ATTN: JMS Yet another DVD question
Hank Tiffany
DVD, crusade is still in "being considered" limbo, and rumors are
flying thick & fast on Jeremiah.
What about the other B5 movies? I suppose Call To Arms might
reasonably go in a Crusade set to bulk it up but that still
leaves Thirdspace and River Of Souls. Are there any whispers/hints
you can give on the possibility of them finding their way to DVD?
Hank
--
Hitler, he only had one ball/Goering, had two but they were small
Himmler, was very simmlar/But poor old Goebbels had no balls at all
Jms at B5
>DVD, crusade is still in "being considered" limbo, and rumors are
>flying thick & fast on Jeremiah.
>
It's my understanding that if the sales continue as they have for B5, they will
indeed release Crusade on DVD.
I read on the net -- was never informed by MGM -- that Jeremiah will be coming
to DVD in January or February of next year, and season 2 begins September 19th
on Showtime.
>What about the other B5 movies? I suppose Call To Arms might
>reasonably go in a Crusade set to bulk it up but that still
>leaves Thirdspace and River Of Souls. Are there any whispers/hints
>you can give on the possibility of them finding their way to DVD?
>
If things continue, I think it very likely from what they've said.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)
Michael J Wise
> It's my understanding that if the sales continue as they have for B5,
> they will indeed release Crusade on DVD.
Yeay!
[Dreams of the supplimental information....]
> I read on the net -- was never informed by MGM -- that Jeremiah will
> be coming to DVD in January or February of next year, and season 2
> begins September 19th on Showtime.
" Hmmm.[tm]
> If things continue, I think it very likely from what they've said.
Yeay!
Aloha mai Nai`a!
--
"Please have your Internet License http://kapu.net/~mjwise/
and Usenet Registration handy..."
C W CHAN
>>OK, it looks like B5 is gonna go the distance(all 5 seasons) on
>>DVD, crusade is still in "being considered" limbo, and rumors are
>>flying thick & fast on Jeremiah.
>>
>It's my understanding that if the sales continue as they have for B5, they will
>indeed release Crusade on DVD.
Would now be a good time to prod them towards continuing Crusade?
It would stand a better chance of suceeding now when they have
evidence of the popularity of the universe rather than two
years down the track.
Either keeping the episodes already made or redoing from scratch is
fine by me, I'm not fussy :)
Chuen Chan c.c...@uq.NOSPAM.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------------
'You can prove anything you want by coldly logical reason - if you pick
the proper postulates... Postulates are based on assumption and adhered
to by faith. Nothing in the Universe can shake them.'
Gregory Powell in Robots series by I. Asimov
Chris Adams
>Either keeping the episodes already made or redoing from scratch is
>fine by me, I'm not fussy :)
What about keeping the episodes already made as season 1, and then doing
5 _additional_ seasons? Let any cast changes be eased in at the start
of season 2, shifting around any necessary story lines - that could take
a few episodes. Expand a little on a part of the arc or two, add a
"back story" non-arc episode or two to fill in on any new characters,
and it should work.
I would just be afraid that any Crusade continuance would be limited by
the fact that a network would know that there are only 4 seasons to go
at most, so they wouldn't get as much out of it as some other TV series.
--
Chris Adams <cma...@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
jehanne
"C W CHAN" wrote:
> Would now be a good time to prod them towards continuing Crusade?
> It would stand a better chance of suceeding now when they have
> evidence of the popularity of the universe rather than two
> years down the track.
Good grief!
Let it rest in peace.
jehanne
DodoBrd16
>If things continue, I think it very likely from what they've said.
I'm having a great day today and this just adds onto it! Thank you!
Third space on DVD, oh yeah...!
DodoBrd16
>
>Let it rest in peace.
I'm willing to let it rest in peace, just as long as the next B5 spin off has
Galen played by Peter Woodward.
Dont get me wrong, the rest of the cast of Crusade was great, but Mr. Woodward
was fan flippin tastic.
macthe...@yahoo.com
> Once upon a time, C W CHAN <zzcw...@fox.uq.net.au> said:
> >Either keeping the episodes already made or redoing from scratch is
> >fine by me, I'm not fussy :)
>
> What about keeping the episodes already made as season 1, and then doing
> 5 _additional_ seasons?
As a minimum, I think you'd still need to film "To the Ends of the
Earth" and "End of the Line" and include them in the first season.
The first explains the uniform change, and the second is the Season 1
finale. Plus, both are *fantastic* scripts. These scripts would be
hard to do, given the extent of the CGI required, but I *hope* they'd
make real showpieces out of them. It'd be the shot in the arm that
the series and fans need right now.
> Let any cast changes be eased in at the start
> of season 2,
I hope these could be kept to a minimum.
> ...shifting around any necessary story lines - that could take
> a few episodes. Expand a little on a part of the arc or two, add a
> "back story" non-arc episode or two to fill in on any new characters,
> and it should work.
>
> I would just be afraid that any Crusade continuance would be limited by
> the fact that a network would know that there are only 4 seasons to go
> at most, so they wouldn't get as much out of it as some other TV series.
Never thought of that. Wonder if it made B5 a hard sell.
KoshN
Mac Breck
news:w5kUa.120264$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "C W CHAN" wrote:
>
> > Would now be a good time to prod them towards continuing Crusade?
I can't resist.
Them being Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production? Yes. Couldn't
hurt.
> > It would stand a better chance of suceeding now when they have
> > evidence of the popularity of the universe rather than two
> > years down the track.
Yes. There is value in striking while the iron is hot, as opposed to when
it's stone cold.
> Good grief!
>
> Let it rest in peace.
Good grief, I disagree!
--
Mac Breck
http://www.scifi.com/babylon5/
http://www.scifi.com/crusade/
http://www.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/1/5/1521 (Brimstone)
Dan Dassow
> "jehanne" <jehann...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:w5kUa.120264$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "C W CHAN" wrote:
> >
> > > Would now be a good time to prod them towards continuing Crusade?
>
> I can't resist.
>
> Them being Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production? Yes. Couldn't
> hurt.
>
>
> > > It would stand a better chance of suceeding now when they have
> > > evidence of the popularity of the universe rather than two
> > > years down the track.
>
> Yes. There is value in striking while the iron is hot, as opposed to when
> it's stone cold.
>
Much as I would like to see Crusade revived,
TNT's malfeasance in the handling of Crusade
has made a business case for its revival
extremely risky. I suspect that no one at
Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production
will serious consider reviving Crusade
unless DVD sales for B5 Season 5 and Crusade
are at the same level as Seasons 1 and 2.
I'm afraid we will have to wait and see.
Dan Dassow
jehanne
"Mac Breck" wrote:
> Yes. There is value in striking while the iron is hot, as opposed to when
> it's stone cold.
I think the iron is pretty darn frigid at this point. It's been 4 years,
people!
I know we're used to B5 accomplishing the impossible, but a revival of
Crusade, with the original cast, strains believeability.
Futhermore, I have enough confidence in JMS to know when the right time to
return to the story is, and not to do it too soon or too late. He's the one
to be checking the temperature of the iron.
(and I thought -I- was a hopeless optimist)
jehanne
Michael J Wise
> I think the iron is pretty darn frigid at this point. It's been 4
> years, people!
Star Trek ceased filming in sixty .. what, eight?
There it sat for over ten years.
And while "Nemesis" may have been a disappointment to some, others
bothered to go out and watch it, and considered their money well-spent.
Aloha mai Nai`a.
Wendy of NJ
Michael J Wise wrote:
> jehanne wrote:
>
>
>>I think the iron is pretty darn frigid at this point. It's been 4
>>years, people!
>
>
> Star Trek ceased filming in sixty .. what, eight?
> There it sat for over ten years.
>
> And while "Nemesis" may have been a disappointment to some, others
> bothered to go out and watch it, and considered their money well-spent.
Not me! But I bought the DVD anyway, because my kid wanted to see it,
and because I have every other bloody Trek thing as it is.
>
> Aloha mai Nai`a.
Jan
>Star Trek ceased filming in sixty .. what, eight?
>There it sat for over ten years.
Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75. Not to
mention *many* other fits and starts and rumors and feelers until The Motion
Picture came out in '79. It wasn't until '93 that The Next Generation, the
first 'spinoff' actually came about.
Yeah, it's a shame that Crusade never even really got to find it's audience.
And perhaps for a short time it might have been possible to revive with it's
original crew. As every month passed that became increasingly unlikely until
the idea of it being resurrected in anything remotely resembling the original
show now is remote to hundreds of decimal places. Some people just insist on
believing six impossible things before breakfast, I guess.
If they want to keep writing, though, that's fine with me. At least they're
letting WB know that there's still some market out there for more B5. The only
thing I'm a little concerned about is that there's already been pouting and
whining that what *has* come out wasn't Crusade and therefor was 'bad' As
Delenn would say, though, "They're wrong, of course".
Jan
Check out my auctions of rare Dark Shadows and Babylon 5 scripts and
memorabilia at http://tinyurl.com/bhkk
Michael J Wise
> Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75.
Mmmm. But the only one I can really remember is the one where they
transmorgified Larry Niven's KnownSpace epic, "The Soft Weapon" into
a story in the Trek universe.
Now if someone would just do a BigScreen adaptation of RingWorld....
Or, heaven forbid, a series on the ManKzin wars, or just about anything
else set in the KnownSpace universe.
Yes (assuming it was decent), I'd pay money to see that.
> Yeah, it's a shame that Crusade never even really got to find it's audience.
Oh, I disagree; I think it well and truly found an audience.
The problem was not lack of an audience, but arrogance on the part of
those who were in a position to terminate it because they got into a
pissing match with the guy who provably knew what the audience ("That
would be us.") wanted.
> Some people just insist on believing six impossible things before
> breakfast, I guess.
Milliways, here I come.
Aloha mai Nai`a!
Pelzo63
Or, heaven forbid, a series on the ManKzin wars, or just about anything
else set in the KnownSpace universe.
i was JUST discussing this very subject in a movie chat on AOL. i deeply want
to see world of ptaavs, but given hollywoods normal treatment of teeps.....i'd
only want joe to do it!
...Chris
Joseph S. Powell, III
"Jms at B5" <jms...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030725013407...@mb-m26.aol.com...
> >OK, it looks like B5 is gonna go the distance(all 5 seasons) on
> >DVD, crusade is still in "being considered" limbo, and rumors are
> >flying thick & fast on Jeremiah.
> >
>
> It's my understanding that if the sales continue as they have for B5, they
will
> indeed release Crusade on DVD.
>
Ahh, but wouldn't it be nice if Crusade could have been finished!
Was a tech raid on the Vorlon homeworld ever mentioned (although such a
thing would be costly in blood, even if it could succeed!)?
Well, no chances of the series ever going back into production - too bad.
macthe...@yahoo.com
> "Mac Breck" <macb...@access995.com> wrote in message news:<cDwUa.586$603....@iad-read.news.verio.net>...
> > "jehanne" <jehann...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:w5kUa.120264$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > >
> > > "C W CHAN" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Would now be a good time to prod them towards continuing Crusade?
> >
> > I can't resist.
> >
> > Them being Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production? Yes. Couldn't
> > hurt.
> >
> >
> > > > It would stand a better chance of suceeding now when they have
> > > > evidence of the popularity of the universe rather than two
> > > > years down the track.
> >
> > Yes. There is value in striking while the iron is hot, as opposed to when
> > it's stone cold.
> >
>
> Much as I would like to see Crusade revived,
> TNT's malfeasance in the handling of Crusade
> has made a business case for its revival
> extremely risky.
In business, as in life, there is risk. Warner Brothers Domestic
Television Production is too freakin' timid.
> I suspect that no one at
> Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production
> will serious consider reviving Crusade
> unless DVD sales for B5 Season 5 and Crusade
> are at the same level as Seasons 1 and 2.
> I'm afraid we will have to wait and see.
The longer they wait, the less likely it will be possible, and the
less likely it will succeed. B5 is NOT Trek. TOS ended in 1969, and
the first movie was in 1979, but they did NOT "re-start" TOS. The did
the spinoff TNG in 1987. We're talking about a Crusade "re-start."
We've got to get Crusade re-started (picking up right where they left
off), while the actors still look close to how they looked in 1999.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> "Mac Breck" wrote:
>
> > Yes. There is value in striking while the iron is hot, as opposed to when
> > it's stone cold.
>
> I think the iron is pretty darn frigid at this point.
And people are *still* talking about it, *still* want to see it
re-started *four years later*, even after all the sabotage, stupidity,
ham-handed fumbling and discouragement.
> It's been 4 years, people!
Yes, it has been four damned long years, and people are still coming
back with the line that we'll likely have to wait six *more* years,
and then they bring up Trek TOS. They did NOT re-start Trek TOS.
Life's uncertain, people. You have to go for it while you can. You
can't always wait and see. Sometimes, there is no tomorrow.
> I know we're used to B5 accomplishing the impossible, but a revival of
> Crusade, with the original cast, strains believeability.
Yours, not mine. Hope is an awful thing. It's the birthday candle
that re-lights, *no matter what*.
> Futhermore, I have enough confidence in JMS to know when the right time to
> return to the story is, and not to do it too soon or too late. He's the one
> to be checking the temperature of the iron.
See above. Life's uncertain.
> (and I thought -I- was a hopeless optimist)
Far from it.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> Jan wrote:
snip
> > Yeah, it's a shame that Crusade never even really got to find it's audience.
>
> Oh, I disagree; I think it well and truly found an audience.
True.
> The problem was not lack of an audience, but arrogance on the part of
> those who were in a position to terminate it because they got into a
> pissing match with the guy who provably knew what the audience ("That
> would be us.") wanted.
The problem was that we, the sci-fi audience, did not sufficiently
overlap with their Wrasslin'/Westerns/Sports audience. This was
discovered during B5 Season 5. It looks like they started the Crusade
"Notes" to turn Crusade into something that their
Wrasslin'/Westerns/Sports audience *would* watch, and then when JMS
wouldn't budge, they used the pissing match as an *excuse* to get the
show off their channel. Then, they held onto the rights out of spite.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> "Jms at B5" <jms...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030725013407...@mb-m26.aol.com...
> > >OK, it looks like B5 is gonna go the distance(all 5 seasons) on
> > >DVD, crusade is still in "being considered" limbo, and rumors are
> > >flying thick & fast on Jeremiah.
> > >
> >
> > It's my understanding that if the sales continue as they have for B5, they
> will
> > indeed release Crusade on DVD.
> >
>
>
> Ahh, but wouldn't it be nice if Crusade could have been finished!
Definitely.
> Well, no chances of the series ever going back into production - too bad.
There *is* no chance of the series ever going back into production
**IF** everybody thinks as you do, and keeps saying things like this.
"Our thoughts form the universe, they always matter."
-- G'Kar to Zack in Babylon 5:"The Hour of the Wolf"
> > >What about the other B5 movies? I suppose Call To Arms might
> > >reasonably go in a Crusade set...
Yeah, maybe they might put it on as the lead-in to "Racing the Night."
Then *somebody* will have got things right. Second thought, I'd put
it as:
A Call to Arms
War Zone
Racing the Night
...and the rest in JMS's Sci-Fi order.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> Michael J Wise wrote:
>
> >Star Trek ceased filming in sixty .. what, eight?
> >There it sat for over ten years.
>
> Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75.
We're talking about "real" series with live actors onscreen, not
amimation.
> Not to
> mention *many* other fits and starts and rumors and feelers until The Motion
> Picture came out in '79. It wasn't until '93 that The Next Generation, the
> first 'spinoff' actually came about.
TNG was Sept. 1987 to May 1994. Where did you get '93?
> Yeah, it's a shame that Crusade never even really got to find it's audience.
> And perhaps for a short time it might have been possible to revive with it's
> original crew. As every month passed that became increasingly unlikely until
> the idea of it being resurrected in anything remotely resembling the original
> show now is remote to hundreds of decimal places.
They still look the same. Nobody has a long term gig. Looks like JMS
is out of Jeremiah. Daniel Dae Kim is the closest to having a long
term gig, and what exactly is the normal lifespan of a redshirt,
anyway?
The more people who repeat the things you've said, the less likely
there will be any re-start.
> Some people just insist on
> believing six impossible things before breakfast, I guess.
And some people just like to give up.
> If they want to keep writing, though, that's fine with me.
Whew, I'm so relieved.
> At least they're
> letting WB know that there's still some market out there for more B5.
Yeah, at least somebody is doing the work. I hope you'll take the
time to watch Crusade (or whatever the re-start is called) if *they*
succeed.
> The only
> thing I'm a little concerned about is that there's already been pouting and
> whining that what *has* come out wasn't Crusade and therefor was 'bad'
What??? That's not why it was bad. TLaDiS was bad all on its own.
It was the ST5/Highlander 2 of B5 movies.
> As Delenn would say, though, "They're wrong, of course".
Good grief. Delenn often lied, and I believe was lying at the time of
that quote.
KoshN - "You do not understand."
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> We've got to get Crusade re-started (picking up right where they left
> off), while the actors still look close to how they looked in 1999.
Honestly, I think some people would take a gun and point it to Joe's head
and say "Revive Crusade or else..."
This is ridiculousness strained to the point of stupidity...
jehanne
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes, it has been four damned long years, and people are still coming
> back with the line that we'll likely have to wait six *more* years,
> and then they bring up Trek TOS. They did NOT re-start Trek TOS.
> Life's uncertain, people. You have to go for it while you can. You
> can't always wait and see. Sometimes, there is no tomorrow.
>
> > Futhermore, I have enough confidence in JMS to know when the right time
to
> > return to the story is, and not to do it too soon or too late. He's the
one
> > to be checking the temperature of the iron.
>
> See above. Life's uncertain.
So you'd like to fore JMS to revive Cruade against his will, if that's what
it takes? 'Cause that seems to be your attitude.
jehanne
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >Star Trek ceased filming in sixty .. what, eight?
> > >There it sat for over ten years.
> >
> > Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75.
>
> We're talking about "real" series with live actors onscreen, not
> amimation.
>
>
> > Not to
> > mention *many* other fits and starts and rumors and feelers until The
Motion
> > Picture came out in '79. It wasn't until '93 that The Next Generation,
the
> > first 'spinoff' actually came about.
One of the things that should be noted is that "ST" wan't a stunning.in
first-run broadast. It -barely- lasted three seasons, and it was only really
in syndication that it's popularity began to take off. So we had fits and
starts for a -long- time. There was the animated series, of dubious fame,
and the aborted "Phase II" revival series which got transmogrified into a
mediocre movie; then ST2 when Leonard Nimoy decided to leave the franchise;
then a mediocre ST3.
So finally, in 1986-87 -- more than 15 years after TOS went off the air, did
we get ST4 - with plans for more movies.... and TNG, which is arguably
superior to to the original ST in a number of ways. That's 15 years of
waiting for the clouds to part.
If -they- could wait, so can we.
So mac... go reread the Centauri Prime novels, or watch your tapes again.
And trust JMS to do what is best for the story.
jehanne
Wendy of NJ
seen any artist renditions that match what I've formed in my head for
Nessus.
Ringworld I think is too big a story for a 2-hr treatment, but
definitely a batch of the Beowulf Schaeffer short stories would be fun
to watch.
I'd actually like to watch a film based on the novel where they find the
Slaver in the statis suit at the bottom of the ocean. Although they may
just turn it into a horror flick, which would suck.
Or even Protector....
macthe...@yahoo.com
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > We've got to get Crusade re-started (picking up right where they left
> > off), while the actors still look close to how they looked in 1999.
>
> Honestly, I think some people would take a gun and point it to Joe's head
> and say "Revive Crusade or else..."
Who's talking about Joe? I'm talking about Warner Brothers Domestic
Television Production, and I'm not holding a gun to anybody's head.
I'm just expressing an interest in the continuation of the Crusade
(however renamed) storyline.
> This is ridiculousness strained to the point of stupidity...
I'm sorry you feel that way.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So mac... go reread the Centauri Prime novels, or watch your tapes again.
Yeah, the individual can have no positive effect on the process,
right? So, showing Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production
that there is sustained interest in seeing Crusade (however renamed)
re-start, is useless in getting that show re-started? I disagree.
> And trust JMS to do what is best for the story.
JMS isn't in charge of it. Warner Brothers Domestic Television
Production owns it. JMS himself has said "Thing is, of course,
there's zip that I can *do* that would achieve that result." (the
result being getting Crusade back in production).
Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production can do more than sit
idly by. They can take a more pro-active approach, and instigate
matters.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> 'Cause that seems to be your attitude.
My "attitude" is one on not accepting defeat, not giving up,
especially when it looks like the planets may be aligning in our favor
*for a change*, with JMS being a little less busy (if he doesn't go
back to Jeremiah/MGM, and the dust up with Top Cow), and nobody else
seeming like they're going to be on any long term gigs.
"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."
-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907
"...and keeps on acomin'." is the hard part.
KoshN
Dan Dassow
> dan_d...@my-deja.com (Dan Dassow) wrote in message news:<b1af4ff.03072...@posting.google.com>...
> > "Mac Breck" <macb...@access995.com> wrote in message news:<cDwUa.586$603....@iad-read.news.verio.net>...
> > > "jehanne" <jehann...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:w5kUa.120264$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > > >
> > > > "C W CHAN" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Would now be a good time to prod them towards continuing Crusade?
> > >
> > > I can't resist.
> > >
> > > Them being Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production? Yes. Couldn't
> > > hurt.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > It would stand a better chance of suceeding now when they have
> > > > > evidence of the popularity of the universe rather than two
> > > > > years down the track.
> > >
> > > Yes. There is value in striking while the iron is hot, as opposed to when
> > > it's stone cold.
> > >
> >
> > Much as I would like to see Crusade revived,
> > TNT's malfeasance in the handling of Crusade
> > has made a business case for its revival
> > extremely risky.
>
> In business, as in life, there is risk. Warner Brothers Domestic
> Television Production is too freakin' timid.
Do the marketing and financial research.
Produce a well thought out and written
business plan that demonstrates
a 10% or better rate of return and back
this up with sound research. Unless you
can do this, no finance person within
Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production
would let such a project go forward.
>
> > I suspect that no one at
> > Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production
> > will serious consider reviving Crusade
> > unless DVD sales for B5 Season 5 and Crusade
> > are at the same level as Seasons 1 and 2.
> > I'm afraid we will have to wait and see.
>
> The longer they wait, the less likely it will be possible, and the
> less likely it will succeed. B5 is NOT Trek. TOS ended in 1969, and
> the first movie was in 1979, but they did NOT "re-start" TOS. The did
> the spinoff TNG in 1987. We're talking about a Crusade "re-start."
>
> We've got to get Crusade re-started (picking up right where they left
> off), while the actors still look close to how they looked in 1999.
>
> KoshN
Let's consider this possible business model:
Produce new episodes of Crusade on a subscription
basis with subscribers receiving a DVD as part
of the subscription of $10 per episode.
(1) Would you be willing and able to pay $10 per episode
to ensure that Crusade is re-started?
(2) Do you believe that you would be able to convince
299,999 other people to pay $10 per episode
for at least five episodes to ensure that
Crusade is re-started?
(3) If so, get started now. Once you accomplished
this objective for at least 5 episodes with at
least 300,000 contractually obligated subscribers,
Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production
may be interested in reviving Crusade.
Dan Dassow
The Nuclear Marine
news:b7d8dca7.03072...@posting.google.com:
> janmsc...@aol.com (Jan) wrote in message
> news:<20030726180434...@mb-m19.aol.com>...
>> Michael J Wise wrote:
>>
>> >Star Trek ceased filming in sixty .. what, eight?
>> >There it sat for over ten years.
>>
>> Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75.
>
> We're talking about "real" series with live actors onscreen, not
> amimation.
Yes, I'd forgotten how "Grave of the Fireflies" was less "real" than
Hogan's Heroes in its portrayel of WWII events. That it has live actors
in it does not make it better. Any more than making a movie out of a
series makes it better.
Hmm, the level of sophistication people place on things: comics, cartoon
series, animated movies, tv movies, tv mini-series, plays, tv shows,
theatrical movies. Seems with hollywood and people in general, the
"lower" projects you work on at the moment define your lot in HW.
OTOH, ya know, an animated series for Crusade would be pretty cool. I'm
sure WB would give the rights to a Japanese company then import it if it
does well. Worst that could happen is if they butcher it.
Wonder if jms would be willing to turn in (with compensation, natch) the
5 year rough draft he had on Crusade for anybody willing to produce it?
I recall a B5 anime series that went nowhere so this might not help.
Nuke
--
Listen to the Black Atheist Avenger: www.InfidelGuy.com
It's been lonely in the saddle since my horse died.
Prison Sex - Silent but Violent
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> My "attitude" is one on not accepting defeat, not giving up,
> especially when it looks like the planets may be aligning in our favor
> *for a change*, with JMS being a little less busy (if he doesn't go
> back to Jeremiah/MGM, and the dust up with Top Cow), and nobody else
> seeming like they're going to be on any long term gigs.
When have we been defeated, huh?
We got FIVE YEARS.... FIVE YEARS mac.... of one of the best stories EVER
told for television, and here you are whining like a fifth grader who didn't
get a gold star on his A+ paper.
Crusade was a bonus, mac... it's not something we're entitled to, just
because it happened to get aborted. It only happened because WB inquired,
and JMS set out to do it in part because he wanted a change of pace after
the rigors of the B5 arc.
Y'know, sometimes I wish JMS had just said, at the end of the fifth season
of B5: "That was the story I wanted to tell, and now it's done. And now for
something completely different..." and just moved on from the universe
entirely, 'cause the story was told and done.
Why do I sometime wish that? 'Cause then we wouln't have little brats like
you fussing now because you only got one slice of cake for dessert instead
of five.
I'm really *pissed* off by your attitude, in case you can't tell, so for the
interests of everyone, I suggest we both drop this battle, 'cause it doesn't
look like we're ever going to see eye to eye.
jehanne
macthe...@yahoo.com
Where are you getting that I'm talking about JMS? I'm talking about
Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production. *They* have the keys.
JMS is just the guy who'd like to drive the car (i.e. write/produce
in that universe) *if* they handed him the keys again.
JMS has said:
"Which goes to the note some people post asking why I don't write in
this area
anymore, do I not care about it. Yeah, of course I do, but WB owns
it, and if
I went otf and started writing stories in that universe I'd be
infringing their
ownership."
Does that sound like somebody for whom writing in the Crusade (however
renamed) storyline would be against his will? I don't think so. If
they gave him the keys and left him alone to tell the story the way he
wanted, I think he'd be happy to re-start Crusade. I, and I suspect a
lot of others, would certainly be happy to watch the show and buy the
resultant DVD season sets. It'd be a refreshing change from the
sci-fi we're getting on TV today.
KoshN
jehanne
'Cause JMS would have to be an integral part of any legitimate revival of
Crusade; he's the brains and the creative talent behind the story.
> JMS has said:
> "Which goes to the note some people post asking why I don't write in
> this area
> anymore, do I not care about it. Yeah, of course I do, but WB owns
> it, and if
> I went otf and started writing stories in that universe I'd be
> infringing their
> ownership."
>
> Does that sound like somebody for whom writing in the Crusade (however
> renamed) storyline would be against his will? I don't think so.
I don't think we can tell from that post -what- his attitude towards writing
"Crusade."
jehanne
Pelzo63
Slaver in the statis suit at the bottom of the ocean. Although they may
that's world of ptaavs, the one i mentioned in my other thread as "only if joe
handles it!"
...Chris
macthe...@yahoo.com
I'm an engineer, not an MBA.
So, when somebody pitches an idea for a show to Warner Brothers, who
does the research, the people pitching the show? Or is it Warner
Brothers?
Has any show ever been done this way? If Babylon 5 had needed this
kind of financing, would we have it today? Doubtful.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> macthe...@yahoo.com (macthe...@yahoo.com) wrote in
> news:b7d8dca7.03072...@posting.google.com:
>
> > janmsc...@aol.com (Jan) wrote in message
> > news:<20030726180434...@mb-m19.aol.com>...
> >> Michael J Wise wrote:
> >>
> >> >Star Trek ceased filming in sixty .. what, eight?
> >> >There it sat for over ten years.
> >>
> >> Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75.
> >
> > We're talking about "real" series with live actors onscreen, not
> > amimation.
>
> Yes, I'd forgotten how "Grave of the Fireflies" was less "real" than
> Hogan's Heroes in its portrayel of WWII events. That it has live actors
> in it does not make it better. Any more than making a movie out of a
> series makes it better.
Real series being ones in which actors looks count, or are a limiting
factor.
> Hmm, the level of sophistication people place on things: comics, cartoon
> series, animated movies, tv movies, tv mini-series, plays, tv shows,
> theatrical movies. Seems with hollywood and people in general, the
> "lower" projects you work on at the moment define your lot in HW.
>
> OTOH, ya know, an animated series for Crusade would be pretty cool. I'm
> sure WB would give the rights to a Japanese company then import it if it
> does well. Worst that could happen is if they butcher it.
I seem to recall a recent JMS post in which he described animation as
a step down, and a hellish work environment. I'd look it up on
JMSNews if I could get it to do a search right now. Unfortunately it
appears to be having a heart attack. After trying to do a search on
"animation" and getting lots of Server Not Found errors, it just
returned 99 hits, none of which have the word "animation" in them.
ARGH!
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > My "attitude" is one on not accepting defeat, not giving up,
> > especially when it looks like the planets may be aligning in our favor
> > *for a change*, with JMS being a little less busy (if he doesn't go
> > back to Jeremiah/MGM, and the dust up with Top Cow), and nobody else
> > seeming like they're going to be on any long term gigs.
>
> When have we been defeated, huh?
>
> We got FIVE YEARS.... FIVE YEARS mac.... of one of the best stories EVER
> told for television, and here you are whining like a fifth grader who didn't
> get a gold star on his A+ paper.
You couldn't possibly be more off base. If anybody's coming off like
a whining fifth grader here, it's you. Somebody doesn't agree with
you, so you come back with demeaning remarks.
> Crusade was a bonus, mac... it's not something we're entitled to,
So who saying it's something we're entitled to? It's not me. I'm
just saying it's something I'd like to see finished, and that a window
of opportunity may be opening for the first time in a long time.
Other people seem determined to ignore that a window of opportinity
may be opening. It certainly looks like they've given up.
> just
> because it happened to get aborted. It only happened because WB inquired,
> and JMS set out to do it in part because he wanted a change of pace after
> the rigors of the B5 arc.
>
> Y'know, sometimes I wish JMS had just said, at the end of the fifth season
> of B5: "That was the story I wanted to tell, and now it's done. And now for
> something completely different..." and just moved on from the universe
> entirely, 'cause the story was told and done.
In hindsight, so do I.
> Why do I sometime wish that? 'Cause then we wouln't have little brats like
> you fussing now because you only got one slice of cake for dessert instead
> of five.
First of all, I'm really pissed by your tone, your condescension.
Second, I don't link the two shows at the hip like you do. Crusade's
a separate show. It isn't desert on the B5 meal. It's separate.
> I'm really *pissed* off by your attitude, in case you can't tell, so for the
> interests of everyone, I suggest we both drop this battle, 'cause it doesn't
> look like we're ever going to see eye to eye.
Fine by me. I've had all the condescension and wise-ass remarks I can
tolerate from you.
KoshN
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "jehanne" wrote:
> > Crusade was a bonus, mac... it's not something we're entitled to,
>
> So who saying it's something we're entitled to? It's not me. I'm
> just saying it's something I'd like to see finished, and that a window
> of opportunity may be opening for the first time in a long time.
Yeah, and you bring it up every chance you get. It's damn annoying, and I
feel like saying so.
What gets to me is that you haven't *yet* acknowledged how astronomically
small the chances are.
> > Why do I sometime wish that? 'Cause then we wouln't have little brats
like
> > you fussing now because you only got one slice of cake for dessert
instead
> > of five.
>
> First of all, I'm really pissed by your tone, your condescension.
Fair enoungh. I've been suitably obnoxious.
> Second, I don't link the two shows at the hip like you do. Crusade's
> a separate show. It isn't desert on the B5 meal. It's separate.
JMS, 7 Apr 2002:
">We thought we had Crusade but we didn't.
>We thought we had Rangers but we didn't.
>
>We don't even have another telemovie.
>
>So JMS. What do we have but soured memories?
The five year Babylon 5 story that I set out to tell in the first place.
I said it before: that was my main goal going into this, to get B5 on the
air
and tell that story. Everything else is lagniappe."
> > I'm really *pissed* off by your attitude, in case you can't tell, so for
the
> > interests of everyone, I suggest we both drop this battle, 'cause it
doesn't
> > look like we're ever going to see eye to eye.
>
> Fine by me. I've had all the condescension and wise-ass remarks I can
> tolerate from you.
Spoken like a true Vorlon.
jehanne
Wendy of NJ
greyeyed
> mention *many* other fits and starts and rumors and feelers until The Motion
> Picture came out in '79. It wasn't until '93 that The Next Generation, the
> first 'spinoff' actually came about.
>
Not to be too fanish, but Next Gen. premiered in '87, ending in '94.
You may be thinking of DS9, which I believe premiered in '93. (If
not, I'm sure someone will correct me.)
It does seem that a number of major sci-fi movie series will be ending
in the near future, which may make way for an ambitious B5 project
(perhaps a trilogy). The Matrix movies and Lord of the Rings movies
end this year, and Star Wars ends in 2005. ("Terminator" leaves a
possibility of more, but who knows if that will ever happen?) It
seems Trek's Next Gen. films are over, although I'm sure they'll try
to patch some characters from different shows into a film at some
point...which seems like a gimmick rather than a film.
The only other continuing sci-fi movie franchises I can think of are
those "Alien" movies and the Riddick ("Pitch Black") series, neither
of which may end up happening (or, if they do, getting an audience).
It seems to me that there will be a clear market for a spaced-based
series of films within the next 5 years, if they can be done well.
Clearly JMS could write a hell-uv-a film...or trilogy. And B5
certainly has that coveted "pre-sale" factor.
(Ok, so there are a few comic book series that will certainly run
strong in the next few years. But spaced-based films are rarely done
well, and I think may appeal to a very large audience if the right
note is struck.)
greyeyed
> Yeah, it's a shame that Crusade never even really got to find it's audience.
> And perhaps for a short time it might have been possible to revive with it's
> original crew. As every month passed that became increasingly unlikely until
> the idea of it being resurrected in anything remotely resembling the original
> show now is remote to hundreds of decimal places. Some people just insist on
> believing six impossible things before breakfast, I guess.
>
> If they want to keep writing, though, that's fine with me. At least they're
> letting WB know that there's still some market out there for more B5. The only
> thing I'm a little concerned about is that there's already been pouting and
> whining that what *has* come out wasn't Crusade and therefor was 'bad' As
> Delenn would say, though, "They're wrong, of course".
>
> Jan
> Check out my auctions of rare Dark Shadows and Babylon 5 scripts and
> memorabilia at http://tinyurl.com/bhkk
The Nuclear Marine
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS Yet another DVD question
Newsgroups: News:rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
To: "macthe...@yahoo.com" <macthe...@yahoo.com>
> janmsc...@aol.com (Jan) wrote in message
> news:<20030726180434...@mb-m19.aol.com>...
>> Michael J Wise wrote:
>>
>> >Star Trek ceased filming in sixty .. what, eight?
>> >There it sat for over ten years.
>>
>> Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75.
>
> We're talking about "real" series with live actors onscreen, not
> amimation.
Yes, I'd forgotten how "Grave of the Fireflies" was less "real" than
Hogan's Heroes in its portrayel of WWII events. That it has live actors
in it does not make it better. Any more than making a movie out of a
series makes it better.
Hmm, the level of sophistication people place on things: comics, cartoon
series, animated movies, tv movies, tv mini-series, plays, tv shows,
theatrical movies. Seems with hollywood and people in general, the
"lower" projects you work on at the moment define your lot in HW.
OTOH, ya know, an animated series for Crusade would be pretty cool. I'm
sure WB would give the rights to a Japanese company then import it if it
does well. Worst that could happen is if they butcher it.
Wonder if jms would be willing to turn in (with compensation, natch) the
Ian Galbraith
:<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
:> > "jehanne" wrote:
:> > Crusade was a bonus, mac... it's not something we're entitled to,
:> So who saying it's something we're entitled to? It's not me. I'm
:> just saying it's something I'd like to see finished, and that a window
:> of opportunity may be opening for the first time in a long time.
:Yeah, and you bring it up every chance you get. It's damn annoying, and I
:feel like saying so.
:What gets to me is that you haven't *yet* acknowledged how astronomically
:small the chances are.
Whats that quote from Babylon 5 about there always being hope.
Nothing wrong with hope. Heck even if JMS continued the story in a
different form, with different characters to get around the restrictions
of WB owning the show I'd be delighted. We saw just enough, and read
just enough from the 2 unproduced scripts, and JMS said just enough
about the future direction to tease me over the show. In hindsight
perhaps it would have been better if it had never even started.
I look at Joss Whedon's efforts to revive Firefly and can't help but
wish JMS did the same.
[snip]
--
Ian Galbraith
Email: igalb...@ozonline.com.au ICQ#: 7849631
"It is easier perceive error than to find truth, for the former lies on
the surface and is easily seen, while the latter lies in the depths,
where few are willing to search for it." - Goethe
jehanne
"Ian Galbraith" wrote:
> "jehanne" wrote:
> :What gets to me is that you haven't *yet* acknowledged how astronomically
> :small the chances are.
>
> Whats that quote from Babylon 5 about there always being hope.
>
> Nothing wrong with hope.
No, but if you're going up against the impossible (or at least highly
improbable), it's good form to at least admit to it first -- otherwise you
look extremely naive and out of touch with reality.
jehanne
Dan Dassow
>
> Whats that quote from Babylon 5 about there always being hope.
>
Alas, Bob Hope has passed beyond the vail.
Dan Dassow
macthe...@yahoo.com
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > "jehanne" wrote:
> > > Crusade was a bonus, mac... it's not something we're entitled to,
> >
> > So who saying it's something we're entitled to? It's not me. I'm
> > just saying it's something I'd like to see finished, and that a window
> > of opportunity may be opening for the first time in a long time.
>
> Yeah, and you bring it up every chance you get. It's damn annoying, and I
> feel like saying so.
>
> What gets to me is that you haven't *yet* acknowledged how astronomically
> small the chances are.
The more people who say over and over and over again how
"astronomically small the chances are," the smaller those chances are.
That *dampens* enthusiasm. That *prevents* people from writing in to
Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production and possibly having any
positive effect. That throws a bucket of water on the fire, and I
will *not* be a party to that.
What part of this:
"Our thoughts form the universe, they always matter."
-- G'Kar to Zack in Babylon 5:"The Hour of the Wolf"
...don't you understand?
It's funny, but the other day, I had lunch at a Chinese restaurant,
and guess what my fortune cookie said. "Every truly great
accomplishment is at first impossible." How fitting.
> > Second, I don't link the two shows at the hip like you do. Crusade's
> > a separate show. It isn't desert on the B5 meal. It's separate.
>
> JMS, 7 Apr 2002:
> ">We thought we had Crusade but we didn't.
> >We thought we had Rangers but we didn't.
> >
> >We don't even have another telemovie.
> >
> >So JMS. What do we have but soured memories?
>
> The five year Babylon 5 story that I set out to tell in the first place.
>
> I said it before: that was my main goal going into this, to get B5 on the
> air
> and tell that story. Everything else is lagniappe."
I just *knew* you were going to bring up that quote.
From JMS's point of view of telling the stories, yes. Telling the B5
story was *his* main goal, and telling the Crusade story would have
been a nice bonus. There is also probably a small measure of
self-protection in his saying what he said above.
From the recipient's point of view, it's like being given the first
tenth of a novel, where that tenth ends on a cliffhanger, and being
told, after you've read it and are hooked, "That's it. There are no
more pages." That was not what JMS intended.
Then, your posts are extending that, saying:
"That's it. There are no more pages. There *never will be* any more
pages. Get used to it. It's hopeless."
Well, the message of B5 and Crusade is exactly the opposite.
"Our thoughts form the universe, they always matter."
-- G'Kar to Zack in Babylon 5:"The Hour of the Wolf"
"...Without the hope that things will get better, that our inheriters
will know a world that is fuller and richer than our own, life is
pointless, and evolution is vastly overrated. "
-- Sinclair and Delenn in Babylon 5:"A Voice in the Wilderness #1"
"G'Quan wrote: ... Greater than the death of flesh is the death of
hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender.
...'"
-- G'Kar in Babylon 5:"Z'ha'dum"
"It's easy to find something worth dying for. Do you have anything
worth living for?"
"I can't see you anymore."
"As it should be."
"What if I fall? How will I know you'll catch me?"
"I caught you before."
"What if I die?"
"I can not create life, but I can breathe on the remaining embers.. It
may not work."
"But I can hope."
"Hope is all we have."
-- Lorien & Sheridan in Babylon 5:"Whatever Happened to Mr.
Garibaldi?"
"He's making a crucible, which he hopes will force out the truth.
Quite brave, possibly futile, but .. very human."
-- Lorien to Ivanova in Babylon 5:"Into the Fire"
"That's all that faith requires. That we surrender ourselves to the
possibility of hope. "
-- Brother Alwyn in Babylon 5:"The Deconstruction of Falling Stars"
JMS: "Faith Manages."
"Babylon 5 was the last of the Babylon stations. There would never be
another. It changed the future .. and it changed us. It taught us that
we have to create the future .. or others will do it for us. It showed
us that we have care for one another, because if we don't, who will?
And that true strength sometimes comes from the most unlikely places.
Mostly, though, I think it gave us hope .. that there can always be
new beginnings .. even for people like us."
-- General Ivanova in Babylon 5:"Sleeping in Light"
"There is always hope, only because it's the one thing that no one has
figured out how to *kill* yet."
-Galen - Crusade - Racing the Night
"You can't kill the truth. .. Actually, you can kill the truth, but it
always comes back to haunt you later."
-- Sheridan to Ivanova in Babylon 5:"Lines of Communication"
Sheridan, "It was an early earth president, Abraham Lincoln, who best
described our situation: The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate
for the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty,
and we must rise to the occasion. We can not escape history. We will
be remembered, in spite of ourselves. The fiery trial through which we
pass will light us down in honor or dishonor, to the last generation.
We shall nobly save, or meanly lose our last best hope..."
-Sheridan - Points of Departure
"It's ironic isn't it. I had every window in the palace blocked off,
because I was afraid that if I came around the corner, and saw this
unprepared, that I would break down and cry. And yet, I spend all of
my time here in this room, looking at it. In my life, I had four
wives, I cared for them all deeply, but I loved Centuari Prime. Loved
every street, every tower, every inch of our world. Everything I did I
did for her and look what we have done to her. But there is hope, but
it will hard, so very hard."
-Londo - In the Beginning
"The stories, the music, they're all about hope, hope enough to
inspire a dozen generations. We talk about the needs of Earth. Well
there's more to it than the obvious. While we're waiting on science
to discover the math that will lead to a cure, we need something to
sustain us. This is the music and the literature of hope. It's what
we need. Another culture forgot that. We can't. Not now. Not
ever."
-Dr. Chambers - Crusade - The Needs of Earth
Gideon: "...Thought I'd come by and ah pick up a little of that,
something easy on the ears, ...hopeful."
Chambers: "Here's a copy of what I was just listening to. Think it'll
do? I guess we could all use a little hope from time to time."
Dureena: "So what was on the data crystals, more of Eilerson's special
videos?"
Gideon: "No, it's ah...hope, at least according to Dr. Chambers."
-Crusade-The Needs of Earth
G'kar, "You should, it's quite a place (Babylon 5). A place of good
times and bad, of pain and growth. But in the end, a place of great
hope."
-Legend of the Rangers pilot
> > > I'm really *pissed* off by your attitude, in case you can't tell, so for
> the
> > > interests of everyone, I suggest we both drop this battle, 'cause it
> doesn't
> > > look like we're ever going to see eye to eye.
> >
> > Fine by me. I've had all the condescension and wise-ass remarks I can
> > tolerate from you.
>
> Spoken like a true Vorlon.
A true Vorlon would have gone Ulkesh on you, and fragged you just for
kicks.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Where are you getting that I'm talking about JMS?
>
> 'Cause JMS would have to be an integral part of any legitimate revival of
> Crusade; he's the brains and the creative talent behind the story.
JMS has said:
"Thing is, of course, there's zip that I can *do* that would achieve
that
result [i.e. Crusade's re-start]. I can stand outside WB and hold my
breath until I turn blue, but that's about it."
So, why would someone start with JMS when he's said that? Further up
the line, with Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production, is the
place to start. What's needed is to get them to go to JMS, to take a
chance that the audience will be there for it. Other than watching
the Crusade reruns, writing to Warner Brothers Domestic Television
Production and buying the DVDs is about all we *can* do.
> > JMS has said:
> > "Which goes to the note some people post asking why I don't write in
> > this area
> > anymore, do I not care about it. Yeah, of course I do, but WB owns
> > it, and if
> > I went otf and started writing stories in that universe I'd be
> > infringing their
> > ownership."
> >
> > Does that sound like somebody for whom writing in the Crusade (however
> > renamed) storyline would be against his will? I don't think so.
>
> I don't think we can tell from that post -what- his attitude towards writing
> "Crusade."
I once asked JMS:
*****************
>If some network approached you and said:
>We will pick up Crusade, but *only* if you go back and fix Season 1
>(Definition of "fix": Remove TNT interference from the existing
Season 1
>episodes. Shoot the rest of the episodes that you would have had in
Season
>1. Put the 22 Season 1 episodes in the airing proper order.),
>Would you do it?
Of course.
But it would never happen. Not in a gazillion years.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
*****************
Does that not indicate that he'd like to write in that area again?
KoshN
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "jehanne" wrote:
> >
> > What gets to me is that you haven't *yet* acknowledged how
astronomically
> > small the chances are.
>
> The more people who say over and over and over again how
> "astronomically small the chances are," the smaller those chances are.
Interesting. And then you proceed to go through a litany of quotations about
how powerful hope is, and how attempting to achieve the impossible is very
human, and how hope is all we
Or would you prefer that we deny the truth and say "There's an excellent
chance Crusade could be revived next month if we can just get 100,000
letters into Joe Whatzizname at WB." I doubt it.
I'll take the truth, as unfiltered and unedited as possible, any day.
> That *dampens* enthusiasm. That *prevents* people from writing in to
> Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production and possibly having any
> positive effect. That throws a bucket of water on the fire, and I
> will *not* be a party to that.
Yet by not admitting what you know to be the case, even as simple little
sidebar, you make youself look rather ignorant, silly, and, dare I say,
fan-boy-ish -- each time you post.
> What part of this:
>
> "Our thoughts form the universe, they always matter."
> -- G'Kar to Zack in Babylon 5:"The Hour of the Wolf"
>
> ...don't you understand?
I'm supposed to take something spoken by a fictional character a fictional
universe as gospel truth? That's probably the weakest sort of reasoning
there is... falling back on cliches and quotations.
Emerson once said: "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." I don't hate
quotations per se, but they're not usually useful in grounding an argument.
Tell me what you know, mac.
> From the recipient's point of view, it's like being given the first
> tenth of a novel, where that tenth ends on a cliffhanger, and being
> told, after you've read it and are hooked, "That's it. There are no
> more pages." That was not what JMS intended.
>
> Then, your posts are extending that, saying:
> "That's it. There are no more pages. There *never will be* any more
> pages. Get used to it. It's hopeless."
I'm not saying it's hopeless; I'm saying that the chances are extremely
small, and that although I, too, would like to see four and a half more
seasons of Crusade, I'd much *rather* see JMS do other work, in other media,
and enjoy that. I think I'd probably say that even if the chanced of getting
Crusade back were extremely good.
Personally, I'd love to see a play or two by JMS... it's been quite a while
since he's released one, unless I'm mistaken, and I'm sure he's learned a
great deal of tricks in the past decade that he could put to use.
JMS labored for almost eight years before the B5 series finally hit the
airwaves in 1994. He dedicated himself to that because it was the story he
had to tell, and he fought the impossible odds to get it made. That's why
we're all here.
If Crusade had been a story he'd just *had* to tell - like "Babylon 5" - he
would have put that Russian stubbornness of his to work and the story would
have gotten told. JMS now has room and time to put out the next really
fantastic story that grips him and won't let go. I'm satisfied with that.
> Well, the message of B5 and Crusade is exactly the opposite.
<snipped>
Lovely.
And for his next trick, macthevorlon usues to politics of "Mein Kampf" to
justify its inclusion in your local public library.
Besides, B5 is a fictional story, not a philosophical text. JMS intended to
raise questions, not provide short quotable answers to all of life's
problems.
jehanne
The Nuclear Marine
> The Nuclear Marine <Nuke-...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:<Xns93C564D06F846Nu...@68.6.19.6>...
>> OTOH, ya know, an animated series for Crusade would be pretty cool.
>> I'm sure WB would give the rights to a Japanese company then import
>> it if it does well. Worst that could happen is if they butcher it.
>
> I seem to recall a recent JMS post in which he described animation as
> a step down, and a hellish work environment. I'd look it up on
> JMSNews if I could get it to do a search right now. Unfortunately it
> appears to be having a heart attack. After trying to do a search on
> "animation" and getting lots of Server Not Found errors, it just
> returned 99 hits, none of which have the word "animation" in them.
> ARGH!
>
I remember the same posting but that had to deal with jms producing a
cartoon series. I'm saying WB, who owns Crusade, should sell production
rights to a Japanese animation company. Sure, people might think it's a
Starship Yamato remake but then year two hits then all bets are off.
For jms, he can sell his 5 year outline of the Crusade story for a
nominal fee. I have no idea how much that would go for but 1 million+
dollars would not be asking for too much. Plus, he can submit scripts
should he feel necessary.
Give it a year or so for it to filter back to the US or even have a joint
broadcast via Cartoon Network et al. Come on, look at the ratings for
the week, Fairly Oddparents and Spongebob are animated shows in the
Neilson top ten. Animating Crusade could be a very viable option to
complete its storyline.
I figure it like this, jms has to put in an enormous amount of effort if
he has to produce a series and insure its integrity. If he can sell his
novelic television ideas then the companies wanting to go the distance
producing and marketing them will be the ones offering up the copper.
For jms, if Warner Brothers pursued such an avenue, how much input are
they legally obligated to seek from you? Also, was my take that you
could sell your 5 year arc on Crusade also on the mark? Lastly, given
your origens in the animated area, how would you feel some of your
creations going into that arena?
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b7d8dca7.03072...@posting.google.com...
[snipped innumerable quotes]
Mr. Vorlon -
I think you are reading _far_ too much from Babylon 5 into this issue,
taking it far too seriously and too personally.
Yes, it is a shame that Crusade barely got started. Yes, the majority of
people here would like to see it continued in some form. Yes, I think that
many here, including myself, would buy Crusade DVDs with the bare hope that
the story would be continued in the television medium. But that is all
there is - a bare hope, no guarantees at all.
My personal view is that it would be nice if Crusade was restarted, but I am
not going to be too upset if it isn't. Not when there are so many books to
read, music to listen to, interesting experiences to undergo.
As for you: Do you think JMS _owes_ you this program? Do you think
everyone who reads this newsgroup should "keep the faith" and be positive
regardless of the actual likelihood of Crusade coming back on?
--
Mark Bertenshaw
Kingston upon Thames
UK
macthe...@yahoo.com
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "jehanne" wrote:
> > >
> > > What gets to me is that you haven't *yet* acknowledged how
> astronomically
> > > small the chances are.
> >
> > The more people who say over and over and over again how
> > "astronomically small the chances are," the smaller those chances are.
>
> Interesting. And then you proceed to go through a litany of quotations about
> how powerful hope is, and how attempting to achieve the impossible is very
> human, and how hope is all we
Think you lost something there.
> Or would you prefer that we deny the truth and say "There's an excellent
> chance Crusade could be revived next month if we can just get 100,000
> letters into Joe Whatzizname at WB." I doubt it.
There we go, the ol' all or nothing argument. Everything has to be
black or white. Of course I wouldn't say to anybody that there's an
excellent chance like you say above. I just *wouldn't say* one way or
the other, wouldn't give any odds, but at least I wouldn't be so
negative.
> I'll take the truth, as unfiltered and unedited as possible, any day.
Ah, well, you're a "half-empty" type.
> > That *dampens* enthusiasm. That *prevents* people from writing in to
> > Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production and possibly having any
> > positive effect. That throws a bucket of water on the fire, and I
> > will *not* be a party to that.
>
> Yet by not admitting what you know to be the case, even as simple little
> sidebar, you make youself look rather ignorant, silly, and, dare I say,
> fan-boy-ish -- each time you post.
By not wanting to be negative whenever possible, I'm fan-boyish???
> > What part of this:
> >
> > "Our thoughts form the universe, they always matter."
> > -- G'Kar to Zack in Babylon 5:"The Hour of the Wolf"
> >
> > ...don't you understand?
>
> I'm supposed to take something spoken by a fictional character a fictional
> universe as gospel truth? That's probably the weakest sort of reasoning
> there is... falling back on cliches and quotations.
So you don't think Joe's trying to tell us anything through the show
and the characters? You think everything must be rigidly applied
within the context of the show and nowhere else? You don't think that
a show can have an overall message to be applied outside the show?
Hmmm?
> Emerson once said: "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." I don't hate
> quotations per se, but they're not usually useful in grounding an argument.
>
> Tell me what you know, mac.
I know you're unwilling to try to get anything started, and will do
your absolute best to be destructive rather than constructive.
> > From the recipient's point of view, it's like being given the first
> > tenth of a novel, where that tenth ends on a cliffhanger, and being
> > told, after you've read it and are hooked, "That's it. There are no
> > more pages." That was not what JMS intended.
> >
> > Then, your posts are extending that, saying:
> > "That's it. There are no more pages. There *never will be* any more
> > pages. Get used to it. It's hopeless."
>
> I'm not saying it's hopeless;
Saying that the odds are hundreds of decimal places against isn't
saying it's hopeless???
> I'm saying that the chances are extremely
> small,
I'm not saying what the chances are. I'm not saying if they're high
or low. I'm just not saying. If people write in to Warner Brothers
Domestic Television Productions, the chances are higher than if they
don't.
> and that although I, too, would like to see four and a half more
> seasons of Crusade, I'd much *rather* see JMS do other work, in other media,
> and enjoy that. I think I'd probably say that even if the chanced of getting
> Crusade back were extremely good.
That makes no sense. You're saying that even if the chances of
getting Crusade back were very good, you'd rather see JMS do work in
"other media" (i.e. not TV). You must not like Crusade very much at
all, like on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is you Hate it, and 10 is you
Love it, you'd be a 5.0000000000000000000000000000001 or so.
How is saying that the odds are hundreds of decimal places against you
going to encourage most people to try to make a difference?
> If Crusade had been a story he'd just *had* to tell - like "Babylon 5" - he
> would have put that Russian stubbornness of his to work and the story would
> have gotten told. JMS now has room and time to put out the next really
> fantastic story that grips him and won't let go. I'm satisfied with that.
>
> > Well, the message of B5 and Crusade is exactly the opposite.
>
> <snipped>
>
> Lovely.
>
> And for his next trick, macthevorlon usues to politics of "Mein Kampf" to
> justify its inclusion in your local public library.
jehanne, overreacting as usual.
KoshN
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "jehanne" wrote:
Absolutely astonishing:
"mac" objects to the truth:
> > I'll take the truth, as unfiltered and unedited as possible, any day.
>
> Ah, well, you're a "half-empty" type.
Is unaware of the impressions other people have of him:
> > Yet by not admitting what you know to be the case, even as simple little
> > sidebar, you make youself look rather ignorant, silly, and, dare I say,
> > fan-boy-ish -- each time you post.
>
> By not wanting to be negative whenever possible, I'm fan-boyish???
Confuses the fictional universe with the real one:
> So you don't think Joe's trying to tell us anything through the show
> and the characters? You think everything must be rigidly applied
> within the context of the show and nowhere else? You don't think that
> a show can have an overall message to be applied outside the show?
> Hmmm?
Puts words in my mouth:
> > Tell me what you know, mac.
>
> I know you're unwilling to try to get anything started, and will do
> your absolute best to be destructive rather than constructive.
And tells *me* what *I* think of Crusade
> That makes no sense. You're saying that even if the chances of
> getting Crusade back were very good, you'd rather see JMS do work in
> "other media" (i.e. not TV). You must not like Crusade very much at
> all, like on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is you Hate it, and 10 is you
> Love it, you'd be a 5.0000000000000000000000000000001 or so.
I don't know whether to find this incredibly amusing or incredibly
frightening.
jehanne
Mac Breck
news:ae134d9a.03072...@posting.google.com...
> > Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75. Not
to
> > mention *many* other fits and starts and rumors and feelers until The
Motion
> > Picture came out in '79. It wasn't until '93 that The Next Generation,
the
> > first 'spinoff' actually came about.
> >
>
> Not to be too fanish, but Next Gen. premiered in '87, ending in '94.
Nothing to do with being "fannish." Takes but a couple seconds to look it
up
on the web, either at
or
--
Mac Breck
http://www.scifi.com/babylon5/
http://www.scifi.com/crusade/
http://www.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/1/5/1521 (Brimstone)
C W CHAN
I am almost sorry I brought up the C word.
Well, actually I'm not. My motivation was:
1. WB is finally convinced of the profitability of the B5 universe
so much that they have accelerated the DVD release schedule beyond
anyone's imagination. And they are likely to release Crusade on
DVD as well.
2. Studios like "sure things", and nothing attracts suits' attention
like piles of money.
3. Suits have very very short memories. Or at least they think
that the audiences do. Last year's darling is passe this year.
4. I assume that Joe would like to finish what he creates.
5. Joe probably has the studio's attention because of how well
the DVDs have sold.
That was why I made the suggestion that perhaps the suits could
be tempted while the DVD sales figures are still fresh.
[ObB5]
I apologize. I'm sorry.
I am sorry that jehanne proceeded to attack anyone
who supported this view, calling them fan boys, little brats,
ignorant, silly and stupid.
I am sorry that jehanne accused us of compelling Joe to do
what we want rather than what he wants, even as far as saying
we want to take a gun and point it at his head.
I am sorry that I waited so long to post this message.
As with everything else, it's the thought that counts.
[/ObB5]
That said, Joe seems to think that a Crusade revival is unlikely,
and he is in the position to know best. However, a reminder
due to change of circumstances (change of WB's attitude towards B5)
is not unwarranted.
Chuen Chan c.c...@uq.NOSPAM.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------------
'You can prove anything you want by coldly logical reason - if you pick
the proper postulates... Postulates are based on assumption and adhered
to by faith. Nothing in the Universe can shake them.'
Gregory Powell in Robots series by I. Asimov
Pelzo63
interests of everyone, I suggest we both drop this battle, 'cause it doesn't
where is the skin off of your back that is causing such hatred towards mac? is
he somehow personally insulting you by keeping up hope that maybe there can be
more B5? in other words, your pissiness is utterly unjustified, but this is
not the first time you've completely over-reacted in this forum, and thanks to
this post, i went from considering plonking you, to actually plonking you.
and for the record, perhaps the mods should haave noticed your blatant flame?
of course, this thread is on Automod for now.
<< 'Cause then we wouln't have little brats like
you fussing now because you only got one slice of cake for dessert instead
of five. >>
...Chris, my money says it's Theron, not enough partial sentences to be Buford.
The Nuclear Marine
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS Yet another DVD question
Newsgroups: News:rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
To: "macthe...@yahoo.com" <macthe...@yahoo.com>
macthe...@yahoo.com (macthe...@yahoo.com) wrote in
jehanne
"C W CHAN"
> I am sorry that jehanne proceeded to attack anyone
> who supported this view, calling them fan boys, little brats,
> ignorant, silly and stupid.
Point of fact: the "attacks" you cite were all contained in a single post,
directed at "macthevorlon" only. The remainder of my posts have been far
more civil.
> I am sorry that jehanne accused us of compelling Joe to do
> what we want rather than what he wants, even as far as saying
> we want to take a gun and point it at his head.
Point of fact: the "compelling Joe" and "gun to his head" phrases were part
of a question.
A question is not a statement.
Accusations must take the form of statements
Ergo, a question can not be an accusation.
jehanne
Laura Appelbaum
> >Would you do it?
>
> Of course.
>
> But it would never happen. Not in a gazillion years.
>
No, what it indicates to pretty much everyone but you is that it's OVER!
How much more clearly can the man tell you it's over than to say "it would
never happen in a gazillion years?" Furthermore, the response you've been
getting here should indicate to you that it's time to move on and live your
life and stop obsessing over whether or not you can will a television
program back into being just because *you* want it, and damn reality.
LMA
macthe...@yahoo.com
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "jehanne" wrote:
>
> Absolutely astonishing:
>
> "mac" objects to the truth:
>
> > > I'll take the truth, as unfiltered and unedited as possible, any day.
> >
> > Ah, well, you're a "half-empty" type.
I object to people who want to say over and over how bad the odds are,
and who are unwilling even to try to change things for the better.
These professional dark clouds exist solely to rain on others'
parades.
> Is unaware of the impressions other people have of him:
>
> > > Yet by not admitting what you know to be the case, even as simple little
> > > sidebar, you make youself look rather ignorant, silly, and, dare I say,
> > > fan-boy-ish -- each time you post.
> >
> > By not wanting to be negative whenever possible, I'm fan-boyish???
Given what I've said in this thread, how many others here share
jehanne's view?
Is "Them being Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production? Yes.
Couldn't
hurt." fan-boyish?
> Confuses the fictional universe with the real one:
>
> > So you don't think Joe's trying to tell us anything through the show
> > and the characters? You think everything must be rigidly applied
> > within the context of the show and nowhere else? You don't think that
> > a show can have an overall message to be applied outside the show?
> > Hmmm?
Is it not possible, and on-topic, to illustrate something that occurs
in the real world with a quote from the show? Is anybody who does
such a thing "confused?" What are the effects of people's perceptions
on the economy? Have negative perceptions ever caused the economy to
get worse, and then has the economy getting worse caused more negative
perceptions, with the result being a downward spiral? The next time
somebody comes on here and asks:
"Would now be a good time to prod them towards continuing Crusade?
It would stand a better chance of suceeding now when they have
evidence of the popularity of the universe rather than two
years down the track."
...if 20 people respond that the odds are hundreds of decimal places
against there ever being a Crusade re-start, and they keep up that
litany in response to any person who says something like:
"Them being Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production? Yes.
Couldn't
hurt."
...is that not likely to discourage any people who would otherwise be
inclined to support such a re-start?
All this makes me wonder about the motivations of those who
continuously spout the "hundreds of decimal places against" argument.
It would seem that these people really would *not* like to see Crusade
re-started, even though they say they'd "like to see four and a half
more seasons of Crusade." They're out to prevent anyone from trying
to have a positive effect in this regard. Then, somebody who doesn't
actively DIScourage people from supporting a Crusade re-start is
derided, and labeled a whiner, a brat, ignorant, silly, and
fan-boy-ish.
> Puts words in my mouth:
>
> > > Tell me what you know, mac.
> >
> > I know you're unwilling to try to get anything started, and will do
> > your absolute best to be destructive rather than constructive.
What I said above is evident from your posts. You seem to have an
agenda of keeping Crusade down, and a proclivity to use double-talk.
> And tells *me* what *I* think of Crusade
>
> > That makes no sense. You're saying that even if the chances of
> > getting Crusade back were very good, you'd rather see JMS do work in
> > "other media" (i.e. not TV). You must not like Crusade very much at
> > all, like on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is you Hate it, and 10 is you
> > Love it, you'd be a 5.0000000000000000000000000000001 or so.
>
> I don't know whether to find this incredibly amusing or incredibly
> frightening.
Ah, that's easier than explaining yourself, isn't it?
Presumably, if "and that although I, too, would like to see four and a
half more
seasons of Crusade" is true, you must have liked Crusade. Otherwise,
why would you like to see 4.5 more years of it?
Then, "I'd much *rather* see JMS do other work, in other media,
and enjoy that." seems to contradict what you've just said. Rather
than continue Crusade, you'd "much rather" see JMS working on other
things (e.g. Jeremiah, other TV shows, etc.) and "other media" (which
would be non-TV). Then, you go on to say "I think I'd probably say
that even if the chanced of getting Crusade back were extremely good."
This means to me that if you liked Crusade at all, and that's a big
IF, you must have been barely above "neither like or dislike" line.
KoshN
jehanne
Mac, I've explained myself half a dozen times to you already. And all you do
is twist my words around. You continually misrepresent me, and we can't
conduct a fair debate if you're going to continue to make unfounded
inferences from my words... not to mention that you now suggest that I'm
lying about my own attitudes.
You simply aren't fighting fair.
jehanne
macthe...@yahoo.com
> "C W CHAN"
> > I am sorry that jehanne proceeded to attack anyone
> > who supported this view, calling them fan boys, little brats,
> > ignorant, silly and stupid.
>
> Point of fact: the "attacks" you cite were all contained in a single post,
> directed at "macthevorlon" only. The remainder of my posts have been far
> more civil.
From: jehanne
Date: 2003-07-27 16:56:14 PST
"and here you are whining like a fifth grader who
didn't get a gold star on his A+ paper."
"Why do I sometime wish that? 'Cause then we
wouln't have little brats like you fussing now
because you only got one slice of cake for dessert
instead of five."
From: jehanne
Date: 2003-07-29 11:52:04 PST
Yet by not admitting what you know to be the case,
even as simple little sidebar, you make youself
look rather ignorant, silly, and, dare I say,
fan-boy-ish -- each time you post.
> > I am sorry that jehanne accused us of compelling Joe to do
> > what we want rather than what he wants, even as far as saying
> > we want to take a gun and point it at his head.
>
> Point of fact: the "compelling Joe" and "gun to his head" phrases were part
> of a question.
>
> A question is not a statement.
>
> Accusations must take the form of statements
>
> Ergo, a question can not be an accusation.
What you said:
"So you'd like to fore JMS to revive Cruade against his will, if
that's what
it takes?"
...implies that a revival of Crusade *would be* against his will.
That is not true. He's just said the odds of it happening are
extremely low.
I'm certainly not saying that I would like to see Crusade revived
against his will. JMS would be 100% necessary to any Crusade revival,
and nothing is going to make him write something he does not want to
write.
KoshN
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
Jehanne -
You may have heard of the stage play version of "Peter Pan" by J Barrie.
Towards the end, Tinkerbell gets killed by Captain Hook, and Peter Pan turns
to the children in the audience, and implores: "If you believe in fairies,
clap your hands!". And as if by magic, Tinkerbell is brought back to life
due to the belief of all the children
I think we are all being asked to "believe in fairies".
To a more practical line of thought, our best hope for getting the end of
the Crusade story is for there to be yet another B5 spin-off, and hope that
at least some of the Crusade story is told in this new series. I can
imagine studio executives preferring a new series. People like "new".
Wendy of NJ
No "people" (especially according to TV execs) prefer the same old thing
in a new PACKAGE. (preferably with the words "new and improved"
somewhere on it)
Andrew Swallow
news:bgagl9$drp$1...@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au...
>
[snip]
>
> 2. Studios like "sure things", and nothing attracts suits' attention
> like piles of money.
>
a. Can you make the new series season 1 break even with viewing
figures 2/3 of Babylon 5's?
b. Can the new series make a profit with DVD sales 2/3 of Babylon 5's?
c. Write a show that gets an audience of 3/2 times as big as
Babylon 5's?
Some equivalent questions for a film. Possibly using the
Hulk/Superman/Star Trek/Spiderman.
Andrew Swallow
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
"Wendy of NJ" <voxw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3F2ACC7A...@hotmail.com...
>
>
> Mark Alexander Bertenshaw wrote:
> > To a more practical line of thought, our best hope for getting the end
of
> > the Crusade story is for there to be yet another B5 spin-off, and hope
that
> > at least some of the Crusade story is told in this new series. I can
> > imagine studio executives preferring a new series. People like "new".
> >
>
> No "people" (especially according to TV execs) prefer the same old thing
> in a new PACKAGE. (preferably with the words "new and improved"
> somewhere on it)
Well, as long as it looks new and shiny, I don't think people will be
complaining.
--
MAB
jehanne
"Andrew Swallow" wrote:
> Some equivalent questions for a film. Possibly using the
> Hulk/Superman/Star Trek/Spiderman.
I'm not sure I understand this... surely you're not suggesting some sort of
massive 4-way crossover?
(run for your lives!!!)
jehanne
The Nuclear Marine
"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@eatspam.btinternet.com> wrote in news:bgf32k
$7ud$1...@titan.btinternet.com:
Ah, one of those when you're a kid where you dare your dad he can't do
something you'd enjoy. Jms's major in sociology will see through your
clever ploy.
As for the last part, what were you smoking and can I have a hit of it?
Nuke
--
I find that with greater understanding comes deeper satisfaction
I find that gops and dead ends in my understanding discomfort me
I find that if I'm afraid, further seeking reveals misunderstanding
I believe it will always be thus.
I desire to seek truth not for fear of loss, nor want of gain, nor need
of words
I endeavor to pursue truth, no matter what it is, who says it or what I
already believe
The Nuclear Marine
"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@eatspam.btinternet.com> wrote in news:bgf32k
$7ud$1...@titan.btinternet.com:
> "C W CHAN" <zzcw...@fox.uq.net.au> wrote in message
Ah, one of those when you're a kid where you dare your dad he can't do
The Nuclear Marine
"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@eatspam.btinternet.com> wrote in news:bgf32k
$7ud$1...@titan.btinternet.com:
> "C W CHAN" <zzcw...@fox.uq.net.au> wrote in message
Ah, one of those when you're a kid where you dare your dad he can't do
macthe...@yahoo.com
In my previous reply to this post, I left out a word. It was supposed
to say:
There are less extreme levels of a re-start, and they should have
higher probabilities....
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> news:b7d8dca7.03072...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > I once asked JMS:
> > >Would you do it?
> >
> > Of course.
> >
> > But it would never happen. Not in a gazillion years.
> >
> > Does that not indicate that he'd like to write in that area again?
Intending to find out *if* JMS was 100% dead-set against writing
Crusade ever again (After all, he might have been so **pissed** at
what happened with TNT that he never would have wanted to touch that
story ever again.), I asked:
>If some network approached you and said:
>We will pick up Crusade, but *only* if you go back and fix Season 1
>(Definition of "fix": Remove TNT interference from the existing
Season 1
>episodes. Shoot the rest of the episodes that you would have had in
Season
>1. Put the 22 Season 1 episodes in the airing proper order.),
>Would you do it?
He responded:
Would he do it? - "Of course."
jehanne was implying that JMS didn't want to write Crusade ever again.
Well, that's disproven.
Odds of this happening: "But it would never happen. Not in a gazillion
years."
The situation I described was as if some network rolled out the red
carpet for him. That would be the most enticing thing. If he
wouldn't go for that, he wouldn't go for anything. Well, the odds of
getting the red carpet are very low. "Not in a gazillion years." is
to be expected.
> No, what it indicates to pretty much everyone but you is that it's OVER!
> How much more clearly can the man tell you it's over than to say "it would
> never happen in a gazillion years?"
There are extreme levels of a restart, and they should have higher
probabilities than the red carpet scenerio I described, especially if
the DVDs continue to sell well.
> Furthermore, the response you've been
> getting here
...mainly from one person...
> should indicate to you that it's time to move on and live your
> life and stop obsessing over whether or not you can will a television
> program back into being just because *you* want it, and damn reality.
This started out with:
"Them being Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production? Yes.
Couldn't
hurt."
How is saying that writing to Warner Brothers "couldn't hurt,"
obsessing?
That's about as dispassionate as it's possible to be, and look what it
got me, almost nothing but being harped on by people saying why it'll
never work. I didn't say it would work. I said it wouldn't hurt.
KoshN
Andrew Swallow
> [posted and mailed]
>
> "Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@eatspam.btinternet.com> wrote in news:bgf32k
> $7ud$1...@titan.btinternet.com:
>
> > "C W CHAN" <zzcw...@fox.uq.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:bgagl9$drp$1...@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au...
> >>
> > [snip]
> >>
> >> 2. Studios like "sure things", and nothing attracts suits' attention
> >> like piles of money.
> >>
> > Challenge to JMS.
> > a. Can you make the new series season 1 break even with viewing
> > figures 2/3 of Babylon 5's?
> >
> > b. Can the new series make a profit with DVD sales 2/3 of Babylon 5's?
> >
> > c. Write a show that gets an audience of 3/2 times as big as
> > Babylon 5's?
> >
> > Some equivalent questions for a film. Possibly using the
> > Hulk/Superman/Star Trek/Spiderman.
> >
> > Andrew Swallow
> >
> >
>
> Ah, one of those when you're a kid where you dare your dad he can't do
> something you'd enjoy. Jms's major in sociology will see through your
> clever ploy.
>
> As for the last part, what were you smoking and can I have a hit of it?
>
known costs and audiences. Although watching a film
in which they have been merged together may be interesting.
Andrew Swallow
Andrew Swallow
news:bgi2f7$4fo$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
> "The Nuclear Marine" <Nuke-...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:20030803002840.WFGW23233.fed1mtao03.cox.net@cx922182-d...
> > [posted and mailed]
> >
> > "Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@eatspam.btinternet.com> wrote in
news:bgf32k
> > $7ud$1...@titan.btinternet.com:
> >
> > > "C W CHAN" <zzcw...@fox.uq.net.au> wrote in message
> > > news:bgagl9$drp$1...@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au...
> > >>
> > > [snip]
> > >>
> > >> 2. Studios like "sure things", and nothing attracts suits' attention
> > >> like piles of money.
> > >>
> > > Challenge to JMS.
> > > a. Can you make the new series season 1 break even with viewing
> > > figures 2/3 of Babylon 5's?
> > >
> > > b. Can the new series make a profit with DVD sales 2/3 of Babylon 5's?
> > >
> > > c. Write a show that gets an audience of 3/2 times as big as
> > > Babylon 5's?
> > >
> > > Some equivalent questions for a film. Possibly using the
> > > Hulk/Superman/Star Trek/Spiderman.
> > >
> > > Andrew Swallow
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Ah, one of those when you're a kid where you dare your dad he can't do
> > something you'd enjoy. Jms's major in sociology will see through your
> > clever ploy.
> >
These condition would also produce the sort of paperwork
that the studios and tv channels should love to see - an
(almost) guaranteed profit.
Andrew Swallow
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> jehanne was implying that JMS didn't want to write Crusade ever again.
> Well, that's disproven.
Show me where I implied this, 'cause I sure don't remember it. You're
misinterpreting me once again.
I ased: "So you'd like to force JMS to revive Crusade against his will, if
that what it takes?"
First: It was a question, not a statement.
Second: The question itself contained a conditional: "if."
If I had said "So you'd like to force JMS to revive Crusade against his
will?" (leaving off the last clause), then *maybe* you'd be able to say with
some *small* amount of credibility that I implied JMS didn't want to write
Crusade again; but even then you'd be on very shaky ground, 'cause it's a
*question,* not a *statement.* And besides which, JMS has disproven any such
statement by stating otherwise long before we ever got into this little
spat.
But I digress.... Questions are not statements; got it? Questions, unless
they contain predications: (e.g. "Given that x, is y?") don't imply a damn
thing and cannot be read as such.
Mac, stop telling me what I think or what I mean. You just keep losing
credibility.
Just because you inferred it, doesn't mean that I ever implied it.
If you think you're a telepath, you're a really lousy one, because when you
try to tell everyone what I think or believe or mean or imply, you're almost
invariably dead wrong.
> > Furthermore, the response you've been
> > getting here
>
> ...mainly from one person...
'Cause this has been hashed and rehashed so many time most folks are tired
of the debate. I, as the relative newbie, felt like jumping in with my
opinion. Most of the few other reponses have agreed with me, basically
saying (like me) "It would be nice to have Crusade back, but it's not a huge
deal anymore to the vast majority of. We tried the campaign when it first
got killed, but JMS has since moved on to other cool things, and that's
enough for us." (sentiments all of which have been echoed by other posters.)
If it's not enough for you, fine, that's your opinion and we can't argue
opinions. But at least be logical and fair when you're debating the issue.
jehanne
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
>
> As for the last part, what were you smoking and can I have a hit of it?
>
> Nuke
And what were you smoking when you managed to treble post? :-)
--
MAB/KUT/UK
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
>
> > > Furthermore, the response you've been
> > > getting here
> >
> > ...mainly from one person...
>
> 'Cause this has been hashed and rehashed so many time most folks are tired
> of the debate. I, as the relative newbie, felt like jumping in with my
> opinion. Most of the few other reponses have agreed with me, basically
> saying (like me) "It would be nice to have Crusade back, but it's not a
huge
> deal anymore to the vast majority of. We tried the campaign when it first
> got killed, but JMS has since moved on to other cool things, and that's
> enough for us." (sentiments all of which have been echoed by other
posters.)
Oh, for God's sake, don't push him down "There's a big conspiracy against
destroying any hopes that Crusade will get restarted.". Next he will be
saying that he's been emailed by people who are too scared to post because
of your bully boy tactics ......
--
MAB/KOT/UK
Deathwalker
--
I.A.N.L.I.N.C.O.L.N.: Intelligent Android Normally for Logical
Infiltration/Networked Construct Optimized for Learning and Nullification
"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@eatspam.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:bgi2f7$4fo$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
Jason V Freddy was just advertised
The Nuclear Marine
"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.be...@virgin.net> wrote in
news:NJaXa.4077$yl6...@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net:
Don't ask me, if I don't mail it, it won't get posted. I mail it, it gets
double posted. It's annoying the hell out of me.
jehanne
"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" wrote:
> Oh, for God's sake, don't push him down "There's a big conspiracy against
> destroying any hopes that Crusade will get restarted.". Next he will be
> saying that he's been emailed by people who are too scared to post because
> of your bully boy tactics ......
If I've been "bully"-ish, I'd hope someone would tell me so, and justifiably
put me in my place. Nobody has (yet).
jehanne
Deathwalker
> news:<20030726180434...@mb-m19.aol.com>...
> > > Michael J Wise wrote:
> wasn't Crusade and therefor was 'bad'
> >
> > What??? That's not why it was bad. TLaDiS was bad all on its own.
> > It was the ST5/Highlander 2 of B5 movies.
okay i give up "TLaDiS" what is it?
Deathwalker
Infiltration/Networked Construct Optimized for Learning and Nullification
> news:20030725013407...@mb-m26.aol.com...
> > >OK, it looks like B5 is gonna go the distance(all 5 seasons) on
> > >DVD, crusade is still in "being considered" limbo, and rumors are
> > >flying thick & fast on Jeremiah.
> > >
> >
> > It's my understanding that if the sales continue as they have for B5,
they
> will
> > indeed release Crusade on DVD.
> >
> > I read on the net -- was never informed by MGM -- that Jeremiah will be
> coming
> > to DVD in January or February of next year, and season 2 begins
September
> 19th
> > on Showtime.
> >
> > >What about the other B5 movies? I suppose Call To Arms might
> > >reasonably go in a Crusade set to bulk it up but that still
> > >leaves Thirdspace and River Of Souls. Are there any whispers/hints
> > >you can give on the possibility of them finding their way to DVD?
> > >
> >
> > If things continue, I think it very likely from what they've said.
> >
> > jms
> >
> > (jms...@aol.com)
> > (all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
> > permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
> > and don't send me story ideas)
>
>
dear jms please can my english version of season 3 be packaged with an
english booklet. oh and rather than mess up yet another transfer and
release disc six yet again can they please do it right first time? ;)
Jan
> okay i give up "TLaDiS" what is it?
"To Live and Die in Starlight". As JMS said after the official announcement
came out:
<<The movie (and the series) is under the heading of BABYLON 5: THE LEGEND OF
THE RANGERS. The specific title for the 2-hour movie's story is "To Live and
Die in Starlight." >>
Most people latched on to the Legend of the Rangers and started referring to
the movie as LotR even though it was easily confused with Lord of the Rings.
hth,
Jan
Check out my auctions of rare Babylon 5 scripts and memorabilia at
http://tinyurl.com/bhkk
Deathwalker
> > jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) writes:
> >
> > >>OK, it looks like B5 is gonna go the distance(all 5 seasons) on
> > >>DVD, crusade is still in "being considered" limbo, and rumors are
> > >>flying thick & fast on Jeremiah.
> > >>
> >
> > >It's my understanding that if the sales continue as they have for B5,
> they will
> > >indeed release Crusade on DVD.
> >
>
with a tv movie of garibaldi catching up with bester. if there is an
official follow up book on these sort of things can someone post a link
here
and suggested reading. ta
long time fan but recently moved here from alt.babylon5.uk
where OT means On Topic unfortunately.
Matthew Buckley
On 6-Aug-2003, "Deathwalker" <ian-l...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Best get on
> with a tv movie of garibaldi catching up with bester. if there is an
> official follow up book on these sort of things can someone post a link
> here
> and suggested reading. ta
Here's the book you're looking for.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0345427173/
It's book three in a trilogy, the first two of which are:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345427157/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0345427165/
Deathwalker
sorry about that but speaking as an avid b5 fan that series stood on its
own, i was always waiting for crusade to get going. If Mr strazynski has
time (which is doubtful considering everything he's doing) then just finish
the series as planned in episodic paper back novels for us devoted fans and
stuff making the tv version.
There are guys making this thing called "the little ninja" they are doing
it
entirely in flash and its brilliant. They have complete creative control
and will finish in their own good time and market it as straight to dvd.
To
make sure there is interest they are showing snippets of it. the
production
values are excellent and so is background music. As long as Christopher
Franke got on board to do the score they'll do fine.
macthe...@yahoo.com
> > jehanne was implying that JMS didn't want to write Crusade ever again.
> > Well, that's disproven.
>
> Show me where I implied this, 'cause I sure don't remember it. You're
> misinterpreting me once again.
>
> I ased: "So you'd like to force JMS to revive Crusade against his will, if
> that what it takes?"
>
> First: It was a question, not a statement.
> Second: The question itself contained a conditional: "if."
>
> If I had said "So you'd like to force JMS to revive Crusade against his
> will?" (leaving off the last clause), then *maybe* you'd be able to say with
> some *small* amount of credibility that I implied JMS didn't want to write
> Crusade again; but even then you'd be on very shaky ground, 'cause it's a
> *question,* not a *statement.*
Note, you said:
"So you'd like to fore JMS to revive Cruade against his will, if
that's what
it takes? 'Cause that seems to be your attitude."
I took it as a statement written as a question, rhetorical. That is,
evidently, you think that I *would* like to force JMS to revive
Crusade against his will, if that what it takes.
1. I am *not* interested in trying to force JMS to write anything
against his will, not that he'd ever do that, anyway.
2. Continuing to write in the Crusade storyline would not be against
his will.
In your 2003-07-27 06:05:29 PST reply to my post, you said:
'Honestly, I think some people would take a gun and point it to Joe's
head
and say "Revive Crusade or else..."'
That was in reply to my:
"We've got to get Crusade re-started (picking up right where they left
off), while the actors still look close to how they looked in 1999."
The emphasis of that statement was on "...while the actors still look
close to how they looked in 1999." because it was in response to:
"I suspect that no one at
Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production
will serious consider reviving Crusade
unless DVD sales for B5 Season 5 and Crusade
are at the same level as Seasons 1 and 2.
I'm afraid we will have to wait and see."
We were talking about waiting and seeing, about the passage of time
and its effects on the odds of a re-start of a live action show in
which the actors' physical appearances matter onscreen. In a
re-start, the physical appearances would have to match within the
limits of the ability of makeup. Hell, look at Claudia Christian in
B5 Season 4 and then look at her on the Season 2 DVD extras! Would it
be possible to do another B5 movie set in 2262? Not likely if she was
to be in it. It'd take a lot to get her to look as she did in Season
4. Well, that's what a Crusade re-start would require, some new
episodes set in 2267, to finish off that season. Gary Cole looks the
same as he did in 1999 when Crusade was being shot, and so do Peter
Woodward and Daniel Dae Kim. Regarding the rest of the cast, I can't
say because I haven't seen them in anything recently. Still, changes
in cast appearance over time, works *against* any Crusade re-start.
The "wait and see" bit just doesn't work for Crusade. The *more* time
that goes by, the *less* likely a re-start becomes. I **understand**
that you're saying that the chances are currently astronomically low.
Maybe they are. I'm just saying that a couple of years from now,
after some more "waiting and seeing," they'll be even *lower*, and
that it "wouldn't hurt" if somebody wrote in to Warner Brothers
Domestic Television Production, now (as opposed to a couple of years
from now), to indicate interest in seeing Crusade re-started, interest
in seeing that story continued.
Honestly, I do *not* know what is so extreme or contentious about my
position. I mean, all anybody has to do to bring the bickering,
argumentative types out of the woodwork is to be even infinitesimally
on the positive side of neutral regarding the lifting of even one
finger in support of a Crusade re-start. In the current environment,
it's much, much easier to be a naysayer, to talk about astronomically
low odds, to say they'd never be able to get the cast together again,
and say that there's no use and that people should give up on Crusade
and let it "rest in peace." When it comes to letting go of something
that I think was very worthwhile, especially in light of some of the
garbage that's thriving on TV these days, I'm sort of like a Pit Bull.
I don't let go of the worthwhile, and I don't give up. Evidently,
that annoys some people. So be it. Too bad.
> And besides which, JMS has disproven any such
> statement by stating otherwise long before we ever got into this little
> spat.
>
> But I digress.... Questions are not statements; got it?
UNLESS they're rhetorical.
> Questions, unless
> they contain predications: (e.g. "Given that x, is y?") don't imply a damn
> thing and cannot be read as such.
Not entirely correct. Questions can be written to state what the
writer thinks is a fact, or to state the writer's opinion, or as
sarcasm. Doing so, does not necessarily involve a "prediction."
> Mac, stop telling me what I think or what I mean. You just keep losing
> credibility.
*sigh* What we have here is a failure to communicate.
> Just because you inferred it, doesn't mean that I ever implied it.
I think you've been insincere on a number of occasions in this thread
and other threads. You've said what I think are contradictory things,
sometimes within the same statement. You've also snipped part of what
you'd said when your previous words went against the current point you
were trying to prove.
Pelzo63/Chris, you may be right.
> If you think you're a telepath, you're a really lousy one, because when you
> try to tell everyone what I think or believe or mean or imply, you're almost
> invariably dead wrong.
Then, express yourself more clearly than you have in all of your posts
*prior to* your 2003-08-03 02:02:43 PST which starts with:
"<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> jehanne was implying that JMS didn't want to write Crusade ever again.
> Well, that's disproven."
Show me where I implied this,..."
> > > Furthermore, the response you've been
> > > getting here
> >
> > ...mainly from one person...
>
> 'Cause this has been hashed and rehashed so many time most folks are tired
> of the debate.
As am I. As am I!
> I, as the relative newbie, felt like jumping in with my
> opinion. Most of the few other reponses have agreed with me, basically
> saying (like me) "It would be nice to have Crusade back, but it's not a huge
> deal anymore to the vast majority of.
Today, regarding a Crusade re-start (or the re-start of *any* show
that's been out of production for a similar amount of time), does it
*have to be* a "huge deal" for anybody to write even one letter to
Warners? Is that some kind of supreme undertaking? Does it require
some kind of superhuman effort? Granted, it probably will not work.
It probably will be futile, but would it *kill* people to try? Is
being in favor of writing to Warners, so wrong?
> We tried the campaign when it first
> got killed,
So did I. Hope springs eternal.
> ...but JMS has since moved on to other cool things, and that's
> enough for us." (sentiments all of which have been echoed by other posters.)
> If it's not enough for you, fine, that's your opinion and we can't argue
> opinions. But at least be logical and fair when you're debating the issue.
I am *not* saying that the group identified by the following...
"It would be nice to have Crusade back, but it's not a huge
deal anymore to the vast majority of [us]. We tried the campaign when
it first
got killed, but JMS has since moved on to other cool things, and
that's
enough for us."
...should write to Warners in support of a Crusade re-start.
Rather, I'm just saying that when somebody comes out and asks the
following:
"Would now be a good time to prod them towards continuing Crusade?
It would stand a better chance of suceeding now when they have
evidence of the popularity of the universe rather than two
years down the track."
...that the knee-jerk response *not* be that of:
**********
"Good grief!
Let it rest in peace."
**********
"Honestly, I think some people would take a gun and point it to Joe's
head
and say "Revive Crusade or else..."
This is ridiculousness strained to the point of stupidity..."
**********
"I know we're used to B5 accomplishing the impossible, but a revival
of
Crusade, with the original cast, strains believeability."
**********
"So finally, in 1986-87 -- more than 15 years after TOS went off the
air, did
we get ST4 - with plans for more movies.... and TNG, which is arguably
superior to to the original ST in a number of ways. That's 15 years of
waiting for the clouds to part.
If -they- could wait, so can we.
So mac... go reread the Centauri Prime novels, or watch your tapes
again.
And trust JMS to do what is best for the story."
**********
"So you'd like to fore JMS to revive Cruade against his will, if
that's what
it takes? 'Cause that seems to be your attitude."
**********
"We got FIVE YEARS.... FIVE YEARS mac.... of one of the best stories
EVER
told for television, and here you are whining like a fifth grader who
didn't
get a gold star on his A+ paper."
**********
"Y'know, sometimes I wish JMS had just said, at the end of the fifth
season
of B5: "That was the story I wanted to tell, and now it's done. And
now for
something completely different..." and just moved on from the universe
entirely, 'cause the story was told and done.
Why do I sometime wish that? 'Cause then we wouln't have little brats
like
you fussing now because you only got one slice of cake for dessert
instead
of five.
I'm really *pissed* off by your attitude, in case you can't tell, so
for the
interests of everyone, I suggest we both drop this battle, 'cause it
doesn't
look like we're ever going to see eye to eye."
**********
> So who saying it's something we're entitled to? It's not me. I'm
> just saying it's something I'd like to see finished, and that a window
> of opportunity may be opening for the first time in a long time.
Yeah, and you bring it up every chance you get. It's damn annoying,
and I
feel like saying so.
What gets to me is that you haven't *yet* acknowledged how
astronomically
small the chances are.
**********
> Nothing wrong with hope.
"No, but if you're going up against the impossible (or at least highly
improbable), it's good form to at least admit to it first -- otherwise
you
look extremely naive and out of touch with reality."
**********
> The more people who say over and over and over again how
> "astronomically small the chances are," the smaller those chances are.
"Interesting. And then you proceed to go through a litany of
quotations about
how powerful hope is, and how attempting to achieve the impossible is
very
human, and how hope is all we
Or would you prefer that we deny the truth and say "There's an
excellent
chance Crusade could be revived next month if we can just get 100,000
letters into Joe Whatzizname at WB." I doubt it.
I'll take the truth, as unfiltered and unedited as possible, any day."
> That *dampens* enthusiasm. That *prevents* people from writing in to
> Warner Brothers Domestic Television Production and possibly having any
> positive effect. That throws a bucket of water on the fire, and I
> will *not* be a party to that.
"Yet by not admitting what you know to be the case, even as simple
little
sidebar, you make youself look rather ignorant, silly, and, dare I
say,
fan-boy-ish -- each time you post."
> What part of this:
>
> "Our thoughts form the universe, they always matter."
> -- G'Kar to Zack in Babylon 5:"The Hour of the Wolf"
>
> ...don't you understand?
"I'm supposed to take something spoken by a fictional character a
fictional
universe as gospel truth? That's probably the weakest sort of
reasoning
there is... falling back on cliches and quotations."
> From the recipient's point of view, it's like being given the first
> tenth of a novel, where that tenth ends on a cliffhanger, and being
> told, after you've read it and are hooked, "That's it. There are no
> more pages." That was not what JMS intended.
>
> Then, your posts are extending that, saying:
> "That's it. There are no more pages. There *never will be* any more
> pages. Get used to it. It's hopeless."
"I'm not saying it's hopeless; I'm saying that the chances are
extremely
small, and that although I, too, would like to see four and a half
more
seasons of Crusade, I'd much *rather* see JMS do other work, in other
media,
and enjoy that. I think I'd probably say that even if the chanced of
getting
Crusade back were extremely good."
**********
******************************
BTW, "hundreds of decimal places against" would indicate odds of *at
least* one in 1.e+100, and that's what I'd call **HOPELESS**.
Compared to that, the odds of winning the Grand Prize in the Powerball
Lottery (See http://www.musl.com/pbprizesNodds.shtm.), of 1 in
120,526,770.00 (or 1 in ~1.25e+8), are *great* odds. The odds of
winning the Powerball Grand Prize are at least 8.3e+91 better than
"hundreds of decimal places against."
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> Oh, for God's sake, don't push him down "There's a big conspiracy against
> destroying any hopes that Crusade will get restarted.".
Eh, you got that one a little mixed up, and you're giving Jehanne
*far* too much credit.
> Next he will be
> saying that he's been emailed by people who are too scared to post because
> of your bully boy tactics ......
Don't count on it. That hasn't happened, and I couldn't care less if
those who might agree with me, post or not.
KoshN
macthe...@yahoo.com
> "Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" wrote:
> > Oh, for God's sake, don't push him down "There's a big conspiracy against
> > destroying any hopes that Crusade will get restarted.". Next he will be
> > saying that he's been emailed by people who are too scared to post because
> > of your bully boy tactics ......
Date: 2003-08-04 17:00:17 PST
> If I've been "bully"-ish, I'd hope someone would tell me so, and justifiably
> put me in my place. Nobody has (yet).
>
> jehanne
Did you not see Pelzo63's 2003-07-31 01:54:00 PST post?...
****************************************
<< I'm really *pissed* off by your attitude, in case you can't tell, so for the
interests of everyone, I suggest we both drop this battle, 'cause it doesn't
look like we're ever going to see eye to eye. >><BR><BR>
where is the skin off of your back that is causing such hatred towards mac? is
he somehow personally insulting you by keeping up hope that maybe there can be
more B5? in other words, your pissiness is utterly unjustified, but this is
not the first time you've completely over-reacted in this forum, and thanks to
this post, i went from considering plonking you, to actually plonking you.
and for the record, perhaps the mods should haave noticed your blatant flame?
of course, this thread is on Automod for now.
<< 'Cause then we wouln't have little brats like
you fussing now because you only got one slice of cake for dessert instead
of five. >>
...Chris, my money says it's Theron, not enough partial sentences to be Buford."
****************************************
KoshN
Deathwalker
> <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:b7d8dca7.0307...@posting.google.com...> news:<ZYzUa.120989$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> > > "Mac Breck" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes. There is value in striking while the iron is hot, as opposed
to
> when
> > > > it's stone cold.
> > >
> > > I think the iron is pretty darn frigid at this point.
> >
> > And people are *still* talking about it, *still* want to see it
> > re-started *four years later*, even after all the sabotage, stupidity,
> > ham-handed fumbling and discouragement.
> >
> >
> > > It's been 4 years, people!
> >
> > Yes, it has been four damned long years, and people are still coming
> > back with the line that we'll likely have to wait six *more* years,
> > and then they bring up Trek TOS. They did NOT re-start Trek TOS.
> > Life's uncertain, people. You have to go for it while you can. You
> > can't always wait and see. Sometimes, there is no tomorrow.
They didn't even finish of farscape. They could at least do a two or 3
parter to clear up the cliff hanger ending.
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
"Jan" <janmsc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030806211505...@mb-m28.aol.com...
> Deathwalker asked:
>
> > okay i give up "TLaDiS" what is it?
>
> "To Live and Die in Starlight". As JMS said after the official
announcement
> came out:
>
> <<The movie (and the series) is under the heading of BABYLON 5: THE LEGEND
OF
> THE RANGERS. The specific title for the 2-hour movie's story is "To Live
and
> Die in Starlight." >>
>
> Most people latched on to the Legend of the Rangers and started referring
to
> the movie as LotR even though it was easily confused with Lord of the
Rings.
Mebbe, but at least people knew what they were talking about from the
context. The subtitle of "LOTR" is pretty obscure.
--
Mark Bertenshaw
Kingston upon Thames
UK
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
"Deathwalker" <ian-l...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:nxRXa.3563$FJ2.33...@news-text.cableinet.net...
>
> They didn't even finish of farscape. They could at least do a two or 3
> parter to clear up the cliff hanger ending.
I was led to believe that they recently ordered a mini-series to tie up the
loose ends.
macthe...@yahoo.com
> "Deathwalker" <ian-l...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:nxRXa.3563$FJ2.33...@news-text.cableinet.net...
> >
> > They didn't even finish of farscape. They could at least do a two or 3
> > parter to clear up the cliff hanger ending.
>
> I was led to believe that they recently ordered a mini-series to tie up the
> loose ends.
I think somebody's been pulling your leg.
KoshN
jehanne
jehanne
<macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Did you not see Pelzo63's 2003-07-31 01:54:00 PST post?...
No, actually, I didn't see it... I don't believe it came through to my
server.
> where is the skin off of your back that is causing such hatred towards
mac? is
> he somehow personally insulting you by keeping up hope that maybe there
can be
> more B5? in other words, your pissiness is utterly unjustified, but this
is
> not the first time you've completely over-reacted in this forum, and
thanks to
> this post, i went from considering plonking you, to actually plonking you.
What does "plonking" mean?
> and for the record, perhaps the mods should haave noticed your blatant
flame?
> of course, this thread is on Automod for now.
I now regret wasting so much emotion over such an inconsequential
discussion.
I made a mistake. Can we move on?
jehanne
Mac Breck
> <total snippage>
> sorry about that but speaking as an avid b5 fan that series stood on its
> own, i was always waiting for crusade to get going. If Mr strazynski has
> time (which is doubtful considering everything he's doing) then just
> finish the series as planned in episodic paper back novels for us
> devoted fans and stuff making the tv version.
I replied to a lot of this is post in the "Legend of the Rangers comes to
the UK" thread. It's re-titled as "Crusade, B5 & Crusade Novels & Short
Stories- Was Re: B5:LotR comes to the UK"
JMS has also said (oldest to most recent applicable messages):
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=16&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: Attn. JMS - The Crusade Story
From: Jms at B5
Date: 03/26/2000 07:01 AM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Neither WB nor TNT would have any impact on the publishing of Crusade
novels; but it's in getting a publishing company to license books for a
series that only went 13 episodes that the idea lapses. Del Rey has
shown no real interest in it, and to the best of my knowledge, no one
else has either.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=15&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: JMS: Rights? Licenses?
From: Jms at B5
Date: 03/31/2000 01:37 PM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Can you explain a bit about how rights work? I understand that WB owns
> Babylon 5 and Crusade. Does this mean that you actually have to get
> their permission whenever you want to write something in those
> universes?
Yes.
> Or can/did you reserve
> those rights at the time you sold it to them?
Nope. Studios own series whole hog.
> What about the other authors who
> write the B5 novels or short stories?
>
Those are done under the purview of a license between the publisher and WB.
> And how do licenses fit in? Specifically regarding the B5 Magazine.
Company X pays WB Y dollars to use the B5 images/likenesses/material in a
product (magazine, book, toy, whatever) for Z years.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=10&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: ATTN JMS: Crusade - The Whole Story
From: Jms at B5
Date: 09/10/2000 09:32 AM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> If I understood you correctly, B5:Crusade is never going to be made
> because TNT is holding the rights and won't sell them in a reasonable
> price, thus not allowing anyone else to make it
No, that's not quite it. WB owns the rights to Crusade, not TNT. SFC wanted
the rerun rights to B5 *as well as* Crusade because it seemed counter
productive to have the one without the other. TNT, not wanting Crusade to
succeed elsewhere -- in the past movies they'd passed on went on to earn
emmys elsewhere, something that annoyed them no end -- asked for a
huge sum of money to pry loose the reruns of B5, far more than anyone would
pay. That was the final sticking point in the deal, not the Crusade part.
> On the other hand, from
> your description, and your script, Crusade must be a hell of a story. So
> my question is, will we ever get to hear it? Is there hope that someone
> might pick it up and produce it? Can we expect more scripts that depict
> the main story? Should we expect a novel?
No, no novels are planned, because I wanted Crusade to be a TV story, and
again, WB owns the rights, which is standard for all TV series. Now, there's
a lot of the Crusade story covered in the technomage novels, so that's one
place, but a pure Crusade novel, no. As for the rest, only time will tell.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=8&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: from jms: a few quick items
From: Jms at B5
Date: 02/13/2001 07:09 AM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
While I'm waiting for permission to talk about some of the big stuff that's
going on, some general news....
As announced today in a press release from the SciFi Channel, the
network has picked up all 13 episodes of Crusade for broadcast this
Summer. This will be the first time the series has been broadcast since
its brief, original run on TNT.
<snip>
On the topic of comics...I will be writing a one-off B5 Graphic Novel for
Wildstorm that will debut later this year. I figure on writing it as soon as
I get out from under my current deadlines.
<snip>
More on these when I'm allowed to talk about them. Probably sometime
next week.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2001 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=7&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Casting Shadows ....
From: Jms at B5
Date: 02/28/2001 08:41 PM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Since these are from outlines by you, Joe, and although I know you'll
> probably say "wait and see", I'm sooooo curious as to whether the
> events in the novels will venture, even momentarily, through Crusade
> territory. It occurred to me while reading there's enough story to
> never make it that far by the third book.
There's actually going to be a LOT of Crusade stuff in the trilogy,
because at the time I wrote the outlines, the series was still in the
works. So some of the stuff I'd planned to reveal in the series will
be revealed here.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2001 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=4&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Novels Question
From: Jms at B5
Date: 07/09/2002 07:45 PM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Any chance of more B5-related novels coming out? A series
> finishing off the Crusade story would be really nice.
Nope, nothing's on the boards, and I think Del Rey's license has
either expired or is about to expire, so any other company could
certainly come in and make a case for picking up the license.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2002 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=3&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: Re: JMS: Can we have a...
From: Jms at B5
Date: 01/25/2003 07:15 PM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> What's the current status of the B5/Crusade graphic novel?
It's in need of some spare round tuits....
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=2&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: Re: JMS: No more B5-Novels?
From: Jms at B5
Date: 01/28/2003 09:52 PM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Why are there no new B5-novels? And why there where never any
> "Crusade"-Books? Why not continue "Crusade" in novels "based
> on an original outline by J.M.S."?
All that's required is for a publisher to make a deal with WB.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)
http://www.jmsnews.com/scripts/MsgStore.dll?MfcISAPICommand=GetMsg&List=1&Topic=1&Flags=1&Query=Crusade%20novel&QFlags=1&ls=1&qs=1&qt=0
Subject: Re: Ranting back: ( was: Re: On JMS : A minor rant...)
From: Jms at B5
Date: 07/30/2003 08:36 PM
Forum: Usenet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
<snipped all but the "novel" part of it, since we're only talking about
novels here>
The B5 graphic novel has simply been waiting time for me to get it done
because of the number of commitments I've been dealing with.
<snip>
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)
**************************************************
Those are the messages that seemed applicable upon doing a search on
"Crusade novel" in JMSNews.
--
Mac Breck
http://www.scifi.com/babylon5/
http://www.scifi.com/crusade/
http://www.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/1/5/1521 (Brimstone)
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
news:b7d8dca7.03080...@posting.google.com...
I posted this link recently:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/news/cult/2003/07/17/5781.shtml
Make of this what you will.
Deathwalker
> "Michael J Wise" <mjw...@kapu.net> wrote in message
> news:Pine.OSX.4.31.030726...@kapu.net...
> > Jan wrote:
> >
> > > Not...quite. You're forgetting the animated series from '73 - '75.
> >
> > Mmmm. But the only one I can really remember is the one where they
> > transmorgified Larry Niven's KnownSpace epic, "The Soft Weapon" into
> > a story in the Trek universe.
> >
> > Now if someone would just do a BigScreen adaptation of RingWorld....
erm you mean Terry Pratchett's Disc World?
Please excuse me i'm a refugge from alt.babylon5.uk and nothing b5 related
happens anymore.
Andrew Swallow
>
> > "Michael J Wise" <mjw...@kapu.net> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.OSX.4.31.030726...@kapu.net...
> > > Now if someone would just do a BigScreen adaptation of RingWorld....
>
> erm you mean Terry Pratchett's Disc World?
>
around a star, on which people live. Such a ring is possible
but very expensive. Disk World is impossible, but fun to read.
Andrew Swallow
Moyra J. Bligh
<jehann...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What does "plonking" mean?
You've been added to his killfile, he'll never see another thing you
write.
--
Moyra J. Bligh - mo...@zlatna.com
FAQ maintainer - alt.fan.mira-furlan http://www.zlatna.com/MFfaq.html
moderator mira-f mailing list - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mira-f/
===============================================================
Mira Furlan & Goran Gajic - come join The Celebration
http://www.zlatna.com/gold.html
===============================================================