Babylon 5 revisited and compressed
Brian Stinson
up by that time, wasn't much to post about.
With not much on TV lately, I finally plunked down the green and bought the
DVD sets. Wow ! I think I forgot just how great this show actually was,
and how it ruined television for me. In the years since, I've found that B5
raised the bar in such a way that I seldom can sit through most of what's on
TV nowadays. I've spent wayyy to much time in front of the TV in the last
few weeks on a B5 binge.
It occurred to me while watching just how much this show is like the few
good shows on TV today in terms of long term story telling, and I wonder if
B5 might be in some way responsible for allowing these shows to exist.
The list is short.
The Sopranos. The show seemed a little lost this last season, but the first
3 or 4 seasons were very solid. Stay away from the newsgroup, though. Kind
of a surly crowd there. They're only happy when the body count increases.
The Shield. Wow is this show great ! Not since B5 have I seen a show with
such a tightly woven multi-year storyline. Listening to the JMS commentary
on the B5 DVD's also reminded me of maybe the biggest similarity between the
two - the choices and consequences. Last season finds the main players
being investigated for crimes committed in the pilot episode five years ago,
and as their world starts to unravel, there are some shocking consequences.
Rome. Only one season so far, but a really amazing and ambitious first
season. DVD set comes out in August. If you have the $$, check it out.
Battlestar Galactica. Who would've thunk it ?! When I heard they were
remaking this, I thought it would be terrible. I couldn't have been more
wrong.
One thing I've noticed about all the shows listed above is that they all
have short seasons, usually 13 episodes. While I always hate the seasons
ending so quickly, I also assume the short seasons might be part of the
reason the quality is high. JMS, if you are reading, do think the short
seasons are for quality control, or is it just a cable TV thing, and if you
did another show, would you be inclined to do the shorter season, or the
longer seasons you did on B5 ?
BTW, I just today read your old posts about The Memory of Shadows, and I'm
sorry to hear the deal didn't go through. After watching Revenge of the
Sith, and seeing how far CGI has come since little B5 started the trend, I
would've loved to see what you could do with a bigger budget.
In any event, thanks again for B5.
Angelika Tobisch
> Wow ! I think I forgot just how great this show actually was,
> and how it ruined television for me. In the years since, I've found that B5
> raised the bar in such a way that I seldom can sit through most of what's on
> TV nowadays.
That's what happened to me, too. I constantly find myself thinking
things like "well, that episode was quite good, but what are the
ramifications going to be?" now. It's not fun at all to watch TNG
with that mindset...
Angelika
Jon Schild
No, because in nearly all cases, the ramifications are nill. If B5 had
a magic reset button to press between episodes like Star Trek and nearly
all other shows have, it wouldn't have been much good either. But with
a long story, over 80 hours not counting the movies, you can really do
something.
Carl
"Jon Schild" <j...@aros.net> wrote in message
news:DPSdnb7-R-hTmwLZ...@aros.net...
Even with 80 hours, most writers on television couldn't do much.
Neil B
Then... don't do that. :) I think you have to watch every TV series as a
product of its own time.
I would also cite 'Lost' as a good example of why a story arc is not
always a good thing.
Neil B
Angelika Tobisch
>> That's what happened to me, too. I constantly find myself thinking
>> things like "well, that episode was quite good, but what are the
>> ramifications going to be?" now. It's not fun at all to watch TNG
>> with that mindset...
>
> Then... don't do that. :) I think you have to watch every TV series as a
> product of its own time.
You're right, but I grew up watching TNG so I don't think I'll ever stop
loving the characters even though they're not nearly as well rounded as
B5's. I miss them. Maybe I should just settle on watching the highlights
again. That might work.
Angelika
Hank Arnold
seems a bit silly to me when I watch it. TOS, on the other hand, has
that "campy" feel to it and is still fun to watch. Maybe in a decade or
so, TNG will be the same....
I'm not even going to discuss the other series..... :-(
Regards,
Hank Arnold
Neil B
Don't get me wrong, I love TNG and still think it's the best of the
post-original series efforts. I have all the DVD's and regularly watch
my favourites or just episodes picked at random. If I avoid Season 1,
I'm rarely disappointed. :)
B5 is different for me in this case. IMO, only a few of the standalone
episodes can go toe-to-toe with TNG, whereas B5's arc (as a whole) flies
well over the head of the older programme. So, a random pick from B5
isn't nearly as satisfying: if it's a standalone, it's unlikely to
particularly thrill me, and if it's an arc episode, I'm uncomfortable
watching it in isolation. In this way, when it comes to killing a couple
of hours with my DVD collection, TNG's episodic format has more to offer
me than B5.
B5 was as much a revelation to me as anyone else, but TNG and everything
before it didn't suddenly cease to thrill; I can still watch them,
understand the limitations of syndicated TV at the time, and enjoy them
for what they are: superior, episodic, standalone sci-fi.
Besides which, there's still a few things that TNG did way better than
B5. ;)
Neil B
Methuselah Jones
of rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated make plain:
> "Jon Schild" <j...@aros.net> wrote in message
> news:DPSdnb7-R-hTmwLZ...@aros.net...
>>
>> Angelika Tobisch wrote:
>>> Brian Stinson schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Wow ! I think I forgot just how great this show actually was, and
>>>> how it ruined television for me. In the years since, I've found
>>>> that B5 raised the bar in such a way that I seldom can sit through
>>>> most of what's on TV nowadays.
>>>
>>> That's what happened to me, too. I constantly find myself thinking
>>> things like "well, that episode was quite good, but what are the
>>> ramifications going to be?" now. It's not fun at all to watch TNG
>>> with that mindset...
>>
>> No, because in nearly all cases, the ramifications are nill. If B5
>> had a magic reset button to press between episodes like Star Trek and
>> nearly all other shows have, it wouldn't have been much good either.
>> But with a long story, over 80 hours not counting the movies, you can
>> really do something.
>
> Even with 80 hours, most writers on television couldn't do much.
Conversely, there are some truly stellar TNG episodes, e.g. "The Inner
Light", "The Measure of a Man", "The Offspring".
--
Methuselah
"Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but
that's not why we do it."
-- Richard Feynman
Wendy of NJ
<goate...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Angelika Tobisch wrote:
>> Neil B schrieb:
>>
>>>> That's what happened to me, too. I constantly find myself thinking
>>>> things like "well, that episode was quite good, but what are the
>>>> ramifications going to be?" now. It's not fun at all to watch TNG
>>>> with that mindset...
>>>
>>> Then... don't do that. :) I think you have to watch every TV series as
>>> a product of its own time.
>>
>> You're right, but I grew up watching TNG so I don't think I'll ever stop
>> loving the characters even though they're not nearly as well rounded as
>> B5's. I miss them. Maybe I should just settle on watching the highlights
>> again. That might work.
>>
>> Angelika
>
>Don't get me wrong, I love TNG and still think it's the best of the
>post-original series efforts. I have all the DVD's and regularly watch
>my favourites or just episodes picked at random. If I avoid Season 1,
>I'm rarely disappointed. :)
I just finished (most) of Season 1 TNG, having borrowed it from my
local library (the price was certainly right!!!), and it wasn't as
awful as I remember (although it was really obvious which actors were
comfortable in their roles and which had to find themselves during the
course of the first season) I think Spiner/Burton had the best moments
together in season 1, and Stewart seemed comfortable in his role.
Everyone else felt a bit awkward.
There were a handful of episodes that I didn't bother watching more
than the teaser act (to remind me, painfully, what episode it was and
that I still remember it as terribly boring)
But some of it was fun from a "oh, this is the first time we see
_____" And also I haven't veiwed these episodes in close to 7 years,
or longer. TNG needs a longer "rest" period between viewings these
days than other series do.
>
>B5 is different for me in this case. IMO, only a few of the standalone
>episodes can go toe-to-toe with TNG, whereas B5's arc (as a whole) flies
>well over the head of the older programme. So, a random pick from B5
>isn't nearly as satisfying: if it's a standalone, it's unlikely to
>particularly thrill me, and if it's an arc episode, I'm uncomfortable
>watching it in isolation. In this way, when it comes to killing a couple
>of hours with my DVD collection, TNG's episodic format has more to offer
>me than B5.
>
>B5 was as much a revelation to me as anyone else, but TNG and everything
>before it didn't suddenly cease to thrill; I can still watch them,
>understand the limitations of syndicated TV at the time, and enjoy them
>for what they are: superior, episodic, standalone sci-fi.
>
>Besides which, there's still a few things that TNG did way better than
>B5. ;)
Care to elaborate? (I'm not baiting you to start a flame war, honest!)
-Wendy
Neil B
> I have found TNG to not age well. It was great in it's time, but it just
> seems a bit silly to me when I watch it. TOS, on the other hand, has
> that "campy" feel to it and is still fun to watch. Maybe in a decade or
> so, TNG will be the same....
Sci-Fi are running TOS in the UK at the moment and I'm enjoying it so
much I might shell out for the DVD's, which so far I've resisted because
of the crappy packaging.
I'm absolutely amazed how well the original series holds up. Of course
you have to grimace and ignore the lewd treatment of the women and the
overwrought nature of some of the acting, but on the whole, it's as
complex and thought-provoking to me today as it was when I was pre-teen
and transfixed to the TV every Tuesday night.
Neil B
Neil B
>> Besides which, there's still a few things that TNG did way better than
>> B5. ;)
>
> Care to elaborate? (I'm not baiting you to start a flame war, honest!)
And neither do I want to have one, but I did drop that jab in there so I
can't get away from it now. :) Let me preface this by saying I love both
shows, just in very different ways.
Relationships, for one, and I don't mean in terms of romance, but in
terms of one person relating to another (alien or otherwise)... the
emotional authenticity. I think they're more convincing and meaningful
in TNG than in B5, with some notable exceptions (need I say: Londo and
G'Kar). Not just amongst the crew, but in the series as a whole. When
characters outside the Enterprise are brought in, the interplay and
drama is compelling and, more often than not, well played by all
concerned. I can honestly think of only a few B5 characters outside of
the main crew that made an impression on me (Rheiner Schone's Dukhat
being at the top of a short list).
Dialogue, on the whole, is tighter and more convincing, some obvious
stand-outs notwithstanding (the G'Kar monologues, for example). This is
especially true of the commanders. Patrick Stewart lends a charisma to
the Enterprise which is sorely lacking on B5, and when he's given good
material to play with, he's blindingly good (re: Yesterday's Enterprise,
Best of Both Worlds, Chain of Command, and many others). Picard is TNG's
G'Kar in many ways, utterly convincing in the role, the most rewarding
route into the program. Dialogue is not JMS's strong point, weaving a
story is; dialogue, on the other hand, is the cornerstone of Stewart's
Picard. Both progs could learn lessons from the other in these respects.
Finally, as I said, TNG's ability to forge memorable standalones far
exceeds B5's. They made their fair share of rubbish, but when an
episodic format is all you've got to play with, I guess you have to
raise your game. B5's problems are most apparent when the arc is forced
into the background, IMO, especially in the first season, which I
certainly don't rate as highly as many folks here, and it's no
coincidence that S3 and S4 represent B5 at the very peak of its quality.
There, you asked. :)
Neil B
Wendy of NJ
<goate...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Wendy of NJ wrote:
>>> Besides which, there's still a few things that TNG did way better than
>>> B5. ;)
>>
>> Care to elaborate? (I'm not baiting you to start a flame war, honest!)
>
>And neither do I want to have one, but I did drop that jab in there so I
>can't get away from it now. :) Let me preface this by saying I love both
>shows, just in very different ways.
>
>Relationships, for one, and I don't mean in terms of romance, but in
>terms of one person relating to another (alien or otherwise)... the
>emotional authenticity. I think they're more convincing and meaningful
>in TNG than in B5, with some notable exceptions (need I say: Londo and
>G'Kar). Not just amongst the crew, but in the series as a whole. When
>characters outside the Enterprise are brought in, the interplay and
>drama is compelling and, more often than not, well played by all
>concerned. I can honestly think of only a few B5 characters outside of
>the main crew that made an impression on me (Rheiner Schone's Dukhat
>being at the top of a short list).
Let me add to that list, if I may. Non-ensemble cast that "made an
impression" on me (in no particular order except that's the order I am
recalling them at this particular time):
Bester, played by Walter Koenig
Neroon
Dukhat
the pre-great machine Dra'al
Dodger
Mr. Morden
"King Arthur" (Michael York)
Duncan
Guest stars on TNG that I can remember offhand as being stand-out
include
"the 'dumb' aliens that kidnapped Geordie"
Whoopi Goldberg (unless you consider her regular cast)
John DeLancie's "Q"
Ro Larin
Dr Pulaski (I know a lot of people didn't like her, but I did
especially since she wasn't "beautiful" and she also didn't like Data)
And of course Lwxana Troi (snerk) - she didn't become "good" until
after Gene died, and her few guest appearances on DS9 were better than
her appearances on TNG (IMHO).
>
>Dialogue, on the whole, is tighter and more convincing, some obvious
>stand-outs notwithstanding (the G'Kar monologues, for example). This is
>especially true of the commanders. Patrick Stewart lends a charisma to
>the Enterprise which is sorely lacking on B5, and when he's given good
>material to play with, he's blindingly good (re: Yesterday's Enterprise,
>Best of Both Worlds, Chain of Command, and many others). Picard is TNG's
>G'Kar in many ways, utterly convincing in the role, the most rewarding
>route into the program. Dialogue is not JMS's strong point, weaving a
>story is; dialogue, on the other hand, is the cornerstone of Stewart's
>Picard. Both progs could learn lessons from the other in these respects.
I may give you that, but TNG loses points for technobabble. One thing
JMS was able to do was tell the story with a minimum of technobabble.
Even if it's real science and makes sense to the initated, it's deadly
boring television.
>
>Finally, as I said, TNG's ability to forge memorable standalones far
>exceeds B5's. They made their fair share of rubbish, but when an
>episodic format is all you've got to play with, I guess you have to
>raise your game. B5's problems are most apparent when the arc is forced
>into the background, IMO, especially in the first season, which I
>certainly don't rate as highly as many folks here, and it's no
>coincidence that S3 and S4 represent B5 at the very peak of its quality.
B5 isn't supposed to be standalone. It's a *novel for television*. You
wouldn't pick up (for example) Hunchback of Notre Dame and just read
Chapter 6.
TNG is more like a collection of short stories - some better than
others. The only commonalities are that they both take place in the
future and in outer space.
>
>There, you asked. :)
>
Thanks for sharing :)
-Wendy
Rob Perkins
> Dr Pulaski (I know a lot of people didn't like her, but I did
> especially since she wasn't "beautiful" and she also didn't like Data)
Brent Spiner should have more roles than he's offered. It's just that
simple.
The actor who played Pulaski, Diana Muldaur, also guested in TOS at
least twice, and it cannot be said that she wasn't "beautiful" in those
eps. She even rated the 60's-era soft-focus closeups that Nichelle
Nichols got a lot of.
IMDB reports the ep names as "Is there in Truth No Beauty" and "Return
to Tomorrow."
Rob, dangling prepositions *again*
Jeffrey Kaplan
> Battlestar Galactica. Who would've thunk it ?! When I heard they were
> remaking this, I thought it would be terrible. I couldn't have been more
> wrong.
>
> One thing I've noticed about all the shows listed above is that they all
> have short seasons, usually 13 episodes. While I always hate the seasons
BSG doesn't have short seasons. Season 1 was short because it started
halfway through, but season two was at least 20 episodes. SciFi just
splits their seasons in two to avoid, as much as possible, conflicting
with the regular networks.
Though season three of BSG is starting in October instead of July this
year.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"The election is a necessity. We cannot have a free government without
elections; and if the rebellion could force us to forgo, or postpone, a
national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered us."
- Abraham Lincoln, on refusing to cancel the 1864 election during the
Civil War despite predictions he'd loose.
Jeffrey Kaplan
> > That's what happened to me, too. I constantly find myself thinking
> > things like "well, that episode was quite good, but what are the
> > ramifications going to be?" now. It's not fun at all to watch TNG
> > with that mindset...
>
> Then... don't do that. :) I think you have to watch every TV series as a
> product of its own time.
A poster on another group I'm in has a sig that's appropriate here:
"Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem".
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
Tips for the Innocent Bystander: 52. When the medical examiner
announces that the victim was bitten or eaten by "something weird that
I've never seen before, probably some kind of animal", avoid the area
where the biting/eating took place. If the victim is still alive, avoid
the victim except under broad daylight.
Joseph DeMartino
> A poster on another group I'm in has a sig that's appropriate here:
>
> "Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem".
If I'm not mistaken that was taken from a comment made by an one of a
group of Jet Propulsion Laboratory or NASA engineers who were wrestling
with some thorny issue. <g>
Regards,
Joe
Joseph DeMartino
> A poster on another group I'm in has a sig that's appropriate here:
>
> "Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem".
If I'm not mistaken that was taken from a comment made by an one of a
Jeffrey Kaplan
> Let me add to that list, if I may. Non-ensemble cast that "made an
> impression" on me (in no particular order except that's the order I am
> recalling them at this particular time):
>
> Bester, played by Walter Koenig
> Neroon
> Dukhat
> the pre-great machine Dra'al
> Dodger
> Mr. Morden
> "King Arthur" (Michael York)
> Duncan
I mostly agree. Me, I'd drop Duncan from that list and add William
Edgars, Gen. Franklin, and Anna Sheridan.
> Guest stars on TNG that I can remember offhand as being stand-out
> include
>
> "the 'dumb' aliens that kidnapped Geordie"
The what?
> Whoopi Goldberg (unless you consider her regular cast)
If you can include Morden in the B5 list, you can include Guynann in
the TNG list. She's Enterprise crew, but not a "regular" cast member.
> Dr Pulaski (I know a lot of people didn't like her, but I did
> especially since she wasn't "beautiful" and she also didn't like Data)
I would not include her in this list because she wasn't a guest or
recurring character, she was a regular character for a season,
replacing Dr Crusher. Naming her here would be like naming Lt. Keffer
from B5.
> And of course Lwxana Troi (snerk) - she didn't become "good" until
> after Gene died, and her few guest appearances on DS9 were better than
> her appearances on TNG (IMHO).
IMO, the best thing about having her on the later Treks was her
problems with the computer constantly misunderstanding her.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
Peter's Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord, #128.
I will not employ robots as agents of destruction if there is any
possible way that they can be re-programmed or if their battery packs
are externally mounted and easily removable.
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
>> "the 'dumb' aliens that kidnapped Geordie"
>
> The what?
Pakleds. One wonders how they ever attained space travel (or mastered
fire for that matter). One of those obvious plot problems that
plagues Trek from time to time. :-)
--
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
Promote someone else.
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
> Conversely, there are some truly stellar TNG episodes, e.g. "The Inner
> Light", "The Measure of a Man", "The Offspring".
While I think _Inner Light_ was one of the best science fiction
stories ever broadcasted on television, I can't agree that _Measure of
a Man_ is worthy of being mentioned along with it as "stellar."
In fact, basically every episode of Trek where the writers tried to
make a social issue out of "computer rights" ended up feeling like
didactic tripe.
("The Doctor" episodes on Voyager, where we got to see how many times
a computer program could disobey orders and endanger missions before
somebody reboot it (evidently the threshold was never reached) were
far worse, of course.)
Like not having a "Wesley," one of the things I really appreciated
about B5 was that the writer(s) never tried to reduce complex social
issues down to whether or not a light switch should be allowed to turn
itself on and off.
Matt Ion
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:56:25 +0000 (UTC), Jeffrey Kaplan wrote:
>
>
>>>"the 'dumb' aliens that kidnapped Geordie"
>>
>>The what?
>
>
> Pakleds. One wonders how they ever attained space travel (or mastered
> fire for that matter). One of those obvious plot problems that
> plagues Trek from time to time. :-)
"Wow, you've got a major plot hole here...."
"Yes, it is broken. We are not smart."
Matt Ion
It's even more frustrating when you realize some of the glimpses TNG
showed of setting up multi-season arcs. Best example I can think of was
the early episode with the creatures taking over the brains of Starfleet
higher-up, which ends with Riker and Picard killing their "mother"
creature that was inhabiting their old nemesis Remick. At the end, they
noted that he had sent a "homing beacon" type signal into deep space...
setting up plenty of possible future stories for the return of these
creatures... a future that was never realized or even hinted at again.
The closest we ever got to a long-term arc was with the Borg, with each
new encouter building off the last, and having repurcussions into the
future (look at how many times Picard's assimilation is brought up again
later, causing him problems). But even that is never fully woven into
the fabric of the show the way it could have been.
Mox Fulder
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:56:25 +0000 (UTC), Jeffrey Kaplan wrote:
> >> "the 'dumb' aliens that kidnapped Geordie"
> >
> > The what?
> Pakleds. One wonders how they ever attained space travel (or mastered
> fire for that matter). One of those obvious plot problems that
> plagues Trek from time to time. :-)
I wonder the same thing about humans.
--
20060626 1445
This .sig is not available at the moment. Leave your message after the beep.
Craig M. Bobchin
In article <CmYng.97313$iF6.40778@pd7tw2no>, sou...@moltenimage.com
says...
Matt Ion
Yup, I still find that with TOS as well. And "overwrought acting"
aside, I still find most of the characters deeper and more compelling in
that short three years than most of TNG's were allowed to become over
seven years on TV and several more in the movies... even WITH numerous
episodes devoted to development of various characters.
Matt Ion
> Thanks, now I have to clean off my monitor from coffee...
"It will not go."
Amy Guskin
(in article <4gareaF...@individual.net>):
> Wendy of NJ wrote:
>
>> Dr Pulaski (I know a lot of people didn't like her, but I did
>> especially since she wasn't "beautiful" and she also didn't like Data)
>
> Brent Spiner should have more roles than he's offered. It's just that
> simple. <<
That can be said about lots of fine actors who end up in science fiction (and
get pigeonholed). Andreas is a classic example. And it's not like he wasn't
_good_ before G'Kar; he was plenty good, but usually only got about five
lines in his non-thug roles in which to exercise his considerable talent (and
the thug roles were by and large fairly broad). As an actor, he must have
been incredibly grateful to JMS for the chance to show off his craft (albeit
underneath the latex) with such a sublime role.
So yeah, look at all the talent who should have more roles than they're
offered. And look at what we get instead.
I'm pretty perturbed these days at TPTB over at The 4400 on this score, in
fact. They dumped Laura Allen (Lily) in favor of a younger, exotically
attractive woman playing her unnaturally-aged daughter. Now, Laura Allen is
only 32 herself - and thin, blonde and cute! imagine a sort of
sharper-featured Kristen Bell - but she was a capable actress. The girl who
got a contract this season, and I'm pretty sure that Laura Allen was dumped
as a consequence of that, is 23 years old and as awkward and green as they
come. It hurts to watch her. And I don't really see how she's helped, as of
yet. The character has potential simply because of the nature of her
existence, but the actress is a joke. I hope they jettison her storyline
_fast_ if she doesn't improve.
>> The actor who played Pulaski, Diana Muldaur, also guested in TOS at
> least twice, and it cannot be said that she wasn't "beautiful" in those
> eps. She even rated the 60's-era soft-focus closeups that Nichelle
> Nichols got a lot of.
>
> IMDB reports the ep names as "Is there in Truth No Beauty" and "Return
> to Tomorrow."<<
Yeah, I loved both of those guest spots of hers. Especially as Thalassa-Ann,
with that great delivery of "I'd forgotten what it felt like even to
breeeeeeathe again." For me, that's as classic a Trek chick line as "You are
not Morg; you are not Imorg" and "Brain, brain, what is brain?!"
Amy
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
>> Pakleds. One wonders how they ever attained space travel (or mastered
>> fire for that matter). One of those obvious plot problems that
>> plagues Trek from time to time. :-)
>
> "Wow, you've got a major plot hole here...."
> "Yes, it is broken. We are not smart."
ROTFL!
Craig M. Bobchin
would've liked to continue Lilly's storyline but she wanted to much
money. So they killed her off and let her daughter take the spotlight.
In article <0001HW.C0C5CF52...@news.verizon.net>,
ais...@fjordstone.com says...
Amy Guskin
(in article <MPG.1f09fdedf...@news.la.sbcglobal.net>):
> Actually my understanding is that it was an issue of money, that TPTB
> would've liked to continue Lilly's storyline but she wanted to much
> money. So they killed her off and let her daughter take the spotlight. <<
Really! If so, that was a big mistake on the part of the actress. I think
the only other substantial role she had was on All My Children a couple of
years ago, and she was truly dreadful then - she's improved a lot in the
intervening years. I wonder, though, if that's actually the case or if it's
instead one of those deliberate leaks on the part of the production studio...
Guess I'll have to poke around and see what else folks are saying. Thanks
for the tip.
Amy
shawn
<sou...@moltenimage.com> wrote:
>Angelika Tobisch wrote:
>> Brian Stinson schrieb:
>>
>>> Wow ! I think I forgot just how great this show actually was, and how
>>> it ruined television for me. In the years since, I've found that B5
>>> raised the bar in such a way that I seldom can sit through most of
>>> what's on TV nowadays.
>>
>>
>> That's what happened to me, too. I constantly find myself thinking
>> things like "well, that episode was quite good, but what are the
>> ramifications going to be?" now. It's not fun at all to watch TNG
>> with that mindset...
>
>It's even more frustrating when you realize some of the glimpses TNG
>showed of setting up multi-season arcs. Best example I can think of was
>the early episode with the creatures taking over the brains of Starfleet
>higher-up, which ends with Riker and Picard killing their "mother"
>creature that was inhabiting their old nemesis Remick. At the end, they
>noted that he had sent a "homing beacon" type signal into deep space...
>setting up plenty of possible future stories for the return of these
>creatures... a future that was never realized or even hinted at again.
I always wondered why they didn't do more of that type of thing. I
know there's a desire to have standalone episodes that can be show out
of order, but that doesn't preclude have B plots that are arc heavy.
That kind of enemy could have been interesting if they had continued
to develop it. It's like the powers in charge didn't want any long
term development in the show.
>The closest we ever got to a long-term arc was with the Borg, with each
>new encouter building off the last, and having repurcussions into the
>future (look at how many times Picard's assimilation is brought up again
>later, causing him problems). But even that is never fully woven into
>the fabric of the show the way it could have been.
I guess the problem is there was no one in charge that believed in
doing long term stories. So it depended on individual writers to come
up with ideas that developed on previous stories and then selling that
to the people in charge. They really needed someone like JMS in charge
to help develop the long term arcs even if they weren't the major
focus of the show.
umarc
>I have found TNG to not age well. It was great in it's time, but it just
>seems a bit silly to me when I watch it. TOS, on the other hand, has
>that "campy" feel to it and is still fun to watch. Maybe in a decade or
>so, TNG will be the same....
I find maybe a handful of TNG episodes truly memorable (Yesterday's
Enterprise and The Best of Both Worlds I and II, to name three); the
rest are pretty forgettable IMHO.
umar
Wesley Struebing
I haven't seen "The 4400" this season, at all (and from your
description, Amy, I'm glad I haven't). I thought they started
reaching last season, and it lost a lot then, for me. I'm not even
sure I could put my finger on it, really, but it seemed they went too
far afield, I guess.
>
>>> The actor who played Pulaski, Diana Muldaur, also guested in TOS at
>> least twice, and it cannot be said that she wasn't "beautiful" in those
>> eps. She even rated the 60's-era soft-focus closeups that Nichelle
>> Nichols got a lot of.
>>
>> IMDB reports the ep names as "Is there in Truth No Beauty" and "Return
>> to Tomorrow."<<
>
Much preferred her over Gates McFadden(sp?). Why did she leave,
anyway? Did she get suddenly smart? (sorry, that wasn't nice; there
WERE very decent TNG episodes, even some with Dr. Crusher...)
--
Wes Struebing
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America,
and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples,
promising liberty and justice for all.
Rob Perkins
> Yeah, I loved both of those guest spots of hers. Especially as Thalassa-Ann,
> with that great delivery of "I'd forgotten what it felt like even to
> breeeeeeathe again." For me, that's as classic a Trek chick line as "You are
> not Morg; you are not Imorg" and "Brain, brain, what is brain?!"
Well, we can't blame the actors for the writing. Mostly.
Ahem:
"That unit is a Woman"
"A mass of conflicting impulses"
My how far we've come since the 60's...
Rob, himself a mass of conflicting impulses ;)
Jeffrey Kaplan
> >>> The actor who played Pulaski, Diana Muldaur, also guested in TOS at
> >> least twice, and it cannot be said that she wasn't "beautiful" in those
> >> eps. She even rated the 60's-era soft-focus closeups that Nichelle
> >> Nichols got a lot of.
> >>
> >> IMDB reports the ep names as "Is there in Truth No Beauty" and "Return
> >> to Tomorrow."<<
> >
>
> Much preferred her over Gates McFadden(sp?). Why did she leave,
> anyway? Did she get suddenly smart? (sorry, that wasn't nice; there
> WERE very decent TNG episodes, even some with Dr. Crusher...)
I think it was that McFadden came back, not that Muldaur left. A more
recent parallel would be the Daniel Jackson/Jonas Quinn swaps in SG1.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"Home is important, It's important to have a home." - George W. Bush,
Feb 18, 2001
Jeffrey Kaplan
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:56:25 +0000 (UTC), Jeffrey Kaplan wrote:
>
> >> "the 'dumb' aliens that kidnapped Geordie"
> >
> > The what?
>
> Pakleds. One wonders how they ever attained space travel (or mastered
> fire for that matter). One of those obvious plot problems that
> plagues Trek from time to time. :-)
Must be one of the many episodes I blanked out of my memory.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"Home is important, It's important to have a home." - George W. Bush,
Feb 18, 2001
Kay Shapero
stinso...@sbcglobal.net says...
> I haven't posted here since I'm guessing 2001. With B5 pretty much wrapped
> up by that time, wasn't much to post about.
>
> With not much on TV lately, I finally plunked down the green and bought the
> DVD sets. Wow ! I think I forgot just how great this show actually was,
> raised the bar in such a way that I seldom can sit through most of what's on
> few weeks on a B5 binge.
>
I know the feeling - I've been watching my way through the series and
taking notes on stuff, mostly the things that take on new meaning after
you know the whole story. Clean back to the first episode! I've been
storing 'em on my website at http://www.kayshapero.net/b5thon.htm (for
"Babylonathon".
--
Kay Shapero
http://www.kayshapero.net
Rob Perkins
Meh. The Best of Both Worlds had an Annoying Guest Star, who IMO wasn't
well-directed.
Rob
Wendy of NJ
<rper...@usa.net> wrote:
>Wendy of NJ wrote:
>
>> Dr Pulaski (I know a lot of people didn't like her, but I did
>> especially since she wasn't "beautiful" and she also didn't like Data)
>
>Brent Spiner should have more roles than he's offered. It's just that
>simple.
>
>The actor who played Pulaski, Diana Muldaur, also guested in TOS at
>least twice, and it cannot be said that she wasn't "beautiful" in those
>eps. She even rated the 60's-era soft-focus closeups that Nichelle
>Nichols got a lot of.
I know that, and that was part of her initial charm (and my excitement
when she replaced McFadden for year 2 when it was originally
broadcast). However, in TNG, she is NOT the "female ideal" - she's
certainly post-menopausal, doesn't have an hourglass figure anymore,
and in the first several eps of the season really managed to carry off
Bones McCoy's sardonicism in some sub-vocalized mutterings to herself.
>
>IMDB reports the ep names as "Is there in Truth No Beauty" and "Return
>to Tomorrow."
2 of my favorite TOS episodes.
-Wendy
Wendy of NJ
>It is alleged that Wendy of NJ claimed:
>
>> Let me add to that list, if I may. Non-ensemble cast that "made an
>> impression" on me (in no particular order except that's the order I am
>> recalling them at this particular time):
>>
>> Bester, played by Walter Koenig
>> Neroon
>> Dukhat
>> the pre-great machine Dra'al
>> Dodger
>> Mr. Morden
>> "King Arthur" (Michael York)
>> Duncan
>
>I mostly agree. Me, I'd drop Duncan from that list and add William
>Edgars, Gen. Franklin, and Anna Sheridan.
>
>> Guest stars on TNG that I can remember offhand as being stand-out
>> include
>>
>> "the 'dumb' aliens that kidnapped Geordie"
>
>The what?
I forget their names... Packled? they would say stuff to Geordie like
"you make us go fast"
>
>> Whoopi Goldberg (unless you consider her regular cast)
>
>If you can include Morden in the B5 list, you can include Guynann in
>the TNG list. She's Enterprise crew, but not a "regular" cast member.
>
>> Dr Pulaski (I know a lot of people didn't like her, but I did
>> especially since she wasn't "beautiful" and she also didn't like Data)
>
>I would not include her in this list because she wasn't a guest or
>recurring character, she was a regular character for a season,
>replacing Dr Crusher. Naming her here would be like naming Lt. Keffer
>from B5.
I only said her because she's a "special guest" on the credits on
season 2. Did Keffer have his picture in the credits, in the intro, or
was his name part of the 'guest cast' that appears once we're into Act
1?
Dave Hayslett
You are smart. You will make it go!
--
Dave (6/26/2006 11:19:49 PM)
Tour the world in a heavy metal band
but they run out of gas, the plane can never land.
Jon Schild
Neil B wrote:
> Wendy of NJ wrote:
>
>>> Besides which, there's still a few things that TNG did way better
>>> than B5. ;)
>>
>>
>> Care to elaborate? (I'm not baiting you to start a flame war, honest!)
>
>
> And neither do I want to have one, but I did drop that jab in there so I
> can't get away from it now. :) Let me preface this by saying I love both
> shows, just in very different ways.
>
> Relationships, for one, and I don't mean in terms of romance, but in
> terms of one person relating to another (alien or otherwise)... the
> emotional authenticity. I think they're more convincing and meaningful
> in TNG than in B5, with some notable exceptions (need I say: Londo and
> G'Kar). Not just amongst the crew, but in the series as a whole. When
> characters outside the Enterprise are brought in, the interplay and
> drama is compelling and, more often than not, well played by all
> concerned. I can honestly think of only a few B5 characters outside of
> the main crew that made an impression on me (Rheiner Schone's Dukhat
> being at the top of a short list).
>
> Dialogue, on the whole, is tighter and more convincing, some obvious
> stand-outs notwithstanding (the G'Kar monologues, for example). This is
> especially true of the commanders. Patrick Stewart lends a charisma to
> the Enterprise which is sorely lacking on B5, and when he's given good
> material to play with, he's blindingly good (re: Yesterday's Enterprise,
> Best of Both Worlds, Chain of Command, and many others). Picard is TNG's
> G'Kar in many ways, utterly convincing in the role, the most rewarding
> route into the program. Dialogue is not JMS's strong point, weaving a
> story is; dialogue, on the other hand, is the cornerstone of Stewart's
> Picard. Both progs could learn lessons from the other in these respects.
>
> Finally, as I said, TNG's ability to forge memorable standalones far
> exceeds B5's. They made their fair share of rubbish, but when an
> episodic format is all you've got to play with, I guess you have to
> raise your game. B5's problems are most apparent when the arc is forced
> into the background, IMO, especially in the first season, which I
> certainly don't rate as highly as many folks here, and it's no
> coincidence that S3 and S4 represent B5 at the very peak of its quality.
>
> There, you asked. :)
>
> Neil B
>
Well, I think TNG is the best Star Trek series, but still not as good as
B5. One example. at first the Klingon culture was interesting but after
a few hours of "Arrrgh! We are strong! We are warriors! etc" it got
really old and boring. It also annoys me that about the only times the
Prime Directive is mentioned is when it's being broken. (That is a flaw
of all but Enterprise, though.) I liked it a lot when it first came
out. Didn't like Q or the Q episodes, but there weren't many of those.
Babylon 5, however, I consider to be the best TV science fiction ever.
Even it is not perfect. There is that wretched episode about Gray 17.
Mox Fulder
> I'm pretty perturbed these days at TPTB over at The 4400 on this score, in
> fact. They dumped Laura Allen (Lily) in favor of a younger, exotically
> attractive woman playing her unnaturally-aged daughter. Now, Laura Allen is
She was not "dumped." She chose to leave.
--
20060626 1115
Hank Arnold
Regards,
Hank Arnold
Jeffrey Kaplan wrote:
>
> A poster on another group I'm in has a sig that's appropriate here:
>
> "Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem".
>
Hank Arnold
Regards,
Hank Arnold
Jeffrey Kaplan
> >> Dr Pulaski (I know a lot of people didn't like her, but I did
> >> especially since she wasn't "beautiful" and she also didn't like Data)
> >
> >I would not include her in this list because she wasn't a guest or
> >recurring character, she was a regular character for a season,
> >replacing Dr Crusher. Naming her here would be like naming Lt. Keffer
> >from B5.
>
> I only said her because she's a "special guest" on the credits on
> season 2. Did Keffer have his picture in the credits, in the intro, or
> was his name part of the 'guest cast' that appears once we're into Act
> 1?
Keffer was main cast, I believe.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
Peter's Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord, #61.
If my advisors ask "Why are you risking everything on such a mad
scheme?", I will not proceed until I have a response that satisfies
them.
John W. Kennedy
> a computer program could disobey orders and endanger missions before
> somebody reboot it (evidently the threshold was never reached) were
> far worse, of course.)
What particularly annoys me about that is that, back around the first
season, my wife pitched them a story along those lines that actually
made some sense (would the programmers of the Doctor--only an emergency
medical device, after all--have bothered to incorporate the Prime
Directive?), they rejected it in horror as too disturbing to the series
premise. (This being one of the main reasons my wife gave up pitching
to them.)
The nauseating episode of "Enterprise" in which Captain Archer somehow
intuits that the Prime Directive will exist in his future, and uses
both that and the Inscrutable Will of Go^H^HEvolution to justify
genocide was, I suppose, another step along the same road.
Matt Ion
> Well, I think TNG is the best Star Trek series, but still not as good as
> B5. One example. at first the Klingon culture was interesting but after
> a few hours of "Arrrgh! We are strong! We are warriors! etc" it got
> really old and boring.
I dunno... all the TOS Klingon episodes I can recall from memory, they
were nowhere near as "ARGH, WE ARE WARRIORS" as they were in TNG. Even
Worf had a constant underlying "ARGH, WE ARE WARRIORS" thing going on.
Even the campiest TOS Klingons, like in "The Trouble with Tribbles,"
aren't that one-dimensional. At the opposite end of the scale is John
Colicos' "Kor", in "Errand of Mercy" - almost Shakespearean in his prose
at times.
To see the Klingons all grunting around the High Council chambers in
TNG, they look more like the cast of Planet of the Apes - one wonders
how they achieved space flight before the Pakleds.
Matt Ion
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 21:49:40 +0000 (UTC), Matt Ion wrote:
>
>
>>Craig M. Bobchin wrote:
>>
>>>Thanks, now I have to clean off my monitor from coffee...
>>
>>"It will not go."
>
>
> You are smart. You will make it go!
We have Amigas. Now we are strong!
Wendy of NJ
<sou...@moltenimage.com> wrote:
>Jon Schild wrote:
>
>> Well, I think TNG is the best Star Trek series, but still not as good as
>> B5. One example. at first the Klingon culture was interesting but after
>> a few hours of "Arrrgh! We are strong! We are warriors! etc" it got
>> really old and boring.
>
>I dunno... all the TOS Klingon episodes I can recall from memory, they
>were nowhere near as "ARGH, WE ARE WARRIORS" as they were in TNG. Even
>Worf had a constant underlying "ARGH, WE ARE WARRIORS" thing going on.
>Even the campiest TOS Klingons, like in "The Trouble with Tribbles,"
>aren't that one-dimensional. At the opposite end of the scale is John
>Colicos' "Kor", in "Errand of Mercy" - almost Shakespearean in his prose
>at times.
>
I guess my problem is that Worf's character (and Klingons in general)
got a lot more detailed and sophisticated treatment in DS9, and all
that background information taints my TNG perceptions, watching the
episodes now.
And I think Colicos was the best thing in the original BSG. And I
enjoyed his reprise performance on DS9 (along with Michael Ansara, and
the other fellow, who also played the Squire of Gothos)
The Ferengi were also very one-dimensional in TNG, but I'm sure that's
because humans had little to no contact with them yet.
Angelika Tobisch
>> Let me add to that list, if I may. Non-ensemble cast that "made an
>> impression" on me (in no particular order except that's the order I am
>> recalling them at this particular time):
>>
>> Bester, played by Walter Koenig
>> Neroon
>> Dukhat
>> the pre-great machine Dra'al
>> Dodger
>> Mr. Morden
>> "King Arthur" (Michael York)
>> Duncan
>
> I mostly agree. Me, I'd drop Duncan from that list and add William
> Edgars, Gen. Franklin, and Anna Sheridan.
Refa!
Angelika
Wendy of NJ
Yes, of course!
And Cartagia, too. (how could I forget them?!?!)
-Wendy
Janne Mikola
> I haven't posted here since I'm guessing 2001. With B5 pretty much wrapped
> up by that time, wasn't much to post about.
>
> With not much on TV lately, I finally plunked down the green and bought the
> DVD sets. Wow ! I think I forgot just how great this show actually was,
> and how it ruined television for me. In the years since, I've found that B5
> raised the bar in such a way that I seldom can sit through most of what's on
> TV nowadays. I've spent wayyy to much time in front of the TV in the last
> few weeks on a B5 binge.
>
> good shows on TV today in terms of long term story telling, and I wonder if
> B5 might be in some way responsible for allowing these shows to exist.
>
[a long story, and a little bit offtopic]
It's amazing how well this describes my thoughts also. When Babylon 5
aired for the first time, I watched it, became a fan and thus part of
fandom. B5 was shown on Saturdays in my country. In the beginning of the
first series I didn't have Internet connection at home at, and a little
bit later I had only an expensive modem-connection but I wanted to know
more, wanted to live a little bit closer to the B5-universe... and I
knew that I could find the fandom on the Internet.
I was quite young at that time, young teenager, and I didn't have much
to do in my life, not any real work at least. During B5 my regular
Saturday started at 11 o'clock when I rode my bicycle to the town center
and went to the library and reserved an Internet-computer for 3 to 5
hours. On the net I chatted, read USENET, read websites, and I was
somehow excited, in some unique way that has never been there after
that... I don't know, it's hard to put it in words. After the library
closed I went to the nearest shop, bought something salty and went home
to wait the clock to be 22:00. And then the main thing in my boring
school week was there. The last, best hope for peace. Or victory.
I think Babylon 5 was a huge phenomenon, but not everyone saw it. Those
who knew what was going on, were immensely affected by the series. My
school notebooks were full of hand-drawn B5's and series logos and my
literature essays were sometimes about, and sometimes largely influenced
by, Babylon 5. One time I even wrote an essay to the teacher in which I
suggested that we should watch parts of Babylon 5 at school, because it
really is sophisticated, cultured and educated... I thought it was more
of those than Schindler's list or most of the finnish novels that we
watched or read. I know that was a bit naive, but hey, I was 15 years old.
But then, everything good comes to its end someday. So did Babylon 5.
For me, the feeling was exactly the same which I had after I had read
Lord of the Rings for the first time. The feeling I believe most of you
have had after finishing an impressive book. "This cannot end now, this
is not true!" "What do I do now?". The empty feeling. Only, that the
magnitude was 50 times higher, which is comparable to the time I had
lived in the realm of the fiction in both cases. LotR gave me a reality
escape for one month. B5 gave it for 5 years... something like 50
months. For my teenage years, B5 was really part of my life. But it
wasn't unsound, really. I did normal things also; I had a moped, I went
through my puberty, there were those normal mishaps with opposite
gender, I went to disco and I tasted cider.
B5 ended. I did some things such as spent a year in army, went to
university and got a girlfriend. Seven years passed.
Then I bought the series, all the movies and Crusade on 41 DVD-discs,
mostly because that's part of the 90's, part of the television history
and part of the culture I want to own, but also because I wanted to show
my girlfriend what was that thing I had grown up with. I began the
re-run of the series, and it felt amazing. It made me subscribe to this
newsgroup again and read every website in hope for new information on
any upcoming Babylon 5 -projects. Of course on the last thing I was
disappointed, but the series showed me that I didn't consider it as the
best only because time had sweetened the memories, but because it is Great.
It was not only very well made, but it was unique when it was done, and
first series to do many things. On one point of view that's not a thing
to consider as a strenght nor a reason and an argumentation for the
claim that B5 is great, and I understand that point of view. Those who
say that are the same people who say that it's terribly wrong to give a
computer game less score than the original game of the series got, if
there's nothing else made wrong in the game but that it's merely the
same game in a new package than the original one. My point of view is
based on train of thought that Tolkien's Middle Earth is the most
fascinating fantasy-world because it is the original, and all the other
elf-human-orc-dwarf -fantasy worlds are so heavily influenced by Middle
Earth that I cannot consider them anything else than derivate of
Tolkien's work.
I claim, that very many of the popular story arced series on TV today
are derivatives of Babylon 5. Not only Babylon 5, but Babylon 5 in to a
great extent.
All things can be discussed, but in few cases it's pointless. Babylon 5
really brought something to TV. What were those things? First of all,
story arc, predetermined plot and the idea to make a multi-year series
consistent with itself. Second, CGI-effects were brought to give the
viewer more realistic and emotional scenes that involved things that
were not possible to be really built and shot in Real Life Size. Second
and half: Babylon 5 was the first scifi-series to use Newtonian physics
in space-battles. Third, Babylon 5 fandom was the first one massively
operating on the Internet. Fourth, possibility to interact with series
creator during the show was something that gave people possibility to
feel themselves closer to the show, story and the world. Fifth, and in
this case, minor thing; widescreen format. Babylon 5 was the first one
to do this also.
Very likely some other shows would have brought these things in to this
world if B5 didn't exist. But it does not make this any less
significant; in this timeline, B5 was the one.
And yes, in my lousy list, there certainly are things that you could try
to override with counter examples which definitely can be found. But the
same thing that is valid in the case of Tolkien's elf-dwarf-man-orc
-world, is valid here; Tolkien and JMS were the First Persons to do,
what they did, Right. I know there were ideas of elfs and dwarfs before
Tolkien, and maybe signs of story-arc, CGI, direct and open
creator-fandom-interaction before B5, but B5 was the first to do it right.
[/a long story, and a little bit offtopic]
--
Janne Mikola | janne....@tut.fi | 040-7726656
http://www.students.tut.fi/~mikolaj/
Craig
<methu...@altgeek.org> wrote:
>Conversely, there are some truly stellar TNG episodes, e.g. "The Inner
>Light", "The Measure of a Man", "The Offspring".
I hardly ever watch TNG anymore but my Tivo recorded the episode
"Darmok" the other day. I watched with my two teenage kids just last
night and had a very nice talk about it afterwards.
I remember when I first saw it and it had a real resonance with me.
Very simple episode but with a very important concept about cultural
understandings and misunderstandings.
Craig
Brian Stinson
in 2 separate DVD sets, I call it two seasons.
"Jeffrey Kaplan" <nom...@gordol.org> wrote in message
news:kfe0a294vvr0jmps3...@gordol.org...
> It is alleged that Brian Stinson claimed:
>
>> Battlestar Galactica. Who would've thunk it ?! When I heard they were
>> remaking this, I thought it would be terrible. I couldn't have been more
>> wrong.
>>
>> One thing I've noticed about all the shows listed above is that they all
>> have short seasons, usually 13 episodes. While I always hate the seasons
>
> BSG doesn't have short seasons. Season 1 was short because it started
> halfway through, but season two was at least 20 episodes. SciFi just
> splits their seasons in two to avoid, as much as possible, conflicting
> with the regular networks.
>
> Though season three of BSG is starting in October instead of July this
> year.
>
> --
> Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
> The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
>
> "The election is a necessity. We cannot have a free government without
> elections; and if the rebellion could force us to forgo, or postpone, a
> national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered us."
> - Abraham Lincoln, on refusing to cancel the 1864 election during the
> Civil War despite predictions he'd loose.
>
Paul Harper
<ras...@aol.com> wrote:
>How about a B5 Scripts/Cafe Press set of mugs, posters, etc.????
Well, as someone said over a decade ago:
"I'm being very careful not to let B5 turn into a *franchise*. It's a
story, created in X-parts, for television. This thing will turn into
an industry over my dead body."
Well, with the TV series, (failed) movie, soundtrack CDs, mugs, books,
videos, DVDs, spin-off series and pilots, clothes, script re-prints
and assorted other multitudes of merchandise, it looks as though the
industry is alive and well despite the series being dead for half a
decade.
I guess time changes things, huh?
Paul.
--
. Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"
. A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
. Is there a moron carrot above? Have you replied to it? Are you sure?
. EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically deleted.
mtogg...@hotmail.com
really stand out in my mind, but its been to long for me to remember
them by name: 1) Picard's visit to his brother following his experience
as Locutis; 2) Picard's visit with Q in the "afterlife" and his
opportunity to change his past and save his heart/life but only at the
cost we learn of losing the"self" he knew and cherished; and 3) Riker's
undercover mission to a planet with a police state which finds him
captured, and his sense of reality twisted & tormented in a
particularly hellish psych ward. I think a number of others are worthy
of honorable mention, "The Measure of a Man" among them if that is the
one where Picard represents Data before a Starfleet administrative
hearing to defend Data's personhood and the rights attendant to it.
Cheers,
Martin Toggweiler
Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 11:09:09 +0000 (UTC), Methuselah Jones wrote:
>
> > Conversely, there are some truly stellar TNG episodes, e.g. "The Inner
> > Light", "The Measure of a Man", "The Offspring".
>
> While I think _Inner Light_ was one of the best science fiction
> stories ever broadcasted on television, I can't agree that _Measure of
> a Man_ is worthy of being mentioned along with it as "stellar."
>
> In fact, basically every episode of Trek where the writers tried to
> make a social issue out of "computer rights" ended up feeling like
> didactic tripe.
>
> ("The Doctor" episodes on Voyager, where we got to see how many times
> a computer program could disobey orders and endanger missions before
> somebody reboot it (evidently the threshold was never reached) were
> far worse, of course.)
>
> Like not having a "Wesley," one of the things I really appreciated
> about B5 was that the writer(s) never tried to reduce complex social
> issues down to whether or not a light switch should be allowed to turn
> itself on and off.
>
> --
> Lance Corporal "Hammer" Schultz
> Promote someone else.
Angelika Tobisch
>>>> Let me add to that list, if I may. Non-ensemble cast that "made an
>>>> impression" on me (in no particular order except that's the order I am
>>>> recalling them at this particular time):
>>>>
>>>> Bester, played by Walter Koenig
>>>> Neroon
>>>> Dukhat
>>>> the pre-great machine Dra'al
>>>> Dodger
>>>> Mr. Morden
>>>> "King Arthur" (Michael York)
>>>> Duncan
>>>
>>> I mostly agree. Me, I'd drop Duncan from that list and add William
>>> Edgars, Gen. Franklin, and Anna Sheridan.
>>
>> Refa!
>
> Yes, of course!
>
> And Cartagia, too. (how could I forget them?!?!)
That's what I was thinking ;)
Angelika
Neil B
> Well, I think TNG is the best Star Trek series, but still not as good as
> B5. One example. at first the Klingon culture was interesting but after
> a few hours of "Arrrgh! We are strong! We are warriors! etc" it got
> really old and boring. It also annoys me that about the only times the
> Prime Directive is mentioned is when it's being broken. (That is a flaw
> of all but Enterprise, though.) I liked it a lot when it first came
> out. Didn't like Q or the Q episodes, but there weren't many of those.
You don't like 'Tapestry'..? (The one where Q gives Picard the chance to
change what he sees as one of the mistakes of his younger self, and
witness the consequences.) That's one of my favourite TNG episodes.
> Babylon 5, however, I consider to be the best TV science fiction ever.
All things considered, I would agree.
I thought the new BSG was going to give it a run for its money but the
second season went a bit to pieces, IMO. The last episode was exactly
what was needed to put it back on track, though, and something of a
relief, I can tell you. :)
Neil B
Angelika Tobisch
> Agreed "Inner Light" was superb. Only a handful of other STNG eps
> really stand out in my mind, but its been to long for me to remember
> them by name: 1) Picard's visit to his brother following his experience
> as Locutis;
"Family"
A good one, actually concentrating on consequences of what happened
before for once.
> 2) Picard's visit with Q in the "afterlife" and his
> opportunity to change his past and save his heart/life but only at the
> cost we learn of losing the"self" he knew and cherished;
"Tapestry"
> and 3) Riker's
> undercover mission to a planet with a police state which finds him
> captured, and his sense of reality twisted & tormented in a
> particularly hellish psych ward.
"Frame of Mind"
I'll definitely have to watch this one again as I didn't get it at all
the first time around. Too much surrealism for a 12-year-old, I guess.
Thanks for reminding me.
Angelika
Angelika Tobisch
>> How about a B5 Scripts/Cafe Press set of mugs, posters, etc.????
>
> Well, as someone said over a decade ago:
>
> "I'm being very careful not to let B5 turn into a *franchise*. It's a
> story, created in X-parts, for television. This thing will turn into
> an industry over my dead body."
>
> Well, with the TV series, (failed) movie, soundtrack CDs, mugs, books,
> videos, DVDs, spin-off series and pilots, clothes, script re-prints
> and assorted other multitudes of merchandise, it looks as though the
> industry is alive and well despite the series being dead for half a
> decade.
Scripts, videos, soundtracks and even *gasp* DVDs??? Oh, how the spirit
of the show has been corrupted.
;)
Angelika
Wendy of NJ
again:
STar trek TNG parody episode script:
http://blahtrek.bgprocessing.com/long/lost.shtml
-Wendy
Jeffrey Kaplan
Refa is important to the Londo plotlines, but other than that, he
doesn't have the same resonance with me as the others. In the case of
Gen Franklin and Anna Sheridan, part of their resonance is their
relative importance to the other characters and/or the plot combined
with their brief appearances.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"I will vouch for his character! I saw the entire thing! Because I
was there, I was in it! I was... and they made a very agreeable thump.
Or did I mention that?" (G'Kar, B5 "A Late Delivery From Avalon")
Matt Ion
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:26:30 +0000 (UTC), Hank Arnold
> <ras...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>>How about a B5 Scripts/Cafe Press set of mugs, posters, etc.????
>
>
> Well, as someone said over a decade ago:
>
> "I'm being very careful not to let B5 turn into a *franchise*. It's a
> story, created in X-parts, for television. This thing will turn into
> an industry over my dead body."
>
> Well, with the TV series, (failed) movie, soundtrack CDs, mugs, books,
> videos, DVDs, spin-off series and pilots, clothes, script re-prints
> and assorted other multitudes of merchandise, it looks as though the
> industry is alive and well despite the series being dead for half a
> decade.
It's not dead, it's only resting.
(*sigh* that was TOO obvious...)
Soundy
Methuselah Jones wrote:
> Conversely, there are some truly stellar TNG episodes, e.g. "The Inner
> Light", "The Measure of a Man", "The Offspring".
Hmmm, Spike just re-ran "Measure of a Man" today... and I was reminded
of something that REALLY REALLY bugs me about the episode: either
Picard and Data are just plain dense, or the writers conveniently
forgot the fact that Data is IN Starfleet of his own will TO BEGIN
WITH. If he IS in fact the "property of Starfleet", how did he get in
that position? By CHOOSING to join Starleet and go through the whole
Academy training process himself!
You'd think Data could have come up with this on his own...
Jeffrey Kaplan
Right. Data is +in+ Starfleet, not owned by it. Data is no more the
"property of Starfleet" than Picard is. Starfleet doesn't go around
disecting organic beings...
Note that it's been several years since I've seen the episode in
question.
--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol
"Hmm, I must remember to dust myself once in a while. This is hardly
appropriate." (Draal, B5 "Voices Of Authority")
Wendy of NJ
wrote:
>It is alleged that Soundy claimed:
>
>>
>> Methuselah Jones wrote:
>>
>> > Conversely, there are some truly stellar TNG episodes, e.g. "The Inner
>> > Light", "The Measure of a Man", "The Offspring".
>>
>> Hmmm, Spike just re-ran "Measure of a Man" today... and I was reminded
>> of something that REALLY REALLY bugs me about the episode: either
>> Picard and Data are just plain dense, or the writers conveniently
>> forgot the fact that Data is IN Starfleet of his own will TO BEGIN
>> WITH. If he IS in fact the "property of Starfleet", how did he get in
>> that position? By CHOOSING to join Starleet and go through the whole
>> Academy training process himself!
>
>Right. Data is +in+ Starfleet, not owned by it. Data is no more the
>"property of Starfleet" than Picard is. Starfleet doesn't go around
>disecting organic beings...
No, but the US Army (as an example) has the attitude that their
soldiers are their "property" and have (in the past for sure) "taken
certain liberties" with the bodies of their soldiers without informed
consent. Maybe the writers were trying to make that point -- once you
join up "we own your ass"
-Wendy
Matt Ion
I don't think the writers were that clever - if that was actually a
point they wanted to make, you'd think the fact that Data joined
Starfleet himself would have been brought up. It wasn't - which makes
it feel a lot more like a conveniently forgotten fact.
krueg...@hotmail.com
Soundy wrote:
> Hmmm, Spike just re-ran "Measure of a Man" today... and I was reminded
> of something that REALLY REALLY bugs me about the episode: either
> Picard and Data are just plain dense, or the writers conveniently
> forgot the fact that Data is IN Starfleet of his own will TO BEGIN
> WITH. If he IS in fact the "property of Starfleet", how did he get in
> that position? By CHOOSING to join Starleet and go through the whole
> Academy training process himself!
>
> You'd think Data could have come up with this on his own...
No one ever questioned whether Data could choose or not. In fact, his
ability to do so was one of the many things they so desperately wanted
to duplicate.
The question was: did Data have equal status in the Federation society?
That's why the episode ended up (between Picard and Guinan) discussing
not mechanics, but slavery.
Matt Ion
I just found it... I dunno, lame I guess... that Data never brought up
the point that he was in Starfleet of his own choosing, and he should be
able to LEAVE Starfleet of his own choosing (remember that the JAG ruled
he was not allowed to resign). It's an important point that the writers
either ignored or overlooked to make their 'bigger' point.
Rob Perkins
> I just found it... I dunno, lame I guess... that Data never brought up
> the point that he was in Starfleet of his own choosing,
Data was in Starfleet because Gene Roddenberry wanted a mechanical man
on his Enterprise. Everything else in that ep moved at the speed of plot.
Speaking of reruns, and recognizing that there are a few Whedon fans
around here, I understand the WB is going dark this Sunday night. I read
in Variety's AvantGo channel that they're reairing the pilot eps for
Angel and Buffy, starting at 6 Eastern (and presumably 6 Pacific)
Rob
Bill
> No, but the US Army (as an example) has the attitude that their
> soldiers are their "property" and have (in the past for sure) "taken
> certain liberties" with the bodies of their soldiers without informed
> consent. Maybe the writers were trying to make that point -- once you
> join up "we own your ass"
Just for clarification, *all* the services have a "we own your ass"
policy. I served in the Air Force and, on day one of basic training, I
was told by the biggest, meanest person I have ever met, "For the next
six weeks, I own your ass."
Bill (who misses messages like "S'Damn good job" in store windows)
Amy Guskin
(in article <4go1a3F...@individual.net>):
Ah, they were both such good pilots! Definitely worth revisiting.
Amy
Chris Adams
>Speaking of reruns, and recognizing that there are a few Whedon fans
>around here, I understand the WB is going dark this Sunday night. I read
>in Variety's AvantGo channel that they're reairing the pilot eps for
>Angel and Buffy, starting at 6 Eastern (and presumably 6 Pacific)
I don't see anything like that in my local WB listings, nor on the main
WB website. Are you sure that is this Sunday? I didn't think the
switch was for another couple of months.
--
Chris Adams <cma...@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
Mel
Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Rob Perkins <rper...@usa.net> said:
>
>>Speaking of reruns, and recognizing that there are a few Whedon fans
>>around here, I understand the WB is going dark this Sunday night. I read
>>in Variety's AvantGo channel that they're reairing the pilot eps for
>>Angel and Buffy, starting at 6 Eastern (and presumably 6 Pacific)
>
>
> I don't see anything like that in my local WB listings, nor on the main
> WB website. Are you sure that is this Sunday? I didn't think the
> switch was for another couple of months.
>
I think it's in September. The article is posted over on
alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer.
Mel
pat...@wintertime.com
Mel <melb...@uci.net> wrote:
>
>I think it's in September. The article is posted over on
>alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer.
Indeed, it's September 17th. The CW begins operating on September 18th.
Patty
Rob Perkins
!!!
My bad. And here I was gonna Tivo it.
Rob, who actually has a Dish DVR and isn't impressed anymore