have supported
> it over the years definitely deserve better than that. A lot better.
>
> jms
>
Think what you could do with the money that was thrown into the toilet
funding 7 years of Star Trek Voyager and 4 years of Enterprise.
Joseph DeMartino
> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
>
> It's that or nothing.
Not that I get a vote here <g> but I just wanted to say that I think
you've made exactly the right decision for exactly the right reasons.
I'd love to see a *real* B5 movie on the big screen. That would be
great. But if that never happens I have 110 episodes, several TV
movies, the novels, the scriptbooks and the JMSNews archive if a I
need a "B5" fix. And I can look forward to "Changeling", "Lensman",
"World War Z" and all the rest.
I've got no complaints.
May you continue to go from success to success.
Regards,
Joe
Christian Hennecke
wrote:
[snip]
> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
>
> It's that or nothing.
Well, personally I would be content with a TV show or DVD production
with several episodes or movies backed by a *decent* budget.
Anyway, I fully understand your position. Eat that, WB! :-)
--
"I smell blood and an era of prominent madmen." - W.H. Auden
Josh Hill
wrote:
>jms...@aol.com wrote:
>> Putting this on a recent thread here where it's more likely to be seen
>> in a quick fashion....
>>
> ...
>>
>> At the end of the day, for me, it's not just a matter of getting more
>> B5. It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
>> before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
>> action. The original show deserves better than that, the surviving
>> cast members deserve better than that, and the fans who have supported
>> it over the years definitely deserve better than that. A lot better.
>>
>Think what you could do with the money that was thrown into the toilet
>funding 7 years of Star Trek Voyager and 4 years of Enterprise.
"I'm going to buy 100 more shares of Bippycorp."
"But Bippycorp has been going down for years! Why not invest in
Boppycorp?"
"Nah, I want to play it safe."
:-) :-|
--
Josh
"My name is not Strangelove. I don't know about Strangelove. I'm not
interested in Strangelove. What else can I say? . . . Look, say it
three times more, and I throw you out of this office."
--Edward Teller
Josh Hill
>B5:TLT was commissioned at a $2 million budget to, yet one more time,
>"test the waters" for B5. We did what we could with that, and that
>was that. As we did with Rangers, which also suffered from not having
>a lot of money because of concerns about "is there really a B5
>audience?" Which is, of course, a foolish question from a studio that
>has never really understood what it has in B5.
Damn. I was sure -- sure -- that after the success of the series DVD's
and TLT they would see the light. I guess I'll never understand
Hollywood. Still, like everyone else, I think you've made the right
decision. The last thing we need is "Babylon 5 Meets Terminator."
Tippi
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:42:18 -0700 (PDT), "jmsa...@aol.com"
>
> <jmsa...@aol.com> wrote:
> >B5:TLT was commissioned at a $2 million budget to, yet one more time,
> >"test the waters" for B5. We did what we could with that, and that
> >was that. As we did with Rangers, which also suffered from not having
> >a lot of money because of concerns about "is there really a B5
> >audience?" Which is, of course, a foolish question from a studio that
> >has never really understood what it has in B5.
>
> Damn. I was sure -- sure -- that after the success of the series DVD's
> and TLT they would see the light. I guess I'll never understand
> Hollywood. Still, like everyone else, I think you've made the right
> decision. The last thing we need is "Babylon 5 Meets Terminator."
how about B5 vs Aliens vs Predator!
I am also disappointed that there will be no more TLT, esp. the third
story that was held back for the "first" release. But also glad that
JMS can "move on".
Kurt Ullman
<19752a98-fc8e-434f...@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Tippi <aa...@torfree.net> wrote:
> how about B5 vs Aliens vs Predator!
>
Nasty thought. However, if Londo ever shows up in a Direct TV
Commercial.. someone is going to die a very slow painful death.
Wes Struebing
>Putting this on a recent thread here where it's more likely to be seen
>in a quick fashion....
>
>Several things just to update folks.
<snip>
>
>So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on whichever
>side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
>'cause it's your show too.
>
Joe, much as I'd love to see more B5-related stuff, I have to say,
you're absolutely correct! (not that we doubted that when push comes
to shove that what you've posted is what you'd say)
And I would imagine that most of us "are good with that", too.
It's been (and still is) a hell of a ride, sir!
--
Wes Struebing
Jan. 20, 2009 - the end of an error
Gregory Weston
<kurtullman-C9C13...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>,
Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Now you know the real reason their hair is that shape.
--
"Harry?" Ron's voice was a mere whisper. "Do you smell something ... burning?"
- Harry Potter and the Odor of the Phoenix
Josh Hill
wrote:
>> Damn. I was sure -- sure -- that after the success of the series DVD's
>> and TLT they would see the light. I guess I'll never understand
>> Hollywood. Still, like everyone else, I think you've made the right
>> decision. The last thing we need is "Babylon 5 Meets Terminator."
>
>how about B5 vs Aliens vs Predator!
I shouldn't laugh -- they actually had a predator rip episode of
Voyager.
>I am also disappointed that there will be no more TLT, esp. the third
>story that was held back for the "first" release. But also glad that
>JMS can "move on".
Me too, but I can see why JMS wouldn't want to fall into the
underbudget sequel trap . . . while some of us were satisfied with a
smaller scale short story format, others were expecting something with
the scope of the show.
John W Kennedy
> It's that or nothing.
And that's probably best. If "Changeling" does what it's expected to do
at the box office, maybe they'll listen. (Or maybe, from their
viewpoint, it's "World War Z" that will be the necessary experiment,
'cause, y'know, all that crazy sci-fi stuff is the same.)
To continue a topic in this thread, maybe you can get Clint Eastwood to
direct, since it seems he's inclined to leave your words alone.
--
John W. Kennedy
"But now is a new thing which is very old--
that the rich make themselves richer and not poorer,
which is the true Gospel, for the poor's sake."
-- Charles Williams. "Judgement at Chelmsford"
Jeffrey Kaplan
> As well intentioned as Rangers and TLT were, as enticing as it was to
> return to those familiar waters, in the end I think they did more to
> subtract from the legacy than add to it. I don't regret having made
> them, because I needed to go through that to get to the point where I
> am now psychologically, but from where I sit now, I wouldn't make them
> again.
>
> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
>
> It's that or nothing.
Please don't lose the computer models again, in case "they" decide to
go for it.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
Notes on Fortress Construction: 8. If possible, no exhaust ports
should lead directly to the heart of the reactor core. If that is
unavoidable, all such exhaust ports should have closeable reinforced
blast doors at every other level, and alternate routes of venting in
case of emergency.
Kay Shapero
79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>, jms...@aol.com says...
>
> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
>
> It's that or nothing.
>
Fair 'nuff. And if you ever do make that feature, I'll be down there in
the front row with my popcorn!
--
Kay Shapero
Signature munged - to email me use kay at domain of my website, below.
http://www.kayshapero.net
Dan Dassow
> jmsa...@aol.com wrote:
> > It's that or nothing.
>
> And that's probably best. If "Changeling" does what it's expected to do
> at the box office, maybe they'll listen. (Or maybe, from their
> viewpoint, it's "World War Z" that will be the necessary experiment,
> 'cause, y'know, all that crazy sci-fi stuff is the same.)
>
> To continue a topic in this thread, maybe you can get Clint Eastwood to
> direct, since it seems he's inclined to leave your words alone.
>
“World War Z” would probably be well served by Clint Eastwood’s almost
journalistic or clinical directorial approach.
Dan Dassow
newton...@ntlworld.com
> So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on whichever
> side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
> 'cause it's your show too.
>
> jms
Simply, Thanks. Good and brave decision.
Babylon 5 Universe RIP.
---
Andrew.
Meditation - its better than sitting round the house doing nothing.
Hank Arnold (MVP)
> At the end of the day, for me, it's not just a matter of getting more
> B5. It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
> before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
> action. The original show deserves better than that, the surviving
> cast members deserve better than that, and the fans who have supported
> it over the years definitely deserve better than that. A lot better.
>
> So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on whichever
> side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
> 'cause it's your show too.
>
> jms
>
I think that all of us are very cool with that. B5 does stand on it's
own. All that TLT and the TMoS proved was that there *IS* a point where
you can't cut funding. If future B5 projects were to be of the same
quality, it would only hurt the B5 legacy.
Thanks for giving us the best TV series *EVER* (note that I didn't say
"Sci-Fi). No natter what you do in the future, that will always be your
greatest accomplishment.
BTW, I've started watching the re-runs of "Jeremiah" on SciFi. Wow!!
Only the third episode and I'm hooked again!! It's really a shame you
didn't get to tell the whole story.
--
Regards,
Hank Arnold
Microsoft MVP
Windows Server - Directory Services
Amy Guskin
<251c9440-c9bc-4071...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>):
> On Jul 13, 9:42 pm, "jmsa...@aol.com" <jmsa...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
>> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
>> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
>> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
>> featured, big-budget feature film.
>>
>> It's that or nothing.
>
> Not that I get a vote here <g> but I just wanted to say that I think
> you've made exactly the right decision for exactly the right reasons.
> I'd love to see a *real* B5 movie on the big screen. That would be
> great. But if that never happens I have 110 episodes, several TV
> movies, the novels, the scriptbooks and the JMSNews archive if a I
> need a "B5" fix. <<
I just said this on a message board last week or so. Personally, I don't
need _one more bit_ of Babylon 5, because I still have the jewel in the crown
-- the five-year series -- plus the assorted other things. But it's that
jewel that I keep coming back to, again and again.
In fact, I wonder what that ratio is, for most of the fandom? That is, how
many times folks have re-watched the whole series or cherry-picked episodes
from the series, as compared to how many times they've re-watched (or
re-read) anything else (Crusade episodes, the whole Crusade series as it
stands, LotR, TLT, any of the tv movies, any of the novels or novelizations)?
In any case, while I know Joe could write us a _great_ big-budget film with a
new story in the B5 universe, I always have to come back to the fact that the
story would, by necessity, be limited. He can't tell any stories that rely
on G'Kar. Or Franklin, for that matter. But the loss of G'Kar to the B5
universe seems -- to me -- to be more of a sticking point, at least for the
period between "Objects at Rest" and "Sleeping in Light" (which is the most
likely period to be writing about, if the idea is to use the original cast).
I think G'Kar will be glaringly obvious by his absence, in any tale told in
that time period. Still, if a big budget is granted, and Joe wants to tell
us a story, obviously I'll be there on opening night with bells on (and
clothes. can't forget the clothes.).
Amy
--
"In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over
again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George
W. Bush, May 24, 2005
Gregory Weston
John W Kennedy <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
> jms...@aol.com wrote:
> > It's that or nothing.
>
> And that's probably best. If "Changeling" does what it's expected to do
> at the box office, maybe they'll listen. (Or maybe, from their
> viewpoint, it's "World War Z" that will be the necessary experiment,
> 'cause, y'know, all that crazy sci-fi stuff is the same.)
Have you read WWZ? (Or are you indicating a belief that the real content
won't matter? The suits will hear "it's got zombies" and let their
'imagination' do the rest?)
I'm actually quite curious to find out how that book turns into a
feature film.
Alex
> It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
> before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
> action.
Thank you! I'm glad that you think this way (and totally support that).
Jon Schild
Amy Guskin wrote:
> Personally, I don't
> need _one more bit_ of Babylon 5, because I still have the jewel in the crown
> -- the five-year series -- plus the assorted other things. But it's that
> jewel that I keep coming back to, again and again.
>
> In fact, I wonder what that ratio is, for most of the fandom? That is, how
> many times folks have re-watched the whole series or cherry-picked episodes
> from the series, as compared to how many times they've re-watched (or
> re-read) anything else
>
> Amy
I am on my 4th full viewing, now getting another newbie hooked.
Joseph DeMartino
> And that's probably best. If "Changeling" does what it's expected to do
> at the box office, maybe they'll listen. (Or maybe, from their
> viewpoint, it's "World War Z" that will be the necessary experiment,
> 'cause, y'know, all that crazy sci-fi stuff is the same.)
I would think that "Lensman" would be more likely to get their
attention, since "WWZ" will probably fall mid-way between the horror
and war genres, and not be perceived as SF at all.
Regards,
Joe
mhai...@gmail.com
> in a quick fashion....
>
> Several things just to update folks.
>
> and offerings to be of assistance on the project I can't talk about.
> I've been swamped with deadlines and unable to reply to any of the
> public notes and private emails, but as soon as I can get my head
> above water, be assured that I'll be in touch with many of you.
>
> Second, as noted in the original thread before I hijacked it, yes, the
> plan at the moment is that I will be at Comic Con San Diego this year,
> primarily doing my thing on Thursday and Saturday afternoons.
>
> There is a *chance* -- mind you, it's just a slim chance but to be
> honorable I must mention it -- that a work situation *may* preclude my
> appearance there. Or it may not. I'll know more by the end of next
> week, and for now as far as I know, everything's on target for me to
> be at SDCC. If that changes, I'll be sure to let everyone know as far
> in advance as possible.
>
>
> "test the waters" for B5. We did what we could with that, and that
> was that. As we did with Rangers, which also suffered from not having
> a lot of money because of concerns about "is there really a B5
> audience?" Which is, of course, a foolish question from a studio that
> has never really understood what it has in B5.
>
> DVDs, again at a low cost, or a cable thing, again with minimal
> investment.
>
> So for the last few months, I've been giving this whole subject a lot
> of quiet thought. And I've come to a conclusion.
>
> B5 as a five year story stands beautifully on its own. If anything
> else is to be continued from that story, it should be something that
> adds to the legacy of B5, rather than subtracts from it.
>
> return to those familiar waters, in the end I think they did more to
> subtract from the legacy than add to it. I don't regret having made
> them, because I needed to go through that to get to the point where I
> am now psychologically, but from where I sit now, I wouldn't make them
> again.
>
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
>
>
> story stands on its own just fine. I'm not lobbying for it, I'm not
> asking fans to write in about it (nor should you) because such
> campaigns never really have much impact...that's simply the position
> I've taken up here. Lord knows I don't lack for other things to do
> these days. I'm busier on more prestige projects with terrific people
> and great film-makers than at any other time in my career.
>
> B5. It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
> before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
> cast members deserve better than that, and the fans who have supported
> it over the years definitely deserve better than that. A lot better.
>
> So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on whichever
> side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
> 'cause it's your show too.
>
> jms
I agree. I have enjoyed the books, the spin offs and TLT but in the
end I felt like it was just a DVD commentary over deleted scenes.
It's fascinating to see, but the strength of the show is and always
will be the 5 year run. It is an amazing feat and the rest seems like
a watered down version of leftovers. That's not a criticism of trying
to do more, but unless (as you say) it can ADD to the original story,
there isn't much point.
There is not a day goes by I do not look up at my picture of Andreas
and SEE G'Kar and then think about Londo. How classic of a struggle is
that? How amazing was it to see the series unfold and the mystery
unravel and, most importantly, watch the people change and grow.
That's what it is all about isn't it?
I hope the others can see this for what it is, an utter agreement of
what you said and not a bashing. I Love B5. I am a huge fanboy for the
universe and I would be for Manga WB cartoon versions of the show if I
thought it could pull off something which improved on the source.
The problem is that the SOURCE was done so well...and I don't ever
need Hamlet 2.
Tom
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:42:18 -0700 (PDT), "jmsa...@aol.com"
Good and bad I think.
Selfishly I think we would all want more B5 despite the budget. I
cannot speak for everyone, but B5 is the reason I know the name JMS
(yes too lazy to type). Having said that, I would hate to see Joe
making B5 if he is not invested. Its kinda like ST. If you are not
invested in preserving the quality of the show even the most die hard
fan will lose interest.
Charlie E.
wrote:
>I think G'Kar will be glaringly obvious by his absence, in any tale told in
>that time period. Still, if a big budget is granted, and Joe wants to tell
>us a story, obviously I'll be there on opening night with bells on (and
>clothes. can't forget the clothes.).
>
>Amy
Amy,
Just a bit of predition: It will be a little while before we get the
B5 movie, but when we do, we will have G'Kar there... As the first all
digital recreation of an actor! (With all proceeds goint to Andrea's
family as though he were actually there!)
Just thinking that Joe ALWAYS likes to push the envelope!
Charlie
Jeffrey Kaplan
> Think what you could do with the money that was thrown into the toilet
> funding 7 years of Star Trek Voyager and 4 years of Enterprise.
Invest in Firefly Industries (and get into a proxy fight with Mollari)?
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"The Superior Person's Book Of Words", by Peter Bowler: ECONOMICS: An
arcane language, used by its own cognoscenti for reviewing past events
in the production and distribution of wealth. There are some who would
define economics as a science rather than a language; but, in the
absence of any evidence that future events can be predicted by
economics on the basis of fixed laws, this approach can hardly be
supported by the objective lexicographer.
Amy Guskin
article <4c773c26-43c5-4cb0...@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>):
>> The problem is that the SOURCE was done so well...and I don't ever
> need Hamlet 2. <<
You realize of course that that movie -- Hamlet 2 -- is coming out rather
soon? :-)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104733/
(Not actually anything like a sequel to "Hamlet"; I just couldn't resist
mentioning it since I just saw a poster for it in the theater last night.)
Brian Harvey
> All that TLT and the TMoS proved was that there *IS* a point where
>you can't cut funding. If future B5 projects were to be of the same
>quality, it would only hurt the B5 legacy.
At the risk of seeming iconoclastic, I don't think you can /entirely/ blame
the budget. Just watching one of any number of very-big-budget movies with
"2" in their names should convince you that it's very, very hard to create a
sequel that's as good as the original. I think we were lucky enough that the
second season of B5 wasn't a disaster! A bigger budget might have helped TLT,
but LotR seemed ill-conceived to me regardless of how well it'd been filmed;
in some ways it reminded me of that movie about the Ewoks whose name I forget.
(Although, I was impressed with the three trilogies of novels filling in the
gaps in the televised story. And I'm not saying I wouldn't watch the B5 movie
if one were made!)
>Thanks for giving us the best TV series *EVER* (note that I didn't say
>"Sci-Fi).
Nah, as JMS said himself (in one of the script books), that's "The Prisoner."
But B5 comes in second. (And then comes Animaniacs, but that's another
story. :-)
Amy Guskin
<5aip74tllgj49ibso...@4ax.com>):
I think I may be sick.
Michael Haines
> >>On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:20:37 -0400, thus spake mhaine...@gmail.com (in
>
> article <4c773c26-43c5-4cb0-b4f0-0826939d0...@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>):
>
> >> The problem is that the SOURCE was done so well...and I don't ever
> > need Hamlet 2. <<
>
> You realize of course that that movie -- Hamlet 2 -- is coming out rather
> soon? :-)
>
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104733/
>
> (Not actually anything like a sequel to "Hamlet"; I just couldn't resist
> mentioning it since I just saw a poster for it in the theater last night.)
>
> Amy
> --
> "In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over
> again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George
> W. Bush, May 24, 2005
Now that is funny.
Horribly, horribly funny.
John W Kennedy
I would not expect to see that happen, unless (and I don't think this
particularly likely) AK's family came to Joe and asked him to do it.
--
John W. Kennedy
"...when you're trying to build a house of cards, the last thing you
should do is blow hard and wave your hands like a madman."
-- Rupert Goodwins
John W Kennedy
> In article <487be9a7$0$7325$607e...@cv.net>,
> John W Kennedy <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> jms...@aol.com wrote:
>>> It's that or nothing.
>> And that's probably best. If "Changeling" does what it's expected to do
>> at the box office, maybe they'll listen. (Or maybe, from their
>> viewpoint, it's "World War Z" that will be the necessary experiment,
>> 'cause, y'know, all that crazy sci-fi stuff is the same.)
>
> Have you read WWZ? (Or are you indicating a belief that the real content
> won't matter? The suits will hear "it's got zombies" and let their
> 'imagination' do the rest?)
I cannot imagine why you seem to think you have a disagreement with me.
--
John W. Kennedy
"The bright critics assembled in this volume will doubtless show, in
their sophisticated and ingenious new ways, that, just as /Pooh/ is
suffused with humanism, our humanism itself, at this late date, has
become full of /Pooh./"
-- Frederick Crews. "Postmodern Pooh", Preface
Amy Guskin
<487cf2b1$0$5022$607e...@cv.net>):
> Charlie E. wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:05:13 GMT, Amy Guskin <ais...@fjordstone.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I think G'Kar will be glaringly obvious by his absence, in any tale told
>>> in
>>> that time period. Still, if a big budget is granted, and Joe wants to
>>> tell
>>> us a story, obviously I'll be there on opening night with bells on (and
>>> clothes. can't forget the clothes.).
>>>
>>> Amy
>>
>> Amy,
>> Just a bit of predition: It will be a little while before we get the
>> B5 movie, but when we do, we will have G'Kar there... As the first all
>> digital recreation of an actor! (With all proceeds goint to Andrea's
>> family as though he were actually there!)
>>
>> Just thinking that Joe ALWAYS likes to push the envelope!
>
> I would not expect to see that happen, unless (and I don't think this
> particularly likely) AK's family came to Joe and asked him to do it.<<
I'd be very surprised if anyone involved would think this a good idea.
Besides being ghoulish at its base, it's also insulting. It implies that
Andreas's acting ability, his talent, is (was) incidental to his physical
appearance and the sound of voice. I don't care how many pieces of
celluloid, digital bits, and segments of audio they piece together; those
digital bits will not be an actor.
jph...@aol.com
> >> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:07:40 -0400, thus spake Joseph DeMartino (in article
>
> many times folks have re-watched the whole series or cherry-picked episodes
> from the series, as compared to how many times they've re-watched (or
> re-read) anything else (Crusade episodes, the whole Crusade series as it
> stands, LotR, TLT, any of the tv movies, any of the novels or novelizations)?
> In any case, while I know Joe could write us a _great_ big-budget film with a
> new story in the B5 universe, I always have to come back to the fact that the
> story would, by necessity, be limited. �He can't tell any stories that rely
> on G'Kar. �Or Franklin, for that matter. �But the loss of G'Kar to the B5
> universe seems -- to me -- to be more of a sticking point, at least for the
> period between "Objects at Rest" and "Sleeping in Light" (which is the most
> likely period to be writing about, if the idea is to use the original cast). �
> I think G'Kar will be glaringly obvious by his absence, in any tale told in
> that time period. �Still, if a big budget is granted, and Joe wants to tell
> us a story, obviously I'll be there on opening night with bells on (and
> clothes. �can't forget the clothes.).
>
> Amy
> --
> "In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over
> again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George
>
> - Show quoted text -
Speaking for myself - with my run of reviews (ten left by my count)
now one episode short of the end of "Crusade" - I'd desperately like
to see the "Crusade" story finished as a novel series or other (at
this point, I think a novel series would be the only way to do it
properly... all of the actors have, by this point, aged too much, and
it would be difficult to get them back together). My frustration
watching "Crusade" is that I really like what's there, even when it's
a bit compromised, and I think had it been left alone it could have
been as good as, or - heresy - better than B5. And I'd just like to
see the story play out, even in print form.
With that one caveat, though, I fully agree with jms' decision. As
much as I'm looking forward to "Lost Tales" (I've deliberately put off
watching it so that I will be reviewing my first viewing of the
stories when I get there), I get the impression it will be a very
minor supplement to a great series. I'm sure I'll enjoy having it
there - I even enjoyed "Legend of the Rangers," featherweight though
it was - but I doubt very much that I will feel that it was an
essential piece of B5.
Besides, when you're making movies with directors of Clint Eastwood's
calibre, you can hardly be expected to stay in the direct-to-TV/late-
night cable wilderness, can you?
(Quick aside for how nice it is not only to see JMS finally getting
some mainstream recognition for his work, but also how nice it is that
in the past 15 years Eastwood has finally started receiving his due
credit as a director. He was doing some creative and genuinely
interesting work 30+ years ago... work that was mostly ignored by
critics at the time, in large part because of its genre. Another
parallel worthy of note?)
John W Kennedy
I agree. (I only allowed the hypothetical exception because I couldn't
very well presume to speak for the family.)
(Can't help thinking of "The Darfsteller", though.)
--
John W. Kennedy
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich
have always objected to being governed at all."
-- G. K. Chesterton. "The Man Who Was Thursday"
Slitheen
news:0001HW.C4A2A3EB...@news.verizon.net...
I agree, but I expect filmmakers to attempt something similar one day
nonetheless. I remember watching a documentary and they were discussing
about the possibility of us one day watching new James Dean and Marylyn
Monroe flicks etc, via the use of modern CGI techniques. Spooky! :/
I get goosebobs from watching the one digitally created segment of
Gladiator - featuring the already deceased Ollie Reed. It's like someone
walked over my grave when I see that.
"Shadows and dust...." :)
--
Slitheen.
Manchester United - Back to Back Champions 2006/07, 2007/08 & Champions of
Europe 2008.
Slitheen
news:g5iemo$1ev$1...@news.xmission.com...
For me, Babylon is on a very small list of shows that I can return to
numerable times and not get bored. In fact, it is a list of only two. At the
top of that list is The Prisoner, which I personally think is the greatest
TV show ever created by man - with Babylon 5 coming in a *very* close
second. These two shows I can watch over and over again without them losing
any of their appeal.
There are other shows I return to on DVD, but for those each viewing is not
as special as the last. The Prisoner and Babylon 5 have that indescribable
quality that just keeps them fresh. Not surprisingly, the following that
surrounds both shows are truly what you would refer to as 'cultish' in
nature.
I am on perhaps my sixth full end-to-end viewing of B5.
Joseph DeMartino
> A bigger budget might have helped TLT, but LotR seemed ill-conceived to me regardless of how well it'd been filmed <
A bigger budget would have fixed the single most-reviled thing in the
"Rangers" pilot, the weapons system, and that would have gone a long
way towards improving the film. I think that the pilot was like most
pilots - it gave a glimps of the possible series, but it wasn't going
to win any awards. On that level it was arguably better than "The
Gathering" and vastly better than the interminable "TNG" pilot.
Regards,
Joe
Slitheen
news:7ea6c682-3835-48b3...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> > So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on whichever
> side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
> 'cause it's your show too.
>
>
Well I won't lie, I was personally looking forward to more DVD's following
TLT. Despite the lower than normal budget, I enjoyed it immensely. However,
I perfectly understand where you're coming from. My thanks for a wonderful
journey. One I hope isn't quite yet over (crosses fingers and hopes for 'B5:
The Movie')
BTW, can I marry your brain?
Amy Guskin
<487d3624$0$20926$607e...@cv.net>):
Yes, that's what I thought you meant -- I definitely didn't mean to sound
like I was defending against what you said. Just elaborating on it.
>> (Can't help thinking of "The Darfsteller", though.) <<
Predictably, the only Walter M. Miller Jr. I have in the house is "A Canticle
for Leibowitz," and my library doesn't have the collection that contains it,
either. So I've just placed an order with half.com. Sounds like a good
story. Thanks.
Slitheen
and purposes Babylon 5 ends with The Lost Tales is that I am the proud owner
of the only *true* definitive DVD box set. Amazon UK exclusively released
'The Complete Collection + The Lost Tales'....which when I ordered it I
thought would be 'The Complete Universe' set and a separate copy of TLT -
but it is all actually in the one box. The entirety of Babylon 5....all five
B5 seasons, Crusade, all the movies.... *and* The Lost Tales. Cool! :)
Not that I wouldn't smile like a man possessed should I hear that the film
was to be made, I should add, but it is very nice to have the lot in one
big, beautiful box. It is the jewel of my DVD collection. :)
Kurt Ullman
"Slitheen" <Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'd be very surprised if anyone involved would think this a good idea.
> > Besides being ghoulish at its base, it's also insulting. It implies that
> > Andreas's acting ability, his talent, is (was) incidental to his physical
> > appearance and the sound of voice. I don't care how many pieces of
> > celluloid, digital bits, and segments of audio they piece together; those
> > digital bits will not be an actor.
> >
>
> I agree, but I expect filmmakers to attempt something similar one day
> nonetheless. I remember watching a documentary and they were discussing
> about the possibility of us one day watching new James Dean and Marylyn
> Monroe flicks etc, via the use of modern CGI techniques. Spooky! :/
Vaguely remember something from a few years ago that Warners (thus my
worry) was feeding Mel Blanc's various characters into a computer so
they could synthesize his voice for new cartoons.
>
> I get goosebobs from watching the one digitally created segment of
> Gladiator - featuring the already deceased Ollie Reed. It's like someone
> walked over my grave when I see that.
>
> "Shadows and dust...." :)
Or Mom's fade out on the Sopranos when Ms. Marchand checked out.
Slitheen
news:vgon74l7j2o1dida0...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:32:37 -0700 (PDT), Tippi <aa...@torfree.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> Damn. I was sure -- sure -- that after the success of the series DVD's
>>> and TLT they would see the light. I guess I'll never understand
>>> Hollywood. Still, like everyone else, I think you've made the right
>>> decision. The last thing we need is "Babylon 5 Meets Terminator."
>>
>>how about B5 vs Aliens vs Predator!
>
> I shouldn't laugh -- they actually had a predator rip episode of
> Voyager.
>
I can't think which episode you could mean.....I've seen them all and that
doesn't ring a bell. Mind you, boredom could factor into that....before
Seven of Nine came into it....it was mind numbing.
Slitheen
news:487c89af$0$7322$607e...@cv.net...
> jms...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> At the end of the day, for me, it's not just a matter of getting more
>> B5. It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
>> before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
>> action. The original show deserves better than that, the surviving
>> cast members deserve better than that, and the fans who have supported
>> it over the years definitely deserve better than that. A lot better.
>>
>> side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should know,
>> 'cause it's your show too.
>>
>> jms
>>
>
> can't cut funding. If future B5 projects were to be of the same quality,
> it would only hurt the B5 legacy.
>
I wouldn't go quite as far as to say that, personally. I had followed news
of the production of TLT closely, so when it arrived I hadn't built myself
up for something that would resemble a production made with a bigger budget.
I was far from disappointed with TLT and I would have happily bought and
watched a full series of such productions. Further productions with similar
budgets would have undoubtedly improved, within the confines of the funding.
Although from the *creator's* perspective, I understand his reasons for
deciding this. B5 is his baby.....and his baby deserves better budgets.
It's just that as a fan, I was really grateful to get something new in the
Babylon 5 universe.....despite the budget constraints. From what I read on
the net upon release of TLT, I was far from alone. The only people who seem
to have got a feeling of anti-climax were those who had expected too much
from a straight-to-DVD release. Some people were seemingly expecting a
feature film, or something close to the original series in terms of action
and effects.
Further, 'Stargate: Ark of Truth', 'Stargate: Continuum' and 'Battlestar
Galactica: Razor' have proved beyond doubt that the direct-to-DVD format can
be done *extremely* well indeed. Although all these had bigger budgets than
TLT, and all were screened on TV. Which makes me wonder what JMS would say
if Warner Bros decided to increase the budget significantly, but to stay
within the direct-to-DVD format. Surely they made a handsome enough profit
to allow him more money? :/
Yes, I personally hope he could be tempted by a better budget, and that the
story continues. If it doesn't, though, I am more than happy with my lot.
Slitheen
>>>On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:20:37 -0400, thus spake mhai...@gmail.com (in
> article
> <4c773c26-43c5-4cb0...@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>):
>
>>> The problem is that the SOURCE was done so well...and I don't ever
>> need Hamlet 2. <<
>
> You realize of course that that movie -- Hamlet 2 -- is coming out rather
> soon? :-)
>
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104733/
>
> (Not actually anything like a sequel to "Hamlet"; I just couldn't resist
> mentioning it since I just saw a poster for it in the theater last night.)
>
LOL...Hamlet 2. Glad to see the movie is a comedy and that the joke actually
is in the title.
I see it's got Steve Coogan in it....he's totally hilarious.
[ I actually used to date his cousin, which is one of my crap 'almost claims
to fame'. ;) ]
Brian Harvey
>I agree, but I expect filmmakers to attempt something similar one day
>nonetheless. I remember watching a documentary and they were discussing
>about the possibility of us one day watching new James Dean and Marylyn
>Monroe flicks etc, via the use of modern CGI techniques. Spooky! :/
You all think you're joking, or at least extrapolating, but I've just come
back from vacation in Boston, where I passed up the opportunity to see
Judy Garland in concert with the Boston Pops. Digitally augmented concert
footage of Judy, with the original instrumental accompaniment removed, to be
replaced by the live Boston Pops. Ugh!
(But I guiltily confess that I would be overjoyed if they could digitally
compose and perform a new Beatles album, exrapolated from the old ones!)
ObB5: Umm, that episode in which the digitally recreated Garibaldi prevents
the rewriting-of-history plot?
Matt Ion
> "Josh Hill" <usere...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:vgon74l7j2o1dida0...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:32:37 -0700 (PDT), Tippi <aa...@torfree.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Damn. I was sure -- sure -- that after the success of the series DVD's
>>>> and TLT they would see the light. I guess I'll never understand
>>>> Hollywood. Still, like everyone else, I think you've made the right
>>>> decision. The last thing we need is "Babylon 5 Meets Terminator."
>>> how about B5 vs Aliens vs Predator!
>> I shouldn't laugh -- they actually had a predator rip episode of
>> Voyager.
>>
>
> I can't think which episode you could mean.....I've seen them all and that
> doesn't ring a bell. Mind you, boredom could factor into that....before
> Seven of Nine came into it....it was mind numbing.
It was still mind-numbing even with Seven of Nine.
Other body parts may not have been so numb though...
Kurt Ullman
b...@cs.berkeley.edu (Brian Harvey) wrote:
> "Slitheen" <Slith...@googlemail.com> writes:
> >I agree, but I expect filmmakers to attempt something similar one day
> >nonetheless. I remember watching a documentary and they were discussing
> >about the possibility of us one day watching new James Dean and Marylyn
> >Monroe flicks etc, via the use of modern CGI techniques. Spooky! :/
>
> You all think you're joking, or at least extrapolating, but I've just come
> back from vacation in Boston, where I passed up the opportunity to see
> Judy Garland in concert with the Boston Pops. Digitally augmented concert
> footage of Judy, with the original instrumental accompaniment removed, to be
> replaced by the live Boston Pops. Ugh!
And then there are the instances when Natalie Cole and Hank
Williams, JR., did "duets" with their departed Fathers. ALthough in this
case it was substantially further down the creepy scale than might have
been otherwise.
Giovanni Wassen
> I am on perhaps my sixth full end-to-end viewing of B5.
I did my fourth rewatch last year and found out I have some scratches on
some dvd's. Time to invest in some new ones, darn :)
--
Gio
http://blog.watkijkikoptv.info
http://myanimelist.net/profile/extatix
Amy Guskin
<kurtullman-79DE3...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>):
How Saturday Night Live responded to that trend says it best. Anyone else
remember the sketch with Ellen Kleghorn playing Natalie Cole, singing with
her dead father and many other dead singers (Chris Farley as Mama Cass,
etc.)? The collection was titled "Unforgivable."
Tom
> <jmsa...@aol.com> wrote in message
I guess we cannot completely rule it out. After all, Serenity was
made after a whole what, 13 episode season of Firefly. Never say
never.
Jeffrey Kaplan
> Vaguely remember something from a few years ago that Warners (thus my
> worry) was feeding Mel Blanc's various characters into a computer so
> they could synthesize his voice for new cartoons.
Didn't Al Pacino star in a movie about the making and use of a virtual
movie star?
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"The future will be better tomorrow." - George W. Bush
Kurt Ullman
Jeffrey Kaplan <gor...@gordol.org> wrote:
> Previously on rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated, Kurt Ullman said:
>
> > Vaguely remember something from a few years ago that Warners (thus my
> > worry) was feeding Mel Blanc's various characters into a computer so
> > they could synthesize his voice for new cartoons.
>
> Didn't Al Pacino star in a movie about the making and use of a virtual
> movie star?
That was one made up from scratch, not the computer-generated version
of a person who once really existed.
Doug Freyburger
> "Josh Hill" <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Tippi <aa...@torfree.net> wrote:
>
> >>how about B5 vs Aliens vs Predator!
>
> > I shouldn't laugh -- they actually had a predator rip episode of
> > Voyager.
There was a B5 episode featuring a "Shadow Warrior" that got
on a sublight ship and hijacked it to head toward Zahahdoom.
It was of a species never seen again and could have been
modelled on Predator.
> I can't think which episode you could mean.....I've seen them all and that
> doesn't ring a bell.
The Hirogen predator species appears in several ST:VOY episodes.
There was even one where they took over Voyager and hijacked
the holodecks so they could dress in stylish Nazi uniforms. Now
that was clever on a scale typical of Voyager. Sigh. The quality
of the scripting from show to show is so very different.
lizardgirl
>
> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
>
> It's that or nothing.
>
good for you.
there's no reason for you to go around like a begger, recently or
ever.
papa harlan will be proud. :^)
lg
Dan Dassow
> In article <vg3s749k6hkf15bpbbn31kj9m9cgeit...@gordol.org>,
The movie is S1m0ne (2002) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0258153/ . More
correctly, Viktor Taransky (Al Pacino) synthesized the synthetic
actress based upon images and voices of a number of famous actresses.
Dan Dassow
Slitheen
news:5bf25fc7-79ff-4417...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Oh the Hirogen...yes, of course....how could I forget. Although I was
thinking he meant a visual rip-off of the predator species, so that threw me
as the Hirogen looked nothing like them. However, they were indeed hunters.
Slitheen
news:g5k94s$dm8$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
For me it was really simple. Voyager for me was like snack food. If you
think of Babylon 5 as haute cuisine, voyager was a cheese burger served from
a street stall by a man who rarely washes his hands after he uses the
urinals.
If you're hungry enough, you'll eat that burger. :)
Slitheen
news:Xns9ADD960D52...@217.19.16.66...
> "Slitheen" <Slith...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am on perhaps my sixth full end-to-end viewing of B5.
>
> I did my fourth rewatch last year and found out I have some scratches on
> some dvd's. Time to invest in some new ones, darn :)
>
> --
It would be cheaper to have the disc scratches professionally removed. There
are many professional online services who carry out the work and I can
personally attest to this treatment leaving the discs looking brand new
again. Last time I used a company here in the UK who repaired 5 discs for
me...games and DVD's...for Ł3 per disc. Most companies charge less per disc
the more you have repaired, and they usually pay for the mailing *both* ways
(the company I used did). They send you a protective mailer with paid
postage, repair the scratches and then send you the discs back. I was
thoroughly impressed with the people I used. If you live in the US, I'm sure
you can find a company to carry out the work.
Note: They use nothing like the home remedy 'radial cleaner'
machines....that often leave discs looking worse than when you put them in.
These guys use expensive, professional machines that 'buff' out scratches -
both fine and deep - using varying grades of abrasion and specially
formulated creams - matched to the individual job at hand. It is amazing
when you get back a disc you thought was knackered for good that now looks
and plays as if it is factory clean.
Luigi Rosa
> B5 as a five year story stands beautifully on its own. If anything
> else is to be continued from that story, it should be something that
> adds to the legacy of B5, rather than subtracts from it.
For What is Worth, I completly agree with your decisions.
Ciao,
luigi
--
/
+--[Luigi Rosa]--
\
It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.
--Neils Bohr
Kay Shapero
@googlemail.com says...
>
>
> For me it was really simple. Voyager for me was like snack food. If you
> think of Babylon 5 as haute cuisine, voyager was a cheese burger served from
> a street stall by a man who rarely washes his hands after he uses the
> urinals.
>
The main thing that bothered me about the show was the vast wastage of
opportunity. I mean - the first thing *I* woulda done is nobble the
transporter, and maybe make few other changes, then take advantage of
the fact that they're travelling, to give them a change of political
environment every season. You start when they're coming into the area
and have to learn who/what lives there, follow through it and end when
they're approaching the next. And then.. but why go on - what a waste.
--
Kay Shapero
http://www.kayshapero.net
Duggy
> I guess we cannot completely rule it out. After all, Serenity was
> made after a whole what, 13 episode season of Firefly. Never say
> never.
Is $40 million really enough? After all, Serenity was made by a
writer/director who felt he hadn't told the story he wanted to tell...
and so he took any chance he could.
Here we're talking about someone who has finished the story he wants
to tell. JMS isn't going to jump at a tiny number.
===
= DUG.
===
Christina Wilson
> The main thing that bothered me about the show was the vast wastage of
> opportunity. I mean - the first thing *I* woulda done is nobble the
> transporter, and maybe make few other changes, then take advantage of
> the fact that they're travelling, to give them a change of political
> environment every season. You start when they're coming into the area
> and have to learn who/what lives there, follow through it and end when
> they're approaching the next. And then.. but why go on - what a waste.
I agree--I also would have included in the arc the stages of grief.
I remember reading an article in TV guide that included an interview
with the producers. They had minimized the conflict with the Maquis,
because they didn't want to make the female captain weak.
Makes no sense to me either.
Christina
Duggy
> There was a B5 episode featuring a "Shadow Warrior" that got
> on a sublight ship and hijacked it to head toward Zahahdoom.
> modelled on Predator.
A alien hunter who only fights dangerous enemies and uses a cloaking
device...
A alien thing that feeds on sleeping crewmembers by almost becoming
part of them, and is shadowy and not completely real.
No, sorry, I can't see it at all.
===
= DUG.
===
Tom
Dunno. I have no idea how much these things cost.
Joseph DeMartino
> Is $40 million really enough?
Considering what the "B5" team and its disciplined approach to
filmmaking was able to do with around $3 million in films like "In the
Beginning", "Thirdspace" and "A Call to Arms", I have no doubt that
JMS & Co. could make a better (not more spectacular, but *better*)
film for $40 million than George Lucas or the "Trek" crew could make
with three or four times that budget.
Although it would certainly be *nice* to have more. <g>
Regards,
Joe
Doug Freyburger
> Doug Freyburger <dfrey...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > There was a B5 episode featuring a "Shadow Warrior" that got
> > on a sublight ship and hijacked it to head toward Zahahdoom.
> > modelled on Predator.
>
> A alien hunter who only fights dangerous enemies and uses a cloaking
> device...
> A alien thing that feeds on sleeping crewmembers by almost becoming
> part of them, and is shadowy and not completely real.
>
> No, sorry, I can't see it at all.
I thought the appearance not the behavior was modelled.
Then again the appearance of the Predator was certainly
not original to that movie either.
But the behavior is a clever twist on Alien when phrased
that way.
I've seen a preview of the next ST movie. The preview
hasn't changed in months - It shows the construction
crew making the Enterprise NCC-1701. It would be
about pre-Pike cruises. Whether they chose to go with
Robert April remains to be seen.
Since JMS has stated he's not involved in the script
there's the worry that the new ST effort will not have
learned the VOY/ENT lesson that staff writers who are
not ST/SF fans churning out script after script do nothing
but head the franchise into the toilet. JMS involvement
would sure have handled that problem.
It's part of why I look forward to any Lensmen effort so
much. JMS is be able to produce scripts that are much
better than the original EE Doc Smith material without
losing the original story line of protracted war against
one side that uses hierarchical structure throughout its
society against a society that only uses it in its military
among other themes.
Dennis (Icarus)
>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:07:40 -0400, thus spake Joseph DeMartino (in
>> article
<251c9440-c9bc-4071...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>):
<snip>
Ageed.
>I think G'Kar will be glaringly obvious by his absence, in any tale told in
>that time period. Still, if a big budget is granted, and Joe wants to tell
>us a story, obviously I'll be there on opening night with bells on (and
>clothes. can't forget the clothes.).
Personally, I wouldn't consider that a faux pas.
Amy
--
"In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over
again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George
W. Bush, May 24, 2005
.
Amy Guskin
<51dc7$487f60f5$4c49ae41$31...@KNOLOGY.NET>):
> "Amy Guskin" <ais...@fjordstone.com> wrote in message
> news:0001HW.C4A218C9...@news.verizon.net...
>>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:07:40 -0400, thus spake Joseph DeMartino (in
>>> article
> <251c9440-c9bc-4071...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>):
>
> <snip>
> Ageed. <<
With what? ;-)
>>> I think G'Kar will be glaringly obvious by his absence, in any tale told in
>> that time period. Still, if a big budget is granted, and Joe wants to tell
>> us a story, obviously I'll be there on opening night with bells on (and
>> clothes. can't forget the clothes.).
>
> Personally, I wouldn't consider that a faux pas.
>
> Amy <<
I'm pretty sure there's a compliment in there somewhere, but since it appears
from the signature that _I_ said it about _myself_, I think this post may
have run off the rails somewhat... <g>
Iva
<jms...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7ea6c682-3835-48b3...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> Putting this on a recent thread here where it's more likely to be
> seen
> in a quick fashion....
>
> Several things just to update folks.
>
> First, many thanks to all those who sent along research suggestions
> and offerings to be of assistance on the project I can't talk about.
> I've been swamped with deadlines and unable to reply to any of the
> public notes and private emails, but as soon as I can get my head
> above water, be assured that I'll be in touch with many of you.
>
> Second, as noted in the original thread before I hijacked it, yes,
> the
> plan at the moment is that I will be at Comic Con San Diego this
> year,
> primarily doing my thing on Thursday and Saturday afternoons.
>
> There is a *chance* -- mind you, it's just a slim chance but to be
> honorable I must mention it -- that a work situation *may* preclude
> my
> appearance there. Or it may not. I'll know more by the end of next
> week, and for now as far as I know, everything's on target for me to
> be at SDCC. If that changes, I'll be sure to let everyone know as
> far
> in advance as possible.
>
> One final note re: recent discussions on TMoS and more Lost Tales.
>
> B5:TLT was commissioned at a $2 million budget to, yet one more
> time,
> "test the waters" for B5. We did what we could with that, and that
> was that. As we did with Rangers, which also suffered from not
> having
> a lot of money because of concerns about "is there really a B5
> audience?" Which is, of course, a foolish question from a studio
> that
> has never really understood what it has in B5.
>
> Of late, there have been more discussions from WB about doing more
> DVDs, again at a low cost, or a cable thing, again with minimal
> investment.
>
> So for the last few months, I've been giving this whole subject a
> lot
> of quiet thought. And I've come to a conclusion.
>
> B5 as a five year story stands beautifully on its own. If anything
> else is to be continued from that story, it should be something that
> adds to the legacy of B5, rather than subtracts from it.
>
> to
> return to those familiar waters, in the end I think they did more to
> subtract from the legacy than add to it. I don't regret having made
> them, because I needed to go through that to get to the point where
> I
> am now psychologically, but from where I sit now, I wouldn't make
> them
> again.
>
> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing
> any
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a
> full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
>
> It's that or nothing.
>
> story stands on its own just fine. I'm not lobbying for it, I'm not
> asking fans to write in about it (nor should you) because such
> campaigns never really have much impact...that's simply the position
> I've taken up here. Lord knows I don't lack for other things to do
> these days. I'm busier on more prestige projects with terrific
> people
> and great film-makers than at any other time in my career.
>
> At the end of the day, for me, it's not just a matter of getting
> more
> B5. It's a matter of getting more *good* B5 that respects what came
> before it and doesn't have to compromise visually or in terms of
> action. The original show deserves better than that, the surviving
> cast members deserve better than that, and the fans who have
> supported
> it over the years definitely deserve better than that. A lot
> better.
>
> So I've drawn that line in the sand, and I'm happy living on
> whichever
> side of that line the universe puts me. Just thought you should
> know,
> 'cause it's your show too.
>
> jms
As much as I'd love to see more stories in the B5, I totally respect
and understand your position. Thanks for as much as you have given us
so far and best of luck with your ongoing projects.
-----
Iva
Slitheen
As a fan of Lost, I think the new Star Trek film is in relatively safe
hands. And this time at least, in the hands of people with a personal
fondness for Sci-Fi, and the show itself.
Duggy
> I thought the appearance not the behavior was modelled.
The appearance, or lack of? I think that the behaviour is a far more
important indicator of if something is derived from something else...
> But the behavior is a clever twist on Alien when phrased
> that way.
Yeah, but more supernatural than biomechanical.
> I've seen a preview of the next ST movie. The preview
> hasn't changed in months - It shows the construction
> crew making the Enterprise NCC-1701. It would be
> about pre-Pike cruises. Whether they chose to go with
> Robert April remains to be seen.
Or not. This is a reboot, after all.
Anyway, I always felt the ad was more metaphorical than actual.
===
= DUG.
===
Dennis (Icarus)
>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:15:16 -0400, thus spake Dennis \(Icarus\) (in
>>> article
> <51dc7$487f60f5$4c49ae41$31...@KNOLOGY.NET>):
>
>> "Amy Guskin" <ais...@fjordstone.com> wrote in message
>> news:0001HW.C4A218C9...@news.verizon.net...
>>>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:07:40 -0400, thus spake Joseph DeMartino (in
>>>> article
>> <251c9440-c9bc-4071...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>):
>>
>> <snip>
>> Ageed. <<
>
> With what? ;-)
Sorry, I had the agreed in the wrong spot.
>
>>>> I think G'Kar will be glaringly obvious by his absence, in any tale
>>>> told in
>>> that time period. Still, if a big budget is granted, and Joe wants to
>>> tell
>>> us a story, obviously I'll be there on opening night with bells on (and
>>> clothes. can't forget the clothes.).
Agreed.
>>
>> Personally, I wouldn't consider that a faux pas.
>>
>> Amy <<
>
> I'm pretty sure there's a compliment in there somewhere, but since it
> appears
> from the signature that _I_ said it about _myself_, I think this post may
> have run off the rails somewhat... <g>
There is indeed a compliment in there. I was justg trying to reassure you
that if we were going to the premiere and you happened to show up a bit
under-dressed, it'd be ok.
Dennis
>
> Amy
> --
> "In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over
> again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." -
> George
> W. Bush, May 24, 2005
>
.
Amy Guskin
<5999f$487fd703$4c49ae41$95...@KNOLOGY.NET>):
> "Amy Guskin" <ais...@fjordstone.com> wrote in message
> news:0001HW.C4A4F446...@news.verizon.net...
>
>>>
>>> Personally, I wouldn't consider that a faux pas.
>>>
>>> Amy <<
>>
>> I'm pretty sure there's a compliment in there somewhere, but since it
>> appears
>> from the signature that _I_ said it about _myself_, I think this post may
>> have run off the rails somewhat... <g>
>
> There is indeed a compliment in there. I was justg trying to reassure you
> that if we were going to the premiere and you happened to show up a bit
> under-dressed, it'd be ok. <<
Thanks, but I fear Regal and/or Lowes wouldn't agree with you! <g>
Dan Dassow
> >> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:58:43 -0400, thus spake Dennis \(Icarus\) (in article
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Amy Guskin" <aisl...@fjordstone.com> wrote in message
> >news:0001HW.C4A4F446...@news.verizon.net...
>
> >>> Personally, I wouldn't consider that a faux pas.
>
> >>> Amy <<
>
> >> I'm pretty sure there's a compliment in there somewhere, but since it
> >> appears
> >> from the signature that _I_ said it about _myself_, I think this post may
> >> have run off the rails somewhat... <g>
>
> > There is indeed a compliment in there. I was justg trying to reassure you
> > that if we were going to the premiere and you happened to show up a bit
> > under-dressed, it'd be ok. <<
>
> Thanks, but I fear Regal and/or Lowes wouldn't agree with you! <g>
>
I suspect that the Philadelphia Police department would also be less
than sanguine if that were to happen.
Dan Dassow
Dennis (Icarus)
<snip>
>>
>> There is indeed a compliment in there. I was justg trying to reassure you
>> that if we were going to the premiere and you happened to show up a bit
>> under-dressed, it'd be ok. <<
>
> Thanks, but I fear Regal and/or Lowes wouldn't agree with you! <g>
You're welcome. :-)
Dennis
.
Jeremy Nickurak
[ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:19:08 +0000, Amy Guskin wrote:
>>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:02:46 -0400, thus spake Charlie E. (in article
> <5aip74tllgj49ibso...@4ax.com>):
>
>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:05:13 GMT, Amy Guskin <ais...@fjordstone.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I think G'Kar will be glaringly obvious by his absence, in any tale
>>> told in that time period. Still, if a big budget is granted, and Joe
>>> wants to tell us a story, obviously I'll be there on opening night
>>> with bells on (and clothes. can't forget the clothes.).
>>>
>>> Amy
>>
>> Amy,
>> Just a bit of predition: It will be a little while before we get the
>> B5 movie, but when we do, we will have G'Kar there... As the first all
>> digital recreation of an actor! (With all proceeds goint to Andrea's
>> family as though he were actually there!) <<
>
> I think I may be sick.
I'll admit to feeling this would be a bad move from the get go. But in
another hundred years, who's to say? If a digital simulation of new work
by an actor can be based generated purely from the recorded archives of
that actor's past roles, isn't the quality of the simulation really a
reflection of how powerful a repertoire the actor left behind? There's
going to be some weird ethical debates in this and other areas in the not-
so-distant future, and I can imagine them not being so one-sided.
--
Jeremy Nickurak - Email/Jabber: jer...@nickurak.ca -
Amy Guskin
<pan.2008.07...@ugrad.cs.ualberta.ca>):
Personally, I don't care how technologically adept we become: without a
living human being behind a performance making decisions, making choices,
choosing phrasing, modulating his or her voice based on the actor(s) with
whom he or she is working, it isn't acting. It's a mechanical reproduction,
a trick, a shade, an echo.
And I find it ghoulish. I would hate if someone did that with my singing
voice after my death, because every performance is a living thing. A person,
a musician, isn't an electronic keyboard, where you just press buttons and
get reliable sounds on cue that suffice for any situation. And it's the same
with acting and actors -- just because someone performed a line really,
really well in one context, doesn't mean that they'd choose to do it the same
way in another context outside of their choosing. I don't want to see a
performance by any dead actor where some programmer made their choices for
them.
My hunch is that all but the most vapidly egotistic performers would find
this idea offensive.
Andreas's performances that remain are all the more precious for being all
that we have left. As much as I'd like to have more of them, I don't think
that diced bits and recreated pieces could ever measure up to real
performances by the real, _living_ actor. IMHO.
Matt Ion
> going to be some weird ethical debates in this and other areas in the not-
> so-distant future, and I can imagine them not being so one-sided.
Alas, regardless of how the debates go, you KNOW it will happen anyway.
Someone will see $$dollar$$signs$$ in it, and that will be all it
takes to make it happen.
It's happened already with colorizing classic B&W movies... it's
happened to a degree with the splicing of old and new performances
(aforementioned Cole and Williams "duets"). Ummm... damn, I had another
example in mind and I just lost it.
But you get the idea.
Oh yeah... it's happened with Star Wars and George Lucas' "tinkering".
It's happened with E.T. and the magical guns that transform into
walkie-talkies. Both of these happened despite loud outcries from the
fans, the critics, and pretty much the entire movie world.
If the technology is there, it WILL be used.
Duggy
Sure he knows how to make a series on a tight budget, but if he's
holding out for the money he wants why accept a smaller amount and
work with a tight budget again.
I don't want to listen to the commentary and hear "in the original
script we had a scene here that was cut for budgetary reasons but it
would have made the film..."
I'm not saying he needs a $350 million Superman Returns budget... but
I'd hope for more then Serenity's throw away budget.
===
= DUG.
===
Jeffrey Kaplan
> Alas, regardless of how the debates go, you KNOW it will happen anyway.
> Someone will see $$dollar$$signs$$ in it, and that will be all it
> takes to make it happen.
You mean like in "Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid", where Steve Martin
interacts with Humphry Bogart, Ingrid Berman, Bette Davis, Cary Grant
and others? Or in "Forrest Gump" where Tom Hanks interacts with JFK?
> Oh yeah... it's happened with Star Wars and George Lucas' "tinkering".
> It's happened with E.T. and the magical guns that transform into
> walkie-talkies. Both of these happened despite loud outcries from the
> fans, the critics, and pretty much the entire movie world.
That is different. In the case of Star Wars, it's adding in what
couldn't be done (for whatever reason) when originally made, and by the
maker of the film. Personally, I prefer the second version of Star
Wars. In the case of ET, the maker of the film changed a detail to fit
a changed political viewpoint, which IMO was a bad thing to do.
But neither are anywhere close to replicating a dead performer into a
new production.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"You're more trouble than a toilet full of snakes, but I couldn't run
this station without you." "Commander, I sense a huge pay raise
coming my way." [laughs] "Dream on." (Cmdr. Sinclair and Mr.
Garibaldi, B5 "Survivors")
Brian Harvey
>You mean like in "Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid", where Steve Martin
>interacts with Humphry Bogart, Ingrid Berman, Bette Davis, Cary Grant
>and others? Or in "Forrest Gump" where Tom Hanks interacts with JFK?
That's different -- those were ironic postmodern films in which the audience
was invited in on the joke, and the films rubbed our noses in the deadness of
some of the actors. In the suggestion that started this thread, we're
supposed to believe in a living G'Kar, and /not/ be jarred by confronting
a dead actor.
An interesting middle ground, for me, was the Beatles' _Anthology_ CDs with
two new songs featuring the dead John Lennon. It's in the middle ground
because we're not supposed to forget John is dead, but we're not supposed to
listen ironically either; we're supposed to feel something like nostalgia or
pathos. (And it worked for me; I cried, despite having heard the demo tapes
they started with on bootlegs.)
John W Kennedy
> Andreas's performances that remain are all the more precious for being all
> that we have left. As much as I'd like to have more of them, I don't think
> that diced bits and recreated pieces could ever measure up to real
> performances by the real, _living_ actor. IMHO.
Though I'm inclined to agree, I feel obliged to point out that a dear
friend of mine (the only American, and the only professional in the
world, to have directed all of Shakespeare), from whom I've learned at
least half of what I know about acting, feels much the same way about
movies and television, per se. He had an epiphany once when he passed by
and saw a projector running in an empty room. It doesn't stop him from
watching movies, and even from being in movies, but no image on
celluloid or tape or recorded in bits is a "real, _living_ actor".
--
John W. Kennedy
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich
have always objected to being governed at all."
-- G. K. Chesterton. "The Man Who Was Thursday"
Matt Ion
> Previously on rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated, Matt Ion said:
>
>> Alas, regardless of how the debates go, you KNOW it will happen anyway.
>> Someone will see $$dollar$$signs$$ in it, and that will be all it
>> takes to make it happen.
>
> You mean like in "Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid", where Steve Martin
> interacts with Humphry Bogart, Ingrid Berman, Bette Davis, Cary Grant
> and others? Or in "Forrest Gump" where Tom Hanks interacts with JFK?
If memory serves, those are more along the lines of the "duets",
blending existing footage with new.
>> Oh yeah... it's happened with Star Wars and George Lucas' "tinkering".
>> It's happened with E.T. and the magical guns that transform into
>> walkie-talkies. Both of these happened despite loud outcries from the
>> fans, the critics, and pretty much the entire movie world.
>
> That is different. In the case of Star Wars, it's adding in what
> couldn't be done (for whatever reason) when originally made, and by the
> maker of the film.
Yeah, except he over-did it. The bit with Jabba in Mos Eisley - notice
he and Han have almost exactly the same conversation Han had with Greedo
just a few minutes before? Really, you'd think he could have come up
with some *new* dialog? It's nice that he could add all the
hustle-and-bustle to the spaceport, but the bit with the bike scaring
the mammoth(?) into bucking its rider was just ridiculous and
unnecessary - nothing like spoiling a serious scene with a bit of
misplaced slapstick.
> Personally, I prefer the second version of Star
> Wars. In the case of ET, the maker of the film changed a detail to fit
> a changed political viewpoint, which IMO was a bad thing to do.
You mean like Greedo shooting first?
Anyway, the point is, if the technology is there, it WILL be used (and
surely ABused).
Jeffrey Kaplan
> > That is different. In the case of Star Wars, it's adding in what
> > couldn't be done (for whatever reason) when originally made, and by the
> > maker of the film.
>
> Yeah, except he over-did it. The bit with Jabba in Mos Eisley - notice
> he and Han have almost exactly the same conversation Han had with Greedo
> just a few minutes before? Really, you'd think he could have come up
That was in the original script, I believe, using a human stand-in for
Jabba.
> > Personally, I prefer the second version of Star
> > Wars. In the case of ET, the maker of the film changed a detail to fit
> > a changed political viewpoint, which IMO was a bad thing to do.
> You mean like Greedo shooting first?
I still see it as Han shooting first. :)
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"That's a lie." "Yes, it is. What's your point?" (PsiCop Bester and
Cmdr. Sinclair, B5 "Mind War")
John W Kennedy
> Yeah, except he over-did it. The bit with Jabba in Mos Eisley - notice
> he and Han have almost exactly the same conversation Han had with Greedo
> just a few minutes before? Really, you'd think he could have come up
> with some *new* dialog?
That scene was in the original, but was cut at the last minute. The only
new part was superimposing the RotJ version of Jabba over the humanoid
actor that had been shot in 1976-7. (The scene is in the original 1977
Marvel comicbook and several other pre-release adaptations.)
--
John W. Kennedy
"But now is a new thing which is very old--
that the rich make themselves richer and not poorer,
which is the true Gospel, for the poor's sake."
-- Charles Williams. "Judgement at Chelmsford"
Matthew Vincent
<snip>
> So I've let everyone up here know that I'm not interested in doing any
> more low-budget DVDs. I'm not interested in doing any low-budget
> cable things or small computer games. The only thing I would be
> interested in doing regarding Babylon 5 from this point on is a full-
> featured, big-budget feature film.
>
> It's that or nothing.
An understandable decision. Thanks for the info.
Matthew
Kathryn Huxtable
>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:42:49 -0400, thus spake Jeremy Nickurak (in article
> <pan.2008.07...@ugrad.cs.ualberta.ca>):
> without a living human being behind a performance making decisions,
> making choices, choosing phrasing, modulating his or her voice based
> on the actor(s) with whom he or she is working, it isn't acting.
> It's a mechanical reproduction, a trick, a shade, an echo.
>
I agree with you fully.
BTW, Howard Waldrop imagined people doing just this in his short
story, "French Scenes". The technology in the story is a bit dated in
that 3D animation hadn't really taken off when he wrote it, but the
ideas are sound. ("Hey, I just found footage of Bogart's shoes from
above.")
I was offended by the form presented, but the story was very
effective.
-K, who thinks everyone should read Waldrop.
Josh Hill
<kat...@kathrynhuxtable.org> wrote:
>I agree with you fully.
>
>BTW, Howard Waldrop imagined people doing just this in his short
>story, "French Scenes". The technology in the story is a bit dated in
>that 3D animation hadn't really taken off when he wrote it, but the
>ideas are sound. ("Hey, I just found footage of Bogart's shoes from
>above.")
>
>I was offended by the form presented, but the story was very
>effective.
Gonna happen. And I predict that the first major movie to feature a
recreation of Humphrey Bogart or whoever will be a huge commercial
success, a la the Jazz Singer or Forrest Gump or Jurassic Park.
Hell, it's even possible that some actors will be improved on. A
Shatner without the hamminess? 'Course, they may discover what the
eaters of farm-raised salmon do: that perfection and quality aren't
the same thing. As Spock would say, it isn't logical, but it's true.
--
Josh
"My name is not Strangelove. I don't know about Strangelove. I'm not
interested in Strangelove. What else can I say? . . . Look, say it
three times more, and I throw you out of this office."
--Edward Teller