ATTN JMS: B5 on DVD & latest news from Warner Bros.
Joseph DeMartino
chat with reps from Warner Home Video. The very first question asked was
about "B5" as were three or four others in the 90 minute discussion (none of
them mine, I'm sorry to say.) That concludes the good news portion of this
post.
Their basic answer was the show was being considered, but that extensive
remastering would be required and that this would take a lot of time. They
never directly answered any questions about widescreen or anamorphic.
They didn't even seem to have a very firm grasp of what the show was about
(surprise, surprise.) At one point they asked which particular episodes
and/or telefilms the fans would be most interested. I'm happy to say that
everyone who had a chance to follow up said, "All of them. It's a
continuing story. We want boxed sets, a season at a time like X-FILES."
Several suggested that "In the Beginning" would make an ideal "test disc" if
they still weren't sure of the size of the market. And a number of people
who logged in to ask about other things added, "oh, and one more vote for B5
season sets." By the end I think they were a little sick of hearing about
the show.
Anyway, what they said tonight is exactly what they said in their first live
on-line chat in February of last year. In early March 1999 "The Big
Picture" DVD news site interviewed Mike Finnegan, VP of DVD Programming at
Warner Home Video. Asked flat-out if "B5" was going to be released on DVD,
Finnegan said, "Yes." Not "being considered." Not "in the works." "Yes."
Asked about a widescreen release, Finnegan said, "To be decided."
I've been trying to pin Mr. Finnegan down via snail mail for the past year.
He finally answered one of my letters last July, but only to tell me that
WHV was being reorganized and that he would no longer be involved in
programming and scheduling DVDs for release.
When the WHV crew logged into the chat tonight they listed "Mike Finnegan of
programming" as one of the participants.
I'd like to clear up a couple of points with you so that I have my ducks in
a row when I go back after WHV and try to get a straight answer from them.
1) Around September you were quoted as saying that Warner Bros. had told
you that a DVD release was scheduled, first in the U.K. (early 2000) and a
few months later in the U.S. Is this quote accurate?
2) I remember seeing an interview with Doug Netter in which he seemed to
imply that hi-def widescreen masters for all the episodes and movies *had
already been produced* by Warner Technical Operations in anticipation of
eventual syndication or cable deals involving HDTV transmission. Is this
information correct? If so, could you sketch out a map of the Warner Bros.
studios showing how to get from the WHV building to WTO? I'd like to send
it along with a compass, a canteen and a few granola bars to Mike Finnegan.
Thanks,
Joe
Tammy Smith
have stopped putting new ones out. I would like to complete my
collection, since I have all the tapes released so far. I'd hate to
have to go with Columbia House, but if they aren't going to continue the
tapes, I guess I will have to.
Tammy
Mac Breck
have stopped putting new ones out in 12/99. I would like to complete my
collection, since I have all the Laserdiscs released so far.
Mac
Mac Breck
news:03aL4.23030$fV.12...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>If so, could you sketch out a map of the Warner Bros.
> studios showing how to get from the WHV building to WTO? I'd like to send
> it along with a compass, a canteen and a few granola bars to Mike
Finnegan.
The compass wouldn't do any good. WHV execs are surrounded by continuously
rotating magnetic fields, so he'd just go in circles until he starved.
Mac
Jms at B5
>you that a DVD release was scheduled, first in the U.K. (early 2000) and a
>few months later in the U.S. Is this quote accurate?
I actually can't recall now where I heard it, I've been kind of scattered of
late, but what I do recall hearing was that they were going to release some in
the UK and if they did well, they would consider releasing them in the US. But
that was the full extent of what I'd heard, and it certainly isn't binding on
anybody.
>2) I remember seeing an interview with Doug Netter in which he seemed to
>imply that hi-def widescreen masters for all the episodes and movies *had
>already been produced* by Warner Technical Operations in anticipation of
>eventual syndication or cable deals involving HDTV transmission.
>Is this
>information correct? If so, could you sketch out a map of the Warner Bros.
>studios showing how to get from the WHV building to WTO? I'd like to send
>it along with a compass, a canteen and a few granola bars to Mike Finnegan.
This I *can* speak to with authority, because I've SEEN the widescreen
versions. We worked hand in hand with the guys at WB's technology office to
help handle the transfer to widescreen. Not only that, but at one point we sat
down at Laser Pacific here in LA with a bunch of guys from WB, LP, and our team
(Flinn, me, Copeland, others) to view an ep in widescreen to examine ways in
which we could take greater advantage of the wide frame while still protecting
for current aspect ratios (i.e., don't shoot everything dead center, have it
off-center a little more or bleed off the side, because it'll all come back
again once you retelecine back to the original widescreen, that sort of thing).
What WB says, repeatedly, is that there is no such critter. Which is true and
not true. There is no such critter in NTSC format. The widescreen versions
were made for foreign release, in PAL format only.
So there is no NTSC format widescreen. But you can HAVE an NTSC format
widescreen by just transferring the PAL digibeta tapes to NTSC.
It costs about $1,500 per episode to do this, because it has to be carefully
tweaked to avoid digital artifacting and line trading and the like. (See how
much tech stuff you learn being an exec producer?) WB has been unwilling to
pony up the dough for that transfer. ($1500 x 110 episodes + the 5 movies is a
good chunk of change.)
So widescreen versions DO exist. I've seen them, others in the B5 team have
seen them, and some of the movies have been released in wide in the UK.
One can only hope that, in time, they can be persuaded to expend the effort.
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)
Michael J Wise
> ($1500 x 110 episodes + the 5 movies is a good chunk of change.)
And a bit of a smokescreen, to boot.
It'll get lost in the cost of mastering the DVD, let alone the cost of
mass-producing and packaging the first couple-thousand for distribution.
Let's assume they produce 1,500 of ONE test episode. It adds $1 to the
cost to produce. I'm SURE they're not going to produce a run of that FEW.
How many people out there would like a DVD of "Severed Dreams" or
"Zahadum", raise your hands?
> So widescreen versions DO exist. I've seen them, others in the B5 team
> have seen them, and some of the movies have been released in wide in
> the UK.
<wimper>
Is it possible to buy them thru the Internet, have them shipped here,
and play them on my iMac DV (without resetting the "Region Code") ?
Aloha mai Nai`a!
--
"Please have your Internet License http://kapu.net/~mjwise/
and Usenet Registration handy..."
Alison Hopkins
Michael J Wise wrote in message ...
>Is it possible to buy them thru the Internet, have them shipped here,
>and play them on my iMac DV (without resetting the "Region Code") ?
>
Sorry, he means VHS to date. We have no DVD's in the UK - yet!
Ali
Mark D. McKean
gka...@webtv.net (Tammy Smith) wrote:
Even CH may not get you a complete set. They skipped the last part of
season 2, and everyone I know who's been in communication with them
about that has gotten runarounds and vague limp hand-waving.
Not to mention that CH tapes cost more than WHV. ($20 for each 2-ep CH
tape vs. $12-$16 for each 2-ep WHV tape ($35-$40 for each 3-tape set).)
This is different from the relative pricing for Star Trek videos...the
in-store tapes of Star Trek are one ep per tape, and appear to have
settled at $16 a tape ($13 for Voyager), whereas CH's Trek tapes are
2-ep tapes, $20 each. For Trek, buying in-store only makes sense if you
don't want a complete collection. But for B5, the WHV tapes save you a
lot of money. Too bad you can't pick and choose from CH.
--
Mark D. McKean - The Quantum Panda - qpa...@iwaynet.net
Michael Ross
snip..
>>2) I remember seeing an interview with Doug Netter in which he seemed to
>>imply that hi-def widescreen masters for all the episodes and movies *had
>>already been produced* by Warner Technical Operations in anticipation of
>>eventual syndication or cable deals involving HDTV transmission.
snip...
>This I *can* speak to with authority, because I've SEEN the widescreen
>versions.
snip...
Point of order Joe - you've seen the widescreen versions. Do you mean
widescreen PAL/NTSC, or *hi-def* (as in 1080i) widescreen, as
mentioned above? I was never quite clear as to the technology used to
produce the masters, and the resolution the CGI was rendered at, and
I'd hate to be holding out false hopes of seeing B5 on 1080i HDTV
native - which presumably could never happen if the CGI was only
rendered at PAL/NTSC resolution!
Thanks
Mike
Saboteur Extraordinary
Iain Rae
> mant...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
>
> >It supposedly can't change after the fifth setting. >Choose well. :-))
>
> 5 choices as in, up o 5 regions at once(are there that many?), or, this week
> it's region 1, next week it's region 2, then back to region 1, and that's 3
> choices?
>
I belive it's 5 changes of region
>
> of course, one might simply delete the preferences file. if one was so
> inclined, i of course, am not. (seriously though, being IN region 1, there's
> not much i would need to change the region for anyways)
I think this is set in the drive itself. If I ere going to experiment I'd make
sure that the last region was to region 1. This is another reason why this whole
regionalisation thing is utterly farcical. Why choose 5 (because it's not 6)?
Anyway even if it were not possible to hack the DVD drives's the obvious
solution for those with money and the space to do it is to buy two drives, set
one to region 1 and set the other to your "local" region this would, I suspect,
cover about 90% of all situations.
Since we're talking about such things can I quickly plug http://www.opendvd.org/
Mac Breck
"Mark D. McKean" <qpa...@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:qpanda-51B7C9....@news.supernews.com...
> This is different from the relative pricing for Star Trek videos...the
> in-store tapes of Star Trek are one ep per tape, and appear to have
> settled at $16 a tape ($13 for Voyager),
Are the two Voyager episodes Scorpion I and II out on tape? If so, who has
them? Those are the only Voyager episodes I liked. I was searching for
mine yesterday. I KNOW I taped them but have NO idea where they are.
> whereas CH's Trek tapes are
> 2-ep tapes, $20 each. For Trek, buying in-store only makes sense if you
> don't want a complete collection.
That's me!
Mac
Mac Breck
>From Amazon:
Star Trek - Voyager, Episodes 68 & 69: Scorpion (VHS)
List Price: $14.95
Our Price: $13.99
You Save: $0.96 (6%)
Release Date: January 1, 2001.
Mac
"Mac Breck" <macb...@timesnet.net> wrote in message
news:8dpqqe$q...@library2.airnews.net...
C/1Lt. Joe Biles
>good chunk of change.)
The pilot was 4:3 ratio, so that's only 4 movies. Still more than I
could afford (hell, right now I couldn't afford to transfer a single
ep) but there it is.
What you COULD do though, make the DVDs from the PAL digibeta masters
and flip the region encoding. On DVDs the only difference between West
v. East is encryption, not actual format differences. Once you've got
the digitized copy of the episode, you can crank out as many as you
want. Making a GOOD transfer from analog to digital format, I'm not
sure how much that costs. NDEI had to do it every ep before they put
in special effects, so you tell us, would that be cheaper than $1500?
On 20 Apr 2000 14:51:33 -0600, jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>>1) Around September you were quoted as saying that Warner Bros. had told
>>you that a DVD release was scheduled, first in the U.K. (early 2000) and a
>>few months later in the U.S. Is this quote accurate?
>
>I actually can't recall now where I heard it, I've been kind of scattered of
>late, but what I do recall hearing was that they were going to release some in
>the UK and if they did well, they would consider releasing them in the US. But
>that was the full extent of what I'd heard, and it certainly isn't binding on
>anybody.
>>2) I remember seeing an interview with Doug Netter in which he seemed to
>>imply that hi-def widescreen masters for all the episodes and movies *had
>>already been produced* by Warner Technical Operations in anticipation of
>>eventual syndication or cable deals involving HDTV transmission.
>>Is this
>>information correct? If so, could you sketch out a map of the Warner Bros.
>>studios showing how to get from the WHV building to WTO? I'd like to send
>>it along with a compass, a canteen and a few granola bars to Mike Finnegan.
>
>This I *can* speak to with authority, because I've SEEN the widescreen
>versions. We worked hand in hand with the guys at WB's technology office to
>help handle the transfer to widescreen. Not only that, but at one point we sat
>down at Laser Pacific here in LA with a bunch of guys from WB, LP, and our team
>(Flinn, me, Copeland, others) to view an ep in widescreen to examine ways in
>which we could take greater advantage of the wide frame while still protecting
>for current aspect ratios (i.e., don't shoot everything dead center, have it
>off-center a little more or bleed off the side, because it'll all come back
>again once you retelecine back to the original widescreen, that sort of thing).
>
>What WB says, repeatedly, is that there is no such critter. Which is true and
>not true. There is no such critter in NTSC format. The widescreen versions
>were made for foreign release, in PAL format only.
>
>So there is no NTSC format widescreen. But you can HAVE an NTSC format
>widescreen by just transferring the PAL digibeta tapes to NTSC.
>
>It costs about $1,500 per episode to do this, because it has to be carefully
>tweaked to avoid digital artifacting and line trading and the like. (See how
>much tech stuff you learn being an exec producer?) WB has been unwilling to
>pony up the dough for that transfer. ($1500 x 110 episodes + the 5 movies is a
>good chunk of change.)
>
>So widescreen versions DO exist. I've seen them, others in the B5 team have
>seen them, and some of the movies have been released in wide in the UK.
>
Jms at B5
>could afford (hell, right now I couldn't afford to transfer a single
>ep) but there it is.
Oops, you're right, I misspoke; the other 4 were in wide, and I just lumped in
the pilot with those.
Michael J Wise
> this is purely hypothetical, as i would never do anything such as this,
> but how does one reset the region code on an iMac DV? (mine's blueberry,
> wanted strawberry, but none were in stock and i didn't feel like
> waiting, yours flavor? ;-)
Blueberry.
http://www.opendvd.org/
http://copyleft.net/cgi-bin/copyleft/t039.pl
Hmmm. Think I'm gonna watch an episode of "From The Earth To The Moon".
Probably "Spider", as it's one of my favorites. Over $100 I paid for
that set of 4, and I'm reasonably certain I was not alone.
Patrick MARCEL
> Hmmm. Think I'm gonna watch an episode of "From The Earth To The Moon".
> Probably "Spider", as it's one of my favorites. Over $100 I paid for
> that set of 4, and I'm reasonably certain I was not alone.
Check! That was unmissable, and a bargain at the price, I thought. And
for real space age nuts, the bonus is that FTETTM dovetails brilliantly
with "The right stuff" and "Apollo 13". You can have your own History of
the American space program marathon. :-)))
Doesn't it sound strange when one thinks that Man has actually stepped
on the Moon? It now seems so far away, and remote, and unlikely... :-(
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
Pelzo63
>This is another reason why this whole
>regionalisation thing is utterly farcical.
which is totally consistant with what i have come to expect from the
entertainment industry. </sheridan>
Iain Clark
"Patrick MARCEL" <mant...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:3900E0A3...@wanadoo.fr...
> Michael J Wise wondered aloud (or whatever the equivalent is for typing):
>
> > Hmmm. Think I'm gonna watch an episode of "From The Earth To The Moon".
> > Probably "Spider", as it's one of my favorites. Over $100 I paid for
> > that set of 4, and I'm reasonably certain I was not alone.
>
> Check! That was unmissable, and a bargain at the price, I thought. And
> for real space age nuts, the bonus is that FTETTM dovetails brilliantly
> with "The right stuff" and "Apollo 13". You can have your own History of
> the American space program marathon. :-)))
>From the Earth to the Moon is an absolutely superb series. It's only out on
VHS in the UK so I'm seriously thinking of shelling out for the Region 1 DVD
box set from the US. It's just the potential import charges that have me
scared at the moment...
> Doesn't it sound strange when one thinks that Man has actually stepped
> on the Moon? It now seems so far away, and remote, and unlikely... :-(
Very strange, and wonderful. Even stranger that some people actually doubt
that it ever happened, whereas I'm only concerned that it may never happen
again (at this rate).
Iain
--
"Signs, portents, dreams...next thing
we'll be reading tea leaves and chicken entrails."
Mark Maher
>
The Moon".
>Probably "Spider", as it's one of my favorites. Over $100 I
paid for
>that set of 4, and I'm reasonably certain I was not alone.
>
agree on "Spider" being one of the favorites from that
collection. What most fascinates me about this mini-series is
how each of the episodes has a completely unique "look-and-feel"
to it and yet they all gel into the greater whole quite nicely.
"It tells the story."
__!_!__
Gizmo
Michael J Wise
> Doesn't it sound strange when one thinks that Man has actually stepped
> on the Moon? It now seems so far away, and remote, and unlikely... :-(
No, it seems so close, and do-able and possible, that I keep wondering,
as Tom Hank's character in Apollo 13 says, "When will we be going back?"
It's really not that hard. Heh, Mr. Gates could probably do it just for
fun. I can see it now, "Microsoft Moon"[tm], with version numbers, of
course, and it always needs to be upgraded to the latest version, but...
Yeah, I'd buy that for $100 per.
I wonder when someone will actually make a movie in space? I wonder how
long AFTER THAT when someone will make a DECENT movie in space? Any
plans for some studio space on ISS, do you suppose? Maybe a transhab?
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/station/assembly/elements/transhab/
Iain Rae
> Patrick MARCEL wrote:
>
> > Doesn't it sound strange when one thinks that Man has actually stepped
> > on the Moon? It now seems so far away, and remote, and unlikely... :-(
>
> No, it seems so close, and do-able and possible, that I keep wondering,
> as Tom Hank's character in Apollo 13 says, "When will we be going back?"
>
At the moment it's too expensive to go there just to look around, you need
a good reason to go, there is currently no commercial reason and the
military no longer have any interest. The key thing is the ISS if you can
show that there is research or manufacturing potential in low earth orbit
then there will be enough traffic that it will bring the costs down to
viable levels. I think you're looking at about 20-30 years. Simply to
re-create the Apollo program would probaby take about 10 years and is
pointless. The key point is to get the price of launching into low earth
orbit down as low as possible.
Brandon
> It costs about $1,500 per episode to do this, because it has to be
> carefully tweaked to avoid digital artifacting and line trading and
> expend the effort.
well maybe we have to start off smaller. if they could be persuaded at
first just to release the b5 movies on DVD. they can make as many
copies as they want. as was suggested no one's going to want to buy
just one episode if only that one episode is released. releasing the
movies would target the b5 fan audience as well as the science fiction
audience in general because they're (relatively) self-contained science
fiction movies.
if they don't sell good enough, at least us fans can have those movies
on DVD. if they do sell, well the possibilities for the whole series on
DVD grow.
someone mentioned laserdisc. i think laserdiscs are out of the picture.
with dvd's now they're not going to lose money making laserdiscs when
they could be making dvd's instead. granted dvd's are not caught on
totally yet but they will, and therefor by releasing dvd you can
reach more people where as releasing laserdisc you're fighting a losing
battle. they'd be LESS likely to release on laserdisc than on DVD, so
you can probably forget about it.
they could package all the movies together into a dvd set and save the
money on packaging if it's REALLY going to make that much of a
difference, whoever made that point.
if there's a petition ever, sign me up.
i , a solid believer in DVD and its future, even though i don't even
have a DVD player yet!!
brandon.
--------------------------------------
and after this there's just the circus
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Brad Ackerman
> Is it possible to buy them thru the Internet, have them shipped here,
> and play them on my iMac DV (without resetting the "Region Code") ?
<http://www.dfbills.com/powerbook/dvd.html> has all the info you need
to make your iMac region free.
--
Brad Ackerman N1MNB "Sorry -- I forgot what my point was."
bs...@cornell.edu Wandering Gweep -- Prof. Koschmann
PGP: 0x62D6B223 http://skaro.pair.com/ HIST 298, 27 March 2000
Rob Perkins
"Jms at B5" <jms...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000420165117...@ng-bk1.aol.com...
> It costs about $1,500 per episode to do this, because it has to be
carefully
> tweaked to avoid digital artifacting and line trading and the like. (See
how
> much tech stuff you learn being an exec producer?) WB has been unwilling
to
> pony up the dough for that transfer. ($1500 x 110 episodes + the 5 movies
is a
> good chunk of change.)
1 ep of B5 = about a million Euros. ("Just a tick under $1 million.")
Creating ALL the eps and movies in widescreen that can be created = about
200,000 Euros.
Steve Case's Salary: 921.73 conversions of widescreen B5 to NTSC.
If he's gonna get our votes for Supreme Master of all things Uncreated on
Earth (provided the SEC and its cousin in Europe think it's OK), he might as
well let us eat widescreen B5 DVD's.
:-)
Rob
UnltdLife
>on the Moon? It now seems so far away, and remote, and unlikely... :-(
>
Strangely enough, my wife's grandfather doesn't believe they actually made it
to the moon. He thinks it was all an elaborate hoax. (He's an 89 year-old
Nebraska rancher so set in his ways, he probably won't ever die. -- "Grim
reaper? You are not! I don't believe it!")
I tried to tell him that the earth is flat as well... but alas...
Jason
Iain Reid
"UnltdLife" <unlt...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000424011859...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
> >Doesn't it sound strange when one thinks that Man has actually stepped
> >on the Moon? It now seems so far away, and remote, and unlikely... :-(
> >
> >Patrick
>
> Strangely enough, my wife's grandfather doesn't believe they actually
made it
> to the moon. He thinks it was all an elaborate hoax. (He's an 89
year-old
> Nebraska rancher so set in his ways, he probably won't ever die. --
"Grim
> reaper? You are not! I don't believe it!")
Actually, IMO, the '67 Moon Landing Hoax is one of the more believable of
the insane conspiracies out there. There are lots of niggling details in
the film footage that just don't add up (the fact that Flag seemed to blow
in a non-existant lunar breeze and the fact that the astronauts should have
been able to jump about 50% higher than they actually did with little or no
effort for example). This combined with the fact that the US was so
desperate to get to the moon before the Russians after the humiliation of
not being the first nation with a man in space (definatley desperate enough
to stage such a hoax if it looked like the Ruskie's were winning) leads me
personally to think that there is a chance that the first moon landing could
possibly have been falsified. But I do think that people have been there
since, probably quite a few - most of the subsequent Appolo missions, for
example- they probably took a look around and went "Ooh. It's a bit grey,
isn't it" and then left...and the less said about the secret millitary
nuclear installation on the dark side, the better ;o).
Iain Reid
Iain Clark
"Iain Reid" <theva...@callnet0800.com> wrote in message
news:8e1dou$8ebih$1...@fu-berlin.de...
>
> "UnltdLife" <unlt...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20000424011859...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
> > >Doesn't it sound strange when one thinks that Man has actually stepped
> > >on the Moon? It now seems so far away, and remote, and unlikely... :-(
> > >
> > >Patrick
> >
> > Strangely enough, my wife's grandfather doesn't believe they actually
> made it
> > to the moon. He thinks it was all an elaborate hoax. (He's an 89
> year-old
> > Nebraska rancher so set in his ways, he probably won't ever die. --
> "Grim
> > reaper? You are not! I don't believe it!")
>
> Actually, IMO, the '67 Moon Landing Hoax is one of the more believable of
> the insane conspiracies out there.
Cough. If you've heard of a '67 moon landing then it was indeed a fake. The
'69 one is a different matter though :-)
> There are lots of niggling details in
> the film footage that just don't add up (the fact that Flag seemed to blow
> in a non-existant lunar breeze and the fact that the astronauts should
have
> been able to jump about 50% higher than they actually did with little or
no
> effort for example).
The whole flag thing is in no doubt (to my knowledge) - they deliberately
wired the flag to give the appearance of blowing so that it would look nice
in the photos. Even if they had faked it on Earth there would have had to
have been a gale blowing in their indoor set. They would also have to have
been more stupid than is plausible!
I hadn't heard the 'astronauts jumping' criticism but it would depend to a
great degree on the solidity of the surface, the weight of the suits, the
ability of the astronauts to flex their legs to give themselves sufficient
push-off, the wisdom of actually jumping too high when your life rests on
the integrity of your suit...and so on...and so on....They certainly jump
(and fall over) in a way that implies they were under lower gravity than on
Earth, so where else were they? Most of these things amount to someone with
no great technical knowledge, or knowledge in only one area, focussing
intensively on one fact without taking into account the context or the
bigger picture.
This smacks of all conspiracy theories - the accumulation of a few things
which seem out of place under intense scrutiny, which are then used as the
foundation for an elaborate house of cards without any reference to the
relevant expertise which might collapse any of the foundations. Look at
*any* human endeavour with a critical layman's eye and you'll find things
that don't add up - paperwork that doesn't gel, statements that contradict.
It's human nature to see patterns where none exist.
> This combined with the fact that the US was so
> desperate to get to the moon before the Russians after the humiliation of
> not being the first nation with a man in space (definatley desperate
enough
> to stage such a hoax if it looked like the Ruskie's were winning) leads me
> personally to think that there is a chance that the first moon landing
could
> possibly have been falsified. But I do think that people have been there
> since, probably quite a few - most of the subsequent Appolo missions, for
> example- they probably took a look around and went "Ooh. It's a bit grey,
> isn't it" and then left...and the less said about the secret millitary
> nuclear installation on the dark side, the better ;o).
The motive was there, no question. But for the first mission to have been
faked and subsequent ones real - well isn't it implausible how exactly they
got the appearance of everything right? It's all totally consistent from
mission to mission. It is, of course *possible* to have faked the landings,
but it would have just about have required more effort than actually going
there, especially if they managed it a short time later. And since there's
no such thing as a perfect conspiracy, it should have been riddled with far
more obvious holes than a few observations about odd-looking photos.
There are also many competing theories about how much was faked - from
statements that humans cannot survive at all outside Earth orbit, to ideas
that only part were faked. This leads me to suspect an idealogically-driven
argument rather than analysis drawn from the facts.
As for all of them being faked - I'm convinced that's not the case. To my
mind there are any number of general things which, taken together, rule
against a hoax: the huge sets required; the amazingly high standard of the
FX work without any digital techniques; the hundreds of people who would
have to have been involved in every techncial and scientific area, not one
of whom has ever come forward even on their death-bed to admit a hoax; the
testimony of countless people involved in the programme which suppport the
reality of the journey (even in casual interviews where the validity of the
enterprise isn't being questioned); the fact that the journey is technically
possible.
For more specific proof off the top of my head, I saw a programme recently
talking about elementary particles, which used as one example the cosmic ray
experiments done on one of the lunar missions. The astronauts reported
seeing flashes in their closed eyes during the journey, when asked to
experiment with whether cosmic rays were visible as they passed through
their bodies. For NASA to have proposed such an experiment, carried it out,
and had results not only officially logged but reported in convincing and
relaxed terms by those involved, on a mission not even under any particular
scrutiny...I have to ask - who the hell would bother with such an obscure
piece of corroborating proof that astonauts had travelled outside earth
orbit? It's possible - but is it likely?
Or the famous experiment with the hammer and the feather being dropped on
the moon with no air resistance. Or the perfect parabolic arc of the dust
kicked up by the lunar rovers. Or the samples of lunar rock returned by the
astronauts which have subsequently been analysed. There is extensive and
well-understood scientific evidence that humans did indeed travel to the
moon.
Admittedly I'm not an expert myself, but unless I see convincing evidence to
the contrary which has been rigorously reviewed by respectable experts in a
range of relevant fields then it seems to me that travelling there is the
actually the simplest and most reasonable explanation.
I'll stop ranting now :-)
Mac Breck
news:8dr39a$p7p$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> someone mentioned laserdisc. i think laserdiscs are out of the picture.
> with dvd's now they're not going to lose money making laserdiscs when
> they could be making dvd's instead. granted dvd's are not caught on
> totally yet but they will, and therefor by releasing dvd you can
> reach more people where as releasing laserdisc you're fighting a losing
> battle. they'd be LESS likely to release on laserdisc than on DVD, so
> you can probably forget about it.
I mentioned Laserdisc. I just said that they should have completed what
they started, not stop dead in the middle.
Mac
Andrew M Swallow
>it
>to the moon. He thinks it was all an elaborate hoax. (He's an 89 year-old
>Nebraska rancher so set in his ways, he probably won't ever die
Tell him to read his tax bills for the late 60s and early 70s. The US
Government was spending his money on something. :-)
If you have satellite tv you can show that satellites orbit the Earth. Just
point the dish away from the sky. The moon is only a bit futher away.
Andrew Swallow
BRETNTRACI
>Actually, IMO, the '67 Moon Landing Hoax is one of the more believable of
>the film footage that just don't add up (the fact that Flag seemed to blow
>in a non-existant lunar breeze and the fact that the astronauts should have
>been able to jump about 50% higher than they actually did with little or no
>desperate to get to the moon before the Russians after the humiliation of
>not being the first nation with a man in space (definatley desperate enough
>to stage such a hoax if it looked like the Ruskie's were winning) leads me
>personally to think that there is a chance that the first moon landing could
>possibly have been falsified. But I do think that people have been there
>since, probably quite a few - most of the subsequent Appolo missions, for
>example- they probably took a look around and went "Ooh. It's a bit grey,
>isn't it" and then left...and the less said about the secret millitary
>nuclear installation on the dark side, the better ;o).
>
Sadly this illustrates that we live in a society where people believe that the
moon shot is fake and professionsal wrestling is real.... <sigh>
WWS
Iain Clark wrote:
>
> "Iain Reid" <theva...@callnet0800.com> wrote in message
> news:8e1dou$8ebih$1...@fu-berlin.de...
>
Those are all excellent points - and I want to reiterate one which you
lightly touched on, and which to my mind is the most important of all.
And that is that hundreds, even thousands of people would have had to
been involved in this. Thing is, I know some people who were in NASA
at the time, and I know quite a few people whose parents were in the
space program at the time. (Not hard to do if you spend any time around
Houston) Not well known names, but the engineers, the designers, the
maintenance experts, and so forth and so on. They would all have had
to have been involved in something of this magnitude, and yet to a man
(and woman) these people were all ordinary, intelligent, dedicated,
college educated people living normal lives and who lived honest lives
and raised ordinary families just like everyone else. Some had military
backgrounds, but a lot were lifelong civilians. Why would every one
of this multitude decide to embark on a life long campaign of lies
and deception that not a single one of them has ever broken? Maybe
overseas it's easy to think that this all happened in the desert, or
some vacuum somewhere, but these people lived, worked, and sent their
kids to school in the middle of one of the biggest cities in the country.
There just wasn't much that was all that secret at the time. (not even
the stuff that was supposed to be secret, if you listen to some of the
stories) I know people who were working at NASA when the Apollo 1
capsule burned and killed Grissom, Chaffee, and White. Wouldn't that
have been something that should have been covered up? The despair
and pain when that happened was even worse than when Challenger blew
up, up until that point they felt they were invincible. Everyone in
that program worked 18 hour days, 7 days a week, no vacations, no breaks,
until they got it back on track. To say that they had to fake it is
to deny what several thousand motivated, dedicated people working at
a common goal day and night until they get it done can accomplish.
It's one of the greatest triumphs of all time, and to admit what they
were able to accomplish is to raise the nagging question of why we
have done so little with the resources we've been given. Easier to
deny it happened, than to admit we've done precious little with our
time and money besides entertain ourselves.
This is a problem with conspiracy theories in general. Anything
that requires the cooperation of more than 2 or 3 people is impossible
to keep secret for very long, no matter how motivated people are.
Even the most highly guarded military secrets all get out sooner or
later. Two or three thousand people all keeping a secret for 30 years??
Never in the history of this Earth has that happened.
Interestingly, this view is extremely common among Muslim fundamentalists.
It's easier to reject science and rationality completely than it is to
question one's own core beliefs and assumptions about the world.
--
__________________________________________________WWS_____________
Keith Wood
Iain Reid wrote:
>
> "UnltdLife" <unlt...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20000424011859...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
> > >Doesn't it sound strange when one thinks that Man has actually stepped
> > >on the Moon? It now seems so far away, and remote, and unlikely... :-(
> > >
> > >Patrick
> >
> > Strangely enough, my wife's grandfather doesn't believe they actually
> made it
> > to the moon. He thinks it was all an elaborate hoax. (He's an 89
> year-old
> > Nebraska rancher so set in his ways, he probably won't ever die. --
> "Grim
> > reaper? You are not! I don't believe it!")
>
> Actually, IMO, the '67 Moon Landing Hoax is one of the more believable of
> the insane conspiracies out there.
You mean 1969?
> There are lots of niggling details in
> the film footage that just don't add up (the fact that Flag seemed to blow
> in a non-existant lunar breeze
The flag was nylon. It had been compressed into a tube and frozen for
several days. As it warmed in the sunlight, the nylon became flexible
-- in 1G it would have dangled, in 1/6G it slowly "relaxed" as it
thawed.
> and the fact that the astronauts should have
> been able to jump about 50% higher than they actually did with little or no
> effort for example).
Have you ever worn a moonsuit? I have. They are bulky, VERY heavy and
not all that well balanced. The later PLSSs were heavier still (larger
batteries and tanks). Nobody wanted to get off-balance, especially
because there was only that thin faceplate keeping the air in with the
astronaut.
And also consider:
A), ham radio operators around the world were able to track the Apollo
spacecraft there and back by the transmissions (and speed-of-light lag
kills the argument that there was just a radio repeater on the
spacecraft)
B), there were very powerful telephoto lenses showing the astros going
across the walkway to the spacecraft, and the White Room crew leaving,
then no other movement there until the launch (or are you suggesting
that the astros hid in the White Room through the launch?)
C), the recoveries of the spacecraft were on telephoto well before any
chopper or boat got close enough for the astros to have climbed aboard
D), the guidance systems were not powerful enough to have achieved
docking of the CM to the LM through remote control (the onboard
computers were not as powerful as today's pocket calculators)
E), the astronomers who watched the albedo (brightness) of the Apollo
spacecraft change in Lunar orbit as the CM and LM separated and
rejoined.
Pelzo63
>Sadly this illustrates that we live in a society where >people believe that
>the
>moon shot is fake and professionsal wrestling is >real....
if, by "people" you mean "extremely insignificant minorities of indiiduals.
then you would be correct. with 6 billion people, there's bound to be 2 who
believe almost any point of view. (i say 2 because 1=person, 2 or more=people
:-)
if on the other hand you seem to think that either of these POV's is held by a
lot of people, please point them out to me. there might be a significant
minority of conspiracy theorists who hold the "fake moon landing" POV, but i
have never met anyone over the age of 10 who thinks professional wrestlin is
not pre-determined. (though they really do pick each other up, and the holds
really do hurt, don't believe me? try it.) don't confuse "it's scripted, but i
enjoy it" with "it's so cool! it has to be real!"
afterall, babylon 5 was scripted too, that hasn't stopped me from enjoying
that. :-)
Iain Clark
"WWS" <wsch...@tyler.net> wrote in message
news:3904F7B2...@tyler.net...
<snip discussion of moon landings>
> To say that they had to fake it is
> to deny what several thousand motivated, dedicated people working at
> a common goal day and night until they get it done can accomplish.
> It's one of the greatest triumphs of all time, and to admit what they
> were able to accomplish is to raise the nagging question of why we
> have done so little with the resources we've been given. Easier to
> deny it happened, than to admit we've done precious little with our
> time and money besides entertain ourselves.
Exactly. Conspiracy theories of this kind, and I'd include in this many of
the theories about ancient civilisations being given their knowledge from an
external source, deny the inherent creativity and inventiveness of humanity,
or the capability of many people working cooperatively to achieve a large
project. Their argument is basically "I can't imagine how it was possible,
so it wasn't..."
(More importantly, they also ignore a lot of specialist knowledge and
evidence in favour of inaccurate generalisations.)
> This is a problem with conspiracy theories in general. Anything
> that requires the cooperation of more than 2 or 3 people is impossible
> to keep secret for very long, no matter how motivated people are.
> Even the most highly guarded military secrets all get out sooner or
> later. Two or three thousand people all keeping a secret for 30 years??
> Never in the history of this Earth has that happened.
Unless they succeeded <g>. No, I agree that the sheer impausibility is so
great as to effectively rule it out.
> Interestingly, this view is extremely common among Muslim fundamentalists.
> It's easier to reject science and rationality completely than it is to
> question one's own core beliefs and assumptions about the world.
True enough; blind and unquestioning fundamentalism of any persuasion is
equally concerning, in my view.
Iain Reid
In case people get the wrong idea about me - and think I'm some sort of
conspiracy loony, I would just like to point out that I don't acutally
believe, on balance, that it is within the realms of liklehood that the moon
landings were faked - I just think there is a remote possibilty that they
were....:o)
> Actually, IMO, the '67 Moon Landing Hoax is one of the more believable of
> the insane conspiracies out there.
^ You see that?^ I wasn't saying "this is what I think is true", I was
saying "This is totally insanse, but out of the insane things that
conspiracy nuts believe, this is one of the more believable ones".
<snip stuff that the conspiracy nuts believe>
>There is a chance that the first moon landing could
> possibly have been falsified.
Note the use of the word "chance". Although I believe there is a /chance/
that they could possibly have been faked, I don't believe that it's likley.
I believe there is a chance that a meteor might fall out the sky tomorrow
and hit me on the head - but I haven't as yet invested in a steel umbrella.
I also believe that I might be wrong and god does exist and that if he does
then I am in deep $%!+...but I still ain't going to church :o).
Just got a little paranoid by all the people responding as though I
personally was holding these views and thought I should clarify :o)
Iain Reid
Iain Clark
"Pelzo63" <pel...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000424212240...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> afterall, babylon 5 was scripted too, that hasn't stopped me from enjoying
> that. :-)
But ISN did base it on real events, though?
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Just got a little paranoid by all the people responding as though I
> personally was holding these views and thought I should clarify :o)
So, you admit of your own free will, that these ideas where being fed to
you by a communist organization to discredit the United States government?
Sign at the dotted line, please.
--
Donate free food with a simple click: http://www.thehungersite.com/
Pål Are Nordal
a_b...@bigfoot.com
Iain Clark
>
> "Iain Reid" <theva...@callnet0800.com> wrote in message
> news:8e1dou$8ebih$1...@fu-berlin.de...
>
> In case people get the wrong idea about me - and think I'm some sort of
> conspiracy loony, I would just like to point out that I don't acutally
> believe, on balance, that it is within the realms of liklehood that the
moon
> landings were faked - I just think there is a remote possibilty that they
> were....:o)
>
> > Actually, IMO, the '67 Moon Landing Hoax is one of the more believable
of
> > the insane conspiracies out there.
>
> ^ You see that?^ I wasn't saying "this is what I think is true", I was
> saying "This is totally insanse, but out of the insane things that
> conspiracy nuts believe, this is one of the more believable ones".
>
> <snip stuff that the conspiracy nuts believe>
>
> >There is a chance that the first moon landing could
> > possibly have been falsified.
After all - look at Capricorn One.... :-)
> Note the use of the word "chance". Although I believe there is a /chance/
> that they could possibly have been faked, I don't believe that it's
likley.
> I believe there is a chance that a meteor might fall out the sky tomorrow
> and hit me on the head - but I haven't as yet invested in a steel
umbrella.
> I also believe that I might be wrong and god does exist and that if he
does
> then I am in deep $%!+...but I still ain't going to church :o).
Ditto.
> Just got a little paranoid by all the people responding as though I
> personally was holding these views and thought I should clarify :o)
I got that, don't worry <g>
John W. Kennedy
By 1969, the Russians were out of the lunar game, as anyone should
remember who A) was there at the time and B) was paying attention.
--
-John W. Kennedy
-rri...@ibm.net
Compact is becoming contract
Man only earns and pays. -- Charles Williams
John W. Kennedy
> This is a problem with conspiracy theories in general. Anything
> that requires the cooperation of more than 2 or 3 people is impossible
> to keep secret for very long, no matter how motivated people are.
> Even the most highly guarded military secrets all get out sooner or
> later. Two or three thousand people all keeping a secret for 30 years??
> Never in the history of this Earth has that happened.
Ha! Check out humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare. More than half the
traffic is taken up by lunatics who refuse to believe that Shakespeare
was Shakespeare.
John W. Kennedy
> The flag was nylon. It had been compressed into a tube and frozen for
> several days. As it warmed in the sunlight, the nylon became flexible
> -- in 1G it would have dangled, in 1/6G it slowly "relaxed" as it
> thawed.
I can't speak to the truth of that, but it was widely reported at the
time that there was a spring sewn into the hem.
Iain Rae
> "Iain Reid" <theva...@callnet0800.com> wrote in message
> news:8e2to3$8fl48$1...@fu-berlin.de...
> >
> > "Iain Reid" <theva...@callnet0800.com> wrote in message
> > news:8e1dou$8ebih$1...@fu-berlin.de...
> >
> > In case people get the wrong idea about me - and think I'm some sort of
> > conspiracy loony, I would just like to point out that I don't acutally
> > believe, on balance, that it is within the realms of liklehood that the
> moon
> > landings were faked - I just think there is a remote possibilty that they
> > were....:o)
> >
> > > Actually, IMO, the '67 Moon Landing Hoax is one of the more believable
> of
> > > the insane conspiracies out there.
> >
> > ^ You see that?^ I wasn't saying "this is what I think is true", I was
> > saying "This is totally insanse, but out of the insane things that
> > conspiracy nuts believe, this is one of the more believable ones".
> >
> > <snip stuff that the conspiracy nuts believe>
> >
> > >There is a chance that the first moon landing could
> > > possibly have been falsified.
>
> After all - look at Capricorn One.... :-)
>
You could fake it but.
1. You'd have to have a fairly small team working with the astronauts and
actually in the know (a couple of hundred rather than thousands)
2. You couldn't run with the USA's freedom of information act, too much low
grade material would get out.
3. The people involved would have to know the secret and be trustworthy and
have a consistent cover story.
4. You need to destroy all written evidence and fund a coverup for a long time
after the event..
5. You have to accept that eventually it's going to come out.
It has been done, the truth about ULTRA wouldn't have come out until the middle
of the next century but for the descision to release the WWII files early
because of funding problems and I think the only material on FISH ( the Lorenz
cipher) came via NSA and the freedom of information act, after all many people
still believe that ENIAC was the first electronic computer (slight wind up of
our US friends :) )
Andrew M Swallow
>By 1969, the Russians were out of the lunar game, as anyone should
>remember who A) was there at the time and B) was paying attention.
At the time Kennedy gave his speech everyone thought the Russians were in the
lead.
Andrew Swallow
Keith Wood
"John W. Kennedy" wrote:
>
> And the "We have to beat the Russians" bit doesn't make sense anyway.
> By 1969, the Russians were out of the lunar game, as anyone should
> remember who A) was there at the time and B) was paying attention.
I was there are the time. I was paying attention.
I remember that the Russki launched a rocket to the moon just a few days
prior to the Apollo 11 launch, and our guys were halfway there before
the Soviet Union admitted that it was an unmanned probe. Until the
announcement, there were a LOT of experts certain that the thing was
manned, even if on a one-way trip.
This doesn't sound "out of the lunar game" to me.
Keith Wood
"John W. Kennedy" wrote:
>
> Keith Wood wrote:
> > The flag was nylon. It had been compressed into a tube and frozen for
> > several days. As it warmed in the sunlight, the nylon became flexible
> > -- in 1G it would have dangled, in 1/6G it slowly "relaxed" as it
> > thawed.
>
> I can't speak to the truth of that, but it was widely reported at the
> time that there was a spring sewn into the hem.
Yep.
Try freezing a nylon flag in a tube sometime, then put it out in
sunlight. You will see the same kind of thawing.
Pelzo63
>But ISN did base it on real events, though?
well, yes, but don't tell anyone, we can't have our knowledge of the future
effecting the future! <g>
Paul Harper
>there were a LOT of experts certain that the thing was
>manned, even if on a one-way trip.
Dangerous things, ill-informed "experts", huh?
Paul.
--
A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
" . . . SFX is a fairly useless publication on just
about every imaginable front. Never have so many jumped-up fanboys done so
little, with so much, for so long." JMS.
John W. Kennedy
>
> >And the "We have to beat the Russians" bit doesn't make sense anyway.
> >By 1969, the Russians were out of the lunar game, as anyone should
> >remember who A) was there at the time and B) was paying attention.
>
> lead.
Yes, but I'm talking about the -- errr -- interesting theory that the
first landing was faked for time.
Brandon
> I mentioned Laserdisc. I just said that they should have completed
yes, they should finish what they start. i imagine people with
laserdisc players gotta be really P.O. with all the money they spent to
find that now DVD's are coming popular slowly and that series such as b5
stop dead.. it's sad but true.
brandon.
--------------------------------------
and after this there's just the circus
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Keith Wood
Paul Harper wrote:
>
> On 25 Apr 2000 20:00:26 -0600, Keith Wood <k...@bctv.com> wrote:
>
> >there were a LOT of experts certain that the thing was
> >manned, even if on a one-way trip.
>
> Dangerous things, ill-informed "experts", huh?
In this case, no. The Russki intentionally misinformed the world
(remember, this was back when they were still claiming that their launch
point was hundred of miles from the actual location).
My point was that we were still actively engaged in the race up to a day
before the landing.
Paul Harper
>
>
>Paul Harper wrote:
>>
>> On 25 Apr 2000 20:00:26 -0600, Keith Wood <k...@bctv.com> wrote:
>>
>> >there were a LOT of experts certain that the thing was
>> >manned, even if on a one-way trip.
>>
>> Dangerous things, ill-informed "experts", huh?
>
>In this case, no. The Russki intentionally misinformed the world
... and the US, and all its "experts", was suckered. This isn't
dangerous?
>(remember, this was back when they were still claiming that their launch
>point was hundred of miles from the actual location).
>
>My point was that we were still actively engaged in the race up to a day
>before the landing.
It's all about perception. The US perceived that there was a race on
(something the USSR encouraged by their successful deception) when in
fact there was nothing of the sort.
Must have amused the Soviets no end.
Maybe the scenario was something like: "Let's get those Yanks to pour
billions and billions of dollars into high-tech research and
development which we'll then spend the next decade stealing for next
to nothing. Good idea Ivan" ;-}
Mac Breck
>
> > I mentioned Laserdisc. I just said that they should have completed
>
> yes, they should finish what they start. i imagine people with
> laserdisc players gotta be really P.O. with all the money they spent to
> find that now DVD's are coming popular slowly and that series such as b5
> stop dead.. it's sad but true.
I have BOTH, Laserdisc and DVD. Now, *if* they pick up on DVD, how many
*extra* years will I have to wait before completing the collection? Answer:
Too damned long.
I'd have liked to have it all on one *or* the other, Laserdisc *or* DVD, but
NOT a mix of both.
Mac
Keith Wood
Paul Harper wrote:
>
> On 26 Apr 2000 13:24:48 -0600, Keith Wood <k...@bctv.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Paul Harper wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25 Apr 2000 20:00:26 -0600, Keith Wood <k...@bctv.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >there were a LOT of experts certain that the thing was
> >> >manned, even if on a one-way trip.
> >>
> >> Dangerous things, ill-informed "experts", huh?
> >
> >In this case, no. The Russki intentionally misinformed the world
>
> ... and the US, and all its "experts", was suckered. This isn't
> dangerous?
Nope.
> >(remember, this was back when they were still claiming that their launch
> >point was hundred of miles from the actual location).
> >
> >My point was that we were still actively engaged in the race up to a day
> >before the landing.
>
> It's all about perception. The US perceived that there was a race on
> (something the USSR encouraged by their successful deception) when in
> fact there was nothing of the sort.
How do you know? Oberg isn't sure, and if anyone should know, he
should.
> Must have amused the Soviets no end.
Well, they spent a lot of money to promote that belief, so who really
lost out?
> Maybe the scenario was something like: "Let's get those Yanks to pour
> billions and billions of dollars into high-tech research and
> development which we'll then spend the next decade stealing for next
> to nothing. Good idea Ivan" ;-}
Well this is a tine-honored Russki tradition! ;)
Frits Kuijlman
>I have BOTH, Laserdisc and DVD. Now, *if* they pick up on DVD, how many
>*extra* years will I have to wait before completing the collection? Answer:
>Too damned long.
>I'd have liked to have it all on one *or* the other, Laserdisc *or* DVD, but
>NOT a mix of both.
Same here, but I am still holding out on buying a DVD player. Anyway,
the market for B5 on DVD isn't that much bigger than that for laserdiscs,
especially since a lot of people have already bought into the videotape
or laserdisc versions. So, what prevents Warner of stopping halfway through
the DVD release because of 'lagging sales'?
If they would have told me in advance that this could happen with the laserdisc
release I wouldn't have bought those discs at all.
Next time I consider a series I'll only do it if they garantee the series
will be complete.
Now, if Warner would give us laserdisc owners a good deal on the missing issues
when the DVD's are released I might consider it. This will probably
never happen though:-)
Frits
--
Frits Kuijlman F.Kui...@twi.tudelft.nl
Delft University of Technology The Netherlands
Joseph DeMartino
I can't imagine what you're basing that statement on. The installed base of
DVD players after 3 years on the market already far exceeds the installed
base of laserdisc players after 20 years - at least here in the States
(Warner Bros. primary market.) There are millions of DVD owners who have
never so much as *seen* a laserdisc, and many more (like me) who
deliberately gave the LDs and VHS tapes a miss because we couldn't afford to
buy the series twice and saw a DVD release as well-nigh inevitable.
Nor do I quite get the "give me assurances" argument. Warner Bros. never
promised anybody that "B5" was going to run the whole five seasons or finish
the story, either. No studio or network does for *any* show. Does that
mean we shouldn't have watched "B5", knowing that it was intended to be a
five year story? If the ratings had been poor, or the show losing money, it
would have been cancelled. That's life, and that's business. If the tapes
or the LDs aren't selling well enough to turn a profit, they stop making
them. Warner Bros. is a corporation in business to sell product and return
a profit to its investors, just like any other. It is not a charitable
institution set up to bring pleasure to television fans at any cost.
I agree that it is a damned shame that poor sales caused the (apparent)
suspension of the home video releases. It is to be hoped that the show will
increase its fanbase once it starts airing on The Sci Fi Channel, and that
this in turn will create renewed demand for the home video versions and that
production will resume. Don't forget that during the TNT exile (to 7 AM on
Saturdays) the show was effectively off the air. The past six or eight
months have been brutal for "B5" fandom: The fan club folded, "B5 Magazine"
ceased publication, the merchandise has largely gone out of production.
There simply hasn't been the influx of new fans needed to keep all of this
stuff going, and with the show essentially unavailable, there is little to
inspire existing fans, or keep them focused on "B5". People move on to
other things.
It is also to be hoped that really spectacular sales for the upcoming
"X-Files" season 1 DVD boxed set will get Warner Bros. attention. A similar
offering of "B5" should generate quite respectable sales of its own,
certainly better than the laserdiscs, probably better than the VHS tapes.
(And DVDs are a lot cheaper to replicate than either of the other formats.)
And at a rate of a full season at regular intervals (assuming sales hold up)
the DVDs could be produced a lot more quickly than the on-again off-again
LD/VHS schedule.
Personally I haven't bought a new laserdisc since Spielberg cancelled the
"Men in Black" DVD release - EXCEPT for "In the Beginning" because I wanted
Warner Bros. to realize that there is indeed a market for this show on home
video. (I bought the first VHS tape set for the same reason.) But I never
bought another one, and have no plans to start again now. I certainly
wouldn't by 120 hours of "B5" on the big discs, not at LD prices, not at the
LD penalty in storage space and capacity, and with the format's inability to
store films in anamorphic form and still have them be playable on 4:3
televisions. "B5" deserves a better format, and DVD is it.
Regards,
Joe
Mac Breck
news:8ebkbi$vt8$1...@jinx.pds.twi.tudelft.nl...
> "Mac Breck" <macb...@timesnet.net> writes:
> >I have BOTH, Laserdisc and DVD. Now, *if* they pick up on DVD, how many
> >*extra* years will I have to wait before completing the collection?
Answer:
> >Too damned long.
>
> >I'd have liked to have it all on one *or* the other, Laserdisc *or* DVD,
but
> >NOT a mix of both.
>
> Same here, but I am still holding out on buying a DVD player. Anyway,
> the market for B5 on DVD isn't that much bigger than that for laserdiscs,
> especially since a lot of people have already bought into the videotape
> or laserdisc versions. So, what prevents Warner of stopping halfway
through
> the DVD release because of 'lagging sales'?
> If they would have told me in advance that this could happen with the
laserdisc
> release I wouldn't have bought those discs at all.
Same here, and I told them exactly that (in a snail mail letter).
> Next time I consider a series I'll only do it if they garantee the series
> will be complete.
Their word means absolutely NOTHING, and they would never give it anyway.
You'd have to wait until the whole series was out on DVD to be sure of that.
Then there's the chance that you may not be able to get all of the episodes
(Some may be out of print by the time the last one comes out.).
> Now, if Warner would give us laserdisc owners a good deal on the missing
issues
> when the DVD's are released I might consider it.
Dream on! You don't think that they care the least little bit about us, do
you? They don't. You could write to them and ask, but I doubt it will do
any good. I don't know if we should write to Warner Brothers *or* Image
Entertainment. I haven't been able to find a mailing address for Image
Entertainment, and the last thing I sent to Warner Brothers (Warner
Brothers, 4000 Warner Blvd., Burbank, CA 91522) came back "Return to
Sender - Not Listed at WBSF or Moved and Left No Forwarding Address". How d
o you like that?
> This will probably
> never happen though:-)
I'd say there's a 100% chance of that never happening.
Mac - Totally Disgusted with the Pinheads at Warner Bros.
Mac Breck
news:7MtO4.39034$fV.23...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Nor do I quite get the "give me assurances" argument. Warner Bros. never
> promised anybody that "B5" was going to run the whole five seasons or
finish
> the story, either.
That has *nothing* to do with the argument. The five years of Babylon 5 is
already out there (aired). If they *start*putting the series on Laserdisc,
they should *finish* the job. To do otherwise is a disservice to those of
who bought the Laserdiscs. However, don't get the impression that I think
that Warner Brothers cares about the people who buy Laserdiscs, DVDs, or VHS
tapes at all. To them, we're nothing but an open wallet, nothing more.
They don't give a rat's a** about the people they left high and dry.
> No studio or network does for *any* show. Does that
> mean we shouldn't have watched "B5", knowing that it was intended to be a
> five year story? If the ratings had been poor, or the show losing money,
it
> would have been cancelled. That's life, and that's business. If the
tapes
> or the LDs aren't selling well enough to turn a profit, they stop making
> them.
Did they ever *communicate* this to the fans that there was a danger of them
having to stop; that sales were not good? Did they ever advertise/market
their product to the fans? Did they make it easy for the fans to buy the
whole collection?
Answer: NO.
> Warner Bros. is a corporation in business to sell product and return
> a profit to its investors, just like any other. It is not a charitable
> institution set up to bring pleasure to television fans at any cost.
The people at Warner Brothers have Masters of Roadblocks degrees. They want
the world to come flocking to them without them having to put forth *any*
effort. Then, when sales are not what they expected, they take their ball
and go home and sulk. They're not exactly the brain trust of the business
world.
I have been an involved fan of Babylon 5 for years. I've written to Warner
Brothers. I'm in the B5 Fan Club. I'm in the Patricia Tallman fan club.
I've been posting on this newsgroup for years. In all this time, I've
*never* received anything from Warner Brothers promoting the show, or
offering merchandise. I've never seen anybody from Warner Brothers on this
newsgroup, promoting the show or offering merchandise. If they were truly
interested in promoting the shows (Babylon 5 or Crusade), don't you think
they'd have my name by now, and probably sold it on a mailing list to other
companies? Don't you think they'd pay attention to this newsgroup or the
fan club?
Warner Brothers or Image Entertainment dropping the Laserdisc and VHS
releases of Babylon 5 because of lower than expected sales, is like a farmer
who doesn't fertilize and water his field getting out of the business
because the crops don't grow. Wow, big surprise there!!
> I agree that it is a damned shame that poor sales caused the (apparent)
> suspension of the home video releases. It is to be hoped that the show
will
> increase its fanbase once it starts airing on The Sci Fi Channel, and that
> this in turn will create renewed demand for the home video versions and
that
> production will resume.
Only because the Sci-Fi Channel *will* promote it. How many times have you
seen Farscape, First Wave, and LEXX (ugh!) commercials? 'Nuff said.
> Don't forget that during the TNT exile (to 7 AM on
> Saturdays) the show was effectively off the air. The past six or eight
> months have been brutal for "B5" fandom: The fan club folded, "B5
Magazine"
> ceased publication, the merchandise has largely gone out of production.
> There simply hasn't been the influx of new fans needed to keep all of this
> stuff going, and with the show essentially unavailable, there is little to
> inspire existing fans, or keep them focused on "B5". People move on to
> other things.
Yes, *because* B5 has never been commonly available, not broadly exposed to
the mainstream of viewers. TNT is the closest it's ever come to that. Most
people have never even heard of Babylon 5, let alone Crusade. If mentioned
to them, you get a blank "deer in the headlights" stare folowed by "What's
that?"
> It is also to be hoped that really spectacular sales for the upcoming
> "X-Files" season 1 DVD boxed set will get Warner Bros. attention.
They're in a coma. Nothing will get their attention, and even if it does,
they will *not* make the connection to DVDs of Babylon 5 or Crusade. All
their neurons are *not* firing.
> A similar
> offering of "B5" should generate quite respectable sales of its own,
> certainly better than the laserdiscs, probably better than the VHS tapes.
If they'd offered this in Laserdisc, I'd have bought them in sets,
especially if they gave a price break (or added goodies) on buying complete
seasons. However, that would entail marketing and promotion. They don't do
this. The only people who promote B5/Crusade are JMS, the actors, and the
fans.
> (And DVDs are a lot cheaper to replicate than either of the other
formats.)
> And at a rate of a full season at regular intervals (assuming sales hold
up)
> the DVDs could be produced a lot more quickly than the on-again off-again
> LD/VHS schedule.
Assuming that they have a clue.
> Personally I haven't bought a new laserdisc since Spielberg cancelled the
> "Men in Black" DVD release - EXCEPT for "In the Beginning" because I
wanted
> Warner Bros. to realize that there is indeed a market for this show on
home
> video. (I bought the first VHS tape set for the same reason.)
So you bought one LD and one tape and expected them to get this message???
> But I never
> bought another one, and have no plans to start again now.
I'm sure they got *that* message. Thanks for your support!
> I certainly
> wouldn't by 120 hours of "B5" on the big discs, not at LD prices, not at
the
> LD penalty in storage space and capacity, and with the format's inability
to
> store films in anamorphic form and still have them be playable on 4:3
> televisions.
Better than PTEN recorded broadcasts, TNT recorded broadcasts, or VHS tape,
by a long shot.
> "B5" deserves a better format, and DVD is it.
..and we'll probably never get it, or at least we'll never get to complete
the whole set. They'll drop it part way through. History repeats itself.
Mac
Patrick MARCEL
> Warner Brothers or Image Entertainment dropping the Laserdisc and VHS
> releases of Babylon 5 because of lower than expected sales, is like a farmer
> who doesn't fertilize and water his field getting out of the business
> because the crops don't grow. Wow, big surprise there!!
Not to defend Warner Bros US, who don't seem overly bright as far as
merchandising their stuff goes, one has to take into account that the
Laserdisc market has all but collapsed, due to the emergence of DVD. Are
LaserDisc still being released in the States? In France, they've
stopped.I may be wrong, but the last one was "Titanic". There's not a
chance that Warner is going to revive what amounts now to an extinct
format, just to be nice to those who had bought the first laserdisks in
the series. I mean, come on! they don't even go out of their way to
provide the series in video, and that's still a viable format.
In fact, for those VHS sales, they have no excuse: the Bab-5 videos are
currently being released in France, at the rate of something like one
boxed season every six months. We've reached season 3. If that can work
out commercially in France, there's no reason why it shouldn't in the
States, where the prospective market is far bigger.
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
Andrew M Swallow
>currently being released in France, at the rate of something like one
>boxed season every six months. We've reached season 3. If that can work
>out commercially in France, there's no reason why it shouldn't in the
>States, where the prospective market is far bigger.
Under the rules of capitalism - if you can sell one, you can make a profit.
You just have to charge more. Warner Bothers just tried to sell the B5
episodes without paying an accountant to work out the price.
Sloth is one of the 7 deadly sins.
Andrew Swallow
Andrew M Swallow
>*never* received anything from Warner Brothers promoting the show, or
>offering merchandise.
When the Cursade tapes came out Warner Brothers UK (or the tape manufactures)
wrote and told me.
Looking through the Babylon 5 magazine I notice that the SHOPS are advertising
the Crusade tapes. Some crafty person's solution to not having an advertising
budget of his own?
Andrew Swallow
Mac Breck
news:390AFFF4...@wanadoo.fr...
> Mac Breck wrote:
>
> > Warner Brothers or Image Entertainment dropping the Laserdisc and VHS
> > releases of Babylon 5 because of lower than expected sales, is like a
farmer
> > who doesn't fertilize and water his field getting out of the business
> > because the crops don't grow. Wow, big surprise there!!
>
> merchandising their stuff goes, one has to take into account that the
> Laserdisc market has all but collapsed, due to the emergence of DVD. Are
> LaserDisc still being released in the States?
Laserdiscs in general? Yes.
Babylon 5 Laserdiscs? Obviously not.
> In France, they've
> stopped.I may be wrong, but the last one was "Titanic". There's not a
> chance that Warner is going to revive what amounts now to an extinct
> format, just to be nice to those who had bought the first laserdisks in
> the series.
Yes, just to be nice to those people who have supported them by buying their
product. What do they need us for?
We're just the CUSTOMER.
Mac
Mac Breck
news:20000429152103...@ng-cd1.news.cs.com...
> > In all this time, I've
> >*never* received anything from Warner Brothers promoting the show, or
> >offering merchandise.
>
manufactures)
> wrote and told me.
That's Warner Brothers UK. THEY seem to have their act together.
> Looking through the Babylon 5 magazine I notice that the SHOPS are
advertising
> the Crusade tapes. Some crafty person's solution to not having an
advertising
> budget of his own?
Not crafty. CHEAP, SKINFLINT.
Mac
Barry Chalmers
If you would like accurate and up-to-date contact info for the studios to express your
support for B5 (or other of the very few quality SF) on DVD, go to
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/studiolink.html
[Thanks, Bill Hunt.]
As someone close to the industry, I'd add; DVD is growing and will grow until
VHS is replaced [see my http://www.hd-dv.com if you'd like specifics on that]
Warner HV have said they will produce B5 on DVD - for my part, I do my best to
make that happen soon and done well by writing and buying the discs when available.
Just a reminder, if you write, please no flames, express appreciation, make it well
written - intelligent; they probably won't reply, but they'll listen. It makes a difference.
Barry Chalmers
Mac Breck
Mac
"Barry Chalmers" <bar...@skylarktech.com> wrote in message
news:%KCO4.125100$8S2.1...@news1.rdc1.tn.home.com...
Simo Aaltonen
>[SNIP] There's not a
>chance that Warner is going to revive what amounts now to an extinct
>format, just to be nice to those who had bought the first laserdisks in
>provide the series in video, and that's still a viable format.
This gives me an idea. Why don't the people developing the B5 PC combat
game (up until they were fired, anyway) drop this whole PC angle...
...and do it on Amiga instead? It'd be like this laserdisk/DVD thing
on reverse.
-sIMO aaltonen
Simo Aaltonen
>Admittedly I'm not an expert myself, but unless I see convincing evidence to
>the contrary which has been rigorously reviewed by respectable experts in a
>range of relevant fields then it seems to me that travelling there is the
>actually the simplest and most reasonable explanation.
In my humble hometown of Kangasniemi (which has much to be humble about
(that's a paraphrased description of Vir from "Sic Transit Vir")), there
is a library. In that library, there is a yellow-covered small book.
Actually more of a thick leaflet than a book -- it's maybe 100 pages.
This book puts forward the theory that man never DID go to moon, and
gives statements from many of the people directly or indirectly involved
in the space programs of USSR and USA.
I don't remember the name of the book or its author, but my reaction to
it was something like Mel Mermelstein's reaction in "Never Forget" to
seeing piles and piles of leaflets and books dedicated to advancing the
claim that the Jewish Holocaust never happened: "What is this?" (Uttered
with a mix of disbelief, outrage, and disgust.)
I *know* the two things aren't anything remotely as insupportable from a
moral standpoint, but that was my reaction when I came upon the book in
the library, while on the other hand I *had* to consider the possibility
whether such a thing would actually be possible (otherwise I might as
well slap on a badge reading "Call me Number 6!").
-sIMO aaltonen
Simo Aaltonen
>"Pelzo63" <pel...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20000424212240...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
>
>> afterall, babylon 5 was scripted too, that hasn't stopped me from enjoying
>> that. :-)
>But ISN did base it on real events, though?
Real and real... There WAS a John Sheridan, but he was actually a
300KG human blimp who only ever ate oranges. So saturated was he with
orange-y stuff that, in fact, according to reliable reports from
insiders, the man never showered -- he was peeled. (Source: Lennier.)
Likewise, there WAS a Michael Garibaldi and a Marcus Cole, but the PR
machine has given both of them a bad rap. Michael Garibaldi never did go
bald. In the contrary, he had flowing, fair hair. And Marcus didn't DIE
when he gave Ivanova some of his life-energy, his hair just fell out. A
tragedy, to be sure... Before that, Marcus and Garibaldi would spend
whole evenings just sitting in front of a mirror, taking turns brushing
each others' hair and drawing smiley faces in the mirror... Later, of
course, Lochley and Garibaldi had a few similar evenings, but then
Lochley made the mistake of asking Garibaldi whether he still remembered
all those evenings spent with Marcus. It is said that Garibaldi then went
on a rampage, beating the walls and the lamps with the hairbrush,
screaming, "I DON'T REMEMBER!". Well, the brush broke, and the two had a
falling-out. They gave each other a hard time for months after that, but
eventually they made up. (Source: Bester.)
These events and personalities have gotten seriously distorted in the ISN
"documentary" series...
Anyone got any more inside stories about how things REALLY were?
-sIMO aaltonen
lcou...@stetson.edu
Lisa Coulter