Attn JMS: Crusade on Sci-Fi - Question
Mac Breck
At this point in time, from a story telling standpoint (i.e., making sense,
no continuity errors, your original vision, etc.), what do you thing would
be the *better* way to continue Crusade on the Sci-Fi Channel? Assume both
1 and 2 are possible.
1. Air "A Call to Arms", and the existing 13 episodes in the best order you
can come up with. Then, start Crusade Season 2.
or
2. Reshoot the first season of Crusade, using as much of the existing 13
episodes as possible, and removing the objectionable pieces (e.g. the TNT
mandated items, and your barbs at TNT), and shooting new episodes to fill in
the blanks. Then air, "A Call to Arms" followed by a full 22 episode
Crusade first season, on Sci-Fi.
I think the existing 13 episodes are too much of a shambles to make a good
first season, no matter how you arrange them, and Path 2 would be better.
Now is the time for all of us to ask the Sci-Fi Channel to back Crusade, but
I want to be sure to ask them for the path you think is best. Therefore, I
need your input.
Mac
Iain Reid
"Mac Breck" <macb...@timesnet.net> wrote in message
news:8claft$a...@library2.airnews.net...
Then again, maybe Joe isn't really interested in restarting Crusade. He
seems to have moved on since them, and I have no doubt that even in the
unlikley event that the SciFi channel ask for another series of Crusade
(doubtfull to say the least) it would be a very difficult thing to pull off
logistically - since most of the cast will be pursuing other projects.
I hope to the Gods I am wrong. I live in the UK, and don't have Sattelite
TV so my first viewing of Crusade was on the videos that have been released
recently. Having already seen all of the B5 episodes many, many times (I
own all of Babylon 5 on Warner Videos and seen it the first time round on
Channel 4) I may have been blinded by how much of a fan I am, but I loved
every second of it. When I finished watching them the first time I had a
lump in my throat knowing that there were only 9 more episodes of this fine
series left to watch.
So this question might not even be an issue. What I would like to know (and
what I think is more to the point) is: If the SciFi channel came to you
(JMS) and said "We really want another series based in the Babylon 5
universe and a prepared to offer you the kind of conditions that you wanted
from TNT or even better" would you want to finish of Crusade and brave the
hassle of putting a cast and crew back together; would you start again -
making an entirely new series based in the B5 universe or have you just had
enough of televisual B5 and have you turned the page on that chapter of your
life?
Iain Reid
James Bell
Iain Reid wrote:
> Then again, maybe Joe isn't really interested in restarting Crusade. He
> seems to have moved on since them, and I have no doubt that even in the
> unlikley event that the SciFi channel ask for another series of Crusade
> (doubtfull to say the least) it would be a very difficult thing to pull off
> logistically - since most of the cast will be pursuing other projects.
>
> I hope to the Gods I am wrong. I live in the UK, and don't have Sattelite
> TV so my first viewing of Crusade was on the videos that have been released
> recently. Having already seen all of the B5 episodes many, many times (I
> own all of Babylon 5 on Warner Videos and seen it the first time round on
> Channel 4) I may have been blinded by how much of a fan I am, but I loved
> every second of it. When I finished watching them the first time I had a
> lump in my throat knowing that there were only 9 more episodes of this fine
> series left to watch.
>
> So this question might not even be an issue. What I would like to know (and
> what I think is more to the point) is: If the SciFi channel came to you
> (JMS) and said "We really want another series based in the Babylon 5
> universe and a prepared to offer you the kind of conditions that you wanted
> from TNT or even better" would you want to finish of Crusade and brave the
> hassle of putting a cast and crew back together; would you start again -
> making an entirely new series based in the B5 universe or have you just had
> enough of televisual B5 and have you turned the page on that chapter of your
> life?
You're right, that is the question. However, your point about the cast doing
other things isn't that big a deal. None of the main cast are huge stars who
are likely to be tied up long-term. Even Gary Cole, whom I've heard may have a
new series this fall, is likely to be available after the new series is
cancelled (How many new series actually make it?). I'd bet SFC could get the
most important cast members on board within a year. By that time, Joe will have
been two years removed from the TNT situation and possibly be ready to jump back
in to the B5 universe again. We can hope so.
Jim
Mac Breck
news:8cltnm$6kj0j$1...@fu-berlin.de...
If I were JMS and my name was on it, I'd want to fix it and make it right,
and would be doing everything in my power to achieve those ends. It would
bug the hell out of me having Crusade out there in it's current form.
> He
> seems to have moved on since them, and I have no doubt that even in the
> unlikley event that the SciFi channel ask for another series of Crusade
> (doubtfull to say the least) it would be a very difficult thing to pull
off
> logistically - since most of the cast will be pursuing other projects.
You can still *try*. If you don't try, there's no way in hell it's ever
going to happen.
> I hope to the Gods I am wrong.
Agreed!
> So this question might not even be an issue. What I would like to know
(and
> what I think is more to the point) is: If the SciFi channel came to you
> (JMS) and said "We really want another series based in the Babylon 5
> universe and a prepared to offer you the kind of conditions that you
wanted
> from TNT or even better" would you want to finish of Crusade and brave the
> hassle of putting a cast and crew back together;
Lets hope he can get the same cast and crew back again. Maybe Claudia could
show up from time to time as well (as Ivanova).
> would you start again -
> making an entirely new series based in the B5 universe or have you just
had
> enough of televisual B5 and have you turned the page on that chapter of
your
> life?
Lets hope not!!! I'll take the B5 universe over the Star Trek or Star Wars
universe ANYDAY.
Joe, tell us a story!
Mac
Mac Breck
news:38EF865D...@naxs.com...
>
>
> Iain Reid wrote:
>
> > Then again, maybe Joe isn't really interested in restarting Crusade. He
> > seems to have moved on since them, and I have no doubt that even in the
> > unlikley event that the SciFi channel ask for another series of Crusade
> > (doubtfull to say the least) it would be a very difficult thing to pull
off
> > logistically - since most of the cast will be pursuing other projects.
> >
Sattelite
> > TV so my first viewing of Crusade was on the videos that have been
released
> > recently. Having already seen all of the B5 episodes many, many times
(I
> > own all of Babylon 5 on Warner Videos and seen it the first time round
on
> > Channel 4) I may have been blinded by how much of a fan I am, but I
loved
> > every second of it. When I finished watching them the first time I had
a
> > lump in my throat knowing that there were only 9 more episodes of this
fine
> > series left to watch.
> >
(and
> > what I think is more to the point) is: If the SciFi channel came to you
> > (JMS) and said "We really want another series based in the Babylon 5
> > universe and a prepared to offer you the kind of conditions that you
wanted
> > from TNT or even better" would you want to finish of Crusade and brave
the
> > making an entirely new series based in the B5 universe or have you just
had
> > enough of televisual B5 and have you turned the page on that chapter of
your
> > life?
>
doing
> other things isn't that big a deal. None of the main cast are huge stars
who
> are likely to be tied up long-term. Even Gary Cole, whom I've heard may
have a
> new series this fall, is likely to be available after the new series is
> cancelled (How many new series actually make it?). I'd bet SFC could get
the
> most important cast members on board within a year. By that time, Joe will
have
> been two years removed from the TNT situation and possibly be ready to
jump back
> in to the B5 universe again. We can hope so.
I say we should do more than hope. We should all get behind this and help.
Write to the Sci-Fi Channel. Thank them for picking up the B5 reruns, and
ask them to back Crusade.
Mac
Angela Hays
>> what I think is more to the point) is: If the SciFi channel came to you
>> (JMS) and said "We really want another series based in the Babylon 5
>> universe and a prepared to offer you the kind of conditions that you wanted
>> from TNT or even better" would you want to finish of Crusade and brave the
>> hassle of putting a cast and crew back together; would you start again -
>> making an entirely new series based in the B5 universe or have you just had
>> enough of televisual B5 and have you turned the page on that chapter of your
>> life?
>
>You're right, that is the question. However, your point about the cast doing
>other things isn't that big a deal. None of the main cast are huge stars who
>are likely to be tied up long-term. Even Gary Cole, whom I've heard may have a
>new series this fall, is likely to be available after the new series is
>cancelled (How many new series actually make it?). I'd bet SFC could get the
>most important cast members on board within a year. By that time, Joe will have
>been two years removed from the TNT situation and possibly be ready to jump back
>in to the B5 universe again. We can hope so.
>
>
Very well put. That's the most optimistic thing I've heard in a long time.
And the great thing about it, is that I could actually see it happening.
Then again, I'm an optimist too.
Wouldn't that be wonderful....
Angela
Lisa Coulter
On this note, two recent magazine interviews come to mind, to which I had *very*
different reactions.
First let me say i *love* B5 and my 2 favorites in the series are, in order,
Delenn and Sheridan (sorry, I like heroes, and strong female heroes are even
better.)
Furlan was asked in issue 21 of the B5 mag if she thinks a big screen movie was
likely, and if she'd be willing to appear. She said she didn't think it was
likely but would love to play Delenn again.. Nice interview.
Boxleitner was asked roughly the same questions in a British cult TV mag (TV
Zone) which had a best of the 90's issue - and proclaimed that in their opinion
the best was B5. He responded in a much more negative way. Why would we want
more with Star Wars out there?( I can think of *lots* of reasons) Asked if the
money and everything was right if he would do Sheridan, he basically said yes
but it isn't going to happen. I find this slightly irksome. Even more so, he
and the mag both felt Season 5 was weak (I disagree - really started to
appreciate it lots while rewatching) and yet he still said he didn't understand
why you would cancel a successful series....
I don't know. He talked lots about his book and new potential Rodenberry series
( a man goes into cold sleep with his family, wakes up they are not there and he
is not sure he is still on earth - why does this remind me of Voyager, the
series(can't remember name) where someone went into a building and came out with
no identity recognized by anyone. Anyway, to be honest I think the Sorbo series
(which seems to be confirmed ) has a much better chance and more interesting
plot.
The whole thing left a sour taste in my mouth.
Maybe he should remember that just because we are B5 fans and like his
performance as Sheridan ( and I really did) doesn't necessarily mean we will
follow him to other series books, etc -- have to admit, I am having second
thoughts.
Don't know, maybe just read it in the wrong mood.
In addition, in terms of feature films, maybe actors don't consider any long
term possibilities worth considering, but I note that the original trek, Mary
Tyle Moore, and Brady Bunch took a long time to do movies. Also Battlestar
Galactica appears likely to do a movie, and that has been quite some time
coming.
Lisa Coulter
Mac Breck wrote:
> > Then again, maybe Joe isn't really interested in restarting Crusade.
>
> If I were JMS and my name was on it, I'd want to fix it and make it right,
> and would be doing everything in my power to achieve those ends. It would
> bug the hell out of me having Crusade out there in it's current form.
>
> > He
> > seems to have moved on since them, and I have no doubt that even in the
> > unlikley event that the SciFi channel ask for another series of Crusade
> > (doubtfull to say the least) it would be a very difficult thing to pull
> off
> > logistically - since most of the cast will be pursuing other projects.
>
> You can still *try*. If you don't try, there's no way in hell it's ever
> going to happen.
>
> > I hope to the Gods I am wrong.
>
> Agreed!
>
> > So this question might not even be an issue. What I would like to know
> (and
> > what I think is more to the point) is: If the SciFi channel came to you
> > (JMS) and said "We really want another series based in the Babylon 5
> > universe and a prepared to offer you the kind of conditions that you
> wanted
> > from TNT or even better" would you want to finish of Crusade and brave the
> > hassle of putting a cast and crew back together;
>
> Lets hope he can get the same cast and crew back again. Maybe Claudia could
> show up from time to time as well (as Ivanova).
>
> > would you start again -
> > making an entirely new series based in the B5 universe or have you just
> had
> > enough of televisual B5 and have you turned the page on that chapter of
> your
> > life?
>
Brian Watson
> I would just love to see some more *movies* -- maybe we can lobby for this!
> Boxleitner was asked roughly the same questions in a British cult TV mag (TV
> Zone) which had a best of the 90's issue - and proclaimed that in their opinion
> the best was B5. He responded in a much more negative way. Why would we want
> more with Star Wars out there?( I can think of *lots* of reasons) Asked if the
> money and everything was right if he would do Sheridan, he basically said yes
> but it isn't going to happen. I find this slightly irksome. Even more so, he
> and the mag both felt Season 5 was weak (I disagree - really started to
> appreciate it lots while rewatching) and yet he still said he didn't understand
> why you would cancel a successful series....
The fact is it WILL have a harder time competing with Star Wars, simply because of
the hype it will get, burying B5 in the movie theaters. It won't affect me though,
as I won't be seeing either based on the crap I saw in the first movie. I'm saving
my money for the LOTR trilogy, at least it's based on GOOD fantasy instead of the SW
fantasy crap that Lucas is shoveling.
> I don't know. He talked lots about his book and new potential Rodenberry series
> ( a man goes into cold sleep with his family, wakes up they are not there and he
> is not sure he is still on earth - why does this remind me of Voyager, the
> series(can't remember name) where someone went into a building and came out with
> no identity recognized by anyone. Anyway, to be honest I think the Sorbo series
> (which seems to be confirmed ) has a much better chance and more interesting
> plot.
>
> The whole thing left a sour taste in my mouth.
>
> Maybe he should remember that just because we are B5 fans and like his
> performance as Sheridan ( and I really did) doesn't necessarily mean we will
> follow him to other series books, etc -- have to admit, I am having second
> thoughts.
Uhhh.. hello. The man is entitled to his opinion! Just because you don't like it,
doesn't mean the man is any different. I agree with him on some points, mostly that
the 5th season was a little weaker than the previous ones when it comes to WHAM
situations (just like it should, as it's the denoumout or whatever of the series).
It started off slow with the Teep colony, but did pick up towards the end with the
crisis on Centauri.
> Don't know, maybe just read it in the wrong mood.
>
> In addition, in terms of feature films, maybe actors don't consider any long
> term possibilities worth considering, but I note that the original trek, Mary
> Tyle Moore, and Brady Bunch took a long time to do movies. Also Battlestar
> Galactica appears likely to do a movie, and that has been quite some time
> coming.
And the world would have been better without the Brady Bunch movies. Something to
think of.
Mark Maher
>I would just love to see some more *movies* -- maybe we can
lobby for this!
>
>On this note, two recent magazine interviews come to mind, to
which I had *very*
>different reactions.
>
>First let me say i *love* B5 and my 2 favorites in the series
are, in order,
>Delenn and Sheridan (sorry, I like heroes, and strong female
heroes are even
>better.)
Good choices. I like it when someone agress with me.
>Furlan was asked in issue 21 of the B5 mag if she thinks a big
screen movie was
>likely, and if she'd be willing to appear. She said she didn't
think it was
>likely but would love to play Delenn again.. Nice interview.
A very good, though fairly short interview. Mira stated in an
earlier interview that she feels an obligation to do the best
job that she can with a given character. She understands that
Delenn is a very complex and rich character, and that makes the
role a satisfying one for a performer.
It's just an opinion that I have, but I don't think she's in the
business for her own self-acclaim. She is a performer who's had
great fame (at least in Europe) and has seen the darker side of
it in many forms.
>Boxleitner was asked roughly the same questions in a British
cult TV mag (TV
>Zone) which had a best of the 90's issue - and proclaimed that
in their opinion
>the best was B5. He responded in a much more negative way. Why
would we want
>more with Star Wars out there?( I can think of *lots* of
reasons) Asked if the
>money and everything was right if he would do Sheridan, he
basically said yes
>but it isn't going to happen. I find this slightly irksome.
Even more so, he
>and the mag both felt Season 5 was weak (I disagree - really
started to
>appreciate it lots while rewatching) and yet he still said he
didn't understand
>why you would cancel a successful series....
Again, just my own opinion here, but I think Bruce saw Babylon 5
as a chance at the kind of fame and guaranteed career that Star
Trek wound up giving to William Shatner (eventually). Who would
have thought that Bill Shatner would have wound up essentially
set for life with the kind of over-acting, egomaniac approach
that he used for Kirk during the original series?
Rumor has it Bruce was the one who kicked and screamed the
hardest when it came time to wrap up the production. Melissa
Gilbert was also quite vocal on USENET in criticizing the whole
deal. I sometimes think that Bruce got cast in "A Call to Arms"
just to shut the both of them up.
>I don't know. He talked lots about his book and new potential
>Rodenberry series
>( a man goes into cold sleep with his family, wakes up they are
>not there and he
>is not sure he is still on earth - why does this remind me of
>Voyager, the
>series(can't remember name) where someone went into a >building
and came out with
>no identity recognized by anyone.
I think Mel Gibson and Jamie Lee Curtis already did this one.
>Anyway, to be honest I think the Sorbo series
>(which seems to be confirmed ) has a much better chance and
>more interesting
>plot.
>
>The whole thing left a sour taste in my mouth.
The ending of the story probably left a sour taste in quite a
few mouths. jms had done something very few people had done
before, pulled the plug on a story when it made logical sense.
He didn't drag it out and bleed it for every miserable penny he
could get while the ratings kept going down and down...
Which leaves the actors out in the cold wondering what's next.
As usual. Some people have gotten used to that and some haven't.
>Maybe he should remember that just because we are B5 fans >and
like his
>performance as Sheridan ( and I really did) doesn't necessarily
>mean we will
>follow him to other series books, etc -- have to admit, I am
>having second
>thoughts.
>
>Don't know, maybe just read it in the wrong mood.
No, I think that you're spot on. *VERY* few actors/actresses get
my unwavering loyalty. They all get involved in a bad project
here and there. I'll look at something if I think it's going to
be worth it in terms of story or screen presentation or
wonderful performances. I really like Gary Oldman, but I didn't
run out and get three copies of "Lost in Space" on video just
because he was in it. I did get two copies of "Lepota Poroka."
No subtitles and none were needed, the acting was that good.
>In addition, in terms of feature films, maybe actors don't
consider any long
>term possibilities worth considering, but I note that the
original trek, Mary
>Tyle Moore, and Brady Bunch took a long time to do movies.
Also Battlestar
>Galactica appears likely to do a movie, and that has been quite
some time
>coming.
If we have to wait *that* long, most of the first generation of
actors and fans won't be left! :-)
__!_!__
Gizmo
Mac Breck
news:AKoI4.7868$8v5.5...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >In addition, in terms of feature films, maybe actors don't
> consider any long
> >term possibilities worth considering, but I note that the
> original trek, Mary
> >Tyle Moore, and Brady Bunch took a long time to do movies.
> Also Battlestar
> >Galactica appears likely to do a movie, and that has been quite
> some time
> >coming.
>
> actors and fans won't be left! :-)
>
I don't know how long it would take to make a Babylon 5 movie, but wouldn't
it make sense to do it at the same time Star Wars Episode 3 is being made?
Mac
Mark Maher
>
>I don't know how long it would take to make a Babylon 5 movie,
but wouldn't
>it make sense to do it at the same time Star Wars Episode 3 is
being made?
>
I don't know. They seem to be in full waffle-mode on whether
there is going to be a number three right now...
__!_!__
Gizmo
Diane K De
>From: Lisa Coulter lcou...@stetson.edu
I had an opposite reaction to the interview. Too often I feel people tell fan
magazines what they think the fans want to here. With Bruce, I feel he's
really saying what he feels and believes. I respect that.
Everyone has feelings and opinions. He's entitled to his.
As to his dwelling on what's going on in his life now, what do you expect him
to do. How long has it been since he played Sheridan? Do any of us dwell on
what was going on in our lives two years ago and ignore what's happening now?
(Maybe some people shouldn't answer that.)
DD
Andy Hock
>
> Now is the time for all of us to ask the Sci-Fi Channel to back Crusade,
I disagree. JMS has said that it is way too early to get into
the Crusade issue now. The time to ask SciFi to back Crusade
(IMHO, of course) is AFTER the B5 reruns become successful on
SciFi (assuming they do) and make SciFi lots of money.
Andy Hock
Jms at B5
>the Crusade issue now. The time to ask SciFi to back Crusade
>(IMHO, of course) is AFTER the B5 reruns become successful on
>SciFi (assuming they do) and make SciFi lots of money.
I get the sense from some folks at SFC that they wanted to make the B5 deal its
own thing, without diluting it, and that they might well come back next year to
pick up the Crusade reruns as another kind of event to spike the B5 reruns a
bit.
Note: I'm not saying that's what's going to happen, only my sense of what will
*probably* happen, given some recent conversations.
Everything in TV has its time; shows are acquired at specific points and in
specific ways. That's why, for instance, the project Chris Carter and I had in
development has to wait until July/August before I can take it out again;
development season runs from about that time through October, then the door's
shut.
To that point, as an aside, since people have emailed and asked what is
involved in development in terms of my side of things....
In the case of the project I was doing with Chris, you don't simply jump over a
broom on the floor and say "Okay, we're now in development." (Taxi fans will
get that one.) Contracts are signed and deals made BEFORE you get into
development and before you pitch it to anyone.
Why?
Because let's say you DON'T sign a deal in advance. You take the project to a
network. They want it. The writer can then hold up the studio for exorbitant
monies because he knows the network wants the show. Studios will NEVER put
themselves in that vulnerable a position. (On the flip side, a writer wants to
make sure his or her position on the show is guaranteed in advance.)
So in the case of THE WORLD ON FIRE, once I'd pitched it to Frank and Chris,
and they liked it, before any development work could commence we had to strike
a deal between me, Ten Thirteen Productions, and Fox Studios. Negotiations
took about 2 or 3 weeks, if I recall.
In that deal, signed around July/August last year, Fox agreed that I would exec
produce the series if it were picked up. Chris and Frank would also be EPs.
Even though the show didn't get picked up because of the Harsh Realm situation,
what's significant is that a) the negotiation and deal, which is now a matter
of record at Fox, put my salary quote at nearly double what it had been at B5
(this is important because all new deals are based on your last deal), and b)
it proved what I'd believed: that having run B5 for five years, keeping it on
budget, on schedule, and making it hugely profitable for WB, was a hell of a
lot more important to the studios than the Crusade situation. Shows get
dropped all the time, sometimes in contentious circumstances.
What mattered to Fox and Ten Thirteen (and all this is a matter of record, I
couldn't say this stuff if it weren't true or Fox would nail my ass to the
wall) was what was done with B5. I don't think they were even *aware* of
Crusade, to be honest.
So when the next development season comes around in July/August, we'll see what
happens. In general I'd prefer to run my own show than come in on someone
else's show (show runners for new and returning series get hired May/June).
I've had some nice offers, including a project with Joe Dante that I'm very
strongly considering, but in general I'm holding out for something *cool*,
whether it's my own show or someone else's.
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)
Mac Breck
Let's hope that means they may not make an Episode 3, and a Babylon 5 movie
would have to wait for one less Star Wars movie. Unfortunately, if JMS
waits for the waffling to be over, we may be waiting a long, long time.
Mac
Mac Breck
news:20000412005551...@ng-fg1.aol.com...
> >I disagree. JMS has said that it is way too early to get into
> >the Crusade issue now. The time to ask SciFi to back Crusade
> >(IMHO, of course) is AFTER the B5 reruns become successful on
> >SciFi (assuming they do) and make SciFi lots of money.
>
> I get the sense from some folks at SFC that they wanted to make the B5
deal its
> own thing, without diluting it, and that they might well come back next
year to
> pick up the Crusade reruns as another kind of event to spike the B5 reruns
a
> bit.
>
> Note: I'm not saying that's what's going to happen, only my sense of what
will
> *probably* happen, given some recent conversations.
So, it would seem that now *would* be a good time for the fans to let the
Sci-Fi Channel that they are happy that Sc-Fi picked up the Babylon 5
reruns, and that we also want Crusade.
I'm in favor of (from my first post):
2. Reshoot the first season of Crusade, using as much of the existing 13
episodes as possible, and removing the objectionable pieces (e.g. the TNT
mandated items, and your barbs at TNT), and shooting new episodes to fill in
the blanks. Then air, "A Call to Arms" followed by a full 22 episode
Crusade first season, on Sci-Fi.
Mac
Pål Are Nordal
> Even though the show didn't get picked up because of the Harsh Realm situation,
> what's significant is that a) the negotiation and deal, which is now a matter
> of record at Fox, put my salary quote at nearly double what it had been at B5
> (this is important because all new deals are based on your last deal)
This leaves the question - would you be forced to once again take a serious pay
cut, if you wanted do more Crusade? The Sci-Fi channel seems to have gotten more
money recently with the success of their original programing, but would they
consider giving you a network level salary?
--
Donate free food with a simple click: http://www.thehungersite.com/
Pål Are Nordal
a_b...@bigfoot.com
Lisa Coulter
Mark Maher wrote:
> Mac Breck wrote in message <8ctao9$9...@library2.airnews.net>...
> >
> >I don't know how long it would take to make a Babylon 5 movie,
> but wouldn't
> >it make sense to do it at the same time Star Wars Episode 3 is
> being made?
> >
>
> I don't know. They seem to be in full waffle-mode on whether
> there is going to be a number three right now...
>
> __!_!__
> Gizmo
Didn't know that there was a question on SW:Ep3, but in terms of B5 I am
not even sure it is necesary to wait for the SW trilogy to finish. I
remember when the first one was going a number of semi-good SF movies
which were somewhat similar coming out. SW may actually *increase* a B5
movie audience becuase the SW junkies are looking for something to watch
while waiting for the next installment. During or shortly thereafter
would be my recommendation for a B5 movie.
In the end, there is always the sunrise.....
Lisa Coulter
Andrew M Swallow
>not even sure it is necesary to wait for the SW trilogy to finish. I
>remember when the first one was going a number of semi-good SF movies
>which were somewhat similar coming out. SW may actually *increase* a B5
>movie audience becuase the SW junkies are looking for something to watch
>while waiting for the next installment. During or shortly thereafter
>would be my recommendation for a B5 movie.
>
The SW and B5 movies could be phased such that they come out in alterative
years. That way they do not clash.
Surprising how fast these new CGI techniques can be. They took 1 year less
than the producer estimated. :)
Andrew Swallow
Jms at B5
>Sci-Fi Channel that they are happy that Sc-Fi picked up the Babylon 5
>reruns, and that we also want Crusade.
>
I'm suggesting that they probably don't need much in the way of encouragement
in terms of picking up the 13 Crusades. So I'd go light on this.
Jms at B5
>pay
>cut, if you wanted do more Crusade?
Cart, horse. Horse, cart.
Jms at B5
>Sci-Fi Channel that they are happy that Sc-Fi picked up the Babylon 5
>reruns, and that we also want Crusade.
One thing I forgot to mention in my prior post was that thus far SFC has been
just terrific and very excited about bringing on B5. They've stayed in touch
with me pretty much every since the announcement, and we're working out what
can be done to promote the show, how to best feature it, that sort of thing.
There have been a couple of ideas expressed that are VERY cool, but it's still
way too early to talk about them. I'll be meeting with Craig Engler from the
SFC web site and Sci Fi Wire in about 2 weeks to continue the discussions about
what can be done on that side as well.
It's nice to have a situation of respectful give and take rather than having
dictates handed down.
UnltdLife
>
> jms
It's amazing to me that you can say so much with so few words...
Now we'll spend the next 10 years just trying to figure out exactly what you
mean...
Jason
Mac Breck
> >This leaves the question - would you be forced to once again take a
serious
> >pay
> >cut, if you wanted do more Crusade?
>
>
> jms
Well, at least a piece of Kosh is alive and well.
Mac
Mac Breck
> >So, it would seem that now *would* be a good time for the fans to let the
> >Sci-Fi Channel that they are happy that Sc-Fi picked up the Babylon 5
> >reruns, and that we also want Crusade.
>
encouragement
> in terms of picking up the 13 Crusades. So I'd go light on this.
Don't you think that airing the existing 13 Crusade episodes on the Sci-Fi
Channel, in TNT's airing order, could hurt the chances for Crusade to be
picked up for further episodes? When viewing Crusade, the very unJMS-like
pieces, and slams at TNT stand out like a sore thumb. Maybe I'm looking at
this from the wrong POV, that of a fan who knows some of what went on in the
Crusade/TNT mess. Maybe, for someone who has never seen Babylon 5 or
Crusade, seeing "A Call to Arms", and then the 13 existing Crusade episodes
(in the best order YOU can come up with) would be OK, and get new fans
behind Crusade.
That said, I still hope you get a chance to touch-up Crusade Season 1 by
cutting some objectionable bits, and filming some new episodes (e.g. Value
Judgements).
> One thing I forgot to mention in my prior post was that thus far SFC has
been
> just terrific and very excited about bringing on B5. They've stayed in
touch
> with me pretty much every since the announcement, and we're working out
what
> can be done to promote the show, how to best feature it, that sort of
thing.
>
> There have been a couple of ideas expressed that are VERY cool, but it's
still
> way too early to talk about them. I'll be meeting with Craig Engler from
the
> SFC web site and Sci Fi Wire in about 2 weeks to continue the discussions
about
> what can be done on that side as well.
Speaking of promoting the show, how about the idea of putting out car bumper
stickers and especially car window decals through the fan club *well before*
the September 25th Sci-Fi Channel airdate? It would help us help you to
promote the show. I can't believe how many people have never heard about
Babylon 5! The owner of the video store had never heard of Babylon 5, when
I showed her my new Season 3 Jacket (fast becoming my favorite jacket). All
they know is Trek. I wore the Crusade Jacket at Fosters/Pittsburgh Jazz
Society the other night (trying to give both jackets equal time).
Mac
Pelzo63
>jms wrote:
>>Cart, horse. Horse, cart.
>Now we'll spend the next 10 years just trying to >figure out exactly what
>you
>mean...
it's an expression, "don't put the cart before the horse".
hth
Hugh Niewoehner
Isn't your statement below pretty much the same thing that was said when
TNT picked up B5? And, while the program was being run out of their
offices on the west coast, it remained that way. It was when Atlanta
got involved that things headed south. Do the people you're working
with at SFC have to report to other management who could make it the
same sort of two headed monster TNT was?
Hughn
0-===
"The question isn't 'Are you paranoid', it's 'Are you
paranoid...enough'" - Pavel Iosevitch
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> From: jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5)
> Date: 12 Apr 2000 17:06:30 -0600
>
> One thing I forgot to mention in my prior post was that thus
> far SFC has been
> just terrific and very excited about bringing on B5. They've
> stayed in touch
> with me pretty much every since the announcement, and we're
> working out what
> can be done to promote the show, how to best feature it, that
> sort of thing.
>
Maagic
consistent with what I have come to expect from JMS." : )
UnltdLife wrote:
>
> >Cart, horse. Horse, cart.
> >
>
> It's amazing to me that you can say so much with so few words...
>
> mean...
>
--
Maagic
aka Bryan Foster
Webmaster of the
Rick and Bubba Audio Page
http://www.cybrtyme.com/personal/bfoster/bubba.htm
Maagic
so I'm going to hold my tongue and wish you good luck :)
Jms at B5 wrote:
>
> >I disagree. JMS has said that it is way too early to get into
> >the Crusade issue now. The time to ask SciFi to back Crusade
> >(IMHO, of course) is AFTER the B5 reruns become successful on
> >SciFi (assuming they do) and make SciFi lots of money.
>
> I get the sense from some folks at SFC that they wanted to make the B5 deal its
> own thing, without diluting it, and that they might well come back next year to
> pick up the Crusade reruns as another kind of event to spike the B5 reruns a
> bit.
>
> Note: I'm not saying that's what's going to happen, only my sense of what will
> *probably* happen, given some recent conversations.
>
> Everything in TV has its time; shows are acquired at specific points and in
> specific ways. That's why, for instance, the project Chris Carter and I had in
> development has to wait until July/August before I can take it out again;
> development season runs from about that time through October, then the door's
> shut.
>
> To that point, as an aside, since people have emailed and asked what is
> involved in development in terms of my side of things....
>
> In the case of the project I was doing with Chris, you don't simply jump over a
> broom on the floor and say "Okay, we're now in development." (Taxi fans will
> get that one.) Contracts are signed and deals made BEFORE you get into
> development and before you pitch it to anyone.
>
> Why?
>
> Because let's say you DON'T sign a deal in advance. You take the project to a
> network. They want it. The writer can then hold up the studio for exorbitant
> monies because he knows the network wants the show. Studios will NEVER put
> themselves in that vulnerable a position. (On the flip side, a writer wants to
> make sure his or her position on the show is guaranteed in advance.)
>
> So in the case of THE WORLD ON FIRE, once I'd pitched it to Frank and Chris,
> and they liked it, before any development work could commence we had to strike
> a deal between me, Ten Thirteen Productions, and Fox Studios. Negotiations
> took about 2 or 3 weeks, if I recall.
>
> In that deal, signed around July/August last year, Fox agreed that I would exec
> produce the series if it were picked up. Chris and Frank would also be EPs.
>
> Even though the show didn't get picked up because of the Harsh Realm situation,
> what's significant is that a) the negotiation and deal, which is now a matter
> of record at Fox, put my salary quote at nearly double what it had been at B5
> (this is important because all new deals are based on your last deal), and b)
> it proved what I'd believed: that having run B5 for five years, keeping it on
> budget, on schedule, and making it hugely profitable for WB, was a hell of a
> lot more important to the studios than the Crusade situation. Shows get
> dropped all the time, sometimes in contentious circumstances.
>
> What mattered to Fox and Ten Thirteen (and all this is a matter of record, I
> couldn't say this stuff if it weren't true or Fox would nail my ass to the
> wall) was what was done with B5. I don't think they were even *aware* of
> Crusade, to be honest.
>
> So when the next development season comes around in July/August, we'll see what
> happens. In general I'd prefer to run my own show than come in on someone
> else's show (show runners for new and returning series get hired May/June).
> I've had some nice offers, including a project with Joe Dante that I'm very
> strongly considering, but in general I'm holding out for something *cool*,
> whether it's my own show or someone else's.
>
> 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)
--
TN...@aol.com
>One thing I forgot to mention in my prior post was that thus far SFC has
>been just terrific and very excited about bringing on B5. They've stayed in
>touch with me pretty much every since the announcement, and we're working out
>what can be done to promote the show, how to best feature it, that sort of
>thing.
Just a thought if the Sci-Fi channel wants to broaden the B5 audience....
I know several people who've never seen B5 and would be interested in the
show, but between kids and fairly high pressure jobs, there's no way they'll
be able to follow a continuing story 5 nights per week. And taping 5 shows a
week (and trying to find the time to view them) rapidly becomes a nightmare.
Once people realize they're not going to be able to keep up with the
continuing story, they'll give up.
Any possibility they'd run it 2 - 3 times/wk. instead? Might attract an
older audience for a much longer period of time.
TNW
Stephen C. Smith
SFC were to come to you and ask you to pitch a new series set in the B5 universe --
not an extension of "B5", not a revival of "Crusade", but a new show -- would you be
interested? Or is that a part of your life that you've left behind and you'd prefer
to do something else?
Thanks in advance,
Stephen
On 11 Apr 2000 22:58:35 -0600, jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>I get the sense from some folks at SFC that they wanted to make the B5 deal its
>own thing, without diluting it, and that they might well come back next year to
>pick up the Crusade reruns as another kind of event to spike the B5 reruns a
>bit.
Visit the FutureAngels Web site
http://www.futureangels.com
Complete coverage of the Anaheim Angels farm system
A Baseball America Online Affiliate
Brandon
> Didn't know that there was a question on SW:Ep3, but in terms of B5
The last official news I heard is that we are going to go all the way to
Ep3, and then there is a question however whether or not Lucas is going
to make the last trilogy. It's nowhere near certain at this point that
he will finish the original 9-arc. He's getting on in years...
I agree with you Lisa. I think that a good time for B5 could be
midpoint between release of say Ep2 and Ep3. As long as it's not
released at the same time as a SW movie it should be okay. Otherwhise
we will have to wait FOREVER... And we don't want to wait too long now
that the series has ended. We have the fanbase ready to go. Leave it
too long and some may be lost.
--------------------------------------
and after this there's just the circus
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
David Barnett
been
: just terrific and very excited about bringing on B5. They've stayed in
touch
: with me pretty much every since the announcement, and we're working out
what
: can be done to promote the show, how to best feature it, that sort of
thing.
: There have been a couple of ideas expressed that are VERY cool, but it's
still
: way too early to talk about them. I'll be meeting with Craig Engler from
the
: SFC web site and Sci Fi Wire in about 2 weeks to continue the discussions
about
: what can be done on that side as well.
: It's nice to have a situation of respectful give and take rather than
having
: dictates handed down.
I'm sincerely delighted that things are going your way for a change.
Will B5 be re-shown exactly as before, or will there be a "Director's Cut"
sort of thing involved?
--
David Barnett
"Are you a doctor? I am today!" (The Pretender)
Patrick MARCEL
> The last official news I heard is that we are going to go all the way to
> Ep3, and then there is a question however whether or not Lucas is going
> to make the last trilogy. It's nowhere near certain at this point that
> he will finish the original 9-arc. He's getting on in years...
Last I heard, Lucas was vehemently and indignantly denying he had *ever*
mentioned three trilogies. Which feels strange when you've read for
twenty-odd years interviews where Lucas lovingly mentioned his three
trilogies. Now "There can be only two".
Considering "The Phantom Menace", two trilogies will probably be one too
many, anyway.
I'm also in favor of a Bab-5 movie without waiting for Lucas to trot out
his next two toy catalogues. "The Phantom Menace" didn't cripple too
badly the release of "The Matrix", after all.
Patrick
--
"We are all born as molecules in the heart of a billion stars; molecules
that do not understand politics or policies or differences. Over a
billion years, we foolish molecules forget who we are, and where we came
from. In desperate acts of ego we give ourselves names, fight over lines
on maps, and pretend our light is better than everyone else's. The flame
reminds us of the piece of those stars that lives on inside us, the
spark that tells us, 'you know better'." JMS
Mac Breck
"Patrick MARCEL" <mant...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:38F72579...@wanadoo.fr...
> Brandon wrote:
>
> > The last official news I heard is that we are going to go all the way to
> > Ep3, and then there is a question however whether or not Lucas is going
> > to make the last trilogy. It's nowhere near certain at this point that
> > he will finish the original 9-arc. He's getting on in years...
>
> Last I heard, Lucas was vehemently and indignantly denying he had *ever*
> mentioned three trilogies. Which feels strange when you've read for
> twenty-odd years interviews where Lucas lovingly mentioned his three
> trilogies. Now "There can be only two".
Altzheimers anyone?
> Considering "The Phantom Menace", two trilogies will probably be one too
> many, anyway.
Agreed. Maybe if SW Ep.1 videos don't sell very well..... hoping....
> I'm also in favor of a Bab-5 movie without waiting for Lucas to trot out
> his next two toy catalogues. "The Phantom Menace" didn't cripple too
> badly the release of "The Matrix", after all.
and deservedly so. I loved Matrix.
Mac
Iain Rae
> "Patrick MARCEL" <mant...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
> news:38F72579...@wanadoo.fr...
> > Brandon wrote:
> >
> > > The last official news I heard is that we are going to go all the way to
> > > Ep3, and then there is a question however whether or not Lucas is going
> > > to make the last trilogy. It's nowhere near certain at this point that
> > > he will finish the original 9-arc. He's getting on in years...
> >
> > Last I heard, Lucas was vehemently and indignantly denying he had *ever*
> > mentioned three trilogies. Which feels strange when you've read for
> > twenty-odd years interviews where Lucas lovingly mentioned his three
> > trilogies. Now "There can be only two".
>
> Altzheimers anyone?
>
I recommend Guiness.......don't drink it, chair the company.
:)
Jms at B5
>if
>SFC were to come to you and ask you to pitch a new series set in the B5
>universe --
>not an extension of "B5", not a revival of "Crusade", but a new show -- would
>you be
>interested?
It would all depend on the circumstances.
Jms at B5
>TNT picked up B5?
Yes, because then we were dealing with TNT Los Angeles. TNT Atlanta didn't get
into the situation until after episode 5 was shot.
>Do the people you're working
>with at SFC have to report to other management who could make it the
>same sort of two headed monster TNT was?
No, as far as I know, it's one business, not a two-headed operation.
Mike
>
>Isn't your statement below pretty much the same thing that was said when
>offices on the west coast, it remained that way. It was when Atlanta
>with at SFC have to report to other management who could make it the
>same sort of two headed monster TNT was?
>
I think one of the biggest problems with TNT was that most of the people in
management didn't really "get" Babylon 5's concept. I believe that TNT didn't
really get into sci fi much, and babylon 5 was the exception. Now that the
SciFi channel is picking it up, I doubt they'll run into the same problem.
SciFi works exclusively on shows that fall within usually similar genres of B5
and I believe the exec's really do appreciate B5 as a literary and artistic
piece of television, which the TNT folks obviously did not.
Mike
Humongous Babylon 5 Fan
(You can't have any of my postings
either SFX Magazine, heh heh)
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Any possibility they'd run it 2 - 3 times/wk. instead? Might attract an
> older audience for a much longer period of time.
The ideal thing would be if they'd have separate runs on weekdays
(daily) and weekends (weekly), though this would need some clever
promotion in order to avoid confusing people.
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Will B5 be re-shown exactly as before, or will there be a "Director's Cut"
> sort of thing involved?
Just to clear one thing up - "Director's Cut" does _not_ mean an
expanded, improved edition. It just means the film is how the director
wanted it. With feature films this is normally a good thing, as the
director tends to be the one with the vision (that can get compromised
by the producer's and suits).
On Babylon 5 (and in TV in general) it's the executive producer who has
the vision, and barring direct intervention from the suits, he always
has the final cut (producer's cut). So what we're seeing is jms vision,
and the only thing he could do would be to insert small scenes and
snippets of dialogue here and there, hardly justifying the hideous
expense of re-editing and re-scoring each episode.
The best thing we can hope for is to have the lost scenes included on
DVD's, with an option to see the episode with them inserted in the
appropriate places.
James Bell
Pål Are Nordal wrote:
> TN...@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Any possibility they'd run it 2 - 3 times/wk. instead? Might attract an
> > older audience for a much longer period of time.
>
> The ideal thing would be if they'd have separate runs on weekdays
> (daily) and weekends (weekly), though this would need some clever
> promotion in order to avoid confusing people.
I like it. Say, M - F daily early evening episodes and then Sunday night at
10:00 or something for the weeklies.
Jim
Joseph DeMartino
assumptions or reasoning is off here. <g>):
***********************************************************
Q: Isn't your statement below pretty much the same thing that was said when
TNT picked up B5?
JMS: Yes, because then we were dealing with TNT Los Angeles. TNT Atlanta
didn't get into the situation until after episode 5 was shot.
Q: Do the people you're working with at SFC have to report to other
management who could make it the same sort of two headed monster TNT was?
JMS: No, as far as I know, it's one business, not a two-headed operation.
***********************************************************
I was looking over some of the early TNT promotional material that Dean
Treadwell had been kind enough to send me back late '97 or early '98. Some
of the copy strikes me as a little over-the-top:
"...BABYLON 5, one of the most popular and critically acclaimed series of
the decade. TNT expands on the phenomenal success of BABYLON 5 ..."
Now understand, I'm not attacking B5 or its considerable achievements.
Certainly it was critically acclaimed (and deservedly so) and certainly it
was extremely popular *among those who watched it*. But "phenomenal
success"? If "B5" was a phenomenal success, don't we have to invent a new
word for the "E.R."s, "Seinfeld"s, and "Friends" of the world?
What I'm getting at is that the TNT effort seemed to be *over* hyping the
show, as though they thought that with the proper advertising "B5" was going
to be a top ten show nationally. Frankly I don't think "B5" could ever have
been a top ten show, even if it had premiered on NBC, ABC or CBS, because it
has three things going against it: 1) It is science fiction, which turns a
lot of people off right there. 2) It is a thoughtful intelligent show that
you have to pay attention to if you're going to enjoy it. 3) It features
continuing stories and requires a bit of a commitment from the viewer.
While there have been intelligent dramas ("Law and Order" comes to mind)
that have been solid ratings successes on the networks, they are few and far
between. ("Homicide: Life on the Streets" was always hanging on by its
fingertips, and was sometimes renewed purely because the network saw it as a
"prestige" show that it could afford to subsidize.) And none of these shows
was science fiction. (My sister always chides me for watching "that crap,
it's so unrealistic." Then she goes home and turns on the daytime soaps.
Oh, yeah - there's a documentary for you. <g>)
I think "B5" could (and can) pull respectable numbers given the right
exposure and the right marketing. But I doubt it is ever going to be a
*huge* hit. Which is fine. Most shows aren't. They attract enough viewers
to (nearly) pay for themselves and enough advertising to stay on the air and
people continue to make money, just not huge hefty bags full of it.
I just wonder if part of the reason TNT soured on the whole project so badly
wasn't their disappointment that it didn't live up to *their own*
exaggerated expectations. I realize things didn't get bad until Atlanta
barged in after "Crusade" episode 5, but most of the promotional material
that I have came out of Atlanta, and suggests that they were trying to
convince someone that "B5" was the TV version of the Second Coming. Did you
get any sense that they saw this as a mistake, and that it affected their
approach to "Crusade" and the subsequent airings of "B5"?
Mac Breck
news:IInK4.9960$WF.5...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> I was looking over some of the early TNT promotional material that Dean
> Treadwell had been kind enough to send me back late '97 or early '98.
Some
> of the copy strikes me as a little over-the-top:
>
> "...BABYLON 5, one of the most popular and critically acclaimed series of
> the decade. TNT expands on the phenomenal success of BABYLON 5 ..."
>
> Now understand, I'm not attacking B5 or its considerable achievements.
> Certainly it was critically acclaimed (and deservedly so) and certainly it
> was extremely popular *among those who watched it*. But "phenomenal
> success"? If "B5" was a phenomenal success, don't we have to invent a new
> word for the "E.R."s, "Seinfeld"s, and "Friends" of the world?
>
> What I'm getting at is that the TNT effort seemed to be *over* hyping the
> show, as though they thought that with the proper advertising "B5" was
going
> to be a top ten show nationally.
1. TNT over-hypes almost everything they air.
2. Maybe they thought it would be *their* best show, ratings-wise.
> Frankly I don't think "B5" could ever have
> been a top ten show, even if it had premiered on NBC, ABC or CBS, because
it
> has three things going against it:
> 1) It is science fiction, which turns a lot of people off right there.
Never understood that.
> 2) It is a thoughtful intelligent show that
> you have to pay attention to if you're going to enjoy it.
It also requires the viewer to actually do some thinking to get the most out
of it. Seems like a lot of people avoid thinking at all costs.
> 3) It features
> continuing stories and requires a bit of a commitment from the viewer.
Isn't viewer apathy and fickleness sickening?
> I think "B5" could (and can) pull respectable numbers given the right
> exposure and the right marketing. But I doubt it is ever going to be a
> *huge* hit. Which is fine. Most shows aren't. They attract enough
viewers
> to (nearly) pay for themselves and enough advertising to stay on the air
and
> people continue to make money, just not huge hefty bags full of it.
>
> I just wonder if part of the reason TNT soured on the whole project so
badly
> wasn't their disappointment that it didn't live up to *their own*
> exaggerated expectations.
They couldn't have swallowed their own PR, could they? They weren't *that*
stupid, .... well maybe they were.
Mac
John W. Kennedy
> Last I heard, Lucas was vehemently and indignantly denying he had *ever*
> mentioned three trilogies.
No.
What he is now saying is that he never had any substantial plans for
7-9, that he just pulled the idea out of the air during an interview,
and that after 20 years he still doesn't have any idea for them, so he's
not going to do it.
--
-John W. Kennedy
-rri...@ibm.net
Compact is becoming contract
Man only earns and pays. -- Charles Williams
John W. Kennedy
> "...BABYLON 5, one of the most popular and critically acclaimed series of
> the decade. TNT expands on the phenomenal success of BABYLON 5 ..."
>
> Now understand, I'm not attacking B5 or its considerable achievements.
> Certainly it was critically acclaimed (and deservedly so) and certainly it
> was extremely popular *among those who watched it*. But "phenomenal
> success"? If "B5" was a phenomenal success, don't we have to invent a new
> word for the "E.R."s, "Seinfeld"s, and "Friends" of the world?
It survived, which for space/future SF without the magic "T" word _is_
phenomenal.
> What I'm getting at is that the TNT effort seemed to be *over* hyping the
> show, as though they thought that with the proper advertising "B5" was going
> to be a top ten show nationally.
_All_ publicity for _all_ US TV makes that assumption.
> While there have been intelligent dramas ("Law and Order" comes to mind)
> that have been solid ratings successes on the networks, they are few and far
> between. ("Homicide: Life on the Streets" was always hanging on by its
> fingertips, and was sometimes renewed purely because the network saw it as a
> "prestige" show that it could afford to subsidize.) And none of these shows
> was science fiction. (My sister always chides me for watching "that crap,
> it's so unrealistic." Then she goes home and turns on the daytime soaps.
> Oh, yeah - there's a documentary for you. <g>)
See C. S. Lewis re: "realism of content" vs. "realism of presentation".
> I just wonder if part of the reason TNT soured on the whole project so badly
> wasn't their disappointment that it didn't live up to *their own*
> exaggerated expectations.
A recent posting rather implies that the real problem was that the show
wasn't popular with TNT's regular audience of drunken pinheaded
banjo-pluckers.
Patrick MARCEL
> Patrick MARCEL wrote:
> > Last I heard, Lucas was vehemently and indignantly denying he had *ever*
> > mentioned three trilogies.
> No.
> What he is now saying is that he never had any substantial plans for
> 7-9, that he just pulled the idea out of the air during an interview,
> and that after 20 years he still doesn't have any idea for them, so he's
> not going to do it.
Fair enough. I was overstating the case for comical effect. :-)
Lisa Coulter
"John W. Kennedy" wrote:
> Joseph DeMartino wrote:
>
> > "...BABYLON 5, one of the most popular and critically acclaimed series of
> > the decade. TNT expands on the phenomenal success of BABYLON 5 ..."
> >
> > Now understand, I'm not attacking B5 or its considerable achievements.
> > Certainly it was critically acclaimed (and deservedly so) and certainly it
> > was extremely popular *among those who watched it*. But "phenomenal
> > success"? If "B5" was a phenomenal success, don't we have to invent a new
> > word for the "E.R."s, "Seinfeld"s, and "Friends" of the world?
>
> It survived, which for space/future SF without the magic "T" word _is_
> phenomenal.
>
> > What I'm getting at is that the TNT effort seemed to be *over* hyping the
> > show, as though they thought that with the proper advertising "B5" was going
> > to be a top ten show nationally.
>
> _All_ publicity for _all_ US TV makes that assumption.
>
> > While there have been intelligent dramas ("Law and Order" comes to mind)
> > that have been solid ratings successes on the networks, they are few and far
> > between. ("Homicide: Life on the Streets" was always hanging on by its
> > fingertips, and was sometimes renewed purely because the network saw it as a
> > "prestige" show that it could afford to subsidize.) And none of these shows
> > was science fiction. (My sister always chides me for watching "that crap,
> > it's so unrealistic." Then she goes home and turns on the daytime soaps.
> > Oh, yeah - there's a documentary for you. <g>)
>
> See C. S. Lewis re: "realism of content" vs. "realism of presentation".
>
Not related, but where does Lewis discuss this?
Faith manages - Delenn
In the end, there is always the sunrise.
Lisa Coulter
John W. Kennedy
>
> "John W. Kennedy" wrote:
> > See C. S. Lewis re: "realism of content" vs. "realism of presentation".
> >
>
> Not related, but where does Lewis discuss this?
Either in "An Experiment in Criticism" or some miscellaneous essay.
(Hey, if I coulda remembered, I woulda cited!) Read "An Experiment in
Criticism" anyway. It's one of those books that makes you realize that
you not only didn't know the answers, but didn't know the questions.