ATTN jms: Sci-Fi Chat on June 21
The Nuclear Marine
Joe, nice chat tonight and thanks for the heads up on:
1. The Seeing Eye Theatre tidbit
2. Selling of the movie rights on Rising Stars
3. A more interesting take on "If you were a tree..." into "If you were
a book..."
4. Reminding me to reread the Book of Job (has it really been 10 years
for me?)
Anyway, I wanted to add on a question but due to the nature *snip 10
page disertation on IRC problems and benefits* so the cat recovered.
Anyway, as a more visible Atheist have you've noticed yourself as an
influence to other Atheist. Also, in the 15 or so years since you've
imagined B5 has your philosophy on Atheism been modified or enhanced
throughout the process?
Again, great chat (220+ people) except for the backpeddling on the
wresting issue. Besides, since nobody's perfect then everybody's
perfect.
================================================
Ever feel when you ask a question that you could go back in time an
clarify, you know, like, Mike Ditka and the Bears vs. the entire Shadow
fleet? Everyone knows Bears by 49 points.
Sheri L. Kirkwood
It might have been nice for someone to have given the heads-up
on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
Sheri
Jms at B5
>influence to other Atheist.
Not that I'm aware of, but since we have no one place where we gather and hang
out, I'd have no way of knowing.
Also, in the 15 or so years since you've
>imagined B5 has your philosophy on Atheism been modified or enhanced
>throughout the process?
>
Not terribly.
jms
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)
J. Potts
Sheri L. Kirkwood <slkir...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>It might have been nice for someone to have given the heads-up
>on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
There were several. You just missed them.
--
JRP
"How many slime-trailing, sleepless, slimy, slobbering things do you know
that will *run and hide* from your Eveready?"
--Maureen Birnbaum, Barbarian Swordsperson
JBONETATI
on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
Sheri>>
I think there was at least one that Sandy Bruckner posted. Just to be safe,
though, you should check out the Zocalo newsletter and check there regularly.
There's *lots* of cool stuff there!
http://www.isnnews.net/the_zocalo/zocalo.htm
Hope this helps!
Jan
Iain Clark
"Sheri L. Kirkwood" <slkir...@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:39526692...@ameritech.net...
>
> It might have been nice for someone to have given the heads-up
> on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
Such as the "Some producer guy chatting at SciFi.com" thread, for example?
:-)
I still forgot all about it, though!
Iain
--
"Signs, portents, dreams...next thing
we'll be reading tea leaves and chicken entrails."
Pål Are Nordal
>
> "Sheri L. Kirkwood" <slkir...@ameritech.net> wrote in message
> news:39526692...@ameritech.net...
> >
> > It might have been nice for someone to have given the heads-up
> > on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
>
> Such as the "Some producer guy chatting at SciFi.com" thread, for example?
> :-)
Well, maybe you'll remember the Bonnie Hammer chat commencing soon now.
Go to http://www.scifi.com/chat/ and I suggest you put Crusade- in front
of your name.
--
Donate free food with a simple click: http://www.thehungersite.com/
Pål Are Nordal
a_b...@bigfoot.com
Gharlane of Eddore
<slkir...@ameritech.net> writes:
>
> It might have been nice for someone to have given the heads-up
> on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
>
You didn't miss much; there were apparently several hundred folks
trying to get in and stay in, and the server software looked a tad
overloaded.... even worse, Craig, the moderator, was going out
of his way to block any "interesting" questions. *grin*
( Actually, I'd be surprised if he had time to even read them all!)
The transcript either is, or will be shortly, available at "scifi.com"
so you can read it yourself. With that many folks trying to get
a question in edgewise, it's easier to just watch/read, anyway.
Mac Breck
news:8itra7$5n1b6$1...@fu-berlin.de...
>
> "Sheri L. Kirkwood" <slkir...@ameritech.net> wrote in message
> news:39526692...@ameritech.net...
> >
> > on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
>
> :-)
>
Not me. I put stuff like that in my Lotus Organizer immediately (with an
alarm 12 hours in advance), so when I check the morning email, it reminds
me.
Bonnie Hammer, Sr. VP of The Sci-Fi Channel is chatting tonight at 9PM.
It's be a good time to show our support for Babylon 5 and Crusade (existing
eps, the three unfilmed scripts, and NEW eps.).
Be sure you have the latest upgrade of Flash before trying to go to
www.scifi.com. They upgraded their site and if you don't have the latest
Flash, you'll get lots of runtime errors (You can still get through, and
chat, but it's a pain.).
Go to http://v2.shockwave.com/bin/v2/entry.jsp to get the latest Flash.
Don't say I didn't tell you.
Mac
The Nuclear Marine
> It might have been nice for someone to have given the heads-up
> on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
>
> Sheri
Hoo, tell me about it. Only one thread mentioned it and nearly missed
the chat trying to figure the settings (missed the S at the end of
events).
And the lurker's guide made no mention of it or the Doyle chat late last
week.
Surely someone will post a transcript of it on the newsgroup, hint,
hint.
===================================================
At some point the pain stops, but usually death takes over then.
The Nuclear Marine
> >Anyway, as a more visible Atheist have you've noticed yourself as an
> >influence to other Atheist.
>
> Not that I'm aware of, but since we have no one place where we gather and hang
> out, I'd have no way of knowing.
>
alt.atheism.moderated was the usual place I read that is not inundated with the
300+ entries of "my imaginary cat is more powerful than your third rate deity"
type post. Intellectual arguments are fairly high. And for one reason or
another your name has been dropped in from time to time.
None that I have read mention your works as an influence but all that respond
about the show replied with how respectful it was of viewpoints while still
questioning belief.
Come time I will add the arguement the US military needs to higher an Atheist
Chaplain as they already have 2 or more Wiccan chaplains. But then, I am still
active duty military so feel the need.
>
> Also, in the 15 or so years since you've
> >imagined B5 has your philosophy on Atheism been modified or enhanced
> >throughout the process?
> >
> Not terribly.
>
Come to think of it, my philosophy sort of solidified after reading Joseph
Cambell "Hero...Faces" and Neil Gaiman's "The Sandman" series and of course B5
which showed how superior technology did not mean superior morality. Course this
came about while I was 21 and haven't changed my viewpoint much aside from a
growing acceptance of many religions and developing the Atheist Christian
concept.
So, have to ask, besides Garibaldi and a hint of Londo, which other characters on
B5 do you envision as atheist (Lyta and Bester are my guess cause one is a god
and the other thinks he is)
>
> jms
> 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)
=======================================
Only reason I see people picking up SFX magazine is they thought is was SEX
magazine.
Mac Breck
From: "Gharlane of Eddore" <ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Cc: <rec-arts-sf-tv-b...@moderators.isc.org>
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 2:02 AM
Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Chat on June 21
> In <39526692...@ameritech.net> "Sheri L. Kirkwood"
> <slkir...@ameritech.net> writes:
> >
> > It might have been nice for someone to have given the heads-up
> > on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
> >
>
>
> You didn't miss much; there were apparently several hundred folks
> trying to get in and stay in, and the server software looked a tad
> overloaded.... even worse, Craig, the moderator, was going out
> of his way to block any "interesting" questions. *grin*
I got several questions asked and answered (after much persistence). The
6/21 chat was a walk in the park compared to the 6/22 Bonnie Hammer chat
(where I didn't even get one question presented to her (ALL were moderated
out. All were Babylon 5 or Crusade related, and all were polite.). Only
one Crusade question got asked, despite the "Crusade presence" (fans who
preceded their name with "Crusade". I wish the word about preceding your
name with Crusade would have gotten out before the chat, because I suspect a
lot of others (myself included) would have done it as well.
Mac
Pål Are Nordal
>
> In <39526692...@ameritech.net> "Sheri L. Kirkwood"
> <slkir...@ameritech.net> writes:
> >
> > It might have been nice for someone to have given the heads-up
> > on this chat and announced it on this newsgroup.
> >
>
> You didn't miss much; there were apparently several hundred folks
> trying to get in and stay in, and the server software looked a tad
> overloaded....
Not exactly - they were trying to disrupt the chat. Since moderation was
on, they couldn't flood it by speaking, so they did it by
entering/exiting with several clones. To bad the moderator had no idea
how IRC works, or he'd have banned them from the channel.
> even worse, Craig, the moderator, was going out
> of his way to block any "interesting" questions. *grin*
> ( Actually, I'd be surprised if he had time to even read them all!)
Tell me about it. I'm tempted to ask a few of my own questions here on
the newsgroups.
> The transcript either is, or will be shortly, available at "scifi.com"
> so you can read it yourself. With that many folks trying to get
> a question in edgewise, it's easier to just watch/read, anyway.
http://www.scifi.com/transcripts/
Pål Are Nordal
>
> I wish the word about preceding your
> name with Crusade would have gotten out before the chat, because I suspect a
> lot of others (myself included) would have done it as well.
Like in the Save Crusade message I posted all over the place?
Mac Breck
news:3953B0A3...@bigfoot.com...
> Mac Breck wrote:
> >
> > I wish the word about preceding your
> > name with Crusade would have gotten out before the chat, because I
suspect a
> > lot of others (myself included) would have done it as well.
>
> Like in the Save Crusade message I posted all over the place?
Not about the chat itself, about preceding your Nickname with "Crusade".
Mine would have been CrusadeKoshN. All those "C" names would have dominated
the list of chat attendees, and would have made an impression on Ms. Hammer.
Mac
SGBruckner
It appears that the newsgroup is looking in the wrong place for information
about Babylon 5. Seems Lurker's hasn't been keeping up with what's current.
Visit The Zocalo Today. The chats were announced a week ago, along with chats
with Jerry Doyle, Marjean Holden and Damian London. The URL is
http://zocalo.isnnews.net. Pop over and have a look.
Take care.
Sandy
Sandra Bruckner
Editor/Publisher
The Zocalo Today
http://zocalo.isnnews.net
Pål Are Nordal
>
> "Pål Are Nordal" <a_b...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:3953B0A3...@bigfoot.com...
> >
>
> Not about the chat itself, about preceding your Nickname with "Crusade".
> Mine would have been CrusadeKoshN. All those "C" names would have dominated
> the list of chat attendees, and would have made an impression on Ms. Hammer.
Look again. Quoted from the message (news:39484601...@bigfoot.com):
> Mark this event on your calendar - If we could show up in force, all
> using nicknames with "Crusade_" in front of them, it would certainly
> send a powerful message.
Tom Holt
The message <003501bfdd41$efbcbe00$10d2...@cobweb.net>
from "Mac Breck" <macb...@access995.com> contains these words:
> Not about the chat itself, about preceding your Nickname with "Crusade".
> Mine would have been CrusadeKoshN. All those "C" names would have dominated
> the list of chat attendees, and would have made an impression on Ms. Hammer.
Indeed. However, with respect, I'm not sure the impression thus made
would necessarily have been favorable.
Pål Are Nordal
Presuming, of course, that you had some idea of what you were talking
about. I mean, since she listed Farscape as her favourite show, she
obviously loves horrid shows and will undoubtedly be very receptive to
the criminally repulsive abysmalness of Crusade.
Therefor I think that the 30+ supporters of the Save Crusade campaign
(or Brain Damage Cases for Crappy Television as we're thinking of
changing our name to) that showed up made a positive impression on her.
Mark Maher
>
>The message <003501bfdd41$efbcbe00$10d2...@cobweb.net>
> from "Mac Breck" <macb...@access995.com> contains these
words:
>
>
>
>> Not about the chat itself, about preceding your Nickname with
"Crusade".
>> Mine would have been CrusadeKoshN. All those "C" names would
have dominated
>> the list of chat attendees, and would have made an impression
on Ms. Hammer.
>
>Indeed. However, with respect, I'm not sure the impression thus
made
>would necessarily have been favorable.
>
I have to agree with you, Tom. Every since the news broke about
Sci-Fi picking up Babylon 5, the "Save-Crusade" fanatics have
been after jms and Sci-Fi, asking if this means they're picking
up Crusade also.
In response, jms has posted an all-points-bulletin post every
week or two stating emphatically and unequivocally that
*NOW_IS_NOT_THE_TIME*! Maybe later, after Babylon 5 has run a
while and shows that it can draw a big enough market share.
Anyone with any comprehension of English can tell that Bonnie
Hammer said essentially the *EXACT_SAME_THING*. "Not now. Let's
see how Babylon 5 does first and then maybe, we'll think about
Crusade." Here is her exact response:
---------------
BonnieHammer: Our first entree into that franchise was picking
up the entire of Babylon 5 series which starts to air September
25, which we are really excited about.
BonnieHammer: We DID think about Crusade before it closed down,
but the timing and the actual financial commitment at the time
just actually wasn't going to work for us. We are actually open
to considering it down th.
BonnieHammer: the road.
BonnieHammer: But first we want to see how B5 does on our air,
and hope all of you tune in!
BonnieHammer: The better it does, the more opportunity there
will be to buy similar series! So please tune in in September!
---------------
But the Crusade fanatics will not let it rest for two seconds.
They don't understand that if they keep the noise level too high
and too constant, the Executive VP of the Sci-Fi Channel is
actually going to get turned against Crusade in much the same
sense that TNT got turned against it. That's why jms wants to
keep it quiet for now; he understands that. Too bad some folks
in the crowd don't.
__!_!__
Gizmo
Pål Are Nordal
>
> I have to agree with you, Tom. Every since the news broke about
> Sci-Fi picking up Babylon 5, the "Save-Crusade" fanatics have
> been after jms and Sci-Fi, asking if this means they're picking
> up Crusade also.
Of course we have. As part of our "Let's annoy jms" program, we're
arranging a barbecue on his front lawn. Everybody is welcome as long as
they first ring the doorbell until he comes out so we can ask him yet
another time if he'll renew Crusade for us.
> In response, jms has posted an all-points-bulletin post every
> week or two stating emphatically and unequivocally that
> *NOW_IS_NOT_THE_TIME*! Maybe later, after Babylon 5 has run a
> while and shows that it can draw a big enough market share.
That's funny. I could have sworn both he and Bonnie Hammer were hinting
at Crusade's chances hanging on the Babylon 5 rerun ratings, that we
should do our damn best to spread the word about them. I guess my
english skills aren't quite up to par.
> Anyone with any comprehension of English can tell that Bonnie
> Hammer said essentially the *EXACT_SAME_THING*. "Not now. Let's
> see how Babylon 5 does first and then maybe, we'll think about
> Crusade."
[ Bonnie Hammer stuff snipped ]
Well, what do you know, I *did* understand it! Pity you didn't.
> But the Crusade fanatics will not let it rest for two seconds.
That's a gross misstatement. I wait at least *3* seconds between each message.
> They don't understand that if they keep the noise level too high
> and too constant, the Executive VP of the Sci-Fi Channel is
> actually going to get turned against Crusade in much the same
> sense that TNT got turned against it.
Damn. I though they liked people trying to get the better ratings.
> That's why jms wants to
> keep it quiet for now; he understands that. Too bad some folks
> in the crowd don't.
No _you_ don't understand. You don't understand that we're tying to help
Crusade by getting people to watch Babylon 5. You don't understand that
the "Crusade" nickname thing was to silently show our devotion, without
being an annoyance. And you don't understand that Mr. Holt's comment was
a dig at the camping - he loathes Crusade and would rather it remain
dead, buried and forgotten.
Tom Holt
The message <39563B81...@bigfoot.com>
from =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Are Nordal <a_b...@bigfoot.com>
contains these words:
> Therefor I think that the 30+ supporters of the Save Crusade campaign
> (or Brain Damage Cases for Crappy Television as we're thinking of
> changing our name to) that showed up made a positive impression on her.
Wow. Thirty people. Outstanding.
Just think. If each of those thirty (sorry, thirty-*plus*) people
were to pony up a measly million bucks, you could make the next
season of Crusade yourselves, without having to go cap in hand to anybody.
I wouldn't be surprised if thirty-plus people wrote in begging the
relevant suits not to axe 'Space; Above & Beyond'. Or 'SeaQuest'. Or
'Martial Law'.
Given that TNT had ratings figures telling them that over a million
people were watching 'Crusade' and they reckoned that wasn't nearly
enough to make the show viable, do you really believe that Sci-Fi can
be persuaded to gamble large sums of money based on the antics of thirty geeks?
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Given that TNT had ratings figures telling them that over a million
> people were watching 'Crusade' and they reckoned that wasn't nearly
> enough to make the show viable
Look, I just rehashed this on the rat/rast/rastb5 Crusade thread. But
I'll repeat it for your benefit:
29 February: TNT pulls plug.
June 9th - September 1st: Crusade airs. It gets decent ratings, good
enough for renewal on both TNT and Sci-Fi.
It had nothing to do with ratings. Sorry.
> do you really believe that Sci-Fi can
> be persuaded to gamble large sums of money based on the antics of thirty geeks?
Nope. But I do hope that it, combined with the Variety ad, the letters,
the emails and the Crusade for a Cure convention, will give a tiny push
on Crusade's favour when B5's ratings arrive and the final decision is
at hand.
That's all we can do, and IMHO it's better than doing nothing.
Tom Holt
The message <3956A790...@bigfoot.com>
> And you don't understand that Mr. Holt's comment was
> a dig at the camping - he loathes Crusade and would rather it remain
> dead, buried and forgotten.
'Loathe' is a bit strong. 'Didn't much like' is nearer the mark. It
annoyed me rather more than most lousy TV shows because I'd expected
better from Mr Straczynski, and disappointment breeds resentment.
Nevertheless; everyone's entitled to at least one really big mistake,
and I shall continue to follow his career with great interest.
For what little it's worth, my beef with the 'Exhume Crusade!'
campaigners is that the show's failure is likely to be a strong
argument in the eyes of TV company suits against putting money into
any further B5-universe projects. I'd dearly love to see a new,
different, not-bloody-awful B5-based project - if not a series, then
another TV movie or two - but this is unlikely to happen as long as
the B5 lobby is seen to be demanding the return of a proven turkey.
Diane K De
<a_b...@bigfoot.com> writes:
>Therefor I think that the 30+ supporters of the Save Crusade campaign
>(or Brain Damage Cases for Crappy Television as we're thinking of
>changing our name to) that showed up made a positive impression on her.
>
One thing that comes across big-time if one reads the entire transcript of the
chat is that the Sci-Fi Channel is inundated with all sorts of factions with
their "Save <insert show here>" efforts. Ms. Hammer as much admitted this in
her answer to the "do letter writing campaigns work?" question. In the end,
they will rely on their own instincts to pick shows and the ratings to tell
them how they are doing, not the amount of letters they get or people who put
"Crusade" in front of the name.
As she was inundated with question after question about an endless array of
programs, the same factors arose in the answers--ratings, costs, contractual
factors.
Hardly a faction (Battlestar Gallactica, MST3K, The Sentinel, Sliders, GvsE,
Forever Knight) seemed to missing from that chat. She politically walked a
tightrope not to piss off anyone too much or spoil many people's hopes. I got
the impression she would say anything to get people to watch. Which happens to
be her job.
What's the worse that could happen by her promise about considering Crusade? A
year from now, people ask, "Hey, Bonnie, did you consider Crusade?". "Of
course, we looked at the Babylon 5 ratings and while it did pretty well, the
effort to revive a series that has been out of production so long was beyond
our capabilities. But, thanks for watching! We love Babylon 5!"
DD
Diane K De
<lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> writes:
>From: Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk>
>Date: 25 Jun 2000 18:55:41 -0600
>
>For what little it's worth, my beef with the 'Exhume Crusade!'
>campaigners is that the show's failure is likely to be a strong
>argument in the eyes of TV company suits against putting money into
>any further B5-universe projects. I'd dearly love to see a new,
>different, not-bloody-awful B5-based project - if not a series, then
>another TV movie or two - but this is unlikely to happen as long as
>the B5 lobby is seen to be demanding the return of a proven turkey.
This reflects my feeling as well. I'd love to see another B5-related project
get a greenlight from someone. It doesn't make sense to continue to expend
energy and direct attention to the suits on one that wasn't so good.
No matter what fans perceive about the reasons behind that, that is never going
to be apparent to others. They'll just see and judge the show for what they
can see.
Yeah, a "non-Crusade" B5 project would be great.
DD
Tim Fleming
Ummm, She dismissed the possibility of Space: Above and Beyond returning.
She also trashed the possibility of G.vs.E returning. This was in the transcript
as well.
However she did leave open the possibility for Crusade to return. funny that huh?
-Tim
Diane K De wrote:
>
>
> Hardly a faction (Battlestar Gallactica, MST3K, The Sentinel, Sliders, GvsE,
> Forever Knight) seemed to missing from that chat. She politically walked a
> tightrope not to piss off anyone too much or spoil many people's hopes. I got
> the impression she would say anything to get people to watch. Which happens to
> be her job.
> DD
Tim Fleming
I understand that normalized ratings for Farscape average between a 1.5 and a
1.7.
This is considered a success. Crusade's normalized average rating was 1.3
(without
the promotion machine going). Also, TNT 's ratings data was hardly relevant to
them.
They has already discontinued the show before it aired. Crusade would have had to
get at least
3 million people to watch for them to reconsider (That would be fantastic for a
cable show).
You may recall that "A Call to Arms" reached almost 3 million people. This
happened right
near the time TNT Cancelled the show. It was not enough for them. What makes you
think
ratings data would have been important given the above?
-Tim
>
>
> Given that TNT had ratings figures telling them that over a million
> people were watching 'Crusade' and they reckoned that wasn't nearly
> enough to make the show viable, do you really believe that Sci-Fi can
Tim Fleming
Please help me along here. How was an unfavorable impression made. Did
we all dress badly?
Tom Holt wrote:
> Indeed. However, with respect, I'm not sure the impression thus made
> would necessarily have been favorable.
The above is with reference to the Bonnie Hammer chat
Tim Fleming
You know if you would have pulled the plug on Babylon 5 after the
first 13
episodes no one would have missed it much. There was no arc. It was
still
pretty much UN in space. Comparing Crusade to Babylon 5 at this point is
a bit unfair. However, I will say this, The first 5 episodes of Crusade
(The real
first 5) were better than the first 5 of Babylon 5 (and I LOVE Babylon
5).
Crusade had a lot of potential. Anyone who read the "lost" scripts at
bookface.com could tell you that. Just like Babylon 5 it looked as though
Crusade was going to be heading in an unpredictable direction.
What surprises me the most is that there are B5 fans who didn't expect
this ;)
-Tim
>
>
> 'Loathe' is a bit strong. 'Didn't much like' is nearer the mark. It
> annoyed me rather more than most lousy TV shows because I'd expected
> better from Mr Straczynski, and disappointment breeds resentment.
> Nevertheless; everyone's entitled to at least one really big mistake,
> and I shall continue to follow his career with great interest.
>
Mac Breck
news:200006250...@zetnet.co.uk...
>
> The message <003501bfdd41$efbcbe00$10d2...@cobweb.net>
> from "Mac Breck" <macb...@access995.com> contains these words:
>
>
>
> > Not about the chat itself, about preceding your Nickname with "Crusade".
> > Mine would have been CrusadeKoshN. All those "C" names would have
dominated
> > the list of chat attendees, and would have made an impression on Ms.
Hammer.
>
> would necessarily have been favorable.
It would have shown that a lot of people still remember and want Crusade 9
months after it's last episode aired. How she'd take it depends on her
personality (jaded TV exec who thinks of the fans as a lower lifeform vs. a
person who appreciates the fans). Unfortunately, I think she's the former
trying to come off as the latter.
Mac
Mark Maher
<3956A8F5...@astro.umd.edu>...
>
> Please help me along here. How was an unfavorable
impression made. Did
>we all dress badly?
>
Have you ever been in a room full of crying infants who won't
stop no matter what you do? All that you want is for the crying
to stop, even if it means putting earplugs in so that you can't
hear anything anymore.
By continually shouting at the top of your lungs ,"RENEW CRUSADE
AND DO RIGHT NOW!" you aren't just causing Sci-Fi to ignore you,
you're causing them to ignore your message.
Get it now?
__!_!__
Gizmo
Tom Holt
The message <81N55.2700$AM4.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
from "Mark Maher" <marka...@worldnet.att.net> contains these words:
> By continually shouting at the top of your lungs ,"RENEW CRUSADE
> AND DO RIGHT NOW!" you aren't just causing Sci-Fi to ignore you,
> you're causing them to ignore your message.
Am I the only one who has a mental image of G'kar trapped in his
quarters, besieged by a mob of statue-brandishing Narns?
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Have you ever been in a room full of crying infants who won't
> stop no matter what you do? All that you want is for the crying
> to stop, even if it means putting earplugs in so that you can't
> hear anything anymore.
Except of course - the chat was moderated. There was no screaming. No
crying. Just fans of Crusade showing up to support the show. One of them
asked if Sci-Fi was still interested in the show, several other Crusade
supporters asked totally unrelated questions.
> By continually shouting at the top of your lungs ,"RENEW CRUSADE
> AND DO RIGHT NOW!" you aren't just causing Sci-Fi to ignore you,
> you're causing them to ignore your message.
I agree.
Point is: THAT ISN'T WHAT THE SAVE CRUSADE CAMPAIGN IS DOING, OR
ENCOURAGING OTHERS TO DO! Why on earth do you persist in claiming this?
> Get it now?
Do you?
Tammy Smith
met him at AgamemCon over the weekend, & I thought the same thing! I've
met almost all the B5 actors now, & Doyle really is the most like his
character of all of them. He seems like a more conservative (in his
politics) version of you--he's very blunt & direct, & can also be very
funny. While I don't agree with everything he stands for, I do
appreciate his directness.
Tammy
Tammy Smith
out there! I've never understood why people bash it so much. I'd
rather go after series that truly are bad (which is almost everything
out there, especially on the major networks). I wouldn't mind seeing
Crusade return, especially since I'm not too excited about what's
currently on the air.
Tammy
Mac Breck
news:20000626051306...@nso-bg.aol.com...
> In article <39563B81...@bigfoot.com>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Are
Nordal
> <a_b...@bigfoot.com> writes:
>
> >Therefor I think that the 30+ supporters of the Save Crusade campaign
> >(or Brain Damage Cases for Crappy Television as we're thinking of
> >changing our name to) that showed up made a positive impression on her.
"We're" ? You're including yourself in a group that you call Brain Damage
Cases for Crappy Television?? Had to be a typo! How could you call it
Crappy Television and then include yourself in the group?
Crusade wasn't crappy. TNT's screwing it up the a**, ... *that* was crappy.
If you want to see what crappy television really is, watch Voyager or Lexx.
> One thing that comes across big-time if one reads the entire transcript of
the
> chat is that the Sci-Fi Channel is inundated with all sorts of factions
with
> their "Save <insert show here>" efforts. Ms. Hammer as much admitted this
in
> her answer to the "do letter writing campaigns work?" question. In the
end,
> they will rely on their own instincts to pick shows and the ratings to
tell
> them how they are doing, not the amount of letters they get or people who
put
> "Crusade" in front of the name.
>
> As she was inundated with question after question about an endless array
of
> programs, the same factors arose in the answers--ratings, costs,
contractual
> factors.
>
> Hardly a faction (Battlestar Gallactica, MST3K, The Sentinel, Sliders,
GvsE,
> Forever Knight) seemed to missing from that chat.
With all the shows mentioned, I wrote:
"*To Moderator* To Bonnie Hammer: With all these shows (discussed so far),
you're going to need more than 24 hours in a day or more than one Sci-Fi
Channel."
However, *none* of my questions (listed below, in ascending chronological
order) were presented to her.
*To Moderator* As a fan of Babylon 5 and Crusade, I'd like
to see Crusade get a full first season (22 episodes) on
The Sci-Fi Channel. From your POV, what would it take
for this to happen?
*To Moderator* To Bonnie Hammer: Have you seen the unfilmed Crusade scripts
that JMS has up on bookface? They're blockbusters!
*To Moderator* To Bonnie Hammer: It'd really help Crusade catch on if some
new episodes were filmed to flesh out Season 1, and then a proper Season 1
was
aired. When B5 does well, I hope you'll do that.
*To Moderator* To Bonnie Hammer: Are you going to show the Babylon 5 TV
Movies (In The Beginning, The Gathering, Thirdspace, The River of Souls, & A
Call to
Arms)?
*To Moderator* To Bonnie Hammer: With all these shows (discussed so far),
you're going to need more than 24 hours in a day or more than one Sci-Fi
Channel.
*To Moderator* To Bonnie Hammer: You know, a Chain Reaction of all five
Babylon 5 Movies would be appreciated by the fans. How about it?
*To Moderator* To Bonnie Hammer: How much mail do you get from the fans?
> She politically walked a
> tightrope not to piss off anyone too much or spoil many people's hopes. I
got
> the impression she would say anything to get people to watch.
That's EXACTLY the impression I got. She was a politician. After she got
away from the chat, she'S likely forget all about it (just like a
politician).
> Which happens to
> be her job.
>
> What's the worse that could happen by her promise about considering
Crusade? A
> year from now, people ask, "Hey, Bonnie, did you consider Crusade?". "Of
> course, we looked at the Babylon 5 ratings and while it did pretty well,
the
> effort to revive a series that has been out of production so long was
beyond
> our capabilities. But, thanks for watching! We love Babylon 5!"
Agreed. I can see exactly that happening (no matter how many watch B5).
However, I hope your crystal ball is wrong.
If cable goes up much more (just went up again), I may have to drop it
entirely, and then this'll be a non-issue for me.
Mac
Mac Breck
news:81N55.2700$AM4.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Tim Fleming wrote in message
> <3956A8F5...@astro.umd.edu>...
> >
> > Please help me along here. How was an unfavorable
> impression made. Did
> >we all dress badly?
> >
>
> stop no matter what you do? All that you want is for the crying
> to stop, even if it means putting earplugs in so that you can't
> hear anything anymore.
>
> AND DO RIGHT NOW!" you aren't just causing Sci-Fi to ignore you,
> you're causing them to ignore your message.
>
>
> __!_!__
> Gizmo
...as if they'd actually pay any attention to our message, no matter what we
do.
Mac
Mark Maher
to is the people who refuse to heed the advice of jms and a lot
of other folks to just back off on getting Crusade renewed for a
while until Babylon 5 has a chance to establish itself on Sci-Fi
Channel. Then if Babylon 5 does okay, maybe jms can get them
interested in reviving Crusade.
But no matter how much you try to talk some sense into them,
they won't listen.
__!_!__
Gizmo
Tammy Smith wrote in message
<16372-39...@storefull-136.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
Pål Are Nordal
>
> But no matter how much you try to talk some sense into them,
> they won't listen.
You've killfiled me, haven't you?
Mark Maher
__!_!__
Gizmo
Pål Are Nordal wrote in message
<395809F4...@bigfoot.com>...
Tom Holt
The message <16372-39...@storefull-136.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
from gka...@webtv.net (Tammy Smith) contains these words:
> Come on, guys--was Crusade *really* all that bad? I've seen a lot worse
> out there!
> I've never understood why people bash it so much.
Rockne O'Bannon, or any of the other low-rent Skiffy hacks, I don't
suppose anybody would have minded terribly much; they'd have shrugged
their shoulders and tuned in to something else, or watched paint dry,
and six months later everybody would have forgotten it had ever
happened. 'What was the name of that show with the ship ripped off
from Blakes 7 and the really annoying music?', they'd ask, and nobody
would be able to remember.
But I think we had a right to expect better from Mr Straczynski. We
asked for bread and he gave us a stone. Furthermore, from my
perspective at least, I'm annoyed because the failure of Crusade has
severely damaged the chances of any further projects in the B5 universe.
And Crusade could have been good, if only he'd tried a little bit
harder. IMHO, Crusade's fatal flaws derived from lazy, unimaginative
writing; potboiler stories, cardboard characters, flayed-dead-horse
'issues' shows wedged in as a substitute for original thought, script
assignments farmed out to talentless hacks. It was sloppy and
unprofessional, giving the impression that Mr Straczynski simply
couldn't be bothered. It was Voyager with jumpgates.
>From those who have little to offer, little is expected. From the
likes of Mr Straczynski, on the other hand, I believe we have a right
to expect more.
Daniel W. Johnson
Tammy Smith <gka...@webtv.net> wrote:
> I've
> met almost all the B5 actors now, & Doyle really is the most like his
> character of all of them.
I seem to recall a comment by JMS that he got the part by showing up at
the audition and (essentially) being Garibaldi.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
pano...@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W
.
lcou...@stetson.edu
It would clearly not have mattered to TNT. It might (hopefully) matter
to SciFi. However, I suspect the kicker will be if B5 gets ratings,
Crusade reruns get picked up and get ratings, and then... we can hope.
Lisa Coulter
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
lcou...@stetson.edu
"Mark Maher" <marka...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Tom Holt wrote in message <200006250...@zetnet.co.uk>...
> >
> > from "Mac Breck" <macb...@access995.com> contains these
> words:
> >
> >
> >
> >> Not about the chat itself, about preceding your Nickname with
> "Crusade".
> >> Mine would have been CrusadeKoshN. All those "C" names would
> have dominated
> >> the list of chat attendees, and would have made an impression
> on Ms. Hammer.
> >
> >Indeed. However, with respect, I'm not sure the impression thus
> made
> >would necessarily have been favorable.
> >
>
> Sci-Fi picking up Babylon 5, the "Save-Crusade" fanatics have
> been after jms and Sci-Fi, asking if this means they're picking
> up Crusade also.
>
> week or two stating emphatically and unequivocally that
> *NOW_IS_NOT_THE_TIME*! Maybe later, after Babylon 5 has run a
> while and shows that it can draw a big enough market share.
>
> Hammer said essentially the *EXACT_SAME_THING*. "Not now. Let's
> see how Babylon 5 does first and then maybe, we'll think about
> ---------------
> BonnieHammer: Our first entree into that franchise was picking
> up the entire of Babylon 5 series which starts to air September
> 25, which we are really excited about.
>
> BonnieHammer: We DID think about Crusade before it closed down,
> but the timing and the actual financial commitment at the time
> just actually wasn't going to work for us. We are actually open
> to considering it down th.
>
> BonnieHammer: the road.
>
> BonnieHammer: But first we want to see how B5 does on our air,
> and hope all of you tune in!
>
> BonnieHammer: The better it does, the more opportunity there
> will be to buy similar series! So please tune in in September!
> ---------------
>
> and too constant, the Executive VP of the Sci-Fi Channel is
> actually going to get turned against Crusade in much the same
> keep it quiet for now; he understands that. Too bad some folks
> in the crowd don't.
>
> Gizmo
>
>
Politics, politics, -- but it's the way the universe works.
Lisa
lcou...@stetson.edu
Tim Fleming <fle...@astro.umd.edu> wrote:
>
> You know if you would have pulled the plug on Babylon 5 after the
> first 13
> episodes no one would have missed it much. There was no arc. It was
> still
> pretty much UN in space. Comparing Crusade to Babylon 5 at this
point is
>
> a bit unfair. However, I will say this, The first 5 episodes of
Crusade
> (The real
> first 5) were better than the first 5 of Babylon 5 (and I LOVE
Babylon
> 5).
>
> Crusade had a lot of potential. Anyone who read the "lost"
scripts at
>
> bookface.com could tell you that. Just like Babylon 5 it looked as
though
>
> Crusade was going to be heading in an unpredictable direction.
>
> What surprises me the most is that there are B5 fans who didn't
expect
> this ;)
>
> -Tim
>
I agree with this. However, I will say that I would take *any* B5 -
universe project - moives, books, series, over none at all.
Lisa Coulter
lcou...@stetson.edu
I have another idea for people to support Crusade - symbolic, but well.
On the deja rating scale it is 11 (I think) right behind ST:Voyager!.
Come on folks, we can do better. www.deja.com
Tim Fleming
Aside from someone continually typing "Save Sliders"
(pre-chat)the behavior mentioned below did not happen (at least on the
part of Crusade supporters). In addition, the chat was moderated so
even if someone was behaving in the manner you describe, Ms. Hammer
would not have seen it (nor would anyone else). Furthermore, there
were questions asked by people with Crusade names that had nothing to do
with Crusade (Have you read the transcript?). This is hardly the crying
infant scenario you described.
-Tim
Mark Maher
<1ecv0hi.zspnpg1g6itjwN%pano...@iquest.net>...
>
>Tammy Smith <gka...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
>> I've
>> met almost all the B5 actors now, & Doyle really is the most
like his
>> character of all of them.
>
>I seem to recall a comment by JMS that he got the part by
showing up at
>the audition and (essentially) being Garibaldi.
>
Yeah, that's spot on from my recollection. I believe that the
comment that Jerry said when asked who he was and what part he
was auditioning for got him the job:
"I'm Jerry Doyle and I'm auditioning for the part that I'm gonna
get."
Or words to that effect.
__!_!__
Gizmo
Mark Maher
>
> You know if you would have pulled the plug on Babylon 5
after >the
>first 13
>episodes no one would have missed it much. There was no >arc.
It was
>still
>pretty much UN in space.
*I* knew that there was a lot more going to happen in the
Babylon 5 story by the time that thirteen episodes had aired. So
did a lot of other folks. The thirteenth episode, "Signs and
Portents" was filled with evidence of the story arc.
> Comparing Crusade to Babylon 5 at this point is
>a bit unfair.
Agreed. Crusade suffered from not being one show but two. The
first five episodes produced were a different show from the
episodes produced later. The story was hurt by the inherent
conflicts that created as well as the deliberate torpedoing by
TNT with their airing order.
>However, I will say this, The first 5 episodes of >Crusade
>(The real
>first 5) were better than the first 5 of Babylon 5 (and I LOVE
Babylon
>5).
I really enjoyed those episodes. I was particualrly impressed
with how many different social issues that "The Needs of Earth"
provided commentary on in a single episode.
> Crusade had a lot of potential. Anyone who read the "lost"
scripts at
>
>bookface.com could tell you that. Just like Babylon 5 it
looked as though
>
>Crusade was going to be heading in an unpredictable direction.
Actually, the direction of the Babylon 5 universe was pretty
well established by that part of the story. As Garibaldi stated
in "Midnight on the Firing Line"; straight to hell in a hand
basket.
> What surprises me the most is that there are B5 fans who
didn't expect
>this ;)
>
There was the recurring mentioning of the incident with the
Cerberus. jms doesn't say some more than once unless he's going
to follow up on it. That much just about anyone should have
picked up on.
As for the Apocalypse Box, it also got numerous mentions. The
part about Galen actually being there on a covert mission rather
than having just been booted out was being hinted at, as well.
The "could've, should've, would'ves" are enough to drive one
mad.
Yeah, it had great potential. As for whether it has a future,
we'll see...but not now.
__!_!__
Gizmo
Pål Are Nordal
>
>
> *I* knew that there was a lot more going to happen in the
> Babylon 5 story by the time that thirteen episodes had aired. So
> did a lot of other folks. The thirteenth episode, "Signs and
> Portents" was filled with evidence of the story arc.
Actually, this is what we would have got:
1. 1- 1 103 26 Jan 94 Midnight on the Firing Line
2. 1- 2 102 2 Feb 94 Soul Hunter
3. 1- 3 104 9 Feb 94 Born to the Purple
4. 1- 4 101 16 Feb 94 Infection
5. 1- 5 108 23 Feb 94 The Parliament of Dreams
6. 1- 6 110 2 Mar 94 Mind War
7. 1- 7 107 9 Mar 94 The War Prayer
8. 1- 8 106 16 Mar 94 And the Sky Full of Stars
9. 1- 9 113 20 Apr 94 Deathwalker
10. 1-10 105 27 Apr 94 Believers
11. 1-11 111 4 May 94 Survivors
15. 1-15 109 6 Jul 94 Grail
22. 1-22 112 26 Oct 94 Chrysalis
Look at the production numbers. "Signs & Portents" was shot as number
16. Evidence of an arc, yes, but it would have been faint until
"Chrysalis" comes out of nowhere.
(And it's fitting that "To the Ends of the Earth" would have aired as
number 13, "Patterns of the Soul" being pushed back to restore continuity).
Pål Are Nordal
Sue
wrote:
>
> Ummm, She dismissed the possibility of Space: Above and Beyond returning.
>She also trashed the possibility of G.vs.E returning. This was in the transcript
>as well.
>However she did leave open the possibility for Crusade to return. funny that huh?
Just because she didn't actually say no doesn't mean it's still open.
Personally, I'm with the faction that says Crusade's failure (for
whatever reasons) argues against its being picked up again and against
another B5 project.
A shame. Because I'd LOVE to see a new B5 universe project. (But not
Crusade).
Sue
"Are those the only choices?"
Babs, "Chicken Run"
Sue
>Come on, guys--was Crusade *really* all that bad? I've seen a lot worse
>out there! I've never understood why people bash it so much. I'd
>rather go after series that truly are bad (which is almost everything
>out there, especially on the major networks). I wouldn't mind seeing
>Crusade return, especially since I'm not too excited about what's
>currently on the air.
Compared to most sf series, no, Crusade wasn't that bad.
Compared to Babylon 5 itself.......<shrug>
Sue
wrote:
> Crusade had a lot of potential. Anyone who read the "lost" scripts at
>
>bookface.com could tell you that.
I'm going to make myself terribly unpopular now.
I read the "lost" scripts. They were okay. They probably would have
been better seen than read, true. But the dialogue was mundane and
what was revealed to the characters therein (I'm trying not to spoil
for any who haven't read them) was, imo, something that those
characters should have figured out long ago....even in the small
number of episodes actually aired.
I think it could have had potential....but didn't. The whole premise
is the usual "quest in space" story.
That's what made B5 different. It wasn't the usual. It wasn't "get a
bunch of characters together and send them off to explore different
planets every week - for whatever reason".
Iain Clark
"Sue" <vam...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:396891eb...@news1.attglobal.net...
<snip>
> I think it could have had potential....but didn't. The whole premise
> is the usual "quest in space" story.
>
> That's what made B5 different. It wasn't the usual. It wasn't "get a
> bunch of characters together and send them off to explore different
> planets every week - for whatever reason".
No, it was the usual "put a bunch of characters together on a turbulent
frontier outpost".
Before you say anything, I do agree that B5 grew very far beyond its basic
premise, but the underlying format is of the Bonanza / Hill Street Blues
variety. It's even described that way in the original sales pitch. It's a
format which has been done less often in SF than other genres (hence all the
nay-saying which DS9 faced in its early seasons) but I think it's still an
old format.
Iain
--
"Signs, portents, dreams...next thing
we'll be reading tea leaves and chicken entrails."
WWS
That's exactly what kills the chance of it ever coming back;
the main slogan in favor of returning it would be
"CRUSADE: IT REALLY WASN'T THAT BAD"
--
__________________________________________________WWS_____________
It may be that your sole purpose in life is
simply to serve as a warning to others.
Pål Are Nordal
>
> I'm going to make myself terribly unpopular now.
Oh, don't worry. The House of Un-Crusadian Activities is currently busy
with Mr. Holt. You should be safe.
For the moment.
> I think it could have had potential....but didn't. The whole premise
> is the usual "quest in space" story.
So you're telling me that with "Who do you serve? Who do you trust?" in
the opening titles, and Gideon's actions at the end of "Endgame", you
still think that "quest in space" is all there is too it?
Pål Are Nordal
>
> A shame. Because I'd LOVE to see a new B5 universe project. (But not
> Crusade).
But how do you know you won't like it less than Crusade? For those who
mainly like the huge, epic aspect of B5, remember jms has said flat out
that he doesn't have the strength to do it again. Crusade was made
'cause he wanted to have fun, and he still maintains that it had "good
stories, good actors, good episodes."
There's also the fact that a lot of people didn't like the first season
of B5, or at least until they watched it with knowledge of what was to
come. With jms going out of his way to create a new feel, I don't think
everybody should be expected to experience love at first sight.
Tom Holt
The message <3968F0A5...@bigfoot.com>
from =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Are Nordal <a_b...@bigfoot.com>
contains these words:
> Sue wrote:
> >
> > I'm going to make myself terribly unpopular now.
> Oh, don't worry. The House of Un-Crusadian Activities is currently busy
> with Mr. Holt.
(Blush) I'm honored.
I'm also intrigued that you should identify so closely with the late
Senator McCarthy. True, there's a certain passing resemblance, but
you aren't *that* bad.
Have a banana.
Tom Holt
The message <396892c7...@news1.attglobal.net>
from vam...@attglobal.net (Sue) contains these words:
> Compared to most sf series, no, Crusade wasn't that bad.
> Compared to Babylon 5 itself.......<shrug>
Exactly. There's a huge list of shows that were/are worse than
'Crusade', including 2 out of the 4 avatars of Star Trek, Farscape,
Lexx, Third Rock, S:AAB... If it had emerged from the digestive tract
of the Viacom corporation and been called "Star Trek; Crusade", we'd
probably be hailing it as a giant leap forward.
But saying it was (mostly) better than Voyager is faint praise
indeed, on a par with 'more honest than Bill Clinton' or 'no worse
than a bad cold'.
(NB; I should qualify my comments on Crusade by admitting that I
haven't seen the last 2 episodes yet, since they haven't yet been
released over here. According to blackstar.co.uk, the final tape
should be with me on Monday. If I enjoy either of these last 2
episodes, I shall make a point of saying so. I may even buy Are a
virtual beer.)
Hell, I wouldn't have minded it being so awful if it'd been a
success, gotten good ratings and made the TNT people lots of money.
My beef with the show is and always has been that its failure has
effectively ruled out the possibility of any further TV projects set
in the B5 universe. That's sad.
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Have a banana.
Is it green or purple?
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Hell, I wouldn't have minded it being so awful if it'd been a
> success, gotten good ratings and made the TNT people lots of money.
> My beef with the show is and always has been that its failure has
> effectively ruled out the possibility of any further TV projects set
> in the B5 universe. That's sad.
The big problem is that TNT were embarrassed by the whole deal - they
weren't used to people who said no, and therefor tried their best to
bury it with lousy promos and then blocking Sci-Fi's attempt to step in.
They're now running their B5 material for all it's worth, hoping to
reduce it's success on Sci-Fi
But cheer up. The fact is that B5 made money. After a few years the
suits forget the reason why it stopped, and thereby become susceptible
to new projects. And Sci-Fi seemed very positive to new B5 projects
(whether Crusade or not) - *if* the B5 reruns do well. So in fact, the
Save Crusade campaign is actually working towards similar objectives to
you :-P
BTW - If B5 is a huge success for Sci-Fi, there's no reason we can't
both get what we want :-))
Tom Holt
The message <3969270B...@bigfoot.com>
> suits forget the reason why it stopped,
they'll mostly remember is that the spin-off got canned after 13 episodes.
> And Sci-Fi seemed very positive to new B5 projects
> (whether Crusade or not) - *if* the B5 reruns do well.
was that the woman in the hot seat was being polite, to the Crusade
enthusiasts and likewise to all the other bushy-tailed types who were
demanding the return of various dead-and-embalmed shows. I wouldn't
be inclined to read anything into that.
AFAIC, I'd love for B5 to do really well on Sci-Fi, to the point
where the suits get interested in maybe one or two more standalone TV
movies - that's just possible (tho', I fear, very unlikely) given
that (as I understand) the TNT movies got passable ratings. Now, if
that were to happen, you wouldn't mind so terribly much, would you?
Andrew Swallow
<lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> writes:
>
>(NB; I should qualify my comments on Crusade by admitting that I
>haven't seen the last 2 episodes yet, since they haven't yet been
>released over here. According to blackstar.co.uk, the final tape
>should be with me on Monday. If I enjoy either of these last 2
>episodes, I shall make a point of saying so. I may even buy Are a
>virtual beer.)
>
Do not forget volume 1.07 comes out on 7th August. You have
to write off to Warner Brothers for it.
Andrew Swallow
Pål Are Nordal
>
> The message <3969270B...@bigfoot.com>
> from Pål Are Nordal <a_b...@bigfoot.com>
> contains these words:
>
> > But cheer up. The fact is that B5 made money. After a few years the
> > suits forget the reason why it stopped,
>
> Not sure about that. My guess is that in five years' time, what
> they'll mostly remember is that the spin-off got canned after 13 episodes.
I think you are giving them far to much credit.
> > And Sci-Fi seemed very positive to new B5 projects
> > (whether Crusade or not) - *if* the B5 reruns do well.
>
> You're talking about the Online Chat thing, yes? The impression I got
> was that the woman in the hot seat was being polite, to the Crusade
> enthusiasts and likewise to all the other bushy-tailed types who were
> demanding the return of various dead-and-embalmed shows.
Obviously. Everything she said was cranked 10 times in the direction of
what everyone wanted to hear. But if you look past that, there was
noticeable differences in what she said to the differing parties. She
said SAAB was long dead, Now & Again and the Others were too
expensive... but more B5/Crusade was possible if the ratings were good.
Jms has said the same several times before.
And look, I'm fully aware that it's a long shot - But wasn't one of the
lessons in B5 that we should be stubborn bastards and try to do things
even when the odds are bad?
> AFAIC, I'd love for B5 to do really well on Sci-Fi, to the point
> where the suits get interested in maybe one or two more standalone TV
> movies - that's just possible (tho', I fear, very unlikely) given
> that (as I understand) the TNT movies got passable ratings.
They got excellent ratings. "In the Beginning" got way above TNT's most
positive estimate and "A Call to Arms" had no promotion and beat the
heavily promoted Houdini movie that aired the day before.
> Now, if
> that were to happen, you wouldn't mind so terribly much, would you?
Oh gosh no - more B5! The horror, the horror!
Tom Holt
The message <39693807...@bigfoot.com>
from =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Are Nordal <a_b...@bigfoot.com>
contains these words:
> > given
> > that (as I understand) the TNT movies got passable ratings.
> They got excellent ratings. "In the Beginning" got way above TNT's most
> positive estimate and "A Call to Arms" had no promotion and beat the
> heavily promoted Houdini movie that aired the day before.
There you go, then. Now, wouldn't it be better policy to petition for
a reprise of a commercial success, rather than a (perceived) failure?
Pål Are Nordal
>
> There you go, then. Now, wouldn't it be better policy to petition for
> a reprise of a commercial success, rather than a (perceived) failure?
While I'm merely a grunt, and not privy to the secret deliberations of
the campaign heads before any others, I do believe that our main
objective should be promoting the B5 reruns, with showing that there's
still interest in Crusade as a secondary goal.
What becomes of any future project will ultimately be in Sci-Fi's and
jms' hands.
Diane K De
>Date: 7/9/00 10:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <396944D1...@bigfoot.com>
>
>Tom Holt wrote:
>>=20
>> There you go, then. Now, wouldn't it be better policy to petition for
>> a reprise of a commercial success, rather than a (perceived) failure?
>
>While I'm merely a grunt, and not privy to the secret deliberations of
>the campaign heads before any others, I do believe that our main
>objective should be promoting the B5 reruns, with showing that there's
>still interest in Crusade as a secondary goal.
>
>What becomes of any future project will ultimately be in Sci-Fi's and
>jms' hands.
>
>a_b...@bigfoot.com
Please don't forget Warner Brothers. They own B5. They have to want to sell
something to Sci-Fi before it can be bought.
DD
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Please don't forget Warner Brothers. They own B5. They have to want to sell
> something to Sci-Fi before it can be bought.
Given that they brought Crusade to Sci-Fi as soon as TNT pulled out, I
think that's quite likely they'd go ahead with new stuff. Besides, I was
thinking of who would decide the shape of the new B5 project once
Warner's had OKed it. Should have made it clearer :-)
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Besides, I was
> thinking of who would decide the shape of the new B5 project once
> Warner's had OKed it.
Of course, that would have to do with the basic concept, so never mind.
Pelzo63
>My beef with the show is and always has been that its >failure has
>effectively ruled out the possibility of any further TV >projects set
>in the B5 universe. That's sad.
wouldn't it be more accurate to blame JMS's long standing stance that there
would only be ONE spinoff to B5 as the main factor in ruling out any new B5
projects?
p.s. yes i enjoyed Crusade production #'s 1-13 a lot more than i enjoyed B5
production #'s 1-13. on the whole.
p.p.s. yes, i know it's an extremely long shot of returning.
p.p.p.s. no, i see nothign productive in actively attempting to make that long
shot even longer.
p.p.p.p.s. no, i'm not blaming JMS.
p.p.p.p.p.s. no more P.S.'s
:-)
--chris
Iain Clark
"Tom Holt" <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:200007100...@zetnet.co.uk...
>
> The message <39693807...@bigfoot.com>
> from =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Are Nordal <a_b...@bigfoot.com>
> contains these words:
>
> > > given
> > > that (as I understand) the TNT movies got passable ratings.
>
> > They got excellent ratings. "In the Beginning" got way above TNT's most
> > positive estimate and "A Call to Arms" had no promotion and beat the
> > heavily promoted Houdini movie that aired the day before.
>
>
> a reprise of a commercial success, rather than a (perceived) failure?
Personally I agree that this is much more likely than a revival of Crusade,
followed in diminishing order of likeliness by a TV Movie of Crusade, a
revival of Crusade as a series, and three more seasons of Babylon 5 starring
David Duchovny.
J. Potts
> I think it could have had potential....but didn't. The whole premise
> is the usual "quest in space" story.
In article <3968F0A5...@bigfoot.com>,
=?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Are Nordal <a_b...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>So you're telling me that with "Who do you serve? Who do you trust?" in
>the opening titles, and Gideon's actions at the end of "Endgame", you
>still think that "quest in space" is all there is too it?
This is what I don't get. People making assumptions about where a five year
series was going based on 13 episodes. Hey this is JMS we're talking about.
You *know* that the series was about much more than simply a quest for a cure.
We *know* that a cure will be found. That ain't the point. The point
was going to be all the other stuff that happens along the way, the things
that get discovered (like the Technomages connection to the shadows, for
example).
If you don't believe me, here's an excerpt from CIS:
Date: 10 Aug 1999 17:08:10 -0700
From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016...@compuserve.com>
To: Karen S. Hayes <11223...@compuserve.com>
Subject: Racing the Night
Message-ID: <forum.baby...@compuserve.com>
References: <forum.baby...@compuserve.com>
"JMS has hinted elsewhere that the cure might be found before the end
of the series. He's also said the show we think we're watching will
turn out not to be the show we're actually watching. Put these two
together, and I wonder greatly if, had the next few years played out,
he might have gradually uncovered some other, greater theme or conflict
that would overshadow the plague, and take over the plot for the last
year or so."
If not sooner....
jms
If you look at the first 13 episodes of B5, they only began to hint at
the larger story. If the series had ended there, the viewers would have
had no idea of what was really going on. I'd also bet that had it done
so, B5 would not have rated much higher than Crusade does now.
--
JRP
"How many slime-trailing, sleepless, slimy, slobbering things do you know
that will *run and hide* from your Eveready?"
--Maureen Birnbaum, Barbarian Swordsperson
Tim Fleming
Tom Holt wrote:
> The message <3969270B...@bigfoot.com>
> from =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Are Nordal <a_b...@bigfoot.com>
> contains these words:
>
> > But cheer up. The fact is that B5 made money. After a few years the
> > suits forget the reason why it stopped,
>
> Not sure about that. My guess is that in five years' time, what
> they'll mostly remember is that the spin-off got canned after 13 episodes.
>
Your statement here is a bit misleading. It implies that the 13 episodes
were unsuccesful in the market place and thus the show was cancelled. In
truth, Crusade was cancelled 5 months before a single episode aired. The
ratings Crusade achieved were actually good. I believe Crusade averaged a
1.3. Keep in mind that SFC's top rated "Farscape" usually gets a 1.5 (with
a helluva lot more promotion than Crusade ever received). Also, keep in mind
that B5 (unlike most SF shows) consistently came in underbudget and was the
first SF show to challenge Star Trek's dominance in the SF television
marketplace.
>
> > And Sci-Fi seemed very positive to new B5 projects
> > (whether Crusade or not) - *if* the B5 reruns do well.
>
> You're talking about the Online Chat thing, yes? The impression I got
> was that the woman in the hot seat was being polite, to the Crusade
> enthusiasts and likewise to all the other bushy-tailed types who were
> demanding the return of various dead-and-embalmed shows. I wouldn't
> be inclined to read anything into that.
If you go back and reread the transcript of the online chat you will
discover that Ms. Hammer was very forthcoming about the chances of shows such
as "Space:A&B", "GvsE", and "MST3K". You seem to be forgetting that ...Why?
>
> AFAIC, I'd love for B5 to do really well on Sci-Fi, to the point
> where the suits get interested in maybe one or two more standalone TV
> movies - that's just possible (tho', I fear, very unlikely) given
> that (as I understand) the TNT movies got passable ratings. Now, if
> that were to happen, you wouldn't mind so terribly much, would you?
The B5 movies got more than "passable" ratings!!! again, go and check
your facts. Both "In the Beginning" and "The Gathering" were big hits on TNT.
Even "Call to Arms" was able to score a 2.8 rating. The 2.8 rating was
achieved without the benefit of any promotion (Many B5 fans missed it). A
press conference to hipe the show was cancelled. This was right about the
time that things were reaching a boiling point with JMS and TNT.
-Tim
Andrew Swallow
>
>
>There you go, then. Now, wouldn't it be better policy to petition for
>a reprise of a commercial success, rather than a (perceived) failure?
>
I see. The Crusade is dead. Long live the Babylon 5 JIhad.
Andrew Swallow
Simn...@aol.com
>Tom Holt wrote:
>> Not sure about that. My guess is that in five years' time,
>> what they'll mostly remember is that the spin-off got
>> canned after 13 episodes.
> Your statement here is a bit misleading. It implies that the 13 episodes
>were unsuccesful in the market place and thus the show was cancelled. In
>truth, Crusade was cancelled 5 months before a single episode aired.
It sounded to me like that was the point. Crusade got ratings that were high
enough to warrant a continuation of the series in any sane universe. But TNT
was not sane, and cancelled it before it was aired. However, since few other
TV execs are any more sane than the TNT schmucks, all those morons in good
suits are gonna remember is that "Crusade was cancelled after only 13
episodes". The fact that they would be wrong is the tradgedy of the affair.
Martin "The Mess" Hohner <*> Simn...@aol.com
"Men rise from one ambition to another; first they seek
to secure themselves from attack, and then they attack
others." -- Niccolo Machiavelli, _Discorsi_, 1531
Sue
<a_b...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>But how do you know you won't like it less than Crusade? For those who
>mainly like the huge, epic aspect of B5, remember jms has said flat out
>that he doesn't have the strength to do it again. Crusade was made
>'cause he wanted to have fun, and he still maintains that it had "good
>stories, good actors, good episodes."
True, I don't know that I'll like it more or less than Crusade. I
understand that JMs is tired. There are other, competent writers out
there. Some of them even great.
I don't think it was just the writing that made B5 great though; it
was a conglomeration of that, the acting, the directing, the *feel* of
the whole thing.
>
>There's also the fact that a lot of people didn't like the first season
>of B5, or at least until they watched it with knowledge of what was to
>come. With jms going out of his way to create a new feel, I don't think
>everybody should be expected to experience love at first sight.
I don't expect everyone to experience love at first sight. Too many
people around here seem to expect people to like Crusade if they liked
B5 even a little bit, though. That doesn't necessarily follow.
And, FWIW, I liked B5 from the beginning, from the first "Gathering".
It had problems but it grabbed me in a way Crusade never did.
Sue
<a_b...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>Oh, don't worry. The House of Un-Crusadian Activities is currently busy
>with Mr. Holt. You should be safe.
Just don't ask me to name names.
>
>> I think it could have had potential....but didn't. The whole premise
>> is the usual "quest in space" story.
>
>So you're telling me that with "Who do you serve? Who do you trust?" in
>the opening titles, and Gideon's actions at the end of "Endgame", you
>still think that "quest in space" is all there is too it?
I think the questions at the beginning were too obvious. We should
have figured it out as we went, like we did with "What do you want?"
and "Who are you?"
I'm afraid I don't remember "Endgame". Is that the script on bookface
that was supposed to be the end of season?
Sue
>Sue wrote:
>> I think it could have had potential....but didn't. The whole premise
>> is the usual "quest in space" story.
>
>In article <3968F0A5...@bigfoot.com>,
>=?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l?= Are Nordal <a_b...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>>So you're telling me that with "Who do you serve? Who do you trust?" in
>>the opening titles, and Gideon's actions at the end of "Endgame", you
>>still think that "quest in space" is all there is too it?
>
>This is what I don't get. People making assumptions about where a five year
>series was going based on 13 episodes.
I know that, Jan. I know that it would have been a different story a
year or two down the line than it was. For me, though, the characters
and current story line didn't grab me enough to *want* to know what
was going to happen down the line. I taped every episode out of a
sense of completeness, not really need....not the same feeling I had
when B5 was on.
The above is my opinion only.
Sue
wrote:
>> Compared to Babylon 5 itself.......<shrug>
>
>Exactly. There's a huge list of shows that were/are worse than
>'Crusade', including 2 out of the 4 avatars of Star Trek, Farscape,
Are you saying Farscape is worse than Crusade?
With that, I must take issue. (Uh-oh, a schism in the Un-Crusadian
Activity group.)
But this is not a Farscape group so I will not go on.
Pål Are Nordal
>
> I'm afraid I don't remember "Endgame". Is that the script on bookface
> that was supposed to be the end of season?
Yup.
Tom Holt
The message <396cd171...@news1.attglobal.net>
a masterpiece of immaculately-crafted television drama, wonderfully
acted by a dedicated and talented cast.
I don't have to watch Farscape; so I don't. If you enjoy it, that's just fine.
Pål Are Nordal
>
> With that, I must take issue. (Uh-oh, a schism in the Un-Crusadian
> Activity group.)
Oh don't worry. Farscape fans are... reserved... for entities much more
evil then our humble selves. We just sit back and enjoy the show.
Have some popcorn. And please, _do_ go on... <veg>
Pelzo63
>year or two down the line than it was. For me, >though, the characters
>and current story line didn't grab me enough to >*want* to know what
>was going to happen down the line.
well, when B5 was first on, i didn't care enough to WANT to know what was
happening to them down the line either, not till the end of the 4th season
anyways, before that it was "oh, cool, this other space show is on now"
--chris
Gharlane of Eddore
Sue wrote:
>
> With that, I must take issue.
> (Uh-oh, a schism in the Un-Crusadian Activity group.)
>
In <396D330E...@bigfoot.com> a_b...@bigfoot.com writes:
>
> Oh don't worry. Farscape fans are... reserved... for entities much more
> evil then our humble selves. We just sit back and enjoy the show.
>
> Have some popcorn. And please, _do_ go on... <veg>
>
<blank look> Did someone page moi?
"Espouse not 'FARSCAPE,' for you are crunchy and taste good with
teriyaki sauce...."
Sue
<a_b...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>Oh don't worry. Farscape fans are... reserved... for entities much more
>evil then our humble selves. We just sit back and enjoy the show.
>
>Have some popcorn. And please, _do_ go on... <veg>=20
I don't think so. Tom is a much more articulate person than I and
he's made it clear he finds Farscape a very low form of science
fiction show indeed. That's his perogative (sp?) and I doubt anything
I could say would change his mind.
Iain Clark
"Pål Are Nordal" <a_b...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:396D2273...@bigfoot.com...
Sue wrote:
>
> I'm afraid I don't remember "Endgame". Is that the script on bookface
> that was supposed to be the end of season?
> Yup.
You mean The End of the Line, I believe. Endgame is towards the end of B5's
fourth season.
Pål Are Nordal
>
> You mean The End of the Line, I believe. Endgame is towards the end of B5's
> fourth season.
Duh!
Sue
of Eddore) wrote:
>Someone bad-mouthed "FARSCAPE," I mean, "made an objective comment," and
They made a subjective comment, to which they are entitled.
>> Oh don't worry. Farscape fans are... reserved... for entities much more
>> evil then our humble selves. We just sit back and enjoy the show.
>>
>> Have some popcorn. And please, _do_ go on... <veg>
>>
>
>
><blank look> Did someone page moi?
>
>"Espouse not 'FARSCAPE,' for you are crunchy and taste good with
> teriyaki sauce...."
>
I LOVE teriyki sauce.......
Mena Ryan
>
> Sue wrote:
> >
> > On 26 Jun 2000 16:52:11 -0600, gka...@webtv.net (Tammy Smith) wrote:
> >
> > >Come on, guys--was Crusade *really* all that bad? I've seen a lot worse
> > >out there! I've never understood why people bash it so much. I'd
> > >rather go after series that truly are bad (which is almost everything
> > >out there, especially on the major networks). I wouldn't mind seeing
> > >Crusade return, especially since I'm not too excited about what's
> > >currently on the air.
> >
> > Compared to most sf series, no, Crusade wasn't that bad.
> >
> > Compared to Babylon 5 itself.......<shrug>
>
> the main slogan in favor of returning it would be
> "CRUSADE: IT REALLY WASN'T THAT BAD"
Well, it *could* get really inane. All JMS would have to do is strand
all the characters somewhere and have them vote on who stays and who
doesn't. He could also have the same premise where Dureena, Galen, and
Gideon are all trying out for a band. What about setting up a camera in
the Excalibur and letting people watch what is going on? Oh, how 'bout
multi-million dollar prizes? Just forget any plot or writing
whatsoever! They can also sit around and talk about all sorts of
relationship problems that no one who breathes out of their nose would
ever have happen to them. I sometimes wonder if the reason that more
and more people are watching pro "wrestling" again is because at least
that has a little bit of a plot...
Sorry but IMO, US TV has gotten sucky well beyond belief. </rant>
Mena
Diane K De
>It sounded to me like that was the point. Crusade got ratings that were high
>
>enough to warrant a continuation of the series in any sane universe. But TNT
>
>was not sane, and cancelled it before it was aired.
To this I disagree. Crusade did not get high enough ratings to be continued.
It's a matter of business. TNT--or any network--has the option of either
filling its airtime with movies that it owns the rights to for a relatively low
price OR to spend much more money producing an original series.
In order to justify this decision the original series must get higher ratings
than what any alternate programming would get in the same timeslot (in TNT's
case that would be a movie). Higher ratings = higher ad revenue =
justification for higher programming cost.
Crusade got about the same rating as a decent movie would have gotten in the
same timeslot or very little above it. Thus, any sane businessman network
executive would cancel it and keep running the lower cost movies.
Please note that last summer the USA Network, whose goals are similar to TNT's,
launched a show called GvsE. As soon as its ratings dropped to Crusade's
level, they canceled it. It eventually got shoved over to the SciFi Channel
where it got canceled as soon as its ratings dropped again.
You can't just ratings just on their number. You have to ask "Are the ratings
high enough to justify the price relative to other programming?" I'm convinced
one of the reasons SciFi is happy with Lexx is that it didn't cost them much to
acquire. Thus, it doesn't have to get as high ratings as other shows to stay
on air.
DD
James Bell
Jim
Pål Are Nordal
>
> Crusade got about the same rating as a decent movie would have gotten in the
> same timeslot or very little above it. Thus, any sane businessman network
> executive would cancel it and keep running the lower cost movies.
But the smart ones also look at the series growth. Ignoring "War Zone"
(since series premiers almost always get abnormally high ratings due to
people sampling the show), Crusade's average rating was rising.
> Please note that last summer the USA Network, whose goals are similar to TNT's,
> launched a show called GvsE. As soon as its ratings dropped to Crusade's
> level, they canceled it. It eventually got shoved over to the SciFi Channel
> where it got canceled as soon as its ratings dropped again.
I believe GvsE's ratings were below Crusade's, and falling.
Pelzo63
dian...@aol.com wrote:
>To this I disagree. Crusade did not get high enough >ratings to be continued.
the issue of how high the ratings were or were not is irrelevent, and as they
are subjective, you are free to disagree and believe they were too low.
However, the fact that the show was canceled by TNT before any ratings came in
is just that, a fact, not a matter of opinion. What TNT's reasons behind the
cancelation were can be many things, but the one thing they can not be is "the
ratings it received were too low".
--chris
http://pelzo63.terrashare.com
Mena Ryan
>
> You can't just ratings just on their number. You have to ask "Are the ratings
> high enough to justify the price relative to other programming?" I'm convinced
> one of the reasons SciFi is happy with Lexx is that it didn't cost them much to
> acquire. Thus, it doesn't have to get as high ratings as other shows to stay
> on air.
What I find scary about the Sci-Fi Channel is how they treated Lexx.
They put all of the most stupid purile episodes on first, since we are
just a bunch of hormonally charged teenage boys, aren't we? Then they
played the rest of them in random order, being apparently unable to
count (the episode numbers are included in the *name* of the episode!)
which resulted in a mess that was extremely difficult to follow. We
shouldn't be too surprised with that since USA did the same thing with
"Gargoyles", but that's for another rant somewhere else. If I didn't
know any Canadians, I probably would have just given up. Through a
severe force of will and being sent some video tapes of the movies, I
found that this is actually a pretty decent show. It has a dark quality
like Dune or Star Wars, yet it really doesn't take itself very
seriously. It is quirky enough to hold my interest, even though the
Sci-Fi Channel wants to sell it as soft-core porn (then they go and edit
it to death, go figure). I would have serious concerns about them
taking over Crusade. I don't believe that their "suits" are any better
than the ones at TNT. It's perhaps for the best that they passed on it.
We would have just gotten disappointed again. :(
Pål Are Nordal
>
> I would have serious concerns about them
> taking over Crusade. I don't believe that their "suits" are any better
> than the ones at TNT. It's perhaps for the best that they passed on it.
> We would have just gotten disappointed again. :(
The big test will be how they handle B5. Haven't heard anything negative yet.
BRETNTRACI
They are splitting the pilot into a two parter -- which *usually* mean editing
content. Even if they don't trim it the "split" practice leaves me with a sour
taste in my mouth.
Pål Are Nordal
Well, that's the way it was shown here in Norway, so I think it comes
split in the syndication package.
Kerry Casey
>>BRETNTRACI wrote:
> >
>> Here is one:
>>They are splitting the pilot into a two parter -- which *usually* mean
editing
>> content. Even if they don't trim it the "split" practice leaves me with a
sour
>> taste in my mouth.
>
>Well, that's the way it was shown here in Norway, so I think it comes
>split in the syndication package.
It wasn't shown split in Australia (back in 1994).
Kerry
--
Kerry Casey
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
E-mail kca...@bom.gov.au